Davidson v Brisbane City Council

[2011] QPEC 9

[2011] QPEC 9

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC

P & E Appeal No 2640 of 2010

GRAHAM PAUL DAVIDSON AND ANOTHER	Appellants
and
BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL AND ANOTHER	Respondents

BRISBANE

..DATE 16/02/2011

..DAY 1

ORDER

CATCHWORDS

Sustainable Planning Act 2009 s 820

Non-compliance with public notification requirements excused - developer applicants placed signs on all 3 named streets to which there was frontage, but overlooked a 2.7 metre frontage to the construction site of the Nundah Bypass Tunnel

HIS HONOUR: The Court makes an order to the effect that the non-compliance with the requirements of the Integrated Planning Act‑‑‑‑‑

...

HIS HONOUR: ‑‑‑‑‑1997 with respect to public notification of the development application that is the subject of these proceedings referred to in the affidavit of Mr John Panaridis filed herein be excused under section 820 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

The appellants have a property in Bage Street surrounded on three sides by the premises of Mary MacKillop College.  They were adverse submitters, disappointed by the Council's favourable response to a development application lodged by the College and appealed against it.

They have filed a notice of discontinuance on the 18th of January 2011  pursuant to rule 15 of the Planning and Environment Court rules 2010.  That rule gives any active party served with a copy of the notice 14 days within which to make an application to the Court which might interfere with an appellant desirous of discontinuing immediately achieving that outcome.

Within the time allowed the co-respondent College filed an application seeking the Court's assistance in respect of a non-compliance with public notification, which apparently was not noticed earlier, but was picked up by the Council during preparation of the appeal.  That non-compliance was the failure to place a notice on a road frontage of the development site.  Signs were placed in Bage Street, in Buckland Road which forms the northern part of the College premises and in Duncan Street, which divides the northern part of the campus from the southern one.  What was overlooked was that in association with roadworks to do with the Nundah bypass tunnel land had been acquired by the relevant authority, which for some‑‑‑‑‑

...

HIS HONOUR:  ‑‑‑‑‑2.733 metres produces a boundary with the College's premises.  The Court is informed that a high hedge on the boundary would prevent anyone from seeing a sign placed on the site there.  Further, it seems inevitable that no one would have been proceeding in that location in any event, given the state of roadworks to be achieved there.  As Mr O'Brien said, it's a very clear case for the Court to excuse that non-compliance which it seems couldn't have had any possible consequences for anyone.

Order as per initialled draft.

-----