In a bid to better protect character homes, developers who demolish heritage buildings face fines of more than $500,000 if they flout local planning laws under new Queensland legislation.

The State Government said the legislation passed on Wednesday night would also deter private certifiers from signing off on inappropriate demolitions.

Deputy Premier and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning Jackie Trad said the new laws clarified that local government planning approval was required before building approvals could be issued, including when character houses were to be demolished.

"This legislation will better protect our cherished heritage places for future generations and ensure that we do not lose historic homes at the stroke of a pen," Ms Trad said.

"We have had several incidences of private certifiers signing off on inappropriate demolitions and these laws deliver tougher penalties to try and stamp out this practice."

The new maximum penalties more than double the fine for development offences from $202,963 to $548,550.

Housing Industry Association Queensland spokesman Michael Roberts said he did not have a problem with increased fines but argued there was already a process for councils to object to the demolition of buildings.

"There's a legitimate pathway to dealt with these matters and they provide protection to character buildings. For some reason council is not happy with that approach. They insist you lodge a town planning application," he said.

"In our view it's an unnecessary burden."

Adjunct Professor Phil Heywood from the Queensland University of Technology said he would have liked even bigger fines but believed the changes would make a difference.

"I think as a message and a signal to developers about a new proactive role of government in protecting heritage this is highly significant and in my judgement will work," he said.

Lessons learned from Highgate Hill

Houses in Brisbane constructed before 1911 are protected if they are listed on the Brisbane's city plan, but not all character properties from that period made it onto the 2014 heritage list.

That allowed a developer to seek approval to tear down the three homes in Highgate Hill, which were built in 1882, 1894 and 1906, to make way for a five-storey unit block.

Despite both the council and the Queensland Government saying they wanted the houses preserved, the developer had obtained a demolition permit.

About 30 locals staged a protest in February this year hoping to delay the demolition and subsequently a stop-work order was issued by Environment and Heritage Protection Minister Steven Miles.

The Heritage Council ultimately voted against protecting the buildings, but the case raised issues about the regulatory framework's ability to protect character homes.

The houses were demolished in April.

Community will not foot costs of legal challenges

The laws also stop the Planning and Environment Court from awarding costs against members of the community who challenge developments.

"When the LNP stripped the community of this legal right in 2012, it meant unscrupulous developers could threaten local communities with a costs order to avoid legitimate appeals against development that does not comply with a council's town plan," Ms Trad said.

"Queenslanders can once again appeal planning decisions without the fear of having hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs awarded against them," Ms Trad said.

Mr Heywood, who also supported the community opposition to the Highgate Hill demolition, said people wanted to be involved in planning processes without fear of financial ruin.

"In the past people... have been bankrupted by bringing thoroughly well-grounded actions against approvals in the Planning and Environment Court. That was terrible and it frightened off public involvement," he said.

But Mr Roberts said there were very few examples of the courts awarding costs against community groups.

"The flip side of that is that legitimate developments are being held up by community groups who want to pursue matters through court that they really have no chance of winning," he said.

"So if you're talking about residential development, someone has to bear those court costs, and those costs inevitably end up being added on to the cost of blocks of land or apartments."

Ms Trad said a working group would be set up to examine how the legislation was working and if any refinements were needed.