b. Provide instructions to legal counsel for appeal matters actioned under Chapter 6 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and Chapter 4 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997, subject to the condition that where the Committee Chairperson is required to use his/her casting vote, the Mayor (and Deputy Mayor in his/her absence), preside over the meeting and be permitted to use his/her casting vote as Chair to determine the matter.

Declaration Of Opening

Cr Townsend declared the meeting open at 10.01am.

Record Of Attendance And Leave Of Absence

Members Present

Cr B Townsend Chairperson and Councillor Division 5

Cr W Boglary Councillor Division 1

Cr C Ogilvie Councillor Division 2

Cr D Henry Councillor Division 3

Cr J Burns Councillor Division 4

Cr T Bowler Councillor Division 6

Cr M Elliott Deputy Mayor and Councillor Division 7

Cr K Reimers Councillor Division 8

Cr K Williams Councillor Division 9

Cr H Murray Councillor Division 10

Committee Manager

Mrs T Averay General Manager Development & Community Standards

Officers

Mr B Appleton Service Manager, Engineering Assessment

Mr B Macnee Group Manager, Sustainable Assessment

Mrs J Saunders Service Manager, Planning Assessment

Minutes

Mrs J Thomas Corporate Meetings & Registers Officer

APOLOGY

An apology was noted for Cr M Hobson, Mayor.

Receipt and Confirmation Of Minutes

Moved by: Cr Elliott
Seconded by: Cr Bowler

That the minutes of the Development & Community Standards meeting of 20 April 2010 be confirmed.

CARRIED

Public Participation At Meeting

Nil

Declaration of Interest

Nil

Motion To Alter The Order Of Business

Nil

1 development & community standards

1.1 DUAL OCCUPANCY AT 2-4 STURGEON STREET, ORMISTON

Dataworks Filename: MC011280

Attachments: Locality Map and Site Plans [PDF 410KB]

Responsible Officer Name: Bruce Macnee
Group Manager, Sustainable Assessment

Author Name: Steven Bell
Planner, Planning Assessment

Executive Summary

Application Type	Negotiated Decision Request
Proposed Use	Dual Occupancy
Property Description	Lot 3 RP 103343
Location	2-4 Sturgeon Street Ormiston QLD 4160
Land Area	1993.1m²
Redlands Planning Scheme Zoning	UR - Urban Residential
Designated Community Infrastructure	N/A
Overlays	Acid Sulfate Soils Overlay Landslide Hazard Overlay
SEQ Regional Plan 2009-2031	Urban Footprint
No. of Public Submissions	4 Submissions
Applicant	Astronomer Pty Ltd As Trustee
Land Owner	Astronomer Pty Ltd As Trustee
Properly Made Date	10/06/2008
Start Decision Stage	04/11/2008
Statutory Decision Date	01/12/2008
Application Coordinator	Steven Bell/Julie Saunders
Assessment Manager – Delegate Recommendation	Bruce Macnee Development Permit

PURPOSE

This Category 4 application is referred to the Development and Community Standards Committee for determination.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council has received a Request for a Negotiated Decision for a Material Change of Use (Impact Assessment) for a Dual Occupancy on an Urban Residential allotment on land described as Lot 3 on RP 103343 at 2-4 Sturgeon Street, Ormiston. The applicant has provided information to address the items that resulted in the granting of a preliminary approval rather than a development permit and has requested that a development permit be issued subject to conditions.

The proposal is for the construction of a partial four (4) storey detached Dual Occupancy. House 1 has a maximum height of 10.5 metres above ground level with the unit being located on the northern half of the allotment. House 2 is three storeys and has a maximum height of 9.4 metres above ground level with the unit being located on the southern half of the allotment.

The proposal was granted a Preliminary Approval because it was considered a number of matters had not been sufficiently addressed in the application. In summary the matters related to:

· Slope stability and the provision of a Geotechnical Report;

· Stormwater requirements;

· Landscaping;

· Amenity;

· Building Height; and

· The number of proposed storeys.

The applicant has provided additional information adequately addressing some of these matters. It is considered appropriate to address the remaining issues prior to issuing the Operational Works – Compliance Assessment Approval.

On this basis, it is recommended that the applicant’s representations be accepted and a development permit be issued subject to conditions.

BACKGROUND

The original application was lodged to Council on the 12^th June 2008. A determination was made on the 20^th October 2009 to grant a preliminary approval (PA) subject to compliance with additional requirements outlined under the PA.

The applicant suspended the appeal period on the 23^rd of October 2009 with the applicant providing representations on the 18^th November 2009.

CONSULTATION

The application was publicly notified from the 9 October 2008. The application received four submissions. The issues raised by the submitters have been assessed as part of the previous report to Council resulting in the issuing of a PA. The concerns expressed by the submitters transferred into some of the PA requirements, particularly in relation to removal of vegetation and building height and it’s relationship to mass and overshadowing.

The Development Assessment Team has consulted with other assessment teams. A copy of the proposal was provided to Councillor Boglary of Division 1 and a response was received on the 8^th October 2009 identifying several concerns about the size and scale of the development. The application was also taken to the Development Assessment Workshop for further consultation, particularly in relation to the geotechnical requirements.

1.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL AND SITE DESCRIPTION

1.1. Proposal

The proposed partial four (4) storey Dual Occupancy is on an allotment with an area of 1993.1m² and has site coverage of 837m². External building materials for the units will consist of walls constructed of rendered and painted brickwork materials with the roof being protected with metal sheeting.

House 1 is located on the northern half of the allotment with a height of 10.5 metres above ground level. The building is setback 19.5 metres from the southern boundary, 1 metre from the northern front boundary, 6 metres to the western boundary and 20 metres from the eastern boundary.

House 2 is located on the southern half of the allotment with a height of 9.4 metres above ground level. The building is setback 1.9 metres from the southern boundary (where the wall is between 0 and 4.5m above ground level) , 3 metres for the second wall from the southern boundary (which is between 4.5 and 7.5 metres above ground level), 6.6 metres from the western boundary and 8 metres from the eastern boundary.

1.2. Site

The site is located at the eastern end of Sturgeon Street, Ormiston. Currently the allotment contains an existing single dwelling house. The land falls from the North-West corner (at 16m AHD) to the middle of the block (5 metres AHD). The block flattens to the east from 5 metres AHD to a minimum of 2 metres AHD. The western slope hosts a large number of mature trees with the majority of flat ground consisting of grass. The driveway is located within the western slope and falls from the north of the allotment to the south.

1.3. Surrounding Area

Adjacent and nearby allotments are zoned Urban Residential, the majority of which are low-rise residential development. The proposed Dual Occupancy is surrounded by the following uses;

North: Unformed road reserve;
East: Moreton Bay;
South: Dwelling Houses; and
West: Dwelling House.

1.4. Amenity and Character

The development is being proposed within a locality that is predominantly low-rise residential with most residential housing providing bay views and an abundance of mature vegetation. The eastern end of Sturgeon Street does not attract a large amount of traffic due to it not being a through road.

2.0 APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

The conditions of the Preliminary Approval required the following items to be addressed prior to issuing a development permit.

Engineering Items

1 Provide the following Geotechnical Requirements:

1.1 Identify and provide detail in regards to the existing waterways and overland drainage paths.

1.2 Provide grades of slope between the road reserve and any existing or future building envelope(s).

1.3 Provide a hydraulic study including details regarding flood levels and impact on adjoining, upstream or downstream properties.

1.4 Extent of new cut and/or fill (please submit calculations), and compaction measures proposed.

1.5 Location and height of cut and/or fill in relation to adjoining premises.

1.6 Details regarding the nature of proposed fill material.

1.7 Relevant detail of the suitability of the land, where earthworks are proposed, for the founding of buildings, roads and infrastructure in relation to Stormwater flow paths.

1.8 Details of any earth retaining structures proposed, including construction materials, proposed landscaping treatment, stability, structural soundness and design life.

1.9 Details regarding the potential for earthwork activity to create vibrations that could cause damage to nearby structures or buildings directly and indirectly.

1.10 Confirm whether or not the proposal will require placement of more than 500 cubic metres of fill. If more than this amount is required, then provide a preliminary desktop report from a qualified soil consultant that estimates the risk of displacement of acidic material.

1.11 Please provide a geotechnical report prepared by an experienced, qualified engineering professional should be submitted. At a minimum the geotechnical engineering report should comprise:

a. Site walkover survey with investigations as required establishing a geotechnical model over the whole site. This may require moderate subsurface investigation and/or testing to provide subsoil material properties;

b. Review potential hazards; and

c. Assessment of slope stability using a suitable model appropriate for the site conditions.

d. Consider the risks to the community with regards to injury or loss of life and damage to infrastructure and mitigate unacceptable risks.

e. Design input from a qualified Practicing Engineering professional, including adoption of good hillside construction practices.

f. The design must comply with the recommendations detailed in the geotechnical engineering report.

g. The geotechnical report should include detailed advice in regards to widening and slope of the new driveway crossover and access way, in order to achieve stability for existing and proposed retaining walls without effecting surrounding structures and neighbouring properties.

h. Demonstrate the disturbance of soil below 5 metres AHD does not trigger investigation under State Planning Policy 2/02.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“These requirements are for detailed information that is best provided at the operational works stage. It would not be fair for our client to have to go the expense of commissioning the mentioned reports, only to have the application refused by the Council on an ‘unrelated’ matter.”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

It should be acknowledged that this site poses constraints that require considerable detailed geotechnical information before a final design solution can be achieved. It is a red soil site adjacent to the Bay. The combination of these elements highlights the importance of requiring this information. In saying that, the issue for Council in assessing the request for deferment of the geotechnical investigation centres on our professional opinion that a design solution can be achieved even though we do not have all of the data, and that once obtained, it will not significantly alter the current proposal to cause impact that adjoining allotments/submitters are currently not aware of.

Council acknowledges that there is a significant cost in undertaking this detailed analysis. The applicant has indicated in the vicinity of $70-$80,000. A site inspection was undertaken by technical officers (including the Manager Engineering Assessment) of the assessment team who confirmed that there is a design solution available - at a considerable construction cost. It is anticipated that the engineering solution is not intended to alter the design. If, in fact, alterations were required as a result of the geotechnical report it would trigger a change of approval or fresh application depending of the degree of change. Council considers that a condition of approval is a reasonable outcome in light of the design intended for the site.

In summary officers consider that the Geotechnical requirements can be provided to Council prior to the lodgement of an associated Operational Works – Compliance Assessment application. This is outlined in condition 1.11 of Operations Works.

2. Provide further detail to demonstrate compliant turning circles for all car parks in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 Off-street car parking.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

Turning Circles have been provided on the submitted plans and compliance is demonstrated with AS2890.

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

Council agrees that the provided templates comply with AS2890. Additionally, the Australian standards for turning circles will be conditioned within the development permit. (Refer to condition 1.12 of the Operational Works Compliance Assessment Conditions – Engineering)

3. Demonstrate on the amended Landscape Plan that the landscaping located between the southern building and the boundary has the potential to provide screening to the southern allotment and grow to a mature height of at least 6 metres from finished ground level.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“A Landscape Plan will be prepared that will demonstrate the extent and height of vegetation proposed along the southern boundary.

With respect to enhancing native vegetation on the site and provision of foreshore buffer planting, your attention is drawn to the Landscape Concept Plan originally submitted with the application. This plan shows planting to what is referred to as the ‘coastal edge’, at a depth of approximately 2.5 metres. It is contended that this buffer is sufficient and that the requirement for it to have a width of eight metres is excessive and would detrimentally affect the open space provision for the units, as this area is the only flat and usable part of the entire lot. A more reasonable requirement would be to have the 2.5 metre buffer include planting and to have the remaining 5.5 metres void of any development (as proposed).”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

The above response does not fully address item 3 of the PA. It is considered that there is an adequate distance between the southern boundary and the southern building to provide effective landscaping. Therefore the intent of the preliminary approval item can be achieved. This item can be addressed in further detail at the Operational Works Stage.

4. According to Overall Outcome (d) (1) the development is required to respond to the topographic features minimising the need for excavation and fill, protecting the site from erosion, maximising the retention of native plants and incorporating the best practice in stormwater management and enhancing water quality. The applicant is required to demonstrate how the development addresses the above overall outcome in accordance with the required geotechnical assessment, excavation and fill and landscaping requirements.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“It is contended that excavation and fill is minimised primarily on the basis that such works are only being carried out within the footprint of the buildings and where absolutely necessary. The proposal responds to topographic features by stepping the built form down the slope, with the majority of built form being on the more level part of the lot. That is, there is very little building actually located ‘under’ the existing ground level. The main area of excavation is for the ‘services’ area and driveway link between the units, which is required to provide a flat manoeuvring surface and a sufficient clearance for a variety of vehicles where the drive passes under unit 2.

When the geotechnical analysis is carried out, the exact extent of excavation required will be confirmed and likely further minimised, in addition to incorporating erosion and sediment control measures. It is important to remember that it is in the developers interest to minimise the extent of earthworks, particularly around the driveway area when keeping a ‘flat’ grade is imperative for vehicle movements.

In terms of vegetation retention, trees are only being removed where in the building footprint or as per the advice in the arborists report submitted with the application. Significant planting and landscaping will be carried out in lieu as per the submitted landscape plans.

Stormwater management and quality is able to be appropriately dealt with and detail will be submitted at the operational works stage.”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

During the assessment process the applicant has provided sufficient information to address the majority of issues raised by Item 4 of the Preliminary Approval with the exception of excavation and stormwater issues. Condition 1 discusses the excavation and geotechnical issues and Condition 12 discusses the water issues around quality outcomes for the site. In summary the applicant has not provided the stormwater quality concept plan information. However it is considered that the proposed development will meet the overall outcome despite the physical constraints presented. Although a concept stormwater quality plan would be a best practice outcome in this instance, in reviewing the development proposal there appears to be sufficient space to achieve stormwater quality outcomes, although this would need to be confirmed through the detailed design process. It is considered that both of these issues will be addressed during or prior to the associated Operational Works Application.

5. Provide an amended shadow diagram for the proposal that provides the shadows locations, in relation to buildings located on the southern allotments, at 12 noon on the 21 June.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“Please find attached a shadow diagram that shows the extent of shadow cast at 12 noon on 21 June. As you can see, the shadow cast at this time of day does not affect any adjoining dwellings.”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

The applicant provided all the requested shadow diagrams for the proposed development. The shadow diagrams demonstrated that the southern allotments receive 3 hours of solar access between the hours of 9am and 3pm on the 21^st June. The above response adequately addresses item 5 of the Preliminary Approval.

6. Provide a photomontage/built form elevation from the north, south, east and west showing the building in relation to surrounding buildings.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“Please find attached a number of perspectives which give a good representation of the appearance of the final product from various aspects. These perspectives demonstrate that the development blends in with the landscape and is of an appropriate bulk and scale for the lot size. The images also clearly show that the buildings primarily sit below the western ridge line and are barely visible from the street, ensuring no impact on the streetscape. “

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

The photomontage, supplied by the applicant, provides perspective to the proposed development and demonstrates the development is of an appropriate bulk and scale in relation to the site. It is considered that:

The building is stepped down the allotment and provides an articulated design from the bay by having the development follow the contours of the allotment;
The southern building setback provides adequate space to accommodate landscaping which can screen the development when viewed from the south;
The streetscape has a large amount of existing vegetation that screens the development from the streetscape; and
The development provides a western impact that is equivalent to a single storey dwelling house.

It is considered that item 6 of the Preliminary Approval has been addressed.

7. Provide a plan identifying the lawfully altered ground level.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“The surveys submitted with the original development application clearly show the existing ground level, which is contended to be the lawfully altered ground level. No site works have been carried out since approval and construction of the existing house on the property.”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

Council agrees that ground level was identified on survey plans submitted to Council with the original development application which will be included in the approved plans of the development permit. Conditions of approval will be implemented to strengthen the height requirements outlined within the development permit. It is considered that Item 7 of the Preliminary Approval can be addressed through conditions.

8. Remove the additional kitchenette from DRW No. 04 OF 21 Issue A, Ground Floor Plan prepared by Anthony Rigg Architectural Technologist and DRW No. 11 OF 21, Issue A Ground Floor Plan prepared by Anthony Rigg Architectural Technologist.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“The proposal is for a Dual Occupancy and is intended to be used as such. The purpose of the kitchenette (or ‘wet bar’ for all intensive purposes) is simply to provide an area for basic food preparation when entertaining on the lower level deck and to provide guests somewhere with basic amenities without the need to go up various flights of stairs to the kitchen. This is a common feature of large homes and in no way implies a separate area of ‘stand alone’ occupation. If the Council has any concern in relation to the future use of the buildings, it is recommended that a condition of approval be imposed to state that the site is to be used in accordance with the definition of a Dual Occupancy at all times. If deemed absolutely necessary, the kitchenette can be removed from the plans.”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

A condition has been included to ensure the use is restricted to two dwelling units only. If the use, as defined under the Redlands Planning Scheme, changes a development application will need to be lodged to Council or compliance action may occur.

9. Due to the size and scale of the proposed development demonstrate compliance with Overall Outcome 2 (b) which states, ‘ The scale of uses and other development contribute to a predominantly detached residential built form by -

a) limiting building height to maintain a low-rise appearance; and

b) buildings are sited and of a width, depth and bulk that are consistent with the lot size and a residential streetscape.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“It is contended that the proposals’ compliance with Overall Outcome 2(b) has been sufficiently justified. To reiterate, the characteristics of the lot (being ‘hidden’ from the street and sitting lower than surrounding properties), mean that the dwelling will barely be visible from the street ensuring it will not and can not have any effect on the streetscape. In terms of building height having a ‘low rise appearance’, it is contended that the proposal does. When viewed from the street only a single storey of the development is visible, as is the case when the development is viewed from the property to the west.”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

Previous site inspections and the provided photomontages confirm that the streetscape and the northern allotment provide a large amount of mature vegetation that has the potential to screen the development from the street.

It is considered that the height of the development in relation to the western property is acceptable due to the western building wall being lower than 8.5 metres above ground level. The building will provide a development impact equivalent to a single storey dwelling house.

During the assessment period it was negotiated that the southern setback be increased to reduce building bulk, improve privacy and cater for potential vegetation screening to the south. It is considered the increased southern building setback allows for potential landscaping therefore providing adequate vegetation screening to the south.

The building is stepped down the allotment and provides an articulated design from the bay by having the development follow the contours of the allotment.

It is considered that item 9 of the preliminary approval has been addressed.

10. Due to the majority of vegetation being removed from the site demonstrate compliance with Overall Outcome 2 (c) (i)(a) which states, ‘ (i) Uses and other development achieves a high standard of amenity by -

a) protecting and enhancing of places of cultural significance or streetscape value.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

Overall Outcome 2(c)(i)(a) relates to amenity issues rather than environmental issues. On account of its current use and zoning, the site has a residential amenity and this is being maintained. The proposed development is considered to achieve a high standard of amenity when viewed from all angles due to the quality built form and level of articulation, in addition to proposed landscaping works. The proposal does not impact on any streetscape values as it will barely be visible from the street. Further, the development site does not have any cultural significance as it does not have any strong aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations.

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

It is considered that the development, from the streetscape, is screened by vegetation and will not cause any significant amenity issues to the street. Refer to comments under item 9 for further justification in relation to amenity issues caused by the development.

11. Demonstrate the development minimises impacts on environmental and scenic values by;

a) responding to topographical features;

b) minimising the need for excavation and fill;

c) protecting the site from erosion;

d) maximising the retention of native plants;

e) maximising the use of native plants that are characteristic to the area;

f) incorporating best practice stormwater management and enhancing water quality;

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“The proposal minimises any impact on environmental and scenic values by stepping the built form down the slope and generally following the natural contours of the land (therefore responding to topographical features), only requiring excavation where associated with building work and providing access, and carrying out significant landscaping works, particularly along the foreshore and boundaries.

The requirements for the proposal to protect the site from erosion and to incorporate best practice stormwater management can be included as condition of approval and may include the preparation of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and a Stormwater Management Plan.“

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

The proposed development steps down the slope and generally follows the natural contours of the allotment. The building design reduces the amount of excavation by having a combination of slab and pole/pier design and by only having associated excavation work occurring within the building footprint, driveway and areas requiring significant landscaping work.

It is considered that the site has an adequate amount of area to cater for best practice stormwater management and enhancing water quality, subject to the implementation of conditions relating to stormwater provisions (refer to item 12 comments of the preliminary approval for further detail).

Therefore it is considered that Item 11 of the Preliminary Approval has been addressed by the applicant.

12. Demonstrate that the stormwater system for the post-construction period is designed to ensure that run-off discharged from the site complies with Part 9, Schedule 11 (Water Quality Objectives) of the Redland Planning Scheme. Stormwater generated from the access driveway, roof and ground surface will require treatment before discharge into the coastal area.

Possible treatment includes (but is not limited to) rubble pits, bioretention devices, vegetated swales, filtration through landscaped or turfed areas, or a combination of these or similar methods. A concept plan will sufficient at the Development Permit stage, however the plan must clearly demonstrate how and where stormwater quality treatment is to occur, and indicate where the post-construction stormwater flow paths will be. Council officers are aware of the various types of treatment available and have access to typical illustrations of these. It is therefore not necessary to provide a list of options only or drawings of typical treatment devices.

The required plan must state which particular treatment option will be adopted for this specific site, and indicate on the plan where it will be located. Any inclusion of devices designed for stormwater detention alone will be disregarded, as such devices are not designed to improve water quality. Detailed plans will not be required until the construction stage. Detailed plans will not be required until the construction stage.

APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATION

“As mentioned above, stormwater quality issues can be dealt with once the final built form is set. Sufficient space exists on site for the management and treatment of stormwater prior to discharge.”

OFFICER’S COMMENTS

Condition 12 of the Preliminary Approval required a concept stormwater quality plan for the post-construction period, prior to issue of a Development Permit. The plan was to demonstrate where stormwater quality treatment would be, the preferred method and likely post-construction stormwater flow paths. The condition stressed that detailed plans were not required until the works stage. The applicant responded that stormwater quality issues can be dealt with once the built form is set at the works stage, and that sufficient space is available for stormwater treatment. While a stormwater quality plan can be deferred until the works stage, there has been no demonstration as yet that stormwater treatment can be satisfactorily accommodated within the developed site. In saying this, based on the current design proposal, there appears to be adequate room to achieve a water quality outcome.

Provision of a stormwater plan has been conditioned for the works stage.

3.0 REFERRAL AGENCIES

At the time this application was assessed external agency referral was required for the Department of Environment and Resource Management. A response from the EPA was received on the 14th of August 2008 which stated advice relating to the proposed development. The Department of Environment required that the development does not increase site discharge for flood events (as per the Stormwater Management Code, S1: Stormwater Drainage Design). Regular inspections and identified maintenance or modification of stormwater management structures was also suggested.

4.0 CONCLUSION

The applicant has made representations regarding the conditions of the Preliminary Approval and provided some further information. The subject sites poses physical and design constraints, which require significant detailed design at a substantial cost. Although Council does not have the detailed information on the geotechnical and stormwater quality issues, on the balance it is considered that the proposal can achieve the outcomes of the Redlands Planning Scheme. Therefore, it is recommended that the application be approved and a development permit be granted, subject to conditions.

Officer’s Recommendation/
Committee Resolution

Moved by: Cr Elliott
Seconded by: Cr Bowler

That Committee, under delegated authority, resolve as follows:

A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

That the application for material change of use for the purpose of a Dual Occupancy on the land known as 2-4 Sturgeon Street, Ormiston, described as Lot 3 RP103343, be approved and a development permit be granted subject to the following conditions.

B CONDITIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

1.0 Approved Plans and Documents

1.1 The approved plans and/or documents for this development approval are listed in the following table:

Plan/Document Number	Plan/Document Title	Prepared by	Date received by Development Assessment
DWG: 01 of 21	Site Analysis Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 02 of 21	Site Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 03 of 21	House 2 - Sections	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 04 of 21	Ground Floor Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 05 of 21	First Floor Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 06 of 21	2^nd Floor Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 07 of 21	3^rd Floor Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 08 of 21	House 1 – North / South Elevations	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 11 of 21	Ground Floor Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 12 of 21	1^st Floor Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 13 of 21	2^nd Floor Plan	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 14 of 21	House 2 – North / South Elevation	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 17 of 21	Roof	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009
DWG: 18 of 21	8.5 Height Indication Drawing	Bleuscape design	13^th March 2009

1.0 Design

1.1 The development must be carried out generally in accordance with the details set out in the application and the approved drawing(s) and/or document(s) listed under Condition 1.1 unless otherwise required by a condition of this approval.

1.2 Safety and security must be maximised by -

(a) including lighting to dwelling unit entries, car parking areas and pedestrian accessways that complies with the provisions of Australian Standard 4282: 1997 - Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting;

(b) allowing visitors who approach the front door to be seen without the need to open the door.

1.3 The vertical illumination resulting from direct, reflected or other incidental light emanating from the site must not exceed 8 lux when measured at any point 1.5 metres outside the boundary at or above ground level.

1.4 Glare and reflection from the sun must be minimised through material and glazing choice.

1.5 All habitable room windows adjacent to habitable rooms of the neighbouring dwellings, privacy between dwelling units must be protected by-

· sill heights being a minimum of 1.5 metres above floor level; or

· providing fixed translucent, such as frosted or textured glazing, for any part of the window below 1.5 metres above floor level; or

· providing fixed external screens that are -

(i) solid translucent screens; or

(ii) perforated panels or trellises that have a maximum of 25 percent openings, with a maximum opening dimension of 50mm and that are permanently fixed and durable;

(iii) are offset a minimum of 300mm from the wall of the building.

2.0 General

2.1 All relevant Council Local Laws, Planning Scheme Provisions and Policies together with all conditions of approval must be complied with to the full and complete satisfaction of the Council.

2.2 All reasonable precautions must be taken to ensure that the proposed use does not interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood by reason of noise, vibration, smell, dust and wastewater.

2.3 The Developer must pay the cost of necessary alterations to existing public utility mains, services or installations due to building and works in relation to the proposed development and/or material change of use, or any works required by condition(s) of this approval. Such cost will be determined by the Council and/or the relevant authority(ies) and must be paid:

· Prior to an application for approval of building works on the site being lodged; or

· Prior to Council being required to issue any approval for Operational Works – Compliance assessment; or

· Prior to any construction works or the use commencing; (whichever is the sooner).

2.4 All payments to be made to the Council and/or money to be deposited and/or bond to be lodged pursuant to any condition of this approval must be made:

· Prior to an application for approval of building works on the site being lodged; or

· Prior to Council being required to issue any approval for Operational Works – Compliance assessment; or

· Prior to any construction works or the use commencing; (whichever is the sooner).

Other conditions must, where applicable, be complied with before the use is commenced, unless otherwise required or agreed in writing by the Council or a delegated officer.

2.5 The use must be serviced by energy, telecommunications and waste and recycling collection facilities.

2.6 The development must be designed so as to facilitate a community titles scheme being applied to the development in accordance with the provisions of this approval, the Sustainable Planning Act, the Body Corporate & Community Management Act and its regulations, and the Redlands Planning Scheme.

2.7 The premise must comprise of no more than two dwelling units as defined by the Redlands Planning Scheme.

2.8 Construct all habitable areas with a minimum finished floor level of 2.7 metres AHD to guarantee immunity against 100 ARI as adopted for flood events.

2.9 The Development must comply with the Acceptable Solutions listed in the Redlands Planning Scheme, Part 5 - Overlays, Division 1 – Acid Sulfate Soils Overlay, Section 5.1.8.

2.10 Filling of the site must be assessed as part of the Operational Works approval and must accept sheet flow from adjoining properties and must not dam upstream properties.

2.11 Stormwater must be discharged to a legal point.

2.12 Engineering plans submitted for construction purposes must demonstrate that the stormwater system for the post-construction period is designed to ensure that run-off discharged from the site complies with Part 9, Schedule 11 (Water Quality Objectives) of the Redland Planning Scheme. Stormwater generated from the access driveway, roof and ground surface will require treatment before discharge into the coastal area. The plans must clearly demonstrate how and where stormwater quality treatment is to occur, and indicate where the post-construction stormwater flow paths will be.

Possible treatment could include (but not be limited to) soakage trenches, bioretention devices, vegetated swales, filtration through landscaped or turfed areas, or a combination of these or similar methods. Council officers are aware of the various types of treatment available and have access to typical illustrations of these. It will therefore not be acceptable to provide only a list of options or drawings of typical treatment devices.

The required plans must state which particular treatment option(s) will be adopted for this specific site, and indicate on the plans where these will be located. Any inclusion of devices designed for stormwater detention alone will be disregarded as such devices are not designed to improve water quality.

3.0 Geotechnical Requirements

3.1 Submit and obtain approval from Council of a Geotechnical Report as outlined in condition 1.11 Operational Works – Compliance Assessment. This report should be lodged and approved prior to other elements of the compliance assessment. Construction is to be undertaken in accordance with the approved Geotechnical Report and any conditions imposed by council during the operational works – compliance assessment application.

4.0 Driveway Crossover

4.1 The domestic driveway crossover –

(a) splays and tapers do not protrude over adjoining property boundaries at any point within the verge;

(b) does not result in the removal or damage to existing street trees;

(c) is not located where it will conflict with proposed street trees;

(d) is of a slope that results in a continuous even surface along the verge or constructed footpath;

(e) is finished in a non-slip surface that is of a colour and design that compliments the streetscape;

(f) has no impact on above or below ground utility infrastructure, including electrical service pillars; and

(g) where the lot or premises is fronted by a road with -

1. kerb and channel, the crossover is designed, sited and constructed in accordance with Standard Drawing R-RSC-2 - Domestic Driveway Crossover for Kerb and Channel; or

2. a drainage pipe, the crossover is designed, sited and constructed in accordance with Standard Drawing R-RSC-16 - Domestic Driveway Crossover for Pipe Crossing; or

3. a drainage swale, the crossover is designed, sited and constructed in accordance with Standard Drawing R-RSC-17 - Domestic Driveway Crossover for Drainage Swale.

4.2 An Associated Works – compliance assessment approval is required to establish the driveway crossovers.

5.0 Driveways

5.1 Driveway materials must be non-slip materials and include exposed aggregate, stamped pigmented concrete, bitumen or unpermeable materials.

6.0 Fences and Walls

6.1 Fencing -

(a) Front fences that exceed ten (10) metres in length must be articulated or detailed to provide visual interest.

(b) Where the front fence is lower than the side boundary fence, it must be tapered to the maximum height of the front boundary fence at or behind the front building line.

(c) do not block or interrupt overland flow paths.

(d) fences forward of the building frontage are not more than -

(i) 1.2 metres in height above ground level where of solid construction; or

(ii) 1.8 metres in height above ground level where the fence is at least 30 percent transparent

7.0 Landscape Design

7.1 The landscape design must resemble Drawing Number 17 of 21, Roof Plan, drawn by Anthony Rigg, received by Council on the 13^th March 2009. Further detail will need to be provided at the associated Operational Works – Compliance Assessment Stage.

7.2 Species used for landscaping must be selected from the native plant species listed in the Redlands Planning Scheme, Schedule 10 - Vegetation Species List, or Schedule 9 - Street Trees where within the road reserve.

7.3 Existing street trees on council’s road reserve must be retained, or where required to be removed for locating a driveway crossover, replaced by similar species selected from Schedule 9 - Street Trees where within the road reserve of the Redlands Planning Scheme.

7.4 Landscaping of the allotment must be done in accordance with the requirements of an associated development works approval for the proposal.

8.0 Waste Management

8.1 Each residential dwelling unit must have there own dedicated waste storage area, for one 140L or 240L waste wheelie bin and one 240L recycle wheelie bin, that –

(a) is located within the curtilage of the dwelling unit, not including garages or carports, as per Project No. 0709 Revision F, Drawing No. 02 of 21 Issue A, titled Site Plan, prepared by Anthony Rigg Architectural Technologist, date received at Council 2nd February 2010;

(b) allows for containers to be moved from storage area to service point without travelling over steps or through dwelling areas, including garage;

(c) has a hardstand surface and screens bins from view; and

(d) is no less than 800mm wide x 1500mm long x 1100mm high.

8.2 For bin servicing, all bins must be provided with 1 metre of unobstructed kerbside length per wheelie bin, excluding driveways, carparks and landscaping. Kerbside space dedicated to the use only shall be used, not that of neighbouring premises.

9.0 Service Facilities

9.1 Service facilities must be provided to meet the needs of residents and must be sited and designed in an unobtrusive and convenient manner.

9.2 Air conditioning equipment must be screened from view from street, adjoining allotments or public area.

9.3 Open air clothes drying facilities with a minimum area of 10m² are provided in sunny, ventilated and convenient locations which are adequately screened from view from the street and internal driveways.

9.4 A storage area must be provided for each unit that:

· Has a minimum, lockable, external accessible area of 3m²;

· Has a minimum internal height of 2.1 metres; and

· Is screened from public view.

10.0 Mechanical Plant

10.1 Refrigeration equipment, pumps, compressors and mechanical ventilation systems must be located, designed and installed to achieve a maximum noise level of 3dB(A) above background levels as measured from noise sensitive locations and a maximum noise level of 8 dB(A) above background levels as measured from commercial locations.

11.0 Lighting

11.1 Where outdoor lighting is required the applicant must locate, design and install lighting which minimises the potential for light spillage to cause nuisance to neighbours. Lighting is to be provided to dwelling unit entries, car parking areas and pedestrian accessways. Lighting provided is to comply with the provisions of Australian Standard 4282: 1997 – Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

12.0 Chemical Storage

12.1 All chemicals in relation to the pool must be located in a covered and bunded area as per indicated on the Ground Floor Plans (4 of 21 and 11 of 21).

13.0 Development Near Underground Infrastructure

13.1 Building foundations must be designed such that no building loads are imposed on the sewer trench. Uses and other development are not to interfere with or adversely affect the function of existing or proposed underground utility infrastructure. Uses and other development are not permitted within a dedicated underground utility infrastructure easement.

13.2 Development must comply with the Acceptable Solutions listed in the Redlands Planning Scheme, Part 8 - General Codes, Division 5 - Development Near Underground Infrastructure, Section 8.5.4.

14.0 Plumbing

14.1 Extend the Council sewer through existing properties and gravity feed effluent to existing sewer infrastructure, or If unable to achieve the above then the Council sewer in Sturgeon St will have to be extended to the property with a new connection point at the Property Owners expense. Each dwelling must have its own Household Sewerage Treatment Plant that discharges to Council sewer via separate pumped discharge lines.

14.2 An inspection chamber must be constructed adjacent to the new property connection point by the Applicants Contractor. The inspection chamber is to be provided with two (2) separate pump discharge points.

14.3 The Applicant is to supply hydraulic plans designed to Councils information document “Requirements for Hydraulic Plans”.

14.4 Each Dwelling Owner is to maintain their own Treatment Plant and effluent lines to the sewer connection point. The Dwelling Owners will be required to comply with the guidelines listed below.

Private Household Sewerage Treatment Plant Pump Station.

14.5 The Owner of the private household sewerage treatment plant pump station shall enter into a quarterly maintenance contract with the supplier of the system, or other qualified agent, to ensure the proper operation and maintenance of the plant.

The service report shall include the following:-

· Correct pump operation.

· All float switches are operational.

· Control panel and alarm functional.

· Oil levels in pumps are in accordance with manufacturers requirements.

14.6 During the relevant period of the permit, a permit fee in accordance with a scale of fee’s in respect of sanitary and sullage waste disposal systems determined by the Council from time to time, shall be paid each twelve (12) months by the permit holders. Extra fees are payable where Council audit tests fail to meet licence requirements.

The pump stations shall :-

· Be installed with dual pumps.

· Be located in an assessable area.

· Have an alternative power supply

15.0 Internal Traffic Movement

15.1 Internal traffic movement must comply with AS2890.1.

15.2 Car parking numbers are as per the Council’s requirements:

· spaces per dwelling unit, of which 1 space per dwelling unit is covered.

· Minimum service vehicle space requirements: SRV as outlined under the RPS.

15.3 Dimensions and layouts of all car parking spaces must comply with AS2890.1.Off street carparking.

CONDITIONS REQUIRING COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT

1.0 Landscaping Conditions

1.1 The site, including adjacent footpath(s) must be landscaped in accordance with the details indicated on an Drawing Number 17 of 21, Roof Plan, drawn by Anthony Rigg, received by Council on the 13 March 2009 and any other relevant construction documentation.

1.2 Prior to site works commencing, the applicant(s) and/or developer must apply for an approval from the Council for landscaping plan(s) and specifications for the construction of the proposed works. In this regard, the applicant(s) and/or developer must apply for and receive an approval for Operational Works – Compliance Assessment (Landscaping) from the Council.

1.3 The following supporting information must be provided in accordance with the Redland Planning Scheme (RPS) documents;

· Part 8 General Codes, Division 8 - Landscape Code;

· Part 11-Planning Scheme, Policy 9 Infrastructure Works – Chapter 11 Landscaping;

· Part 9 Schedules, Schedule 9 - Street Trees;

· Part 9 Schedules, Schedule 10 - Vegetation Species List; and

· Part 9 Schedules, Schedule 12 - Weed Species List which are available on the Council’s web site www.redland.qld.gov.au; and

· generally in accordance with the Roof Plan drawing no: 17 of 21, issue A

1.4 The documentation must contain the following information:

Existing Vegetation

a) Integration of existing vegetation, street trees and overhanging trees on adjacent properties.

Planting Design

b) A planting design with plant material that is in accordance with Schedules 9, 10 and 12 of the Redlands Planning Scheme. The planting design must not contain any plant material that has been identified in the RPS as:

· declared environmental weeds;

· an invasive weed; or

· a poisonous plant in South-East Queensland. Similarly, any existing vegetation that falls within the above categories shall be removed.

The design must provide:

· A hierarchy of planting, which includes shade trees, shrubs and groundcovers.

· Provide a shady tree focus.

· Proposed screening to any back-of-house service areas, refuse bins from public view.

Irrigation

c) Watering of all plant material in accordance with Queensland Water Commission - Efficient Irrigation Guideline, to promote health, viability and growth. http://www.qwc.qld.gov.au/Efficient+irrigation.

d) Provision of a Management Plan to demonstrate how plant material (including turf) on public land is to be kept alive during the “On Maintenance “period of 6 months.

e) Provision of Management Plan that includes irrigating from rainwater from on-site storage tanks for plant material (including turf) on private land; and/or use of water-saving products and materials for the site such as soil-wetting agents and aeration products that;

· have the ability to store water and absorb soluble fertiliser;

· have the potential to reduce the amount of water required by up to 50%;

· reduce the amount of fertiliser lost to leaching;

· enable soils and potting mixes to be easily re-wet;

· gradually release easily available water to the root;

· increase soil aeration & improving clay soils;

· increase the water holding ability of sandy loams by up to 70; and

· enhance the self-restoring ability of turfed areas.

f) Details of soil improvements systems to maximise the viability and successful maturity of all plant material. This may include;

· the use of water absorption products mixed in with the soil that allow water and air nutrients to be readily absorbed by the root system;

· imported compost and topsoil (preferably a premium organic garden blend); and

· organic mulch (not pebbles).

Hard Landscape Works

g) Provision of an aggregate threshold to any planted area that abuts a building. The aggregate must form a barrier to the potential entrance to the building by termites. The aggregate threshold must be approx 150mm wide and separate organic mulch from any part of the building.

h) Details of paving design and type.

i) Details of all proposed fencing, and height of proposed retaining walls.

j) Location of existing services such as overhead power lines and power poles, underground cabling, etc. which have the potential to impact on the placement of plant material.

k) Details design of all proposed timber decking and timber screening areas.

l) Details of elevation drawings.

m) Details of contour levels and finished levels, with these shown on the landscape drawings.

n) Details of invert levels and stormwater outlets to the drawings to verify in accordance with the landscape code.

o) Location/s of rainwater tanks.

Lighting Design

p) Lighting design details showing an integration of external lighting to driveways and other areas of pedestrian and car conflict. Bollards may be used to demarcate pedestrian uses with overhead lighting to provide a high level of illumination.

Design details are to integrate the principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) theory. Lighting design is to illuminate potential areas of concealment and is to project illumination so that a human face is easily discernible from 15 metres.

q) Provision of sufficient night lighting, which renders people, colours, vegetation and objects correctly. i.e. ‘white’ light. Particular attention should be given to pathways, driveways and common external spaces.

1.5 Lighting design and planting design must not conflict with a safe pedestrian environment.

1.6 The cost of any new fencing must be borne by the developer.

1.7 Approved landscaping works must be completed prior to the use commencing.

1.8 “As constructed” details of landscaping works are to be given to the Council (to the Landscape Technical Officer – Integrated prior to occupancy of the building. The requirements of such documentation are listed in Planning Scheme Policy 9 Chapter 2 Documentation and General Conditions.

2.0 Operational Works – Compliance Assessment (Engineering)

2.1 Signage Prior to Construction

Prior to the commencement of any construction works associated with the development, a sign of approved size detailing the project team must be placed in a prominent position, at the road frontage, at each entrance to the development. The sign must detail the relevant project coordinator for the works being undertaken on the site, and the following parties (where relevant):

Developer

Project Coordinator

Architect / Building Designer

Builder

Civil Engineer

Civil Contractor

Landscape Architect

2.2 Construction Supervision, Required Council Inspections, and Acceptance of Works by the Council

The developer must ensure that their engineering representatives contact the Council as early in the process as possible.

a) Engineering Works – Supervision

All site earthworks, drainage and pavement construction must be designed by and the construction supervised by a Registered Professional Engineer, Queensland (RPEQ). Testing must be carried out by N.A.T.A. registered laboratories.

Prior to occupancy of the units, the developer’s Supervising Engineer must submit a certificate to the Council certifying that all work has been satisfactorily completed in accordance with all requirements of the Council, and to accepted engineering standards.

b) Engineering Works – Council Inspections

Council inspections must be called for, and carried out, at the following stages:

i) Pre start – This meeting is to be carried out prior to any works commencing, within an existing road reserve or on any infrastructure that will eventually be transferred to the Council.

ii) Installation of erosion and sediment management measures.

iii) ‘Box’ inspection of crossover and footpath with reinforcing in place. Reinforcing mesh is to be supported on bar chairs.

iv) Stormwater pipelines and manholes bedded and partially backfilled.

v) ‘On Maintenance’ inspection of completed works.

vi) ‘Off Maintenance’ inspection of works 12 months after acceptance of works on maintenance.

c) Engineering Works – Acceptance of Works by the Council

The Council’s Design Standards for Developments details all requirements to be complied with prior to works being accepted On and Off Maintenance by the Council.

2.3 As Constructed Requirements

As part of all land or building developments within Redland City, Council requires as-constructed details for any road, roofwater, stormwater, water or sewerage infrastructure installed/constructed. The as-constructed details shall:

a) be supplied and presented in accordance with the standard requirements of Redland Planning Scheme Policy 9 – Infrastructure Works; and

b) be surveyed and presented on Redland City Council’s Co-ordinate System and on AHD vertical datum.

Upon request, the following information can be supplied by Council to assist the developer’s survey and engineering consultants meet the above requirements:

a) A map detailing co-ordinated and or levelled PSMs adjacent to the site.

b) A listing of Council (RSC) co-ordinates for some adjacent co-ordinated PSMs.

c) An extract from Natural Resources and Mines’ SCDB database for each PSM.

d) Permanent Survey Mark sketch plan copies.

This information can be supplied without charge once Council receives a signed declaration from the consultant agreeing to Council’s terms and conditions in relation to the use of the supplied information.

Refer to Documentation and General Conditions in Chapter 2 of the Infrastructure Works Policy for further details.

2.4 Frontage Works

The developer must construct the following works, to the Council’s standards, along the entire frontage of the site to Sturgeon Street.

a) Footpath earthworks, topsoiling and turfing of all disturbed footpath areas;

b) Reinstatement of concrete kerb and channel, where required;

c) Entry treatment / access to the site as per the Council’s standards;

d) A minimum 1.5 meter concrete shared footpath to the Council’s standards;

e) Adjustments and relocations necessary to public utility services resulting from these works;

f) Signage and line marking as per the Department of Main Roads’ standard, titled the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD);

These works must be completed prior to the use commencing. In this regard, the developer is required to apply for and receive an Operational Works – Compliance Assessment approval from the Council.

2.5 Electrical Poles and Construction Considerations

A 300mm gap, in any proposed concrete slabs, must be maintained around the base of all electricity poles along the frontage of the development. Other readily removable surface treatments are to be constructed up to the base of the pole.

2.6 Stormwater from Roofed and Paved Areas

Construction of driveways and drainage must be to the Council and/or Department of Main Roads standards; including the provision for an ARI 100 year’s overland flow through driveways, open space areas or easements over adjoining properties. An assessment of the effect of 50% blockage of inlets must be included in the drainage calculations.

Temporary drainage must be provided during the building construction phase such that discharge from all constructed roofs and paved areas is disposed of to approved street drainage system and not onto the construction site. This temporary system must be maintained for the duration of building works.

Prior to the commencement of any works within the site, the developer must apply for and receive an Operational Works – Compliance Assessment (Engineering) approval for engineering plans and specifications for the construction of proposed drainage.

2.7 Stormwater Nuisance and Legal Right of Stormwater Discharge

a) Overland flow paths and underground drainage must be designed so as not to directly or indirectly cause nuisance to a downstream or adjoining property. All stormwater from the site shall be discharged to Stormwater End structure Maximo Asset Number 162954.

b) If option 1 is not technically achievable (levels), an alternative will be contemplated for design and construct a stormwater soakage system, the system will be assessed during operational works stage and must be worked in accordance with WSUD technical design guidelines South-East Queensland Chapter 7.

2.8 Reticulated Water Supply Connection

The developer must connect the proposed development to the existing reticulated water supply system.

Where the existing reticulated water supply does not currently service the site or is not an adequate capacity, the developer is to pay the Council its estimated cost to construct the required connection/s to the site.

Requests for connections and estimates must be made to the Council in writing, with details of work required specified. The payment for such works is to be made prior to works being carried out.

2.9 Sewerage Connection

The developer must connect the proposed development to the existing sewerage system.

Where sewerage connections are not available to the site, or where existing connections are not satisfactory for the proposed development, the developer must pay the Council its estimated cost to construct the required connections.

Requests for connections and estimates must be made to the Council in writing, with details of work required specified. The payment for such works is to be made prior to works being commenced.

2.10 Sewerage Considerations – Building Design

All structures must be located a minimum of 1.5 metres off the alignment of the sewers.

Building foundations must be designed such that no additional loads, associated with the building, are imposed on the sewer trench.

2.11 Earthworks

If the development of the subject property requires soil to be imported or exported, the developer must identify the allotments that would be used for borrowing or filling and must advise the Council of such works. Any significant borrowing or filling may require the approval of the Council. If clarification is required on the significance of the works to be undertaken, contact should be made with the Council to determine relevant approvals required.

a) Excavation and fill protects the safety of people and property by –

i) where involving gradients or embankments comply with Schedule 5, Division 5 of the Standard BuildingRegulations 1993;

ii) ensuring retaining walls or structures –

· are designed in accordance with Section 3 of Australian Standard 4678:2002 - Earth Retaining Structures;

· have a design life of not less than 60 years;

iii) ensuring compaction is carried out in accordance with -

· Australian Standard 3798:2007 – Guidelines on earthworks for commercial and residential developments;

· Australian Standard 2870:1996 - Residential slabs and footings - construction.

b) Excavation and fill prevent land or water contamination, or the harbourage of vermin by ensuring –

i) the controlled use of clean, dry, solid, inert building material as per section 4 of Australian Standard 3798:2007 - Guidelines on earthworks for commercial and residential developments; and

ii) where the site contains contaminated material, the removal of contaminated material is disposed to an approved landfill under the conditions of a disposal permit issued under the Environmental Protection Act 1994.

