PlanningAlerts

5 Comments

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

1. This is a tall, bulky building for a garden precinct and a great many existing trees have already been removed. I have noticed that one of the trees supposed to be kept has been savaged by machinery digging out nearby tree roots. It reeks of an unethical attempt to get rid of this tree through unscrupulous means. I must object to this degradation of the number of mature trees being removed from the property in order to cram as many apartments as possible into this site. Although Council has stipulated that a variety of trees and vegetation must be planted to soften the bulkiness of the proposed building, will this planting be policed properly? What happens after the project is finally signed off? Will the plantings on the various levels be allowed to die and the whole building becomes a rundown eyesore?

   Will there be enough setback from fence lines to allow for the stipulated deep planting landscaping? Hopefully the developer has plans to employ a permanent onsite gardener to ensure the continued attractiveness of the landscaping.
   
   ... "Referring to 3.5.10. Arborist Report An Arborist Report has been prepared by Treescience which is enclosed in Appendix Q:
   The supporting Arborist Report outlines that the development of the site, as proposed, would impact on the identified trees and these would likely require removal, and that these trees are in relative isolation in the context of the area and should be considered in the context of the benefits of the proposed redevelopment of the site."

   The above arborist report from the application is disturbing in that it heralds the very real possibility for the removal of trees that are supposed to be kept. Eg: An existing mature Forest Redgum is supposed to be retained. Will Council impose a hefty fine if the builder "damages the root system" and requests the tree be removed? I hope so, in order to deter him and other builders from exploiting similar situations in the future for their own agenda.

   Has Council insisted that building contractors' site offices and associated machinery must be contained onsite rather than taking over and parking on neighbourhood footpaths and roads? I object strongly to this deplorable practice. Developers all over the Gold Coast have no respect for neighbours and selfishly and ruthlessly thumb their noses at us and in almost every instance, the Council allows it to happen. We, the people, object to being regarded as inferior to the almighty developer and his vested interests.

   Will noise levels be properly monitored and limited to normal daytime hours? Out of hours noise will be reported to council with the expectation that disciplinary action will be taken.

   This is a large apartment block. Will it be much-needed affordable accommodation or is the developer planning to build luxury apartments for cashed-up investors in order to maximise his profit?

2. Hi, Just checking does the x69 mean 69 apartments/units ?

   Is the building likely to be around 18 stories high?

3. Apparently it is 69 apartments and I think the plans show 12 levels but who knows whether the GCCC will allow extra on top of this. It's already big and bulky enough so let's hope not.

4. On further study of this application - The application provides for 50 extra basement car parks (see copy from the application below) which is many more than is required for the 69 apartments. It raises the question: is the developer planning to apply for permission to build much more accommodation (and therefore dramatically increase the height of this building beyond the number of levels shown in these plans) once the initial plans have been accepted? It could almost double the size of the building.

   I would object strongly to any devious means of increasing the size and height of this building by using dodgy tactics to outsmart the public. It seems that lawyers have deliberately worded the Town Plan to suit developers and development. This bulky tower completely fills 5 allotments as it is, especially if remaining trees are removed and the deep landscaping required for the minimal setbacks (in a recognised garden precinct) turns out to be parsimonious.
   
   Copied from the application: Car Parking
   City of Gold Coast (CoGC) provides car parking rates for specific land uses. The parking requirement for the subject development is listed below in Table 3.
   Table 3. Parking Requirements – Car Parking
   Land Use City of Gold Coast (CoGC) Requirement Extent Parking Requirement
   Parking Provision Diff Multiple Dwelling

   Residential: 0.9 carparks per dwelling: 69 dwellings = 63 car parks
   Visitor: 1 per 10 carparks per dwelling = 7 visitor car parks
   +50 extra car park spaces
   This is 113 residential car parks + 7 visitor car parks
   Total 120
   The site provides a total of 120 (visitor and residential) parking spaces for an estimated demand of 63, this satisfies the Council requirements.

5. Is this building more than 8 stories? I thought this area was zoned for 8 levels only.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Gold Coast 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