Greentree & Ors v. Brisbane City Council

[2009] QPEC 19

[2009] QPEC 19

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC

P & E No 2399 of 2008

STEVEN GREENTREE AND OTHERS	Appellants
and
BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL AND ANOTHER	Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 31/03/2009

ORDER

CATCHWORDS: Integrated Planning Act 1997 s4.1.52(2)(b) - changes to development application held minor - limited to internal road layout and some limited consequential change to relocate a fire exit and to more onerous provisions for external road works required by Council condition.

HIS HONOUR:  The Court makes an order in terms of the initialled draft which in form dismisses an adverse submitter appeal but on the basis of the appeal being determined on amended plans which incorporate some changes which I am about to confirm the Court regards as minor, the changes go some way to satisfy concerns of the appellants.

Except for Mr Henderson and Ms Renyi, the appellants have already filed in the Court documents indicating their withdrawal. 

Exhibit 1 consists of some communications to the Court from Mr Henderson on behalf of himself and his partner.  Although they bespeak some misgivings about the co-respondent developers' proposal, it is clear that Mr Henderson and Ms Renyi are going along with the resolution that's been arrived at following mediation and discussions and negotiations.  There has been no appearance today by the remaining appellants who are unable to be here.

On the 26th September last year, I made an order dealing with technical matters which are of importance relating to public notification of the proposal of the developer and notification of the appeal in appropriate quarters.

The only matter requiring consideration of the Court today is those changes to the application which is for a large development on a site at Coorparoo which includes a Heritage building. On that basis, if not others, the application which had important aspects under Section 3.1.6 of the Integrated Planning Act concerning a preliminary approval overriding the Planning Scheme required public notification. This excited the interest of the appellants.

The Court has the benefit of an affidavit of the architect, Mr Proberts, describing the changes from the plan that the Council approved which coincide with what was notified and the final plans.

Some redesign of one building in a minor way to relocate a fire exit has been necessitated by changes to the internal traffic pattern.  All of those changes are internal and won't have any effect other than to make the site work more effectively.  There won't be any effect outside the site or the development, nor on the Heritage building or people's ability to enjoy it.

There's also been some change in the conditions required by the Council for work to be done on an intersection adjacent to the property by provision of traffic islands and I'm told, a dedication by the co-respondent of an additional strip of land to provide a taper.  For the purposes of 4.1.52(2)(b) of IPA, it's clear that those changes represent no more than minor change. 

Another matter which may not represent a change to all, concerns the calculation of GFA on one plan 150m² higher, or 5100m², by reason of the inclusion of a courtyard area; on other plans the 150m² had been indicated.  This is not a change at all.

Order as per initialled draft.

-----