Prior to submission of operational works application a geotechnical report prepared by an experienced, qualified geotechnical engineering professional (RPEQ) must be submitted to Council . At a minimum the geotechnical engineering report must comprise:

c) Site walkover survey with investigations as required establishing a geotechnical model over the whole site. This may require moderate subsurface investigation and/or testing to provide subsoil material properties;

d) Review potential hazards; and

e) Assessment of slope stability using a suitable model appropriate for the site conditions.

f) Consider the risks to the community with regards to injury or loss of life and damage to infrastructure and mitigate unacceptable risks.

g) Design input from a qualified Practicing Engineering professional, including adoption of good hillside construction practices.

h) Technical designs like Structural, stormwater, excavation and fill; must comply with the recommendations detailed in the geotechnical engineering report.

i) The geotechnical report should include detailed advice in regards to widening and slope of the new driveway crossover and access way, in order to achieve stability for existing and proposed retaining walls without effecting surrounding structures and neighbouring properties.

j) A copy of the Geotechnical report and Development studies/Designs, must be available for consultation on site during whole construction phase.

During operational works stage the applicant must submit for assessment (excavation and fill component) the following information:

k) Identify and provide detail in regards to the existing waterways and overland drainage paths.

l) Provide grades of slope between the road reserve and any existing or future building envelope(s).

m) Extent of new cut and/or fill (please submit calculations), and compaction measures proposed.

n) Location and height of cut and/or fill in relation to adjoining premises.

o) Relevant detail of the suitability of the land, where earthworks are proposed, for the founding of buildings, roads and infrastructure in relation to Stormwater flowpaths.

p) Details of any earth retaining structures proposed, including construction materials, proposed landscaping treatment, stability, structural soundness and design life.

q) Details regarding the potential for earthwork activity to create vibrations that could cause damage to nearby structures or buildings directly and indirectly.

2.12 Car Parking and Internal Driveways

Prior to works commencing, the developer must apply for and receive an approval from the Council for Operational Works – Compliance Assessment (Engineering) for engineering plans and specifications for the construction of proposed car parking facilities and internal driveways. The following issues are to be addressed:

a) Compliance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1: Off Street Parking – Car Parking Facilities.

b) Provision is to be made for vehicles to turn within the subject site so as to enter and exit the property in a forward gear, without encroachment into formal visitor parking spaces.

c) Parking areas should not be used for general storage or any purpose other than the parking of motor vehicles.

d) Construction must comply with the following:

i) Surfacing is to be a bituminous seal coat, asphalt, concrete, or pavers, and

ii) Properly constructed, drained and maintained to good engineering standards.

e) All site earthworks, drainage and pavement construction are to be designed and supervised by a Registered Professional Engineer, Queensland (RPEQ). Testing is to be carried out by NATA Registered Laboratories. Prior to occupancy or the use commencing, the Supervising Engineer must submit a certificate certifying that all work has been satisfactorily completed to the quality control criteria for this site.

2.13 Public Open Space Contribution

A public open space contribution must be made to Council, at the rate applicable at the time of payment, and paid prior to approval of any subsequent ‘operational works’ application. The amount payable for this development must comply with Chapter 5 of Planning Scheme Policy 3 in the Redlands Planning Scheme. In this regard the following comments are made:

a) The current rate for 2009/2010 per additional unit is $3,500.00 The amount of contribution for a particular development is to be determined in accordance with Clause 3.5.6 and Table 3 of the policy.

b) The rate of contribution is reviewed annually on 01 July.

Any contributions previously paid may be claimed as contributing towards the amount due to Council.

2.14 Transport Infrastructure Charges Contributions

A contribution for local transport infrastructure must be made to Council, at the rate applicable at the time of payment, and paid prior to approval of any subsequent ‘operational works’ application. The amount payable for this development must comply with Chapter 4 of Planning Scheme Policy 3 in the Redlands Planning Scheme. This contribution does not cover the cost of local road works necessary for the development that are not part of the roadworks identified in the above mentioned Council policy and that all such costs are the responsibility of the applicant. In this regard the following comments are made:

a) The current rate for 2009/2010 per equivalent tenement is $12,685.54;

b) The conversion factors (where relevant) for various residential uses are contained in the policy;

c) The amount of contribution for a particular development is to be determined in accordance with Clause 1.7 of the policy. This is based on multiplying the maximum number of equivalent tenements permitted on the site by the rate per equivalent tenement by the conversion factor for the particular development proposed;

d) The rate of contribution is reviewed annually on 01 July.

Any contributions previously paid may be claimed as contributing towards the amount due to Council.

2.15 Water Supply Headworks

A contribution for water supply augmentation and other works must be made to the Council, at the rate applicable at the time of payment, prior to approval of any subsequent 'operational works' application.

The amount payable for this development must comply with Chapter 7 of Planning Scheme Policy 3 in the Redlands Planning Scheme. In this regard the following comments are made:

a) The current rate for 2009/2010 per equivalent tenement is $6,682.00

b) The conversion factors for water supply headworks payable vary amongst the different uses. Refer to the policy in this regard.

c) the amount of contribution for a particular development is determined by multiplying the calculated number of equivalent tenements by the rate per equivalent tenement based on the conversion factor for the particular development included in the table of conversion factors;

d) The rate of contribution is reviewed annually on 01 July.

Any headworks previously paid may be claimed as contributing towards the amount due to the Council.

2.16 Sewerage Headworks

A contribution for sewerage augmentation and treatment must be made to the Council, at the rate applicable at the time of payment, prior to approval of any subsequent 'operational works' application.

The amount payable for this development must comply with Chapter 7 of Planning Scheme Policy 3 in the Redlands Planning Scheme. In this regard the following comments are made:

a) The current rate for 2009/2010 per equivalent tenement is $7,588.00

b) The conversion factor for sewerage headworks payable vary amongst the different uses. Refer to the policy in this regard.

d) The rate of contribution is reviewed annually on 01 July.

Any headworks previously paid may be claimed as contributing towards the amount due to the Council.

NB: If sewerage is not immediately available, no unit is to be occupied until a sewerage service is available.

2.17 Cycleway Infrastructure Contribution

A contribution for Cycleway Infrastructure must be made to Council, at the rate applicable at the time of payment, and paid prior to any approval of any subsequent ‘operational works’ application. The amount payable for this development must comply with Chapter 4A of Planning Scheme Policy 3 in the Redlands Planning Scheme. This contribution is required to fund new and/or improved infrastructure needed to manage the future growth on the Council’s mainland. In this regard the following comments are made:

a) The current rate for 2009/2010 per equivalent tenement is $1,397.46;

b) The conversion factors (where relevant) for various residential uses are contained in Chapter 4A of Planning Scheme Policy 3 in the Redlands Planning Scheme;

d) The rate of contribution is reviewed annually on 01 July.

Any contributions previously paid may be claimed as contributing towards the amount due to Council.

2.18 Erosion and Sediment control on site.

a) The Applicant must ensure that a copy of the Development Approval Conditions, Development Permit, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Monitoring and Maintenance Program, Landscape and/or Site Rehabilitation Plan, and any other documents required for the management of soil erosion and sediment control, are provided to the principal contractor prior to the commencement of land disturbing activities.

b) Prior to the commencement of any construction activities, or soil disturbance (excluding that reasonably required for site investigation, survey or data collection), the Applicant must engage and nominate appropriately trained and experienced personnel to undertake regular ESC (Erosion and Sediment Control) audits of the site, directly after a runoff-producing rainfall, and at no greater than fourteen (14) calendar day intervals, from the commencement of site disturbance until acceptance of the site by Council under “on-maintenance” conditions. Such personnel must, collectively, have the following capabilities:

i) an understanding of the local environmental values that could potentially be affected by the proposed works; and

ii) a good working knowledge of the site’s Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) issues, and potential environmental impacts that is commensurate with the complexity of the site and the degree of environmental risk; and

iii) a good working knowledge of current best practice ESC measures appropriate for the given site conditions and type of works; and

iv) ability to appropriately monitor, interpret, and report on the site’s ESC performance, including the ability to recognise poor performance and potential ESC problems; and

v) ability to provide advice and guidance on appropriate measures and procedures to maintain the site at all times in a condition representative of current best practice, and that is reasonably likely to achieve the required ESC standard; and

vi) a good working knowledge of the correct installation, operational and maintenance procedures for the full range of ESC measures used on the site.

c) Council Engineering/development Control officers and their representatives are entitled to enter onto the land at any time to carry out additional erosion mitigation and sediment control works required as a result of the development. The cost of any such works shall be fully recouped from the developer prior to any further work proceeding.

d) All office facilities and operational activities must be located such that any effluent, including wash-down water, can be totally contained and treated within the site.

e) Adequate waste collection bins must be provided on-site and maintained such that potential and actual environmental harm is minimised.

f) Site access must be stabilised and confined to the minimum practicable number of locations.

g) Vehicular access into the site must be appropriately managed to minimise the risk of sediment being tracked or washed onto adjoining sealed roadways.

h) All reasonable and practicable measures must be taken to ensure stormwater runoff from access roads and stabilised entry/exit systems drains to an appropriate sediment control device.

2.19 Performance Bonding Agreement

a) In accordance with Planning Scheme Policy 3 – Contributions and Security Bonding, the lodgement of security with the Council in accordance with the table in Condition 3.2 must be undertaken to guarantee the execution of works to be done in association with this approval.

b) All payments to be made to the Council and/or money to be deposited and/or bond to be lodged pursuant to any condition of this approval must be made:

i) Prior to an application for approval of building works on the site being lodged; or

ii) Prior to Council being required to issue any approval for Operational Works – Compliance assessment; or

iii) Prior to any construction works or the use commencing; (whichever is the sooner).

c) Other conditions must, where applicable, be complied with before the use is commenced, unless otherwise required or agreed in writing by the Council or a delegated officer.

Item	Amount	Drawn down	Returned
Engineering Infrastructure external to the site	$3,500.00	to the greater of $1,000 and 5% of the value of works, when accepted On Maintenance by the Council	When works are accepted Off Maintenance by the Council (Note – There is a minimum maintenance period of 6 months).
Landscaping	$5,000.00		When works are accepted Off Maintenance by the Council (Note – There is a minimum maintenance period of 6 months).
General performance	$2,000.00	not applicable	When all conditions associated with this approval have been complied with, as accepted by the Council.
TOTAL	$10,500.00

d) In the case of failure to comply with the above conditions, the Council may cause the necessary work to be carried out and may deduct the cost thereof from the money deposited and/or bond held. Should such cost exceed the security held, the applicant(s) and/or the developer and/or their successor must on demand pay to the Council the amount of the works.

C. REFERRAL AGENCY’S RESPONSE

The Advice Agency Response – Conservation Estate from the Queensland Government – Department of Environment and Resource Management, dated 20 July 2009, is attached. This advice does not form a condition of this approval.

D. ADDITIONAL PERMITS/APPROVALS REQUIRED

This approval does not authorise construction to commence. Further development permits for Building Works and Plumbing and Drainage Works are required.

Capping of sewer -

The applicant must lodge a “Capping of Sewer” application with Redland Shire Council’s Plumbing Department prior to the demolition of any existing buildings on the development property/ies.

Building Works -

Compliance Assessment approvals (from the Council) are required for:

· Building Works (Demolition)

- Referral Agency Assessment through Redland City Council to undertake the demolition works or potential asbestos removal is required prior to seeking and obtaining a formal building approval;

Operational Works – Compliance Assessment approvals (from the Council) are required for:

· Engineering

- External roadworks and drainage works;

- Internal car parking and stormwater drainage works

- Earthworks;

- Water and sewer infrastructure

· Landscaping

E. ADVICE

Relevant Period

This development permit for a material change of use will remain current for a period of four years starting the day the approval takes effect, as per the Integrated Planning Act 1997.

Fire Ants

Certain areas within Redland City have been identified as having an infestation of the Red Imported Fire Ant (RIFA). The movement of extracted or waste soil, retaining soil, turf, pot plants, plant material, baled hay/straw or mulch/green waste/fuel into, within and out of the City from a property inside a restricted area is subject to approval of the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) - RIFA Movement Controls. Further information can be obtained from the DPI Call Centre 13 25 23 or on their web site www.dpi.qld.gov.au/fireants.

Connection to Council Services

Should the existing allotment be further reconfigured, the applicant must ensure that each individual allotment is directly connected to Council services (such as water supply, sewer mains, etc.). This may require the extension of Council’s existing infrastructure to service the individual allotments.

Construction Work

In order to minimise undue noise disturbance and associated nuisance to surrounding premises, construction hours are to be confined to times permitted by the Environmental Protection Regulations. Enforcement of these matters is undertaken by the Environmental Protection Agency.

If the development of the subject property requires soil, plants, mulch, potting mix or construction materials to be imported or exported, the applicant shall examine such material for fire ant infestations. If fire ants are suspected ring the Department of Primary Industries on 13 25 23.

Crime Prevention

Development of the site is to be designed in accordance with the principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) to assist in crime prevention by being designed and well lit to ensure casual surveillance opportunities, particularly for open space, car parking and pedestrian and cycle paths.

Environment

Development of the site is to protect the environment from impacts associated with the use and its construction, including stormwater run-off, water quality, erosion and sediment run-off and weed infestation.

Sea Level Rise

The Draft Queensland Coastal Plan projects significant sea level rise in the future. By 2059 the projected sea level is to be in the range of RL 3.00. Although the Queensland Coastal Plan is only in draft format and has not yet been formally adopted, the projections contained within it should be taken into account during the development of the site and design of the dwellings, in order to avoid damage to property and persons. The applicant is advised that this approval is based upon current Planning provisions, which do not necessarily respond immediately to new and developing information on sea level rise, and accordingly should seek its own advice about this issue."

CARRIED

1.2 CATEGORY 1 - MINOR COMPLYING CODE ASSESSMENT & HOUSEKEEPING (BUILDING AND PLUMBING)

Dataworks Filename: GOV-DAC Delegated Items

Responsible Officer Name: Bruce Macnee
Group Manager, Sustainable Assessment

Author Name: Anne-Maree Sankey
Administration Assistant

Executive Summary

At the General Meeting of 15 May 2002, Council resolved that development assessments be classified into the following four Categories:

Category 1 – Minor Complying Code Assessments & Housekeeping (Building & Plumbing);

Category 2 – Complying Code Assessments & Minor Impact Assessments;

Category 3 – Moderately Complex Code & Impact Assessments;

Category 4 – Major and Significant Assessments.

A total of 143 Building and Plumbing Applications were dealt with during the period 29 March, 2010 to 16 April, 2010.

The applications detailed in this report have been assessed under Category 1 criteria - defined as complying, policy based Code Assessment, general housekeeping matters and other applications of a minor nature.

Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to note that the following applications were dealt with under delegated authority – Category 1 – Minor Complying Code Assessments and Housekeeping.

1. Development application for building works approval assessed against the Redlands Planning Scheme to construct a swimming pool at 20 Cooee Crescent, Macleay Island. Queensland Pool Approvals. (BW001069)

2. Development application for building works approval assessed against the Redlands Planning Scheme for a domestic outbuilding (2 x Garages) at 54-56 Beveridge Road, Thornlands. DBR Building Certification. (BW001139)

3. Development application for building works approval assessed against the Redlands Planning Scheme for a domestic outbuilding (shed) at 52 Sturgeon Street, Ormiston. The Certifier Pty Ltd. (BW001136)

4. Development application for building works approval assessed against the Redlands Planning Scheme for domestic additions at 82-86 Winston Road, Sheldon. Mr G L and Mrs D L McLennan. (BW001122)

5. Development application for building works approval assessed against the Redlands Planning Scheme for domestic additions at 8 Kawana Street, Amity. Mr G A Nankervis. (BW001133)

6. Development application for building works approval assessed against the Redlands Planning Scheme for domestic additions at 66 O’Connell Parade, Wellington Point. The Certifier Pty Ltd. (BW001081)

7. Development application for a material change of use for a dwelling house at 7 Trevanna Avenue, Russell Island. Taytif Pty Ltd As Trustee. (MC012127)

8. Development application for a material change of use to construct a dual occupancy at 245-257 (proposed Lot 2) Main Street, Redland Bay. Sutgold Pty Ltd. (MC01942)

9. Development application for a material change of use to construct a dual occupancy at 245-257 (proposed Lot 3) Main Street, Redland Bay. Sutgold Pty Ltd. (MC01936)

10. Development application for a material change of use to construct a dual occupancy at 245-257 (proposed Lot 4) Main Street, Redland Bay. Sutgold Pty Ltd. (MC01943)

11. Development application for a material change of use to construct a dual occupancy at 245-257 (proposed Lot 5) Main Street, Redland Bay. Sutgold Pty Ltd. (MC01942)

12. Development application for a material change of use to construct a dual occupancy at 245-257 (proposed Lot 6) Main Street, Redland Bay. Sutgold Pty Ltd. (MC01945)

13. Development application for a material change of use to construct a dual occupancy at 245-257 (proposed Lot 7) Main Street, Redland Bay. Sutgold Pty Ltd. (MC01946)

14. Development application for a material change of use to construct a dual occupancy at 245-257 (proposed Lot 8) Main Street, Redland Bay. Sutgold Pty Ltd. (MC01947)

Officer’s Recommendation/
Committee Resolution

Moved by: Cr Elliott
Seconded by: Cr Reimers

That the report be noted.

CARRIED

1.3 CATEGORY 2 - COMPLYING CODE ASSESSMENT AND MINOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

Dataworks Filename: GOV-DAC Delegated Items

Responsible Officer Name: Bruce Macnee
Group Manager, Sustainable Assessment

Author Name: Anne-Maree Sankey
Administration Assistant

Executive Summary

At the General Meeting of 15 May 2002, Council resolved that development assessments be classified into the following four Categories:

Category 1 – Minor Complying Code Assessments & Housekeeping;

Category 2 – Complying Code Assessments & Minor Impact Assessments;

Category 3 – Moderately Complex Code & Impact Assessments; and

Category 4 – Major and Significant Assessments.

The applications detailed in this report have been assessed under Category 2 criteria - defined as follows:

· Complying small scale types of Code Assessable applications without submission of public objection (i.e. not being adverse submissions); and

· Includes a number of process-related delegations, operational works applications and all other delegations not otherwise listed.

Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to note that the following applications were dealt with under delegated authority – Category 2 – Complying Code Assessments and Minor Impact Assessments. [Category 2 report] [PDF 400KB]

1. Development application for a material change of use to operate a home business (Indoor) at 8 Kawana Street, Amity. Mr G A Nankervis. (MC012095)

2. Development application for building works approval assessed against the Redlands Planning Scheme for domestic additions at 22 Raby Bay Boulevard, Cleveland. Stewart Homes Pty Ltd. (BW001053)

3. Development application for reconfiguration of lots (1 into 2 lots) at 12 Lakefield Drive Victoria Point. Philip Impey Architect. (SB005376)

4. Development application for reconfiguration of lots (1 into 2 lots) at 38-50 Pinecone Place, Thornlands. Bartley Burns Certifiers & Planners. (SB005461)

5. Development application for a material change of use for a dwelling house, relatives apartment, domestic outbuildings and a private swimming pool at 64 Heinemann Road, Redland Bay. Mr G C Edwards. (MC011982)

6. Development application for a material change of use for a dwelling house at 79 Beachcrest Road, Wellington Point. Mr M T and Mrs D M Johnston. (MC012057)

7. Development application for a material change of use for a dwelling house at 9 Island View Road, Russell Island. Mr M W Osborn. (MC012066)

8. Request to change an existing development approval for a dwelling house at 38 Kings Road, Russell Island. Bay Island Designs. (MC011662)

9. Development application for a material change of use for a small lot house at 72-74 Cane Street, Redland Bay. Mr B J and Mrs M Bastardi . (MC012063)

10. Development application for a material change of use for a small lot house at 12 (proposed Lot A/House 1) Lakefield Drive, Victoria Point. Phil Impey Architect . (MC012065)

11. Development application for a material change of use for a small lot house at 12 (proposed Lot B/House 2)Lakefield Drive, Victoria Point. Phil Impey Architect . (MC012066)

12. Development application for a material change of use for a small lot house at 34 Paulina Street, Wellington Point. Heisig Constructions (QLD) Pty Ltd . (MC012069)

13. Development application for a material change of use for a small lot house at 32 Paulina Street, Wellington Point. Heisig Constructions (QLD) Pty Ltd . (MC012070)

Officer’s Recommendation/
Committee Resolution

Moved by: Cr Bowler
Seconded by: Cr Elliott

That the report be noted.

CARRIED

1.4 CURRENT APPEALS LIST AS AT 20 APRIL 2010

Dataworks Filename: GOV-DAC Appeals List

Responsible Officer Name: Bruce Macnee
Group Manager, Sustainable Assessment

Author Name: Anne-Maree Sankey
Administration Assistant

Executive Summary

File No.

Applicant

Application

Details

Hearing

Date

Appeal Details

SB351901

Appeal 2884 of 1998.

Sabdoen Pty Ltd

Point O’Halloran Road, Victoria Point.

Claim against zoning amendment.

Matter adjourned to date to be fixed.

Compensation

MC009414 Appeal 1167 of 2007. Received April 2007.

AJ & CL Dowley

-v- RSC,

20 Emerson Street, Russell Island.

Application for dwelling house on Residential A lot.

Adjourned to 13 May 2010 for Further Review.

Applicant appeal against Condition 1 of Negotiated Decision.

SB005137

Appeal 1034 of 2008.

Received April 2008.

Harridan P/L –v- RCC. 46-48 Muller Street, Redland Bay.

Application for MCU and reconfiguration into 62 allotments.

Set down for Hearing June 2010 pool (2 days).

Applicant

Appeal against preliminary approval.

MC009568

Appeal 1521 of 2008.

Received June 2008.

Canaipa Developments P/L -v- RCC.

1 Wright Street & 116 Canaipa Road, Russell Island.

Application for Mixed Use – Tourist Accommodation, Outdoor Recreation.

Preliminary Point Hearing 8 April 2010. Appeal dismissed.

Applicant appeal against refusal.

MC010498 Appeal 1740 of 2008.

Received July 2008.

KCY Investments (No 2) P/L -v- RCC

7 Samarinda Drive, Point Lookout.

Application for dwelling house.

Adjourned to date to be fixed.

Applicant appeal against refusal.

SB004758.1A SB004758.1B MC007588

Appeal 1880 of 2008.

Received July 2008.

Heritage Properties P/L & Ausbuild P/L -v- RCC

268, 278, 296, 310, 332 & 344

Cleveland-Redland Bay Road, Thornlands.

Application for MCU (residential development) and reconfiguration into 34 lots (1A) and 25 lots (1B).

Listed for Further Review 10 June 2010. Set down for Hearing in July 2010 pool.

Applicant appeal against deemed refusal.

MC010968 Appeal 2627 of 2008.

MC010968

Supreme Court Appeal 12616 of 2009.

Received November 2009.

Queensland Construction Materials P/L -v-RCC & Ors:

Various Sites on North Stradbroke Island.

Birkdale Progress Association, FOSI, SIMO, Wildlife Preservation Society & Ors –v- Qld Construction Materials P/L

Application for Material Change Of Use for Extractive Industry

(Removal and Transportation of Sand Tailings) and

Environmentally Relevant Activity 20 (Extracting

Rock or Other Material).

Application for Leave to Appeal the PE Court Preliminary Point Judgment 29 September 2009

Preliminary Points Judgment handed down 29 September 2009.

Adjourned for Further Review to 12 May 2010.

Preliminary Point Hearing held 26 March 2010, awaiting judgment.

Applicant Appeal against refusal

Submitter Application against PE Court Judgment

MC009566 Appeal 3220 of 2008 Received December 2008.

Slade P/L, PJ Laing & J Laing -v- RCC

14-20 Gordon Road, Redland Bay.

Application for Development Permit (Material Change of Use) for residential purposes

No date set

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

MC011268

Appeal 245 of 2009.

Received February 2009.

Sutgold Pty Ltd

-v- RCC.

97 Main Street, Redland Bay.

Application for dwelling house on land zoned part Urban Residential/part Open Space.

No date set.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

10.

SB005347

Appeal 1016 of 2009.

Received April 2009.

BMD Properties Pty Ltd –v- RCC

18 Mainsail Street, Birkdale.

Application for reconfiguration into 10 lots.

No date set.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

11.

MC008405

Appeal 1302 of 2009.

Received May 2009.

Ausbuild Projects Pty Ltd –v- RCC

104 Kinross Road, Thornlands

Application for rezoning to Residential for reconfiguration into 107 lots.

Adjourned for Further Review 29 April 2010.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

12.

MC008305

Appeal 1303 of 2009.

Received May 2009.

PEET Thornlands Pty Ltd –v- RCC

89-101 Kinross Road, Thornlands

Application for rezoning to Residential for reconfiguration into 102 lots.

Adjourned for Further Review 29 April 2010.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

13.

MC010645

Appeal 1615 of 2009.

Received June 2009.

HJ & HM Harrison –v- RCC 68-80 Kinross Road, Thornlands.

Application for temporary vehicle depot.

No date set.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

14.

MC010715

Appeal 1963 of 2009-07-28

Received July 2009.

JT George Nominees P/L –v- RCC

Cnr Taylor Rd & Woodlands Dve, Thornlands.

Application for preliminary approval for MCU for neighbourhood centre, open space and residential uses (pursuant to a concept master plan).

No date set.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

15.

MC011526

Appeal 2194 of 2009

Received August 2009.

Ken Ryan & Assoc –v- RCC

41 Tramican Street, Point Lookout

Application for Dwelling House.

No date set.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

16.

MC009598

Appeal 2271 of 2009.

Received August 2009.

J G Clissold as Trustee –v- RCC

11-15 Nicholas Street, Russell Island

Application for Child Care Centre.

Adjourned for Further Review 23 June 2010. Set down for Hearing August 2010 pool (5 days).

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

17.

MC011579

Appeal 2345 of 2009.

Received August 2009.

S Maller & Y Allayban –v- RCC

9 Piccaninny Street, Macleay Island

Application for Dwelling House.

No date set.

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

18.

MC011745

Appeal 3296 of 2009.

Received November 2009.

S Mergler –v- RCC

106 Beelong Street, Macleay Island

Application for Dwelling House.

No date set.

Applicant Appeal against conditions of approval.

19.

MC010225

Appeal 3391 of 2009.

Received December 2009.

M Parsons –v- RCC

65 Coondooroopa Drive, Macleay Island

Application for Dwelling House.

Adjourned for Further Review 28 April 2010.

Applicant Appeal against conditions of approval.

20.

MC011322

Appeal 3566 of 2009.

Received December 2009.

Casagrande Investments Pty Ltd –v- RCC

537-547 Redland Bay Road, Victoria Point

Application for Multiple Dwelling (13 units)

Listed for Further Review 13 May 2010. Set down for Hearing June 2010 pool (4 days).

Applicant Appeal against refusal.

21.

MC009585

Appeal 290 of 2010.

Received January 2010.

HIB Investments P/L –v- RCC

2-6 School of Arts Rd, Redland Bay

Application for mixed use development (shops, showroom class A, refreshment establishment)

No date set.

Application Appeal against refusal.

JS.

MC011754 Appeal 516 of 2010.

Received February 2010.

K & KC Young –v- RCC

17 Portsmouth Place, Cleveland

Application for 3 storey dwelling house

Set down for Directions Hearing 23 April 2010.

Applicant Appeal against deemed refusal.

23.

MC011141

Appeal 1052 of 2010.

Received April 2010.

Florina Pty Ltd –v- RCC

241-259 Boundary Road, Thornlands

Application for development permit to extend existing flower farm.

Entry of Appearance to be filed. No date set.

Applicant Appeal against conditions of approval.

Information on appeals may be found as follows:

1) Planning and Environment Court

a. Information on current appeals and declarations with the Planning and Environment Court involving Redland City Council can be found at the District Court web site using the “Search civil files (eCourts) Party Search” service:

http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/esearching/party.asp

b. Judgements of the Planning and Environment Court can be viewed via the Supreme Court of Queensland Library web site under the Planning and Environment Court link:

http://www.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/

2) Redland City Council

The lodgement of an appeal is acknowledged with the Application details on the Councils “Planning and Development On Line - Development - Application Inquiry” site. Some Appeal documents will also be available (note: legal privilege applies to some documents). All judgements and settlements will be reflected in the Council Decision Notice documents:

http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/Planning/Pages/default.aspx

3) Department of Infrastructure and Planning (DIP)

The DIP provides a Database of Appeals (http://services.dip.qld.gov.au/appeals/) that may be searched for past appeals and declarations heard by the Planning and Environment Court. The database contains:

· A consolidated list of all appeals and declarations lodged in the Planning and Environment Courts across Queensland of which the Chief Executive has been notified.

· Information about the appeal or declaration, including the appeal number, name and year, the site address and local government.

Officer’s Recommendation/
Committee Resolution

Moved by: Cr Elliott
Seconded by: Cr Williams

That the report be noted.

CARRIED

Meeting Closure

The meeting closed at 10.04am.

Signature of Chairperson:
Confirmation Date: