St Bernards Village v Scenic Rim Regional Council

Case

[2011] QPEC 34

04/03/2011

No judgment structure available for this case.

[2011] QPEC 34

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN

P & E Appeal No 3207 of 2009

ST BERNARDS VILLAGE Appellant

and

SCENIC RIM REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 04/03/2011

..DAY 1

ORDER

CATCHWORDS

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

Developer's appeal against refusal of reconfiguration (two lots into 4)- reconfiguration redesigned to increase size of one lot at expense of another - held "minor change"
HIS HONOUR:  The court makes an order in terms of the initialled draft.

It resolves this developer appeal, against refusal of a
reconfiguration of two lots into four, on the basis of
conditions set out in annexure A to the order, which includes
a changed design of the reconfiguration.

The preamble in the initialled draft order recites the court's
satisfaction that insofar as the development application, the
subject of the appeal is changed by a new plan of development
dated 17 February 2011, which forms part of the order the change is minor for the purpose of section 4.1.52(2)(b) of
the Integrated Planning Act 1997 having regard to sections 350
and 821(2)(b) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

There's no difficulty in the court being so satisfied.
The essential change is to enlarge the proposed Lot 2 from
.372 hectares to .892 hectares.  That will be achieved by Lot
2 extending much further to the rear from the Alpine Terrace
frontage so that it includes the bulk of the existing
improvements constituting the hotel and indoor entertainment
area of the St Bernards Hotel.  Otherwise those facilities were to be included in Lot 2.  The existing motel, as the order has proposed, will be on the new Lot 4, which is
accessed from Alpine Terrace via an easement across Lot 3.
Whether or not those changes are the explanation for the

Council's change in attitude, it now supports the application
and consents the court making the order in terms of the
initialled draft.

-----

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0