482 O'regan Creek Road, Toogoom, QLD

Impact Assessment - Material Change of Use - Community Residence

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website almost 4 years ago. It was received by them 3 days earlier.

(Source: Fraser Coast Regional Council, reference MCU-151045)

12 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Lynette Bradford and Paul Bradford commented

    We wish to express our disapproval of above application and do not support approval of any change. We live at 515 O'Regan Creek Road and have been broken into, robbed, ramsacked and had our car stolen by juveniles residing in current residence of 482 O'Regan Creek Road run by a government department (DOCS). Our suburb of Toogoom does not provide facilities such as a regular bus service (except for morning and afternoon school service) or affordable, convenient grocery store such as Woolwoorths, Aldi or Coles or a petrol station. Community housing brings residents of lower income whom may not be employed or may have a disability. Locating residents in this area will isolate them with no convenient services. This will lead to unacceptable behaviours which current residents of Toogoom should not have to deal with. Toogoom is a desirable area for quiet pleasures, natural vegetation, rural type properties, untouched beaches and an abundance of flora and fauna. Existing residents in this location are on larger alotments and have greater real estate values. Properties have also been purchased for the lifestyle that presents as being safe and away from the CBD and suburbia. A Community residence will devalue all properties. Will the developer or the council compensate existing residents for the loss of property values. very unlikely. Please explain how an approval benefits the suburb or the existing community. I thought this land is tidal so most of it would be unusable or will developers change natural flow of creek which will lead to greater flooding in area.
    PLEASE DO NOT change Toogoom. Please come and look at our quite little part of paradise on the Fraser Coast.

  2. Peter van Rooyen and Karli Jozeps commented

    We Peter and Karli appose the change because there have been problems with the 'residents' of this address. There have been numerous incidents requiring police involvement. These residents have been respnsible for trespassing, often after dark but not limited to the night time. There have been thefts and break-ins as well.
    This has been a quiet neighbourhood where residents feel safe leaving their homes unlocked whilst away on short visits, erands or beach walks. Unfortunenately because of the presence of these people we have had to alter our way of living which, we came here for the quiet life.
    These people have been hanging around, malingaring, the streets and beach at times one would expect them to be home. One feels like they are 'casing the joint' when they walk down to the beach (down ORegans Creek Rd and then via Ries Rd) They have been caught on camera stealing cigaretes and alcohol sometimes at one oclock in the morning!
    There are children in the community who could/will be influenced by these people with regards to smoking, stealing and bad behaviours. There has been some graffiting although this is not confirmed as having been committed by the residents of this facility.
    We strongly feel that this type of facility is best suited for another area not ours. We are not prepared to change our lifestyle for the sake of having such a facility in our area. We believe that having this facility here will adversly affect future house and land prices and who will recompence us for this? The Council perhaps or the facility?
    Please decline the proposed change and let us continue to enjoy the peaceful lifestyle that we have enjoyed and not infringe on our right to continue to enjoy in the future.

  3. Colin and Lynda Smith commented

    We,Colin and Lynda Smith would like to oppose the change of use to this address. We have had to rely on the Howard Police to control the theft, vandalism, break'ins and trespass incidents that have occurred by the 'residents' residing at this address. As they walk our streets heading to the beach, we feel as if they are casing our homes and properties. These 'residents' have been caught on camera during night time raids, stealing property that is not theirs.

    We now have to lock everything away, even if only visiting neighbours for a short time.

    There is no regular bus service, shopping outlets or activities in the immediate vicinity to service a community housing of this nature.

    These 'residents' have proven unacceptable behavior as per reports to the Howard Police Station. We should not have to change our lifestyle to accommodate the bad behaviour from these 'residents'. Please decline the proposed change so our quiet lifestyle will continue.

  4. Janice & Ross Breedon commented

    We Ross & Janice Breedon have seen first hand the residents of 482 O` regan Creek Rd
    entering properties checking for unlocked house windows & car doors of our neighbors &
    removing items from their patio tables that don`t belong to them. This makes us feel very uncomfortable about going out & leaving our homes unattended which is affecting our peaceful lifestyle that we purchased along with our property that we valued until this so called halfway house with their "residents" arrived.
    We would like to decline the proposed change so we can feel safe & comfortable again.

  5. Bob Forrester commented

    I Bob Forrester would like to comment on the proposed Material Change of Use of the property, 482 O’Regans Creek Road.

    Whilst I agree with the comments of the previous persons I acknowledge as stated in the IFYS submission that the property has been used for the proposed purpose since 2009.
    My wife and I have lived in Ries Rd since 2002 and to my knowledge the problems of kids roaming and thieving etc has only been happening relatively recently, mainly but not exclusively after dark in the early hours of the morning.

    The application states that there is only accommodation for one carer 24/7. I understand that a comment was made that the carer cannot see what these kids are up to when he/her is asleep. This comment I believe was made during Police visits to persons that had been victims of theft by kids resident at these premises at the time.

    Whilst the premises and location are theoretically ideal for the purpose being applied for, the actual layout of the buildings, there being two (2) bed rooms detached from the main building, makes the premises unsuitable for the intended purpose, unless better supervisory facilities are put in place.

    These could/should include:
     more conscientious carers,
     a 24/7 carer in each sleeping area
     movement sensors to monitor the movement of persons outside the buildings during hours when direct supervision is not possible.
     no bedrooms detached from the main building.

    Certainly more concern for the existing residents of this quiet residential area should be given before approval by FCRC goes ahead.
    Bob Forrester
    15 Ries Rd Toogoom

  6. Tammy Davies commented

    I am the OWNER of this beautiful property at 482 O'Regan Creek Road, Toogoom and have been for the past 11 years.

    I have lived in this property for many years and know only too well that it suits my tenants needs 100%. It gives my tenants an AMAZING opportunity to grow and develop as every Australian citizen deserves.

    I feel the negative responses to the application for material use of change stems from a "not in my backyard" mentality which is very unaustralian. My property features a huge house with ALL bedrooms are attached to the house, nothing is detached. My land is NOT tidal. This is a material use of change NOT development of my land.

    My property is extremely unique and is valued way in excess of the majority of properties in Toogoom so for it to be mentioned that my property devalues Toogoom is a complete joke.

    If my tenants were to relocate away from my property......who will my next tenants be ???? Are they going to be ostracised from the community too because they do not "fit" other residents ideal of a community member?

    Sometimes I am embarrassed to be an Australian, a Toogoom property owner and a Fraser Coast rate payer!

  7. lorraine Taylor commented

    My name is Lorraine Taylor, and l live in the area near this residence, 482 O,Regans Creek Rd,Toogoom.Naturally the owner of this property has an interest in this property being rented out, so l would completely rule out her comments. Because we live with the threat of our homes being broken into by some of these "residents" of 482 O'Regans Creek Rd, l do not consider it to be "unAustralian" to object to their being there. I find her comment very insulting. I wonder how she would feel if she lived nearby(which she doesn't!).She misses the point entirely when she states that her property is valued "way in excess of most Toogoom properties". It is not about the value of properties, but about being able to live with peace of mind, not being under the threat of being burgled.To the owner, l say, "Come out here and live nearby" before you post your "UnAustralian" comments.

  8. ROBERT (BOB) TAYLOR commented

    I ROBERT TAYLOR of 2 RIES ROAD,TOOGOOM object to this application on several
    grounds.
    1. This property has been run illegally for some time now (a poor indication of the ethics of the operators and owners of this facility) If this is their mind-set what mey expect in the future?
    2. This property and its residents have the subjects of many calls to police and thus police investigations some of which are teenagers identified by CCT as residents of this facilitystealing cigarettes, alcohol,and money on multiple occasions. Police have not been able to gain any satisfaction through the legal system. Are we to be held to ransom by these and future thieves?
    3.The staffing situation is tolally inadequate for this type of facility.One fulltime staff member is ridiculous to maintain strict supervision 24 hours per day.They could not be expected to control the residents during the hours of darkness(the hours that the resident seem to be most active ).
    4.On several occasions in the last week I seen some of these residents (the last time Monday November 2 ) after dark roaming the streets.Why are young people allowed to roam at at will at night?
    In reply to the Owner ,of course the property would suit ,-----as far as you she is concerned from a purely monetary point of view ----anybody. As for her other comments I " think she protests too much". Also we and the other protesters have chosen to live in this country and in Toogoom in particular as occupier residents and rate and tax payers

  9. lorraine Taylor commented

    I am still outraged by Ms Davies comments re being "Un Australian" and " not in my backyard". If her concern is for the welfare of these residents of her property, and not merely a monetary concern for herself, perhaps she could make arrangements for them in "her backyard". I don't think this will happen.I wonder if she has taken the trouble to contact Howard Police to ascertain what has been happening in our area, concerning these "residents" she is so concerned about. Is it "unAustralian" for residents in our area to be concerned about their own welfare and property ?.You are obviously concerned about your property being rented out for monetary gain.We are concerned for our welfare and safety of our property.You mention the "high value" of your property. This is completely irrelevant to the issue.I might add, that l am NOT embarrassed to be Australian, a Toogoom resident, or, a Fraser Coast rate payer.I imagine that l pay about the same as you do for rates.

  10. Tammy Davies commented

    Bob and Lorraine, I have known you both for many years.......my tenants were approved and recommend to me by TOOGOOM BEACH REAL ESTATE and spent years at my property without ANY issues being raised. As for the value of my property I was responding to other comments made on here that "MY PROPERTY" was devaluing Toogoom. I whole heartedly support my tenants. As for the Police well they were not interested in over $80,000 of property being stolen from my property WELL BEFORE my current tenants even resided in Toogoom!!! I am still interested to know WHO is responsible for this! But unfortunately no body knows anything, especially the Police!

  11. lorraine taylor commented

    I was not aware that property had been stolen from your property. I have been led to believe that residents from your property had in actual fact been caught on ctv footage at neighbours property at night. If this is incorrect, then l apologise, but l do believe it to be true.I do know that residents from your property have been seen roaming at night. One has to wonder about the proper supervision.This is not helpful to the children involved or anyone else.

  12. Bob Forrester commented

    I understand that the date for submissions opposing the Material Change of Use to be considered has now passed, but after reading the owner’s (Tammy Davies) comments expressing her views I can’t help feeling that she is making a very poor argument when she says ‘My property is extremely unique and is valued way in excess of the majority of properties in Toogoom’ It seems to me to be a case of IFYS make better tenants because they will return a higher rent and could be expected to be longer term tenants than a normal family. The council rates are no doubt substantial due to the size of the land area.
    Her comment ‘If my tenants were to relocate away from my property who will my next tenants be ????) provides a clue to the possibility that “good” long term tenants are hard to come by. A property of that type requires a tenant that would be able to utilise the land area and therefore is prepared to pay a higher rent.
    Her comment that she had over $80,000 worth of property stolen, with no resolution by the police, seems to imply that there are already thieves in the area. Whilst this is possible as it is any other area she may be able to put the record straight, as sometime after that event there was a rumour that the “stolen property” was removed by the then tenants.
    I understand it is hard to get “good” tenants when one is relying on rental managers especially when the owner is not living in the area
    As I said in my earlier letter the property itself is fairly well suited to the proposed use, it is the conduct of the persons living there and the supervision by the organisation (IFYS) that have allowed it to get the reputation that it now has.
    As the property has been in use for the proposed purpose since 2009 would it be true to say that it is only now being made “legal” because of the complaints to police due to the activities of the tenants?

  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