KCY Investments (No 2) Pty Ltd v Redland City Council

[2010] QPEC 98

[2010] QPEC 98

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC

P & E Appeal No 1740 of 2009

KCY INVESTMENTS (NO 2) PTY LTD	Applicant
and
REDLAND CITY COUNCIL	Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 15/09/2010

..DAY 1

ORDER

CATCHWORDS

Sustainable Planning Act 2009, s 350, s 821 Integrated Planning Act 1997, s 4.1.52(2)(b)

Developer appeal resolved favourably on basis of changes to proposal for a residence close to the beach at Point Lookout to reduce the extent of façade presented to the beach and accommodate various visual environmental and ecological concerns raised by the Council

HIS HONOUR:  The court makes an order in terms of the initialled draft.

The effect of it is to permit this developer appeal to proceed on the basis of changed plans. The application has been prepared to suit the relevant provision of section 4.1.52(2)(b) of the Integrated Planning Act 1997. Sections 350 and 821 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 apply.

This is presented as an unusually complicated application of its kind given the welter of changes to numerous plans.  Mr Ovenden has gone through those exhaustively in his affidavit.  There are many vegetation management issues to do with preservation of sand dunes and the like given that the site is on the beach at Point Lookout. 

It may be my own failing but as material was presented I found it somewhat difficult to see the ‘wood for the trees’.  Mr Conrick has guided me through the material.  The essential change is to reduce the façade of the proposed new residence as it presents to the beach.  That's been done by relocating one of the three modules comprising the building from its former position in a line of three to one essentially behind the other two.

The development application was code-assessable.  As I may have indicated already the many changes that have been made serve to alleviate concerns that the council has expressed.  Speaking generally they're all calculated to limit the environmental, ecological, and visual impacts of the proposal.  The court has no difficulty in identifying what is desired to be achieved as a minor change, a permissible change or whatever the relevant concept may be.

Order as per initialled draft. 

The court records Mr Conrick's instructing solicitors undertaking to ensure that an original of Mr Ovenden's affidavit sworn the 31st of August is on the court file.  The court's proceeded on the basis of the copy that was handed up at the hearing.

‑‑‑‑‑