775 Economy, Planning and Environment Committee

775

Adopted Report

of the Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting

held

Wednesday 5 June 2019

9am

City of Gold Coast Council Chambers 135 Bundall Road, Surfers Paradise 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 2 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Index Adopted Report of the 775 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting Wednesday 5 June 2019 at 9am

Direct Item File Page Subject Div: City Development Branch 1 DIV 9 ROL/2018/244 4 Report on Development Application for Reconfiguring a Lot (1 into 2 Lots) at 3 Woodvale Drive Tallai #2 DIV 3 PN308801/123/DA2 Preliminary Approval (Impact Assessment) for a 32 Variation Request Which Seeks to Vary the Effect of the Local Planning Instrument at 78 Beattie Road, Coomera - Division 3 City Planning Branch

3 EPE CE196/696/01/06 178 Introductory Paper – Review of the Open Space Preservation Levy Land Acquisition Policy Closed Session City Development Branch

4 EPE CM787/790/01/01/04/01 182 Quarterly Appeals Report – 1 January 2019 to 31 March 2019

City Planning Branch

#5 DIV 2 PD113/1275/14/02 197 Oxenford Investigation Area Community Consultation Outcomes 6 EPE PD98/1132/04/46 City Plan Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 310 6) Major Update Amendment Package – Proposed Amendments Part A Open Session General Business 7 EPE PD98/1132/- 417 Car Stackers and Car Lifts Investigation #Officer’s recommendation changed at Committee Meeting.

KEY: OCEO - Office of the Chief Executive Officer OCOO - Office of the Chief Operation Officer EPE - Economy, Planning and Environment OS - Organisational Services LC - Lifestyle and Community TI - Transport and Infrastructure WW - Water and Waste 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 3 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

ADOPTION BY COUNCIL 13 June 2019

RESOLUTION G19.0613.046 moved Cr Caldwell seconded Cr O'Neill

That the Report of the Economy, Planning and Environment Committee’s Recommendations of Wednesday, 5 June 2019, numbered EPE19.0605.001 to EPE19.0605.006, be adopted with the exception of:-

Recommendation Numbers EPE19.0605.001 EPE19.0605.002 EPE19.0605.004 and EPE19.0605.005 which were specifically resolved.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

ATTENDANCE

Cr C M Caldwell Chairperson Cr G O'Neill Cr W M A Owen-Jones Cr P J Young Cr G Baildon AM Cr P A Taylor Cr G Tozer

Cr D Gates (Visitor) Cr D McDonald (Visitor) Cr P Young (Visitor)

Ms A Swain Director Economy, Planning & Environment Mr M Moran Manager City Development Ms A Tzannes Manager City Planning Ms Z Meha Manager Business Support Mr S Brett Executive Coordinator Major Assessment Mr H Moscrop-Allison Senior Planner Ms N Bishop Senior Environmental Planner Mr J Collofello Principle Regional Planner

APOLOGY/LEAVE OF ABSENCE

PROCEDURAL MOTION moved Cr O’Neill seconded Cr Taylor

That the apology of Cr Vorster be noted.

CARRIED

PRESENTATIONS

Nil 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 4 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

ITEM 1 CITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Refer 4 page attachment

1 APPLICATION SUMMARY

Application information

Address 3 Woodvale Drive, TALLAI QLD 4213 Lot and plan Lot 13 RP132853 Site area 8,286m2 Properly made date 13 July 2018 City Plan version City Plan version 5 Zone / Precinct Rural residential zone Acid sulfate soils overlay Airport environs overlay Overlays Bushfire hazard overlay Environmental significance overlay Landslide hazard overlay Proposed use Reconfiguring a lot (1 into 2 lots) Categories of development and Impact assessment

Luke Currey (Applicant) B C Currey (Surveys) Pty Ltd (Planning consultant) Applicant and Applicant’s consultancy Eldon Botcher (Bushfire Consultant) team Country-Wide Water P/L (Wastewater consultant) Biosphere (Environmental consultant) Land owner BPT Chemicals Australia Pty Ltd

Objections Support Submissions One (1) None Key matters raised by submitters Stormwater management Decision due date 10 May 2019 Referral agencies Not applicable Officer’s recommendation Refusal

2 PROPOSAL

The purpose of this report is to assess an application for a development permit for reconfiguring a lot to subdivide 1 into 2 lots at 3 Woodvale Drive, Tallai. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 5 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Table 5.6.1 of the City Plan categorises the proposal as subject to impact assessment because the proposed subdivision involves the creation of two lots which do not achieve an average lot size of 8000m2.

Proposed Lot 1 is to be 4006m2 and is proposed to incorporate a 1106m2 building envelope. This building envelope incorporates a 328m2 area for effluent disposal. The building envelope is proposed to be located in proximity to the proposed common boundary between Lots 1 and 2. Proposed Lot 1 is located on a bend in Woodvale Drive and has a frontage of approximately 110m.

Proposed Lot 2 is proposed to be 4280m2 in area and incorporates the existing dwelling. This lot will have a frontage to Woodvale Drive of approximately 50m.

The proposal achieves an average lot size of 4143m2.

The following plans provide an initial view of the proposed development.

Figure 1: proposal plan (source: application material)

3 KEY CONSIDERATIONS

The key considerations of the proposal revolve around lot design, the potential impacts on the character and amenity and the environmental features of the site. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 6 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

The application proposes an alternative to the required average lot size of 8000m2 for subdivision within the Rural residential zone. The proposed average lot size of the development is 4143m2. The key considerations for assessment are:

 whether the proposed average lot size of the development protects the local amenity and character in accordance with the intent of the average lot size provisions within the Rural residential zone; and

 whether the proposed subdivision protects the environmental features of the site.

The development proposes the retention of the existing dwelling and driveway for Lot 2 and a building envelope within a vegetated area within Lot 1. Assessment has determined that due to specific site and locality characteristics the proposal will impact adversely upon the character and amenity of the area and the environmental features of the site.

The building envelope on proposed Lot 1 is located in a visually prominent, vegetated area. It is considered that vegetation clearing within the building envelope and clearing associated with bushfire management measures will impact upon the semi-rural character of the area.

In addition, this vegetation clearing will result in damage to medium priority vegetation which cannot be substantially offset. The loss of vegetation on site will reduce the site’s ability to provide koala habitat and to allow for the movement of the koala through the site. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will impact upon the environmental features of the site.

4 SITE CONTEXT

4.1 Subject site

The subject site is triangular in shape and is currently occupied by an existing dwelling in the north- eastern corner of the lot. The site slopes down from the existing dwelling towards the southern corner. The area around the existing two storey dwelling incorporates associated structures and gardens. The balance of the site is vegetated with a variety of vegetation.

Site photos

Looking up from the southern portion of the site The rear of the existing dwelling viewed in through existing vegetation towards Woodvale proximity to the proposed boundary between Lots Drive. 1 and 2. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 7 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Frontage of the site to Woodvale Drive looking Frontage of the site to Woodvale Drive looking north north

Frontage of the site to Woodvale Drive looking Approximate location of the driveway from west to the end of Woodvale Drive Woodvale Drive to the building envelope on proposed Lot 1

Figure 2: Site photos (source: officer site inspection)

4.2 Immediate context

The site is located within an existing rural residential area. The proposed lots range in area from 4135m2. While some lots within the surrounding area, including the lot opposite the site and the adjoining lot, incorporate approved or constructed second detached dwellings or secondary dwellings the majority of lots are generally in excess of 8,000m2 in area and are occupied by single detached dwellings.

A material change of use application for two detached dwellings was previously approved over the adjoining lot to the north. This approval was issued under the Our Living City Gold Coast Planning Scheme 2003. A two lot subdivision was subsequently lodged over this site to create a separate lot for each detached dwelling. This subdivision was supported on the basis that the dwellings were already approved and the subdivision itself would have no additional impact upon the character of the area. This approval is not considered to set a precedent in relation to defining the predominant character of the area. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 8 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Figure 3: Aerial photo of the site and the immediate area (source: ArcGIS)

4.3 Local context

Lots within the surrounding area are incorporated within the Rural residential zone. The site is accessed via Worongary Road and is located approximately 1km from the Mudgeeraba Show Ground.

5 PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Section 45(5) of the Planning Act 2016 identifies:

(5) An impact assessment is an assessment that –

(a) must be carried out -

(i) against the assessment benchmarks in a categorising instrument for the development; and

(ii) having regard to any matters prescribed by regulation for this subparagraph; and

(b) may be carried out against, or having regard to, any other relevant matter, other than a person’s personal circumstances, financial or otherwise.

The proposed development triggers impact assessment and has been assessed in accordance with Section 45(5) of the Planning Act 2016.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 9 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

5.1 State Planning instruments

The application has been assessed against the following instruments:

Instrument Comment

State Planning Policy The City Plan appropriately reflects all aspects of the State Planning Policy apart from aspects relating to natural hazards, risk and resilience (coastal hazards). The proposal does not trigger assessment against any assessment benchmarks relating to natural hazards, risk and resilience (coastal hazards). South East Queensland Regional Plan The proposal is consistent with the goals, elements and strategies; and the Southern Sub-regional directions of the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (ShapingSEQ). Schedule 10 (Development The proposal does not trigger assessment against any assessment) of the Planning assessment benchmarks in Schedule 10 (Development Regulation 2017 assessment) of the Planning Regulation 2017. Schedule 12 (Particular reconfiguring The proposal does not trigger assessment against any a lot requiring code assessment) of assessment benchmarks in Schedule 12 (Particular the Planning Regulation 2017 reconfiguring a lot requiring code assessment) of the Planning Regulation 2017.

5.2 Local categorising instruments

The application has been assessed against the following instruments:

Local categorising instrument Comment

The proposal does not trigger assessment against any Temporary Local Planning Instrument temporary local planning instruments. There is no new trunk infrastructure required as part of this Local Government Infrastructure Plan development. The proposal does not trigger assessment against a variation Variation approval approval.

5.3 City Plan

The following is an assessment of the application against the City Plan.

5.3.1 Assessment against the Strategic framework

The strategic framework requires balanced consideration of the provisions to best achieve the purpose and objectives of the City Plan. The strategic framework sets the policy direction for the City Plan and has a planning horizon of 2031.

This Policy direction is structured in the following way:

(a) The strategic intent describes the planning vision for the Gold Coast over the coming decades; in particular, what our city will look like and how it will function, potential for major development over 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 10 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

the next 20 years and areas for growth and protection.

(b) The following six city shaping themes play an important role in shaping future growth and managing change across the city, and collectively represent the policy intent of the City Plan:

i Creating liveable places;

ii Making modern centres;

iii Strengthening and diversifying the economy;

iv Improving transport outcomes;

v Living with nature; and

vi A safe, well designed city.

(d) Elements that refine and further describe the strategic outcomes.

(e) Specific outcomes sought for each of the elements.

Strategic intent

The Strategic intent flows through to the Themes (Strategic outcomes), Elements (Specific outcomes) and applicable codes. The Strategic intent is achieved through assessment against these outcomes.

Theme/s and Elements

The following is an assessment of the application against the relevant Theme/s and Elements of the strategic framework identified in the table below:

Theme/s Related element Maps 3.3.7 Element - Rural Strategic framework map 1 – Creating liveable places residential areas designated urban area  Non-urban area Living with nature 3.7.4 Element – Nature conservation Strategic framework map 2 – settlement pattern 3.8.2 Element - Landscape  Rural residential areas character A safe, well designed city 3.8.5 Element – Safe, healthy and cohesive communities

Character and amenity

The subject site is located within a non-urban area (Strategic framework map 1) and a rural residential area (Strategic framework map 2). The City Plan aims to protect the rural residential areas of the city from inappropriate development and support small-scale development opportunities where consistent with this protection. For assessment purposes, the abovementioned themes and elements of the Strategic Framework are applicable. These parts of the framework describe the intent for rural residential areas as low intensity environments with a semi-rural landscape character where environmental features of the site are protected. Development within these areas is not to disrupt local character and amenity. The 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 11 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9 assessment revolves around the proposed lot size and design and the impacts of the proposal on local character and amenity and how the environmental features will be maintained and protected.

The following outcomes relate to the assessment of the character and amenity of the development as follows:

Theme – Creating liveable places: Strategic outcome 3.3.1(15) ‘Rural residential areas are very low intensity and low-rise environment with a semi-rural landscape character and protected natural features. They are not expanded.’

Element - Rural residential areas Specific outcome 3.3.7.1(1) ‘Rural residential areas continue to support the lifestyle and amenity aspirations of residents in a semi- rural or bushland environment on very low intensity lots. They are not part of the urban area.’

Specific outcome 3.3.7.1(2) ‘Rural residential areas protect and enhance bushland, waterways and wetlands, habitat trees and wildlife corridors. They help maintain the city’s green frame, particularly on the Hinterland ranges and foothills. These areas may be subject to private conservation agreements.’

Specific outcome 3.3.7.1(3) ‘Rural residential areas maintain their amenity and very low intensity and low-rise living environment. Subdivision is limited to existing rural residential areas. Development does not disrupt local amenity and character. Sustainable eco-villages may be appropriate where landscape character and ecological values are maintained.’

Theme – A safe, well designed city: Strategic outcome 3.8.1(1) ‘Areas of landscape character that contribute to the city’s unique landscape and built form are identified and protected.’

Element – Landscape character Specific outcome 3.8.2.1(1) ‘The distinctive rural, semi-rural and natural character of the city’s river valleys, hinterland settlements, extensive natural landscape area, rural production areas and rural residential areas provide a clear hard edge to, and natural backdrop setting for, the city’s urban area.’

Specific outcome 3.8.2.1(7) ‘Rural production areas and rural residential areas are protected for their contribution to the city’s scenic amenity’

Element - Urban design, character and community identity Specific outcome 3.8.3.1(1) ‘Development is cognisant of the function and desired future appearance of each individual area and reinforces or reinterprets the character of that area.’

Officer’s comment Development within rural residential areas is required to maintain very low intensity and low-rise living to retain the existing semi-rural landscape character of the area. In order to determine if the proposed 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 12 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9 two lot subdivision will reinforce the intended character and existing character of the area a lot size analysis has been undertaken. This analysis is detailed below and demonstrates that the majority of lots within Woodvale Drive and the immediate surrounding area are greater than 8000m2.

Figure 5: Lot sizes in surrounding area (source: interactive mapping)

It is acknowledged that the adjoining properties to the north of the site at 1 Woodvale Drive have been approved with a similar lot size to that currently proposed. However, it is noted that this adjoining site had an existing approval under a superseded planning scheme for a second detached dwelling. As the subdivision did not increase the density on site it was considered to have other relevant matters/sufficient grounds to support the proposal despite non-compliance with the average lot size. The subject site at 3 Woodvale Drive does not have any previous approvals over it and therefore does not have grounds similar to those at the adjoining property.

The existing character of the surrounding area is comprised of lots generally in excess of 8000m2, occupied by detached dwellings and some scattered secondary and second detached dwellings within a bushland setting. The proposed subdivision is considered to conflict with the Strategic framework as it will disrupt the local character and amenity of the immediate area. The proposed building envelope within Lot 1 is located within a vegetated area and will result in vegetation clearing for the establishment of a future dwelling. In addition, due to the topography of the site it is anticipated that earthworks will be required for the construction of the future dwelling. As a result of vegetation clearing, earthworks and visual prominence of this lot on the bend in Woodvale Drive it is considered that the proposed lot and future dwelling will impact detrimentally upon the character and amenity of the local area.

The intent of the Strategic framework is for rural residential areas to be low intensity environments within a semi-rural landscape character where environmental features of the site are protected. Development within these areas should not disrupt the existing local amenity and character. In 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 13 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9 addition, these areas are intended to provide a natural backdrop setting for the city’s urban areas and contribute towards scenic amenity. The proposed subdivision and resultant changes to the character of the site are not considered to support retention of the existing landscape character. The proposed two lot subdivision is not considered to be consistent with the existing character and amenity of the area. As discussed previously the proposed development will result in the change of a visually prominent vegetated area, which supports the existing bushland character, to a building envelope for a future dwelling. Clearing associated with a future dwelling, driveway and potential fencing along the boundary between proposed Lots 1 and 2 will directly conflict with the existing character.

Living with nature The following outcomes relate to how the development addresses the environmental constraints and features of the site as follows:

Theme: Living with Nature Strategic outcome 3.7.1(5) ‘Outside of biodiversity areas high priority vegetation is protected in situ. Regulated, medium and general priority vegetation is maintained and disturbance is minimised.’

Strategic outcome 3.7.1(6) ‘Significant residual impacts on medium priority vegetation outside of biodiversity areas are managed through a prioritised hierarchy of avoiding, mitigation on-site and offsetting such impacts.’

Element – Nature conservation Specific outcome 3.7.4.1(1) ‘The Gold Coast’s biodiversity areas and other matters of environmental significance are conserved, protected, enhanced and managed to maintain a diversity of terrestrial, aquatic and marine species, ecosystems and ecological processes. Poorly protected regional ecosystems and habitat for threatened species, such as koalas, are enhanced.’

Specific outcome 3.7.4.1(3) ‘The city’s matters of environmental significance include: (a) native vegetation of national, state or local significance; (b) coastal environments, wetlands and waterways; (c) core habitat areas and substantial remnants; (d) hinterland to coast critical corridors, including: (i) Burleigh Heads to Springbrook; (ii) Springbrook to Wongawallan; (iii) Southern Moreton Bay to Wongawallan; (iv) Southern Moreton Bay to Clagiraba; (v) Currumbin to Cobaki Broadwater (Tweed Shire); and (vi) Currumbin to Currumbin Valley. (e) habitat for threatened species, such as koalas.’ 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 14 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Specific outcome 3.7.4.1(6) ‘Outside biodiversity areas, significant residual impacts on medium priority vegetation are managed, in order of priority, by: (a) avoiding significant adverse environmental impacts; (b) mitigating significant adverse environmental impacts where these cannot be avoided; and (c) offsetting any significant residual impacts.’

Specific outcome 3.7.4.1(7) ‘Matters of environmental significance in the city’s non-urban area are protected from urban encroachment by containing urban activity within the city’s urban area.’

Officer’s comment Council’s Environmental Assessment section have reviewed the proposal and advised that damage to medium priority vegetation has not been mitigated or avoided nor can it be substantially offset. It is therefore considered that the proposed development does not appropriately protect the Medium priority vegetation on site.

Summary of Strategic framework

It is not considered that the proposal supports or promotes ‘Creating liveable places’, ‘A safe, well designed city’ and ‘Living with Nature’ themes of the Strategic framework. It is therefore considered that the proposal does not meet the intent of the Strategic framework for the following reasons:

 The proposed subdivision does not support the existing semi-rural bushland environment of the surrounding area.

 The proposed subdivision will disrupt the local amenity and character through the creation of an additional lot and future vegetation clearing associated with the construction of a dwelling and driveway and potential vegetation clearing along the common boundary between Lots 1 and 2.

 The proposed development does not reinforce the character of the area.

 The proposed development does not adequately mitigate or avoid medium priority vegetation and cannot be substantially off-set. 5.3.2 Assessment against the codes

The following is an assessment of the application against the applicable codes of the City Plan identified in the table below:

Zone code Overlay codes Development codes

 Rural residential zone code  Environmental significance  Reconfiguring a lot code overlay  General development  Acid sulfate soils overlay provisions code  Airport environs overlay  On-site sewerage facilities  Bushfire hazard overlay code  Landslide hazard overlay  Vegetation management overlay code code

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 15 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

5.3.2.1 Assessment against the zone code

The proposal has been assessed against the Rural residential zone code. The purpose of the Rural residential zone code is to:

‘provide for residential development on large lots where local government infrastructure and services may not be provided on the basis that the intensity of residential development is generally dispersed’.

This purpose is intended to be achieved through the overall outcomes identified within the zone code. Overall outcome 2(d)(ii) relates to the average lot size and is relevant to this subdivision. This overall outcome states that lot design ‘provides an average lot size of no less than 8000m2 to protect the local amenity and character’.

Officers have undertaken an assessment of all relevant provisions. The proposed development does not comply with the following applicable performance outcome:  PO7 – average lot size less than 8000m2

Lot design (for subdivision only)

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO7 AO7 Where not on the Minimum lot size overlay map or No acceptable solution provided. Rural residential landscape and environment precinct Average lot size is no less than 8,000m² and no lots have an area less than 4,000m². Note: this provision does not apply to land that is to be dedicated to Council or State for open space or infrastructure purposes.

Officer’s comment

The proposed subdivision involves the creation of two lots with an average lot size of 4143m2. This average lot size is significantly less than the average lot size identified within PO7. While the proposed development does not comply with the performance outcome, in accordance with section 5.3.3 of the City Plan the development can still be assessed as complying with a code provided it complies with the purpose and overall outcomes of the code.

Overall outcome 2(d)(ii) requires lots to have an average lot size of no less than 8000m2 to protect the local amenity and character. The character of the surrounding local area is one of rural residential lots within a bushland setting where lots are generally 8000m2 or greater. The proposed subdivision is not considered to be consistent with this existing amenity or character. The proposed subdivision will result in significant vegetation clearing within the building envelope and throughout the site for bushfire management purposes. As the site is located on a visually prominent bend in Woodvale Drive the impact of this vegetation clearing and future construction of a dwelling is considered to impact significantly upon the existing rural residential bushland amenity and character of the area. It is therefore considered that the proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the intent of Overall outcome 2(d)(ii).

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 16 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

The above assessment demonstrates that the proposed development does not comply with the applicable performance outcome and overall outcomes. It is therefore considered that the proposal does not comply with the Rural residential zone code.

5.3.2.2 Assessment against the overlay code

The proposal has been assessed against the following overlay codes:

 Environmental significance overlay  Acid sulfate soils overlay  Airport environs overlay  Bushfire hazard overlay  Landslide hazard overlay Officers have undertaken an assessment of all relevant provisions. The proposed development does not comply with the following applicable performance and acceptable outcomes of the Environmental significance overlay code:  AO10 and PO10 – Vegetation management  AO14 and PO14 – Priority species  PO15 – Priority species Vegetation management Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO10 AO10 Vegetation is protected when it is: Vegetation is not damaged when it is: (a) identified as medium priority vegetation on the (a) identified as medium priority vegetation on the Environmental significance – vegetation Environmental significance – vegetation management overlay map; and management overlay map; and (b) located outside the biodiversity areas identified (b) located outside the Environmental significance on the Environmental significance – –biodiversity areas overlay map. biodiversity areas overlay map. OR Where all attempts have been made to avoid and minimise damage to vegetation as stated above, any significant residual impact is offset consistent with the Environmental Offsets Act 2014, at a ratio of 3:1 (area) in accordance with SC6.9 City Plan policy – Environmental offsets. OR Damage to medium priority vegetation identified on the Environmental significance – vegetation management overlay map and located outside the biodiversity areas identified on the Environmental significance – biodiversity areas overlay map is for committed development.

Officer’s comment

Council’s Environmental Assessment section have reviewed the proposal and advised that the proposal does not comply with PO10 of the Environmental significance overlay code. This section has advised as follows:

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 17 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

‘Bushfire management for this site requires the whole of proposed Lot 1 to be cleared of mid story and ground cover vegetation. This will have a significant impact on the floristic structure of the remaining mapped medium priority vegetation. While mid story and ground cover vegetation throughout the site is required to be cleared an environmental offset cannot be obtained for the whole of this area. An environmental offset is not valid for an outer bushfire management zone as the predominant canopy trees are still being retained. Therefore only 25% of damaged vegetation will able to be offset under the definition of the Environmental Offsets Policy. It is therefore clear that damage to medium priority vegetation, as a result of bushfire clearing, cannot be mitigated or avoided nor can it be substantially offset. As a result it is considered that the proposed development does comply with PO10 in relation to the protection of medium priority vegetation.’ Priority species Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO14 AO14 Assessable koala feed and shelter trees are protected Development avoids impacts on assessable koala when they are: feed and shelter trees. Any damage is minimised to (a) in koala habitat areas as identified on the the greatest extent possible. Environmental significance – priority species overlay map; and (b) outside biodiversity areas as identified on the Environmental significance – biodiversity areas overlay map. PO15 AO15 Site design provides safe koala movement No acceptable outcome provided. opportunities by incorporating measures to maintain connectivity between areas of koala habitat on and adjacent to the site. Note : DEHP’s Koala-Sensitive Design Guideline should be consulted for suitable measures to provide for safe koala movement. 8.2.6.2 PURPOSE (d) Outside of Biodiversity Areas: (iii) State and local significant species and their habitat are identified and protected. (iv) The quality or connectivity of habitat for State and local significant species (including the koala) is improved.

Officer’s comment

Council’s Environmental Assessment section have reviewed the proposal and advised that the proposal does not comply with PO14 and PO15 of the Environmental significance overlay code as follows:

‘The site has significant value with regard to fauna movement throughout the surrounding greater landscape area. A map of ecological significance overlays showing vegetation, koala habitat, priority species habitat and waterways (refer below) shows the subject site as an important movement corridor for fauna, including the koala.’ 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 18 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Figure 6: Ecological significance overlay maps (source: Council mapping)

‘The development will result in the permanent loss of 1106m2 of mapped koala/priority species habitat as a result of clearing within the building envelope. The bushfire management requirement results in the permanent removal and ongoing removal of the mid-storey and groundcover of another 3000m2 of mapped koala and priority species habitat. The vegetation clearing requirements for the proposed development significantly reduces the site’s ability to provide koala habitat and to allow for the movement of the koala through the site. It is therefore considered that PO14 & PO15 of the Environmental significance overlay code are not complied with.’

In addition it is considered that the proposal has not demonstrated compliance with overall outcome (2)(d)(iii) and (iv) of the Environmental significance overlay code. It is considered that clearing resulting from the proposed subdivision will impact upon State and local significant species and their habitat. The quality and connectivity of habitat for these species will be detrimentally impacted rather than improved as a result of the proposed clearing.

5.3.1.5 Assessment against development codes

The proposal has been assessed against the following development codes:

 Reconfiguring a lot code  General development provisions code  On-site sewerage facilities code  Vegetation management code

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 19 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Under the City Plan, compliance with a code, can be achieved by either compliance with the purpose and overall outcomes of the code, or, compliance with either the performance outcomes or acceptable outcomes. Acceptable outcomes are generally quantifiable provisions, with the performance and overall outcomes generally qualitative and performance based. Officers have undertaken an assessment of all relevant provisions of the above codes. The proposed development does not comply with the following applicable performance outcome:  PO2 – Amenity protection

Amenity protection

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO2 AO2 The proposed development prevents loss of amenity No acceptable outcome provided. and threats to health and safety, having regard to: (a) noise; (b) hours of operation; (c) traffic; (d) signage; (e) visual amenity; (f) wind effects; (g) privacy; (h) vibration; (i) contaminating substances; (j) hazardous chemicals; (k) odour and emissions; and (l) safety.

Officer’s comment

Following a detailed assessment of the submitted material, it is considered that the proposed development demonstrates compliance with the requirements of PO2. The following assessment is provided:  Noise – The proposal is considered to result in a reasonable impact on noise amenity.  Hours of operation – Not applicable.  Traffic – The development does not present an unreasonable increase of traffic to the area  Signage – Signage is not proposed as part of the development application.  Visual amenity – The building envelope for proposed Lot 1 is located on a visually prominent corner within Woodvale Drive. Future clearing within the building envelope and maintained clearing of mid-storey and ground cover vegetation as a result of bushfire management measures are considered to impact significantly upon the existing rural residential bushland setting.  Wind effects – The proposed development will not cause any unreasonable wind impacts.  Privacy – The building envelope within proposed Lot 1 is considered to be located at a sufficient distance to limit overlooking and privacy impacts on surrounding development and would comply with setback requirements. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 20 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

 Vibration – The proposed development will not cause any unreasonable vibration impacts.  Contaminating substances – The proposed development will not cause any unreasonable impacts from contaminating substances.  Hazardous chemicals – The proposed development will not cause any unreasonable impacts from hazardous chemicals.  Odour and emissions – The proposed development will not cause any unreasonable impacts from odour and emissions.  Safety – The proposal is of an acceptable and safe configuration. The proposed development is not considered to comply with PO2 of the General development provisions code. Furthermore, the development is not considered to comply with the overall outcomes of the General development provisions code, in particular overall outcomes 2(a) and 2(c). These overall outcomes aim to ensure:  Development is designed to maintain the expected level of amenity for the area; and  Development is designed to respect the natural values of the land, including vegetation, natural topography and development on steep slopes to minimise impacts on the landscape character of the city’s rural, urban and hinterland areas. The proposed subdivision is considered to adversely impact upon the expected level of amenity for the area and existing landscape character of the site. The development will result in vegetation clearing associated with the future dwelling and bushfire management. Due to the visual prominence of the proposed building envelope on Lot 1 it is considered that future clearing and earthworks will impact detrimentally upon the existing amenity of the area.

6 INFRASTRUCTURE CHARGES

It is noted that the infrastructure charges of $19,018.20 would be applicable if the application were to be supported. The details of these charges are as follows:

Charges Resolution No. 1 of 2018 Qty Rate Gross Charge Amount ROL Proposed Lot 2 Lots @ $ 19,018.20 $ 38,036.40 $ 38,036.40 Net Charge Summary Gross Charge Amount Applied Credit Amount Net Charge Amount $ 38,036.40 $ 19,018.20 $ 19,018.20

Applied credit Standard lot credit applied (Other and Water Networks only) details

7 LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS THAT MAY BE MATERIALLY AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT

The proposal does not trigger assessment against any assessment benchmarks for another local government area materially affected by the development. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 21 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

8 REFERRALS

8.1 Internal referrals

This application has been assessed by internal referral officers who have provided comments in relation to the proposal. An overview of these comments are provided in the table below:

Internal city expert Conditions

City Assets have reviewed the proposal and have advised that this City Infrastructure section has no requirements in relation to the recommended refusal. Council’s Environmental Assessment section have reviewed the Environmental Assessment proposal and concluded that the development is in conflict with the Environmental significance overlay code. In particular, the proposal is

considered to conflict with PO10, PO14 and PO15. Detailed comments provided by this section are provided in section 5.3.2.2 (Assessment against the overlay code) of this report. Council’s Hydraulic and Water Quality Assessment section reviewed the Hydraulics and Water proposal and have advised that they have no requirements in relation to Quality the recommended refusal. Council’s Plumbing and Drainage section reviewed the proposal and Plumbing and Drainage have no requirements in relation to the recommended refusal. Council’s Bushfire Planning and Assessment section have reviewed the Queensland Fire Rescue proposal and advised that they have no requirements. Council’s Subdivision Engineer has reviewed the proposal and advised Subdivision Engineering that they have no requirements in relation to the recommended refusal. Water and Waste have reviewed the proposal and advised that they Water and Waste have no requirements in relation to the recommended refusal.

8.2 External referrals

There is no concurrence or advice agency triggered by this development application.

9 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

9.1 Overview

In response to public notification:

 no submissions were received that were properly made; and

 one (1) not properly made submission was received. This submission was considered to be not properly made as it was not received within the public notification period.

9.2 Compliance with public notification requirements

The applicant has submitted a notice of compliance stating public notification has been completed in accordance with the requirements of the Development Assessment Rules under the Planning Act 2016. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 22 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Council has reviewed the public notification material and considers the applicant has complied with the requirements of the Development Assessment Rules.

9.3 Accepted submissions

Clause 19.1(b) of the Development Assessment Rules allows the assessment manager to accept a submission even if the submission is not a properly made submission.

In order for a submitter to have appeal rights under Schedule 1 of the Planning Act 2016, the submission must be a properly made submission.

In this instance, the assessment manager accepts the submission in accordance with Clause 19.1(b), however the submitter does not have appeal rights.

9.4 Issues raised in submissions

The main issues raised by submitters who made a properly made submission or a submission that has been accepted by the assessment manager are discussed below.

Issue Officer’s comment

The potential impact on the adjoining lot from The proposal and issues identified by the stormwater as a result of the subdivision, submitter were referred to Council’s Hydraulic vegetation removal and associated works. and Water Quality section for review and comment. This section determined that stormwater management could be appropriately managed on site. If the application were to be approved a condition would be placed on the approval that requires overland flow paths to be unaltered such that the characteristics of existing overland flow paths remain uninhibited and unchanged. The development would be required to not increase peak flow rates downstream from the site, to not increase flood levels external to the site and to not increase the duration of inundation external to the site.

10 CONCLUSION

After a detailed assessment, it has been determined that the proposal to subdivide the subject site into 2 lots will result in adverse character, amenity and environmental outcomes. The detailed assessment has also demonstrated that proposal fails to meet the purpose and key provisions of the City Plan, specifically the following elements of the Strategic framework:

 Rural residential areas – Creating liveable places;  Landscape character - A safe, well designed city;  Urban design, character and community identity – A safe, well designed city; and  Nature conservation - Living with nature. It has also been determined that the proposal does not meet the purpose and overall outcomes of the Environmental significance overlay code, the Rural residential zone code and the General development provisions code. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 23 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

11 NOTIFICATIONS

Not applicable

12 RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that Council resolves as follows:

2 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcomes and Performance outcomes of the Environmental significance overlay code in that: a) The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 8.2.6.2(2)(d)(ii) of the Environmental significance overlay code as impacts on medium priority vegetation are not avoided or mitigated and cannot be offset; and b) The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 10 of the Environmental significance overlay code as impacts to medium priority vegetation are not avoided or mitigated and cannot be substantially offset; and c) The proposal does not comply with Performance outcomes 14 and 15 of the Environmental significance overlay code as clearing requirements for the proposed development significantly reduces the sites ability to provide koala habitat and to allow for the movement of the koala through the site 3 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcomes and Performance outcomes of the Rural residential zone code in that: a) The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 6.2.21.2(2)(d)(ii) of the Rural residential zone code as the proposal provides an average lot size less than 8,000m2; and b) The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 7 of the Rural residential zone code as the proposal provides an average lot size less than 8,000m2. 4 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcome and Performance outcomes of the General development provisions code in that: a) The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 9.4.4.2(2)(a) and 9.4.4.2(2)(c) of the General development provisions code as the proposal is considered to adversely impact upon the expected level of amenity of the area and the existing landscape character of the site. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 24 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

b) The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 2 of the General development provisions code as clearing associated with the building envelope and bushfire management measures will adversely impact upon the existing amenity.

Author: Authorised by:

Julie Carstairs Alisha Swain Town Planner Director Economy Planning and Environment May 2019 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 25 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

Committee Recommendation Adopted At Council 13 June 2019

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION EPE19.0605.001 moved Cr Tozer seconded Cr Owen-Jones

That Council refuses the issue of a development permit for reconfiguring a lot (1 into 2 lots), on the following grounds:- 1 The development does not support and promote the Strategic framework in that: A The proposal does not support the existing semi-rural bushland character of the surrounding area; B The proposal will disrupt the local amenity and character through the creation of an additional lot and future vegetation clearing associated with the construction of a dwelling and driveway and potential vegetation clearing along the common boundary between Lots 1 and 2; and C The proposal does not reinforce the existing character of the area. D The proposed development does not adequately mitigate or avoid medium priority vegetation. 2 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcomes and Performance outcomes of the Environmental significance overlay code in that: A The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 8.2.6.2(2)(d)(ii) of the Environmental significance overlay code as impacts on medium priority vegetation are not avoided or mitigated and cannot be offset; and B The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 10 of the Environmental significance overlay code as impacts to medium priority vegetation are not avoided or mitigated and cannot be substantially offset; and C The proposal does not comply with Performance outcomes 14 and 15 of the Environmental significance overlay code as clearing requirements for the proposed development significantly reduces the sites ability to provide koala habitat and to allow for the movement of the koala through the site. 3 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcomes and Performance outcomes of the Rural residential zone code in that: A The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 6.2.21.2(2)(d)(ii) of the Rural residential zone code as the proposal provides an average lot size less than 8,000m2; and B The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 7 of the Rural residential zone code as the proposal provides an average lot size less than 8,000m2. 4 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcome and Performance outcomes of the General development provisions code in that: A The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 9.4.4.2(2)(a) and 9.4.4.2(2)(c) of the General development provisions code as the proposal is considered to adversely impact upon the expected level of amenity of the area and the existing landscape character of the site. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 26 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

B The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 2 of the General development provisions code as clearing associated with the building envelope and bushfire management measures will adversely impact upon the existing amenity.

CARRIED

Cr Gates returned to the room.

ADOPTED AT COUNCIL 13 June 2019 RESOLUTION G19.0613.043 moved Cr Tozer seconded Cr Caldwell That Committee Recommendation EPE19.0605.001 be adopted as printed which reads as follows:-

1 The development does not support and promote the Strategic framework in that: A The proposal does not support the existing semi-rural bushland character of the surrounding area; B The proposal will disrupt the local amenity and character through the creation of an additional lot and future vegetation clearing associated with the construction of a dwelling and driveway and potential vegetation clearing along the common boundary between Lots 1 and 2; and C The proposal does not reinforce the existing character of the area. D The proposed development does not adequately mitigate or avoid medium priority vegetation. 2 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcomes and Performance outcomes of the Environmental significance overlay code in that: A The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 8.2.6.2(2)(d)(ii) of the Environmental significance overlay code as impacts on medium priority vegetation are not avoided or mitigated and cannot be offset; and B The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 10 of the Environmental significance overlay code as impacts to medium priority vegetation are not avoided or mitigated and cannot be substantially offset; and C The proposal does not comply with Performance outcomes 14 and 15 of the Environmental significance overlay code as clearing requirements for the proposed development significantly reduces the sites ability to provide koala habitat and to allow for the movement of the koala through the site. 3 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcomes and Performance outcomes of the Rural residential zone code in that: A The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 6.2.21.2(2)(d)(ii) of the Rural residential zone code as the proposal provides an average lot size less than 8,000m2; and

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 27 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 1 (Continued) REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) AT 3 WOODVALE DRIVE, TALLAI ROL/2018/244 DIVISION 9

B The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 7 of the Rural residential zone code as the proposal provides an average lot size less than 8,000m2. 4 The development does not achieve the Purpose, Overall outcome and Performance outcomes of the General development provisions code in that: A The proposal does not comply with Overall outcome 9.4.4.2(2)(a) and 9.4.4.2(2)(c) of the General development provisions code as the proposal is considered to adversely impact upon the expected level of amenity of the area and the existing landscape character of the site. B The proposal does not comply with Performance outcome 2 of the General development provisions code as clearing associated with the building envelope and bushfire management measures will adversely impact upon the existing amenity.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 28 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 1 (1 of 1)

Locality plan – 3 Woodvale Drive, Tallai 775th Economy, Council

4.68 Planning Meeting Existing 10.45 Existing Septic Access & Environment Trench LAA 13 June

Existing 2019 14.34 LOT 2 House Committee Existing H.S.T.P

Proposed H.S.T.P 4280 m² Meeting

19.85 5 June 2019

5 Proposed Land Application Area (328 m²) Proposed 6 Building 28.44 Access Envelope 1106 m² Attachment 2 (1 of 2)

13.44

LOT 1 13.70 Development Summary 4006 m² 21.20 Total Area - 8286 m² WOODVALE DRIVE Lot 1 Total Area - 4006 m² 17.70 ADOPTED 4.68 18.69 Lot 2 Total Area - 4280 m² 8 Average Lot Area - 4143 m² Scale 1:500 at A3 - Lengths are in Metres. REPORT 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Notes: Client Level Datum Azimuth DATE 05/06/18 No Revision Details Date By No Revision Details Date By JOB NO This plan is a true representation of the proposed development, AHD RP132853 BL B.C.CURREY(SURVEYS) 29 COMPUTER AS Title Origin Coord System however, the plan is subject to changes resulting from approvals, Preliminary Plan of Proposed SURVEYED BC PLANE DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS survey, construction, registration and development processes, SubDivision for Discussion AHD CHECKED BC Office No 2 Purposes Only on Lot 13 on RP132853 Origin QT Coomera Shopping Centre therefore all the information contained on this plan including areas, RP132853 Dreamworld Parkway over 3 Woodvale Drive,Tallai Scale Coomera QLD 4210 lot numbers and boundaries are subject to change. Reference # Parish of Gilston 1:500 Telephone 07 5573 6488 This note is an integral part of this plan. County of Ward Facsimilie 07 5529 9255 BL B.1 775th Economy, Council

4.68 Planning Meeting Existing 10.45 Existing Septic Access & Environment Trench LAA 13 June

Existing 2019 14.34 LOT 2 House Committee Existing H.S.T.P

Proposed H.S.T.P 4280 m² Meeting

19.85 5 June 2019

5 Proposed Land Application Area (328 m²) Proposed 6 Building 28.44 Access Envelope 1106 m²

13.44

Notes: Client Level Datum Azimuth DATE 05/06/18 No Revision Details Date By No Revision Details Date By JOB NO This plan is a true representation of the proposed development, AHD RP132853 BL B.C.CURREY(SURVEYS) 30 COMPUTER AS Title Origin Coord System however, the plan is subject to changes resulting from approvals, Preliminary Plan of Proposed SURVEYED BC PLANE DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS survey, construction, registration and development processes, SubDivision for Discussion AHD CHECKED BC Office No 2 Purposes Only on Lot 13 on RP132853 Origin QT Coomera Shopping Centre therefore all the information contained on this plan including areas, RP132853 Dreamworld Parkway over 3 Woodvale Drive,Tallai Scale Coomera QLD 4210 lot numbers and boundaries are subject to change. Reference # Parish of Gilston 1:500 Telephone 07 5573 6488 This note is an integral part of this plan. County of Ward Facsimilie 07 5529 9255 BL A.1 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 31 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 3 (1 of 1)

Zone plan for surrounding area – Rural residential zone and Open space zone 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 32 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 CITY DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Refer 78 page attachment

1 APPLICATION SUMMARY

Application information Address 78 Beattie Road, Coomera. Lot and plan Lot 50 on SP214550. Site area 59.46ha. Properly made date 29 March 2018.

 Lodged under Version 4; and City Plan version  Consideration has also been had to Version 6. Zone / Precinct Waterfront and marine industry zone.

 Acid sulfate soils overlay code;  Airport environs overlay code;  Coastal erosion hazard overlay code;  Environmental significance overlay code – wetlands and Overlays waterways overlay;  Flood overlay code;  Landslide hazard overlay code; and  Regional infrastructure overlay code. Preliminary Approval including a Variation Request which seeks to vary the effect of the local planning instrument as it Proposed use relates to making a Material Change of Use, a Reconfiguring a Lot and carrying out Operational Works. Categories of development and Impact Assessment. assessment

 Citimark Properties Pty Ltd (Applicant); o No director details provided;  Utopia Urban Planning (Planning Consultant);  Place Design Group (Landscape Planning & former Planning Consultant);  JLL (Economic Consultant); Applicant and Applicant’s  Cardno (Civil Engineering Consultant); consultancy team  Venant Solutions (Hydraulic Engineer);  Burchills Engineering Solutions (Environmental and Engineering Consulting);  Bitzios Consulting (Traffic Consultant);  MWA Environmental (Air and Noise Quality Consultant); and  MAK Planning & Design (Open Space Consultant). 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 33 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

 Isobel Joan Beattie; and Land owner  Lynton Noel Foulkes. Objections Support

 One properly made  Zero submissions Submissions submission; and made in support.  Zero properly made submissions.  Traffic; Key matters raised by submitters  Need; and  Location of one of the public notification signs. Decision due date 13 June 2019. Department of State Development, Manufacturing and Referral agencies Infrastructure and Planning. Officer’s recommendation Refusal.

2 PROPOSAL

The purpose of this report is to assess an application for a Preliminary Approval including a Variation Request which seeks to vary the effect of the local planning instrument as it relates to making a Material Change of Use, a Reconfiguring a Lot and carrying out Operational Works at 78 Beattie Road, Coomera.

The application triggers Impact Assessment as the proposal is for a Preliminary Approval which includes a Variation Request.

The proposed Variation Request seeks the following:

 To establish three precincts – which in principle reflect tailored versions of zones within the City Plan. These include the following: o Medium Density Residential Precinct; o Neighbourhood Centre Precinct; . The applicant seeks to establish approximately 250m2 of commercial development within this precinct; and o Open Space Precinct;  The development could facilitate approximately 445 dwellings where complying with the proposed Acceptable outcome for density;  An indicative and preliminary drawing demonstrates that the applicant proposes approximately 282 lots;  A one hectare park with flood immunity up to Q100 to be dedicated to Council;  A 4.9 hectare recreation linkage park with flood immunities of Q10 and Q20 in different locations to be dedicated to Council; and  28.4 hectares of wetland/ rehabilitation area to be dedicated to Council.

The development parameters of the proposal are outlined in the table below: 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 34 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Development parameters Medium Density Residential Precinct  The majority of this precinct is proposed to be RD2 (1 dwelling per 300m2); Density and  A portion of this precinct is proposed to be RD3 (1 dwelling per 250m2). Medium Density Residential Precinct  2 storeys within the portion proposed to be mapped RD2; and  3 storeys within the portion proposed to be mapped RD3. Height Neighbourhood Centre Precinct  3 storeys / 15m. Open Space Precinct  11.5m. Medium Density Residential Precinct  375m2 within the portion proposed to be mapped RD2; and  250m2 within the portion proposed to be mapped RD3. Neighbourhood Centre Precinct Lot size  1,000m2. Open Space Precinct No new lots are to be created within this precinct unless for public open space purposes. Medium Density Residential Precinct Lot frontages  12.5m within the portion proposed to be mapped RD2; and  8m within the portion proposed to be mapped RD3. Medium Density Residential Precinct

Setback Minimum distances measured in metres (m) Height Setback

Front up to 3 storeys 4m

up to 4.5m 1.5m for that part between 4.5m – 2m 7.5m Side and rear Setbacks an extra 0.5m is added for for that part exceeding 7.5m every 3m in height or part thereof over 7.5m. Between on site habitable Double the applicable side setback. buildings (where not attached)

OR Setbacks for dwelling houses on small lots: Setback Minimum distances measured in metres (m)

Building line (outer most projection): 4m Front OR Building line (outer most projection): 2m if the lot has vehicular

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 35 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

access via a rear lane and the building is elevated 900mm above street level.

Covered car parking: 2m behind front building line

Secondary frontage of corner Front wall: 4m (not including projections up to 2m) lot Height Setback 0m where a class 10 building located along a southern or up to 3m western boundary and to a Side (not applicable to the maximum length of 9m. secondary frontage of corner lots) up to 4.5m 1.0m

for that part between 4.5m – 1.5m 7.5m for that part exceeding 7.5m 2m 0m where abutting a rear lane otherwise, 0.5m minimum 1m Rear maximum OR For development on rear lots the setback is 3m from all boundaries.

