If you live in Parkwood or travel along Napper Road, you’ve probably seen an increase in discussion about the Parkwood Investigation Area and new development proposals. This post pulls together the timeline, key council decisions, and what the community has been saying..

What is the Parkwood Investigation Area?

Council has been investigating a section of Napper Road for higher-density development since 2016–17. Originally, the investigation covered a much larger area, but it was reduced to 11 large properties fronting Napper Road from around Uplands Drive to Captain Cook Drive.

The aim is to transition the area from rural residential to urban uses, delivering more diverse and affordable housing close to major employment hubs like the Gold Coast University Hospital and Southport CBD.

You can read Council’s official project page here: Parkwood Investigation Area

The vote to endorse the plan

In late 2024, the Preferred Concept Plan for the Parkwood Investigation Area came before Council. The majority of councillors endorsed it for inclusion in the upcoming City Plan (expected to be finalised in 2027).

Cr Joe Wilkinson strongly backed the Investigation Area, calling it “a thoughtful and strategic step forward to accommodate growth” and “I want to formally place on record my support for (its) inclusion in the forthcoming new planning scheme.”

While councillors like Hammel, Gates, and Fowler were warning against the “investigation area” approach when speaking on Oxenford, or calling for infrastructure first, Parkwood still received the green light – strongly backed by Cr Wilkinson, who represents the area.

Here’s that speech:

Why that endorsement matters now

Fast forward to 2025, and we now have four properties within the Investigation Area lodging development applications, totalling 95 proposed townhouses:

• 170 Napper Rd – 27 townhouses
• 176–178 Napper Rd – 41 townhouses
• 182 Napper Rd – 27 townhouses
• All propose 2-3-storey townhouses

All three proposals seek to align with the likely future zoning in the endorsed concept plan. This is where the endorsement vote last year becomes so significant — it set the scene for exactly what we’re now seeing, way ahead of the necessary infrastructure.

Technically, these applications will be assessed under the current City Plan, but with the new zoning expected to be in place around 2027, it’s reasonable to expect Council will weigh that future zoning in its decision-making. The developers are explicitly asking Council to do exactly that.

The planning reports from the developer also suggest locals should expect this type of development because consultation occurred…

Consultation concerns

The developer’s planning reports reference “community consultation” for the Parkwood Investigation Area. However, the most recent open public engagement was an online survey completed by just 97 people back in 2018-19.

Since then, consultation has been limited to landowners of 11 properties along Napper Road. Those landowners of course, now have development applications in and look to profit from the changes. The wider Parkwood community, including nearby streets and suburbs that will feel the day-to-day impacts of growth, were not part of that process.

Comparisons to Oxenford and Highland Park

This year, Council voted to put the Oxenford Investigation Area on hold after eight years of work because the infrastructure wasn’t ready to support the proposed growth. Cr Naomi Fowler called it a responsible “not yet.” Cr Hammel and Cr Gates supported this position, noting the importance of infrastructure-led planning.

The Highland Park Investigation Area was also put on hold until the need for growth is identified and infrastructure planning is in place.

The question many locals are asking:

If Oxenford and Highland Park were paused for lack of infrastructure, why did Parkwood proceed? 

Here’s what councillors said about these investigation areas:

Cr Cameron Hammel – “I hate these investigation areas… (we should) not be picking out random areas and purely focusing on those.”

Cr Donna Gates – “The investigation areas are perhaps not the best way forward into the future… Infrastructure-led development is incredibly important.”

Cr Naomi Fowler – “There is no commitment, no funding, no planning… it’s just not the right time to proceed. (That) upholds the promise of infrastructure-led planning.”

Community feedback so far

When I’ve posted about these developments, many residents have expressed concern about:

• Traffic impacts along Napper Road
• The loss of green space and wildlife corridors
• The lack of costed and committed infrastructure upgrades, particularly for Napper Rd
• These in combination with the other developments already approved for the area
• Some have compared it to the Arundel Hills golf course proposal, pointing out the inconsistency of opposing one development on environmental grounds while supporting this for Parkwood.

You can see some of the conversation on Facebook here, here and here.

My commitment

One of my ongoing commitments is to keep the community informed on what’s happening in our area.

I don’t have the benefit of being briefed as a councillor, and I don’t pretend to be an expert on planning, so that means taking the time to read through and understand planning applications, keeping across council agendas, and sharing key details with you, even when official updates are limited or slow to come.

I believe transparency is essential, so I’ll continue to post summaries, links to original documents, and opportunities for you to have your say. If you’re not already following me on Facebook, that’s my most updated channel.

The takeaway

This blog isn’t about being “for” or “against” the Parkwood Investigation Area or these proposed developments.

We need more housing, and it can’t come soon enough, particularly a mix that includes affordable and diverse options. We’re in a housing crisis, and the Gold Coast urgently needs more homes.

I want to be clear that I’m not against this type of development in principle, but it needs to be properly planned for, with the infrastructure, services, and environmental protections in place. It also needs to be in the most appropriate areas for the long-term benefit of both new and existing residents.

I’m still trying to understand why our councillor strongly backed the Parkwood Investigation Area without having infrastructure costs or timelines locked in – even when it was in the council’s plan to do that. Particularly with so many other councillors saying these Investigation Areas are not the way forward.

I hope this post has helped give some background on how councillor decisions have led us here, and raised questions about why the “infrastructure first” approach applied to Oxenford and Highland Park wasn’t applied to Parkwood.

With the City Plan changes just a couple of years away, the decisions council makes now will directly shape what happens next — and I’ll continue doing my part to keep the community informed every step of the way.

Newsletter signup

Stay up to date on local issues: