Comments made here were sent to Gold Coast City Council. Add your own comment.
So another high rise block of concrete on a tiny block ruining Broadbeach. GCCC wake up!
This is crazy putting a high rise here on a small block. It casts shadows on existing properties. Just like Encore building in Britannia Avenue.
The Gold Coast Council are destroying the Gold Coast. I am not apposed to development but buildings should have minimum 4 metre set backs from their boundary fence not 2 metres. This will make it less appealing for developers to build on small blocks. Towers on small block should taper in from ground level and have 1/2 metre setbacks from the 3rd or 4th level. This would make developers reassess purchasing a development site before submitting to council to approve a wide, tall tower on a small block. Where are the A/C machines going to be located? Where are the acoustic reports? Neighbouring residents will be so close to the tower that they'll here the AC machines run all day/night. Its disgraceful how council approves these large towers on small blocks. Having a tower with minimal setbacks creates shadowing, obstruction of natural sunlight and cross ventilation to adjacent buildings. Those councillors, members who approve these structures will not have my vote come election time. Its time for you Mr Tom Tate to leave council and enjoy your lavish life outside chambers and not destroy the Gold Coast. Change the criteria for developments, increase setback, taper towers on small blocks, lower site cover to 40% max not 60%
Guys, sorry to advise all Broadbeach residents
Mayor Tate, your local councillors and GCCC are not listening allowing every excuse for developers to keep building hi-rise unit blocks.
Sorry now called towers.
Are you aware of planned Assana Tower 52 levels 15 Rosewood Ave Broadbeach on 1208 Sqm.
I can count at least 14 planned developments around these few streets alone.
Might be time to pull up stumps or if lucky a developer knocks on door.
Regards.
We couldn't agree more with all the residents in Broadbeach, complaining of proposed Hi-Rises being too close to neighbours - latest from Linda + Graham (2 separate replies); we believe Council has also approved another one, to be called "Rivea" at 2934 Gold Coast Hwy, Surfers Paradise - TOO CLOSE to northern & southern neighbours, & too narrow to be visually appealing.......AND 32 STOREYS....the traffic congestion with exiting cars will be horrendous for traffic heading north, which is the ONLY way cars can go. Council should insist that Developers purchase more neighbouring property/s to "spread out" their plans, which would have greater appeal anyway, & in many cases, negate digging down as many levels below the ground. If Developers can afford to do this, they can afford to purchase adjoining property/s instead, & residents in these suburbs would not be complaining so much, as shadows or air cond. noise not nearly as significant.
I wish we had an avenue to have these concerns really heard by Council. It seems it all falls on deaf ears. All about getting more ratepayers, kudos from developers with no thought or planning about the future of Broadbeach. It will very soon be as horrible as Surfers.
There is also no consideration to the noise residents have to endure while building and the road closures and permanent narrowing of roads. When has it become ok for builders to close off areas to build just because they don’t have enough land size? If I was building a private home I would be required to keep everything on my land!
We couldn’t agree more will all of the above comments, and endorse the suggestion of Robert White that developers should have to purchase more land. In some streets in Broadbeach, new residents in these huge buildings on tiny sites are taking town planning control into their own hands and purchasing one unit in neighbouring existing buildings to prevent future similar development that could block their sunlight and views. That’s a pretty strong indicator that the City Plan needs to be fixed. Currently, it’s inequitable and achieving bad streetscapes and environmentally irresponsible buildings. Even just to reintroduce a requirement for gardens at ground level would create improvement. Broadbeach has potential to be a wonderful and dense highrise area, but it needs to keep some green in between. Residents who care might like to join Better Broadbeach Inc community association starting up soon. Look for Better Broadbeach on Facebook and Instagram
I wish we had an avenue to have these concerns really heard by Council. It seems it all falls on deaf ears. All about getting more ratepayers, kudos from developers with no thought or planning about the future of Broadbeach. It will very soon be as horrible as Surfers.
There is also no consideration to the noise residents have to endure while building and the road closures and permanent narrowing of roads. When has it become ok for builders to close off areas to build just because they don’t have enough land size? If I was building a private home I would be required to keep everything on my land!
Development is inevitable, we accept that but we are disgusted that Council are getting away with approving developments too large for the land. We live at 120 Surf Parade with a 32 storey building going up next door at 122 Surf Parade. They have had to knock our fence down and destroy our property, (placing a temporary fence 1.5 metres over our boundary inside the yard of residents), so they can get their machinery close enough to build their foundations. This should NEVER be allowed to happen. It is not the builders fault, it is government for allowing developers to build this close to boundary. SHAME ON YOU COUNCIL!!!
So now they think it is ok to permanently close the walkway from jubilee st to Surf parade! Are these developers able to just do whatever they like despite disrupting the life of locals?! I use that path almost everyday!
