1388 Gold Coast Highway, Palm Beach QLD 4221

Material Change of Use Code Assessment Multiple Dwellings (x9)

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website 10 months ago. It was received by them 1 day earlier.

(Source: Gold Coast City Council, reference MCU/2019/464)

28 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Tamara Johansen commented

    I object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach - for the following reasons:

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for site coverage - 62% vs 50%

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for density - 1 bed/20.33m2 vs 1 bed/33m2

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for setbacks - there needs to be space to breathe between these developments

    - No allowance for deep soil planting or communal open space at ground level for residents

    - Design feels sterile and more suited to an inner city block than a sleepy beachside community, not in keeping with the local character of Palm Beach

    - 1 x visitor carpark to accommodate 9 x "villas" with the extreme lack of on street parking already apparent is not acceptable

    - There is already a 9 storey development approved on this very small, narrow street, and many others in the immediate vicinity including Canopy - grossly oversized and in breech of many acceptable town planning outcomes including density, setbacks, and design ;Pacific - zero setbacks, excessive height, excessive shadowing, offensive design that does not complement the character of our area; Magnoli apartments + villas - excessive density, excessive height; Siarn; 27th Avenue beachfront; the site currently occupied by Avvia restaurant; Periscope apartments.

    Please insist that the plans are reworked to comply with the acceptable outcomes for site coverage, density, and setbacks. Please insist on deep soil planting and appropriate parking provisions for the comfort & enjoyment of future residents.

  2. Karen Rowles commented

    1 Visitor Carpark is completely unacceptable.
    I notice the Development has been set back on the boundary on the Highway to allow for the Planned Light Rail... which the majority of Palm Beach residents DO NOT WANT.
    The setbacks on the other boundaries are too little and do not adhere to City Plan Guidelines.
    The height is not acceptable.
    There is no infrastructure to support these Developments.
    These High Density High Rises are not in keeping with the character or amenity of our coastal community. However the Council have effectively changed the amenity and character of Palm Beach by disregarding their own City Plan Guidelines. It’s criminal!
    I know residents will remember the Destruction of Palm Beach at Election 2020.

  3. Trish Hawkins commented

    The development at 1388 Gold Coast Highway does not comply with GCCC code on:
    density, setbacks, site coverage, amenities such as communal open space and car parking.
    I strongly object to this development for the reasons given above .
    The council requires us to be polite and direct, I request that council should give the residents of Palm Beach a fair say . Sadly that has not been happening since this council was elected.
    Councils are elected in good faith by the community to uphold the laws of the city but I see no evidence of this instead building codes are being broken repeatedly and relentlessly. Where will it all end. The community has no power against greed. Very sad to see a beautiful part of Australia ruined.

  4. Tracey commented

    I object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach - for the following reasons:

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for site coverage - 62% vs 50%

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for density - 1 bed/20.33m2 vs 1 bed/33m2

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for setbacks - there needs to be space to breathe between these developments

    - No allowance for deep soil planting or communal open space at ground level for residents

    - Design feels sterile and more suited to an inner city block than a sleepy beachside community, not in keeping with the local character of Palm Beach

    - 1 x visitor carpark to accommodate 9 x "villas" with the extreme lack of on street parking already apparent is not acceptable

    - There is already a 9 storey development approved on this very small, narrow street, and many others in the immediate vicinity including Canopy - grossly oversized and in breech of many acceptable town planning outcomes including density, setbacks, and design ;Pacific - zero setbacks, excessive height, excessive shadowing, offensive design that does not complement the character of our area; Magnoli apartments + villas - excessive density, excessive height; Siarn; 27th Avenue beachfront; the site currently occupied by Avvia restaurant; Periscope apartments

    We need to protect our lifestyle we need to build a sustainable city, council need to look into reworking this development to suit the suburbs character

  5. Sandra Dobson commented

    I object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach - for the following reasons:

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for site coverage - 62% vs 50%

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for density - 1 bed/20.33m2 vs 1 bed/33m2

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for setbacks - there needs to be space to breathe between these developments

    - No allowance for deep soil planting or communal open space at ground level for residents

    - Design feels sterile and more suited to an inner city block than a sleepy beachside community, not in keeping with the local character of Palm Beach

    - 1 x visitor carpark to accommodate 9 x "villas" with the extreme lack of on street parking already apparent is not acceptable

    - There is already a 9 storey development approved on this very small, narrow street, and many others in the immediate vicinity including Canopy - grossly oversized and in breech of many acceptable town planning outcomes including density, setbacks, and design ;Pacific - zero setbacks, excessive height, excessive shadowing, offensive design that does not complement the character of our area; Magnoli apartments + villas - excessive density, excessive height; Siarn; 27th Avenue beachfront; the site currently occupied by Avvia restaurant; Periscope apartments.

    Please insist that the plans are reworked to comply with the acceptable outcomes for site coverage, density, and setbacks. Please insist on deep soil planting and appropriate parking provisions for the comfort & enjoyment of future residents.

  6. Karen Rowles commented

    I object on the basis that Setbacks have been disregarded.
    The design of the building is not in keeping with the amenity of the area.
    Inadequate on site Parking.
    There are already too many high rises in such a small area.
    We don’t want the character of Palm Beach destroyed.

  7. Kevin Kunst commented

    I object on the basis that nearly all council guidelines have been disregarded. These guidelines were introduced to provide suitable development and still protect the area without destroying the character of the suburb. Obviously this is not happening and council should be brought to account over these matters.

  8. Debra Wolfe commented

    I also object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach
    as already raised by other concerned locals.

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for site coverage - 62% vs 50%

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for density - 1 bed/20.33m2 vs 1 bed/33m2

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for setbacks - there needs to be space to breathe between these developments

    - No allowance for deep soil planting or communal open space at ground level for residents

    - Design feels sterile and more suited to an inner city block than a sleepy beachside community, not in keeping with the local character of Palm Beach

    - 1 x visitor carpark to accommodate 9 x "villas" with the extreme lack of on street parking already apparent is not acceptable

    - There are way to many developments that actually don't add anything to the beach culture and Palm Beach is looking like a suburb of Brisbane!!

    GCCC - Please, Please Please - act within the code and ensure developers comply.

  9. Sharee Fiume commented

    Council needs to enforce the maximum 50% site coverage with ZERO tolerance for any application that exceeds this.

    What is the purpose of council regulations if they are not adhered to?

    Families make decisions on where to buy and where to live, partly based on what council allow and do not allow in the immediate vicinity. We need to be able to trust council to adhere to their own regulations, not bow to the $ of big developers.

  10. Shannon May commented

    I object to this application on the basis that this building will add to the congestion that is already in Palm Beach and most certainly the small street of 22nd Avenue. The suggested site is too small for a building of this application and it does not adhere to other guidelines such as set backs, room size, deep root plantings and it does not adhere to the village lifestyle that was Palm Beach.

    Development is fine, but over development in Palm Beach is unnecessary and is destroying the very reason why people wanted to live there in the first place. This unsightly building along with other new unsightly buildings will certainly become the future slums of the suburb. Everyday the likelihood of the light rail going through Palm Beach is becoming more and more UNLIKELY. This is not a good enough excuse to allow relaxations in the City Plan.

    Developers must stay within the guidelines of the City Plan and the GCCC must now stand up for the City and push back on these developers cashing in and walking out when they are done. We the residents of the Gold Coast voted this Council in to work for us, not themselves and their developer friends. In addition, I was told directly by a GCCC city planner that west of the GC Highway has a height limit of 2 stories and it is shown so on the map... despite other buildings being pushed through without reason. It's time these planners stand by their word.

  11. Domenica De pasquale commented

    To approve this development application is poor town planning by the GCCC.
    Palm beach TRAFFIC is horrendous due to the current over development and high density high rises already constructed that were NOT within the current town plan guidelines.
    With currently 10 cranes in Palm Beach constructing buildings that have ALL been given RELAXATIONS it would be criminal to approve another non compliant development with not enough car parks, visitor parking or green space.
    DEEP PLANTING is what the local community want and require for all large developments.
    Currently Bin collection day is horrendous in Palm beach with traffic, illegally parked cars and cranky garbage truck drivers.
    I invite you to come to 27th ave where the RSL have just finished three concrete jungles and with 39 apartments due to be constructed INFRONT of these with a set back of only 1.6 metres off the beach esplanade. This is town planning at its worst. The Gold Coast city council town planning department should be ashamed of what they have achieved. The future of Palm beach is at risk as all amenities are currently being greatly affected.
    The current Gold Coast Highway is at a stand still. Traffic is stopped. This road has not been upgraded since the 80s.
    I pay enormous rates.
    I developed a building with three car parks per apartment. With plenty of deep planting and 7 evergreen fully grown frangipani trees. We have plenty of lawn. A beach front pool and gardens. I maintained Pandanus trees which were planted in the 1950s. This is how development should be done to maintain the lifestyle that palm beach residents deserve and expect.

  12. Linda knight commented

    I strongly object to this proposed building, 22nd Avenue is far too small and narrow it is congested as it is,cars parked on either side, garbage day is horrendous. This lovely Street is still able to allow children to play outside something that would not happen if this plan goes through please reject this proposal let’s keep the charm of Palm Beach.

  13. Catherine Modini commented

    What is the point of planning guidelines when they are ignored by council and approval is given. Over development is only going to cause more traffic congestion, shadowing, wind tunnels etc. & total degradation to a once healthy, livable environment. This sort of development is not what people want!

  14. Lesley Oldfield commented

    I object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach - for the following reasons:

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for site coverage - 62% vs 50%

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for density - 1 bed/20.33m2 vs 1 bed/33m2

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for setbacks - there needs to be space to breathe between these developments

    - No allowance for deep soil planting or communal open space at ground level for residents

    - Design feels sterile and more suited to an inner city block than a sleepy beachside community, not in keeping with the local character of Palm Beach

    - 1 x visitor carpark to accommodate 9 x "villas" with the extreme lack of on street parking already apparent is not acceptable

    - There is already a 9 storey development approved on this very small, narrow street, and many others in the immediate vicinity including Canopy - grossly oversized and in breech of many acceptable town planning outcomes including density, setbacks, and design ;Pacific - zero setbacks, excessive height, excessive shadowing, offensive design that does not complement the character of our area; Magnoli apartments + villas - excessive density, excessive height; Siarn; 27th Avenue beachfront; the site currently occupied by Avvia restaurant; Periscope apartments.

  15. KAREN ROWLES commented

    The Setback is drastically outside City Plan Guidelines.
    GCCC Councillor CAMERON Caldwell has said that the Light Rail Route will no longer be an excuse for Developers to ignore Height, Setback, Density and other City Plan Guidelines.
    Therefore, if Cr Caldwell is to be believed, this Proposed Development MUST BE REJECTED.

  16. Sue Thomas commented

    I object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach - for the following reasons:
    - it is drastically outside the city plan guidelines which the GCCC tells us is the criteria that they use to retain the liveability and "feel" of our suburbs while allowing for growth and progress.
    - the articles of the city plan that it contravenes are irrelevant (but have been stated in many of the previous comments shown here), the only relevant fact is that it DOES contravene them. These criteria were developed with adequate allowance for progress and growth while still maintaining an environment that the people of the Gold Coast can enjoy
    - GCCC Councillor Caldwell has, as previously stated here, has said that the light rail cannot be used as an excuse for ignoring setback, height, and density regulations as stated in the city plan. This statement must be taken into account as it reflects the feelings of the community
    - there is an unacceptable amount of overheight, oversized building already constructed or under construction in the vicinity of this proposed building (Canopy, Magnoli, Siarn and Pacific to name a few) with little or no consideration for parking, traffic flow and general ambience of the suburb.
    I live in Palm Beach and have for almost 2 decades. While I am aware that progress is necessary the fact that I can drive between Currumbin Creek and Tallebudgera Creek and see no less than 14 new buildings or construction site or proposed construction sites leads me to firmly believe that the GCCC needs to heed the emotion of the populace and seek to find a middle ground.
    If we are to have ANY faith at all in our council and councillors this proposed developement MUST be rejected.

  17. Patrick Comerford commented

    I object to this proposed development on the grounds as stated by other objectors that it contravenes GCC planning guidelines. When are gold coast planning requirements going to be enforced to protect the WHOLE community of Palm Beach from inappropriate use of residential size blocks being turned into concrete blocks.

  18. Jennifer commented

    Palm Beach residents rely on Council's development guidelines to indicate what development may be tolerated in their locality. However, it seems that Council have the view that their guidelines are just something that can be discarded and developers can invent what ever they like. Council, This is not acceptable and other ratepayers have called on Council to represent their views on developments in Palm Beach.

    Council, What is also not acceptable is developers overcrowding the land space with the building footprint, people and the accompanying numbers of vehicles.

    Council must be onside with ratepayers and protect what living standards residents want or need in Palm Beach.

    Council, Palm Beach residents are calling on you to say NO to further high-rise development overcrowding the precious little space available in Palm Beach.

  19. Rachel commented

    I object to this proposed development on the grounds it contravenes the City Plan Guidelines as already outlined.

    Further, the shadow the building will cast means neighbouring properties will only have a few hours of sun in March and almost no sun in winter. The is also incredibly close to the boundaries.

    There is already another nine storey development approved on the adjoining block.
    At the moment the streets are already narrow, crowded and dangerous.
    Council, please consider neighbouring properties and the dangers, especially now Council is proposing a change in the landslide risk to adjoining lots.

  20. Brett commented

    I think the most dangerous DA approved so far is next door of 1388 . Which is no 4 TWENTY SECOND AVENUE palm beach .
    I invite all my fellow residence to go back to the council web site and have a look of it .
    9 story building, 23 units approved in such a tiny 700 sqm block of land . Honestly the funniest DA approved in whole country by braking every single rule of the council.this 1388 is nothing compared to the next door

    1) exceeded the density. It’s RD 5 site and 700 sqm . Only suitable for 14 beds ( 50 sqm per bed ) now they have 23 units and 48 beds
    2)look at the setbacks folks. 0.5 m from one side and rear set back is 0.8 m ( that is unbelievable)
    3)3 visitor parking for 23 units ( you must be kidding. What’s happening to the street parking. How is your children going to play .
    4) 9 story + 2 basements + roof top .. basically 12 story here . ( gosh covering the sunlight of Naibour’s in March )
    5)max hight you could go here is 29 meters. Please look at the hight of this building.

    I called this a modern slums.23 units in 700 sqm block with 3 visitor parking. 1388 is nothing. Just 9 units in 600 sqm land . 15 more units in the next door because it’s 100 sqm more bigger .

    This may be a dream .

  21. Lorraine Barker commented

    This is way OTT for the area. Narrow Street(dangerous for parking etc)
    And standard suburban houses all around. Please consider the height limits for this Area?

  22. Leah Ellis commented

    I object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach - for the following reasons:

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for site coverage - 62% vs 50%

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for density - 1 bed/20.33m2 vs 1 bed/33m2

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for setbacks - there needs to be space to breathe between these developments

    - No allowance for deep soil planting or communal open space at ground level for residents

    - Design feels sterile and more suited to an inner city block than a sleepy beachside community, not in keeping with the local character of Palm Beach

    - 1 x visitor carpark to accommodate 9 x "villas" with the extreme lack of on street parking already apparent is not acceptable

    - There is already a 9 storey development approved on this very small, narrow street, and many others in the immediate vicinity including Canopy - grossly oversized and in breech of many acceptable town planning outcomes including density, setbacks, and design, Pacific - zero setbacks, excessive height, excessive shadowing, offensive design that does not complement the character of our area; Magnoli apartments + villas - excessive density, excessive height; Siarn; 27th Avenue beachfront; the site currently occupied by Avvia restaurant; Periscope apartments.

    Please insist that the plans are reworked to comply with the acceptable outcomes for site coverage, density, and setbacks. Please insist on deep soil planting and appropriate parking provisions for the comfort & enjoyment of future residents.

  23. Tony Smith commented

    I’m from Burleigh heads . I was trying to buy no 4 Twenty Second Avenue some time ago when it was on for sale with Will west .
    I was amazed after found out what the developer has achieved in the adjoining block of 1388 GC Highway. 9 story building + Double basement parking and 22 Units in a 700 sqm block of land .
    I’m not a big or a popular developer, but I was so surprised to see that they got approved

    1) 600 mm & 800 mm SET BACKS FROM TWO SIDES

    2) LESS THAN 10 SQM PER BED in a 50 SQM PER BED , RD 5 Zone

    3) Two or three visitor car spaces for 22 units in a street like this ( probably people going to park on the street )

    4) DESIGN & FACADE looks absolutely horrible

    NO WONDER after looking at this sort of a approval other people also asking for some sort of development opportunities. IF A 9 STORY WITH 23 UNITS GOT APPROVED IN A 700 SQM BLOCK WHY NOT A PERSON CAN ASK FOR 9 UNITS IN A 600 SQM BLOCK WITH A 7 STORY .

    I think WE ALL LIVE IN A EQUAL WPRLD . No one have super powers or super opportunities to compare others . I BELIEVE THIS IS A VERY FAIR APPLICATION & IF THIS IS A PROBLEM WHY NOT COUNCIL TAKE STEPS TO CANCEL THE APPROVED 4 TWENTY SECOND AVENUE ( next door to 1388 ) THATS FAIRNESS FOR neighbours.
    Other wise the DEVELOPER WHO GOT APPROVED NEXT DOOR to 1388 will fight for EVER to stop the development of 9 units Because if this 7 story comes up , it blocks his sea views and won’t be able to sell .
    COUNCIL is for the fairness of every single person who lives in this beautiful place .

  24. Sam commented

    I object to this proposed development - 1388 Gold Coast Highway Palm Beach - for the following reasons:

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for site coverage - 62% vs 50%

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for density - 1 bed/20.33m2 vs 1 bed/33m2

    - Proposed development exceeds acceptable outcomes for setbacks

    - Numerous other developments already approved within the immediate vicinity.

    - 1 x visitor carpark to accommodate 9 x "villas" with the extreme lack of on street parking already apparent

    This application should be refused in its current form.

  25. Mark commented

    think the most dangerous DA approved so far is next door of 1388 . Which is no 4 TWENTY SECOND AVENUE palm beach .
    I invite all my fellow residence to go back to the council web site and have a look of it .
    9 story building, 23 units approved in such a tiny 700 sqm block of land . Honestly the funniest DA approved in whole country by braking every single rule of the council.this 1388 is nothing compared to the next door

    1) exceeded the density. It’s RD 5 site and 700 sqm . Only suitable for 14 beds ( 50 sqm per bed ) now they have 23 units and 48 beds
    2)look at the setbacks folks. 0.5 m from one side and rear set back is 0.8 m ( that is unbelievable)
    3)3 visitor parking for 23 units ( you must be kidding. What’s happening to the street parking. How is your children going to play .
    4) 9 story + 2 basements + roof top .. basically 12 story here . ( gosh covering the sunlight of Naibour’s in March )
    5)max hight you could go here is 29 meters. Please look at the hight of this building.

    I called this a modern slums.23 units in 700 sqm block with 3 visitor parking. 1388 is nothing. Just 9 units in 600 sqm land . 15 more units in the next door because it’s 100 sqm more bigger .

  26. Linda Evans commented

    Wow !! Why people repeating the same comment here against this .
    IF 23 UNITS APPROVED IN A 700 SQM BLOCK NEXT DOOR WHY NOT 9 UNITS IN A 600 SQM BLOCK ?
    Also the HIGHT LIMIT here is 29 Meters. This building is very less and only 7 story .
    Compared to the set backs of approved 4 twenty second avenue next door this got set backs of 3 m , 3 m , 7.5 m & 1.7 m
    Approved one is 600 mm & 800 mm set backs .
    Compared to 23 units it’s 9 units , compared to 9 story 1388 is 7 story , set backs are million times better .
    WHAT ACTUALLY THE PROBLEM HERE FOLKS. looks like THIS BUILDING COVERS THE SEA VIEWS OF already approved one .
    THEN THATS NOT NAIBOUR’s PROBLEM.

  27. Alan commented

    I wish and hope this application will be APPROVED SOON .
    By looking at the comments I understand I’m that way the next door 23 UNITS IN 700 SQM is never ever going to build . BECAUSE WHEN THIS 7 STORY COVERS THE SEA VIEWS OF 9 STORY that’s all about it .
    That’s a big relief for all the Naibour’s. 9 units is no problem at all . How about if 23 units builds here and if 23 new families comes in to this tiny street . No way of getting street parking.
    THEREFORE I WISH THIS WILL BE APPROVED SOON TO SAVE OUR NAIBOURHOOD FROM unbelievably approved 23 units in 700 sqm block .

  28. Steve Ross commented

    I agree with what Alan mentioned above. By looking at the DA Approval of 4 Twenty Second Avenue, the application of 1388 Gold Coast Highway is much more sophisticated, elegant and low impact. I believe the proposed development at 1388 GC Highway it is going to give the area and the street better appeals. The landscaping plan proposed by the developer of 1388 GC HWY is also going to give that section of the Gold Coast Highway a lift.

    The density proposed at 1388 is much less than what was approved for 4 Twenty Second Avenue. Given that all other requirements are met, I believe the council should grant approval to 1388 GC HWY.

  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