Harding v. Brisbane City Council

[2009] QPEC 21

[2009] QPEC 21

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC

P&E Appeal No 1713 of 2007

GUY HARDING	Appellant
and
BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL AND ANOTHER	Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 01/04/2009

ORDER

CATCHWORDS: Integrated Planning Act 1997 s4.1.52(2)(b) - minor change where developer now proposes to dedicate a 3.5 metre strip along its frontage on narrow lane to alleviate concerns that vehicles parking would obstruct passing of traffic.

HIS HONOUR:  The Court makes an order in terms of the

initialled draft.  As so often happens it forced the Court to

be satisfied under section 4.1.52(2)(b) of the Integrated

Planning Act 1997 that a change made to the development

Application, which serves to mollify the adverse submitter,

appellant is a minor one.

The relevant concerns of the appellant focused on traffic

matters and congestion which he feared in the narrow

Kingfisher Lane where it was apprehended that vehicles might

be parked, effectively precluding necessary access along the

lane.

The appeal has been resolved on the basis of a 3.5 metre road

dedication on the Kingfisher Lane frontage by the developer.

The consequence of that on the ground will be that ownership

of a 3.5 metre strip which was always going to be sealed to

provide driveways and pedestrian access to the proposed new

building will now be in public ownership rather than private

ownership.  The strip will be available for some parking. 

There will be no significant change in the appearance of

things so far as the Court can tell.

I think it is inconceivable that any rational person would go

to the trouble of making a submission if becoming aware that

the development application differed in this way from what was

publicly notified.

-----