122 Surf Parade, Broadbeach QLD 4218

Material change of use Code assessment 196 x Short term accommodation units, 4 x Multiple Dwellings and Food and Drink outlet (170m2)

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website about 1 month ago. It was received by them 3 days earlier.

(Source: Gold Coast City Council, reference MCU/2019/386)

11 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Craig Delianis commented

    To whom it may concern,

    I am an owner and resident of 120 Surf Parade, Broadbeach and would be directly impacted by the proposed development at 122 Surf Parade, Broadbeach. The Planning Application specifies "196 x Short term accommodation units, 4 x Multiple Dwellings and Food and Drink outlet (170m2)”.

    As much as I understand that the site in question is ripe for redevelopment and to be expected, I have serious concerns regarding the proposal, given the proposed site is not a large land area.

    The Planning Application specifies 200 units. The only comparable new building in the area is Qube Broadbeach on Jubilee Avenue. That building is 202 Apartments over 40 Levels. The land area where Qube has been constructed is substantially larger than 122 Surf Parade, Broadbeach by a factor of 3 - 4 times. The proposed building would require deep foundations and car parking infrastructure and a high likelihood of structural impact, to especially the front tower at 120 Surf

    There are a large number of current developments in the Broadbeach area under construction. None of them are on the scale proposed, for a comparable land size at 122 Surf Parade, Broadbeach. The similar developments are:

    Vue Broadbeach - 71 Apartments over 25 levels

    Koko Broadbeach - 99 Apartments over 25 floors

    Opus Broadbeach - 113 Apartments over 27 Levels

    Encore Broadbeach - 100 Apartments over 25 Levels

    As much as you can never guarantee a view or an aspect, such a large development immediately on the Northern boundary of 120 Surf Parade, Broadbeach would significantly impact the natural light presently enjoyed and would result in a shadow being cast, especially during the winter months when it is most important.

    I respectfully request that this Planning Application be rejected in its current form and a more reasonable proposal be submitted.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Craig Delianis

  2. Lester Eastwood commented

    To whom it may concern,

    I am an owner and resident of 121 Surf Parade, Broadbeach and would be directly impacted by the proposed development at 122 Surf Parade, Broadbeach. The Planning Application specifies "196 x Short term accommodation units, 4 x Multiple Dwellings and Food and Drink outlet (170m2)”.

    The Planning Application specifies 200 units. The only comparable new building in the area is Qube Broadbeach on Jubilee Avenue. That building is 202 Apartments over 40 Levels. The land area where Qube has been constructed is substantially larger than 122 Surf Parade, Broadbeach by a factor of 3 - 4 times. The proposed building would require deep foundations and car parking infrastructure and a high likelihood of structural impact, to especially the front tower at 120 Surf.

    I respectfully request that this Planning Application be rejected.

  3. Terry Wilson commented

    To whom it may concern,
    I am the owner of an apartment at 121 Surf Parade. We have recently renovated and have plans to reside in the apartment. We are in the front tower and would be directly impacted by the proposed development at 122 Surf Parade, Broadbeach. The Planning Application specifies "196 x Short term accommodation units, 4 x Multiple Dwellings and Food and Drink outlet (170m2)”.

    The impact in terms of traffic flow, noise pollution during the build, increased pedestrian movements and most importantly on a personal perspective the impact on the view and shading to our apartment will be considerable and likely have a material impact on not just the value of the apartment but also our peaceful enjoyment.

    I respectfully request that this Planning Application be rejected in its current form and a more reasonable proposal be submitted.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Terry Wilson

  4. Dian Neowhouse commented

    To whom it may concern
    I am an owner in 121-125 Surf Parade Broadbeach.
    I am not against the location being redeveloped however, the proposed 31 storey building development application MCU/2019/386 at 122-124 Surf Parade is excessive for the land available from combining the two sites, this would be a massive imposing structure on a small footprint of land and totally out of alignment with the existing low to medium rise buildings.
    I respectfully request that this Planning Application be rejected in its current form and a more reasonable proposal be submitted.

  5. Angus Barr commented

    To whom it may concern

    I am an owner in 121 Surf parade and concerned at the size and number of units proposed for the development (MCU/2019/386). The building will have a negative impact to the area including traffic noise reverberating off the existing buildings and add further pressure to the lack of street parking available.

    I request the planning application be rejected due to the size and negative impact to the area.

  6. Pam Rogers commented

    To whom it may concern
    I am an owner in 121 Surf Parade. I am writing to express my objection to the proposed development in its current form. The number of units is excessive for the size of the site and would significantly change the amenity of the immediate surroundings.

  7. Ken and June Bowden commented

    We are current owners of a unit on the western side of Capricornia 121 Surf Parade Broadbeach.
    We are writing to object to the proposed application MCU/2019/386 122-124 Surf Parade Broadbeach.
    Whilst we understand that a development opportunity exists for this site the application in its current form is excessive for the current land size and has too many floors and units.
    We are concerned about increased traffic and noise and extra pressure on the already limited parking in this area. This development is more suited for a highway location on a larger block.
    We request that this development proposal be rejected in its current form and a more reasonable proposal be submitted of at least 25 floors or less.

  8. Suanne and Wayne Cummins commented

    To whom it may concern,
    We are resident owners at "Capricornia", 121 Surf Pde, Broadbeach, directly opposite the proposed development. We object to the proposed development on the following grounds:
    1.The severe impact on health and lifestyle of losing all natural sunlight into lower floor units facing west. This will be particularly harsh during winter.
    2. Noise and traffic congestion which will necessarily be caused by such a large development on a small parcel of land surrounded by mainly residential buildings of significantly lower density.
    3. Loss of views to units on western side of "Capricornia".
    4. Loss of financial value in market terms resulting from the above 1, 2 and 3.
    5. Removal of established trees which, along with changes to density and building heights, will negatively alter the character of Broadbeach.
    We request that this application be rejected in its current form.

  9. Robyn & Philip Mexted commented

    To whom it may concern.
    re: MCU/2019/386
    My husband and I are owners and permanent residents at 120 Surf Parade, Broadbeach. Our 3 level apartment is directly adjacent to the proposed development site at 122-124 Surf Parade Broadbeach.
    The planning application lodged with the City of Gold Coast Council specifies a tower of 31 levels, 196 short term accommodation units, 4 multiple dwellings, a food and drink outlet and a 2 level basement carpark.
    While my husband and I are not opposed to development, we are greatly concerned with the height, size and density of accommodation proposed on such a small foot-print of land, especially in comparison to similar buildings in the area. For example: Qube, Belle Maison and Capricornia, all built on significantly larger parcels of land.
    Our apartment and those also in the front tower of 120 Surf Parade, would lose their northerly vista, winter sun, natural light, privacy and would be greatly impacted with noise from the loading bay, service and rubbish areas on the southern boundary of the proposed development.
    Significant and inevitable increase in traffic generated by such a large building would also greatly impact an already busy area of Broadbeach, where vehicle parking is at a premium.
    Our very genuine concern also, is the possibility of damage to the structural integrity of our building during the de-watering and sheet piling process necessary for such a large development.
    Considering all of the above, we respectfully request that the Council reject this planning application in its current form and a more reasonable proposal be submitted.

  10. Bev Moore commented

    To Whom it may Concern,
    Re: MCU/2019/386

    I am an owner resident of 120 Surf Parade Broadbeach and am concerned about the proposed development MCU/2019/386 for 122 to124 Surf Parade Broadbeach.

    Being in the back block (off Jubilee Ave) the current design has balconies looking into my living area and bedroom meaning I will lose all privacy.

    The size of development for the size of land is of great concern, especially during the construction phase when they will need to dig two storeys below ground for parking. There is significant risk of damage to the foundations of our building as the proposed development is just metres from our property in sandy soil.

    Having a Hotel in the middle of low to medium residential area is going to bring more traffic with Coaches and cars to a narrow street that already has parking problems and will be near a bend. Surf Parade just south of the proposed development is closed to all traffic several times per year for music festivals causing traffic to come to a halt in front of our property and needing to U-turn with limited space.

    Such a tall building is also going to block the sun on our property and pool area.

    I respectfully request that the current plans are reviewed for a more suitable proposal.

  11. Jenny Cowell commented

    As and owner resident in Capricornia 121-125 Surf Pde. I object to the current proposal known as MCU/2019/386 for 122 Surf Pde.

    The 'continued trend' of intense high rise developments close to the Gold Coast beach side is drawing constant negative appeal for obvious reasons. This is another example.

    1. The balance of size and space has been radically compromised.

    2. The impact of traffic congestion, parking and noise will add major disruptions to an already existing situation in Broadbeach.

    3. Broadbeach is a prestigious residential location enjoyed by many permanent residences over 40 years, due to the planning of medium to low rise developments.

    4.Continued approvals of this kind will reverse this trend into a 'high-rise short term rental venue', reducing the value of existing homes and owner properties.

    5.Council planning authorities should look ahead of the game, and not be pressured by developers optimising quality for quantity.

    6.The properties on the southern boundary are medium rise, this profile should be maintained, I am not against development just a common sense approach to it. The size per land ratio is ridiculous .

    7.I strongly object to this proposal in its current form , as the impact of existing residences and local business will be detrimental. Obstruction to ones health, safety, and general traffic movement in Broadbeach should be a major consideration for the continued development in this whole area. Adding additional high rise in compromised locations will not benefit the future of this town, or any other coastal town.

    Yours sincerely,

    Jenny Cowell.

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts