PlanningAlerts

1 Comment

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. There are far too many "loopholes" that have effectively been added to the Town Plan so proposals that appear to be contradictory to the expressed "desired outcomes" are able to be received by Council, rather than rejected.
   This is one of those those proposals which appears to be non-compliant.
   The fact is the local Councillors can no longer represent local interests despite that being a role that might be reasonably expected, especially with proposals that are so non-compliant with the expressed outcomes.
   Others have mentioned that the area has been "planned" by Council such that proposals such as this would not be allowed ie it is a residential area with sets of requirements that must be met.
   Amongst those is the idea of quiet enjoyment ie the expectation that neighbouring properties will be developed in such a way as to avoid substantial and probably regular nuisances and impacts on neighbours.
   Much larger numbers of people, many more cars, losses of mature green areas, losses of privacy, many more rubbish bins, lack of parking, etc are all expected to be far more than would occur from the current developments in the area and as expressed as "desirable outcomes" etc in the Town Plan.
   Proposals such as this should be restricted to strict compliance ie no relaxations, and rejected unless it is Council's expressed intent that the same or similar development will also be approved nearby and elsewhere, as part of a planned outcome by Council and Councillors, including the local Councillors?

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Brisbane City Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment