Lucas v Brisbane City Council

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Lucas v Brisbane City Council [2015] QPEC 25

PARTIES:

DOREEN LUCAS
(appellant)

v

BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No. BD2963/2014

DIVISION:

Appellate

PROCEEDING:

Appeal (Interlocutory Hearing)

ORIGINATING COURT:

Planning and Environment Court

DELIVERED ON:

4 June 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATES:

14 and 15 May 2015

JUDGE:

Dorney QC DCJ

ORDER:

1.    It is ordered that the parties prepare joint short minutes of the relevant orders, including as to costs, if any, in accordance with these reasons – or, failing agreement, separate minutes each – by 4pm on 11 June 2015.

CATCHWORDS:

Planning and Environment – demolition in DCP – whether building does not contribute positively to the visual character of the street – whether demolition will not result in loss of traditional “tin and timber” character within DCP

LEGISLATION CITED:

Sustainable Planning Act 2009, s 313, s 313(2)(c), s 313(3), s 326, s 461, s 493(1)

CASES CITED:

Berlese v Brisbane City Council [2003] QPELR 330

Ken Ryan & Associates v Brisbane City Council [2008] QPELR 147

Leach & Ors v Brisbane City Council [2011] QPELR 609

Litbit Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council [2009] QPELR 197

Lonie v Brisbane City Council [1998] QPELR 209

Lynch v Brisbane City Council [2011] QPELR 321

Rosswalmore Property Pty Ltd v Maroochy Shire Council [2009] QPELR 73

Stockland Development Pty Ltd v Townsville City Council & Ors (2013) 195 LGERA 317

Thurecht & Anor v Brisbane City Council [2015] QPEC 19

Unterweger v Brisbane City Council [2012] QPELR 335

Wallace v Brisbane City Council [2012] QPELR 689

COUNSEL:

S M Ure for the appellant

B D Job for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Macdonnells Law for the appellant

Brisbane City Legal Practice for the respondent

Introduction

1. The issue in this proceeding (which was ordered to be determined separately from the appeal itself by order of this Court on 1 April 2015) concerns whether circumstances exist to grant a preliminary approval for the carrying out of building work for the demolition of a “pre-1946” character house within the Demolition Control Precinct (“DCP”).  Although properly stated as “pre-1947” (because the period is defined as “in or prior to the end of 1946”), I will use the term as it is used, at times, in the relevant planning scheme and the experts’ reports. The house is situated at 117 Vernon Street, Nundah, Brisbane.

1. On the first day of the trial, after an opening by the appellant’s learned counsel as to this issue, I conducted a view of Vernon Street and its surrounding streets for the purpose of better understanding the evidence to be led during the hearing.

The “Site”

1. The land, on which the building (being a house) at 117 Vernon Street is an improvement:

·    is described as Lots 75 and 76 on RP34487;

·    has a combined area of the two allotments of approximately 810 m²;

·    is included in the DCP pursuant to the Brisbane City Plan 2000 (“Planning Scheme”); and

·…