Neighbourhood Centre Precinct

Minimum distances measured in metres (m) Setback Height Setback up to 9.5m and not more than 2 0m (maximum 2m) storeys Front for that part exceeding 9.5m or 2 2m storeys 0m where the site abuts the up to 9.5m and not more than 2 Centre zone, Neighbourhood storeys centre zone or Mixed use zone Side 2m otherwise 2m plus an extra 0.5m for every for that part exceeding 9.5m or 2 3m in height or part thereof over storeys 9.5m up to 9.5m and not more than 2 2m storeys Rear for that part exceeding 9.5m or 2 6m storeys

Open Space Precinct

Setback Minimum distances measured in metres (m) Front 10m Side and rear 6m

Medium Density Residential Precinct  50%. Neighbourhood Centre Precinct Site cover  80%. Open Space Precinct  10%.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 36 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

The following images provide an initial view of the proposed development.

Figure 1: Proposed Masterplan (source: applicant)

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 37 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 2: Proposed density and building height map (source: applicant)

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 38 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 3: Proposed flood immunity masterplan (source: applicant)

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 39 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 4: Proposed staging plan (source: applicant)

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 40 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 5: Proposed stormwater treatment devices (source: applicant)

Further to the information provided above, the applicant has provided an indicative layout (included below) for the preliminary approval. Were a future application able to come in under this proposed preliminary approval, the layout may not reflect that of the below but it has been provided as an indication of a likely or potential outcome for the site should this Preliminary Approval application be supported. The plan includes 282 lots in total, including a commercial allotment and a large lot for ‘retirement living’, plus parks and road.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 41 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 6: Proposed indicative layout (source: applicant)

3 KEY CONSIDERATIONS

The key issue of the proposal relates to the intended nature of the development (its land use and design).

The proposed residential outcome presents non-compliances which cut across the City Plan as it is significantly conflicts with the intended development for the Waterfront and marine industry zone and the Strategic framework. The proposed preliminary approval seeks to establish a planning framework which would facilitate a residential development with a small commercial node within the Waterfront and marine industry zone, compromising the site for any future industrial development as well as potentially hindering existing and future development within the Coomera Marine Precinct (also referred to as Gold Coast Marine Precinct) due to reverse amenity impacts.

The subject site represents the second largest of three large undeveloped lots within the Gold Coast Marine Precinct and is the least constrained with respect to flood (see figure below).

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 42 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 7: Extent of Flood overlay code (version 6) within the Coomera Marine Precinct

The applicant, through their material, acknowledges the significant degree of non-compliance posed by the proposal and has presented a number of other relevant matters pursuant to section 45(5)(b) of the Planning Act 2016. The other relevant matters put forward by the applicant include the following:

1. Material error with the planning scheme including this site in the Waterfront and marine industry zone due to the following: o Hydraulic constraints; o Constrained navigable channel; o Emissions and hazardous activities constraints; o Environmental constraints; o LGIP park constraints; o Urban design constraints; o Constraints to retain heritage; and

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 43 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

o Site context constraints. 2. The site is unlikely to be developed for Marine industry purposes; 3. Lack of need for Marine industry development; 4. Suitability of the subject site for residential development; 5. Demand for waterfront residential development; and 6. Community benefit relating to the following: a. The provision of Trunk infrastructure; b. Public access to the Coomera River; c. Enhancement of the site’s ecological values; and d. Protection of the site’s heritage values.

The primary emphasis of the applicant’s other relevant matters relate to the cumulative impact of the site’s constraints. The applicant provided the figure below to demonstrate how they feel the constraints limit their opportunity to provide a Marine industry development.

Figure 8: Applicant's suggested developable area as a result of cumulative impacts (source: applicant)

Officers disagree with the extent the applicant believes the site is constrained with respect to facilitating Marine industry development for reasons which include, but are not limited to, the below.

Buffer to sensitive land uses

The figure includes a 250 metre buffer to sensitive land uses with the applicant citing this as a requirement of the City Plan. The only reference to this requirement within the City Plan is within the table of assessment (Table 5.5.12: Material change of use – Waterfront and marine industry zone), preventing the development from being established without an application being made to Council. Marine industry development which is within 250 metres of a sensitive land use or where directly adjoining water triggers Code assessment and therefore (pursuant to the Planning Act 2016) is a presumed approvable – subject to meeting relevant assessment benchmarks. Officers do not consider this to be prohibitive. Further, this table establishes the level of assessment and does not act as an

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 44 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2 assessment benchmark for which an application is assessed. Therefore, as this requirement does not feature as an assessable outcome, officers fail to see how it would reasonably deter a Marine industry development. It is evident within the image above how much the applicant has relied on this constraint to portray their position that the site is too constrained to facilitate a Marine industry development.

While the assessment of any Marine industry development would be required to consider the proximity to the adjoining residences to the west, the assessment benchmarks are favourable for this type of development, given the site’s intent. Further, Marine industry development is not limited to boat manufacturing, it also includes supportive tenancies such as chandleries and warehouses.

Buffer to railway

The figure includes a 100 metre buffer to the railway corridor to the east. This setback relates to a requirement to mitigate acoustic impacts to sensitive uses through attenuation. This outcome is not applicable to Marine industry development and therefore, again, a Marine industry development is significantly less constrained with respect to this matter.

Flood constraints

Only 11ha (approximately) has been developed under the marine industry scenario depicted above, despite the proposed development including approximately 25.16ha of land developed for residential. Officers also consider Marine industry development to be less inhibited than residential development with respect to hydraulic constraints due to the degree of risk which could facilitate a higher level of inundation in appropriate areas. Therefore, officers disagree with the applicant’s representations that the development footprint would be more limited from a flooding perspective under a Marine industry scenario.

Sections within this report also detail how the subject site is the least flood affected of the three large remaining lots within the Gold Coast Marine Precinct, with the other two large vacant lots being either significantly, or entirely flood affected.

Flooding constraints are typical of waterfront properties and development. It is acknowledged that this is a typical constraint when developing Marine industry development due to its reliance on having access to water. Therefore, officers do not support the applicant’s position as to the extent that flood is a constraint to development of the site for Marine industry purposes.

Recreational opportunities and pedestrian permeability

Wording within Figure 8 states that a Marine industry development would not be able to provide the recreational benefits provided as part of the proposed development. However, officers note that the applicant’s exploration of a Marine industry development (to the extent provided as part of this application) is limited and has therefore not gone into the depths provided as part of their proposed development. Officers believe that recreational space could be provided in a Marine industry development scenario as this site, regardless of development outcome, is likely to require a cut-fill balance approach (at least to some degree). Therefore, it is possible that the proposed recreational space could still be provided as part of a Marine industry development, albeit with more or different considerations to how it interfaces with development.

Alternatively, if it was suitably demonstrated to officers that the mapped LGIP park space could not be facilitated under a Marine industry scenario officers would likely recommend the legislatively correct position that the City Plan prevails over the LGIP to the extent of any inconsistency. Thereby, allowing development to occur without providing this recreational infrastructure.

Heritage significance

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 45 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

While the site is not currently listed as being a place of heritage significance, the applicant has identified the heritage significance of the place in their application material. Therefore, despite Council not listing this site as being a place of heritage significance, officers have had regard to its cultural and heritage value.

78 Beattie Road is considered to be a rare and important example of an original farmstead on the Gold Coast, with significant heritage value. The farmhouse, outbuildings and setting with views of the Coomera River are all important aspects of the property’s cultural heritage significance. The property adds significantly to the area’s unique local character and cultural significance, identifying and retaining a connection to the area’s original rural residential and agriculture uses. The property’s continuous ownership and use by the historically prominent Beattie family for over 150 years are exceptionally rare circumstances that contribute to the Gold Coast’s cultural heritage.

Despite the place not being heritage listed (and would require a Council Resolution to become as such) Council’s Office of the City Architect Heritage Unit considers that the place is likely to meet the following statutory criteria for a locally significant heritage place:

 The place is important in demonstrating the evolution and history of the Gold Coast;  The place demonstrates rare, uncommon or endangered aspects of the Gold Coast’s heritage;  The place has the potential to yield information that will contribute to the knowledge and understanding of the Gold Coast’s history; and  The place has a special association with the life or work of a particular person (John Beattie, who served in local government for 30 years).

The Office of the City Architect Heritage Unit has considered the applicant’s other relevant matters and does not consider the proposed development to appropriately respond to and preserve the heritage significance of the place as the outcomes within the proposed development code are considered to facilitate the offering of limited memorabilia around the proposed park space. The application does not demonstrate how significant elements of the place such as the farmhouse, outbuildings and setting will be conserved or adaptively reused to ensure the cultural heritage values of the property are maintained.

Balance of need

Council officers commissioned the peer review of the applicant’s Market Analysis (which was provided in place of an Economic Need and Impact Analysis). The findings of Council’s peer reviewer were, among other things, that:

 The applicant has failed to demonstrate a lack of need for marine industry;  The applicant has failed to demonstrate the need for residential development; and  Council is not required to provide for niche sub-markets such as waterfront residential development – something the applicant has suggested.

Marine industry development is one of, if not, the most ‘locationally dependant’ land use/ type of development as it relies on abutting or having access to water and being located in an area appropriate for industrial activities – from an amenity perspective as well as strategically (e.g. close proximity to major transport corridors etc.). Residential development is one of the least ‘locationally dependant’ development types as its appropriate location is generally informed by the surrounding services.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 46 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

The City Plan and the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (ShapingSEQ) identify how significant Marine industry is for the growth of the region and is a key contributor to skilled labour. These documents also clearly outline that the fragmentation of precincts such as the Gold Coast Marine Precinct impact and detract from its global competitiveness and efficiency, therefore, strongly discouraging development such as this proposal.

The Gold Coast Marine Precinct in Coomera is perhaps the Gold Coast’s most essential marine industry area due to its size, central location and context (with respect to its proximity to essential services, infrastructure and surrounding character). Section 4 ‘Site Context’ of this report demonstrates the advantages offered by the Gold Coast Marine Precinct over the other precincts which are separated from the motorway and are significantly smaller in size. This section also illustrates how infrequently this zone appears across the city. The subject site alone is larger than most of the city’s other marine industry areas. In fact, the only marine industry area that competes with Coomera in terms of scale is the precinct in Steiglitz which is far more removed from the Pacific Motorway, the future Coomera Connector, the heavy rail and is not planned to be serviced by sewerage infrastructure until 2066. It is also the second largest vacant site left within the Gold Coast Marine Precinct and is the least constrained hydraulically.

The cumulative impact that the Marine industry development, heavy rail line and future Coomera Connector pose to this site are considered to result in an unreasonable amenity impact to the proposed residential development. Council’s Health and Regulatory Services have outstanding issues with respect to odour and acoustic impacts and it is therefore considered highly undesirable to introduce circa 445 new sensitive receptors into the area and specifically on this site.

Lack of information

Officers expressed to the applicant that there are critical outstanding concerns with the proposed development, however the applicant has requested that a decision be made on the information currently provided. In some instances, this has resulted in insufficient information for officers to reasonably ascertain whether compliance with an assessment benchmark has been achieved (including, but not limited to transport assessment); while in other instances it has resulted in critical concerns remaining outstanding (including, but not limited to planning and hydraulic assessment).

Summary

Given the strong non-compliances posed by the development cutting across the City Plan and even the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (ShapingSEQ), the lack of compelling other relevant matters and the lack of information available to officers, officers recommend that the application be refused.

4 SITE CONTEXT

4.1 Subject site

The subject site:

 Is 59.46ha in size;  Is located within the Waterfront and marine industry zone;  Abuts the Coomera River for approximately 950m;  Has a 600m frontage to Beattie Road and a 30m frontage to Esplanade / De Barnett Street (in the site’s south-western corner);  Abuts the heavy rail corridor to the east – for 700m;  Is currently improved by a number of buildings including a farmstead and outbuildings which are

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 47 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

believed to have been constructed in 1896;  Has an artificial/engineered farm drain running west-to-east through the site;  Is mapped as having both a local recreation park as well as a district recreation linkage park along the Coomera River pursuant to Council’s Local Government Infrastructure Plan (LGIP) as well as a new sewer pump station within the site’s north-western corner;  Includes vegetation across the site, natural vegetation is located within the north-western corner of the site and along the Coomera River and connected low-lying area, while the southern half of the site is densely covered in sugarcane;  Receives external stormwater through the north-western corner of the site; and  Is burdened by two sewerage easements and benefits from one drainage easement.

Figure 9: Mapped LGIP infrastructure as it relates to the subject site

4.2 Local context

The subject site is the south-westernmost allotment within the Coomera Marine Precinct / Gold Coast Marine Precinct. The additional local context is provided below.

North: A large majority of the Coomera Marine Precinct is located north of the site, including the proposed Gold Coast International Marine Precinct (the precinct’s northernmost site) and the regional dredge spoil facility. Two townhouse developments are located on the adjacent side of Beattie Road, while recreational space including William Guise Foxwell Park exists north of the site. Further north is

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 48 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

the Coomera Town Centre, Coomera train station and the Waterway Downs development.

East: The site’s eastern boundary abuts the heavy rail corridor, which itself adjoins the proposed Coomera Connector (formerly Intra-Regional Transport Corridor). ‘The Boatworks’ and an undeveloped Waterfront and marine industry site (158 Beattie Road) 20.35ha in size are located east. Further east is the Coomera River, Sanctuary Cove and Hope Island Resort.

South: The site’s southern boundary abuts the Coomera River and separates it from residential development and Mangrove Jack Park. Further south is more residential development as well as mixed use commercial development which is located either side of the motorway.

West: The site immediately abuts a number of townhouse developments. Further west is the Coomera Sports Park, Coomera Indoor Sports Centre, Coomera Leisure Centre, Pacific Motorway, Viney Park, Damian Leeding Memorial Park, Coomera State School and Dreamworld.

Figure 10: Subject site and surrounding context

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 49 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 11: Map showing the future 'Coomera Connector' as it dissects the Gold Coast Marine Precinct (source: DSDMIP)

4.3 City wide context

The Gold Coast Marine Precinct in Coomera could be considered Gold Coast’s most essential marine industry area due to its size, central location and context (with respect to its proximity to essential services, infrastructure and surrounding character).

The figure below demonstrates the advantages offered by the Gold Coast Marine Precinct over the other precincts which are separated from the motorway and are significantly smaller in size. The figure also illustrates how infrequently this zone appears across the city.

The subject site alone is larger than most of the city’s other marine industry areas (including that of Main Beach). In fact, the only marine industry area that competes with Coomera in terms of scale is the precinct in Steiglitz which is far more removed from the Pacific Motorway, the future Coomera Connector, the heavy rail and is not planned to be serviced by sewerage infrastructure until 2066.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 50 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 12: A map indicating the Waterfront and marine industry precincts across the city (source: City Plan mapping)

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 51 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

5 PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Section 45(5) of the Planning Act 2016 identifies:

(5) An impact assessment is an assessment that –

(a) must be carried out -

(i) against the assessment benchmarks in a categorising instrument for the development; and

(ii) having regard to any matters prescribed by regulation for this subparagraph; and

(b) may be carried out against, or having regard to, any other relevant matter, other than a person’s personal circumstances, financial or otherwise.

The proposed development triggers impact assessment as it seeks a preliminary approval and has been assessed in accordance with Section 45(5) of the Planning Act 2016.

5.1 State Planning instruments

The application has been assessed against the following instruments:

Instrument Comment State Planning Policy The City Plan appropriately reflects all aspects of the State Planning Policy apart from aspects relating to natural hazards, risk and resilience (coastal hazards). The proposal triggers assessment against assessment benchmarks relating to natural hazards, risk and resilience (coastal hazards). This is discussed below. South East Queensland Regional Plan The proposal is not consistent with the goals, elements and strategies; and the Southern Sub-regional directions of the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (ShapingSEQ). This is discussed in section below. Schedule 10 (Development The proposal does not trigger assessment against any assessment) of the Planning assessment benchmarks in Schedule 10 (Development Regulation 2017 assessment) of the Planning Regulation 2017. Schedule 12 (Particular reconfiguring The proposal does not trigger assessment against any a lot requiring code assessment) of assessment benchmarks in Schedule 12 (Particular the Planning Regulation 2017 reconfiguring a lot requiring code assessment) of the Planning Regulation 2017.

Assessment against the State Planning Policy The proposal has been assessed against the following assessment benchmarks in Part E – interim development assessment requirements of the State Planning Policy.

The subject site is located entirely within the coastal management district and partially within the erosion prone area (coastal area). The proposal is considered to adequately respond to the constraints associated with this assessment benchmark due to the suitable setback to the Coomera

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 52 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

River and the proposed earthworks which will adequately mitigate the risk from natural hazards. Council’s geotechnical engineers have assessed the application and consider it appropriate subject to conditions.

Figure 13: State mapping relating to coastal management and erosion (source: DSDMIP)

Assessment against the Regional Plan The South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (ShapingSEQ) seeks to encourage an efficient and consolidated development pattern, appropriately intensifying residential areas while maintaining and improving employment opportunities. Officers believe that the proposal to facilitate residential development on land intended for marine industry development in an area which has significant portions of vacant, undeveloped high residential density, medium residential density and centre zoned land to be at odds with the principles and strategies within the regional plan. Below is an extract taken from ShapingSEQ about maintaining efficient industrial and commercial development:

“ShapingSEQ realises that when it comes to economic activity, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts – that is, when industries and businesses co-locate and are well-connected, they increase their productivity and capacity to compete nationally and globally. These geographic concentrations of interconnected businesses, suppliers and associated institutions result in greater economic activity and are significant economic drivers.”

ShapingSEQ identifies expected employment demands to reach 433,431 in 2040-2041, an increase of 178,522 from those stated to have been required in 2015-2016. Manufacturing features as one of South East Queensland’s top five industries listed within ShapingSEQ and identifies that SEQ’s competitive advantages will be built on:

 Key export-oriented industries including knowledge, education and creative industries; food production and agribusiness; energy and resources; tourism; and high-value manufacturing;  Our position as Australia’s eastern global gateway to Asia and beyond, facilitated by our port, airports and freight networks; and  The continuing role of SEQ’s centres, knowledge and technology precincts, and other major industry and enterprise areas, with collective outputs far greater than once envisioned.

Coomera is identified as a Major regional activity centre. These centres are focal points for sub- regional employment and the delivery of sub-regional services including but not limited to major

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 53 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2 concentrations of business and related activities, traditional service roles, growth and commercial development and knowledge-intensive businesses to meet the demands of a changing economy.

ShapingSEQ also seeks to protect major enterprise and industrial areas as follows:

 Major enterprise and industrial areas accommodate medium and high-impact industries and other employment uses associated with, or with access to, state transport infrastructure. These areas are major drivers of economic growth. They are either significant in size or have the potential to expand to provide for industry and business activity clusters of regional and state significance.  Protect major enterprise and industrial areas, including associated connections to freight, intermodal, and supply chain networks that form part of the strategic transport system, from encroachment by incompatible land uses.  Enable the intensification and expansion of major enterprise and industrial areas, where appropriate, to improve their capacity and functionality.  Plan for new major enterprise and industrial areas that are appropriately located near existing or planned freight and supply chain networks, including intermodal terminals, where they can accommodate regionally or state significant agglomerations of industry and business activity.

As part of its delivery strategy ShapingSEQ talks to unlocking underutilised land within the urban footprint which may be unused due to constraints which might be alleviated through the amalgamation of lots or the provision of catalytic infrastructure. However, as detailed within this report, officers do not consider the site to be unreasonably constrained beyond development for marine industry purposes.

Therefore, officers consider that the proposed development is inconsistent with the objectives and intent of ShapingSEQ.

5.2 Local categorising instruments

The application has been assessed against the following instruments:

Local categorising instrument Comment The proposal does not trigger assessment against any Temporary Local Planning Instrument temporary local planning instruments. This application does not trigger assessment against a Variation approval variation approval. City Plan: While the application was lodged under City Plan (Version 4), it had not entered the decision stage prior to City Plan (Version 6) commencing. The application is also for a preliminary approval which seeks to vary the effect of the planning scheme for the life of its approval. Therefore, officers have had regard to City Plan (Version 6), as Local Government Planning Scheme permitted by section 45(7) of the Planning Act 2016 during the assessment, which is provided in section 5.3 of this report (below). Local Government Infrastructure Plan: The proposal triggers requirement for new and upgraded trunk infrastructure to service the development. This is discussed in the section below.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 54 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Assessment against the Local Government Infrastructure Plan The proposed development would trigger the requirement for new Trunk infrastructure to service the development.

Park infrastructure

The applicant has proposed the following Trunk park infrastructure:

 A one hectare park with flood immunity up to Q100 to be dedicated to Council; and  A 4.9 hectare recreation linkage park with flood immunities of Q10 and Q20 in different locations to be dedicated to Council.

Council’s LGIP assigns a value of $4,519,352.00 offset (based on $79.12 per 1m²) for the Trunk linkage park and Trunk recreational park. However, officers from Council’s park and recreational services section have not recommended a condition of approval representing any offset at this point in time as the application is for a preliminary approval only.

Sewer infrastructure

Council’s Water and Waste section have identified that an additional 3.1kL of sewerage emergency storage is required to facilitate the development. However, the determination of how this additional capacity will be catered for can be established as part of the assessment of any application for a Development Permit, were this application for a preliminary approval supported.

Transport infrastructure

The applicant’s plans identify the widening of Beattie Road to be in accordance with the LGIP. However, this would not have been a requirement for future development as the widening of Beattie Road does not stretch this eastward in the current LGIP, only in the superseded LGIP (Council’s old PIP) does it go further east than the Coomera Sports Park, Coomera Indoor Sports Centre and Coomera Leisure Centre.

5.3 City Plan The following is an assessment of the application against the City Plan.

Assessment against the Strategic framework The strategic framework requires careful and balanced reading of the provisions to best achieve the purpose and objectives of the City Plan. The strategic framework sets the policy direction for the City Plan and has a planning horizon of 2031.

This Policy direction is structured in the following way: a The strategic intent describes the planning vision for the Gold Coast over the coming decades; in particular, what our city will look like and how it will function, potential for major development over the next 20 years and areas for growth and protection. b The following six city shaping themes play an important role in shaping future growth and managing change across the city, and collectively represent the policy intent of the City Plan:

i Creating liveable places; ii Making modern centres; iii Strengthening and diversifying the economy;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 55 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

iv Improving transport outcomes; v Living with nature; and vi A safe, well designed city. c Strategic outcomes for each theme. d Elements that refine and further describe the strategic outcomes. e Specific outcomes sought for each of the elements.

Strategic intent The Strategic intent flows through to the Themes (Strategic outcomes), Elements (Specific outcomes) and applicable codes. The Strategic intent is achieved through assessment against these outcomes.

Theme/s and Elements The following is an assessment of the application against the most relevant Theme/s and Elements of the strategic framework identified in the table below:

Theme/s Related element Maps Creating liveable places Not applicable. Strategic framework map 1 – designated urban area Making modern centres Not applicable.  Urban area Strengthening and diversifying  Industry and business areas Strategic framework map 2 – the economy settlement pattern Improving transport outcomes Not applicable.  Industry and business area  Natural landscape areas; Strategic framework map 5 – focus areas for economic Living with nature  Nature conservation; and  Coastal, wetland and activity waterway areas.  Marine industry  Urban design, character and community identity; A safe, well designed city  Safe, healthy and cohesive communities; and  Environmental health and amenity. Officers have undertaken a detailed and balanced assessment against the Themes and Elements of the Strategic framework and consider the outcomes included below to be most relevant for the assessment of the Preliminary Approval.

Assessment against the Themes and Elements identified above has been undertaken and grouped as follows:

Nature of development

3.2.2 City shape and urban transformation (Strategic intent)

“The City Plan will change how development is regulated in the city’s industrial areas and strategic government and non-government owned infrastructure sites and facilities. This will promote efficient and sustainable use of these scarce and economically important areas and ensure that residential or other sensitive uses do not adversely impact their safe and optimal operations. Similarly, these areas,

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 56 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2 sites and facilities will not establish or intensify in areas where this would cause unacceptable environmental harm or nuisance to nearby sensitive places.”

3.2.3 Globally competitive economy (Strategic intent)

“A strong and diverse economy is critical to the city’s future growth and prosperity as an international location of choice for businesses, residents and visitors. As a world-class city, the Gold Coast will be recognised globally for its unique lifestyle, talented people, its innovation and entrepreneurial culture. To achieve this, we must drive job creation, grow emerging industries and build business and investor confidence.

Traditionally, the city’s economic prosperity has been driven by population growth, a strong tourism industry and a local business focus across industries such as construction, retail and services. This employment mix and its dispersed geography have impacted productivity.”

“…the Gold Coast must increase levels of employment in businesses focused on external markets.”

“The City Plan aims to help shift the economy to sectors that focus on productive and knowledge intensive activity, connectivity and economic density. This will lift the city's competitiveness, increase employment opportunities and attract new talent, wealth and investment. A diversified economic base will allow us to compete in regional, national and global economies.”

Strategic outcome 3.3.1(2) (Theme – Creating liveable places) states:

(2) The Gold Coast’s settlement pattern provides housing choices and diverse lifestyle opportunities in mixed use centres and specialist centres, neighbourhood centres, urban neighbourhoods, suburban neighbourhoods, new communities, and rural residential and township areas. Limited opportunities also exist in the Merrimac/Carrara flood plain special management area. Strategic outcome 3.3.1(7) (Theme – Creating liveable places) states:

(7) Medium and higher intensity housing occurs in mixed use centres and specialist centres and urban neighbourhoods. Strategic outcome 3.5.1(2) (Theme – Strengthening and diversifying the economy) states:

(2) The city’s settlement pattern accommodates a variety of business, education and employment choices in appropriate settings, scale and locations to underpin economic growth, including: (a) mixed use centres; (b) specialist centres, including health, education, knowledge and innovation areas; (c) industry and business areas; (d) unique character precincts; (e) tourism areas; (f) residential neighbourhoods, including home based business and neighbourhood centres; and (g) rural production areas. Strategic outcome 3.5.1(3) (Theme – Strengthening and diversifying the economy) states:

(3) The Gold Coast continues to support and promote its existing priority industries while moving towards more knowledge intensive, high value and internationally competitive economic sectors. Priority business and industry sectors include: (a) Existing priority sectors:

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 57 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

(i) health and medical; (ii) education and training; (iii) information technology and communications; (iv) lifestyle and adventure related industries, including sport; (v) construction and building; (vi) marine-related industries (including craft and components manufacturing and servicing); (vii) general manufacturing industries (including food processing); (viii) transport, storage and distribution industries; and (ix) tourism and tourism products. Strategic outcome 3.5.1(4) (Theme – Strengthening and diversifying the economy) states:

(4) Development provides an attractive enterprise business environment that balances a diversified, resilient and robust economy. Specific outcome 3.5.2.1(1) (Element – Industry and business areas) states:

(1) Industry and business areas support single use or concentrations of related economic activities and are locations for major employment, investment and production activity. The orderly, sequenced, consolidated and attractive growth of these locations maximises economic advantage and public and private investment. Industry and business areas are categorised as: (a) business areas; (b) general industry areas, including the regionally significant Yatala/Stapylton enterprise area; and (c) marine industry areas. Specific outcome 3.5.2.1(13) (Element – Industry and business areas) states:

(13) Marine industry areas accommodate and support intensive boat building and related water- based industries. These unique water-based locations may interface with residential, tourist and public areas where there are no conflicting and competing interests. New proposals continue to provide primarily marine-based industry. A limited range of retail, medical, education and tourist activities are accommodated if they directly relate to the primary marine-based industry function. Other general industry uses are also established if these activities do not impact existing marine industry uses and the long-term use of marine industry land for its intended purpose. Strategic outcome 3.8.1(13) (Theme – A safe, well designed city) states:

(13) Residential and other sensitive uses are located away from areas that could cause environmental harm or nuisance from emissions or other impacts. Specific outcome 3.8.3.1(1) (Element – Urban design, character and community identity) states:

(1) Development is cognisant of the function and desired future appearance of each individual area and reinforces or reinterprets the character of that area. Specific outcome 3.8.6.1(1) (Element – Environmental health and amenity) states:

(5) Existing or planned sensitive uses do not unreasonably constrain or adversely impact on the safe and optimal operation of existing and planned strategic infrastructure sites and corridors that are important to the efficient functioning of the city or region. Strategic infrastructure sites and corridors include: (a) essential public services and facilities, such as water and wastewater treatment plants, major electricity infrastructure, landfill sites, emergency facilities and hospitals;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 58 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

(b) general and marine industry areas; (c) strategic freight corridors; (d) resource areas, including committed and non-committed extractive resource sites and their haulage routes; (e) rural production areas, including strategic cropping and agriculture land; (f) Gold Coast Airport; (g) transport terminals, heavy rail and the major road network; (h) theme parks and tourist attractions; (i) district and regional sport and recreation facilities, such as motor sport parks; and (j) other essential community or productive sites, facilities and corridors having the potential to impact the amenity of a sensitive use. Officer’s comments

The proposed development is not considered to contribute towards achieving these outcomes. In fact, the proposal is considered to undermine these objectives as the subject site is located within an Industry and business area on the City Plan’s settlement pattern map indicating that the site is not zoned for, nor intended to provide a residential development. The development compromises the long- term use of the land for industrial purposes by facilitating a medium density residential outcome in place of marine industry or even general industry development. Further, it is also considered to potentially compromise, hinder or undesirably restrict (through reverse amenity impacts) the adjoining marine industry land (north and east) by introducing sensitive land uses which would experience impacts to amenity through the emissions (noise, air quality etc.) created by the adjacent industrial users. These potential impacts to future residential amenity are further exacerbated by the proximity of the heavy rail and future Coomera Connector.

The City Plan’s Strategic framework identifies Marine industry development as being a significant contributor to the city’s planned growth. The outcomes included above specifically seek to discourage or prevent the fragmentation of strategically significant nodes and precincts like this (the Gold Coast Marine Precinct) as it reduces efficiencies and jeopardises the success and competitive advantages they otherwise offer.

The proposed residential development and resulting loss of Marine industry land (and employment land) presents a strong conflict with the Strategic framework. The proposed fragmentation and reconfiguration of the site to facilitate the proposed residential development would lead to multiple ownerships making any redevelopment opportunity inconceivable. The size of the proposed allotments would not permit large format buildings or the access, parking and manoeuvrability of large vehicles, aspects typically required of waterfront and marine based industrial activity. The proposed road layout is also considered to be of a residential nature and not that of an industrial standard, therefore being too narrow and not of a profile which would support large, heavily vehicles. Further to this, there are other components which are required as part of the City Plan when developing a site for industrial purposes, such as landscaping, which could not be facilitated within these small, narrow allotments.

The applicant provided a ‘Market Analysis’ in lieu of an Economic Need and Impact Analysis to support the justification for why the applicant feels there is not a need for Marine industry development and why there is a need for waterfront residential development in this area. Council officers commissioned the peer review of the applicant’s Market Analysis, the findings for which, among other things, were that:

 The applicant has failed to demonstrate a lack of need for marine industry;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 59 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

 The applicant has failed to demonstrate the need for residential development; and  Council is not required to provide for niche sub-markets such as waterfront residential development – something the applicant has suggested.

Marine industry development is a ‘locationally dependant’ land use/ type of development as it relies on abutting or having access to water and being located in an area appropriate for industrial activities – from an amenity perspective as well as strategically (e.g. close proximity to major transport corridors etc.). Residential development is one of the least ‘locationally dependant’ development types as its appropriate location is generally informed by the surrounding services.

The Gold Coast Marine Precinct in Coomera is perhaps the Gold Coast’s most essential marine industry area due to its size, central location and context (with respect to its proximity to essential services, infrastructure and surrounding character). Section 4 ‘Site Context’ of this report demonstrates the advantages offered by the Gold Coast Marine Precinct over the other precincts which are separated from the motorway and are significantly smaller in size. This section also illustrates how infrequently this zone appears across the city. The subject site alone is larger than most of the city’s other marine industry areas. In fact, the only marine industry area that competes with Coomera in terms of scale is the precinct in Steiglitz which is far more removed from the Pacific Motorway, the future Coomera Connector, the heavy rail and is not planned to be serviced by sewerage infrastructure until 2066. The subject site is also the second largest vacant site left within the Gold Coast Marine Precinct and is the least constrained hydraulically.

The cumulative impact that the Marine industry development, heavy rail line and future Coomera Connector pose to this site are considered to result in an unreasonable amenity impact to the proposed residential development. Council’s Health and Regulatory Services have outstanding issues with respect to both odour and acoustic impacts and it is therefore considered highly undesirable to introduce circa 445 new sensitive receptors into the area and specifically on this site.

Hydraulic impacts

Specific outcome 3.7.3.1(5) (Element – Green space network) states: (5) Waterways and riparian areas are protected as natural green space corridors to: (a) protect vegetation, wildlife habitat and ecological corridors; (b) protect scenic amenity; (c) provide continuous public access and parkland corridors for recreation, walking and cycling; (d) provide visual relief from the built environment and a retreat from developed areas; (e) provide flood mitigation, flood resilience, drainage and water quality functions; (f) provide natural and renewable water cycle processes (water health and water quality); and (g) protect foreshores from erosion and stormwater inflows. Strategic outcome 3.8.1(14) (Theme– A safe, well designed city) states: (14) Greater resilience to the impacts from natural hazards is achieved by managing and minimising risks in susceptible areas. Some parts of the city are unsuitable for development due to the extent of natural hazard affectation. Specific outcome 3.8.7.1(1) (Element – Natural hazards) states:

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 60 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

(1) Development avoids natural hazard areas where the risk to life and property, the likely cost of damage, or the measures needed to effectively mitigate the risk are unacceptable. Natural hazards include bushfire, flooding, landslide and coastal risks. Officer’s comments

Officers do not consider that the proposed development contributes towards achieving these outcomes as the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated that the development would not cause, increase or have cumulative potential to cause or increase adverse impacts associated with flooding (both on and off site). The applicant has also not demonstrated that the flood storage and flood conveyance capacity of the catchment will not be adversely impacted. The proposal has not adequately quantified the impacts (and associated risk) of the proposed development and the proposal is likely to cause or increase the adverse impacts of flooding. Further, the submitted information has not confirmed that overland flow (both external and internal) management will not cause any adverse hydraulic impacts external to the site.

Recreation facilities

Specific outcome 3.5.2.1(14) (Element – Industry and business areas) states:

(14) Development in marine industry areas: (a) allows for public access to the waterfront for recreation, access and transport in appropriate locations; (b) presents an attractive appearance when viewed from the waterway and land; and (c) manages impacts to provide for an acceptable level of health and amenity to nearby residential and other sensitive uses. Officer’s comments

The proposed development is considered to comply with this outcome due to the following:

 The development facilitates public access to, and recreational opportunities adjacent to, a major watercourse, being the Coomera River;  This proposed interface is considered to be aesthetically pleasing due to the soft scaped approach provided; and  The introduction of a sensitive use on this site will not impact the health and amenity of nearby sensitive uses.

Environmental significance

Strategic outcome 3.7.1(4) (Theme – Living with nature) states: (4) Matters of environmental significance within biodiversity areas are protected in situ. Strategic outcome 3.7.1(7) (Theme – Living with nature) states: (7) Coastal environments are protected for their ecological, economic and recreational values. Strategic outcome 3.7.1(8) (Theme – Living with nature) states: (8) Water quality and quantity in drainage catchments maintains the operation and health of ecosystems, provides flood mitigation and meets requirements for water-based primary and secondary leisure activities. Strategic outcome 3.7.1(9) (Theme – Living with nature) states: (9) Catchments maintain water quality and quantity to supply existing and forecast urban development, support compatible water-based leisure activities and retain future options for water harvesting.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 61 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Specific outcome 3.7.2.1(1) (Element – Natural landscape areas) states:

(1) Natural landscape areas are retained and enhanced to perform essential functions such as nature conservation, cultural heritage, scenic amenity and other green space values, which are vital to protecting the city’s matters of environmental significance, including biodiversity areas and landscape character. Specific outcome 3.7.2.1(2) (Element – Natural landscape areas) states:

(2) Natural landscape areas, like rural production areas and rural residential areas continue to maintain a green frame to the city’s urban areas, particularly on the Hinterland ranges and foothills. This contributes to the city’s distinctive form, visual attractiveness and role as a major tourist destination. Specific outcome 3.7.2.1(5) (Element – Natural landscape areas) states:

(5) Waterways and riparian areas are protected as natural green space corridors to: a) protect vegetation, wildlife habitat and ecological corridors; b) protect scenic amenity; c) provide continuous public access and parkland corridors for recreation, walking and cycling; d) provide visual relief from the built environment and a retreat from developed areas; e) provide flood mitigation, flood resilience, drainage and water quality functions; f) provide natural and renewable water cycle processes (water health and water quality); and g) protect foreshores from erosion and stormwater inflows. (10) Development facilitates accessible, safe and integrated local open space networks that contribute to sense of place and quality of life. Specific outcome 3.7.4.1(1) (Element – Nature Conservation) states:

(1) The Gold Coast’s biodiversity areas and other matters of environmental significance are conserved, protected, enhanced and managed to maintain a diversity of terrestrial, aquatic and marine species, ecosystems and ecological processes. Poorly protected regional ecosystems and habitat for threatened species, such as koalas, are enhanced. Specific outcome 3.7.4.1(3) (Element – Nature Conservation) states:

(3) The city’s matters of environmental significance include: a) native vegetation of national, state or local significance; b) coastal environments, wetlands and waterways; c) core habitat areas and substantial remnants; d) hinterland to coast critical corridors, including: i. Burleigh Heads to Springbrook; ii. Springbrook to Wongawallan; iii. Southern Moreton Bay to Wongawallan; iv. Southern Moreton Bay to Clagiraba; v. Currumbin to Cobaki Broadwater (Tweed Shire); and vi. Currumbin to Currumbin Valley. e) habitat for threatened species, such as koalas. Specific outcome 3.7.5.1(1) (Element – Coastal, wetland and waterway areas) states:

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 62 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

(1) Coastal terrestrial, aquatic and marine ecosystems and their ecological processes are protected to sustain their viability. This includes the conservation and enhancement of endemic vegetation on beaches, dunes and coastal headlands, and along natural waterways and floodplains. (3) Disturbance to undeveloped parts of erosion-prone areas, storm-tide inundation hazard areas, tidal waterways and nutrient hazard areas is avoided other than for maritime infrastructure where impacts are minimised. Officer’s comments The proposed development is considered to achieve these outcomes due to the following:  The proposed development includes the creation of a large network of wetland areas and restoration of the existing Coomera River riparian vegetation. The existing Coomera River riparian corridor will be retained, rehabilitated and widened. Stabilisation of the riparian areas via soft engineering is also to include works below the high tide mark under advisory/direction with Council’s Catchment Management Unit. It is the intention that these areas will be dedicated to Council as public open space, with the recreational linkage forming trunk infrastructure;  The subject site is highly modified and contains few Matters of environmental significance. The extensive rehabilitation proposed is considered to represent a significant environmental improvement of the subject site;  The site currently contains sugarcane up to the bank of the Coomera River. The rehabilitation of significant portions of the subject site bordering the river is considered to represent an improvement in protection of coastal environments and associated functions;  The rehabilitation of significant portions of the subject site bordering the river is considered to represent an improvement in operation and health of ecosystems and provides for water-based leisure activities;  The site does not contain any noteworthy landscape areas. The extensive rehabilitation proposed is considered to represent a significant environmental improvement of the subject site;  The proportion of rehabilitated open space areas to development footprint is considered to result in the development not dominating the landscape within its context and locality;  The proposed open space areas are accessible, safe and integrated and are likely to contribute to sense of place and quality of life for adjacent residents and other users;  The subject site is not located within a biodiversity area, and the site does not contain significant matters of environmental significance. The rehabilitation of significant portions of the subject site bordering the river is considered to represent an improvement in protection of terrestrial, aquatic and marine species, ecosystems and ecological processes;  The rehabilitation of significant portions of the subject site bordering the river is considered to represent an improvement in protection of coastal environments and ecological processes;  The proposed rehabilitation of the buffer to the Coomera River and conversion from sugarcane fields to natural areas is considered to represent an overall improvement to potential erosion- prone areas, storm-tide inundation hazard areas, tidal waterways and nutrient hazard areas; and  Water-based leisure infrastructure is proposed to be constructed.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 63 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 14: Extent of Environmental significance as mapped under City Plan (version 6)

Summary of Strategic framework

The proposal is not considered to support and promote the Strategic framework for the following reasons:

 The application seeks to establish a large residential development instead of providing Marine industry development;  The proposed fragmentation and reconfiguration of the site would lead to multiple ownerships making any redevelopment opportunity inconceivable. Further, the size of the proposed allotments would also not permit large format buildings or the access, parking and manoeuvrability of large vehicles, aspects typically required of waterfront and marine based industrial activity. The proposed road layout is also considered to be of a residential nature and not that of an industrial standard, therefore being too narrow and not of a profile which would support large, heavily vehicles; and  The development would compromise the efficiency and competiveness of the Gold Coast Marine Precinct through reducing its size, fragmenting the industry across the city, unreasonably constraining other development within the precinct and would come at the expense of a large waterfront site.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 64 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

As stated within Section 3 ‘Key Considerations’ of this report, officers have considered, and had regard to, the other relevant matters posed by the applicant pursuant to s45(5)(b) of the Planning Act 2016 and do not consider that these outweigh the non-compliances posed by the proposal to the planning assessment framework nor do they warrant the support of the proposal in any case. Therefore, officers recommend that the proposal be refused.

5.3.2 Assessment against the codes

The following is an assessment of the application against the applicable codes of the City Plan identified in the table below:

Zone code Overlay codes Development codes

 Waterfront and marine  Acid sulfate soils overlay The following codes are sought industry zone code. code; to be modified (at least to some  Airport environs overlay code; degree):  Coastal erosion hazard  Commercial design code; overlay code;  General development  Environmental significance provisions code; overlay code;  Reconfiguring a lot code;  Flood overlay code;  Small lot housing (infill focus)  Landslide hazard overlay code; and code; and  Transport code.  Regional infrastructure The following codes are overlay code. specified as being applicable to future development:  Child care centre code;  Dual occupancy code;  Dwelling unit code;  Home based business code;  Market and temporary use code;  Multiple accommodation code;  Rural activity code;  Sales office code;  Secondary dwelling code;  Change to ground level and creation of new waterways code;  Driveways and vehicular crossings code;  Fire services in developments accessed by common private title code;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 65 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Zone code Overlay codes Development codes  Healthy waters code;  Landscape work code;  Solid waste management code;  Vegetation management code; and  Works for infrastructure code.

5.3.2.1 Assessment against the zone code

The proposal has been assessed against the Waterfront and marine industry zone code.

The purpose of the Waterfront and marine industry zone code is to:

(1) The purpose of the waterfront and marine industry zone code is to provide for uses for which a location adjoining or near the waterfront or a marine environment is essential. It may include non-industrial and business uses that support the industrial activities where they do not compromise the long-term use of the land for industrial purposes. (2) The purpose of the code will be achieved through the following overall outcomes: (a) Land uses – (i) support intensive boat building and related water based industries such as marine industry, research and technologies and warehouses; (ii) involving other low and medium impact industry uses may also be established if they do not compromise the long-term use of marine industry land for its intended purpose; (iii) include a limited range of complementary uses that directly relate to the primary marine-industry function of the zone such as a car wash, shops, food and drink outlets, service stations and manufacturer’s shop; (iv) include a limited range of uses that support the zone may be considered providing they do not compromise the long term use of the zone for marine industry purposes such as, hardware and trade supplies, health care services, offices, educational establishments, places of worship, service industries, parking stations, port services and transport depots; (v) such as hotels, large food and drink outlets, short-term accommodation, resort complexes and tourist attractions that make best use of the unique water-based locations of the zone may be considered providing there are no conflicting and competing interests and the amenity impacts of the industrial uses can be mitigated; (vi) do not include special industry; and (vii) manage impacts to provide for an acceptable level of health and amenity to nearby residential and other sensitive land uses. (b) Character consists of – (i) large, unobtrusive buildings that are creatively designed to be functional and visually appealing from waterways and land;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 66 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

(ii) legible and attractive streetscapes with wide streets that provide easy site access; and (iii) extensive landscaping where adjoining sensitive land uses and transport corridors. (c) Built form – (i) is of a height that allows for the efficient manufacturing, storing and repairing of vessels, while not significantly impacting on adjacent uses; and (ii) allows for public access to the waterfront for recreation, access and transport in appropriate locations. (d) Lot design – (i) allows land to be used for waterfront and marine industrial activities. Officer’s comment

The proposal is not considered to achieve the purpose of the Waterfront and marine industry zone as it compromises the long-term use of the land for industrial purposes by facilitating a medium density residential outcome in place of marine industry or even general industry development. Further, it is also considered to potentially compromise, hinder or undesirably restrict the adjoining marine industry land by introducing sensitive land uses which would experience impacts to amenity through the emissions (noise, air quality etc.) created by the adjacent industrial users. As outlined earlier in this report, it is not essential for the proposed residential development to be waterfront. The applicant has provided an air quality assessment which accounts for existing development within the area. A Council commissioned third-party peer review of this report raised some concerns, citing the omitted detail, including the exclusion of some nearby Marine industry development (north-east of the subject site). There are also some outstanding concerns relating to the acoustic report, specifically noise generated in the early morning. The proposed residential development does not:  Support intensive boat building or provide for related industrial activity;  Provide a built form outcome which could otherwise be readily converted to marine industry or general industry development;  Propose roadways that are designed to be of an industrial standard;  Provide a built form consisting of large format buildings, nor would the proposed allotments facilitate such development, therefore hindering future industrial redevelopment options; and  The proposed reconfiguration of the site will introduce multiple owners (circa 445) making it unrealistic to contemplate any future changes to this development typology. Despite the above, a small component of the proposal could provide complementary uses to the broader precinct. These include land uses such as Food and drink outlets, Health care services, Shops and Showrooms. Notwithstanding, the non-residential components form only a very small proportion of the proposed development and is not considered to assist in addressing the outcomes included above. Council’s Landscape assessment officers are not satisfied with the development’s landscape buffer to Beattie Road and do not believe it constitutes an “extensive” buffer as required by Overall outcome (2)(b)(iii). Therefore, the proposed development is not considered to comply with the Purpose or the following Overall outcomes of the Waterfront and marine industry zone:  Overall outcome (2)(a)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code;  Overall outcome (2)(a)(ii) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code;  Overall outcome (2)(a)(iv) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 67 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

 Overall outcome (2)(a)(v) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code;  Overall outcome (2)(b)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code;  Overall outcome (2)(b)(ii) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code;  Overall outcome (2)(b)(iii) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code;  Overall outcome (2)(c)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; and  Overall outcome (2)(d)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code. As outlined earlier within this report, the proposal is also considered to provide non-compliances which cut across the Strategic framework. As the earlier assessment within this report concluded, the other relevant matters posed by the applicant are not considered to warrant the approval of this application. Therefore, officers recommend refusing the application. Officers have undertaken an assessment of all relevant provisions of the zone code. The proposed development does not comply with the following applicable acceptable outcomes:  Lot design

Lot design (for subdivision only)

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO2 AO2.1 Lots are of a size that support waterfront and marine Minimum lot size is 1,000m², exclusive of any access based industrial activity and configured to operate strip or access easement of rear lots. efficiently and effectively. AO2.2 Minimum road frontage and average lot width is 25m. OR For rear lots, the average lot width is 25m.

Officer’s comment

The proposal includes lots which are as small as 250m2 with frontages of 8m; therefore, the development provides an alternative outcome to Acceptable outcome 2.

The proposed minimum allotment sizes of 250m2 (where mapped RD3) and 375m2 (where mapped RD2) of the Medium Density Residential Precinct, which is the biggest precinct to be developed by the applicant, are not considered to be of a size to support waterfront and marine based industrial activity as development of this nature typically requires large format buildings. The size would also not permit or account for the access, parking and manoeuvrability of large vehicles, aspects typically required of waterfront and marine based industrial activity. This would therefore result in impacts flowing onto the street, preventing the development from efficiently and effectively catering for industrial uses. The proposed road layout is also considered to be of a residential nature and not that of an industrial standard, therefore being too narrow and not of a profile which would support large, heavy vehicles.

Further to the above, there are other components such as landscaping, which could not be facilitated if industrial development was proposed on these small, narrow allotments.

Therefore, the proposal does not comply with PO2, nor the corresponding Overall outcome (OO(2)(d)(i)). As outlined within this report, the proposed development is recommended to be refused.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 68 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

5.3.2.2 Assessment against the overlay code

The proposal has been assessed against the following overlay codes:

 Acid sulfate soils overlay code;  Airport environs overlay code;  Coastal erosion hazard overlay code;  Environmental significance overlay code;  Flood overlay code;  Landslide hazard overlay code; and  Regional infrastructure overlay code. Officers have undertaken an assessment of all relevant provisions. The proposed development does not comply with the following applicable acceptable outcomes:  Ecological site assessment – Environmental significance overlay code;  Wetland and waterway – Environmental significance overlay code;  Flood storage – Flood overlay code;  Overland flow – Flood overlay code;  Flooding risk – Flood overlay code; and  Flood storage and conveyance – Flood overlay code.

Environmental significant overlay code

Ecological site assessment

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO1 AO1 All matters of environmental significance on and Proposed works do not impact on: adjacent to the development site are identified and (a) areas identified on Environmental significance protected. – vegetation management overlay map; (b) buffers to wetlands and watercourses being: Note - An Ecological Site Assessment prepared in (i) 100m from the mapped boundary of a State accordance with SC6.7 City Plan policy – significant aquatic area, as identified on Ecological site assessments, is Council’s Environmental significance – wetlands preferred method for addressing this and watercourse overlay map; performance outcome. (ii) 100m from the outer landward boundary of a State significant wetland, as identified on Environmental significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay map; (iii) 100m from the outer landward boundary of a Local significant wetland, as identified on Environmental significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay map; (iv) 60m from the outer bank of a Major Watercourse identified on Environmental significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay map; or (v) 30m from the outer bank of a Watercourse identified on Environmental significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay map; and (c) individual trees within areas mapped on the Environmental significance – priority species overlay map.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 69 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Officer’s comment

The proposed development is located within the separation distances prescribed by AO1 and therefore provides an alternative outcome. The proposed development is considered to comply with Performance outcome 1 as the submitted ecological reporting has demonstrated that negligible ecological value currently exists on the subject site. As outlined within the assessment of the Strategic framework, the extensive ecological rehabilitation proposed is considered to represent a significant ecological improvement to the overall site.

Wetland and waterway

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO5 AO5.3 Buffers are provided to wetlands and watercourses Buffers at least 100m wide are provided between the identified on the Environmental significance – development and the outer landward boundary of a wetlands and watercourse overlay map to ensure Local significant wetland as identified on the the: Environmental significance – wetlands and (a) protection of matters of environmental watercourse overlay map. significance mapped onsite or identified through AO5.4 an ecological site assessment; Buffers at least 60m wide are provided between the (b) unimpeded movement of fauna along the development and the outer bank of a Major watercourse; Watercourse as identified on the Environmental (c) water quality is maintained; significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay (d) bank stability; and map. (e) protection of property and infrastructure. AO5.5 Note: The buffer width for wetlands is measured from Buffers at least 30m wide are provided between the the outer, landward boundary of the mapped development and the outer bank of a watercourse as wetland, as shown on Environmental identified on the Environmental significance – significance – wetland and watercourse overlay wetlands and watercourse overlay map. map. Note: Recommendations provided in an ecological site assessment (prepared in accordance with SC6.7 City Plan policy – Ecological site assessments) is Council’s preferred method for determining alternative buffer widths. Note Artificial watercourses are to be addressed through the Coastal erosion hazard overlay code and map. Where a waterbody contains both natural and artificial banks, the natural banks are to be assessed in accordance with this performance outcome.

Officer’s comment

Despite the proposed development encroaching on the setbacks required by AO5.3, AO5.4 and AO5.5 the proposed development is considered to comply with Performance outcome 5 due to the following reasons:  As detailed within the assessment against the Strategic framework, the subject site has been highly modified and is unlikely to represent significant ecological value;  Whilst local significant wetlands are mapped as occurring on site, they are more likely associated with cane drains and low lying sugarcane areas;  The proposed establishment of extensive wetland areas in the open space areas of the site is considered to represent a net benefit to wetland values on the subject site; and

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 70 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

 The majority of the development achieves a greater than 60m buffer to the Coomera River with the exception of a minor access joining the adjacent existing esplanade in the south-western portion of the site. This ensures an appropriate buffer is maintained to the Coomera River.

Flood overlay code

Council’s hydraulic engineers have identified a number of concerns with the applicant’s specialist reports. These concerns (which are specifically detailed within section 8.1 of this report) relate to:

 Stormwater quantity,  Stormwater quality,  Impacts to the external catchment,  Local flooding; and  Regional flooding.

These outstanding concerns result in the application material failing to demonstrate an appropriate outcome with respect to objectives of the Strategic framework, the Flood overlay code and the Healthy waters code.

Flood storage

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO1 AO1 All development activity conducted on land below the The flood storage volume on the site is maintained up designated flood level must not detrimentally affect the to the Designated Flood Level. flood storage capacity of the catchment and the Note: The Designated Flood Level must be obtained drainage regime. from Council’s Flood Search.

Officer’s comment

The submitted earthworks plan and cut/ fill presented on the proposed drawings are not clear. As such, the submitted information does not confirm that flood storage will be maintained to the predevelopment condition. Despite these concerns, the applicant requested that Council officers proceed with a recommendation based on the information provided. Officers do not consider that the proposal has demonstrated that the flood storage capacity of the catchment will be maintained and therefore has not demonstrated compliance with AO1 and PO1.

Overland flow

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO4 AO4 Development must not obstruct free open surface flow Overland flowing stormwater is allowed free open of stormwater through a site. surface flow between the street and any waterway at the rear of the property, in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

Officer’s comment

Officers consider that the local flood models used for modelling the overland flow and drainage systems for the site and surrounding area need to be modified to accurately represent the proposed changes on the site. As such, the submitted stormwater report does not confirm that there will be no adverse impact external to the site, in relation to surface flow of stormwater. Therefore, officers

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 71 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2 consider that the proposed application has failed to demonstrate how it complies with Performance outcome 4 of the Flood overlay code.

Flooding risk

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO5 AO5 Development in flood affected areas must not cause, or Development does not: have the cumulative potential to cause, damage, must (a) increase the number of people calculated to be at not increase the level of risk to life, or be to the risk from flooding; detriment of flood evacuation procedures. (b) increase the number of people likely to need evacuation; (c) shorten flood warning times; (d) impact on the ability of traffic to use evacuation routes, or unreasonably increase traffic volumes on evacuation routes, or as identified within Council's Counter Disaster Plan (flooding); (e) place additional burdens on Council's resources or emergency services; (f) increase the duration of flooding, unless that increase is part of a Council approved flood mitigation strategy.

Officer’s comment

It appears from the flood maps in the submitted report that there are impacts external to the site. However, these impact maps are likely to be changed as both the local and regional flood models require amendments (as detailed within other sections of this report) to accurately represent the changes proposed on the site. As such, actual impacts of the development are unknown. Therefore, officers consider that the proposed application has failed to demonstrate how the proposal complies with Performance outcome 5 of the Flood overlay code.

Flood storage and conveyance

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO6 AO6.1 Development with plans for earthworks in a floodplain Provide flood storage calculations that demonstrate on or over a water body or within a flood affected area that flood storage volume, over the site below the below the Designated Flood Level must allow for the Designated Flood Level, is maintained or increased. maintenance of flood storage, and flood conveyance of flood and drainage channels and overland flow paths. AO6.2 A certified hydraulic study (and, if necessary, a hydrologic study) is prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced engineer to investigate the hydraulic characteristics of both the undeveloped and developed site and make comparisons between them. Proposed developments in, on or over a water body, or within a flood affected area, must be tested for: (a) the 50%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 2% and 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) for local flood events; (b) the 5%, 2%, and 1% AEP floods. For the Nerang River Catchment Hinze Dam stage 2 condition must be used. (as specified in Table 8.2.8-3: Table to performance outcome PO7); and

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 72 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

(c) any resultant afflux or increase in flood velocities sufficient to cause real damage to premises. The Assessment Manager may also require the development to be assessed against rarer floods.

Officer’s comment

The submitted earthworks plan and cut/ fill presented on the proposed drawings are not clear. As such, the submitted information does not confirm that flood storage will be maintained to the predevelopment condition. The flood maps in the submitted report show impacts greater than 2mm external to the site (including impacts to private properties, roads and drainage areas). However, these impact maps are likely to be changed as both local and regional flood models need to be modified to accurately represent the changes on the site. As such, actual impacts of the development are unknown. Officers do not consider that the proposal has demonstrated compliance with PO6 of the Flood overlay code and is therefore taken to have not complied with demonstrating an appropriate outcome in this regard.

The concerns officers have with the submitted specialist reports (relating to the above-mentioned non compliances) elevate up to the Purpose and Overall outcomes of the Flood overlay code, which read as follows:

(2) The purpose of the Flood overlay code is to regulate development occurring in flood affected areas to ensure development does not cause, increase or have cumulative potential to cause or increase, the risks and/or hazards associated with flooding. (3) The purpose of the code will be achieved through the following overall outcomes: (e) The flood storage function of the city's flood plains is protected. (f) The flood discharge capacity of the city's rivers, streams and canals is protected. (j) The effects of future climate variability are taken into account.

Therefore, for the reasons cited above, officers do not believe that the application material has demonstrated compliance with the Purpose and Overall outcome (3)(e), (3)(j) and (3)(j) of the Flood overlay code, as well as PO1, PO4, PO5 and PO6. As detailed within the assessment against the Strategic framework, the proposal is also considered to present non-compliances with Strategic outcome 3.8.1(14) and Specific outcome 3.7.3.1(5)(e) and Specific outcome 3.8.7.1(1). The application is therefore recommended to be refused.

5.3.2.3 Assessment against development codes

The proposal has been assessed against the following development codes:

 Child care centre code;  Commercial design code;  Dual occupancy code;  Dwelling unit code;  General development provisions code;  Home based business code;  Market and temporary use code;  Multiple accommodation code;  Reconfiguring a lot code;  Rural activity code;  Sales office code;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 73 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

 Secondary dwelling code;  Small lot housing (infill focus) code;  Transport code;  Change to ground level and creation of new waterways code;  Driveways and vehicular crossings code;  Fire services in developments accessed by common private title code;  Healthy waters code;  Landscape work code;  Solid waste management code;  Vegetation management code; and  Works for infrastructure code. Part 3 of the proposed development code states that all of the codes listed above would be applicable to future assessment and are therefore considered to be well represented within the proposed development code. However, the proposed development code includes 19 Performance outcomes which relate to aspects similar to those represented within the following codes:

 Commercial design code;  General development provisions code;  Reconfiguring a lot code;  Small lot housing (infill focus) code; and  Transport code. Notwithstanding, these outcomes provide a consistent objective with those of the City Plan and are therefore considered satisfactory. There is a benefit to the applicant in including these outcomes within the proposed development code as it elevates them up the assessment hierarchy from development codes, into what will essentially act as a zone code and they would therefore hold more weight in terms of assessment. If a residential development was to be supported on this site, then officers would support the way in which the applicant has sought to utilise the codes of the City Plan. However, the application itself must be assessed against these codes; therefore, officers have undertaken an assessment of all relevant provisions. The proposed development does not comply with applicable outcomes of the following codes:

 Amenity protection – General development provisions code;  Rearranging lot boundaries – Reconfiguring a lot code;  Stormwater quality – Healthy waters code;  Stormwater quantity – Healthy waters code; and  Traffic impact assessment – Transport code.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 74 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

General development provisions code

Amenity protection

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO1 AO1 Development mitigates any negative effects to amenity, No acceptable outcome provided. health and safety from existing surrounding activities having regard to: (a) noise; (b) hours of operation; (c) traffic; (d) signage; (e) visual amenity; (f) wind effects; (g) privacy; (h) vibration; (i) contaminated substances; (j) hazardous chemicals; (k) odour and emissions; and (l) safety.

Officer’s comment

The proposed introduction and facilitation of a residential development on this site is not considered to comply with Performance outcome 1 nor the corresponding Overall outcome of the General development provisions code which reads as follows:

(2) The purpose of the code will be achieved through the following overall outcomes: (a) Development is designed to maintain the expected level of amenity for the area. The proposal is not considered to comply with these outcomes as it seeks to facilitate sensitive land uses on a site which is currently zoned and intended for marine industry development, thereby introducing a use which would have users who would expect a higher level of amenity than users of the site were it to be developed for Marine industry purposes as intended.

Were the proposed development to be facilitated, it is considered that it would have the following negative impacts:

 It would be subject to impacts from adjacent marine industry land, including but not limited to impacts associated with noise, sharing the roadway with large, heavy vehicles, visual impacts, vibrations, odour and potentially the general feeling of safety;  The development would be subject to impacts of the heavy rail and the future Coomera Connector, creating similar impacts to those mentioned above for marine industry development; and  It would constrain both existing industrial development and future industrial development through their heightened amenity expectation (from those which would otherwise be expected on-site currently).

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 75 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Therefore, the proposed development presents non-compliances with Performance outcome 1 and Overall outcome (2)(a) of the General development provisions code. The nature of these non- compliances are also considered to flow into and throughout the Strategic framework (as outlined earlier in this report), therefore, the application is recommended to be refused. Reconfiguring a lot code

Rearranging lot boundaries

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO7 AO7.1 Rearranging a lot boundary results in lots which have The rearranging of a lot boundary does not restrict the practical shapes and allow for the intended uses lawful use of either lot. described in the zone. AO7.2 Note: irregular shaped lots will only be accepted to address encroachments. The rearranging of a lot boundary results in lots which comply with the applicable zone requirements.

Officer’s comment

The proposed development is not considered to comply with the outcomes included above (being AO7.1, AO7.2 and PO7 of the Reconfiguring a Lot code) as the outcomes seek to facilitate allotments that align with the intent of the site’s zoning. The proposed development code seeks to facilitate allotments which are of a size and nature typical of residential lots and not that of industrial (marine or other) allotments. The proposed size and frontages of the likely future allotments would not be sufficient to accommodate marine industry development as these developments require large scale buildings and areas for on-site car parking and servicing. Therefore, the proposed allotment (or controls for which they would be facilitated under) are not considered to allow for the future development of marine industry development.

For the reasons outlined above, the proposal is also considered to be contrary to the corresponding Overall outcome of PO7, being Overall outcome (2)(a), which reads as follows:

(2) The purpose of the code will be achieved through the following overall outcomes: (a) Subdivisions provide a range of lot sizes and frontages to facilitate: (i) different development expected in the zone; (ii) on-street parking which generally caters for demand within the street; and (iii) public utilities and street trees. Officers have also considered the proposed development against the purpose statement of the Reconfiguring a lot code, which reads as follows: (1) The purpose of the Reconfiguring a lot code is to ensure that the reconfiguring a lot lays the foundations for high-quality urban design that supports the outcomes for the zone and is sensitive to the environment, topography and landscape features. For the same reasons that officers have found non-compliances within the Strategic framework and the Performance outcome and Overall outcome included above, this application is not considered to facilitate allotments which would allow the site’s intended development to occur. This denotes, the proposal is at odds with the purpose of the Reconfiguring a lot code. As a result of these non- compliance and those already outlined within this report, the proposed development is recommended to be refused.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 76 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Healthy waters code

Stormwater quality

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO1 AO1.3 Development appropriately manages stormwater Where development is not listed in AO1 a Stormwater quality to: Quality Management Plan is prepared by a suitably- (a) protect natural ecosystems; qualified person in accordance with the Stormwater quality management guidelines in SC6.11 City Plan (b) integrate stormwater treatment into the urban policy – Land development guidelines, Section 8 – landscape; Engineering drawings, documents and reports. (c) protect water quality; (d) reduce runoff and peak flows; and (e) meet the water quality objectives and environmental values for Queensland waters. Note: Water quality objectives and environmental values for Queensland waters are contained within Schedule 1 of the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009. Water quality objectives are locally specific and vary between and within river catchments.

Officer’s comment

The submitted application material is not considered to demonstrate compliance with AO1.3 or PO1 of the Healthy waters code as the submitted water quality modelling requires modification to accurately represent the alterations proposed to the subject site. Therefore, the submitted stormwater management plan does not adequately demonstrate how (or that) the development will maintain the Council’s water quality objectives.

Stormwater quantity

Performance outcome Acceptable outcome

PO2 AO2 Stormwater quantity management outcomes A stormwater quantity management plan is prepared by demonstrate no adverse impact on stormwater flooding a suitably qualified person and demonstrates: or the drainage of properties external to the subject (a) achievable stormwater quantity control measures site. for discharge during both the construction and operational phases of development designed in accordance with the Queensland Urban Drainage Manual (QUDM) unless subject to specific requirements of SC6.11 City Plan policy – Land development guidelines, Section 4 – Stormwater drainage and water sensitive urban design standards; (b) on-site detention systems that are designed to restrict peak outflows for Q2, Q5, Q10, Q20 Q50 and Q100 to pre-development conditions.

Officer’s comment

The submitted application material is not considered to demonstrate compliance with AO2 or PO2 of the Healthy waters code as the local flood models used for modelling the peak flow mitigation need to be modified to accurately represent the proposed changes on the site. As such, the submitted stormwater report does not confirm that the proposed development will reduce runoff and peak flow. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 77 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

The concerns officers have with the submitted stormwater management plan (relating to the abovementioned non compliances) elevate up to the Purpose and Overall outcomes of the Healthy waters code, which read as follows:

(1) The purpose of the Healthy waters code is to protect the quality of the city’s waters from the impacts of development. (2) The purpose of the code will be achieved through the following overall outcomes: (a) Urban stormwater quality management, wastewater management, and management of waters are based on the following principles: (iv) Development avoids adverse impacts on the City of Gold Coast’s waters or, where this is not feasible, adverse impacts are minimised. Therefore, for the reasons cited above, officers do not believe that the application material has demonstrated compliance with the Purpose and Overall outcome (2)(a)(iv) of the Healthy waters code, as well as PO1 and PO2. As detailed within the assessment against the Strategic framework, the proposal is also considered to present non-compliances with Strategic outcome 3.8.1(14) and Specific outcome 3.7.3.1(5)(e) and Specific outcome 3.8.7.1(1). The application is therefore recommended to be refused.

Transport code Traffic Impact Assessment Performance outcome Acceptable outcome PO20 AO20 Development is: A Traffic Impact Assessment is prepared and (a) appropriately located to reduce the need to submitted to Council in the following instances: travel by car and is accessible by public (a) when the development is identified as “any transport, walking and cycling; and other use not listed in this table” or “any other (b) designed to reduce impacts on the amenity, undefined use” in Part 5 – Tables of safety and operation of the road network assessment; through appropriate measures to ensure that (b) when the development is freight dependent; the function and capacity of the road network (c) when vehicle access will be required to a road is not compromised. identified on the Function road hierarchy map; (d) when vehicle access will be required to a service road as identified on the Pacific motorway service road types overlay map; (e) when vehicle access will be required within 100m of a signalised intersection; (f) when vehicle access will be required within 50m of a roundabout; or (g) when a new intersection is proposed.

Officer’s comment A Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) is required to meet Acceptable outcome AO20 of the Transport code since access is proposed via Beattie Road, which is identified as a Distributor road on the Functional road hierarchy map. The applicant has prepared and submitted a TIA as required. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 78 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Compliance with AO20 is therefore achieved. The findings of the TIA are summarised below:  The proposed development has a traffic generation potential of 331 peak hour vehicle trips;  The intersection of Beattie Road / Whitewater Way is shown to exceed the acceptable performance limits during the 2031 peak design traffic volumes; and  The intersection of Beattie Road / Dreamworld Parkway is shown to exceed the acceptable performance limits during the 2017 background traffic volumes. The TIA submitted by the applicant is based on the four lane upgrade of Beattie Road however Council’s Transport and Traffic branch has advised that this is not consistent with the LGIP the road is identified as being upgraded to four lanes up to the eastern edge of Dreamworld only (approximately 780m west of the site’s proposed entry point). Officers consider that an amended traffic impact assessment is required as it will allow for more certainty in regard to required road works as there may be more information available with regard to development timing and yield, and other aspects relating to third party road upgrades. Officers consider that this can be appropriately conditioned as the surrounding network has the carrying capacity to cater for the demand of the proposed development. Further, the subject site is large enough to provide for the intersection works necessary to facilitate the proposed access points. Therefore, officers have recommended that an amended traffic impact assessment be provided as part of any future application, if this application is supported.

6 INFRASTRUCTURE CHARGES

Infrastructure charges are not applicable to this application as it is for a preliminary approval.

7 LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS THAT MAY BE MATERIALLY AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT

The proposal does not trigger assessment against any assessment benchmarks for another local government area materially affected by the development.

8 REFERRALS

8.1 Internal referrals

As outlined earlier in this report the applicant was made aware that there are critical outstanding concerns with the proposed development, however the applicant requested that a decision be made on the information currently provided, stating that no further information will be provided. Therefore, the table below outlines what outstanding concerns exist and, where possible, what reasonable and relevant conditions have been recommended from the internal referral officers.

Internal city Conditions expert

Officer’s comments

“Whilst the Strategic Framework contemplates an interface with residential, tourist City Planning and public areas, this should only occur where there are no conflicting and competing interests. The establishment of permanent residential development on land south of Beattie Road will result in conflicting and competing interests, particularly with the existing core of the Gold Coast Marine Precinct (GCMP), given 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 79 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

that:

 It will bring additional residential development in closer proximity to established marine and waterfront industries located within the GCMP; and

 Various industrial activities associated with the marine industry can emit a level of odour that is not conducive to maintaining a level of amenity that is expected within residential areas.

Given the economic importance of the waterfront and marine industry land, it is critical that the marine industry uses are not affected by the encroachment of additional permanent residential land uses in this area, which could exacerbate a reverse amenity issue and affect the on-going operation of existing waterfront and marine industry activities.

City Plan

The following sections are considered relevant as part of a holistic assessment of the proposal:

Strategic Framework

Theme (3.5) Strengthening and diversifying the economy

Strategic Outcome - 3.5.1(3) the Gold Coast continues to support and promote its existing priority industries while moving towards more knowledge intensive, high value and internationally competitive economic sectors. Priority business and industry sectors including

(a) existing priority sectors:

….

(vi) marine related industries (including craft and components manufacturing and services).

3.5.2 Element – Industry and business areas

3.5.2.1 Specific Outcomes

Industry and business areas support single use or concentrations of related economic activities and are locations for major employment, investment and production activity. The orderly, sequenced, consolidated and attractive growth of these locations maximises economic advantage and public and private investment. Industry and business areas are categorised as:

…

(13) Marine industry areas accommodate and support intensive boat building and related water-based industries. These unique water-based locations may interface with residential, tourist and public areas where there are no conflicting and competing interests. New proposals continue to provide primarily marine- based industry. A limited range of retail, medical, education and tourist activities are accommodated if they directly relate to the primary marine-based industry function. Other general industry uses are also established if these activities do not impact existing marine industry uses and the long-term use of marine industry land for its intended

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 80 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

purpose.

(14) Development in marine industry areas:

(a) allows for public access to the waterfront for recreation, access and transport in appropriate locations;

(b) presents an attractive appearance when viewed from the waterway and land; and

(c) manages impacts to provide for an acceptable level of health and amenity to nearby residential and other sensitive uses.

Waterfront and Marine Industry zone

6.2.12.2 Purpose

(1) The purpose of the waterfront and marine industry zone code is to provide for uses for which a location adjoining or near the waterfront or a marine environment is essential.

It may include non-industrial and business uses that support the industrial activities where they do not compromise the long-term use of the land for industrial purposes.

(2) The purpose of the code will be achieved through the following overall outcomes:

(a) Land uses –

(i) support intensive boat building and related water based industries such as marine industry, research and technologies and warehouses;

(ii) involving other general industry uses may also be established if they do not compromise the long-term use of marine industry land for its intended purpose;

(iii) include a limited range of non-industrial uses that directly relate to the primary marine-industry function of the zone such as a car wash, shops, food and drink outlets and service stations and manufacturer's shop;

(iv) that support the zone may be considered providing they do not compromise the long term use of the zone for marine industry purposes such as large food and drink outlets, hardware and trade supplies, health care services, offices, educational establishments, places of worship, service industries, parking stations, port services and transport depots;

(v) that make best use of the unique water-based locations of the zone may be considered providing there are no conflicting and competing interests and the amenity impacts of the industrial uses can be mitigated such as hotels, short-term accommodation, resort complexes and tourist 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 81 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

attractions; and

(vi) do not include special industry.

It is considered the proposed development, which is essentially a medium/low density residential subdivision is substantially inconsistent with various high order policies expressed in the Strategic Framework.”

The Office of the City Architect provided the following comments: “Small lots The plan of development (POD) seeks to allow small lots scattered throughout the development amongst larger lots. These are identified in the image below as the dark purple lots. The layout shows that small lots are generally grouped together and importantly are not “double loaded” on either side of the road. The concern being a reduction in on-street parking and potential for high street enclosure which can lead to poor surveillance over the public realm. The indicative layout (see Image 1) is acceptable considering that it retains opportunities for on-street parking and surveillance over the public realm. These aspects of the development will be controlled through later development applications in accordance with the POD and relevant City Plan codes.

City Architect

Image 1 – indicative subdivision layout Small lots and their impact on the local character are controlled through PO14, PO15 and OO2(i) [of the proposed development code] and relevant City Plan codes.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 82 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

These provisions are acceptable given that building design, orientation, street surveillance and maintaining the intended residential character are key aspects of the performance outcomes and overall outcomes in the POD.” Recommendation It is recommended the application be supported by the Office of City Architect. Conditions summary  Nil.

Outstanding concerns relating to: The applicant has raised the consideration of the place’s cultural and heritage values as a relevant matter for consideration, however, the proposed development does not ensure the adaptive reuse of the place or conservation of its heritage values. Officer’s comments The Heritage Unit does not consider the proposed development to appropriately respond to and preserve the heritage significance of the place as the outcomes within the proposed development code are considered to facilitate the offering of limited memorabilia around the proposed park space. The application does not demonstrate how significant elements of the place such as the farmhouse, outbuildings and setting will be conserved or adaptively reused to ensure the cultural heritage values of the property are maintained. Outcomes within the proposed development code are not considered to provide suitably measurable benchmarks and are also considered to allow for the removal or demolition of the original farmhouse and outbuildings which is not considered appropriate by this section.

While the site is not currently listed as being a place of heritage significance, the applicant has identified the heritage significance of the place in their application Heritage Unit material. Council’s Heritage Unit considers that the place is likely to meet the following statutory criteria for a locally significant heritage place:

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 83 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Recommendation Council’s Heritage Unit recommends that the application be refused.

Outstanding concerns relating to:  Acid sulfate soils – whilst an investigation was provided, a prescriptive and comprehensive management plan was not submitted. The subject site is mapped as containing acid sulfate soils on land at or below 5m and 20m AHD. Environmental Conditions summary Assessment  Habitat restoration;  Acid sulfate soils; and  Tidal flushing of wetland (amended plan for Flood Impact Assessment and Stormwater Management Plan).

Outstanding concerns relating to:  The submitted acoustic report and air quality report. Officers were to request that the applicant address the following concerns: “Acoustic impacts  It is recommended that a site inspection be conducted by MWA between 4am and 5am to confirm the source of the elevated noise levels. If spectrum of the measured noise levels is available, this could also be used to confirm the sources of the elevated noise levels. MWA should verify that the environment at a minimum of two of their attended monitoring locations (Attended Locations 3 and 4 preferred) are unaffected by industrial noise to confirm the noise modelling conducted. Odour  Further justification for use of the year 2010 for the air dispersion modelling is required to demonstrate that inter-annual variability does not need to be accounted for. Health and  CALMET run in Hybrid with Gold Coast Seaway as a surface file instead of Regulatory assimilating into TAPM to be considered. Services  Further information of the CALMET setting used in particular the TERRAD value.  The reference for the odour emission rates from spray painting sourced from a high volume commercial painting facility in southeast Queensland to be provided to assess the suitability of its use.  Justification is required for the omission of (shed 25 and 26) emission sources at Riveria. It is noted that given the separation of the Rivera site from the development site the omission of these sheds are unlikely to result in exceedances of the odour and styrene criteria at the nearest receptors within the development site.  The CALPUFF input file and output file are not appended to the report.  Further odour surveys be conducted to capture a range of meteorological conditions and improve the statistical validity of the odour surveillance results.  The odour complaint history for the residential areas surrounding the marine precinct be sought from the Department of Environment and Science and/ or Council to assess if there are any current odour issues and also assist in validating the odour modelling.” 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 84 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Officer’s comments

“It has been advised by the Assessment Manager that the applicant will not be providing any further information to support the application.

It is considered the issues raised by the peer review provide uncertainty with regard to the suitability of the proposed development within proximity to existing (future) Marine Industry. This is considered significant when consideration is given to the scale of the proposed development and the current Marine Industry zoning of such land etc.

It is therefore considered full compliance has not been demonstrated with Performance Outcome 1 of the General development provisions code as the development potentially does not mitigate the negative effects to amenity, health and safety from existing surrounding activities. Furthermore, compliance has not been achieved with Overall Outcome (2)(a) of the General development provisions code as the development has not confirmed it has been designed to maintain the expected level of amenity for the area.

This proposal has been assessed against Strategic outcomes: Strategic outcome 3.8.1(13) of the Strategic framework has not been complied with as the development will introduce residential development into an area that could cause environmental harm or nuisance from emissions or other impacts.

This proposal has been assessed against Environmental health and amenity: Specific outcome 3.8.6.1(1) of the Strategic framework has not been complied with as the development has the potential to unreasonably constrain or adversely impact on the safe and optimal operation of the marine industry area, strategic infrastructure sites and strategic infrastructure corridors. Therefore based on the above matters raised, Health is unable to support the application in its present state.” Recommendation Health and Regulatory Services recommends that the application be refused.

Outstanding concerns relating to:  Stormwater quantity;  Stormwater quality;  External catchments;  Local flooding; and Hydraulics and  Regional flooding. Water Quality Officer’s comments

“Stormwater Quantity The below issues have not been resolved in the above stormwater management report. i. It has been mentioned in the report that the development can comply with peak flow mitigation objectives during staged construction. However, this

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 85 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

has not been sufficiently demonstrated. Therefore, the report must include pre and post development hydrographs at all lawful point of discharges (LPD) of the site (i.e. at Railway Bridge and proposed culverts outlets) and demonstrate no increase in peak flow rates for all events up to and including the 100 year ARI storms; ii. For staged development, the report is required to identify the stage boundary and demonstrate through appropriate modelling that each stage can independently achieve the ‘no worsening’ objective; iii. The report is required to include design drawings showing location and extent of detention basins and cross-sections of the proposed detention systems and long sections of proposed stormwater drainage pipes incorporating invert levels, inlet / outlet details and other engineering details; iv. Existing drainage system should be clearly identified in a stormwater drainage layout plan; v. The report is required to include storage volume and stage storage relationships for the proposed detention basins. Provide Stage vs Storage relationship of the basin.

Stormwater Quality The below issues have not been resolved in the above stormwater management report. i. The Music model layout (Figure 7) is not consistent with the MUSIC Catchment properties identified in Table 5-2. Provide consistent information in the report. ii. We note that the no commercial land use have been considered in the MUSIC model though part of area 4 (Figure 7) is identified as Neighbourhood Centre. iii. Identify how the runoff from area 4 (Figure 7) will be treated / conveyed to a treatment system. Be advised that Council may not accept the treatment of runoff from the Neighbourhood Centre within any contributed asset. iv. Include scaled plan and sections of the combined bioretention and detention basins identifying all components of the basin and demonstrating adequate space availability during detailed design stage and demonstrate that the allocated space is adequate to comply with the requirements of the LDG.

External catchments The following issues have not been satisfactorily resolved to address the management of external catchments runoff through the site. i. Watercourse diversion: The response to information letter claimed that the diversion details, of the existing watercourse across Lorenzo Drive and traversing through the site, have been provided in the report. However, no such details/ clarification can be identified in the stormwater management plan and associated drawings. As described in the information request, the encroached proposed development footprint within the overland flow path may produce adverse hydraulic impact by limiting the available space for the hydraulic functionality and flow transition. It is important to identify the

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 86 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

extent of required diversion work. According to the revised drawings (Ref: WE16028-CI-001-2, WE160285-CI- 002-2, we believe that the proposal has not dedicated enough space for hydraulic functionality, flow transition, construction of the required channel, setback from adjacent properties. The diversion works will have impact on the adjacent proposed development footprint. Therefore, the applicant is requested to submit information on the watercourse diversion i.e. cross section, longitudinal profile, maximum velocity, setback from adjacent existing and future properties, maintenance access, etc., demonstrating the design of the diversion drain complies with the Land Development Guidelines and the QUDM. ii. Yaun Street extension & associated catchments: The submission claimed that the drainage pipe through Yaun Street will be continued and discharged into a small channel. However, the applicant did not identify the channel. Therefore, the applicant is requested to identify the channel and demonstrate the proposed discharge location is achievable by levels and will not produce adverse hydraulic impact to external property and designed in accordance with Land Development Guidelines.

Local flooding The below issues have not been resolved in the above flood impact assessment report. i. It is understood that, in the existing scenario, no runoff during minor flood events enters into the site from Coomera River. However, the new culverts will allow flood waters from Coomera River to enter into the site. The applicant has developed a XP-SWMM model to assess the impact of local flooding. It appears a part of the Coomera River is included in the model domain which could not be an appropriate boundary condition. As such, further clarification is required about how the proposed drainage structures are configured and what type of boundary condition is applied in the model. Therefore, detail information of model setup including model domain, input / inflow hydrographs, bathymetry, model parameters, upstream and downstream boundary conditions and figures must be included in the report. ii. The report mentioned a tailwater level of 0.67m AHD was applied at the downstream boundary of the model which indicates climate change has not been incorporated in the model. According to PO8 of the City Plan policy – Flood overlay code hydrologic and hydraulic impact assessment required to address the impacts of future climate change. Therefore, the applicant is requested to incorporate the impact of future climate change in the modelling. iii. Include in the report the pre and post development hydrographs at the locations of LPDs of the site for local flooding (i.e. at railway bridge & new culverts) demonstrating no increase in peak flow rates, water level and velocity for all events up to and including 100 year ARI storms beyond the property boundary. iv. Include the pre and post development velocity comparison at the LPDs.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 87 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Regional flooding The below issues have not been resolved in the above flood impact assessment report. i. The applicant has not provided adequate information regarding model setup. Include further detail regarding model domain, input / inflow hydrographs, bathymetry, model parameters, grid size, upstream and downstream boundary conditions and figures in the report. ii. It is understood that, in the existing scenario, no runoff during minor flood events enters into the site from Coomera River. However, the new culverts will allow flood waters from Coomera River to enter into the site. It is unclear in the report whether proposed drainage structures have been incorporated in the model or not. Therefore, the report must clarify how the drainage structures are included in the model. iii. The Venant Solutions report (October 26, 2018) replaced a number of structures from Council’s model (2016 MIKE Flood model) and used eddy viscosity and Manning’s roughness instead. While for impact assessment purpose Council may accept replacing structures with appropriate roughness coefficient, the model needs to be verified against Council model’s results. It is expected that the revised model replicates same or similar flood levels and variation is limited within 10mm. However, such information has not been provided. Therefore, the revised report must include comparison of model results; iv. Developed case change in ground level plan shows ‘Minor Earthworks’on the eastern neighbouring property, which is not part of this application. The revised report must ensure that no work is proposed external to the subject site of the application; v. The impact maps show increase in flood levels at various flood events external to the site, which are greater than 2 mm (being consider as model noise); the revised report must demonstrate that no external property is impacted as a result of the proposed development; vi. Address the flood overlay code based on the revised modelling and report. vii. The baseline of the flood storage (existing and compensatory) calculation is not clear in the submission. Clarify in the report and ensure that the existing / pre development flood storage is calculated from the existing ground surface of the site and the compensatory flood storage is calculated from the standing water level of the environmental wetland or the MHWS (whichever is applicable). Submit revised drawing; i.e. identify the cut and fill locations, provide cross sections etc.; and calculations. Summary of assessment The applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated that the development would not cause, increase or have cumulative potential to cause or increase adverse impacts associated with flooding (both on and off site). The applicant has not also demonstrated that the flood storage and flood conveyance capacity of the catchment will not be adversely impacted. The proposal has not adequately quantified the impacts (and associated risk) of the proposed development and the proposal is likely to cause or increase the adverse impacts of flooding. The submitted information has not also confirmed that overland flow (both external and

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 88 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

internal) management will not cause any adverse hydraulic impact external to the site. Therefore, the proposal does not comply with:  The Strategic Framework: Strategic outcomes 3.8.1(14) and Specific outcomes 3.7.3.1(5)(e) & 3.8.7.1(1);  The Flood overlay code: Purpose 8.2.8.2(2), Overall outcomes 8.2.8.2(3)(e), (f) & (j), and Performance outcomes PO1, PO4, PO5 & PO6; and  The Healthy waters code: Purpose 9.4.5.2, Overall outcomes 9.4.5.2(2)(a)(iv), and Performance outcomes PO2.” Therefore the application is recommended for refusal.

Outstanding concerns relating to:  The development’s interface to Beattie Road. Landscape Conditions summary Assessment  Amended plans – requiring a 1.5m wide strip of the site’s frontage to be dedication to Council for landscape planting purposes; and  Landscaping works.

Conditions summary  Land transfer; Open Space Assessment  Open space documentation to be submitted as part of future development applications; and  Open space management.

Outstanding concerns relating to:  Stormwater quantity;  Stormwater quality;  External catchments;  Local flooding; and  Regional flooding.

Officer’s comments “Council’s Hydraulic engineering team has indicated that the proposed work will not Operational be able to satisfy the requirements of the Flood overlay code. As this overlay is a Works relevant assessment benchmark for the Operational Works Change to Ground Level application, the application cannot be supported for these reasons. The prescribed tidal works component (earthworks and outlets in below high water mark), is dependent on the outcome of the earthworks levels. As a result, it would be premature to issue an approval for prescribed tidal works that are integral to the change to ground level application.” Assessment against the code – Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2017 – Schedule 3 “Based on the preliminary detail provided, the works appear to comply with the acceptable outcomes in the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2017 – Schedule 3. The works could therefore be approved subject to further detailed design information on scour protection treatment for stormwater outlets, full detail on

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 89 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

disturbed areas, stabilisation measures for earthworks exposed to tidal influence and general certified engineering detail to satisfy the Performance outcomes in the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation which include but are not limited to:  PO 7.1 Excavation and Filling for prescribed tidal works;  PO 7.2 Location of works;  PO 7.3 Rehabilitation of works;  PO12.1 Standard of design and construction of works;  PO12.3 No adverse effects on stability of bed and banks;  PO12.4 Material specifications; and  PO12.7 Safety of works.” Therefore the application is recommended for refusal.

Outstanding concerns relating to:  The traffic impact assessment was based on a four lane upgrade for the entire Transport length of Beattie Road, which was proposed to occur under the former PIP Assessment (superseded LGIP) but is not planned to occur under the current LGIP. Conditions summary  Amended traffic impact assessment.

Outstanding concerns relating to:  How the site will be connected to Council’s network without adversely impacting on the network;  Connection methodology – as the applicant has proposed to connect the subject site to SPS CT5 through 999 Yaun Street (Lot 999 SP 137597). Consent from this land owner has not been included in the submitted material. Without such consent for sewer works within the lot, the applicant will require an alternative arrangement to discharge to SPS CT5; and  An additional 3.1kL of sewerage emergency storage is required. As the applicant has elected not to provide a sewer reticulation schematic plan to demonstrate their intention for the overall development for the site and/or provide a detailed staging plan, it is impossible to know when this will be Water and provided with respect to subsequent approvals. Waste Despite these outstanding concerns, officers consider that this detail can reasonably be conditioned. Conditions summary  Rectification of Council’s infrastructure;  Sewer and water schematic plan;  Sewer capacity – additional emergency storage;  Sewer reticulation;  Water reticulation; and  Fire loading.

8.2 External referrals

The application was referred to the following external agencies: 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 90 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

8.2.1 Concurrence agencies

SARA of the Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning are a Concurrence agency on this application as the State Government’s single referral agency as:  The development involves the removal, destruction or damage of marine plants;  The development involves waterway barrier works;  The development exceeds the intensity thresholds specified within of Schedule 10, Part 9, Division 4, Subdivision 1, Table 1, Item 1 – Aspect of development stated in Schedule 20 of the Planning Regulation 2017;  The site adjoins the heavy rail corridor;  The site is adjacent to the Coomera Connector;  The development relates to or affects tidal waters; and  The site is location within the coastal management district.

The Department has provided conditions of approval relating to the following matters:  The temporary removal of marine plants;  The approved marine plant restoration plan;  Management of spoil material;  Fish passages;  Waterway barrier works;  Extent of approved earthworks;  Setback to railway corridor;  Hydraulic impact to State transport infrastructure;  Provision of active transport options; and  The relocation and upgrade of existing bus stops along Beattie Road. The Gold Coast Waterways Authority are a Concurrence agency on this application as:

 The development relates to or affects tidal waters.

The Gold Coast Waterways Authority has provided a response, outlining that they have no requirements for the development. 8.2.2 Advice agency(s)

There are no Advice agencies relevant for this application.

9 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

9.1 Overview

In response to public notification:

 One properly made submission was received, which was made in objection. The grounds for objection related to traffic impacts and the location of one of the public notification signs. This

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 91 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

objection is addressed within part 9.4 of this report (below).

9.2 Compliance with public notification requirements

The applicant has submitted a notice of compliance stating public notification has been completed in accordance with the requirements of the Development Assessment Rules under the Planning Act 2016.

Council has reviewed the public notification material and considers the applicant has complied with the requirements of the Development Assessment Rules.

9.3 Accepted submissions

Not applicable.

9.4 Issues raised in submissions

The main issues raised by submitters who made a properly made submission or a submission that has been accepted by the assessment manager are discussed below.

Issue Officer’s comment Traffic Council officers have assessed the proposed Example: development and the submitted traffic impact assessment (TIA) and consider there to be “I believe that the development will further flaws within the application material which has exacerbate the already horrendous traffic resulted in officers not having certainty around problems within the Coomera area. It is the impact the proposed development poses to impossible to access the Motorway at many times the road network or the surrounding area. of the day.” The TIA submitted by the applicant is based on a four lane upgrade to the entirety of Beattie Road, which is consistent with the superseded LGIP (Council’s former PIP), however under the current LGIP, the road is identified as being upgraded to four lanes up to the edge of Dreamworld (approximately 780m west of the site’s proposed entry point). Notwithstanding this outstanding concern, officers consider that the surrounding network has the carry capacity to cater for the demand of the proposed development. Further, the subject site is large enough to provide for the intersection works necessary to facilitate the proposed access points. Therefore, officers have recommended that an amended traffic impact assessment be provided as part of any future application, if this application is supported. Need The Waterfront and marine industry zone Example: facilitates commercial activity which complement the precinct. Therefore, the 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 92 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

“I also believe that it duplicates many of the introduction of commercial uses at an businesses already in the area.” appropriate scale can be considered appropriate. Notwithstanding, the commercial component of this preliminary approval is small with the predominant component being for residential development. As detailed within this report the findings of the applicant’s Market Analysis have not been agreed with by the Council commissioned third party peer reviewer who raised significant concerns with the report. Due to the strong non-compliances through the City Plan, the application is recommended to be refused. Location of one of the public notification signs Pursuant to Schedule 3: Public notice Example: requirements of the Development Assessment Rules, a sign for public notification must be “It is my belief that the signage, situated on “placed on, or within a reasonable distance of, Beattie Rd is in a position that is not easily seen the road frontage for the premises, ensuring by motorists. It is situated amongst trees, near the that it is clearly visible from the road” “road rail overpass & is not easily seen from traffic frontage for the premises means the boundary exiting Ford Rd towards the M1.” between the premises and any road adjoining the premises…” Therefore, while officers can understand why a member of the public might say that the sign has been placed, at least somewhat, strategically due to its location in amongst trees (noting the site has plenty of frontage which is not landscaped in the same way), officers believe that the applicant has complied with their requirements as the applicant is required to place the sign on the boundary of their site as it presents to the road.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 93 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Figure 15: Photographs of public notification signs (source: provided by submitter)

10 CONCLUSION

Council is in receipt of an application for a Preliminary Approval for a Variation Request which seeks to vary the effect of the local planning instrument as it relates to making a Material Change of Use, a Reconfiguring a Lot and carrying out Operational Works at 78 Beattie Road, Coomera.

After a detailed assessment, it has been determined the proposal does not achieve, contribute to achieving or comply with the following outcomes or benchmarks of the City Plan:

1 3.2.2 City shape and urban transformation (Strategic intent); 2 3.2.3 Globally competitive economy (Strategic intent); 3 Strategic outcome 3.3.1(1) (Theme – Creating liveable places); 4 Strategic outcome 3.3.1(7) (Theme – Creating liveable places); 5 Strategic outcome 3.5.1(2) (Theme – Strengthening and diversifying the economy); 6 Strategic outcome 3.5.1(3) (Theme – Strengthening and diversifying the economy); 7 Strategic outcome 3.5.1(4) (Theme – Strengthening and diversifying the economy); 8 Specific outcome 3.5.2.1(1) (Element – Industry and business areas); 9 Specific outcome 3.5.2.1(13) (Element – Industry and business areas); 10 Strategic outcome 3.8.1(13) (Theme – A safe, well designed city); 11 Specific outcome 3.8.3.1(1) (Element – Urban design, character and community identity); 12 Specific outcome 3.8.6.1(1) (Element – Environmental health and amenity);

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 94 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

13 Specific outcome 3.7.3.1(5) (Element – Green space network); 14 Strategic outcome 3.8.1(14) (Theme– A safe, well designed city); 15 Specific outcome 3.8.7.1(1) (Element – Natural hazards); 16 Purpose – Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 17 Overall outcome (2)(a)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 18 Overall outcome (2)(a)(ii) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 19 Overall outcome (2)(a)(iv) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 20 Overall outcome (2)(a)(v) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 21 Overall outcome (2)(b)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 22 Overall outcome (2)(b)(ii) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 23 Overall outcome (2)(b)(iii) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; 24 Overall outcome (2)(c)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code; and 25 Overall outcome (2)(d)(i) - Waterfront and marine industry zone code. 26 Purpose - Flood overlay code; 27 Overall outcome (3)(e) - Flood overlay code; 28 Overall outcome (3)(f) - Flood overlay code; 29 Overall outcome (3)(j) - Flood overlay code; 30 Performance outcome 1 – Flood overlay code; 31 Performance outcome 4 – Flood overlay code; 32 Performance outcome 5 – Flood overlay code; 33 Performance outcome 6 – Flood overlay code; 34 Purpose – General development provisions code; 35 Overall outcome (2)(a) – General development provisions code; 36 Performance outcome 1 – General development provisions code; 37 Purpose – Reconfiguring a lot code; 38 Overall outcome (2)(a) – Reconfiguring a lot code; 39 Performance outcome 1 – Reconfiguring a lot code; 40 Purpose – Healthy waters code; 41 Overall outcome (2)(a)(iv) – Healthy waters code; 42 Performance outcome 1 – Healthy waters code; and 43 Performance outcome 2 – Healthy waters code. Council received one submission in objection. The submission received raised concerns about traffic impacts, economic need and the location of the one of the public notification signs.

Officers have considered the other relevant matters put forward by the applicant (pursuant to section 45(5)(b) of the Planning Act 2016) and do not consider them compelling enough to outweigh the non- compliances or otherwise support the proposal despite the non-compliances. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 95 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

It is recommended the application be refused for the reasons included within the officer’s recommendation.

11 NOTIFICATIONS

Not applicable. 12 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: That Council refuses the issue of a preliminary approval which includes a variation approval for a Material Change of Use and Reconfiguring a Lot and Operational Works on the following grounds:

1 The nature of the development does not comply with, or is contrary to, the following outcomes and assessment benchmarks: a The South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (ShapingSEQ) as the development would decrease the size of the Coomera Marine Precinct, reducing its efficiency, productivity and competitive advantages. The facilitation of this development would fragment the marine industry sector as it reduces the ability for business to co-locate and be well-connected with each other. This type of development is not intended nor supported in such a strategic location and it reduces the region’s ability to provide necessary jobs and employment choice. b Strategic intent (3.2.2 City shape and urban transformation) as the development is not an efficient or sustainable use of marine industry or industry land and seeks to introduce a sensitive use which would potentially impact the operations of the adjoining industrial activity. c Strategic intent (3.2.3 Globally competitive economy) as the development is not facilitating industrial jobs which would otherwise provide development necessary for the expected increases in employment. d Strategic outcome 3.3.1(2) as the application seeks to facilitate a residential development outside of the areas specified within this outcome. Being mixed use centres and specialist centres, neighbourhood centres, urban neighbourhoods, suburban neighbourhoods, new communities, and rural residential and township areas. e Strategic outcome 3.3.1(7) as the development seeks a medium intensity residential outcome outside of a mixed use centre, specialist centre or urban neighbourhood. f Strategic outcome 3.5.1(2) as the development detracts from the city’s offering of employment choice and economic growth in an important sector. g Strategic outcome 3.5.1(3) as the development does not support and promote its existing priority industries while moving towards more knowledge intensive, high value and internationally competitive economic sectors. h Strategic outcome 3.5.1(4) as the development does not provide an attractive enterprise business environment that balances a diversified, resilient and robust economy. i Specific outcome 3.5.2.1(1) as the development is not for related economic activities. The development does not represent orderly, sequenced, consolidated and attractive growth of this marine industry area nor does it 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 96 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

maximise the economic advantages afforded to it in line with the outcome. j Specific outcome 3.5.2.1(13) as the development does not accommodate and support intensive boat building and related water-based industries. It does not provide primarily marine-based industry. The development would potentially impact existing marine industry uses and the long-term use of marine industry land for its intended purpose. Further, the small component of commercial development is not directly related to the primary marine-based industry function of the site. k Specific outcome 3.8.3.1(1) as the development is not cognisant of the function and desired future appearance of each individual area and reinforces or reinterprets the character of that area. l Specific outcome 3.8.6.1(1) as the development has the potential to unreasonably constrain or adversely impact on the safe and optimal operation of the marine industry area, strategic infrastructure sites and strategic infrastructure corridors. m The Purpose of the Waterfront and marine industry zone code as a location adjoining or near the waterfront or a marine environment is not essential for this type of development. Further, the development would likely compromise the long-term use of the land for industrial purposes. n Overall outcome (2)(a) of the Waterfront and marine industry zone code as the development: i Does not support intensive boat building or related water based industries such as marine industry, research and technologies and warehouses; ii Does not involve other low and medium impact industry uses; iii Compromises the long-term use of marine industry land for its intended purpose; iv Make best use of the unique water-based locations of the zone; v Appropriately manage competing interests; and vi Alleviate the amenity impacts of the industrial uses. o Overall outcome (2)(b) of the Waterfront and marine industry zone code as the development does not: i Consist of large, unobtrusive buildings that are creatively designed to be functional; and ii Provide wide streets that provide easy site access. p Overall outcome (2)(c) of the Waterfront and marine industry zone code as the development is not of a height that allows for the efficient manufacturing, storing and repairing of vessels. 2 The nature of size and nature of the allotments do not comply with, or is contrary to, the following outcomes and assessment benchmarks: a Overall outcome (2)(d) of the Waterfront and marine industry zone code as the development does not seek to facilitate lots which are to be, or could be, used for waterfront and marine industrial activities. b Performance outcome 2 of the Waterfront and marine industry zone code as the lots are not of a size that support waterfront and marine based industrial activity or configured to operate efficiently and effectively as intended. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 97 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

c Purpose of the Reconfiguring a lot code as the development does not lay the foundations for high-quality urban design that supports the outcomes for the zone and is sensitive to the environment, topography and landscape features. d Overall outcome (2)(a) of the Reconfiguring a lot code as the development does not provide for development expected in the zone. e Performance outcome 7 of the Reconfiguring a lot code as the development does not result in lots which have practical shapes and allow for the intended uses described in the zone. 3 The development is likely to be subject to residential amenity related impacts which do not comply with, or is contrary to, the following outcomes and assessment benchmarks: a Strategic outcome 3.8.1(13) as the development will introduce residential development into an area that could cause environmental harm or nuisance from emissions or other impacts. b Overall outcome (2)(a) of the General development provisions code as the development is not designed to maintain the expected level of amenity for the area. c Performance outcome 1 of the General development provisions code as the development potentially does not mitigate the negative effects to amenity, health and safety from existing surrounding activities. 4 The applicant has not appropriately demonstrated that the development would not cause hydraulic impacts and therefore does not comply with, or is contrary to, the following outcomes and assessment benchmarks: a Specific outcome 3.7.3.1(5) as the development potentially does not provide appropriate flood mitigation, flood resilience, drainage and water quality function. b Strategic outcome 3.8.1(14) as the development potentially does not provide or improve resilience to the impacts from natural hazards by managing and minimising risks in a susceptible area. c Specific outcome 3.8.7.1(1) as the development potentially does not appropriately avoid natural hazard areas where the risk to life and property, the likely cost of damage, or the measures needed to effectively mitigate the risk are unacceptable. d The purpose of the Flood overlay code as the development could potentially cause, increase or have cumulative potential to cause or increase, the risks and/or hazards associated with flooding. e Overall outcome (3)(e) of the Flood overlay code as the development potentially does not protect the storage function of the city’s flood plain. f Overall outcome (3)(f) of the Flood overlay code as the development potentially does not protect the flood discharge capacity of the city’s rivers, streams and canals. g Overall outcome (3)(j) of the Flood overlay code as the development potentially does not account for the effects of future climate variability. h Performance outcome 1 of the Flood overlay code as the development potentially detrimentally affects the flood storage capacity of the catchment and the drainage regime.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 98 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

i Performance outcome 4 of the Flood overlay code as the development potentially obstructs free open surface flow of stormwater through a site. j Performance outcome 5 of the Flood overlay code as the development will potentially cause, or have the cumulative potential to cause, damage, increase the level of risk to life, or be to the detriment of flood evacuation procedures. k Performance outcome 6 of the Flood overlay code as the potentially does not allow for the maintenance of flood storage, and flood conveyance of flood and drainage channels and overland flow paths. l Purpose of the Healthy waters code as the development potentially does not protect the quality of the city’s waters from the impacts of development. m Overall outcome (2)(a)(iv) of the Healthy waters code as the development potentially does not avoid adverse impacts on the City of Gold Coast’s waters. 5 Assessment of the development against the above mentioned assessment benchmarks warrants refusal of the development application. 6 Assessment of the development application against the following relevant matters supports a decision to refuse the development application: a There is no economic or planning need for the proposed development; b There is economic or planning need for the site to be utilised for Marine industry purposes; c The applicable provisions of the City Plan, referred to in these grounds, are of recent origin and are explicitly applicable to the subject land; d The subject land shares common characteristics with, and is subject to the same development controls as, other land in the special management area and approval of the development, contrary to the planning intent expressed in the provisions of the City Plan referred to in these ground would result in the creation of expectation for, and pressure upon, the Council to approve other similar development on unsuitable site; e Approval of the development would be contrary to the reasonable expectations of the surrounding precinct and the residents of the city, having regard to the provisions of the City Plan referred to in these grounds; and f Approval of the proposed development would not be in the public interest. 7 The development cannot be conditioned to address the non-compliances.

Author: Authorised by: Hoagy Moscrop-Allison Alisha Swain Senior Planner Director Economy, Planning & Environment May 2019 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 99 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 2 (Continued) PRELIMINARY APPROVAL (IMPACT ASSESSMENT) INCLUDING A VARIATION REQUEST WHICH SEEKS TO VARY THE EFFECT OF THE LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT AS IT RELATES TO MAKING A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE, RECONFIGURING A LOT AND CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORKS AT 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA - DIVISION 3 PN308801/123/DA2

Committee Recommendation Adopted At Council 13 June 2019

PROCEDURAL MOTION moved Cr Caldwell seconded Cr Tozer

That the matter be deferred to a future Economy, Planning and Environment Committee Meeting.

CARRIED

Cr Gates returned to the room.

PROCEDURAL MOTION moved Cr Caldwell seconded Cr Owen-Jones

That the matter be deferred to the Economy, Planning and Environment Committee Meeting to be held on 24 July 2019.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Coomera railway station/ Site Upper Coomera Future Westfield site The Palms Golf Course Upper Coomera Coomera Dreamworld Hope Island Sanctuary 775th State College Anglican Economy, Coomera Gold Coast City Cove College Sports Park Marine Precinct The Pines Golf Couse Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting

Beattie Rd 5 June 2019 Attachment 1 (1 of 24)

Oxenford Brisbane to Gold Coast ADOPTED Upper Coomera City Centre Railway line

Highland Reserve Helensvale Home Hope Island Resort REPORT State School Coomera River Superstore Golf Course 100

Date Project No. Place Design Group Pty Ltd 4215 Australia BEATTIE RD, COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street T + 61 7 5591 1229 SURROUNDING CONTEXT MAP Scale: NTS Southport, QLD F + 61 7 5591 5825 04 Coomera Sports Brisbane to Viney Park Coomera Park Gold Coast Water connection Community Dreamworld Railway line to Broadwater 775th Kindergarten Economy, Site Beattie Road Gold Coast City Marine Precinct Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019

Pacific Mwy Committee Beattie Rd Meeting 5

BNE / GC Railway June 2019

Coomera River ADOPTED REPORT 101

Date Project No. Place Design Group Pty Ltd 4215 Australia BEATTIE RD, COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street T + 61 7 5591 1229 SITE CONTEXT MAP Scale: NTS Southport, QLD F + 61 7 5591 5825 05 775th BEATTIE ROAD Economy,

FORD ROAD Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE June 2019 Committee

LORENZO DRIVE Meeting

REVEGETATION RESIDENTIAL PRECINCT 5 June 2019

BIO BASIN

LOCAL PARK

YUAN STREET

BOARDWALK OVER

KAYAK LAUNCH

BIRD HIDE

LINKAGE PATH BIRD HABITAT OPEN WATER LOCAL PARK BREAKDOWN: Local Recreation Park: 1.0ha Recreation Linkage: 4.9ha FORTUNE STREET RECREATION PATH LINKAGE PARK TOTAL LOCAL PARK = 5.9ha

BOARDWALK OVER BALANCE OPEN SPACE: Wetlands and Rehabilitation = 28.4ha TOTAL BALANCE OPEN SPACE RESERVE = 28.4ha

TOTAL OPEN SPACE PROPOSED = 34.3ha

DISCLAIMER: ADOPTED For any wetland or surface levels information 45M WIDE RVEGETATED BUFFER please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. EXISTING VEGETATED RIVER BANK The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only. EXISTING BEACH OUTLOOK/FISHING PLATFORMS ESPLANADE N REPORT

COOMERA RIVER 0 50 100 150 200M SCALE 1:4000 @ A3 102

Date Project No. Place Design Group Pty Ltd 4215 Australia BEATTIE RD, COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street T + 61 7 5591 1229 MASTERPLAN Scale: 1:4000@A3 Southport, QLD F + 61 7 5591 5825 07 LEGEND:

PARK - Q100 IMMUNITY 775th Economy,

PARK - Q20 IMMUNITY Council PARK - Q10 IMMUNITY Planning WETLAND/REHABILITATION AREA Meeting RIVER EDGE REHABILITATION AREA

DISCLAIMER: &

For any wetland or surface levels information Environment please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. 13 The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only. June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Q50

RIVER EDGE REHABILITATION ADOPTED REPORT

0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A3 103 N

Place Design Group Pty Ltd BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA DateDATE PROJECTProject No. NO. Level 4, 7 Short Street 4215 Australia Place Design Group Pty Ltd 01/03/2018 1616035 Southport, QLD BEATTIEFLOOD IMMUNITY RD, MASTERPLAN COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street 4215 Australia T + 61 7 5591 1229 FLOOD IMMUNITY MASTERPLAN Scale:Scale: 1:2000@A3AS SHOWN Southport, QLDT + 61 7 5591 1229 F + 61 7 5591 5825 F + 61 7 5591 5825 08A Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE RESIDENTIAL INDICATIVE TRUNK AREA WETLAND AND REHABILITATION OPEN SPACE INDICATIVE COLLECTOR ROAD KEY PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Indicative Trunk Area Plan

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps 24/10/2018 1616035 A 56-01 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 104 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE LOCAL CENTRE Q100 FLOOD BOUNDARY RECREATION PARK EXTENTS

LOCAL RECREATION PARK (ABOVE Q100) WETLAND AND REHABILITATION OPEN SPACE INDICATIVE COLLECTOR ROAD KEY PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Structure Plan - Indicative Open Space Concept

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road 24/10/2018 1616035 B 27 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 105 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE

STAGE BOUNDARY

RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE LOCAL CENTRE

RECREATION PARK EXTENTS

LOCAL RECREATION PARK WETLAND AND REHABILITATION OPEN SPACE INDICATIVE COLLECTOR ROAD KEY PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Staging Plan

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road 30/10/2018 1616035 A 58 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 106 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE PROPOSED DEVELOPABLE AREA PROPOSED OPEN SPACE FUTURE ROAD WIDENING

LGIP LAND AND EMBELLISHMENT FOR RECREATION LGIP LAND AND EMBELLISHMENT FOR RECREATION LINKAGE EXISTING ROADS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Map 1- Development Footprint

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps 19/10/2018 1616035 B 50-01 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 107 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

EXISTING LAND USE/CONTEXT

MAJOR TOURISM

NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE

SPORT AND RECREATION

OPEN SPACE ZONE

LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE

MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE

WATERFRONT & MARINE INDUSTRY ZONE COMMUNITY FACILITIES

SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT AREAS PRECINCT

PROPOSED LAND USE SUBJECT SITE PROPOSED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PRECINCT PROPOSED OPEN SPACE PRECINCT PROPOSED LOCAL CENTRE PRECINCT PROPOSED COLLECTOR ROUTE

FUTURE PROPOSED COLLECTOR ROUTE INDICATIVE LOCAL STREETS INDICATIVE OPEN SPACE TRAIL ESPLANADE ROAD FRONTAGE

FULL MOVEMENT INTERSECTION LEFT-IN/LEFT OUT ONLY

INDICATIVE LOCAL RECREATION PARK

INDICATIVE RECREATION LINKAGE

PRIMARY PARK NODE

SECONDARY PARK NODE

FUTURE ROAD WIDENING EXISTING ROADS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Map 2 - Precinct Map

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps 19/10/2018 1616035 B 50-02 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 108 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE

HEIGHTS / DENSITIES - RD2 (1/375M2 - UP TO 2 STOREYS) - RD3 (1/250M2 - UP TO 2 STOREYS) - UP TO 3 STOREYS

PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE PRECINCT: GFA 250M2 INDICATIVE OPEN SPACE TRAIL

ESPLANADE ROAD FRONTAGE

OPEN SPACE

INDICATIVE LOCAL RECREATION PARK

INDICATIVE RECREATION LINKAGE

PRIMARY PARK NODE

SECONDARY PARK NODE

WALKABLE CATCHMENTS

PROPOSED COLLECTOR ROUTE

FUTURE PROPOSED COLLECTOR ROUTE

FULL MOVEMENT INTERSECTION

LEFT-IN/LEFT OUT ONLY

FUTURE ROAD WIDENING

EXISTING ROADS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Map 3 - Density & Building Height

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps 19/10/2018 1616035 B 50-03 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 109 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N NOTES: information, areas and dimensions are approximate subject to final lot Cadastral information and site boundary is based on preliminary SmartMap calculations and site survey.

The contents of this plan are preliminary and for discussion purposes only. Subject to relevant local and state planning approvals. development extent, layout and yield outcome are based on preliminary technical studies. Further technical input may vary these preliminary assumptions.

FORTUNE

STREET YAUN

ESPLANADE STREET

Collector Connection Collector LORENZO 23.9m

26.4m 597m²

78 DRIVE

374m² 30m 375m² 77

375m² 75

450m²

375m² 73 375m² 72

540m²

450m²

11.5m 375m² 70

12.5m 69 12.5m 375m² 68 12.5m 501m² 67 15m 450m²

12.5m 66 375m²

65 12.5m 375m²

64 16.5m

18.0m 501m² 30m

375m² 15.0m 63

62 12.5m 375m² 17.9m

12.5m 487m² 30m 16.7m 60 15.0m

16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement)12.5m 526m²

59 29.9m

12.5m 449m²

650m² 22.0m wide road (13.0m pavement) (13.0m road wide 22.0m 58

498m²

79 16.7m

17.5m 530m² 29.9m

12.5m 373m² 22.5m 88

12.4m

18.7m 373m²

12.5m 56

448m² 8.9m

10.5m 55

23.3m 54

374m²

12.5m

500m²

374m²

53 30m 30m 374m² 52 89 20.4m

374m² 13.7m 12.5m 51

700m²

450m² 15m 15m 49

17.2m 12.5m 16.7m 80 471m² 517m²

108

87 12.5m 12.5m 375m²

107

15m 37.8m 12.5m 12.5m 375m²

450m² 106 15m 90 15m 442m²

102

12.5m 375m² 30m

105 12.5m

375m² 30m 104 12.5m 375m² 103 12.5m 12.5m 520m² 19.7m

109 516m²

446m² 17.3m 16.7m

375m² 81

86 12.5m 91 12.5m 15m

12.5m 11m 17.5m

450m²

101 14.2m 15m

23.5m 15m 15m 123 15m 374m² 16.7m

122 425m²

375m² 12.5m 30m 15.1m 12.5m 14.1m

121 449m²

549m² 15.2m 92 375m²

110 12.5m 18.2m 12.5m

449m²

30m 120 30m 17

500m² 655m² 119

39.5m 94

450m² 524m²

118 36.1m 593m² 444m² 455m² 15m 30.4m 455m² 95 82

25.2m 412m² 83

84 30.4m 33.9m 390m²

384m² 32.1m

30.8m 17.5m 551m²

461m² 11m 30.8m

21m

444m²

99 100 19m 93 505m²

16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement) 16.7m

517m² 111

375m²

112 30m

375m² 10.1m 113 14.6m

15.2m 15.2m 11.7m 426m² 8.2m 114 31.3m

450m²

12.5m 115 450m² 16.7m

15m 116

685m²

117 30m

454m²

19.2m 15m

493m² 15

35 16.7m

11.6m 493m² 12.5m 15m 18

12.5m 588m²

24.7m

14.2m 41 12.4m

15m 453m² 15m

450m²

30m 14 501m² 15.0m 16.7m

42 34

Open Space

501m² 19

758m²

16.7m 43 10.8m

2.51 ha

503m²

16.7m 16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement) (7.5m road wide 16.5m

30m 13 15m 450m² 35.8m

33 10m 450m² 30m PRELIMINARY

30m 20

16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement) (7.5m road wide 16.5m

15m 15.8m

766m² 35.3m

474m²

40 44

533m² 15.8m

450m² 15m

12 32

450m² 18m

15m 16.7m

501m² 30m

450m² 15m

501m² 31 39

501m² 16.7m

15m 15m 450m² Drainage 697m²

46 30m 450m² 15m

450m² 30m

30 38

450m²

23 15m

15m 15m

450m²

15m 12.5m 47 375m² 29

450m²

537m² 37 16.7m 375m²

590m² 450m²

24 9 15m

498m² 10 12.5m 1

30m 30m

11 12.5m

375m²

30m 28 554m² 35.2m 375m²

48 16.7m

554m² 18.7m 25 12.5m 36 18.2m 861m²

18m 2

535m²

27 18.4m

535m² 51.4m

26 538m²

375m² 375m²

8 24.7m 30m 7 501m² 6 540m² 5 517m² 161

716m²

15m 30m 17.5m 12.5m 3

15m Indicative Left in - Left Out intersection 15m

450m² 160 16.4m 12.5m 30m 12.8m 12.5m

375m²

159

12.5m 16.7m 375m² 162 450m² 158 18m 450m²

157 30m

501m² 156

Subject to detail design

375m²

155 12.5m 154

520m² 12.5m

12.5m 375m² 163 15m pavement) (13.0m road wide 22.0m

495m² 134 15m

375m² 133 20m

132 375m² 15m

450m² 131

130

450m² 18m 30m

450m²

165 15m

600m² 17.5m 375m² 129

166 17.6m 525m² 164 15m

450m²

450m² 167

128 450m²

540m² 127 168 16.8m

126

450m²

501m²

169 30m 30m 375m²

170

450m²

125

520m²

Local Recreation Park 171

124

676m² 30m 15m

495m² 12.5m 135 375m² 136 375m² 15m 137

450m²

15m 138

16.7m 450m²

139

600m² 18m 30m

12.8m 140 18.2m 652m² 225

450m² 141 53m 23m

1.01 ha 25.6m 794m² 18.2m 143

532m²

142

647m² 212 12.5m 12.5m

15m

15m 30m 15m 11.7m 603m²

211 20m

450m² 16.7m

224 30m 36.3m 144

603m² 17.8m

22.0m wide road (13.0m pavement) (13.0m road wide 22.0m 15m 24.1m 637m²

450m² 198

213 12.5m

536m²

30m 178 15m 15m

375m² 13.7m pavement) (7.5m road wide 16.5m 223

17m 12.5m 21.9m 18m 446m² 145

450m² 210 30m 15m

450m²

214

12.5m 12.5m 15m 528m²

450m² 177 199 31m

540m²

176 17.5m

375m² 375m²

179 222 517m²

15m 172 15m

450m² 12.5m

175

433m²

146

450m² 15m 174

450m²

Recreation Linkage

209

501m² 12.5m BEATTIE 16.7m 215

375m² 200 375m²

30m 180 12.5m

501m² 30m

221 21.5m

375m² 16.7m

411m² 173 13m 147 12.5m

Open Space

375m² 208 12.5m COOMERA RIVER 30m

375m²

375m² 201

4.90 ha 216

30.80 ha

15m

12.5m 551m²

182 554m² 31m

181

375m²

183 375m²

450m²

12.5m 188 220 12.5m 375m²

375m² 184

207 448m² 15m 148 450m²

185 12.5m 15.1m 450m²

375m² 186

202

450m²

217

15m 12.5m

450m² 206

517m² 30m

30m 17.5m

187 12.5m 15m 22.3m 362m² 622m²

149 219

450m²

203 12.5m

12.5m

22.3m 17.3m 30m 15m

548m²

218 16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement)15m

15m 30m 12.5m

368m² 562m² 15.2m 150

205

23.2m 30m 8.1m

24.7m 15.9m 602m² 204

634m²

197 4.9m

501m²

196 30m 16.7m

450m² 495m² 195

151

450m²

194

450m²

193

531m²

255 30m

573m² 30m

16.7m 192 15m

191

529m²

15m 33.8m 17.3m 11.7m

477m²

36.9m

427m² 190 15m

497m² 15m 16.7m 254 152 616m²

15m 15m 39.5m 189 450m²

531m²

253

256 16.7m 15m 30m

518m²

252 17m 15m 15m

450m² 251 18.4m 450m²

250

501m² 39.4m 249

20.7m 30m 22.1m 510m²

620m²

248

786m²

247 30m 15.3m 17m 153

531m²

257 pavement) (16.0m road wide 25.0m 15.2m 20.7m

573m² 22.5m 226 12.8m 15.8m 4.7m 10.9m 27.8m 524m² 259

375m²

260 531m² 30m

258 18m 540m² 375m² 261 17m 246 450m² 15.8m 262

450m²

540m² 263

227

501m²

264 18m 503m²

265 30m

12.5m 16.7m

12.5m 501m² 12.5m 245

Neighbourhood

15m 501m² 16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement)15m 228

16.7m 16.7m 16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement)

Centre Lot 458m²

272

450m² 15m 0.12 ha 244 FORD 22.5m 15.8m 450m² 12.5m 229 15m 31.8m 12.5m 15m 31.6m

524m²

271 12.5m 12.5m

15.8m 375m²

243 30m 375m² 270 474m²

273

450m² 269 375m²

230

375m² 268

375m²

267 12.5m

480m²

266 30m

12.5m 375m² 242 INDUSTRY MARINE FROM OFFSET 50M PROPOSED

15.8m 12.5m 375m² 231

474m²

274

Retirement Living

25m 12.5m 30m

16.3m 449m² 241

626m² 33.5m 276 15m

450m² 30m

232 31.7m 476m²

31.6m 277

396m² 278 15m

526m²

275

2.79 ha

396m² 279

17.6m

533m²

280 31.7m

368m²

240 12.5m

374m²

233 ROAD

14.5m 0.11 ha

358m²

15m 239 12.5m

16.5m wide road (7.5m pavement) 12.5m

12.5m 361m² 234

28.3m 499m² 238 28.3m

488m²

235 18m

27.2m

567m² 237 26.1m

596m² 23.3m

236

APPROX. 250M OFFSET FROM FUTURE MARINE INDUSTRY (INCL. RAIL BUFFER) RAIL (INCL. INDUSTRY MARINE FUTURE FROM OFFSET 250M APPROX. 100M RAIL BUFFER (FROM EDGE OF RAIL LINE) RAIL OF EDGE (FROM BUFFER RAIL 100M

200m

ASSUMED IRTC CORRIDOR RESUMPTION - APPROX 60M 60M APPROX - RESUMPTION CORRIDOR IRTC ASSUMED

GOLD COAST RAILWAY LINE RAILWAY COAST GOLD

PROPOSED INTRA-REGIONAL TRANSPORT CORRIDOR TRANSPORT INTRA-REGIONAL PROPOSED 100M RAIL BUFFER (FROM EDGE OF RAIL LINE) RAIL OF EDGE (FROM BUFFER RAIL 100M MAP 8 - INDICATIVE SUBDIVISION LAYOUT SU OEISEDSRPINB H DATE CHK BY ISSUE DESCRIPTION CODE ISSUE 131 Robertson Street F: +61 7 3852 4766 P: +61 7 3852 3922 FORTITUDE VALLEY, QLD, 4006 PO Box 419 A BRISBANE 1616035_55 © PLACE Design Group Pty Ltd A.C.N. 082 370 063 NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE LOT APPROXIMATE ROAD WIDENING RETIREMENT LIVING SITE RECREATION LINKAGE LOCAL RECREATION PARK OPEN SPACE and DRAINAGE SUBJECT SITE CA Beattie Road, Coomera Indicative Subdivision Layout CONSTRUCTION : : : : EP 1616035 CK 1:1750@A1 Citimark NOT FOR A P17/10/2018 EP CK

NORTH

REPORT ADOPTED 2019 June 5 Meeting Committee Environment & Planning Economy,

110 110 2019 June 13 Meeting Council 775th Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE

INDICATIVE MAJOR RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR STREET (25M RESERVE) FULL MOVEMENT INTERSECTION INDICATIVE RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR STREET WITH BUS ROUTE (22M RESERVE)

LEFT-IN/LEFT OUT ONLY INDICATIVE MINOR RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR FUTURE PROPOSED COLLECTOR ROUTE

EXISTING CONNECTIONS INDICATIVE OPEN SPACE TRAIL

ESPLANADE ROAD FRONTAGE PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE PRECINCT: GFA 250M2

PRIMARY PARK NODE

SECONDARY PARK NODE

OPEN SPACE

INDICATIVE LOCAL RECREATION PARK

INDICATIVE RECREATION LINKAGE

FUTURE ROAD WIDENING

NO DIRECT LOT ACCESS (EXCL. NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE) EXISTING ROADS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Map 4 - Road Hierarchy and Access

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps 19/10/2018 1616035 B 50-04 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 111 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE

BEATTIE ROAD BUS ROUTE EXISTING BUS STOP

WALKABLE CATCHMENTS

FUTURE SHARED PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE NETWORK INDICATIVE MAJOR PEDESTRIAN ROUTE INDICATIVE SECONDARY PEDESTRIAN ROUTE

EXTERNAL PEDESTRIAN ROUTE

INDICATIVE OPEN SPACE TRAIL

ESPLANADE ROAD FRONTAGE PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE PRECINCT: GFA 250M2

PRIMARY PARK NODE

SECONDARY PARK NODE

OPEN SPACE

INDICATIVE LOCAL RECREATION PARK

INDICATIVE RECREATION LINKAGE

FUTURE ROAD WIDENING

EXISTING ROADS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Map 5 - Active Transport

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps 19/10/2018 1616035 B 50-05 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 112 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N Economy, 775th Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

Legend

SUBJECT SITE

DRAINAGE & REHABILITATION PROPOSED CONNECTION

EXISTING CONNECTION INDICATIVE OPEN SPACE TRAIL

ESPLANADE ROAD FRONTAGE

PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE PRECINCT: GFA 250M2

PRIMARY PARK NODE SECONDARY PARK NODE OPEN SPACE

INDICATIVE LOCAL RECREATION PARK

INDICATIVE RECREATION LINKAGE

FUTURE ROAD WIDENING

EXISTING ROADS ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd Date Project No. Revision DWG No. 131 Robertson Street Map 6 - Open Space

Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps 19/10/2018 1616035 B 50-06 REPORT 4006 Australia

T + 61 7 3852 3922 113 F + 61 7 3852 4766 0 20 40 60 80 100M/ 1:2000@A0 N KEY PLAN 775th Economy, Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June CONCRETE FOOTPATHS 2019 Committee

OUTLOOK PLATFORM Meeting PLAYGROUND 5

BBQ SHELTERS June 2019

BIRD WATCHING SHELTER

OUTLOOK WITH SHADE SHELTERS

Wetland - Refer to Ecological report for details

KAYAK LAUNCH

DISCLAIMER: ADOPTED For any wetland or surface levels information please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only.

N REPORT

0 10 20 30 40 50M

SCALE 1:750 @ A3 114

Date Project No. Place Design Group Pty Ltd 4215 Australia BEATTIE RD, COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street T + 61 7 5591 1229 DETAILED PLAN 1 Scale: 1:750@A3 Southport, QLD F + 61 7 5591 5825 10 KEY PLAN 775th Economy, Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June PARK - Q20 IMMUNITY BOARDWALK OVER 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

OPEN WATER

LINKAGE PATH

BIRD HABITAT

BIRD HIDE

DISCLAIMER: ADOPTED For any wetland or surface levels information please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only. BIRD HABITAT N

Wetland - Refer to Ecological REPORT

report for details 0 10 20 30 40 50M

SCALE 1:750 @ A3 115

Date Project No. Place Design Group Pty Ltd 4215 Australia BEATTIE RD, COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street T + 61 7 5591 1229 DETAILED PLAN 2 Scale: 1:750@A3 Southport, QLD F + 61 7 5591 5825 11 KEY PLAN 775th Economy,

OUTLOOK WITH SHELTERS Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 BOARDWALK OVER LINKAGE PARK June 2019

RECREATION PATH Committee

Wetland - Refer to Ecological

report for details Meeting

LINK PATH OVER PIPES RECREATION PATH 5 June

PARK - Q10 IMMUNITY 2019

OUTLOOK/FISHING PLATFORMS

EXISTING BEACH

COOMERA RIVER

DISCLAIMER: ADOPTED For any wetland or surface levels information please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only.

N REPORT

0 10 20 30 40 50M

SCALE 1:750 @ A3 116

Date Project No. Place Design Group Pty Ltd 4215 Australia BEATTIE RD, COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street T + 61 7 5591 1229 DETAILED PLAN 3 Scale: 1:750@A3 Southport, QLD F + 61 7 5591 5825 12 KEY PLAN 775th Economy, Council Planning

A Meeting & Environment 13 June B 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

WETLAND ADOPTED

BIRD HABITAT WETLAND KAYAK LAUNCH Q100 REPORT

DISCLAIMER:

For any wetland or surface levels information please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. 117 The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only.

Date Project No. Place Design Group Pty Ltd 4215 Australia BEATTIE RD, COOMERA 29 October 2018 1616035 Level 4, 7 Short Street T + 61 7 5591 1229 SITE SECTIONS A Scale: 1:500@A3 Southport, QLD F + 61 7 5591 5825 13 775th Economy,

WETLAND EDGE PLANTING WETLAND EDGE PLANTING Council Planning Meeting & Environment

WETLAND OPEN WATER 13 June 2019 Committee

HAT RL 1.08m AVEREAGE ELEVATION MHWS 0.67 m AHD MHWS RL 0.67m

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION A Meeting

WETLAND 5 June 2019

KEY PLAN BUFFER PLANTING TO ECOLOGICAL CORRIDOR EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE RETAINED

WETLAND EDGE PLANTING NATURE WALK

HAT RL 1.08m MHWS RL 0.67m AVEREAGE ELEVATION MHWS 0.67 m AHD EXISTING TOB

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION B

COOMERA WETLAND 45 m VEGETATED BUFFER/ ECOLOGICAL CORRIDOR RIVER ADOPTED REPORT

DISCLAIMER:

For any wetland or surface levels information please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. 21.08.18118 The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only. This drawing is copyright and the property of Burchills Engineering 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA Solutions. It must not be retained, copied or used without the authority B VOGEL of Burchills Engineering Solutions. FIGURE 6.4 B VOGEL C KELLY This drawing and its contents are electronically generated, are confidential and may only be used for the purpose for which they were Date Project No. FOR CITIMARK PROPERTIES4215 PTY Australia LTD intended. 78 BEATTIE ROAD Place Design Group Pty Ltd Burchills Engineering Solutions will not accept responsibility for any consequences arising from the use of the drawing for other than its 29 October 2018 1616035 D REVISED LAYOUT 21.08.18 intended purpose or where the drawing hasBEATTIE been altered, amended or RD, COOMERA COOMERA CROSS SECTIONS Level 4, 7 Short Street changed either manually or electronically by any third party. T + 61 7 5591 1229 C REVISED LAYOUT 05.03.18 A & B Scale: 1:500@A3 B REVISED LAYOUT 26.02.18 This is an uncontrolled document issued for information SITEpurposes only, SECTIONS A&B Southport, QLD unless the checked sections are signed or completed. F + 61 7 5591 5825 Figured dimensions take precedence over scale. Do not scale reduced A3 size drawings. Verify dimensions prior to commencing any on-site or REV D14 off-site works or fabrication. WETLAND EDGE PLANTING 775th Economy,

WETLAND OPEN WATER (CHANNEL) Council Planning Meeting & Environment 13 June 2019 Committee

HAT RL 1.08m MHWS RL 0.67m

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION C Meeting

WETLAND 5 June 2019

KEY PLAN WETLAND EDGE PLANTING

WETLAND OPEN WATER (CHANNEL)

HAT RL 1.08m MHWS RL 0.67m

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION D

WETLAND ADOPTED REPORT

DISCLAIMER:

For any wetland or surface levels information please refer to the ecologist / stormwater reports. 21.08.18119 The levels on this plan are indicative purposes only. This drawing is copyright and the property of Burchills Engineering 78 BEATTIE ROAD, COOMERA Solutions. It must not be retained, copied or used without the authority B VOGEL of Burchills Engineering Solutions. FIGURE 6.4 B VOGEL C KELLY This drawing and its contents are electronically generated, are confidential and may only be used for the purpose for which they were Date Project No. FOR CITIMARK PROPERTIES4215 PTY Australia LTD intended. 78 BEATTIE ROAD Place Design Group Pty Ltd Burchills Engineering Solutions will not accept responsibility for any consequences arising from the use of the drawing for other than its 29 October 2018 1616035 D REVISED LAYOUT 21.08.18 intended purpose or where the drawing hasBEATTIE been altered, amended or RD, COOMERA COOMERA CROSS SECTIONS Level 4, 7 Short Street changed either manually or electronically by any third party. T + 61 7 5591 1229 C REVISED LAYOUT 05.03.18 C & D Scale: 1:500@A3 B REVISED LAYOUT 26.02.18 This is an uncontrolled document issued for information SITEpurposes only, SECTIONS C&D Southport, QLD unless the checked sections are signed or completed. F + 61 7 5591 5825 Figured dimensions take precedence over scale. Do not scale reduced A3 size drawings. Verify dimensions prior to commencing any on-site or REV D15 off-site works or fabrication. 775th Economy,

TOTAL WIDTH 25m Council PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY Planning Meeting BIKE ROAD PAVEMENT BIKE RESIDENTIAL LOTS VERGE PARKING LANE 2 Moving Lanes LANE PARKING VERGE RESIDENTIAL LOTS & Environment 13

4.5m 2.5m 1.5m 7m 1.5m 2.5m 4.5m June 2019

1m 2m 1.5m 1.5m 2m 1m Committee FOOTPATH FOOTPATH Meeting 5 June 2019

LANDSCAPE BUFFER PARKING SPACE PARKING SPACE LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ROAD EDGE LINE MARKING LINE MARKING TO ROAD EDGE ADOPTED

Disclaimer: All information shown on this plan is indicative for discussion purposes only, and is subject to detail design, engineering and consultant input and all relevant planning and REPORT local authority approvals. 120

Place Design Group Pty Ltd BEATTIE ROAD COOMERA DATE PROJECT NO. REVISIONDWG NO. 131 Robertson Street 20/04/2017 1616035 A 21-1 Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD INDICATIVE STREET SECTION - Typical 25m Collector Rd 4006 Australia T + 61 7 3852 3922 0 4321 5M/ 1:100@A3 F + 61 7 3852 4766 N 775th Economy,

TOTAL WIDTH 22m Council PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY Planning Meeting ROAD PAVEMENT RESIDENTIAL LOTS VERGE PARKING 2 Moving Lanes PARKING VERGE RESIDENTIAL LOTS & Environment 13

4.5m 2.5m 7m 2.5m 4.5m June 2019 Committee 1m 2m 1.5m 1.5m 2m 1m FOOTPATH FOOTPATH Meeting 5 June 2019

LANDSCAPE BUFFER PARKING SPACE PARKING SPACE LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ROAD EDGE LINE MARKING LINE MARKING TO ROAD EDGE ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd BEATTIE ROAD COOMERA DATE PROJECT NO. REVISIONDWG NO. 131 Robertson Street 20/04/2017 1616035 A 21-2 Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD INDICATIVE STREET SECTION - Typical 22m Collector Rd 4006 Australia T + 61 7 3852 3922 0 4321 5M/ 1:100@A3 F + 61 7 3852 4766 N 775th Economy,

TOTAL WIDTH 16.5m Council PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY Planning Meeting

RESIDENTIAL LOTS VERGE ROAD PAVEMENT VERGE RESIDENTIAL LOTS & Environment 13

4.5m 7.5m 4.5m June 2019

1.5m 1.5m 1.5m 1.5m1.5m 1.5m Committee FOOTPATH FOOTPATH Meeting 5 June 2019

LANDSCAPE BUFFER LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ROAD EDGE TO ROAD EDGE ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd BEATTIE ROAD COOMERA DATE PROJECT NO. REVISIONDWG NO. 131 Robertson Street 20/04/2017 1616035 A 21-3 Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD INDICATIVE STREET SECTION - Typical 16.5m Access St 4006 Australia T + 61 7 3852 3922 0 4321 5M/ 1:100@A3 F + 61 7 3852 4766 N 775th Economy, Council TOTAL WIDTH 8m PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY Planning Meeting &

RESIDENTIAL LOTS ROAD PAVEMENT RESIDENTIAL LOTS Environment 13

1m 6m 1m June 2019 Committee Meeting 5 June 2019

LANEWAY CENTRELINE ADOPTED

Place Design Group Pty Ltd BEATTIE ROAD COOMERA DATE PROJECT NO. REVISIONDWG NO. 131 Robertson Street 20/04/2017 1616035 A 21-4 Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, QLD INDICATIVE STREET SECTION - Typical 8m Laneway 4006 Australia T + 61 7 3852 3922 0 4321 5M/ 1:100@A3 F + 61 7 3852 4766 N 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 124 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 2 (1 of 41)

78 Beattie Road, Coomera

Preliminary Approval, including a variation approval to affect the City Plan Version 4

Plan of Development

Version 2, 30.08.18 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 125 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Contents of 78 Beattie Road, Plan of Development

Part 1 Introduction 1.1 Preliminary 1.2 Development Intent 1.3 Purpose and Structure 1.4 Definitions 1.5 Application 1.6 Interpretation Part 2 Tables of Assessment 2.1 Preliminary 2.2 Reading the Tables of Assessment 2.3 Determining Categories of Development and Categories of Assessment for Assessable Development 2.4 Tables of Assessment 2.4.1 Table of assessment – Material change of use 2.4.2 Table of assessment – Reconfiguring a lot 2.4.3 Table of assessment – Building work 2.4.4 Table of assessment – Operational work 2.4.5 Table of assessment – Overlays Part 3 Plan of Development Codes 3.1 Preliminary 3.2 City Plan Use Codes 3.3 City Plan Development Codes 3.4 City Plan Overlay Codes 3.5 City Plan Codes – Not Applicable Part 4 78 Beattie Road Development Code 4.1 Application 4.2 Purpose 4.3 Specific benchmarks for assessment Part 5 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps Map 1 – Development Footprint Map 2 – Precinct Map Map 3 – Density and Building Height Map 4 – Road Hierarchy and Access Map 5 – Active Transport Map 6 – Open Space Map 7 – Indicative Road Sections Map 8 – Indicative Subdivision Layout 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 126 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Part 1 Introduction

1.1 Preliminary The 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development (Plan of Development) supports the Preliminary Approval that includes a Variation Request affecting the City Plan Version 4 (City Plan) in accordance Section 61 of the Planning Act 2016 (Planning Act). The Plan of Development guides the development of a master planned community named 78 Beattie Road which includes residential development ranging in low to medium density and a neighbourhood centre. The Development Plan involves one (1) allotment being 78 Beattie Road, described as Lot 50 on SP214550. The 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Area (Plan Area) is illustrated on Map 1 – Development Footprint.

1.2 Development Intent 78 Beattie Road, establishes urban development at a supported scale and density, whilst providing expansive open space and recreation opportunities available to the local community. 78 Beattie Road allows for the provision of a range of residential activities, including dwelling house, dual occupancy, multiple dwelling and retirement facility. The master planned community allows for a range of dwelling options to provide variety and service the housing need within Coomera. The neighbourhood centre is located at the Beattie Road frontage of the site to provide the day-to-day goods and services. The centre will offer convenience-style business activities to service the master planned community as well as the immediate surrounding neighbourhood. It is envisioned that the business activities will aid in the creation of a vibrant neighbourhood centre, providing activation and a safe, and pedestrian-focused environment. 78 Beattie Road also recognises the open space and recreational potential that adjoins the Coomera River and seeks the creation of an extensive recreational offering and open space for the community. The proposed precincts of the Plan of Development include:

− Medium Density Residential Precinct; − Neighbourhood Centre Precinct; and − Open Space Precinct. Reference is made to Map 2 – Precinct Map which illustrates the precinct applicable to the Plan Area. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 127 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

1.3 Purpose and Structure

1. The purpose of the Plan of Development is to provide detailed planning provisions for the future development of the site. The Plan of Development is comprised of the following elements: a) Part 2 - Tables of Assessment; b) Part 3 – Plan of Development Codes; c) Part 4 – 78 Beattie Road Development Code; and d) Part 5 – 78 Beattie Road Plan of Development Maps. 2. The provisions of the Plan of Development form part of the Preliminary Approval that includes a Variation Request to vary the effect of the City Plan in accordance with section 61 of Planning Act. Where practicable the Plan of Development has been prepared to exist as a standalone regulatory tool that varies the requirements of the City Plan. However, where considered appropriate, the applicability of codes contained within City Plan have been specified in Part 2 Tables of Assessment. 3. The Plan of Development has generally been prepared in accordance with the style and format of the City Plan. 1.4 Definitions

1. For the purpose of the Plan of Development, references to use definitions, clustering of use definitions and administrative definitions are consistent with Schedule 1 of the City Plan unless otherwise specified. 1.5 Application

1. This Plan of Development applies to all assessable development located within the Plan Area, as indicated in Map 1 – Development Footprint. 2. The tables of assessment included as Part 2 identify the category of assessment for development within the Plan Area. 3. The codes that may be relevant to the assessment of development in this Plan Area are listed in Part 2.

4. Where City Plan codes are identified as relevant assessment criteria, the relevant version applicable is the City Plan Version 4. 1.6 Interpretation

1. To remove any doubt, if any inconsistency exists between the provisions of the Plan of Development and the City Plan, the provisions of the Plan of Development prevail to the extent of the inconsistency. 2. In the absence of any equivalent provision within the Plan of Development, the provisions of the City Plan Version 4 prevail. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 128 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Part 2 Tables of Assessment

2.1 Preliminary

The tables in this part identify the category of development, the category of assessment and assessment benchmarks for assessable development within the Plan Area. 2.2 Reading the Tables of Assessment

The tables identify the following: 1. Development that is accepted development, that may or may not be subject to requirements or assessable development subject to code or impact assessment; 2. The category of assessment for development within: a) The subject site of the Plan of Development; b) A precinct of the Plan of Development; and c) An overlay (where applicable). 3. The assessment benchmarks for development, including: a) 78 Beattie Road Development Code; and b) Any applicable codes under the City Plan. Generally including: i. Use codes; ii. Other development codes;

iii. Overlay codes; and

iv. Any other applicable code/s as shown within the assessment benchmarks column. 2.3 Determining Categories of Development and Categories of Assessment for Assessable Development

The process for determining a category of development and category of assessment is: 1. For Material Change of Use, establish the use by reference to the use definitions within Schedule 1 – Definitions of the City Plan. 2. For all development, identify the: c) Relevant precinct, by reference to Map 2 – Precinct Map; d) Relevant overlay(s) (if applicable), by reference to the overlay mapping in the City Plan. 3. Determine the category of development and category of assessment by reference to the tables in section 2.4 Tables of Assessment.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 129 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

2.4 Tables of Assessment

The following tables identify the applicable category of assessment within the Plan Area for making a Material Change of Use, Building Work, Reconfiguring a Lot and Operational Work.

2.4.1 Table of assessment – Material change of use

The following tables identify the categories of development and assessment for development in a zone for making a material change of use.

They also identify assessment benchmarks for assessable development.

For accepted development subject to requirements, the table identifies applicable codes which include required outcomes the development must meet in order to remain accepted. If no codes are listed in the assessment benchmarks and required outcomes column for development, this means that there are no required outcomes for the development to meet.

Other tables in this part may affect the category of development or category of assessment for a particular development or identify additional assessment benchmarks or required outcomes for accepted development.

Table 2.4.1 Table of assessment – Material change of use – Medium density residential precinct Activity group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All activities Impact assessment Height 78 Beattie Road Development Code If involving building work and height exceeds the height City Plan Strategic Framework identified on the Map 3 – Density and Building Height. Any other relevant code within Part Density 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein for all other uses other than: (a) Dwelling house; (b) Secondary dwelling; or (c) Residential care facility;

If density exceeds the density identified on the Map 3 – Density and Building Height Business Accepted subject to requirements activities Sales office 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Sales office code

Community Code assessment activities Community use 78 Beattie Road Development Code

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 130 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Activity group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Recreation and Accepted environmental Park if: Any other relevant code within Part activities a) not including lighting; or 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein b) including only pedestrian lighting

Accepted subject to requirements Park n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Residential Accepted activities Dwelling house n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Home based business if home Any other relevant code within Part based child care 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Accepted subject to requirements Dual occupancy 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Dwelling house if: Any other relevant code within Part a) involving a secondary 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein dwelling with a GFA not exceeding 80m2 Multiple accommodation code

Home based business n.e.i Dual occupancy code

Rooming accommodation if: Home based business code a) accommodating no more than four unrelated Secondary dwelling code people; and b) in existing building and either involving no building work or minor building work

Code assessment Dwelling unit 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Multiple dwelling Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein Residential care facility Dwelling unit code Retirement facility Multiple accommodation code

Impact assessment 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 131 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Activity group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes Rooming accommodation n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Multiple accommodation code

Rural activities Accepted Permanent plantation 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Cropping Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Tourism and Code assessment entertainment activities Impact assessment Short-term accommodation 78 Beattie Road Development Code

City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Multiple accommodation code

Uses Assessment Benchmarks Impact assessment Any use listed in this table and not 78 Beattie Road Development Code meeting the description listed in the use column City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other use not listed in this table Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein Any other undefined use 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 132 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table 2.4.2 Table of assessment – Material change of use – Neighbourhood centre precinct Activity Group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All activities Impact assessment Height 78 Beattie Road Development Code If involving building work and height

exceeds the building height identified City Plan Strategic Framework on Map 3 - Density and Building

Height map. Any other relevant code

within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 Note: No change to the categories herein of development and assessment applies to freestanding telecommunication towers

Impact assessment Density 78 Beattie Road Development Code For all uses other than:

City Plan Strategic Framework a) Any use where building

height identified on the Map Any other relevant code 3 - Density and Building within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 Height, is equal to or greater herein than 15 metres, 3 storeys,

If density exceeds the density identified on the Map 3 –Density and Building Height map.

Note: No change to the categories of development and assessment applies if building height, as identified on the Map 3 - Density and Building Height.

Business Accepted subject to requirements activities The following uses if establishing in 78 Beattie Road Development an existing non-residential premises Code and either; involving no building work (other than an internal fitout); or Any other relevant code involving only minor building work: within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein a) Food and drink outlet if Involving: Commercial design code i. no consumption of alcohol; or Sales office code ii. consumption of alcohol between the hours of 10am and 10pm b) Health care services; c) Office if not a real estate agency or a call centre; d) Shop if GFA of any single shop does not exceed 250m2 e) Showroom if GFA of the use 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 133 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Activity Group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes does not exceed 250m2 f) Sales office

Code assessment Child care centre 78 Beattie Road Development Code Food and drink outlet if: a) not including a drive through Any other relevant code facility; and within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 b) not involving consumption of herein alcohol in external patron areas between 10pm and Child care centre code 10am Commercial design code Health care services n.e.i

Office n.e.i

Shop if GFA of any single shop does not exceed 250m2

Showroom if GFA of the use does not exceed 250m2

Veterinary services

Impact assessment Food and drink outlet n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Community Impact assessment activities Community use 78 Beattie Road Development Code

City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code Recreation and Accepted environmental activities Park if: 78 Beattie Road Development a) not including lighting; or Code b) including only pedestrian lighting Any other relevant code 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 134 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Activity Group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Accepted subject to requirements Park n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Code assessment Indoor sport and recreation if GFA 78 Beattie Road Development of the use does not exceed 250m2 Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Rural Activities Accepted Permanent plantation 78 Beattie Road Development Code Cropping Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes Accepted subject to requirements Any use if Temporary use 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Market and temporary use code

Uses Assessment benchmarks Impact assessment Any use listed in this table and not meeting the description 78 Beattie Road Development listed in the use column Code

Any other use not listed in this table City Plan Strategic Framework 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 135 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Activity Group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes

Any other undefined use Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 136 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table 2.4.3 Table of assessment – Material change of use – Open space precinct Activity group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All activities Impact assessment Height 78 Beattie Road Development Code If involving building work and height

exceeds 11.5 metres City Plan Strategic Framework

Note: No change to the categories of Any other relevant code development and assessment within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 applies to freestanding herein telecommunication towers

Impact assessment Density 78 Beattie Road Development Code For all uses, if density exceeds

one dwelling per lot City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Community Accepted facilities Community use if establishing in 78 Beattie Road Development existing building and involving no Code building work (other than an internal fitout) Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Accepted subject to requirements Community use n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Recreation and Accepted environmental Park if: 78 Beattie Road Development activities a) not including lighting; or Code b) including only pedestrian lighting Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Accepted subject to requirements Indoor sport and recreation if on 78 Beattie Road Development designated public land Code

Outdoor sport and recreation if on Any other relevant code 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 137 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Activity group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes designated public land within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein Park n.e.i Commercial design code Outdoor sport and recreation if a non- motorised water sport along Coomera River Frontage

Code assessment Outdoor sport and recreation if not a 78 Beattie Road Development golf course and/or driving range Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Impact assessment Indoor sport and recreation n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code Outdoor sport and recreation n.e.i City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Rural activities Accepted Cropping 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Tourism and Code assessment entertainment Club if: 78 Beattie Road Development activities a) excluding the sale of liquor; or Code b) involving the sale of liquor up to 25 hours per week Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Impact assessment Club n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

City Plan Strategic Framework 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 138 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Activity group Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Transport and Accepted infrastructure Landing if associated with a non- 78 Beattie Road Development activities commercial use Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Impact assessment Landing n.e.i 78 Beattie Road Development Code

City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Commercial design code

Uses Assessment benchmarks and required outcomes Accepted subject to requirements Any use if Temporary use 78 Beattie Road Development Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Market and temporary use code Activity groups Assessment benchmarks Impact assessment Any use listed in this table and not meeting the description 78 Beattie Road Development listed in the use column Code

Any other use not listed in this table City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other undefined use Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 139 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table of assessment – Reconfiguring a lot

The following table identifies the categories of development and assessment for reconfiguring a lot.

They also identify assessment benchmarks for assessable development.

Other tables in this part may affect the category of development or category of assessment for a particular development, or identify additional assessment benchmarks or required outcomes for accepted development subject to requirements.

The Regulation also categorises some reconfiguration as accepted development (in Schedule 6) or as assessable (in Schedule 12).

Table 2.4.4 Table of assessment– Reconfiguring a lot – All Precincts Precinct Categories of development and Assessment benchmarks and assessment required outcomes All Precincts Code assessment Any reconfiguring a lot that: 78 Beattie Road Development Code a) rearranges the boundaries of a lot and results in no Any other relevant code within additional lots; or Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein b) results in no lots with an area less than the minimum lot size identified on the Map 3 – Density and Building Height map.

Impact assessment Any reconfiguring a lot that does 78 Beattie Road Development not meet code assessable criteria Code

City Plan Strategic Framework

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 140 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

2.4.2 Table of assessment – Building work

Building work is not regulated by this Plan of Development. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 141 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

2.4.3 Table of assessment – Operational work

The following tables identify the categories of development and assessment for operational work.

They also identify assessment benchmarks for assessable development.

Table 2.4.5 Table of assessment – Operational work – change to ground level Precinct Categories of development Assessment benchmarks and and assessment required outcomes Medium density Code assessment residential Operational work – change to 78 Beattie Road Development ground level that: Code a) involves excavation or filling associated with a Any other relevant code within material change of use or Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein reconfiguring a lot; or b) exceeds a volume of 40m3 General development of fill or excavation; or provisions code c) results in an increase in the depth or height of the Change to ground level and ground level or finished creation of new waterways design level by more than code 1.0 vertical metre

Neighbourhood Code assessment centre Operational work – change to 78 Beattie Road Development ground level that: Code a) involves excavation or filling associated with a Any other relevant code within material change of use or Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein reconfiguring a lot; or b) exceeds a volume of 20m3 General development of fill or excavation; or provisions code c) is within 1.5 metres of site boundary and results in an Change to ground level and increase in the depth or creation of new waterways height of the ground level code or finished design level by more than 1.0 vertical metre

Open space Code assessment Operational work – change to 78 Beattie Road Development ground level that: Code

a) exceeds a volume of Any other relevant code within 100m3 of fill or excavation; Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 142 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Precinct Categories of development Assessment benchmarks and and assessment required outcomes or b) is within 20 metres of a site General development boundary provisions code

Change to ground level and creation of new waterways code

Table 2.4.6 Table of assessment– Operational work – infrastructure Precinct Categories of development Assessment benchmarks and and assessment required outcomes All precincts Code assessment

Operational works – 78 Beattie Road Development infrastructure works associated Code with the provision of: a) roads; or Any other relevant code within b) stormwater drainage design Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein and management; or c) street lighting; or General development d) water supply reticulation; or provisions code e) sewerage reticulation; or f) open space and recreation Change to ground level and facilities; or creation of new waterways g) underground service code conduits; or h) reticulated gas; or Works for infrastructure code i) electricity

Table 2.4.7 Table of assessment – Operational work – landscape works Precinct Categories of development Assessment benchmarks and and assessment required outcomes All precincts Accepted

Operational works – minor 78 Beattie Road Development landscape work; Code

or Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein Operational works – landscape works associated with a dwelling house

Code assessment Operational works – landscape 78 Beattie Road Development works Code

Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Landscape work code

Table 2.4.8 Table of assessment – Operational work – vegetation clearing Precinct Categories of development Assessment benchmarks and and assessment required outcomes 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 143 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

All precincts Accepted subject to conditions

Operational works – vegetation 78 Beattie Road Development clearing that results in damage Code to assessable vegetation Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Vegetation management code Code assessment Operational works – vegetation 78 Beattie Road Development clearing that results in damage Code to assessable vegetation where not identified as a required Any other relevant code within outcome in Part A of the Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein Vegetation Management Development Code Vegetation management code Impact assessment Results in the removal of, or 78 Beattie Road Development damage to, vegetation over Code which Vegetation Protection Order has been made by City Plan Strategic Framework Council Any other relevant code within Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein

Vegetation management code

Table 2.4.9 Table of assessment – Operational work – vehicle access works Precinct Categories of development Assessment benchmarks and and assessment required outcomes All precincts Accepted

Operational works – vehicle access works for a vehicular crossing on a State controlled road Accepted subject to requirements Operational works – vehicle 78 Beattie Road Development access works for the provision of Code a driveway Operational works – vehicle Any other relevant code within access works for a vehicular Part 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 herein crossing on a Local Government road Driveways and vehicular crossings code

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 144 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

2.4.4 Table of assessment – Overlays

The following tables identify where an overlay changes the category of development and assessment from that stated in a zone.

They also identify additional assessment benchmarks for assessable development.

Table 2.4.10 Table of assessment – Acid sulfate soils overlay Development Categories of Assessment development and benchmarks and assessment required outcomes All precincts Any Operational work, where the work is Code assessment if Acid sulfate soils proposed on any part of a lot that: provisionally made overlay code accepted or accepted a) is identified on the Acid sulfate subject to requirements soils overlay map; and by another table of b) has a natural ground level at or assessment below the 20m AHD contour; and c) results in:

i. excavating or otherwise removing 100m3 or more of soil or sediment on land at or below the 5m AHD contour; or ii. filling of land involving 500m3 or more of material with an average depth of 0.5 of a metre or greater at or below the 5m AHD contour. Any Material change of use or Code assessment if Acid sulfate soils Reconfiguring a lot, which would affect provisionally made overlay code any part of a lot that: accepted or accepted subject to requirements a) is identified on Acid sulfate soils by another table of overlay map ; and assessment b) has a natural ground level at or below the 20m AHD contour; and c) results in: i. excavating or otherwise removing 1,000m3 or more of soil or sediment on land at or below the 5m AHD contour; or ii. filling of land involving 1,000m3 or more of material with an average depth of 0.5 of a metre or greater at or below the 5m AHD contour. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 145 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table 2.4.11 Table of assessment – Coastal erosion hazard overlay Development Categories of development Assessment and assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All precincts Any material change of use, Accepted subject to Coastal erosion reconfiguration of a lot or requirements if provisionally hazard operational work on a site identified made accepted by another overlay code as being in a ‘Waterfront table of assessment development control area’ or Note: a material change of ‘Foreshore seawall’ area on the use that remains accepted or accepted subject to Coastal erosion hazard overlay requirements and results in map building work for Class 1 and/or Class 10 buildings is not subject to RO1 or RO11 (these are to be addressed at the building works stage, see Section 1.5)

No change to the categories Coastal erosion of development and hazard assessment if not otherwise overlay code specified above Any building work (not related to a No change to the categories Coastal erosion material change of use) on a site of development and hazard identified on the Coastal erosion assessment overlay code hazard overlay map

Table 2.4.12 Table of assessment – Environmental significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay Development Categories of development Assessment and assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All precincts A material change of use for a No change to the categories Environmental Dwelling house (not involving a of development and significance overlay secondary dwelling) assessment code

Any operational work associated with the construction of, or ancillary to, a Dwelling house (not involving a secondary dwelling) Any operational work vegetation clearing that results in damage to assessable vegetation which meets the required outcomes in Part A of the Vegetation management code Any other material change of use, Accepted subject to Environmental reconfiguration of a lot or requirements if provisionally significance overlay operational work on a site made accepted by another code containing, or within a defined table of assessment buffer distance from, any ‘Wetlands No change to the categories Environmental and watercourse’ category, other of development and significance overlay than ‘Canals and Lakes’ as assessment if not otherwise code identified on the Environmental specified above significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay map 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 146 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table 2.4.13 Table of assessment – Flood overlay Development Categories of development Assessment and assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All precincts Any material change of use, Accepted subject to Flood overlay code reconfiguration of a lot or requirements if provisionally operational work on land identified made accepted by another in the ‘Flood assessment required’ table of assessment area as identified on the Flood Code assessment if for Flood overlay code overlay map operational works involving earthworks which exceeds the volume of 5m3 (not associated with building works or material change of use) No change to the categories Flood overlay code of development and assessment if not otherwise specified above

Table 2.4.14 Table of assessment – Landslide hazard overlay Development Categories of development Assessment and assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All precincts Any material change of use on an Accepted subject to Landslide hazard allotment partially or completely requirements if provisionally overlay code encumbered by ‘Landslide hazard’ made accepted by another as identified on the Landslide table of assessment hazard overlay map No change to the categories Landslide hazard of development and overlay code assessment if not otherwise specified above Any reconfiguration of a lot on an No change to the categories Landslide hazard allotment partially or completely of development and overlay code encumbered by ‘Landslide hazard’ assessment as identified on the Landslide hazard overlay map Any operational work on an No change to the categories Landslide hazard allotment partially or completely of development and overlay code encumbered by ‘Landslide hazard’ assessment as identified on the Landslide hazard overlay map

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 147 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table 2.4.15 Table of assessment – State controlled roads, rail corridor and transport noise corridors overlay Development Categories of development Assessment and assessment benchmarks and required outcomes All precincts Any code or impact assessable No change to the categories Regional material change of use for a of development and infrastructure sensitive land use (excluding assessment overlay code Office, Short-term accommodation) or reconfiguration of a lot on an allotment that is adjacent to a ‘State controlled road’ as identified on the State controlled roads, rail corridor and transport noise corridors overlay map

Any code or impact assessable No change to the categories Regional material change of use for a of development and infrastructure sensitive land use (excluding assessment overlay code Office, short-term accommodation) or reconfiguration of a lot located within the ‘Rail corridor 100m buffer’ as identified on the State controlled roads, rail corridor and transport noise corridors overlay map

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 148 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Part 3 Plan of Development Codes

3.1 Preliminary 1. Plan of Development codes are codes for assessment where identified as an applicable code in Part 2 Tables of Assessment. 2. The following are the codes contained within the Plan of Development: a. 78 Beattie Road development code

3.2 City Plan Use Codes 3. The following are City Plan use codes that may also be applicable within the Plan of Development Area: a. Child care centre code; b. Commercial design code; c. Dual occupancy code; d. Dwelling unit code; e. Home based business code; f. Market and temporary use code; g. Multiple accommodation code; h. Rural activity code; i. Sales office code; and j. Secondary dwelling code.

3.3 City Plan Development Codes 4. The following are City Plan other development codes that may also be applicable within the Plan of Development Area: a. Change to ground level and creation of new waterways code; b. Driveways and vehicular crossings code; c. Fire services in developments accessed by common private title code; d. General development provisions code; e. Healthy waters code; f. Landscape work code; g. Reconfiguring a lot code; h. Small lot housing (infill focus) code; i. Solid waste management code; j. Transport code; k. Vegetation management code; and l. Works for infrastructure code. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 149 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

3.4 City Plan Overlay Codes 5. The following are City Plan overlay codes that may also be applicable within the Plan Area: a. Acid sulfate soils overlay code; b. Coastal erosion hazard overlay; c. Environmental significance – wetlands and watercourse overlay; d. Flood overlay; e. Landslide hazard overlay; and f. State controlled roads, rail corridor and transport noise corridors overlay.

3.5 City Plan Codes – Not Applicable 6. To remove any doubt those City Plan codes not listed under (3), (4) and (5) are not applicable to development carried out under this Plan of Development. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 150 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Part 4 78 Beattie Road Development Code

4.1 Application

1. This code applies to accepted and assessable development identified as requiring assessment against the tables of assessment in Part 2 Tables of assessment.

4.2 Purpose

(1) The purpose of the 78 Beattie Road development code is to provide for the integrated planning and development of the site.

The site comprises a mix of residential activities, limited gross floor area of business activities forming a neighbourhood centre and expansive open space.

The residential activities provide a range and mix of dwelling types which may include Dwelling house, Dual occupancy Multiple dwelling, Retirement facility which is supported by a neighbourhood centre which will provide for a mix of land uses to service the community.

The neighbourhood centre includes small scale convenience shopping, professional offices, child care, community services and other uses that directly support the immediate community.

The site also includes expansive open space that rehabilitates a significant area to wetlands, and multi functional areas that serve the recreational needs of a wide range of residents and visitors. To meet community needs, open space may include shelters, bird watching structures, amenity facilities, picnic tables and playgrounds and infrastructure to support safe access and essential management.

(2) The purpose of the 78 Beattie Road development code will be achieved through the following overall outcomes:

(a) Land uses:

i. residential activities which include a range of medium density residential uses, predominantly permanent accommodation;

ii. residential land uses such as Multiple dwelling, Dual occupancy, Dwelling house on standard size to small lots and Retirement Facility are included in the precinct to provide a mix of dwelling types;

iii. a neighbourhood centre to provide day-to-day goods and services and diverse business opportunities without exceeding the needs of the immediate neighbourhood, detracting from the residential amenity of the area or undermining the viability of mixed use or specialist centres;

iv. open space which includes passive and active recreational activities which are complemented by wetlands with educational signage, bird watching shelters and pathways connecting from the surrounding community, parks and nodes. Drainage areas are also provided within the passive open space areas;

(b) Residential activities are provided at a form, scale and intensity that is appropriate for the site. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 151 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

(d) The type and mix of housing responds to the nature of the activities and each locality it is in where the following outcomes are satisfied:

i. capacity of available infrastructure to support the development, including water, sewer, transport, electricity, telecommunications and social and community facilities;

ii. delivery of a generous mix of housing and lot form, sizes and affordability outcomes that meet housing needs for the locality; and

iii. has a lot size, density and building height that does not exceed that identified on Map 3 - Density and Building Height.

(e) Character consists of:

i. residential activities that vary from pockets of detached housing on standard lot sizes to small lots; to medium intensity pockets, which may contain dual occupancy, multiple dwelling and retirement facility;

ii. a well serviced and compact urban neighbourhood that offers a level of amenity appropriate to the intensity of the area;

iii. walking and cycling paths, street trees and local streets for shared car and bike use, as illustrated on the Map 7 – Indicative Road Sections;

iv. connectivity opportunities to the existing adjoining community, as illustrated on Map 4 – Road Hierarchy and Access;

v. small mix of business activities to meet the needs of the immediate neighbourhood within a 1,000 metre walking distance;

vi. urban streets framed by attractive buildings and shaded by street trees;

vii. safe and accessible public areas with an appropriate level of facilities consistent with its setting to allow for informal recreational activities and enjoyment by the local community, as illustrated on Map 6 – Open Space;

viii. well maintained open space areas that positively contribute to the City’s green space network;

i. safe and accessible pedestrian and cycle focused environments that contribute to a bustling street life with local streets for shared car and bike use; and

ii. a network of district linkage park, local park, a neighbourhood centre and open space that allows for social interaction and relaxation generally in accordance with Map 5 – Active Transport.

(f) Built form:

i. building height that generally does not exceed that identified on Map 3 –Density and Building Height;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 152 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

ii. residential dwellings include buildings that are of an intensity and form to support mixed use development that transitions sensitively to surrounding residential areas;

iii. strengthens the urban ‘street edge’ with active uses, attractive materials and building variations with retail and commercial uses to provide an active, safe and pedestrian focused environment;

i. neighbourhood centre that provides for activation with the street, a flexible range of commercial opportunities and flexible reuse of non- residential space;

ii. open space is of a height that allows for a flexible range of recreational activities while not adversely impacting on the amenity of the open space area or nearby sensitive land uses; and

iii. open space is flexible, adaptable and multiuse to support the wide range of social, cultural and civic uses and needs envisaged in the precinct.

(g) Lot design:

i. supports a mix and variety of housing forms envisaged in the community;

ii. is indicatively illustrated on Map 8 - Indicative Subdivision Layout;

iii. addresses site constraints; and

iv. is generally in accordance with the residential density (RD) designations on Map 3 –Density and Building Height.

(h) The coordinated overall outcomes for 78 Beattie Road development code are realised through the land use, character and built form intent of the following precincts:

i. Medium density residential

ii. Neighbourhood centre

iii. Open space

(i) The Medium density residential precinct provides a range of dwellings including Dwelling houses, Dual occupancy and Multiple dwellings. The configuration of lots and dwellings is designed to ensure a high level of residential amenity and collectively contribute to an attractive streetscape.

Individual residential dwellings are designed to ensure:

i. setback from road frontages to promote an urban setting and interface with the street;

ii. setback from side and rear boundaries to protect the amenity of adjoining residences;

iii. small lot housing can be scattered throughout the precinct;

iv. terrace-style housing may be considered where interfacing with the Open space precinct; 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 153 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

v. varying site cover to reduce building dominance and provide areas for landscaping;

vi. orientation and building design addresses the street and provide casual surveillance;

vii. sufficient off street car parking for residents and visitors;

viii. functional private open space areas and convenient access to local public open space;

ix. lot size and configuration support a mix and variety of housing forms envisaged in the precinct; and

v. Reconfiguring a lot where creating small lots, demonstrates a Dwelling house can be accommodated where it meets the relevant precinct intent and the Small lot housing (infill focus) code through: . a site plan for all lots with an area 250m2 to 400m²; and . site plan, floor plan and elevations for all lots with an area less than 250m2

(j) The Neighbourhood centre precinct provides for a range of small scale convenience shopping, professional offices, community services and other uses that directly support the immediate community.

The uses include business and recreation activities such as neighbourhood stores, newsagents, café, child care, medical, child care, indoor recreation, and other local services.

The neighbourhood centre is designed to:

i. Include Food and drink outlets (without drive through facilities);

ii. Include commercial activities that cease by 10pm to limit potential social and amenity impacts arising from these uses to nearby residents;

iii. Include external patron areas, particularly where alcohol is consumed, are designed and orientated to mitigate any potential residential amenity impacts;

iv. not detract from the amenity of nearby sensitive land uses or land zoned for sensitive land uses;

v. operate in a manner that do not cause nuisance to sensitive land uses;

vi. include shops, providing the GFA of any single shop does not exceed 250m2;

vii. include distinctive ground floor businesses that provide a convenient and diverse shopping experience;

viii. include a streetscape that is pedestrian friendly, with ample parking and framed by awning covered, attractive shop frontages;

ix. include a high level of accessibility by walking and cycling;

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 154 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

x. integrate with existing neighbourhood focal points such as public transport services, parks and other community facilities, wherever possible;

xi. be setback from road frontages to complement the streetscape character and allow for activation of the street;

xii. be setback from side and rear boundaries to protect the amenity of adjoining residential properties;

xiii. have site cover to maximise the use of the land while providing adequate space for car parking, facilities and landscaping;

xiv. creates strongly defined building edges and an attractive, safe and pedestrian focused environment;

xv. is not dominated by supermarkets or bulky and large built form; and

xvi. have lots that are of a size and configuration that support viable neighbourhood centre activities.

(k) The Open space precinct serves the recreational needs of a wide range of residents and visitors. To meet community needs, open space may include shelters, amenity facilities, picnic tables and playgrounds and infrastructure to support safe access and essential management.

The open space includes passive and active recreational activities which are complemented by wetlands, local parks connected by pathways and educational signage.

The open space is designed to:

i. support social, cultural and civic uses and needs, including temporary uses such as markets;

ii. rehabilitate the natural wetlands;

iii. references to the historical ownership of the Beattie Family;

iv. include uses such as indoor sport and recreation, outdoor sport, recreation and parks are supported where they do not compromise the open space character and are compatible with surrounding development;

v. not affect the amenity of adjacent areas, particularly residential areas;

vi. not compromise the informal recreation function of the precinct;

vii. include the protection and rehabilitation of matters of environmental significance onsite;

viii. have limited site cover to protect the recreational function of open space areas;

ix. be setback to minimise impacts on adjoining uses and reduce visual dominance; and

x. be setback from matters of environmental significance onsite; and 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 155 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

xi. include lots that preserve the open space character for informal recreation activities. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 156 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

4.3 Specific benchmarks for assessment

Part A applies to accepted development subject to requirements.

Part B applies to assessable development.

PART A ACCEPTED DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS

Table 4.3.1 78 Beattie Road development code – for accepted development subject to requirements

Required outcomes All precincts Setbacks RO1 Setbacks are provided in accordance with Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development Requirements

Site cover RO2 Site cover is provided in accordance with Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development Requirements

Height RO3 Building height and Structures do not exceed that set out in Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development Requirements

Density RO4 Density does not exceed that shown on Map 3 –Density and Building Height

Off-street car RO5 parking Off- street car parking spaces are provided in accordance with the following table: Use Off-street car parking rate All uses Table 9.4.13-3 of the Transport Code Medium density residential precinct

Private space RO6 For Dual occupancy, the private open space for each dwelling has: (a) minimum dimension of 5m; and (b) a maximum gradient not exceeding one in ten. For Multiple dwellings, the private open space for each dwelling has: (a) has a minimum area of 16m2; (b) has a minimum width of 3m; (c) is located adjacent to each dwelling unit; (d) if a balcony, is accessible from the living room; (e) has a maximum gradient not exceeding one in ten; and (f) is sufficiently screened or elevated for privacy without total seclusion.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 157 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Required outcomes Privacy RO7 Habitable room windows do not ‘directly face’: (a) a habitable room window of another building within 10m; and (b) an access way, footpath or communal open space area within 3m. OR Habitable room windows: (a) have fixed obscure glazing in any part of the window below 1.5m above floor level; (b) have privacy screens that cover a minimum of 50% window view.

Neighbourhood centre precinct Land use RO8 Business hours of non-residential activities are between 6am to 10pm.

RO9 If proposed, residential uses are located above ground floor.

RO10 The design of the ground floor services and utilities allow for easy reconfiguration of commercial tenancies.

RO11 The GFA of a single shop does not exceed 250m2. Open space precinct

Setbacks RO12 Setbacks are provided in accordance with Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development Requirements.

Site cover RO13 Site cover does not exceed 10%.

Height RO14 Building height does not exceed 11.5m. AND Structures do not exceed a height of 11.5m.

Required Outcomes

Advisory note Accepted development identified in the assessment tables as subject to requirements must comply with all the nominated requirements in this and other applicable codes. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 158 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

PART B ASSESSABLE DEVELOPMENT BENCHMARKS

Table 4.3.2 78 Beattie Road development code – for assessable development Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes

Setbacks PO01 AO1 Setbacks: Setbacks are provided in accordance with All precincts Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development (a) assist in the protection of adjacent Requirements amenity; Medium density residential precinct (b) allow for access around the building; (c) contribute to streetscape character; (d) allow for onsite car parking; Neighbourhood centre precinct (e) allow buildings to address and actively interface with streets and public spaces; (f) provide additional width to the public realm and additional space for road side dining opportunities; Open space precinct (g) reduce visual dominance of the built form from the road or adjoining dwellings.

Site Cover PO02 AO2 Site cover: Site cover is provided in accordance with Medium density residential precinct Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development Requirements (a) is balanced between built form and green areas for landscaped private open space; (b) contributes to neighbourhood character and amenity; (c) promotes bulk form in accordance with the character of the area; (d) promotes an open, attractive and distinct skyline; and (e) facilitates small, fast moving shadows. Neighbourhood centre precinct (f) ensures adequate space for storage and other necessary facilities required to support the land use; (g) allows for areas of high quality landscaping and streetscaping treatments; and (h) contributes to neighbourhood character.

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 159 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes

Open space precinct (i) reduces the dominance of buildings and structures; and (j) preserves the use of open space areas for a range of recreational activities.

Height PO03 AO3 All precincts Building height and structure height does not Development has a building height that is exceed that set out in Table 4.3.3 Precinct consistent with the 78 Beattie Road Development Requirements development code context and nominated height range set out in Map 3 Density and Building Height.

PO04 AO4 All precincts Freestanding garages and carports do not Free standing garages and car ports present exceed a height of 3.5m. to the street as single storey.

Density PO05 AO5 All precincts Development density is provided in Development has a density that is consistent accordance with the nominated range set out with the 78 Beattie Road development code in Map 3 - Density and Building Height context and sufficient infrastructure capacity.

Car parking PO06 AO6 All precincts Off- street car parking spaces are provided in Development provides off-street car parking at accordance with Table 9.4.13-3 of the rates that: Transport Code. (a) accommodate demand generated by proposed use(s); (b) reduce congestion and car dependency; (c) maximise efficiency of car parking provided; and (d) encourages alternative transport options such as walking, cycling and the use of public transport. Neighbourhood centre precinct only PO07 AO7.1 Commercial buildings present well to the street Development provides awnings which are a and provide awnings for the comfort of minimum width of 1.5m over the pedestrian pedestrians. access/footpath.

AO7.2 Footpath awnings are designed to complement and integrate with the façade and the streetscape. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 160 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes

PO08 AO8 Non-residential activities operate within Business hours of non-residential activities are appropriate hours to minimise nuisance to between 6am to 10pm. nearby, existing or intended sensitive land uses.

PO09 AO9 Residential land uses do not compromise the Residential uses are located above ground activation of ground floor storeys. floor.

PO10 AO10 Ground floor spaces are designed to enable the The design of the ground floor services and flexible reuse of nonresidential floor area to utilities allow for easy reconfiguration of support changing community and business commercial tenancies. needs.

PO11 AO11 Non-residential development: No acceptable outcome provided. (a) serves the needs of the immediate neighbourhood catchment – generally calculated as the planned population and jobs within a 1,000 metre walk from the centre; (b) supports a range of neighbourhood centre uses and enterprise opportunities; and (c) provides a range of goods and services to satisfy the day to day convenience needs of the immediate neighbourhood catchment. PO12 AO12 A single tenancy does not dominate the retail The GFA of a single shop does not exceed GFA of the neighbourhood centre area and does 250m2. not exceed 250m2. Lot design (for subdivision only) PO13 AO13 All precincts New lots meet the minimum requirements set Lot size and configuration supports a mix and out in Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development variety of building forms envisaged in the Requirements precinct. PO14 AO14 Medium density residential precinct Small lots must demonstrate that they can Setbacks for Dwelling houses on small lots: accommodate a Dwelling house that is (a) protect the amenity of adjacent residences; compliant with the relevant precinct (b) visually integrate with the character of the requirements set out in Table 4.3.3 Precinct locality; Development Requirements and the Small lot (c) provide differentiation by means of housing (infill focus) code through: articulation; and (a) a site plan for all lots with an area (d) allow for on-site car parking. 250m2 to 400m²; and (b) site, floor plans, and elevations for all lots with an area less than 250m2

Notes: (a) AO14 does not apply to the creation of small lots where associated with an existing residential building. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 161 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes

(b) House plans provided as part of a Reconfiguring a lot application will not be conditioned as part of an approval.

PO15 AO15 Medium density residential precinct No acceptable outcome provided Small lots in residential subdivisions are distributed amongst larger lots to facilitate variation in dwelling form and to meet the purpose of the precinct.

PO16 AO16 All precincts Development provides An overall street network is provided which: (a) a streetscape network in accordance (a) prioritises pedestrians and cycling over with Map 4 – Road Hierarchy and motor vehicles; Access; (b) establishes a connected and legible (b) pedestrian and cycle access to street network; commercial, public transport, parks and (c) provides a high level of internal community service areas, in accessibility and high-quality external accordance with Map 5 – Active connections for pedestrians and cyclists Transport. and appropriate external connections for (c) provide street trees; vehicles; (d) allow for efficient, safe and unimpeded (d) creates safe conditions for pedestrians, movement of buses alongside cyclists and vehicles for both day and pedestrians, cyclists and other night-time usage; motorists; (e) are designed to be responsive to the (e) accommodate service vehicle natural contours of the land; requirements; (f) facilitates safe and efficient access for (f) have footpaths that link to existing service vehicles including refuse footpaths, road crossings, parks and collection; and public transport facilities; and (g) does not compromise (g) provide street lighting in accordance future development to achieve the same with SC6.9 City Plan policy – Land outcomes listed above. development guidelines.

Open space linkages and ecological corridors PO17 AO17 Development provides open space linkages Where development is carried out within a through the site and connecting with adjoining connection as identified on Map 6 – Open open space. . Space, linkages should be provided in the form of pathways and cycleways that connect to the continuous open space parklands within the Plan Area. PO18 AO18 Development provides for the rehabilitation of Where development is carried out within an nominated ecological corridors. open space area, as identified on Map 6 – Open Space, rehabilitation is carried out in accordance with the Habitat Restoration Plan (Document No: BE160303-RP-HRP-01) prepared by Burchills dated October 2018. PO19 AO19 The development should explore opportunities In support of the Beattie Family cultural 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 162 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes

to retain the important cultural heritage building heritage values of the site, at least four of the (homestead) and consider other heritage following 7 elements must be included within elements on the site to ensure that the Strategic the Plan Area: outcomes of City Plan are not compromised. (a) Use the existing materials from the The Beattie Family cultural heritage values original homestead for recreation should: facilities such as seating and bird (a) demonstrate the evolution and history of watching shelters within the Open the Gold Coast; Space Precinct (Map 6). (b) demonstrates rare, uncommon or (b) Provision of historical farming endangered aspects of the Gold Coast’s equipment. heritage; (c) Educational signage about the Beattie (c) yield information that will contribute to the Family history of the site within the knowledge and understanding of the Gold Indicative Open Space Trail and/or Coast’s history; and Indicative Esplanade Pathway (Map 6). (d) reference the special association with the (d) Beattie Family naming opportunities of life or work of a particular person zones within the Open Space Precinct (particularly John Beattie who served in (Map 6). local government for 30 years). (e) Retention of the homestead in-situ with appropriate curtilage for adaptive re-use as a ‘special residential allotment with authentic heritage place’ within the Proposed Medium Density Residential Precinct (Map 2) – a heritage agreement can form part of the sales condition to support confidence of prospective buyers. (f) Retention of the homestead in-situ with appropriate curtilage for adaptive re-use as a community facility or business activity in accordance with the Table of assessment for the Proposed Neighbourhood Centre Precinct (Map 2). (g) Relocation of the homestead within the Plan Area and adaptive re-use as a community facility or business activity in accordance with the Table of assessments within Section 2.4. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 163 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table 4.3.3 Precinct Development Requirements

Medium Density Residential Precinct Setbacks Setback Minimum distances measured in metres (m) Height Setback Front up to 3 storeys 4m Side and Rear up to 4.5m 1.5m for that part between 4.5m 2m – 7.5m for that part exceeding an extra 0.5m is added for 7.5m every 3m in height or part thereof over 7.5m. Between on site habitable Double the applicable side buildings (where not setback. attached) OR Setbacks for dwelling houses on small lots: Front Minimum distances measured in metres (m) Building line (outer most projection): 4m OR Building line (outer most projection): 2m if the lot has vehicular access via a rear lane and the building is elevated 900mm above street level. Covered car parking: 2m behind front building line Secondary Front wall: 4m (not including projections up to 2m) frontage of corner lot Side (not Height Setback applicable to the up to 3m 0m where a class 10 building secondary located along a southern or frontage of western boundary and to a corner lots) maximum length of 9m. up to 4.5m 1.0m for that part between 4.5m 1.5m – 7.5m for that part exceeding 2m 7.5m Rear 0m where abutting a rear lane otherwise, 0.5m minimum 1m maximum OR For development on rear lots the setback is 3m from all boundaries. Maximum In accordance with Map 3 –Density and Building Height, building height Height does not exceed the following: Building height designation Maximum building height RD2 Up to 2 storeys RD3 Up to 2 storeys and Up to 3 storeys in hatched area only

Maximum Site cover does not exceed 50% Site Cover Minimum Lot In accordance with Map 3 –Density and Building Height, new lots meet the Size following: Lot size designation Minimum lot site Minimum frontage requirements RD2 375m2 12.5m RD3 250m2 8m

Density Density does not exceed that shown on Map 3 – Density and Building Height. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 164 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Neighbourhood Centre Precinct Setbacks Setback Minimum distances measured in metres (m) Height Setback Front up to 9.5m and not 0m (maximum 2m) more than 2 storeys for that part exceeding 2m 9.5m or 2 storeys Side up to 9.5m and not 0m where the site abuts the more than 2 storeys Neighbourhood centre precinct 2m for all other precincts

for that part exceeding 2m plus an extra 0.5m for 9.5m or 2 storeys every 3m in height or part thereof over 9.5m Rear up to 9.5m and not more 2m than 2 storeys for that part exceeding 6m 9.5m or 2 storeys Maximum Building height does not exceed 3 storeys with a maximum height of 15m. Height AND Structures do not exceed a height of 15m Maximum Site cover does not exceed 80%. Site Cover Minimum Lot Minimum lot size is 1,000m2. Size Gross Floor Gross Floor Area does not exceed that shown on Map 3 – Density and Area Building Height, being 250m2. Open Space Precinct Setback Setback Minimum distances measured in metres (m) Front 10m Side and rear 6m Maximum The height of buildings and structures do not exceed 11.5m. Height Maximum Site cover does not exceed 10%. Site Cover Minimum Lot New lots are not created unless for public open space purposes. Size Density Not applicable 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 165 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 3 (1 of 9)

Our reference: 1804-4899 SRA Your reference: 1616035

5 April 2019

The Chief Executive Officer Gold Coast City Council PO Box 5042 GCMC QLD 9726

Via email: [email protected]

Dear Sir/Madam

Referral agency response—preliminary approval only (with conditions) (Given under section 56 of the Planning Act 2016)

The development application described below was properly referred to the Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning (the department) on 26 April 2018.

Applicant details

Applicant name: Citimark Properties c/- Utopia Urban Planning Applicant contact details: PO Box 35 Chirn Park QLD 4215 [email protected] Location details

Street address: 78 Beattie Road, Coomera QLD 4209 Real property description: Lot 50 on SP214550 Local government area: Gold Coast City Council

Application details

Preliminary Approval for Material Change of Use, Reconfiguring a Lot and Operational Work seeking a Variation Request.

Referral triggers

The development application was referred to the department under the following provision of the Planning Regulation 2017:

Planning and Development Services (SEQ South) PO Box 3290 Page 1 of 9 Australia Fair QLD 4215 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 166 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

 Schedule 10, Part 6, Division 3, Subdivision 3, Table 1, Item 1 – Operational Work involving removal, destruction or damage of marine plants  Schedule 10, Part 6, Division 3, Subdivision 3, Table 2, Item 1 – Reconfiguring a Lot and Material Change of Use involving removal, destruction or damage of marine plants  Schedule 10, Part 6, Division 4, Subdivision 3, Table 1, Item 1 – Operational Work involving waterway barrier works  Schedule 10, Part 9, Division 4, Subdivision 1, Table 1, Item 1 – State transport infrastructure  Schedule 10, Part 9, Division 4, Subdivision 2, Table 1, Item 1 – Reconfiguring a Lot near a State transport corridor  Schedule 10, Part 9, Division 4, Subdivision 2, Table 4, Item 1 – Material Change of Use of premises near a State transport corridor or that is a future State transport corridor  Schedule 10, Part 17, Division 3, Table 1, Item 1 – Operational Work in Tidal works in a Coastal Management District  Schedule 10, Part 17, Division 3, Table 2, Item 1 – Operational Work in Tidal waters  Schedule 10, Part 17, Division 3, Table 5, Item 1 – Reconfiguring a Lot in a coastal management district or for a canal  Schedule 10, Part 17, Division 3, Table 6, Item 1 – Material Change of Use involving work in a coastal management district.

Variation request Under section 56(2)(b)(ii) of the Planning Act 2016 (Planning Act), the conditions set out in Attachment 1 must be attached to any development approval.

Reasons for decision to impose conditions The department must provide reasons for the decision to impose conditions. These are set out in Attachment 2.

Advice to the applicant The department offers advice to the applicant about the development application as set out in Attachment 3.

Approved plan The department requires that the plans and specifications set out below and enclosed must be attached to any development approval.

Plan title Prepared by Date Reference no. Version/issue Preliminary Approval for Material Change of Use, Reconfiguring a Lot and Operational Work Marine Plants – Burchills August 2018 N/A N/A Temporary Disturbance: Science and Areas of Interest Lot Engineering 502 on SP214550, 78 Beattie Road, Coomera Citimark Properties Habitat Restoration Burchills October 2018 BE160303-RP-HRP- 1 Plan Science and 01 Engineering Functional Layout Cardno 15/10/2018 WE16028-CI-003 Rev 2 Prelimanary Bulk

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 2 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 167 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Earthworks – Sheet 2 Functional Layout Cardno, 15/10/2018 WE16028-CI-004 Rev 2 Prelimanary Bulk Earthworks – Sheet 3 Map 1 - Development Place Design 19/10/2018 50-01 B Footprint Group Pty Ltd Map 2 - Precinct Map Place Design 19/10/2018 50-02 B Group Pty Ltd Map 5 -Active Transport Place Design 19/10/2018 50-05 B Group Pty Ltd Beattie Road Functional Cardno Limited 14.08.2018 WE16028-C1-030 1 Layout as amended in red to upgrade the Bus stop to an intermediate stop as per the Public Transport Infrastructure Manual 2015.

A copy of this response has been sent to the applicant for their information.

For further information please contact Isaac Harslett, Senior Planning Officer, on 07 5644 3222 or via email [email protected] who will be pleased to assist.

Yours sincerely

Gareth Richardson Manager, Planning and Development Services (SEQ South)

cc: Citimark Properties c/- Place Design Group, [email protected]

enc Attachment 1—Conditions to be imposed Attachment 2—Reasons for decision to impose conditions Attachment 3—Advice to the applicant Attachment 4—Approved plan and specifications

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 3 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 168 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 1—Conditions to be imposed

No. Conditions Condition timing

Preliminary Approval for Material Change of Use, Reconfiguring a Lot and Operational Work

Schedule 10, Part 6, Division 3, Subdivision 3, Table 1, Item 1 and Schedule 10, Part 6, Division 4, Subdivision 3, Table 1, Item 1 – Operational Work involving waterway barrier works – Operational Work involving removal, destruction or damage of marine plants - The Chief Executive administering the Planning Act 2016 nominates the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries to be the enforcement authority for the development to which this development approval relates for the administration and enforcement of any matter relating to the following conditions: 1. Development authorised under this approval is limited to At all times. operational works to remove, damage, destroy marine plants being limited to the temporary removal of 5731m² of marine plants and shown in Marine Plants – Temporary Disturbance: Areas of Interest Lot 502 on SP214550, 78 Beattie Road, Coomera Citimark Properties, Burchills Science and Engineering, August 2018. 2. The marine plant restoration must be carried out generally in Prior to the accordance with the Habitat Restoration Plan Prepared by commencement of Burchills Science and Engineering dated October 2018, reference use and to be BE160303-RP-HRP-01 and revision 1 in particular: maintained at all  Figure 6.1 Restoration Management Zones; and times.  Section 6.1.4 Reconstruction/Fabrication – Management Zone D (6.47 ha). 3. Provide written notice to [email protected], when the (a) At least 5 development authorised under this approval: business days but (a) will start, and no greater than 20 (b) when it has been completed. business days prior to the These notices must state this permit number 1804-4899 SRA. commencement of the works (b) Within 15 business days of the completion of the fisheries development works. 4. Spoil is not disposed of on tidal lands or within waterways and is For the duration of managed to prevent acid soil development. the works. 5. This fisheries development (as defined by the Fisheries Act 1994) Prior to the constitutes a place that is required to be open for inspection by an commencement of inspector at all times, pursuant to section 145 of the Fisheries Act use. 1994. 6. Marine plants that are temporarily removed, damaged or Within 5 years of destroyed by this development must be restored to pre- removal, damage or disturbance condition. destruction. 7. Development authorised under this approval is limited to For the duration of

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 4 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 169 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

operational works to raise or construct a waterway barrier works the works. that is a waterway modification including culvert crossings within a tidal waterway off the Coomera River and shown in:  Functional Layout Prelimanary Bulk Earthworks – Sheet 2, Cardno, 15/10/2018, We16028-Ci-003, Rev 2; and  Functional Layout Prelimanary Bulk Earthworks – Sheet 3, Cardno, 15/10/2018, We16028-Ci-004, Rev 2 8. Up and downstream fish passage must be provided across each At all times. of the waterway barriers. 9. The fish passage provided must cater for the whole fish At all times. community taking into account species, size classes, life stages and swimming abilities as well as the seasonal and flow related biomass of the fish community. 10. The waterway barrier(s) and any associated infrastructure At all times. including, but not limited to intakes, walls, access structures, pipe works, spillways and dissipation devices are to be constructed and maintained to avoid fish injury, mortality and/or entrapment. Schedule 10, Part 17, Division 3, Table 1, Item 1 – Operational Work in Tidal works in a Coastal Management District – The Chief Executive administering the Planning Act 2016 nominates the Department of Environment and Science to be the enforcement authority for the development to which this development approval relates for the administration and enforcement of any matter relating to the following condition: 11. The bulk earthworks must be carried out generally in accordance For the duration of with the following plans: the works.  Functional Layout Preliminary Bulk Earthworks – Sheet 2, Prepared by Cardno, dated 15/10/2018, drawing number WE16028-CI-003, rev 2.  Functional Layout Preliminary Bulk Earthworks – Sheet 3, Prepared by Cardno, dated 15/10/2018, drawing number WE16028-CI-004, rev 2.  Development Footprint, prepared by Place Design Group Pty Ltd, dated 19/10/2018, drawing number 50-01, revision B. Schedule 10, Part 9, Division 4, Subdivision 1, Table 1, Item 1 – State transport infrastructure – The Chief Executive administering the Planning Act 2016 nominates the Department of Transport and Main Roads to be the enforcement authority for the development to which this development approval relates for the administration and enforcement of any matter relating to the following condition: 12. The minimum setback of the Proposed Medium Density Prior to the Residential Zone from the railway corridor must be generally in commencement of accordance with Map 2 – Precinct Map, prepared by Place Design use and to be Group, dated 19/10/2018, drawing number 50-02, revision B. maintained at all times 13. Any excavation, filling/backfilling/compaction, retaining structures, At all times. batters, stormwater management measures, and other works involving ground disturbance must not de-stabilise the railway corridor, including rail transport infrastructure or the land

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 5 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 170 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

supporting this infrastructure, or cause similar adverse impacts. 14. (a) Stormwater and flooding management of the development At all times. must ensure no worsening or actionable nuisance to the railway corridor or the future State-controlled road corridor. (b) Any works on the land must not: i. create any new discharge points for stormwater runoff onto the railway corridor or future State-controlled road corridor; ii. interfere with and/or cause damage to the existing stormwater drainage on the railway corridor or future State-controlled road corridor; iii. surcharge any existing culvert or drain on the railway corridor or future State-controlled road corridor; iv. reduce the quality of stormwater discharge onto the railway corridor or future State-controlled road corridor; v. reduce the site’s floodplain storage capacity and/or hydraulic conveyance. 15. The development must provide the ‘Future Shared Prior to the Pedestrian/Cycle Network’, ‘Indicative Major Pedestrian Route', commencement of 'Indicative Secondary Pedestrian Route’ and ‘External Pedestrian use or Prior to Route’ generally in accordance with Map 5-Active Transport, submitting the Plan prepared by Place Design Group, dated 19 October 2018, of Survey to the drawing number 50-05, revision B. local government for approval, whichever occurs first 16. (a) The existing bus stops in the pair, ‘Beattie Rd near Ford Rd, Prior to the Coomera’ (TransLink ID: 101388, Hastus ID: 300753 and commencement of TransLink ID: 101389, Hastus ID: 300754) adjacent to the site use or prior to in Beattie Road must be relocated and upgraded to an submitting the Plan Intermediate stop standard generally in accordance with the of Survey to the Beattie Road Functional Layout, prepared by Cardno Limited, local government for dated 14.08.2018, drawing number WE16028-CI-030 and approval or prior to revision 1 as amended in red to upgrade the Bus stop to an obtaining intermediate stop as per the Public Transport Infrastructure development Manual 2015. approval or (b) Each relocated and upgraded bus stop must be in accordance operational work, with the Department of Transport and Main Roads TransLink whichever occurs Public Transport Infrastructure Manual 2015, the Transport first Operations (Road Use Management – Road Rules) Regulation 2009, in particular stopping at intersections, and the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002 made under subsection 31(1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1993. (c) A disability compliant, pedestrian access across Beattie Road and footpaths in Beattie Road connecting to each bus stop must be provided generally in accordance with the Inset on the Beattie Road Functional Layout, prepared by Cardno Limited, dated 14.08.2018, drawing number WE16028-CI-030 and revision 1 as amended in red to upgrade the Bus stop to

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 6 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 171 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

an intermediate stop as per the Public Transport Infrastructure Manual 2015. 17. The roadworks to Beattie Road shown on the Beattie Road Prior to the Functional Layout, prepared by Cardno, dated 14 October 2018, commencement of drawing number WE16028-CI-030, revision 1 as amended in red use or prior to to upgrade the Bus stop to an intermediate stop as per the Public submitting the Plan Transport Infrastructure Manual 2015, must be designed and of Survey to the constructed to be in accordance with the following to local government for accommodate a single unit rigid bus of 12.5m in length: approval or prior to  Department of Transport and Main Roads Road Planning obtaining and Design Manual, 2nd Edition, Volume 3 – Guide to development Road Design (March 2016); approval or operational work,  Department of Transport and Main Roads Supplement to whichever occurs Austroads Guide to Road Design (Parts 3, 4-4C and 6); first  Austroads Guide to Road Design (Parts 3, 4-4C and 6); and  Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Part 13 Local Area Traffic Management (March 2018).

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 7 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 172 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 2—Reasons for decision to impose conditions

The reasons for this decision are:  To ensure the development is carried out in the location and to the extent specified on the approved plans of development.  To ensure the marine plant restoration is undertaken with the submitted habitat restoration plan.  To facilitate the monitoring of the development works for compliance purposes.  To ensure the disturbance of acid sulfate soil is managed to prevent impacts on fisheries resources and fish habitats.  To facilitate the monitoring of the development works for compliance purposes.  To ensure the development is carried out in the location and to the extent specified on the approved plans of development.  To ensure the design of the fish way provides for adequate fish movement.  To ensure the design of the fish way adequately caters for the whole fish community taking into account species and biomass variations.  To ensure the development does not increase the risk of mortality, disease or injury, or compromise the health and productivity in fish.  To ensure future noise sensitive uses are adequately set back from Gold Coast heavy rail line.  To ensure the development and its construction does not cause adverse structural impacts on state-transport infrastructure.  To ensure that the impacts of stormwater events associated with development are minimised and managed to avoid creating any adverse impacts on the state transport corridor.  To ensure the development provides for adequate public passenger transport routes.  To provide, as far as practicable, public passenger transport infrastructure to support public passenger services.  To provide, as far as practicable, public passenger transport infrastructure to support public passenger services.

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 8 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 173 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 3—Advice to the applicant

General advice

Ref. Public passenger transport

1. Urban bus stops – construction The existing bus stops, ‘Beattie Rd near Ford Rd, Coomera’ (TransLink ID: 101388, Hastus ID: 300753 and TransLink ID: 101389, Hastus ID: 300754), will be impacted on by the development. These bus stops must be able to function and pedestrian access to these facilities must be maintained during the construction of the development. Accordingly, if any temporary bus stop and pedestrian access arrangements are required, the applicant must reach agreement on suitable arrangements with the Department of Transport and Main Roads’ TransLink Division (bus_stops@translink.com.au or on 3851 8700) prior to any construction or works commencing.

2. Urban bus stops – design and relocation Please contact the Department of Transport and Main Roads’ TransLink Division regarding the detailed design and specifications for the upgrade and relocation of the existing bus stops, ‘Beattie Rd near Ford Rd, Coomera’ (TransLink ID: 101388, Hastus ID: 300753 and TransLink ID: 101389, Hastus ID: 300754) prior to any works occurring on [email protected] or on 3851 8700.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads’ TransLink Public Transport Infrastructure Manual 2015 and Bus Network Infrastructure Signage Manual are available at: http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/business-industry/Technical-standards-publications/Public-transport- infrastructure-manuals.aspx.

3. Bus routes Traffic calming devices should not be incorporated into the design and construction of existing bus routes in accordance with Chapter 2 - Planning and Design, Section 2.3.2 Bus Route Infrastructure (page 6) of the Department of Transport and Main Roads Public Transport Infrastructure Manual, 2015.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads’ TransLink Public Transport Infrastructure Manual 2015 is available at: http://translink.com.au/about-translink/reports-and-publications.

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 9 of 9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 174 GE78-N Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment 4 (1 of 2)

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Statement of reasons for application 1804-4899 SRA (Given under section 56 of the Planning Act 2016) - Referral agency

Departmental role: Referral agency

Applicant details

Applicant name: Citimark Properties c/- Utopia Urban Planning Applicant contact details: PO Box 35 Chirn Park QLD 4215 [email protected]

Location details

Street address: 78 Beattie Road, Coomera QLD 4209 Real property description: Lot 50 on SP214550 Local government area: Gold Coast City Council

Development details and assessment matters

Nature of Level of Development Applicable State Development approval assessment description Assessment Provisions version 2.2 (SDAP) Variation Impact Preliminary State code 11: Removal, destruction or Request Assessment Approval to vary damage of marine plants (State code 11) the effect of the local planning State code 18: Construction or raising instrument waterway barrier work in fish habitats (State code 18)

State code 6: Protection of state transport networks (State code 6)

State code 2: Development in a railway environment (State code 2)

State code 8: Coastal development and tidal works (State code 8)

Planning and Development Services (SEQ South) PO Box 3290 Page 1 of 2 Australia Fair QLD 4215 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 175 1804-4899 SRA Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

State code 7: Maritime Safety (State code 7)

Reasons for the Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning response The reasons for the response are:  The proposed development complies with all applicable performance outcomes of the SDAP, State code 11, 18, 6, 2, 8 and 7.  The proposed development will be constructed in accordance with the approved plans, which have been designed by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland.  The proposed development will not impact the railway corridor.  The proposed development will upgrade existing public passenger transport facilities.  The proposed development will rehabilitate marine plants on site to a greater extent than the existing area of marine plants on site.  Fish passage will not be impacted by the proposed development.  The proposed development will not impact upon coastal processes.

Response:

Nature of approval Nature of response Date of response Variation Request Preliminary approval only (with conditions) 5 April 2019

Relevant material  Planning Act 2016  Planning Regulation 2017  Development Assessment Rules, 1.1  SDAP, version 2.2  common material.

Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning Page 2 of 2 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 176 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT Our ref 215/150/42 Attachment 5 (1 of 2) Council ref MCU201800383 Enquiries Jason Smith

24 April 2018

Chief Executive Officer City of the Gold Coast PO Box 5042 Gold Coast Mail Centre OLD 9729

Via email: [email protected] Attention Hoagy Moscrop-Allison

Dear Sir/Madam

REFERRAL AGENCY RESPONSE - PRELIMINARY APPROVAL - NO REQUIREMENTS - GOLD COAST WATERWAYS AUTHORITY (Given under s56 of the Planning Act 2016)

The referral agency material for the development application described below was properly referred to the Gold Coast Waterways Authority (GCWA) under the Planning Act 2016 (the Act) on 17 April 2018.

Applicant details Applicant name: Citimark Properties Pty Ltd Applicant contact details: Citimark Properties Pty Ltd Cl- Place Design Group PO BOX 1027 SOUTHPORT OLD 4215

Location details Street address: 78 Beattie Road, Coomera Real property description: Lot 50 on SP214550 Local government area: Gold Coast City Council

Application details Proposed development: Preliminary Approval for a Variation Request which seeks to vary the effect of the local planning instrument as it relates to making a Material Change of Use, a Reconfiguring a Lot and carrying out Operational Works

40 44 ,Pawor d ::Irve � , Be f. Q 421 >() Box ·o Soul r. t (,I 4 1 P: 07 55 �9 715 I gcwa.qld.gov.au I E: 'T' Queensland ABN: 1 675 2 l 044 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 177 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Our ref 215/150/42 Council ref MCU201800383 Enquiries Jason Smith

Referral triggers The development application was referred to GCWA under the following provisions of the Planning Regulation 2017: Referral trigger Assessable development under s 28 in Gold Coast waters - Schedule 10, Part 17, Division 3, Table 3, item 1 - Tidal works and works in a coastal management district

No requirements Under section 56(1 )(a) of the Act, GCWA advises it has no requirements relating to the application.

This response has been electronically sent to assessment manager and the applicant.

If you wish to discuss this matter, please contact Mr Jason Smith on 55 397 301.

Yours sincerely

Hal Morris Chief Executive Officer

C/c Citimark Properties Pty Ltd Cl- Place Design Group Ms Lauren Schmidt [email protected] 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 178 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

ITEM 3 CITY PLANNING INTRODUCTORY PAPER – REVIEW OF THE OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION LEVY LAND ACQUISITION POLICY CE196/696/01/06

1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY

Not Applicable.

2 PURPOSE OF REPORT

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the review of the Open Space Preservation Levy (OSPL) Land Acquisition Policy, proposed to commence in alignment with corporate governance best practice. The review will ensure the policy is reflective of current terminology, strategies, plans and mapping methodology.

The draft revised Policy will then be presented for consideration at a future Economy, Planning and Environment Committee. To ensure the revised Policy accurately reflects the City’s priorities, a Councillor workshop will be offered prior to finalising the drafting process.

3 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS

Ex Minute No SC09.0908.001

“1 That Council adopt the draft Open Space Preservation Levy (OSPL) Land Acquisition Policy Phase 3 to guide future acquisitions under the OSPL Land Acquisition Program.

2 That Council note that the Open Space Preservation Levy (OSPL) Land Acquisition Policy Phase 3 will be implemented in accordance with the Project Management Plan endorsed by the Corporate Governance Committee at its meeting of 2 September 2009 with progress of implementation being reported quarterly in the Corporate Performance Report.”

Ex Minute No GB12.0622.0003

“...7 That the Open Space Preservation Levy Land Acquisition Program of $5,092,200 be deleted together with the proposed $5,000,000 loan to fund this program.

8 That the Open Space Preservation Levy Land Acquisition Program be paused, until otherwise determined by Council.”

4 DISCUSSION

The Open Space Preservation Levy (OSPL) Land Acquisition Program aims to acquire sites of the highest significance for nature conservation, particularly where other strategies are unable to achieve the required level of protection, or where there is significant public benefit in protecting such sites through public ownership. This program has protected and made publically accessible over 4300 hectares of highly significant natural asset areas.

The OSPL Land Acquisition Policy Phase 3 was endorsed by Council in September 2009. Following Council's endorsement of the Policy, officers invited Councillors, community representatives and Council officers to nominate sites to be assessed for potential acquisition under Phase 3 of the program. A Priority Acquisition List was presented to Council in 2010 and successful acquisitions included sites such as Rowe Lane in Cedar Creek, Tee Trees Boulevard in Arundel and the joint acquisition of Bally Mountain and Rosegum sites with the Australian Government. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 179 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 3 (Continued) INTRODUCTORY PAPER – REVIEW OF THE OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION LEVY LAND ACQUISITION POLICY CE196/696/01/06

In 2012, Council placed the OSPL Land Acquisition Program on pause and removed its operational budget (GB12.0622.0003). Nominations of sites have continued to be received intermittently from Councillors, officers and the community. On receipt of these ad hoc requests, officer’s generally complete a preliminary assessment of nominated sites to report back to individuals, and note these nominations for future reference should budget become available.

In response to Corporate Governance and Policy requirements the OSPL Land Acquisition Policy Phase 3 was scheduled for a five year review in September 2014 and subsequently extended to September 2015. The policy remained on hold pending endorsement of the Our Natural City (ONC) Strategy and the outcomes of the Securing Koala Habitat in East Coomera project, including the introduction of the Koala Habitat Acquisition and Enhancement Separate Charge in 2018.

Therefore, with these key strategy and planning initiatives finalised, a review of the Land Acquisition Policy is proposed to support ONC Strategy delivery; accurately reflect updated City priorities; and align with current terminology and methodologies including: • Open Space Maintenance and Enhancement Separate Charge • City Plan • Our Natural City Strategy • Up to date environmental mapping such as vegetation and critical corridors • Other relevant tools and methods.

As part of this Policy review, stakeholder consultation workshops are proposed across Directorates and with Councillors to ensure priorities are adequately reflected.

It is anticipated the revised Policy will set out a decision framework for site assessment, which will be applied following adoption of the Policy. This framework can draw upon well- established conservation planning and decision support tools that are used by all levels of government in Australia and internationally to help guide the acquisition of high value conservation lands to maximise return on investment and achieve value for money. The revised Policy will provide the basis for assessing potential acquisition sites. Joint property acquisition, revolving funds and excision options will also be retained within the Policy to ensure flexibility in protection options.

This report requests that Council note the Policy review has commenced.

5 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION

Name and/or Title of the Directorate or Is the Stakeholder Satisfied Stakeholder Consulted Organisation With Content of Report and Recommendations (Yes/No) Amanda Tzannes - Manager, Economy, Planning and Yes City Planning Environment Mark Ash – Manager, City Transport and Yes Assets Infrastructure Ron Jacobs - Manager, Parks Lifestyle and Community Yes & Recreational Services Kathy Baker - Manager, Water and Waste Yes Service Sustainability 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 180 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 3 (Continued) INTRODUCTORY PAPER – REVIEW OF THE OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION LEVY LAND ACQUISITION POLICY CE196/696/01/06

6 RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that Council resolves as follows:

That Council note the commencement of a review of the Open Space Preservation Levy Land Acquisition Policy – Phase 3, to align with current policies, strategies and priorities.

Author: Authorised by: Nina Bishop Alisha Swain Senior Environmental Planner Director Economy, Planning and Environment May 2019 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 181 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 3 (Continued) INTRODUCTORY PAPER – REVIEW OF THE OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION LEVY LAND ACQUISITION POLICY CE196/696/01/06

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION EPE19.0605.002 moved Cr Owen-Jones seconded Cr Caldwell

That Council note the commencement of a review of the Open Space Preservation Levy Land Acquisition Policy – Phase 3, to align with current policies, strategies and priorities.

CARRIED 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 182 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 4 QUARTERLY APPEALS REPORT RECEIVED JANUARY 2019 - MARCH 2019 CM787/790/01/01/04 CONFIDENTIAL

CLOSED SESSION LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2009 AND SUPPORTING REGULATIONS

PROCEDURAL MOTION moved Cr Caldwell seconded Cr Tozer

That the Committee move into Closed Session pursuant to Section 275(1) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the consideration of the following items for the reason shown:-

Item Subject Reason

4 Quarterly Appeals Report – 1 January 2019 to 31 March 2019 Legal Matter

CARRIED

PROCEDURAL MOTION moved Cr Tozer seconded Cr O’Neill

That the Committee move into Open Session.

CARRIED

Following resumption into open session, Items 4 and 5 were moved and carried as shown on the following pages. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 183 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 4 (Continued) QUARTERLY APPEALS REPORT RECEIVED JANUARY 2019 - MARCH 2019 CM787/790/01/01/04 CONFIDENTIAL

REDACTED – Report – pages 183 to 195 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 196 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 4 (Continued) QUARTERLY APPEALS REPORT RECEIVED JANUARY 2019 - MARCH 2019 CM787/790/01/01/04 REPORT CONFIDENTIAL

Committee Recommendation Adopted At Council 13 June 2019

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION EPE19.0605.003 moved Cr Tozer seconded Cr Taylor

2 That Council note the Quarterly Appeals Report for the months of January 2019 – March 2019. CARRIED

Cr Owen-Jones and Cr Gates returned to the room.

ADOPTED AT COUNCIL 13 June 2019 RESOLUTION G19.0613.044 moved Cr Caldwell seconded Cr Tozer That Committee Recommendation EPE19.0605.003 be adopted as printed which reads as follows:-

1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009. 2 That Council note the Quarterly Appeals Report for the months of January 2019 – March 2019. CARRIED

Cr PJ Young voted in the positive Cr Owen-Jones and Cr Gates returned to the room

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 197 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 CITY PLANNING OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

Refer 93 page attachment

Attachment A: Fact Sheet; FAQs and plan of investigation area opportunities and challenges Attachment B: Community engagement and marketing report (Oxenford Investigation Area) Attachment C: Oxenford Investigation Area community meetings report (Articulous, November 2018) Attachment D: Proposed Planning Priorities for Oxenford Investigation Area Major Update Scope

1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY

1.1 I recommend that this report be considered in Closed Session pursuant to section 275 (1) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the reason that the matter involves

(g) any action to be taken by the local government under the Planning Act, including deciding applications made to it under that Act; or (h) other business for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government or someone else, or enable a person to gain a financial advantage.

1.2 I recommend that the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Oxenford Investigation Area is located along Michigan Road and Tamborine-Oxenford Road and includes 205 properties in the Rural residential zone.

In November 2017, a land use and infrastructure planning investigation for the Oxenford Investigation Area was reported to Council. Preliminary recommendations were provided for a long-term opportunity to accommodate approximately 1,447 dwellings within the investigation area, comprising a mix of low density (i.e. detached dwelling) and low-medium density housing (RD2 up to 1 dwelling per 300sqm of net ha). Recommendations were also provided for a new Mixed use zone – Fringe business precinct along Old Pacific Highway in the eastern part of the investigation area, reflecting recently approved commercial development.

The land use and infrastructure planning investigation concluded that the feasibility of servicing the area with trunk infrastructure is dependent on identified growth opportunities being realised. To realise the identified growth opportunities, sites need to be assembled for development, which requires support from property owners. If only a small number of sites were developed in the short term (e.g. due to lack of property owner support), there is a financial risk if Council invests in infrastructure too early. This can also lead to operational issues for networks, particularly sewerage.

Towards the end of 2018, community engagement was carried out on the land use and infrastructure planning study for the Oxenford Investigation Area. This consultation has assisted with making a decision on the priorities for further strategic planning within the investigation area. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 198 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

The first stage of community engagement involved informing the community (targeting property owners and community groups) of the identified potential development opportunities and gaining initial feedback to inform further consultation. This included letters to property owners and community groups with information, a dedicated GC Have Your Say webpage, facilitated community meetings and informal community ‘drop in sessions’.

The second stage of consultation included writing to property owners to complete a survey, which was also open to the wider community through GC Have Your Say. Responses to the survey were received from owners representing 142 of the 205 residential properties (70%). In addition, 56 responses were received from outside of the investigation area and 4 responses from residents renting in the investigation area

There was strong opposition to growth opportunities from non-owners. This may be due to the fact that the majority of the respondents residing outside the investigation area did not participate/engage prior to completing the survey. This opposition emphasises the need to ensure impacts from development of the Oxenford Investigation Area on the wider community are adequately considered in future planning for the area. This will require a wider community consultation, pending a Council decision to prepare a major update for the Oxenford Investigation Area.

In contrast, the survey responses received from the property owners indicated strong support for further investigation of growth opportunities within 5-15 years (56%) and within 15-25 years (8%). 32% of the responses did not support any changes in the area (or only after 25 years) and 4 per cent were undecided. Spatial analysis of the survey responses received from the property owners has identified parts of the investigation area where there is strong support for development (within 5-15 years), well located to local shopping and in a close proximity to existing sewerage infrastructure.

Having regard to the endorsed evaluation methodology, cost efficiency of intensifying development, its positive contribution to the City’s dwelling targets and support from the property owners, it is recommended that Council pursue development of a planning scheme amendment to support urban intensification of the Oxenford Investigation Area.

However, prior to commencing the statutory plan making process, it is proposed that the City will undertake a holistic local planning exercise to ensure an integrated and coordinated approach to the long-term planning of this locality can be achieved. Based on the key findings of the 2017 investigation and the recent community consultation, Attachment D has identified:

 where the short term growth opportunities (5-15 years) exist that will require the preparation of a more detailed precinct plan; and  where the future strategic opportunity areas (post 2031) exist that will require the preparation of a conceptual plan.

It is expected that the realisation of the growth opportunities within the Oxenford Investigation Area will take many years and will be influenced by infrastructure planning. Development opportunities will need to be staged in precincts to align with infrastructure planning, particularly for the sewerage network. Consequently, it is recommended that this local planning exercise will also:

 undertake further infrastructure planning to determine the extent of short term (5-15 years) growth areas due to proximity of existing sewerage infrastructure and/or difficult typography to service some areas; and  undertake more detailed servicing/infrastructure planning (roads and stormwater); and 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 199 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

 identify the extent of environmental values to ensure that adequate protection is achieved.

It is recommended to write to survey respondents, property owners within the investigation area and the wider Oxenford community to notify them of Council’s resolutions on the community consultation outcomes and process to review City Plan. Given that it is recommended to proceed to develop a planning scheme amendment for this investigation area, it is further recommended that should Council resolve to proceed with the proposed recommendations, City officers arrange a debriefing session with the community to directly communicate what this decision means for them and what are the next steps involved.

3 PURPOSE OF REPORT

The purpose of this report is to present the findings of community consultation on potential future low-medium density residential development opportunities for the Oxenford Investigation Area and provide recommendations to inform further strategic planning within this locality.

4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS

On 23 August 2016, Council resolved (CP16.0817.006 / G16.0823.018):

‘That further investigation into urban development opportunities and infrastructure costing for Mudgeeraba North, Parkwood and Oxenford investigation areas is carried out in the 2016-17 financial year’

On 3 March 2017, Council noted (CP17.0301.007 / G17.0303.014) a project update report on the Mudgeeraba North, Parkwood and Oxenford investigation areas.

On 28 November 2017, Council resolved (CP17.1122.010 / G17.1128.013) to prepare a property owner engagement strategy for the investigation areas:

1. That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009. 2. That the contents of this report and attachments be noted. 3. That a property owner engagement strategy, to assist decision making on whether to pursue development of City Plan updates for urban development opportunities in each area, is prepared in consultation with relevant local councillors and reported to Council. 4. That the order of priority for future strategic planning and property owner engagement is as identified in the report. 5. That the preliminary recommendations for each area are used to inform future strategic planning and property owner engagement.

On 28 August 2018, Council endorsed a community engagement strategy (EPE18.0822.009 / G18.0828.020) for the investigation areas:

1. That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009. 2. That the community engagement strategy phases and evaluation measures, provided in Attachment C, are endorsed. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 200 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

3. That the ‘Investigation Areas Program – Project Update 2’ report and attachments to the Economy, Planning and Environment Committee on 22 November 2017 be deemed non-confidential.

5 DISCUSSION

5.1 Project background

In November 2013, investigation areas were first identified in a draft State interest review version of City Plan. At this time, the South East Queensland Regional Plan (SEQRP) was under review and investigation areas were identified to assist with accommodating State Government projected population growth. In February 2016, City Plan commenced and identified 17 investigation areas on Strategic framework map 1 – Designated Urban Area.

The Investigation Areas Program assists the City to effectively analyse and plan for new housing supply opportunities. The program seeks to deliver long-term strategic planning, which is necessary to ensure:

 development opportunities are preserved;  there is efficient planning of infrastructure to support future urban development;  the implications of additional population growth are considered when planning for infrastructure upgrades around the identified investigation areas; and  on-site constraints are managed.

Two investigation areas (Eggersdorf Road, Ormeau and Courtney Drive, Upper Coomera) that could facilitate approximately 1,000 new dwellings are currently being progressed through various City Plan Major update amendment packages. To ensure that the identified growth could be realised, land use and infrastructure planning for new housing in these areas was undertaken in consultation with the community following strong property owner interest.

In 2016, the Oxenford Investigation Area was identified as a high priority for investigation, subject to further feasibility assessment to determine potential urban development opportunities. The Oxenford Investigation Area study boundary (Figure 1) includes 205 properties in the Rural residential zone. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 201 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

Figure 1: Map of Oxenford investigation area

Prior property research identified a high proportion of owner-occupier homes (81 per cent) in the investigation area, compared to the Oxenford average of 69.2 per cent. The average length of ownership in this investigation area is 15 years, which is twice as long as the City average of 7-8 years.

In November 2017, the key findings and preliminary recommendations from the Oxenford Investigation Area study were reported to Council. The preliminary recommendations identified an ultimate long-term opportunity for the investigation area to accommodate approximately 1,447 dwellings, comprising a mix of low density (i.e. detached dwelling) and low-medium density (RD2 up to 1 dwelling per 300sqm of net ha) housing.

In consultation with the City’s infrastructure network representatives, the report identified that future urban development of the investigation area would require a large investment to upgrade infrastructure for roads, sewerage, stormwater and open space. Areas were also identified which would be more difficult to service with sewerage due to topography, leading to the need for new sewerage pump stations and rising mains. It is important to note that this investigation identified a need to undertake further infrastructure planning if planning for future urban development opportunities was to be further pursued.

The report concluded that the feasibility of servicing the area with trunk infrastructure is dependent on identified growth opportunities being realised. To realise growth opportunities sites need to be assembled for development, which requires support from property owners. If only a small number of sites were developed in the short term (e.g. due to lack of property owner support), there is a financial risk for Council to outlay costs for trunk infrastructure earlier than required.

The community consultation on identified potential growth opportunities seeks to assist Council with making a decision on how to prioritise further planning within the investigation area, to mitigate the financial risk to Council for infrastructure delivery. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 202 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

An overview of the planning process as it relates to the Oxenford Investigation Area is provided in Figure 2.

Identification of Investigation Areas in draft City Plan - November 2013

Prioritisation of Investigation Areas - 2016

Opportunities and Constraints Analysis, Preliminary Concept Plan and Developer Feasibility Assessment - 2016-2017

Infrastructure Needs and Costs Assessment (Stormwater, Water and Wastewater, Recreation Open Space) Preliminary Structure Plan - 2017 Completed phases

Community engagement - 2018

Current phase Council Check Point - Report on community engagement outcomes / endorse next steps

Proposed next steps (refer report section 5.5)  Inform and debrief community of consultation outcomes.  Consult with State Government on State interests (including infrastructure planning) and discuss process for preparing a City Plan major update.  Undertake a local land use and infrastructure planning exercise involving the community to assist preparing draft City Plan policy setting (Detailed Precinct Plan) for community consultation.  Carry out statutory process for making a major update to City Plan with possible tailored process (concurrent State interest review; and Minister’s approval to proceed to adoption; and public consultation)

Figure 2: Investigation area program overview (Oxenford)

5.2 Community engagement overview

Community engagement on the investigation area studies is important to ensure strategic land use planning is carried out in a transparent manner, involving the community. This aligns with recent State Government directions on plan making (i.e. Queensland Government Community Engagement Toolkit for Planning, August 2017).

As prefaced in the Community Engagement Toolkit for Planning, local communities benefit the most from good planning. Queensland’s planning system encourages effective and genuine community engagement so that local communities can participate in the plan making process. It does this while supporting efficient and consistent decision making that instils community confidence and investment.

Having regard to the cost efficiencies of intensifying development, in August 2018 a community engagement strategy was endorsed for the Oxenford Investigation Area (EPE18.0822.009 / G18.0828.020). A key purpose of this strategy was to involve the local community in the plan making process and assist Council with making a decision on how to prioritise further planning within this investigation area. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 203 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

The community engagement included the following activities:

 Briefing the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) and the Department of State Development Manufacturing Infrastructure and Planning (DSDMIP).  Writing to property owners and local community groups to inform them of the consultation and engagement activities.  Creating a dedicated GC Have Your Say webpage, with a forum for questions and answers and information (e.g. fact sheet, timelines and investigation area technical studies).  Facilitating property owner meetings (day and evening options) which provided a forum for discussion and generated feedback using live polling technology.  Following up the property owner meetings with three ‘drop-in’ sessions open to property owners and the wider community.  Inviting the community and property owners to participate in a survey via the GC Have Your Say webpage. This included writing to property owners with the option to complete a paper survey. Property owners were also provided with a copy of FAQs and a simplified plan of investigation area opportunities and challenges (Attachment A).  Reminder letters were sent to property owners who did not respond by the initial due date, giving an extension to 25 January 2019 and a second extension to 31 March 2019.

5.3 Property owner meetings and drop-in sessions

Property owners were invited to attend one of two meetings at the Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre, with the breakdown of those who attended as follows:

Community Participants* Number of lots % of lots in the meeting represented investigation area 6pm 15 October 61 37 9am 17 October 39 29 Total 100* 62* 31% (*) Some participants at the 15 October community meeting chose to attend the 17 October meeting as well. They were asked to refrain from the live polling activities, but were asked to participate in the Q&A.

These meetings gauged initial community sentiment towards the potential transition to urban development and sought to identify participants’ aspirations for the future of the area and their appetite for change. Information was given about Council’s obligations to plan for the future of the area, the technical investigations undertaken to date, and the timing and nature of planning for redevelopment, should the Council decide to proceed in that direction.

This approach allowed participants to be as informed as possible prior to completing a survey on GC Have Your Say. The planning and facilitation of these meetings was assisted by expert community engagement consultants Articulous (refer to full meeting report in Attachment B).

A feature of the meetings was the use of live polling, which allowed the collection of questions and feedback in real time. Participants could see how their views, opinions and aspirations align with (or differ to) their neighbours. Below are two examples of the questions asked and the responses received (refer Figure 3 and 4). The information provided in these figures are the combined results from both community meetings and it is important to note that responding to the questions were not mandatory and some participants did not respond to some of the questions. A further limitation to this data was that more than one property owner could have provided a response to these questions. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 204 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

Number of responses

Figure 3: Responses to the question ‘How long do you want to live in the area?’

Number of responses

Figure 4: Responses to the question ‘How supportive would you be of redevelopment in your area?

After the community meetings, to gain further insight around community sentiment towards the potential transition to urban development, the following information was uploaded to the GC Have Your Say webpage and posted to property owners:

 presentation provided at community meetings, including polling results (refer Attachment B);  more detailed responses to Frequently Asked Questions prepared following community meetings, phone conversations and via gchaveyoursay.com.au (refer Attachment C); and  a simplified plan of the Oxenford investigation area, with discussion on opportunities and challenges (refer Attachment C). 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 205 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

The wider community (including property owners) were also invited to attend drop-in session events, also held at the Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre. The three events were attended by 16 members of the local Oxenford community.

5.4 Evaluation of GC Have Your Say survey responses

A total of 202 unique survey responses were recorded for the Oxenford investigation survey (refer full report at Attachment B). There were 142 properties within the Oxenford investigation area which were represented by a survey response. Only one response from each property was counted, but multiple responses per property were combined together to make sure all views are captured.

The responses from property owners to two key survey questions have influenced the recommendation on the directions for further strategic planning of the investigation area.

Charts showing response to survey questions on potential growth opportunities

43% 14% 5% 6% 32%

7% 2% 3% 15% 73%

Figure 5: Response to question ‘Some areas of the Gold Coast have large lot residential properties (e.g. 1,000sqm or greater) which are well located to existing services (e.g. schools, parks, centres and employment).

What is your level of support for increased housing (2-3 storeys) and subdivision of these large lot residential properties across the Gold Coast as a way to plan for long- term sustainable growth?’ 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 206 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

56% 8% 6% 26% 4%

12% 3% 12% 71% 2%

Figure 6: Response to question ‘The investigation areas present potential long-term opportunities that may take up to 25 years to be realised.

Thinking about the future of properties within the Oxenford Investigation Area, are you supportive of this area accommodating increased housing (2-3 storeys) and subdivision?’

As demonstrated in Table 1, compared to the live polling results from the property owner meetings, the GC Have Your Say survey responses received from property owners indicate a more positive sentiment with regard to redevelopment and increased housing in shorter term (refer Table 1).

Table 1: Comparison of property owner community meeting and survey responses

GC Have Your Say survey Property owner meeting (live polling) (property owners) Supportive to some degree of 45% Within 5-15 years 56% redevelopment Within 15-25 years 8% Not supportive at all or have 27% Do not support any change 32% reservations (or only after 25 years)

In summary, the GC Have Your Say survey responses from the property owners indicated strong support for further investigation of growth opportunities within 5-15 years (56%) and within 15-25 years (8%). 32% of the responses did not support any changes in the area (or only after 25 years) and 4% were undecided.

Responses from both property owners and non-property owners were of value in evaluation of the community consultation. However, the property owner responses have been used to assist with making a decision on the priorities for further strategic planning within the investigation area. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 207 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

In contrast to the strong property owner support, there was strong opposition from non- owners. This may be due to the fact that the majority of the respondents residing outside the Investigation Area did not participate/engage prior to completing the survey. The opposition received from people outside of the investigation area emphasises the need to ensure impacts from development of the Oxenford Investigation Area on the wider community are adequately considered in future planning. This will require a wider community consultation, pending a Council decision to prepare a major update for the Oxenford Investigation Area.

The length of time that respondents had owned the property in the investigation area was compared with the timeframe in which they supported change (Figure 7). Changes within 5- 15 years were supported by 63.5% of properties owned for 0-10 years compared with 48.5% of properties owned more than 10 years.

Figure 7: Chart showing how support for change relates to the length of time that respondents had owned the property in the investigation area.

A number of respondents justified their support or opposition to the proposed changes in the open-ended survey question. A summary of the open ended responses is provided in Attachment B.

As part of the endorsed community engagement strategy, an evaluation criteria (Table 2) was developed to assist with making recommendations on the direction for future strategic planning of the investigation area. After plotting the survey responses within the endorsed evaluation precincts, it is evident there is strong support in some evaluation precincts within the investigation area for realising development opportunities in the short term (within 5-15 years). 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 208 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

Table 2: Evaluation criteria and response approach

Response Criteria Council’s response to this approach Category Strong At least 50 per cent of Strong support positively influences Council support responses for properties within planning opportunities to rezone a precinct for an evaluation precinct are urban development. supportive of a change for urban development as soon Such areas would be subject to further as possible. consideration of the cost and timeframe for providing suitable urban infrastructure and will Timing: 5-15 years require additional precinct planning with (subject to infrastructure). property owners to provide a more detailed planning response. This will be explored through Phase 2 of the proposed community engagement strategy. Longer At least 50 per cent of This response provides Council an term responses for properties within opportunity to pursue longer term support an evaluation precinct are infrastructure planning and ‘future urban’ supportive of future urban development opportunities. This outcome development at some time. may include a higher level of strategic planning which may not result in a change to Timing: either 5-15 years or an urban zone, instead resulting in review of 15-25 years (subject to the City Plan strategic framework and infrastructure). planning for longer term delivery of infrastructure. Negative At least 50 per cent of A negative response may lead to Council response responses for properties within abandoning further planning investigation for an evaluation precinct are urban development opportunities and unsupportive of a change for potentially reinvestigating in 10-15 years. urban development within 25 years. Undecided Undecided response These responses may be discounted or further consultation may occur to determine a response.

5.5 Proposed next steps – City Plan Major update scope

5.5.1 Early infrastructure planning considerations

The Oxenford Investigation Area study identified the opportunity for accommodating approximately 1,447 dwellings in the investigation area. Based on the infrastructure planning studies as part of the investigation, including consultation with the Council’s infrastructure network representatives, the cost to service the investigation area with trunk infrastructure was deemed acceptable, subject to recovery of infrastructure charges from development of the area.

The following major infrastructure upgrades were identified as critical to facilitate increased housing in the investigation area: 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 209 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

 Conversion of Rural Access Streets to Residential Access or Minor Residential Collector standards (including road pavement design, road width and stormwater). Council would be expected to deliver this non-trunk infrastructure to facilitate development.  Supply of trunk sewerage infrastructure including two new sewerage pump stations with rising mains and other associated sewerage infrastructure upgrades (mainly for development in the western part of the investigation area shown in Attachment A).  Expansion of stormwater detention basin areas (existing lakes) to avoid further downstream flooding and avoid impacts on water quality.  Possible trunk road upgrade of Riversdale Road to a Major Collector within the investigation area (or part of the road).  Trunk road upgrades to several road intersections.  Improvements to existing recreation open space areas within the investigation area.

Together with the consultation outcomes, infrastructure planning matters are an important consideration in defining the scope for the major update. In particular, the feasibility of a developer to deliver trunk sewerage infrastructure is a key consideration in staging the investigation area for future urban development.

5.5.2 Local planning exercise

A spatial analysis of the survey responses overlayed with the evaluation precincts reveals strong support (at least 50%) in every precinct for urban development within 5 – 15 years. To assist with infrastructure planning implications on the wider area and assist with identifying short term opportunities (5-15 years) and future strategic opportunity post 2031, a second evaluation gate (Attachment D) was developed with the following criteria:

 ease of servicing the area with sewerage infrastructure;  proximity to existing local shopping and/or community facilities;  limited environmental constraints (slope, flooding, significant vegetation); and  access to public transport.

Attachment D identifies areas where it is proposed that the local planning exercise will require that preparation of a Detailed Precinct Plan or a Concept Plan. The extent of development opportunities and timeframes for development will be influenced by the ability to service the area with sewerage and environmental constraints (e.g. slope, flooding, significant vegetation). The timeframe for development within the Concept Plan will be influenced by the rate of growth in Detailed Precinct Plan areas.

A local planning exercise prior to the commencement of the statutory plan making process for a planning scheme amendment is recommended to:  deliver a detailed precinct plan for short term development areas with consideration of a higher level strategic planning approach for longer term growth areas;  assist planning for a more accurate dwelling yield to support Council infrastructure investment (and mitigate Council’s financial risk).  ensure an acceptable urban design outcome is achieved, which seeks to ensure development suitably interfaces with other rural residential properties in the investigation area whilst achieving addressing environmental constraints.

The local planning exercise will holistically address land use, environmental constraints, urban design and infrastructure planning and sequencing issues and comprise the following key elements: 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 210 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

 A site analysis to identify important local features and significant dwellings (i.e. those unlikely to be removed with development of the area). This includes environmental assessment within areas identified for investigation of short term housing opportunities, which will also consider environmental linkages to the surrounding areas.  Outcomes for built form, density, lot sizes and how to interface with open space and rural residential areas (including updated planning assumptions for number of residential dwellings). This will build upon the recommendations within the land use and infrastructure planning investigation.  Infrastructure planning: o movement network (trunk roads, local roads, pedestrians and public transport) – . new footpaths; . bus stops / shelters; . existing local access roads (consider aligning road works with Council’s asset management maintenance schedule); . trunk road network considerations including the timeframe for intersection upgrades and consideration for the need to upgrade to Riversdale Road to a Major Collector (considering alternative options to alleviate/minimise widening of the road); and . new local access roads. o sewerage and stormwater networks . Investigate a more adaptable and integrated water services plan and strategy for sewerage, to facilitate delivery of short term development opportunities and plan for longer term growth areas. This will assist with recommendations for development and infrastructure staging of various sub-precincts. . Investigate an innovative water sensitive approach to stormwater management. This will investigate opportunity to reduce quantity of stormwater from development and co-location of infrastructure networks to reduce long-term infrastructure costs. o recreational open space - network strategy to determine required details and timing of embellishments to the recreation open space network in Oxenford. This will also consider implications of population growth on district / citywide open space.  Investigation of commercial opportunities for land adjacent Old Pacific Motorway, acknowledging existing uses and approved development in this area.  Consultation with State Government in relation to implications of population growth on State Government infrastructure (e.g. roads, public transport, schools, police etc.).

The outcome of the local planning exercise will be a Detailed Precinct Plan for short term growth areas and a Conceptual plan for future strategic opportunity areas (post 2031). Future strategic opportunity areas will be included in the infrastructure planning for the short term development opportunity areas.

It is proposed that the Detailed Precinct Plan will at least identify:

 areas of ecological value and preservation;  slope affected land (requiring site specific design);  consideration of flood affected land;  built form outcomes including zones, heights, density and preferred building typologies;  design interface with longer term rural residential transition areas;  location of new local access roads, improvements to existing roads, footpaths, public transport stops; and 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 211 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

 preferred development sequence and infrastructure servicing strategy (sewerage, roads, open space, stormwater).

In accordance with the previously adopted community engagement strategy phases (EPE18.0822.009 / G18.0828.020) further consultation with affected property owners is proposed to assist with preparing the detailed precinct planning (draft policy setting). Feedback from the community on the draft policy setting will assist preparation of a draft major update which will include an update to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan (LGIP).

Further analysis and reporting to Council will be undertaken to consider the best approach to preparing the Major update. This will include consideration on the planning scheme mechanism e.g. local plan, zone precinct, new overlay code.

6 ALIGNMENT TO THE CORPORATE PLAN, CORPORATE STRATEGIES AND OPERATIONAL PLAN

The investigation areas program project is aligned to the following Corporate Plan 2022 objectives:

1.1 Our city provides a choice of liveable places We can choose diverse lifestyle and housing options from rural to city living.

Relevant key plans and work program:  Regularly amend the City Plan to ensure the city is safe, accessible and can take advantage of emerging opportunities.  Consolidate population growth in ‘priority growth areas’, including mixed use activity centres, urban neighbourhoods, light rail corridor urban renewal areas, remaining greenfield, specialist business precincts and identified future growth areas.  Protect identified areas for their distinctive character or lifestyle attributes, including parks, green space, City assets, high value ecological areas or land with rural production and scenic amenity values.  Support the delivery of housing choice to support liveability and affordability in the city.  Plan and implement appropriate community facilities for residents across the city.

1.2 We live in balance with nature We manage quality rural and urban living while looking after the future of the city’s rainforest, bushland, waterways and open space.

Relevant key plans and work program:  Support the preservation of the city's natural environment (open space, natural resources and conservation) through a strategic leadership approach to the City Plan and environmental strategies.

1.6 Our modern centres create vibrant communities We can work, live and play in our local neighbourhoods. Relevant Performance Measure: 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 212 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

 Percentage of residents who live within 400m of a recreational park (by 2022 80%)  Percentage of people who live within 800m of public transport (by 2022 90%)

A. We plan for the future of the city We make good choices that create a better future for the Gold Coast community.

Relevant key plans and work program:  Manage the long term growth of the city through the City Plan, focusing on the redevelopment of urban centres and key inner city neighbourhoods, ensuring non- urban areas such as the hinterland ranges and foothills are protected.

The City Plan is an initiative in the Operational Plan.

7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS

Not applicable.

8 RISK MANAGEMENT

The activity supports the mitigation of the following Directorate Risk:

 CO00510 – City Plan delivers inadequate and / or ineffective strategic/development policy (e.g. poor planning, built form, growth, social and environmental outcomes).

9 STATUTORY MATTERS

Community engagement strategy

Queensland’s planning system includes opportunities for genuine and effective community engagement in the plan making process, secured in the state’s planning legislation. The Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (MGR) under the Planning Act 2016 (July 2017) requires City Plan amendments to be developed in accordance with a community engagement strategy, prepared having regard to the ‘Community Engagement Toolkit for Planning’, prepared by the State Government.

The community consultation undertaken for the Oxenford Investigation Area was part of community engagement strategy to prepare a potential City Plan major update. There will be further community engagement with the owners of properties within the investigation area to prepare a draft Major Update.

Planning Act 2016

The Planning Act 2016 (the Act) identifies the statutory requirements for making an amendment to a planning scheme. A local government can either amend the planning scheme following the process in the MGR or propose a process to amend the planning scheme (i.e. ‘Tailored Process’) under Section 18 of the Act.

Early engagement with the State Government and community in the plan making process may justify a Tailored Process for preparing a Major Update for the Oxenford Investigation Area. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 213 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

10 COUNCIL POLICIES

Not applicable.

11 DELEGATIONS

Not applicable.

12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION

Name and/or Title of the Directorate or Is the Stakeholder Satisfied Stakeholder Consulted Organisation With Content of Report and Recommendations (Yes/No) (comment as appropriate) Martine Cousins Economy, Planning and Yes Coordinator Program Environment Management Kylie Petersen Office of the Chief Operating Yes (subject to all internal Account Officer Officer approvals being obtained for Corporate Communication Attachment B) Donald MacKenzie Economy, Planning and Yes Executive Coordinator Environment Environment Lau Chean Strategic Infrastructure Yes Special Coordinator Kim Evans Water & Waste Feedback has been Coordinator Strategic Land addressed and included into Use Planning the report.

Additional internal stakeholders from the following sections in Council were involved in preparing the Oxenford Investigation Area study. These stakeholders have been informed of this report and recommendations:

 City Architect, Office of the CEO  Planning Assessment, Planning & Environment  City Planning Team, Planning & Environment  Transport & Traffic, City Infrastructure  Stormwater City Assets, City Infrastructure  Catchment Management, Water & Waste  Parks & Recreation Services, Community Services  Property Services, Organisational Services

13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS

External / community stakeholder Impacts  The survey responses received during the community consultation indicates that the majority of property owners within the investigation area will be satisfied with further planning being carried out for the Oxenford investigation area and some property owners will not be satisfied. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 214 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

 It is further recommended that should Council resolve to proceed with the proposed recommendations, City officers arrange a debriefing session with the Oxenford community to directly communicate what this decision means for them and what are the next steps involved.

Internal (Organisational) Stakeholder Impacts  The recommendations of this report will not have any impacts on internal stakeholders.

14 TIMING

A fact sheet provided to the community as part of the community engagement included a timeline of the investigation area planning and consultation process (Attachment A). This timeline indicated, pending the outcome of community consultation, the preparation of a draft land use and infrastructure plan could occur between 2019 to 2021. New land use opportunities in City Plan (including an update to the LGIP) could be reflected in City Plan between 2022 to 2023.

At this stage, City officers intend to work to these indicative timeframes, subject to the outcome of the proposed local planning exercise.

15 CONCLUSION

Community consultation for the Oxenford Investigation Area has been completed to assist Council making a decision on the timeframe to plan for identified housing growth opportunities in the area. The consultation was carried out over two stages in accordance with a Council endorsed Community engagement strategy.

The first stage of consultation was to inform/educate the community on previous studies identifying development opportunities and challenges for the area. The second stage of consultation included a survey to seek feedback on the identified potential development opportunities to assist Council decision making on the priorities for further land use and infrastructure planning (and development of a City Plan Major update).

In summary, the survey responses from property owners identified strong support for further investigation of growth opportunities in the investigation area. Having regard to the cost efficiency of intensifying development, its positive contribution to the City’s dwelling targets and support from the property owners, it is recommended that Council pursue a major planning scheme amendment to support urban intensification of the Oxenford Investigation Area.

During the consultation, in contrast to the strong property owner support, there was strong opposition from non-owners. This may be due to the fact that the majority of the respondents residing outside the Investigation Area did not participate/engage prior to completing the survey. The opposition received from people outside of the investigation area emphases the need to ensure impacts from development of the Oxenford Investigation Area on the wider community are adequately considered in future planning. This will require a wider community consultation, pending a Council decision to prepare a major update for the Oxenford Investigation Area.

Prior to commencing the statutory plan-making process, it is proposed that the City undertakes a holistic local planning exercise to ensure an integrated and coordinated approach to the long- term planning of this locality can be achieved. The local planning exercise will involve further consultation with the Oxenford community to develop a detailed precinct plan for areas where short term (5-15 years) growth opportunities are identified. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 215 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

More detailed servicing/infrastructure planning (roads, sewerage and stormwater) is recommended to be carried out concurrently with the local planning exercise. Development opportunities will need to be staged in precincts to align with infrastructure planning, particularly for the sewerage network. The proposed planning priorities for the Oxenford Investigation Area Major Update scope are provided in Attachment D.

It is recommended to write to survey respondents, property owners within the investigation area and the wider Oxenford community to notify them of Council’s resolutions on the community consultation outcomes and process to review City Plan. It is further recommended that should Council resolve to proceed with the proposed recommendations, City officers arrange a debriefing session with the Oxenford community to directly communicate what this decision means for them and what are the next steps involved.

16 RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that Council resolves as follows:

1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009. 2 That the attached ‘Community engagement and marketing report for the Oxenford Investigation Area’ (Attachment B) be noted by Council. 3 That the attached ‘Oxenford Investigation Area – Community Meetings Report’ (Attachment C) be noted by Council. 4 That the ‘Proposed Planning Priorities for Oxenford Investigation Area Major Update Scope’ (Attachment D) is endorsed to inform preparation of a local planning exercise that will involve further community consultation. 5 That the outcomes from the local planning exercise will be reported back to Council. 6 That the respondents to the Oxenford Investigation Area Survey and property owners within the Oxenford investigation area are notified of the above Council resolutions.

Author: Authorised by: Justin Collofello Alisha Swain Principal Regional Planner Director Economy, Planning & Environment May 2019 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 216 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 5 (Continued) OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES PD113/1275/14/02

Committee Recommendation Adopted At Council 13 June 2019

Changed recommendation

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION EPE19.0605.004 moved Cr Owen-Jones seconded Cr Tozer

1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009. 2 That the attached ‘Community engagement and marketing report for the Oxenford Investigation Area’ (Attachment B) be noted by Council. 3 That the attached ‘Oxenford Investigation Area – Community Meetings Report’ (Attachment C) be noted by Council. 4 That the ‘Proposed Planning Priorities for Oxenford Investigation Area Major Update Scope’ (Attachment D) is endorsed to inform preparation of a local planning exercise that will involve further community consultation. 5 That the outcomes from the local planning exercise will be reported back to Council. 6 That the respondents to the Oxenford Investigation Area Survey and property owners within the Oxenford investigation area are notified of the above Council resolutions by the local area Councillor.

CARRIED ADOPTED AT COUNCIL 13 June 2019 RESOLUTION G19.0613.045 moved Cr Owen-Jones seconded Cr Tozer That Committee Recommendation EPE19.0605.004 be adopted as printed which reads as follows:-

1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009. 2 That the attached ‘Community engagement and marketing report for the Oxenford Investigation Area’ (Attachment B) be noted by Council. 3 That the attached ‘Oxenford Investigation Area – Community Meetings Report’ (Attachment C) be noted by Council. 4 That the ‘Proposed Planning Priorities for Oxenford Investigation Area Major Update Scope’ (Attachment D) is endorsed to inform preparation of a local planning exercise that will involve further community consultation. 5 That the outcomes from the local planning exercise will be reported back to Council. 6 That the respondents to the Oxenford Investigation Area Survey and property owners within the Oxenford investigation area are notified of the above Council resolutions by the local area Councillor.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 217 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment A (1 of 8)

Oxenford

Planning for the future of our city The Gold Coast is one of the fastest growing cities in Australia. To ensure we can meet the needs of our current and future residents, and protect our enviable lifestyle, we are undertaking long-term strategic planning across the city. Following an initial study to identify the city’s priority investigation areas, the City of Gold Coast is openly engaging with residents to find out what you want to see in your community. Your views will help us shape the future of Oxenford.

What is an investigation area? Under the South East Queensland Regional Plan (ShapingSEQ 2017), the Queensland Government has established population growth In planning for long-term sustainable growth, we are looking at targets for the Gold Coast. Investigation Area Studies are one way opportunities across the Gold Coast to better utilise land close to that we’re identifying areas that can support future growth. existing services and employment. Seventeen investigation areas were originally identified across the What future growth opportunities have been Gold Coast, each with different opportunities to support growth. identified in Oxenford? Opportunities include a range of things such as access to The Oxenford Investigation Area includes rural residential zoned land transportation, proximity to employment, existing water along Michigan Drive and Tamborine-Oxenford Road, Oxenford. infrastructure, open space, public parks and amenities. We have identified a range of opportunities including: Investigation areas are just one way that we are planning for the future of our city and including the community in the process. • access to transportation, including the M1 • proximity to district centre and employment opportunities Why is the City undertaking Investigation Area Studies? • access to existing sporting facilities and open space By undertaking the Oxenford Investigation Area Study, we are better • access to existing services including stormwater, drinking water equipped to: and roads • improve how we support and manage growth Future growth opportunities will need to be considered together • involve residents and property owners in the planning process with existing constraints such as flooding, environmental, • create opportunities for residents to live in a diverse mix of infrastructure and topographical (slope). housing types To find out more about the Oxenford Investigation Area, we • effectively plan for upgrades of services (including stormwater, encourage you to attend one of our meetings (refer overleaf). wastewater and roads) in the most cost effective manner • plan for new and/or improved community amenities where What are the potential outcomes? we are planning for growth (for example, landscaping, parks, Planning for sustainable growth doesn’t happen overnight. sporting facilities and pathways) Outcomes of the Investigation Area Study in Oxenford may take • accurately forecast and plan for City expenditure to support up to 25 years before future opportunities can be realised. future growth The feedback that you provide is important and will influence • share potential future plans to give residents improved whether we progress strategic planning within your area. visibility of the planning process and enable community feedback to be considered. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 218 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019Have your sayADOPTED REPORT Investigation area planning and Whether you are a property owner, resident or consultation process part of the Oxenford community, we want to hear The timeline below provides a broad overview of the Investigation Area Studies. from you. Your feedback will influence whether we progress planning in your area and help shape This process puts the community at the centre of planning with ongoing the future of Oxenford. opportunities for feedback to shape how we plan for Oxenford. Meetings with property owners Investigation areas Property owners in the Oxenford Investigation 2013 identified Area are invited to attend a meeting with the City. This will be a presentation format followed by question and answer time.

Investigation areas To attend one of these meetings, please RSVP 2016 prioritised to [email protected] by Wednesday 10 October. • Monday 15 October 2018 6pm – 8pm Opportunities Infrastructure Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre 2017–18 and constraints WE ARE needs assessment HERE 25 Leo Graham Way, Oxenford • Wednesday 17 October 2018 9am – 11am 2019 Decision made about ...pending outcome Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre whether to progress of the community with planning... consultation Community ‘drop-in’ sessions A series of community ‘drop-in’ sessions will be held over the following dates: • Saturday 27 October 2018 Prepare draft Prepare draft 2019–21 Land Use Plan Infrastructure Plan 9am – 11.30am Helensvale Library Auditorium Corner Lindﬁeld Rd and Sir Overall Drive, Helensvale Community Consultation

Urban infrastructure is • Monday 29 October 2018 Create new land financed in Local 5.30pm – 7.30pm 2022–23 use opportunities Government in City Plan Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre Infrastructure Plan • Tuesday 30 October 2018 12.30pm – 4.30pm Feedback from community consultation, timing of infrastructure Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre 2023 delivery and market conditions influence redevelopment onwards opportunities and delivery time-frames. Anyone can attend and no appointment or RSVP is required.

Have your say online Ongoing reviewing and/or amendments Shortly we will be inviting you to participate in an online survey. The outcomes of this survey will inﬂuence whether the City progresses with planning in your area.

TTamam booririnene OxO enf To ﬁnd out more information and participate in this xenforrdd Rooaad survey, visit gchaveyoursay.com.au/oxenford

i v e rs BBrentw dale Oxenford Ro Russell Hinze re a n d Park tw Park oood o d T e

r R

R ra

u c

t e

h h

T Obe e

e ron

W O r

r a

r y lld

a a d

c c

PPac

e e Contact us

R a

i c v

e ﬁﬁc

r c s

HigH

d a

i If you have any questions, please contact us:

Gambamora g l e

R Park w o

aay a

y d City of Gold Coast, City Planning team Michigan Drive Reserve P 07 5582 8290 E [email protected]

M Oxenford Investigation Area ichhiiganga n Driiveve W gchaveyoursay.com.au/oxenford 219 REPORT Metres

500 800mradius ADOPTED

l P 250

l t a r

e ou b l

G c C o la x P e s C od s ottonw o u S 125

Otway P Otway l y ace

o r

r a

u r

o d e

C a T l

l o

d a y

M R

o e o l

a w t d

s n

Damian Leeding Damian Memorial Park r e

e r

iv B t r

R o

e C

n o a o r

e Oxenford SchoolState

h t

t i y n a 2019 June 5

Regatta Waters Park Waters Regatta Roa ord d enf e Ox

Meeting in

ambor

T t

e r

e G Committee 2019 June 13 Environment & Meeting Planning Council 775th Economy, Low-medium densityresidential opportunity (i.e. low opportunities lots) townhouse/apartment/small rise and centre district the to close where exist shops/services. neighbourhood dwellings) detached (mostly residential density Low sizes lot Larger areas. other for exists opportunity and areas slope-constrained for apply would on impact restrict to apply would provisions additional environmentally constrained areas. conceptThe which Council testedfor infrastructure long-term an ultimate identified feasibility planning is This area. the in dwellings 1,447 for opportunity be developed. would site every that assuming of part be to need will development urban Future sites. development amalgamated Areasaffected byslope (i.e. grade of greaterthan 1:6) resulting Any develop. to difficult more are impacts, visual negative avoid must development such as large unsightly retaining wallsand scarring of the landscape. Developmentofslope-constrained access. rear with allotments some in result may land on identified areas for required is assessment Flood the City PlanVersion 6 Flood overlay map. will conceptually) (shown areas detention Stormwater approach a regional address to identified be to need management. stormwater to The western part ofthe investigation area requires with service to solution (non-gravity) costly more sewerage new and mains rising including sewerage stations. pump enable will development Urban space. open Existing recreation the to improvements in invest to Council network. space open supermarket to radius 800m Investigation area boundary – zone use Mixed new a for opportunity an is There Highway Pacific Old along precinct business Fringe for approved been previously have properties where activities. commercial not occur will development future - easement Energex area this within

Legend Notes: sewerage to redevelop, area the investigation support To and environmental human to protect be required will services health. be developed. will the area for strategy servicing sewerage A by be determined will infrastructure of this staging and Timing in the activity of development and location scale timing, the area. investigation a or by Council be delivered may infrastructure Sewerage process. approval development asof the part developer Plan City with Alignment - 2018) (November A Revision Map. Overlay 6 Flood Version Land use opportunities and constraints - Oxenford InvestigationArea - Revision A 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 220 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Frequently Asked Questions Oxenford Investigation Area

Contents

Why would I participate in this? What is the benefit of this for me? ...... 2 How many people must agree for a change to zoning to be developed? ...... 2 How will this impact on the value of my property? Will this impact my rates? ...... 2 Can properties be developed individually or will amalgamation be required? ...... 3 What if my neighbour doesn’t want to amalgamate but I do? ...... 3 If developers do not become involved, will single land owners be able to subdivide? Will we be required to have new sewerage facilities before we can subdivide? ...... 3 If a sewerage main is provided in our street, will we be forced to connect to the sewerage? ...... 3 Why can’t we subdivide into two blocks? ...... 4 What if my property is on slope-constrained land? ...... 4 Will it now be harder to build a house on an existing block? ...... 4 What kind of development could happen if there is strong support? ...... 4 What is being done to ensure that our roads and schools are going to be able to handle the influx of residents? ...... 5 Will I be informed as the project progresses? ...... 5 How are the City’s flood maps produced? ...... 5

FAQs – Oxenford Investigation Area Page 1 of 5

Ispot # 72105015 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 221 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Frequently asked questions

infrastructure planning and amendments to the Why would I participate in this? City Plan’s strategic framework.

What is the benefit of this for me? If the majority of property owners in the investigation area (or part of the investigation The Investigation Area study is a way for us to area) are strongly opposed to a transition to urban identify different opportunities across the Gold development within the next 25 years, the City Coast and ensure that we start planning now for may abandon further planning (for whole, or part what we will need in five, ten or 20 years and of, the investigation area). The area may be beyond. investigated again as part of a future whole-of- The outcome of this consultation will influence the planning scheme review, which occurs City of Gold Coast’s (City) decision to invest in approximately every ten years. planning for future urban development opportunities. This includes longer term provision How will this impact on the value of of urban infrastructure such as sewerage reticulation and improvements to roads, my property? Will this impact my stormwater and open space. rates? The City has not made a decision to prepare an A change to the zoning of land may lead to an update to the planning scheme (City Plan) for the increase in land value over the longer term. Investigation Area. To date, we have identified potential opportunities and challenges for However, a change to the zoning of your property discussion. Available on is only one factor that can contribute to your rates www.gchaveyoursay.com.au/oxenford are reports changing. which identify concept scenarios for future growth opportunities and the challenges for achieving The valuation of land takes into account a range these. These concepts give an indication of the of matters including improvements on the property type of future growth which may occur without and zoning that generally reflect the value of land placing a heavy financial burden on the City to in the open property market and the rent that fund the necessary infrastructure improvements. could reasonably be obtained for lease of the They are not Council endorsed policy. premises in the open market.

In November 2018, there we will be a survey The rates charged for a particular property can be which will assist us to determine if further planning expected to increase if the Valuer General should proceed. Whilst property owners are a key determines that the value of the property has stakeholder, the survey will be open to the whole increased. community. You may be entitled to the State Government pensioner rates subsidy and/or City of Gold How many people must agree for a Coast's pensioner rate remission (Council Remission) on your next rates bill if you own and change to zoning to be developed? occupy the property and are the holder of either of There will need to be at least half of property the following: owners supporting short term change (5-15 years)  Queensland Pensioner Concession Card; or if the City is to pursue planning for rezoning of the investigation area (or part of the investigation  Queensland Gold Veterans' Affairs Card. area). If there is at least half of property owners For more information, go to supporting short term change or longer term www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/council/pensioner- transition to urban development (redevelopment concessions commencing in 15-25 years), the City may pursue longer term strategic planning which may not result in a change to zoning. This will result in

FAQs – Oxenford Investigation Area Page 2 of 5

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 222 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Can properties be developed require a minimum size development area. This requirement encourages the amalgamation of individually or will amalgamation sites (i.e. at least two sites). be required? There are many benefits from amalgamating development sites including: If an amendment to City Plan is developed to support future urban development, this is likely to  a higher development yield; require a minimum sized development area which  increased design opportunities which can would require sites to be amalgamated (i.e. at result in better housing design, improved least two sites). There are many benefits from liveability and improved marketability of amalgamating sites including: product;  a higher development yield;  better development opportunities for slope or  increased design opportunities which can environmental constrained sites (e.g. utilising result in a better housing form with improved access from adjacent site, increased liveability and improved marketability of opportunity to retain an existing house as part product; of a larger development proposal);  opportunities realised for slope or  lower development costs (e.g. through environmental constrained sites (e.g. utilising economies of scale and shared costs for the access from adjacent site, increased provision of infrastructure); and opportunity to retain an existing house as part  lower risk in the development assessment of a larger development proposal); process (e.g. easier to comply with planning  lower development costs (e.g. economies of outcomes, lower chance of public submissions scale, more efficient and shared costs with and appeals). infrastructure provision); and  lower risk in the development assessment To support this area to redevelop, sewerage process (e.g. easier to comply with planning services will be required to protect human and environmental health. A sewerage servicing outcomes, lower chance of public submissions strategy for the area will be developed. Timing and appeals). and staging of this infrastructure will be determined by the timing, scale and location of What if my neighbour doesn’t want development activity with the investigation areas. Sewerage infrastructure may be delivered by to amalgamate but I do? Council or a developer as part of the development Property laws in Queensland require a binding approval process. contract of sale between an offeror and the property owner/s. The law does not allow for an If a sewerage main is provided in individual or company to forcefully acquire a property without all owners signing a contract of our street, will we be forced to sale. connect to the sewerage? If developers do not become If a reticulated sewerage main is provided (which your property could connect into), the City will not involved, will single land owners be force you to provide a connection to the network able to subdivide? Will we be for your existing house. However, should there be future development on required to have new sewerage your property; the City will not approve any further facilities before we can subdivide? on-site septic systems if the proposed development can connect to the reticulated If an amendment to City Plan is developed to sewerage network. support future urban development, it is likely to

FAQs – Oxenford Investigation Area Page 3 of 5

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 223 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Why can’t we subdivide into two Will it now be harder to build a blocks? house on an existing block?

Lots less than 4,000m2 with on-site sewerage There are currently no changes proposed to the facilities have greater risk of environmental harm existing requirements for building a house on an and/or health impacts. existing lot (i.e. block of land). If an amendment to City Plan is developed to support future urban If this type of development was approved, there is development, there could be changes to the a risk that the City would need to undertake costly requirements relating to building a house on new retrofitting of the area with reticulated sewerage in lots. the event of environmental or health issues. The City Plan 2016 provides a strong policy What kind of development could position in relation to subdivision in the Rural residential zone, restricting subdivision of lots less happen if there is strong support? 2 than 4,000m . There are some areas of the City www.gchaveyoursay.com.au/oxenford includes where development approvals issued under the reports which identify concept scenarios for future previous planning scheme were carried over into growth opportunities and the challenges for City Plan 2016, allowing for subdivision in the achieving these. These concepts give an 2 Rural residential zone to 2,500m (e.g. Parkwood). indication of the type of future growth which may However, this lot size requires connection to occur without placing a heavy financial burden on reticulated sewerage. the City to fund the necessary infrastructure The City has an obligation to ensure land and the improvements. They are not Council endorsed provision of infrastructure is utilised in the most policy. efficient manner. The concept which Council tested infrastructure planning feasibility identified an ultimate long-term What if my property is on slope- opportunity for 1,447 dwellings in the area. Thjs constrained land? assumes every site would be developed. An earlier concept, which identified potential for a Land with slope constraints (i.e. grade of greater higher yield (if there was more 3 storey than 1:6) is more difficult to develop. Any resulting apartments), was not recommended due to lack of development must avoid negative visual impacts, market demand for this type of housing product in such as large unsightly retaining walls and the area. scarring of the landscape. Development of slope- constrained land may result in some allotments If there is strong support in the Investigation Area with rear access. (or part of the area), a City Plan update may be prepared to provide for a mix of detached and If there is support to prepare a zoning amendment attached housing, depending on the location and to City Plan, property owners will be given the attributes of the land. This type of housing will be opportunity to be involved in preparation of a draft low-rise (two to three storeys). Larger lots are plan for the area. This may include details such as expected on land with slope constraints (i.e. a preferred locations for new roads and access grade more than 1:6). Greater density (i.e. smaller points to ensure quality development opportunities lots and apartment/attached housing product) may can be realised. be achieved where closer to commercial areas. If an amendment to City Plan is developed to In preparing a draft City Plan update, provisions support future urban development, this is likely to will need to be considered to ensure new housing require a minimum sized development area. It is mitigates impacts to privacy and existing rural expected that sites will need to be amalgamated residential amenity on adjacent rural residential (i.e. at least two sites). This will help to ensure properties. This could be achieved by providing slope-constrained properties are considered as separation through generous building setbacks, part of a larger development proposal. avoiding grade separations on boundaries and

FAQs – Oxenford Investigation Area Page 4 of 5 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 224 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT provision of dense landscaping or placement of Will I be informed as the project roads alongside adjoining boundaries. progresses? Future development in the area will seek to optimise a legible and permeable subdivision In mid-2019 an update will be provided on the pattern. This may be achieved by creating clusters outcomes of the community engagement. of development with a sense of place, interconnected system of streets and open spaces How are the City’s flood maps that provide pleasant and comfortable walking and cycling environments and support public transport. produced?

Flood overlay maps identify properties where What is being done to ensure that future development will need to meet the our roads and schools are going to provisions of the Flood overlay code. be able to handle the influx of Flood overlay maps reflect the impact of a one in 100 year ARI (Average Recurrence Interval) residents? rainfall.

The Investigation Area is long-term planning for The City has recently updated existing flood the future of our city. By identifying areas that may overlay mapping which will commence as part of be suitable for future growth in the medium and City Plan Version 6 on 20 September 2018. long-term, Council and State Government can be better equipped to plan, budget and upgrade the The updated mapping considers future changes to necessary infrastructure and amenities to support climate, incorporating the projected increase in long-term growth. This includes ensuring schools, sea level of 0.8m above present day levels by roads and public transport are planned 2100 established by the State Government in accordingly. 2015. The updated mapping also includes the State Governments projected 10 per cent storm The State Government is currently planning a tide intensity and 10 per cent rainfall intensity, number of upgrades to the Pacific Motorway M1. based on advice from industry representatives. Information is available on the Department of Transport and Main Roads website: More FAQs on flood mapping is available on www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/council/flood-heights- https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/P maps-2222.html

FAQs – Oxenford Investigation Area Page 5 of 5 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 225 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment B (1 of 19)

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT

INVESTIGATION AREAS PROGRAM – OXENFORD

MAY 2019 – VERSION 7 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 226 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Version history

Document Author Comments Date version 1 Ali Bec Oxenford data separated 19 Feb 2019 2 Ali Bec Data updated 30 April 2019

3 and 4 Ali Bec Updates following Regional 8 May 2019 Planning Review 5 Ali Bec Updated template 16 May 2019 6 Eli Torabi Minor edits 16 May 2019 7 Justin Collofello Updates following OOM briefing 22 May 2019

Document distribution and approval

Signature Name Title Action Date (iSPOT#) Joe McCabe Chief Operating Officer, OCOO Approve #73573192 29 May 2019 Policy Implementation and Community Chris Lynch Approve #73570604 29 May 2019 Engagement Officer, OOM Director Economy Planning and Environment, Alisha Swain Approve #73536400 24 May 2019 EP&E Amanda Tzannes Manager City Planning, EP&E Approve #73528355 23 May 2019 Executive Coordinator City and Regional Kelli Adair Approve #73468816 16 May 2019 Planning, EP&E Renee Trezise Coordinator Regional Planning, EP&E Approve #73396103 8 May 2019 Justin Collofello Principal Regional Planner, EP&E Approve 73400754 8 May 2019 Executive Coordinator Corporate Communication, Nicole Waters CC only OCOO Coordinator Marketing, Communication and Bernice Jones Approve #73372466 3 May 2019 Engagement, OCOO Kylie Petersen Account Officer EP&E, OCOO Approve #72749437 7 Feb 2019 Skye Ross Account Officer Community Engagement, OCOO Approve #73395883 8 May 2019 Alexandra Bec Community Engagement Officer, OCOO Endorse #73369379 3 May 2019

iSPOT #72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 2 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 227 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Table of Contents

1 Executive summary ...... 4 1.1 Key findings ...... 4 1.2 ‘GC have your say’ analytics ...... 4 1.3 Report considerations ...... 4 2 Project background ...... 5 3 Community engagement objectives ...... 5 4 Scope and timing ...... 6 5 Communication strategy ...... 6 5.1 Key messages ...... 6 5.2 Marketing and communication of the engagement ...... 8 6 Survey results ...... 11 Appendix A – Community engagement tools ...... 16 GC have your say project page ...... 16 Online survey ...... 17

iSPOT #72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 3 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 228 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

1 Executive summary Further to the community meetings held on 15 and 17 October 2018, the City of Gold Coast (the City) conducted an online survey on GC have your say to ensure local community opinions were considered regarding future land use opportunities and constraints within the Oxenford investigation area. Key land use planning information was available for download and review on the project page and an online survey was open to the public. During the engagement a marketing and communication plan was implemented to inform the community and encourage participation. The engagement period ran from 12 November 2018 to 31 March 2019 and was targeted to property owners within the Oxenford Investigation Area. This report provides a summary of the engagement, marketing and communication activities undertaken and the feedback received.

1.1 Key findings A total of 202 survey responses were received for the Oxenford investigation area.  There were responses received from property owners of 142 properties with 57% of property owners either strongly or somewhat supported the proposed increase in housing and subdivision of property across the Gold Coast, whilst 37.3% somewhat or strongly opposed it.  Of the respondents supporting change in the investigation area, 56.3% of property owners supported change within 5-15 years and 8.5% supported change within 15-25 years. However, 31.7% of property owners did not support any change or only after 25 years.  There were 56 responses received from people residing outside of the investigation area and 4 responses from residents renting in the investigation area. These responses (83%) were mostly opposed to any change within the investigation area or only after 25 years.  Respondents noted they supported the proposed changes due to the area being ideally situated close to schools, transport and parks.  Respondents noted they opposed the proposed changes due to concerns over increased traffic and how it will affect the unique attributes of the area (e.g. semi-rural).

1.2 ‘GC have your say’ analytics ‘GC have your say’ analytics summary below shows:  413 aware participants – visited at least one page on the site  293 informed participants – visited multiple pages, viewed images and contributed  105 engaged participants – completed the survey (excludes hardcopy surveys).

1.3 Report considerations The responses to this survey provide an indication of Gold Coast community views within a specific geographic area. They are not a randomly selected representative sample.

The survey format consisted of both closed and open-ended questions. The first survey question asked the level of support for increased housing (2-3 storeys) and subdivision of large lot residential properties across the Gold Coast. The second survey question focused on the support for increased housing and subdivision in the relevant locality. The qualitative data from the open-ended questions was analysed using coding and data tagging to identify common themes.

The survey data files are located at #72765546 containing all online and hardcopy survey responses.

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 4 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 229

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

2 Project background The Oxenford Investigation Area is presently included in the Rural residential zone. The City Plan identified this area in the strategic framework as being subject to investigation for land use opportunities and constraints. There are 205 residential properties in the Oxenford investigation area. There was a small increase in the number of dwellings in the area following completion of second detached dwellings (approved under the previous planning scheme).

During consultation of the draft City Plan in 2014 there was mixed community response to the inclusion of the investigation area in City Plan. The Oxenford Investigation Area had a large number of responses, both for and against urban development, following Councillor communication to residents.

In August 2016, a preliminary feasibility assessment investigated land use opportunities and constraints for investigation areas located inside the previous SEQ Regional Plan Urban Footprint. The Oxenford Investigation Area was ranked as one of the highest, with funding approved for further investigation.

Planning and infrastructure investigations for the investigation area was carried out and reported to City Planning Committee on 22 November 2017. This included a draft structure plan for each area identifying future urban development opportunities and critical infrastructure required to support transition from rural residential to urban. The report also identified preliminary recommendations to inform future strategic planning and property owner engagement.

The Council resolution included the following actions relating to future property owner engagement:

3 That a property owner engagement strategy, to assist decision making on whether to pursue development of City Plan updates for urban development opportunities in each area, is prepared in consultation with relevant local Councillors and reported to Council. 4 That the order of priority for future strategic planning and property owner engagement is as identified in the report. 5 That the preliminary recommendations for each area are used to inform future strategic planning and property owner engagement.

Queensland’s planning system includes opportunities for genuine and effective community engagement in the plan making process, secured in the state’s planning legislation. The Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (MGR) under the Planning Act 2016 requires City Plan amendments to be developed in accordance with a community engagement strategy, prepared having regard to the department’s Community Engagement Toolkit for Planning.

The community engagement strategy for the Oxenford Investigation Area was developed with regard to Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure, and Planning (DSDMIP) community engagement toolkit for planning.

3 Community engagement objectives The community engagement objectives were:

 To create a positive climate for the project through meaningful engagement with property owners of the investigation area, at regular intervals.  Use a facilitator to lead community meetings to engage with property owners of the investigation area to discover interests, needs, concerns, preferences and potential issues in order to inform a Council decision on future changes to residential form and a possible City Plan major update.  To ensure that views expressed throughout the engagement process are recorded and reported accurately.  Avoid speculation and raising expectations of development opportunities prior to completing a City Plan update.

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 5 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 230

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

4 Scope and timing The Corporate Communication team’s scope was to:

 Ensure engagement activities aligned with Corporate Communication guidelines.  Develop and manage a project page on GC have your say with the associated survey.  Manage and deliver social media and communication requirements.  Provide survey consultation results and report to the directorate.

The community engagement ran from 12 November 2018 to 31 March 2019.

5 Communication strategy

5.1 Key messages The key messages for this community engagement were:

The Gold Coast is one of the fastest growing cities in Australia. In 2017, the Gold Coast welcomed more than 15,000 new residents.

Under the South East Queensland Regional Plan (ShapingSEQ 2017), the Queensland Government has established population growth targets for the Gold Coast. This requires the delivery of 158,9001 new dwellings by 2041, across a diverse mix of housing types.

To ensure that we can achieve projected population growth, and protect the city’s enviable lifestyle, we are undertaking long-term strategic planning.

The City Plan Investigation Area Study is one way that we’re planning for long-term, sustainable growth within our city.

Planning for sustainable growth doesn’t happen overnight. Outcomes of the City Plan Investigation Area Study may take up to 25 years before development opportunities can be realised.

The City Plan Investigation Area Study identifies opportunities to better utilise land close to existing services and employment that have the potential to support growth.

By undertaking the City Plan Investigation Area Study, the City, in consultation with Queensland Government, is equipped to:

 improve how we manage growth within the city  involve residents and property owners in the planning process for their community  effectively plan for upgrades of services, including stormwater, sewerage and roads, in the most cost effective manner.  plan for new and/or improved community amenities (e.g. landscaping, parks, sporting facilities, pathways etc.) where we are planning for long term population growth  accurately forecast and plan for expenditure  create opportunities for residents to live in a diverse mix of housing types  share potential future plans to give residence improved visibility of the planning process and enable community feedback to be considered.

1 Additional dwellings (2016-2041) as identified in Shaping SEQ 2017 iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 6 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 231 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

In 2016, an initial study was undertaken across 17 areas within City of Gold Coast to investigate the specific opportunities and constraints within each area.

The study identified that Oxenford has specific land use opportunities and, with the right planning and investment, have the potential to support long-term growth.

Oxenford Investigation Area

The Oxenford Investigation Area includes rural residential zoned land along Michigan Road and Tamborine- Oxenford Road, Oxenford.

The Oxenford Investigation Area Study has identified a range of opportunities and constraints, including:

 access to transportation, including the M1  proximity to district centre and employment opportunities  access to existing sporting facilities and open space  access to existing services including stormwater, drinking water and roads  flooding, environmental, infrastructure and topographical (slope) constraints affect some properties.

The Oxenford Investigation Area creates an opportunity to bring new wastewater infrastructure to service the area over the longer term and provide for upgrades to roads, stormwater and open space infrastructure to enhance services and amenities for the community.

The Oxenford Investigation Area Map identifies the specific properties, the required critical urban infrastructure to service the area and opportunities for future amenities.

Consultation

The City of Gold Coast is meeting with residents and seeking input about what they/you would like to see in your community over the longer term.

This will be carried out over a period to enable the City to involve, educate and gain meaningful feedback from residents.

Potential outcomes

Feedback will be used to assist decision-making for potential future urban development opportunities in Oxenford, under the City Plan.

If most landholders support the planning for urban development opportunities in the Oxenford Investigation Area, or part of the area, the City will progress strategic planning. The extent and outcomes of future strategic planning will depend on consultation feedback including the timeframe which landholders provide support for future urban development opportunities to be realised.

Future strategic planning may include:

 developing an infrastructure strategy for delivery of improvements to open space, roads, stormwater and provision of wastewater infrastructure  developing updates to City Plan to facilitate low-rise (between 2 and 3 storey) future urban development subject to further public consultation

The timeframe and strategic approach for future urban planning will be influenced by feedback from property owners, developer economic feasibility and delivery of infrastructure.

If there is a strong negative response, Council may not proceed with updating City Plan to allow for urban development within the identified area. Urban development opportunities may be reconsidered in 10 – 15 years.

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 7 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 232

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Even if there is strong support for a change to allow for future urban development, City Plan will take at least 4-5 years to be amended. This is to allow time for an amendment to be developed in consultation with the community and to align with the City’s program for infrastructure planning. Ultimately, future development will be dependent on the timeframe for delivery of critical upgrades to wastewater, roads and stormwater services.

5.2 Marketing and communication of the engagement A land use and infrastructure planning investigation for the Oxenford Investigation Area concluded that the feasibility of servicing the area with trunk infrastructure is dependent on identified growth opportunities being realised. To realise the identified growth opportunities, sites need to be assembled for development, which requires support from property owners. If only a small number of sites were developed in the short term (e.g. due to lack of property owner support), there is a financial risk if Council invests in infrastructure too early. This can also lead to operational issues for networks, particularly sewerage.

Consequently, the engagement was specifically targeted to property owners within the Oxenford Investigation Area to assist with Council making a decision on the priorities for further strategic planning within the investigation area. Further consultation with the wider Oxenford community is to occur during preparation of a Major City Plan Update for the investigation area, pending Council’s decision.

Information packs including letters and factsheets were directly mailed to property owners/residents of rural residential zoned properties within the area (refer to creative example below).

Community groups within the local area were also provided with letters and factsheets.

Key messages were also supplied to local Councillors to share information about the consultation with local residents.

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 8 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 233

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Example creative

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 9 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 234 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 10 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 235 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

6 Survey results The survey was distributed as both a hard copy version and online.

Oxenford Responses

Total submissions 209

Duplicates (where more than one response was received for a property 7 within the investigation area)2

Property owner 142

Renting in the investigation area 4

Outside of the investigation area 56

Total unique submissions 202

Response rate from properties in the investigation area (total of 205 70.3% properties in the area)

A total of 202 unique respondents completed the Oxenford Investigation Area survey. Responses from property owners equated to 70.3% whilst 29.7% of respondents were non-owners. Of the non-owners the majority resided outside and only four respondents rented a property within the Investigation Area. Tenant responses were low and these results were combined with respondents who neither owned nor rented a property in the engagement area. This category has been labelled as ‘Non-owners’. For more information please refer to #72765546 for the data file for this engagement.

50 23.3% 21.8% 45

40 18.8% 17.8% 35 30 25 8.9% 20 7.9% 15

Number of respondents Number 10 5 0.5% 0 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Age (years)

Property owners Non-owners Male Female

2 Multiple responses per property were combined to make sure all views are captured. iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 11 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 236 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Prior to completing the survey 38.7% of respondents acknowledged they attended either a property owner meeting or a community ‘drop-in’ session. However, 55.5% of respondents indicated that they did not participate or in any way contact the project team regarding the proposed changes. Reasons for no attendance at the sessions included being unavailable on the specified days and being unaware of the sessions.

Of note, the consultation was primarily targeted to property owners, including letters to all property owners. Respondents outside of the investigation area were not targeted for the consultation. Further consultation with the wider Oxenford community is to occur during preparation of a Major City Plan Update for the investigation area, pending Council’s decision.

120 55.5%

100

80 33.7%

40 Number of respondents Number 20 5% 4.5% 1.5% 0 I attended a property I attended a I contacted the I left a question the GC None of the above owner meeting community 'drop-in' planning team have your say website session

Property owner Non-owner

The results found that 57% of property owners and 9% of non-owners either strongly or somewhat supported the increased housing (2-3 storeys) and subdivision of the large lot residential properties across the Gold Coast in general. Alternatively, 38% of owners and 88% of non-owners strongly opposed or somewhat opposed.

The strong opposition from non-owners may be due to the fact that the majority of the respondents residing outside the investigation area did not participate/engage prior to completing the survey. This opposition emphasises the need to ensure potential impacts from development of the Oxenford Investigation Area on the wider community are adequately considered in future planning for the area. This will require a wider community consultation, pending a Council decision to prepare a major update for the Oxenford Investigation Area.

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 12 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 237

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Percentage (%) of respondents 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Property owner 43% 14% 5% 6% 32%

Non-owner 7% 2%3% 15% 73%

Strongly support it Somewhat support it Neither support nor oppose it Somewhat oppose it Strongly oppose it

The length of time that respondents had owned the property in the investigation area was compared with the extent they supported or opposed the changes. A total of 48 (64.9%) property owners who have owned the property for 0-10 years and 33 (48.5%) property owners who have owned the property for more than 10 years either strongly or somewhat supported the changes. Property owners of 0-10 years who strongly or somewhat opposed the changes equated to 28.4%, whilst property owners of more than 10 years equated to 47.1%.

45 52.7% 40

35 42.6% 30

25 32.4% 20 21.6% 15 16.2% 12.2%

Number of respondents Number 10 6.8% 6.8% 5 4.4% 4.4%

0 Strongly support it Somewhat support it Neither support nor Somewhat oppose it Strongly oppose it oppose it

0-10 yrs 10+

When considering the potential long-term opportunities for increased housing and subdivision within the investigation area, 32% of property owners and 83% of non-owners did not support any change or only after 25 years. Of the property owner respondents supporting change in the investigation area, 56% supported change within 5-15 years and 8% supported change within 15-25 years. Only 12% of non-owners supported change within 5-15 years and 3% of non-owners supported change within 15-25 years.

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 13 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 238

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Percentage (%) of respondents 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Property owner 56% 8% 6% 26% 4%

Non-owner 12% 3% 12% 71% 2%

Within 5-15 years Within 15-25 years Only after 25 years I do not support any change I haven't decided yet

The responses from both property owners and non-property owners were of value in evaluation of the community consultation. However, the property owner responses have been used to assist with making a decision on the priorities for further strategic planning within the investigation area.

The strong opposition from non-owners may be due to the fact that the majority of the respondents residing outside the investigation area did not participate/engage prior to completing the survey. This opposition emphasises the need to ensure impacts from development of the Oxenford Investigation Area on the wider community are adequately considered in future planning for the area. This will require a wider community consultation, pending a Council decision to prepare a major update for the Oxenford Investigation Area.

The length of time that respondents had owned the property in the investigation area was compared with the timeframe in which they supported change. Changes within 5-15 years were identified by 63.5% of property owners for 0-10 years compared with 48.5% of property owners of more than 10 years. A total of 32.4% of property owners who have owned the property for more than 10 years did not support any change, compared with 20.3% of property owners for 0-10 years.

50 63.5% 45 40 35 48.5% 30 25 32.4% 20 20.3% 15

Number of respondents Number 10 8.1% 8.8% 6.8% 4.4% 5.9% 5 1.4% 0 Within 5-15 years Within 15-25 years Only after 25 years I do not support any I haven't decided yet change

0-10 yrs 10+

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 14 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 239

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Overall 81.7% of the respondents would like to remain informed of the outcomes and future engagement opportunities. Please refer to #72675311 data file for respondent contact details.

Many respondents used the open-ended questions as an avenue to reinforce and explain their support or opposition to the proposed changes. Reasons opposing the proposed change included:

 Multiple respondents were concerned that higher density housing will lead to greater rental and short- term visitors as well as increased crime.  Comments raised concerns over increased traffic with several respondents presenting issues with the current infrastructure’s capacity to handle traffic.  Several respondents believed the proposed changes will change the aspects of the area that motivated people to purchase property, such as being a quiet suburb, semi-rural, private and large land area.  Respondents acknowledged that the larger blocks in the area was a nice balance to the smaller blocks in other Gold Coast suburbs.  Many respondents also expressed support for subdivision but not for 2-3 storey developments.  One respondent supported 2 storey developments, but not 3 storey developments so they opposed the proposed changes.  One respondent did not believe 1000sqm qualifies as a large enough block to subdivide.  One respondent identified roads needing repairing and widening, as well as other infrastructures upgrades (such as septic) to support future developments.

Reasons supporting the proposed change included:

 Several respondents thought the area is well placed for more houses or units given the proximity to schools, shops, parks and motorway.  One respondent believed there is less demand for large property lots given the social trend towards higher density living.  One respondent stated the proposed changes create opportunities for larger granny flats to support multigenerational living arrangements.  One respondent was in favour of the higher density housing to support their home business operations (childcare services).

Other comments highlighted the need for additional infrastructure in the area irrespective of the proposed changes. For instance suggestions included a noise barrier along Old Pacific Highway, improved road access, congestion and footpaths (e.g. in Ruth Terrace).

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 15 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 240

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Appendix A – Community engagement tools

GC have your say project page

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 16 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 241

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Online survey

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 17 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 242

Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 18 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 243 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

iSPOT # 72831028 – OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA ENGAGEMENT AND MARKETING REPORT Page 19 of 19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 244 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT Attachment C (1 of 64) `

Not Council policy - For information only

28 NOVEMBER 2018

City of Gold Coast Council Oxenford Investigation Area – Community Meetings

Amanda Newbery Emma Andrews MANAGING DIRECTOR CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER

articulous.com.au Level 1, 123 Charlotte Street, Brisbane 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 245 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Contents

1 Executive Summary 2 2 Background 3 3 Engagement Approach 4 3.1 Approach 4 3.2 Desired outputs 4 3.3 Live polling 5 4 Community meetings overview 7 4.1 Agenda 7 4.2 Presentations: key messages 9 5 Community meetings’ results 10 5.1 Essential points 10 5.2 About the respondents 11 5.3 What people like about the area, and what they see as threats 11 5.4 Support, or otherwise, for redevelopment in the area 11 5.5 If redevelopment was going to occur… 12 5.6 Analysis of each question 12

6 Appendices 31 A Community Meeting PowerPoint presentation with live polling results (as 32 provided to property owners) B Verbatim answers to live polling questions at the community meetings 55

1 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 246 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

1 Executive summary

City of Gold Coast Council engaged Articulous The community meetings were well attended Communications (‘Articulous’) to co-ordinate by 61 people at the evening meeting on and run two community meetings for land Monday 15 October 2018, and 39 at the owners in the Oxenford Investigation Area. morning meeting on Wednesday 17 October 2018. The area is a rural residential estate adjacent the M1 and is close to retail and community The meetings focussed on identifying the facilities. The Council, through its obligations aspirations of those present for the future of under the South East Queensland Regional the area and their appetite for change in the Plan, is investigating this area – and many area. The meetings also provided information others – to ascertain whether it should consider from Council officers on the Council’s an amendment to the Planning Scheme to allow obligations to plan for the future of the area, for redevelopment to accommodate a greater the technical investigations the Council has number of dwellings. undertaken to date, and the timing and nature of planning for redevelopment, should the The community meetings were intended to Council decide to proceed in that direction. gauge initial community sentiment towards the potential transition. Additional community This report summarises the outcomes of the engagement activities are to follow these community meetings. meetings, particularly a survey of all property owners, and the opportunity for any interested The Council gave undertakings at the meetings person or party to have informal ‘drop-in’ to make abridged versions of the meetings’ sessions with Council officers. outcomes available to those who participated.

2 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 247 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

2 Background

The Oxenford City Plan Investigation Area comprises 197 Properties zoned for rural residential purposes (acreage lots averaging around 4,000m2) where Council has investigated land use planning and infrastructure opportunities. These areas have the potential to transition to urban development in the longer term.

The Council has prepared a community engagement strategy to involve the community, particularly landholders, in the Council’s decision making process to determine if further strategic planning for urban development opportunities should be pursued. Community and stakeholder engagement activities have been informed by stakeholder analysis.

The community consultation for the Mudgeeraba City Plan Investigation Area commenced in early October 2018 with the release of community materials (go to https://www.gchaveyoursay.com.au/oxenford), a website and invitations for property owners to attend a community meeting or 'talk to a planner' event. The final stage of the community engagement is a survey which will assist Council to determine if further strategic planning for urban development opportunities should be pursued.

Articulous was engaged by City of Gold Coast Council (‘the Council’) to provide expert community consultation advice, including the development of an agenda and presentation for the community meetings and lead, facilitate and record outcomes of the community meetings. These meetings were important to assist with informing the community on the investigation area planning studies and to provide a forum for property owners to express views and ask questions prior to Council holding a survey on future growth opportunities.

Following the community meetings, ‘talk to a planner’ style drop-in consultation events were held for both the wider community and property owners.

3 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 248 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

3 Engagement approach

3.1 Approach Articulous identified the following engagement features to assist the Council with the community meetings:

- Devise agendas for the community meetings which equips the participants with useful information about: - Why the investigations are happening - the State Government’s and Council’s obligations to plan for increased development intensity - The constraints to development in their area - Changing housing preferences - Options for their own future - Use digital technology that the community can touch and feel - Deliver a conversational and empathetic tone in the community meetings: - Remove angst and apprehension, and foster an atmosphere of discussion and clarity - Explain the planning process, its length, its milestones, and the way for them to remain informed and ‘on top of it’ - Take time to debunk untruths and incorrect assumptions about timing, outcomes, and matters which they perceive have an impact on their comfort and decision-making - Provide examples of how redevelopment could be realised in an ordered and logical way – and the controls that would need to be brought to bear to achieve this. - Use digitised response formats alongside paper-based recording - Interpret the feedback, add meaning

3.2 Desired outputs The agenda for the community meetings was designed to deliver these outputs: 1. The most important outcomes for each participant in the near-to-far future 2. An understanding of the Council’s obligations to investigate the potential for more intensive development of land in good proximity to centres, facilities and within areas already serviced by trunk infrastructure 3. Participants have a robust understanding of the planning scheme amendment and land development processes, and the range of plausible development outcomes for their own land, groups of lots, and the investigation area. This includes an understanding of: a. Hard constraints (non-negotiables) i. Green corridors ii. Wetlands / Storm water paths and retention basins / Flooding (noting opportunities for fill in Oxenford Investigation Area)

4 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 249 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

iii. Road and other Infrastructure upgrades – esp roads, pedestrian/cycle paths, water, sewer, power, telecommunications, community services iv. The timing of planning scheme amendments and the processing of development approvals b. Soft constraints (negotiable, resolved by design) i. The range of individual interests and aspirations ii. The timing and challenges of land acquisition/amalgamation iii. The timing/challenges/vagaries of land development – from acquisition through to occupation 4. Participants’ level of acceptance and/or their appetite for change 5. Participants’ level of acceptance of higher residential density (or non-residential intensification where appropriate) 6. How soon that change would be acceptable 7. Participants’ preferences for involvement in the future planning of the area

3.3 Live polling This engagement tool enables the participants to be engaged in real time. It is a digital tool. Participants use their mobile phone or tablet and log onto the website. Once the facilitator has turned on the questions, participants can see each question and answer by typing into their phone or tablet. Within a few moments, the collective answers from all participants are projected onto a screen for all to see. This tool has several advantages which made it a useful part of the community meetings: - We were able to ask participants a range of questions, from open ended, to multiple choice (both select one option, or multiple options) - The information was collected live and in real time, and - Within a few moments the participants’ answers were uploaded to the projection screen, either as their verbatim words (in the case of an open ended question) or as a live bar chart, indicating the percentage of responses for each option available. An important feature of the meetings was to allow participants to see how their views, opinions and aspirations align with (or differ to) their neighbours: - Each participant’s privacy was secured. There is no way (short of a participant actually showing their answers to someone) that their answer could be traced back to them. - Minimisation of biased answers: Often when community engagement activities seek participant’s views or aspirations, or deal with controversial or emotionally charged subjects, some participants can either not be heard over those who might be naturally more demonstrative or feel their opinions are swayed as they see others expressed forcefully. Live polling enables every participant to have their answer or view/opinion, recorded with the same weight as everyone else’s.

Note: 1 The Council ensured there was an independent WIFI router at hand so that participants did not need to use their own data to participate. 2 Where participants did not have access to a phone or tablet, Council staff were on hand to either lend them a phone or tablet or assist them with using their device.

5 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 250 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

3 At the community meetings participants were asked to restrict their interaction with the live polling so that only one device per lot was logging their answers. This was to enable the analysis to be more accurately reflective of the views of lot owners, rather than the number of people at the meeting. Our analysis of the data suggests that, by and large, participants complied with this request.

6 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 251 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

4 Community meetings overview Two Oxenford Investigation Area community meetings were held at the Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre, 25 Leo Graham Way, Oxenford: - 6:00pm – 8:00pm Monday 15 October 2018 - 9:00am – 11:00am Wednesday 17 October 2018

The breakdown of those who attended is:

Community Participants * Number of lots % of lots in the meeting represented * investigation area

15 October 61 37 17 October 39 29

Total 100* 62 * 31% (*) Some participants at the 15 October community meeting chose to attend the 17 October meeting as well. The total number of lots represented takes this into account. These participants were asked to refrain from the live polling activities, but were invited to participate in the Q&A.

Also in attendance at the meetings were: - Cr William Owen-Jones - Amanda Tzannes, Manager, City Planning Branch, City of Gold Coast Council - City of Gold Coast Council staff - Mark Doonar, Articulous - Kim Stone, Articulous

4.1 Agenda

This agenda was followed, albeit with some changes where questions from the floor required more detailed discussion. For example, questions about the following matters were asked by participants from the floor through the meetings:

- Investigation process - Decision making and makers - Planning scheme process - Traffic congestion - Road widening - Cost of infrastructure - Population growth - Property values and uncertainty - Relevance of investors and - Infrastructure upgrades eg sewer developers - Rates increasing if area redevelops

7 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 252 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Time Session Detail -30 min Pre-meeting Arrival, registration and refreshments, etc arrival 0 General Cr William Owen-Jones, Welcome, quick overview, hand welcome over to facilitator 5 min Introduction Mark Doonar, Facilitator s & Program Introductions, program for the event, etc 20 min Your Mark Doonar, Facilitator aspirations Live polling What are your aspirations?

40 min The Amanda Tzannes, Manager City Planning, City Planning Council’s Branch, CoGC obligations Why growth opportunities are being investigated, and the Council’s obligations

1 hr 10 Your view Mark Doonar, Facilitator min of change Live polling How much change? and what type? and when?

1 hr 30 Next steps Amanda Tzannes, Manager City Planning, City Planning min Branch, CoGC The next steps in the investigation area planning and consultation process

1 hr 40 General Mark Doonar, Facilitator min Q&A General discussion on matters raised during the meeting

1 hr 55 Closing Mark Doonar, Facilitator min comments Cr William Owen-Jones 2 hr Close

8 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 253 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

4.2 Presentations: key messages

The community meetings included the following keynote speakers and experts:

Speaker (in order of appearance)

15 October 15 October 17 tor

Meeting Meeting Meeting Facilita Councillor officers CoGC Expert Cr William Owen-Jones, Oxenford yes yes yes Councillor Amanda Tzannes, Manager City yes yes yes yes Planning, City Planning Branch, CoGC Mark Doonar, Project Manager, yes yes yes Articulous

Significant information presented during the meetings included the following, summarised as: 1. The Council is obligated to look at Investigation Areas across the City - Oxenford is one of many 2. The work to date has been technical 3. The community meetings are part of a number of consultation activities – to help both land owners and the Council be better informed 4. Land owners each have different points of view, which can reflect their different circumstances and our views of the future 5. There are a number of plausible outcomes for Oxenford – ranging from ‘no change’ through to ‘major redevelopment’ 6. If redevelopment does occur, there are many challenges to be met by a developer 7. The process to amend the Planning Scheme runs from now through to 2023

A more detailed summary of what was presented is included in the appendices. This covers: - What this community meeting is (and isn’t) about - Why growth opportunities are being investigated - The Council’s obligations - Investigation areas - Technical work undertaken to date - Planning challenges - Development challenges - Planning Scheme amendment process/timing - Next Steps

9 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 254 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

5 Community meetings’ results

Covered in this section: - Essential points - About the respondents - What people like about the area, and what they see as threats - Support, or otherwise, for redevelopment in the area - If redevelopment was going to occur… - Analysis of each live polling question

The live polling questions are not intended to be part of the Council’s decision making process. The purpose of asking questions has been: - To enable property owners to see there are differing opinions - To give participants the opportunity to have input into the meeting (without having to be vocal) - To help property owners to start thinking about their views on change (as a precursor to the survey in November) - To give the Council an idea of initial community sentiment - To help to inform the preparation of material to accompany survey (e.g. FAQs) and whether or not the draft survey questions in November required to be adjusted

Background to these results is included in section 5.6 and the appendices. This includes bar charts of the answers to each live polling question and verbatim responses to open-ended questions.

5.1 Essential points - A very high proportion of the people who participated in the live polling (‘the respondents’) have lived in the Oxenford Investigation Area for a very long time, and a high proportion expect to continue living there for the next 5-10+ years. - About half would prefer houses (of some type) in the area, and the retention of the area’s character - 57% of respondents would be supportive of redevelopment in the area. 40% would have reservations or be not at all supportive. - If redevelopment was to occur, about half would prefer this to occur in the next 5-15 years

10 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 255 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

5.2 About the respondents: - The number of land owners (representing 62 lots) who attended the community meetings was a good representative sample size - about 31% of the total properties in the investigation area - Most want to be more informed about their options for the future - A very high proportion have lived there for a very long time - About half would like to stay there for at least the next 10 years - In the next 5-10 years, about a third expect to be retired, and about a third expect to still be living in Oxenford - Most (86%) would like to participate in future meetings (eg design workshops) so that their concerns can be considered in preparing a draft plan for the area (should this occur)

5.3 What people like about the area, and what they see as threats - They like the rural feel/space of the area, large residential lots, quiet and peaceful setting, open spaces, green countryside, horse & walking trails, and birds - They like the proximity to both the M1 and local services/facilities - They are concerned about more people, subdivision into smaller lots & higher density, inappropriate dwellings and occupants, and loss of community/privacy/quietness/safety - They’re also concerned about increased traffic volumes & noise, and M1 & local road congestion

5.4 Support, or otherwise, for redevelopment in the area - Over half (57%) are supportive, to some degree - A large proportion (40%) are not supportive, to some degree - Half (52%) would prefer houses (of some type) in the area, and the retention of the area’s character - Half do not expect to gain any benefit from redevelopment next to their place of residence (although about a quarter would expect some increase in the value of their property) - Over half (53%) would have concerns about the noise, dust, traffic and parking issues of redevelopment - About a third (34%) would have concerns about more neighbours, strangers, renters and crime; loss of views and privacy; reduced quality of life and lifestyle, and loss of natural features, peace and serenity

11 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 256 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

5.5 If redevelopment was going to occur… - About a quarter (27%) would prefer it to occur either immediately or in the next 1-2 years - About half (49%) would prefer it to occur in the next 3-15 years, and - About a quarter (24%) would prefer it to occur beyond the next 15 years - 28% would prefer to stay where they are, with no changes - About a third (35%) would prefer to sell their property in 1-10 years - About a third (37%) would prefer to stay where they are and add more dwellings, or redevelop their own land, or redevelop as part of a larger parcel with neighbouring properties

5.6 Analysis of each question In the following pages we’ve set out for each question asked at the community meetings: - The question - The limits on answers (eg, select one option, or select any) - The number of respondents (multiple participants representing a lot - typically 2 people – were asked to restrict their contributions to just one device, so that a more accurate assessment could be made of the responses per lot) - The number of responses (this could be more that the number of respondents where the answers could be more than one option, or an open-ended question) - A bar chart of the responses, expressed as a percentage of the total responses, and - A quick summary of the outcomes Note: - The results/answers from both community meetings have been combined, and so the results will differ from those seen (courtesy of the immediate response function of live polling) at the community meetings - Responding to the questions was not mandatory and some respondents did not respond to some questions. The number of respondents varied from 56 to 70.

12 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 257 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q1 What’s your main interest in being here today?

The 70 respondents could select any of the options. There were 145 responses. Each respondent selected two of the options, on average. The percentage of total responses is shown.

12.4 a. Contribute my ideas and aspirations

31.7 b. Become more informed about my options

c. Find out how to get involved in the future 13.1 of the area

14.0 d. Hear about investment opportunities

e. Understand more about the planning and 26.9 development processes

6.2 f. Hear what other people think

0.0 g. Other reasons

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

The most frequent responses were: - 46% of respondents wanted to become more informed about their options. - 39% wanted to understand more about the planning and development processes.

13 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 258 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q2 How long have you lived at your current address in the area?

The respondents (63) were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

3.2 a. Less than a year

23.8 b. 2 – 5 years

7.9 c. 5 – 10 years

27.0 d. 10 – 20 years

38.1 e. More than 20 years

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

65% of respondents have lived at their current address in the area for more than 10 years. (35% for less than 10 years.) 38% have lived there for more than 20 years. 27% have lived there for 10-20 years. 24% have lived there for 2-5 years.

14 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 259 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q3 What do you like most about living in the area? There were 56 respondents, who contributed 96 responses. The nature of the responses to this open-ended question is illustrated in the word cloud below. It captures and displays each of the different verbatim responses and highlights those words that are used more frequently. Thus, at a glance, this reflects the most frequently stated words that most respondents used to describe what they like about living in the area. The verbatim responses are included in the appendices.

The most frequently use words (and their context), in order of the frequency with which they were used are: - Space, close (proximity), open (space), large (lots) - Proximity (to facilities), neighbours, (residential) blocks, quiet, and - (Proximity to) everything, country, convenience, spaces, and feel

15 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 260 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following table. The percentage of total responses is shown.

Location: proximity to M1 and local 26 services/facilities, separation from noise

Rural feel/space, large residential lots, quiet 41 and peaceful setting,

Good investment, development opportunities, 6 capital gain

Open spaces, green countryside, horse & 23 walking trails, birds

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

With regard to what most respondents like about living in the area: - 43% of the responses were about rural feel/space, large residential lots, quiet and peaceful setting. - 27% were about location: proximity to M1 and local services/facilities, and separation from noise. - 24% were about open spaces, green countryside, horse & walking trails, and birds. - 6% were about good investment, development opportunities, and capital gain.

16 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 261 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q4 What are the biggest threats to what you like most about living in the area in the future? There were 54 respondents, who contributed 69 responses. The nature of the responses to this open-ended question is illustrated in the word cloud below. It captures and displays each of the different verbatim responses and highlights those words that are used more frequently. Thus, at a glance, this reflects the most frequently stated words that most respondents used to describe what they think the biggest threats are to what they like most about living in the area. The verbatim responses are included in the appendices.

The most frequently use words (and their context), in order of the frequency with which they were used are: - Traffic - Development - Allowing (development), (higher density) housing, (traffic congestion), (traffic) noise, over (development), and high density (housing)

17 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 262 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following table. The percentage of total responses is shown.

Not allowing development, or infrastructure upgrades, compulsory acquisition, additional 13 costs caused by development

Elderly difficulties with home maintenance 3

Increased traffic volumes & noise, M1 & local 33 road congestion

Development sequence, commercial 10 operations out of backyard sheds

More people, subdivision into smaller lots & higher density, inappropriate dwelling and 41 occupants, loss of community/privacy/quietness/safety

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

With regard to what most respondents think the biggest threats to what they like most about living in the area: - 41% of the responses were about the threats posed by more people, subdivision into smaller lots & higher density, inappropriate dwellings and occupants, and loss of community/privacy/quietness/safety. - 33% were about increased traffic volumes & noise, and M1 and local road congestion. - 23% were about issues that related to the transitioning to redevelopment, and the knock-on affects to residents: - Development sequence, commercial operations out of backyard sheds, and - Not allowing development, or infrastructure upgrades, compulsory acquisition, and the additional costs caused by development

18 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 263 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q5 How long do you want to live in the area?

There were 60 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

3 a. I want to leave asap

32 b. 1 – 5 years

10 c. 5 – 10 years

8 d. 10 or more years

47 e. For as long as I can

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

55% of respondents said they would like to live in the area for more than 10 years. 46% would like to live in the area for as long as they can. 42% would like to live in the area for between 1 and 10 years. 32% would like to live there for 1 – 5 years.

19 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 264 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q6 What do you think you will be doing in the next 5 – 10 years? There were 63 respondents, who contributed 79 responses. The nature of the responses to this open-ended question is illustrated in the word cloud below. It captures and displays each of the different verbatim responses and highlights those words that are used more frequently. Thus, at a glance, this reflects the most frequently stated words that most respondents used to describe what they think they will be doing in the next 5-10 years. The verbatim responses are included in the appendices.

The most frequently use words (and their context), in order of the frequency with which they were used are: - Living (in Oxenford), retired - Travelling, retirement, (living in) Oxenford, working, and property

20 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 265 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following table. The percentage of total responses is shown.

Enjoying Oxenford, or in Oxenford in a 31 different dwelling

Sold, or moved away, or downsizing 14

Retired/Semi-retired, travelling, or on a beach 37

Enjoying life 8

Other (eg, did not answer, 'pushing up daisies', subject to the Council's development 10 rules) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

37% of respondents expect to be retired/semi-retired, travelling, or on a beach. 31% expect to be enjoying Oxenford, or in Oxenford in a different dwelling. 14% expect to have sold, or moved away, or be downsizing

21 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 266 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q7 How supportive would you be of redevelopment in your area?

There were 60 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

a. Not at all supportive 27

b. I have reservations 13

c. Neutral 3

d. Somewhat supportive 12

e. Supportive 8

f. Very supportive 37

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

57% of respondents would be either supportive (8%) or somewhat supportive (12%) or very supportive (37%) of redevelopment in the area. 40% would have reservations or be not at all supportive (27%) of redevelopment.

22 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 267 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q8 If redevelopment was going to occur, which of the following would you prefer?

There were 57 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

28 a. Staying where I am with no changes

21 b. Selling my property in the next 1-5 years

14 c. Selling my property in the next 5-10 years

d. Staying where I am (and in my current 12 house) and adding more dwellings for sale or rent

e. Redeveloping my own land with new 7 dwellings

f. Redeveloping my own land as part of a 18 larger parcel with neighbouring properties

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

If redevelopment was going to occur: - 28% of respondents would prefer to stay where they are, with no changes - 35% would prefer to sell their property in 1-5 years (21%), or in 5-10 years (14%), and - 37% would prefer to: - Stay where they are (and in their current house) and adding more dwellings for sale or rent (12%) - Redevelop their own land with new dwellings (7%), and/or - Redevelop their own land as part of a larger parcel with neighbouring properties (18%)

23 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 268 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q9 If a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while you are living in your current house, what are the benefits you would expect to gain?

There were 49 respondents who made 55 contributions. The nature of the responses to this open-ended question is illustrated in the word cloud below. It captures and displays each of the different verbatim responses and highlights those words that are used more frequently. Thus, at a glance, this reflects the most frequently stated words that most respondents used to describe what benefits they would expect to gain if a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while they are living in their current house. The verbatim responses are included in the appendices.

The most frequently used words (and their context), in order of the frequency with which they were used are: - None - Property value increase - Sewerage

24 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 269 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following table. The percentage of total responses is shown.

Other 2

Future development of my property 13

Sewerage/other improvements 13

Capital growth, increase property value 24

None, nil 49

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

With respect to what benefits respondents would expect to gain if a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while they are living in their current house: - 49% of respondents reported that they would expect to gain no benefit. - 24% expect to see capital growth or an increase in the value of their property. - 26% expect to benefit from the availability of sewerage, other improvements (such as fencing), or the future development of their own property.

25 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 270 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q10 If a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while you are living in your current house, what are the concerns you would have?

There were 53 respondents, who made 95 contributions. The nature of the responses to this open-ended question is illustrated in the word cloud below. It captures and displays each of the different verbatim responses and highlights those words that are used more frequently. Thus, at a glance, this reflects the most frequently stated words that most respondents used to describe the concerns they would have if a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while they are living in their current house. The verbatim responses are included in the appendices.

The most frequently used words (and their context), in order of the frequency with which they were used are: - Noise - Loss (of a number of things) - Traffic

26 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 271 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following table. The percentage of total responses is shown.

Forced to sell, decrease in value 1

Maintenance of future development rights 1

Reduced/disrupted services & infrastructure 3

Other 4

More neighbours, strangers, renters & crime: 19 loss of views, privacy

Traffic, street parking 19

Noise, dust, dirt 34

No concerns 7

Reduced quality of life, lifestyle, natural 12 features, peace/serenity 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

53% of respondents expect to have concerns about: - Noise, dust and dirt (34%) and/or - Traffic, street parking (19%) 34% expect to have concerns about: - More neighbours, strangers, renters and crime: loss of views, privacy (19%) - Reduced quality of life, lifestyle, natural features, peace/serenity (12%) - Reduced/disrupted services/infrastructure (3%)

27 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 272 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q11 Which of the following higher density housing types would be the most appropriate in the area?

There were 57 respondents who selected 125 options. Respondents were asked to select any option. Respondents selected an average of 2.4 different housing types each. Photos of each of the housing types were on display. The percentage of total responses is shown.

a. No change to the current range of houses 25

b. New houses in front of, beside, or behind existing 12 houses

c. Tiny houses (just one or two, moveable, but more 4 permanent than a caravan)

d. Tiny houses (many) in their own master planned 3 precinct or neighbourhood

‘e. Granny flats’ (self-contained, one bedroom units, 7 near to existing houses)

f. Houses on small lots (eg less than 400m2) 7

g. Houses on small lots in their own master planned 8 precinct or neighbourhood

h. Duplexes (2 dwellings in one building) 7

i. Small scale town houses (dwellings sharing a common wall, next to each other, 2 stories, with less than 10 5 dwellings) j. Larger scale town houses (with more than 10 10 dwellings)

k. Low rise apartments (up to 3 stories) 4

l. Medium-rise apartments (3-5 stories) 4

m. High rise apartments (5+ stories) 3

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 52% selected houses of some type (excluding tiny houses). 25% of respondents selected no change to the current range of houses. 22% selected duplexes or townhouses. 15% selected houses on small lots. 14% selected tiny houses or granny flats. 11% selected apartments.

28 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 273 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q12 If the area were to be redeveloped what is your preferred timing?

There were 57 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

a. Immediately 23

b. Next 1-2 years 4

c. 3-5 years 21

d. 5-15 years 28

e. 15-25 years 5

f. 25+ years from now 19

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

If the area was to be redeveloped, respondents would prefer the following timing: - 27% would prefer it to occur either immediately (23%) or in the next 1-2 years (4%) - 49% would prefer it to occur in the next 3-15 years: - 21% in the next 3-5 years, and - 28% in the next 5-15 years - 24% would prefer it to occur beyond the next 15 years: - 5% in the next 15-25 years, and - 19% beyond 25 years

29 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 274 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q13 How would you prefer to be consulted on future growth opportunities if the Council makes a decision to pursue an update of the Planning Scheme?

There were 56 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

a. I wish to participate in future meetings (e.g. design workshops) so that my concerns can be 86 considered in preparing a draft plan for the area.

b. I don’t wish to participate in future meetings however, I want an opportunity to 14 provide feedback on a draft plan for the area.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

86% of respondents would like to participate in future meetings (eg design workshops) so that their concerns can be considered in preparing a draft plan for the area.

30 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 275 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

6 Appendices

A Community Meeting PowerPoint presentation with live polling results (as provided to property owners)

B Verbatim answers to live polling questions at the community meetings

31 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 276 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Appendix A: Community Meeting PowerPoint presentation with live polling results (as provided to property owners)

Oxenford Investigation Area Community Meetings – Summary of Outcomes

15 & 17 October, 2018

This document

Two Oxenford Investigation Area community meetings were held at the Oxenford and Coomera Community Youth Centre, 25 Leo Graham Way, Oxenford on: - 6:00pm – 8:00pm Monday 15 October 2018, and - 9:00am – 11:00am Wednesday 17 October 2018

The breakdown of those who attended is:

Community meeting Participants * Number of lots % of lots in the represented * investigation area 15 October 61 37 17 October 39 29 Total 100 62 * 31%

(*) Some participants at the 15 October community meeting chose to attend the 17 October meeting as well. The total number of lots represented takes this into account. These participants were asked to refrain from the live polling activities, but were invited to participate in the Q&A.

At the meetings the Council gave an undertaking to those who attended to make a summary of the outcomes of the meetings available to them.

Slide 2

32 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 277 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Welcome Cr William Owen-Jones

Your facilitators Mark Doonar and Kim Stone Project Managers Articulous Communications

33 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 278 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Today’s program

1. Your aspirations 2. The Council’s obligations 3. Your view of change 4. Next steps 5. Questions and answers

Slide 5

What this community meeting is (and isn’t) about

It IS about: It IS NOT about: • Only land owners in the area are attending • Forcing you to do anything with your house or • Answering your questions - giving you useful your property information • Making you agree to something you don’t like • Respecting the privacy of your views and opinions, • Forcing (or allowing) redevelopment in the area and preferences • Helping you make more informed decisions • A pre-determined outcome that the Council already has in mind • Understanding your views, your aspirations, and those of your neighbours • Using a community meeting to push or favour a • What you like about the area particular interest in the future of the area • How supportive you are about change in the area • Disputing site-specific development issues • Your preferences for housing styles

• How you’d like to be involved in the future Slide 6

34 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 279 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Session 1 Your aspirations

Live polling exercise

Live polling sessions

An important feature of the meetings was to allow participants to see how How to get your mobile phone or tablet ready for their views, opinions and aspirations align with (or differ to) their the live polling sessions: neighbours: • Each participant’s privacy was secured. There is no way (short of a Free Wi-Fi participant actually showing their answers to someone) that their Network: goldcoast answer could be traced back to them. Password: goldcoast • Minimisation of biased answers: Often when community engagement www.pollev.com/art2018 activities seek participant’s views or aspirations, or deal with controversial or emotionally charged subjects, some participants can Open up a browser. either not be heard over those who might be naturally more demonstrative or feel their opinions are swayed as they see other’s Don’t do a google search expressed forcefully. Live polling enables every participant to have their answer or view/opinion, recorded with the same weight as everyone else’s. Simply type in this url: http://www.pollev.com/art2018 Note: 1. The Council ensured there was an independent WiFi router at hand Don’t click on just www.pollev.com. so that participants did not need to use their own data to participate. 2. Where participants did not have access to a phone or tablet, Council You don’t need to register or log in staff were on hand to either lend them a phone or tablet or assist them with using their device. Your responses are anonymous 3. At the community meetings participants were asked to restrict their interaction with the live polling so that only one device per lot was Please ensure that there’s only one response from logging their answers. This was to enable the analysis to be more accurately reflective of the views of lot owners, rather than the each lot or household number of people at the meeting. Our analysis of the data suggests that, by and large, participants complied with this request. Slide 8

35 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 280 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Analysis of each question

In the following pages we’ve set out for each question: • The question • The limits on answers (eg, select one option, or select any) • The number of respondents (multiple participants representing a lot - typically 2 people – were asked to restrict their contributions to just one device, so that a more accurate assessment could be made of the responses per lot) • The number of responses (this could be more that the number of respondents where the answers could be more than one option, or an open-ended question) • A bar chart of the responses, expressed as a percentage of the total responses, and • A quick summary of the outcomes

Note: This document consolidates the answers received at both Community Meetings, and so the information displayed in the charts and summaries will differ to those which were displayed at each meeting.

Slide 9

Q1 What’s your main interest in being here today?

The 70 respondents could select any of the options. There were 145 responses. Each respondent selected two of the options, on average. The percentage of total responses is shown.

The most frequent responses were: 12.4 a. Contribute my ideas and aspirations • 46% of respondents wanted to become more informed about their options.

31.7 • 39% wanted to understand more about b. Become more informed about my options the planning and development processes. 13.1 c. Find out how to get involved in the future of the area

14.0 d. Hear about investment opportunities

e. Understand more about the planning and development 26.9 processes

6.2 f. Hear what other people think

0.0 g. Other reasons

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Slide 10

36 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 281 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q2 How long have you lived at your current address in the area?

The respondents (63) were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 65% of respondents have lived at their current address in the area for more 3.2 a. Less than a year than 10 years. (35% for less than 10 years.) • 38% have lived there for more than 20 years. 23.8 b. 2 – 5 years • 27% have lived there for 10-20 years. • 24% have lived there for 2-5 years

7.9 c. 5 – 10 years

27.0 d. 10 – 20 years

38.1 e. More than 20 years

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Slide 11

Q3 What do you like most about living in the area?

There were 56 respondents, who contributed 96 responses. We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following chart. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 43% of the responses were about rural feel/space, large residential lots, quiet and peaceful setting. Location: proximity to M1 and local services/facilities, • 27% were about location: proximity to 26 separation from noise M1 and local services/facilities, and separation from noise. • 24% were about open spaces, green countryside, horse & walking trails, and Rural feel/space, large residential lots, quiet and peaceful birds. 41 setting, • 6% were about good investment, development opportunities, and capital gain.

Good investment, development opportunities, capital gain 6

Open spaces, green countryside, horse & walking trails, 23 birds

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Slide 12

37 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 282 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q4 What are the biggest threats to what you like most about living in the area in the future?

There were 54 respondents, who contributed 69 responses. We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following chart. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 41% of the responses were about the threats posed by more people, Not allowing development, or infrastructure upgrades, subdivision into smaller lots & higher compulsory acquisition, additional costs caused by 13 density, inappropriate dwellings and development occupants, and loss of community/privacy/quietness/safety. • 33% were about increased traffic Elderly difficulties with home maintenance 3 volumes & noise, and M1 and local road congestion. • 23% were about issues that related to the transitioning to redevelopment, Increased traffic volumes & noise, M1 & local road 33 congestion and the knock-on affects to residents: development sequence, commercial operations out of backyard sheds, and Development sequence, commercial operations out of 10 backyard sheds • Not allowing development, or infrastructure upgrades, compulsory acquisition, and the additional costs More people, subdivision into smaller lots & higher density, caused by development inappropriate dwelling and occupants, loss of 41 community/privacy/quietness/safety

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Slide 13

Q5 How long do you want to live in the area?

There were 60 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 55% of respondents said they would like to live in the area for more than 10 3 a. I want to leave asap years. 46% would like to live in the area for as long as they can. • 42% would like to live in the area for between 1 and 10 years. 32% would 32 b. 1 – 5 years like to live there for 1 – 5 years

10 c. 5 – 10 years

8 d. 10 or more years

47 e. For as long as I can

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Slide 14

38 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 283 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q6 What do you think you will be doing in the next 5 – 10 years?

There were 63 respondents, who contributed 79 responses. We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following chart. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 37% of respondents expect to be retired/semi-retired, travelling, or on a beach. Enjoying Oxenford, or in Oxenford in a different dwelling 31 • 31% expect to be enjoying Oxenford, or in Oxenford in a different dwelling. • 14% expect to have sold, or moved away, or be downsizing Sold, or moved away, or downsizing 14

Retired/Semi-retired, travelling, or on a beach 37

Enjoying life 8

Other (eg, did not answer, 'pushing up daisies', subject to 10 the Council's development rules)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Slide 15

Session 2 The Council’s obligations

39 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 284 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Amanda Tzannes Manager, City Planning Branch City of Gold Coast Council

This session

1. Why the growth areas are being investigated 2. The Council’s obligations 3. Technical work undertaken to date 4. Your interests, and other’s 5. Some plausible outcomes 6. Development challenges 7. Planning Scheme amendment timing 8. Questions

Slide 18

40 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 285 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Quick summary

1. The Council is obligated to look at Investigation Areas across the City - Oxenford is one of many 2. The work to date has been technical 3. This community meeting is part of a number of consultation activities – to help both you and the Council be better informed 4. As land owners we each have different points of view, which can reflect our different circumstances and our views of the future 5. There are a number of plausible outcomes for Oxenford – ranging from ‘no change’ through to ‘major redevelopment’ 6. If redevelopment does occur, there are many challenges to be met by a developer 7. The process to amend the Planning Scheme runs from now through to 2023

Slide 19

Why growth opportunities are being investigated

• Quick access to the M1 • Proximity to shops/jobs • Proximity to education and sporting facilities • Existing infrastructure (esp roads and water)

Slide 20

41 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 286 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

The Council’s obligations

City Plan Zoning Map

SEQ Regional Plan Southern Sub-region directions Slide 21

The Council’s obligations

17 Investigation Areas in total

Completed investigations 1. Upper Coomera (Courtney Drive) 3 2. Eggersdorf Rd, Ormeau

2 Current investigations 3. Goldmine Rd, Ormeau 4. Oxenford 5. Parkwood (Napper Rd) 6. Mudgeeraba North 1 Future investigations 4 7. Gaven North (Glade Drive) 8. Highland Park 9. Molendinar 5 10. Gaven Central (Hymix Road) Not investigating further 11. Mudgeeraba (Bonogin Road) 12. Gilston (Pyrus Court) 13. Carrara (Whitian Drive) 14. Coomera (Amity Road) 15. Stanmore Rd, Yatala 6 Outside Urban Footprint 16. Canelands 17. East Coomera / Yawalpah Slide 22

42 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 287 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Technical work undertaken to date

Key site features

Slide 23

Technical work undertaken to date

Waterway and storm water corridors

Slide 24

43 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 288 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Technical work undertaken to date

Wastewater - potential upgrades

Slide 25

Technical work undertaken to date

Future road upgrades, pedestrian/cycle paths, and open spaces

Slide 26

44 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 289 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Planning challenges

Planning Schemes get reviewed

Now Review 2026 Review 2036 Review

Slide 27

Source: Matusik Property Insights and APP Corporation

Some plausible outcomes

How amalgamations can affect the outcomes

2 houses on 1 house on 1 lot 2 lots becomes 5 becomes 10 houses houses

4 houses on 4 houses on 4 4 lots lots becomes 14 become 20 houses and houses 20 townhouses

Slide 28 Source: Place Design Group

45 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 290 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Development challenges

Development is complex and risky

Getting a project going Co-ordinating the details Delivery • The pedigree of the developer • Timeframes and target dates • Market depth & direction • Where is the site? and when • Valuations – site, the • Marketing plan & focus is the right time to begin? development, products • Sales and marketing • How should the project be • Construction costs, commissions positioned in the market? availability of trades • Settlement process • What will the Return on • Regulations, taxes and • Future projects Investment need to be? charges • What is the competition? How • Development finance exposed is the project to • Exit strategy failure? • How long will the development approval take? Slide 29

Source: Matusik Property Insights and APP Corporation

Planning Scheme amendment process/timing

Should the Council decide to pursue a Planning Scheme amendment ….

Mid 2019 • Council endorse development of a draft City Plan amendment for part or whole of the Investigation Area (pending outcome of consultation) 2019 – 2020 • Prepare draft City Plan amendment with input from local community • Confirm planning assumptions for infrastructure 2021 - 2022 • Prepare infrastructure delivery strategy • State Government review / approval of draft amendment • Finalise draft amendment 2022 • Statutory public consultation of draft amendment 2023 • New version of City Plan 2025 – 2050 • Rolling delivery of infrastructure to support growth opportunities (pending market demand and Council priorities)

Slide 30

46 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 291 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Questions?

Shortly we’ll have some more live polling – this will cover your views on change with topics like:

1. How supportive (or not) you are about redevelopment, and when 2. What you think the benefits and concerns are with redevelopment 3. What preferences you have for housing in the area 4. How you’d like to stay involved in planning for the area

But are there any questions about what you’ve heard and seen tonight?

Slide 31

Session 3 Your view of change

Live polling exercise

47 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 292 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q7 How supportive would you be of redevelopment in your area?

There were 60 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 57% of respondents would be either supportive (8%) or somewhat supportive a. Not at all supportive 27 (12%) or very supportive (37%) of redevelopment in the area. • 40% would have reservations or be not b. I have reservations 13 at all supportive (27%) of redevelopment.

c. Neutral 3

d. Somewhat supportive 12

e. Supportive 8

f. Very supportive 37

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Slide 33

Q8 If redevelopment was going to occur, which of the following would you prefer?

There were 57 respondents. They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• If redevelopment was going to occur: 28 a. Staying where I am with no changes • 28% of respondents would prefer to stay where they are, with no changes

21 • 35% would prefer to sell their property in b. Selling my property in the next 1-5 years 1-5 years (21%), or in 5-10 years (14%), and

14 • 37% would prefer to: c. Selling my property in the next 5-10 years • Stay where they are (and in their current house) and adding more dwellings for sale or rent (12%) d. Staying where I am (and in my current house) and adding 12 more dwellings for sale or rent • Redevelop their own land with new dwellings (7%), and/or 7 • Redevelop their own land as part of e. Redeveloping my own land with new dwellings a larger parcel with neighbouring properties (18%) f. Redeveloping my own land as part of a larger parcel with 18 neighbouring properties

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Slide 34

48 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 293 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q9 If a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while you are living in your current house, what are the benefits you would expect to gain?

There were 49 respondents who made 55 contributions. We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following chart. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 49% of respondents reported that they would expect to gain no benefit. Other 2 • 24% expect to see capital growth or an increase in the value of their property. • 26% expect to benefit from the availability of sewerage, other Future development of my property 13 improvements (such as fencing), or the future development of their own property.

Sewerage/other improvements 13

Capital growth, increase property value 24

None, nil 49

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Slide 35

Q10 If a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while you are living in your current house, what are the concerns you would have?

There were 53 respondents, who made 95 contributions. We have analysed the phrases that respondents used and grouped them into consistent and closely related themes. These are presented in the following chart. The percentage of total responses is shown.

• 53% of respondents expect to have concerns about: Forced to sell, decrease in value 1 • Noise, dust and dirt (34%) and/or Maintenance of future development rights 1 • Traffic, street parking • 34% expect to have concerns about: Reduced/disrupted services & infrastructure 3 • More neighbours, strangers, renters and crime: loss of views, privacy (19%) Other 4 • Reduced quality of life, lifestyle, More neighbours, strangers, renters & crime: loss natural features, peace/serenity 19 of views, privacy (12%) • Reduced/disrupted Traffic, street parking 19 services/infrastructure (3%)

Noise, dust, dirt 34

No concerns 7

Reduced quality of life, lifestyle, natural features, 12 peace/serenity 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Slide 36

49 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 294 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q11 Which of the following higher density housing types would be the most appropriate in the area?

There were 57 respondents who selected 125 options. Respondents were asked to select any option. Respondents selected an average of 2.4 different housing types each. The percentage of total responses is shown.

a. No change to the current range of houses 25 • 52% selected houses of some type (excluding tiny b. New houses in front of, beside, or behind existing… 12 houses).

c. Tiny houses (just one or two, moveable, but more… 4 • 25% of respondents selected no change to the d. Tiny houses (many) in their own master planned … 3 current range of houses. • 22% selected duplexes or ‘e. Granny flats’ (self-contained, one bedroom units, … 7 townhouses.

f. Houses on small lots (eg less than 400m2) 7 • 15% selected houses on small lots. g. Houses on small lots in their own master planned … 8 • 14% selected tiny houses or granny flats. h. Duplexes (2 dwellings in one building) 7 • 11% selected apartments. i. Small scale town houses (dwellings sharing a common … 5

j. Larger scale town houses (with more than 10 dwellings) 10

k. Low rise apartments (up to 3 stories) 4

l. Medium-rise apartments (3-5 stories) 4

m. High rise apartments (5+ stories) 3

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Slide 37

Q12 If the area were to be redeveloped what is your preferred timing?

There were 57 respondents They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

If the area was to be redeveloped, respondents would prefer the following timing: a. Immediately 23 • 27% would prefer it to occur either immediately (23%) or in the next 1-2 years (4%) b. Next 1-2 years 4 • 49% would prefer it to occur in the next 3-15 years: • 21% in the next 3-5 years, and c. 3-5 years 21 • 28% in the next 5-15 years • 24% would prefer it to occur beyond the next 15 years: d. 5-15 years 28 • 5% in the next 15-25 years, and • 19% beyond 25 years e. 15-25 years 5

f. 25+ years from now 19

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Slide 38

50 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 295 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q13 How would you prefer to be consulted on future growth opportunities if the Council makes a decision to pursue an update of the Planning Scheme?

There were 56 respondents They were asked to select one option. The percentage of total responses is shown.

86% of respondents would like to participate in future meetings (eg design workshops) so that their concerns can be a. I wish to participate in future meetings (e.g. considered in preparing a draft plan for the design workshops) so that my concerns can be 86 area. considered in preparing a draft plan for the area.

b. I don’t wish to participate in future meetings however, I want an opportunity to provide 14 feedback on a draft plan for the area.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Slide 39

Session 4 Next steps

51 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 296 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Amanda Tzannes Manager, City Planning Branch City of Gold Coast Council

Next Steps

The next steps in the investigation area planning and consultation process: • Completion of meetings with property owners • Community ‘drop in’ sessions • Have your say online in November - gchaveyoursay.com.au/oxenford • CoGC Council decision timeframes

Questions

Slide 42

52 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 297 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Session 5 General Q&A

Session 5 Closing comments

53 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 298 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Contact details

PO Box 5042 Gold Coast MC QLD 9729 P 1300 GOLDCOAST E [email protected] W cityofgoldcoast.com.au

54 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 299 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Appendix B: Verbatim answers to live polling questions at the community meetings

Q3 What do you like most about living in the area?

Open space The people in the area are wonderful Space. Not suburbia Good investment property It has the potential of development opportunities Open spaces Keeping horses Space. Trees. I've been here this long so it says it all. Wouldn't want to live anywhere else Block sizes and location Greenspace horse trails Open space and lot size. Space, close to facilities, proximity to M1 but still quiet Large acreage blocks, rural feel, quiet residential areas away from commercial areas, Open space, acreage, quiet, pony trails Future capital gains Location and my home The opportunity to develop and invest The convenience of the area Uniqueness and proximity to M1 Minimal residential clutter Green spaces. Large residential blocks. Large block with water views. Peaceful. Lots of birds and good sunset views. Big space. Country surroundings Space for kids to play Quiet and lots of space, not living on top of neighbours neighbours, local school, opportunities for future Open spaces low density living Space and trees Everything close quiet, handy to everything, potential investment opportunity, place for horses Walking tracks Quiet and green Open rural areas Large blocks. Lake. Proximity. Space.privacypeaceandquietroomfor kids to play Open space...no close neighbours

55 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 300 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Open spaces Large blocks Space Close to everything Position and services Infrastructure increasing with Bunnings and Kmart moving into Oxenford. Close to the highway. Large blocks, nature reserves, horses, proximity to M1, Position and services Convenience for shops, schools, daycares and parks Open space and access Large lots & peace Space, convenience, high school catchment, quiet neighbourhood, low crime, owner occupied neighbours. It's a lovely environment; has the country rural feel but so close to everything else for convenience. it is a unique place Room,access to highway Bit of country in the city The area has a country feel with no Close neighbours. Open space. Feel and proximity. To retail large blocks Close to the M One and shopping centre and space.

Q4 What are the biggest threats to what you like most about living in the area in the future?

Subdivision, commercial development Over development. Allowing subdivisions Traffic People not wanting to sell/develop when others may want to Population increases and more traffic Getting too old to deal with maintenance Increase of motorway noise Encroachment of retail and high density housing More and more people operating businesses in big sheds from their properties Subdivision. Smaller blocks and more traffic. Highway congestion Over development- townhouses etc Not allowing development Being built out Getting too hard to look after Traffic noise from Tambourine Oxenford road. Increased Traffic from western redevelopment areas

56 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 301 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Traffic congestion & noise. High density housing. Over development Not allowing us to develop High density housing/ over development Not having sewerage Traffic & high density housing Increasing Density, increase in traffic More neon lights encroaching the environment Compulsory purchase by council Its a tempting jewel sitting on the counter. Not allowing development Allowing heavy vehicles on Leo Graham way Privacy quietness traffic noise Subdivision and development for the sake of development traffic and change without allowing devt. extra cost due to devt Loss of community Poor infrastructure, not coping with increased traffic, motor way noise worsening, subdivision, strata titles allowed Urban sprawl Rezoning Becoming too busy Traffic, crime Small blocks surrounding and rezoning losing open feeling None yet Redevelopment with high density housing Surrounding areas traffic congestion Roads need upgrading High density development. Traffic getting too heavy around area Development moving in None Higher crime, rentals/inconsistent neighbourhood, NOISE Traffic. Residents using rural residential for businesses Rezoning small blocks crime losing the horse trails for the kids Being too crowded. Rental properties. More traffic. Congestion at local shops. Roads around shops too narrow. Traffic congestion, noise from m one

57 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 302 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q6 What do you think you will be doing in the next 5 – 10 years?

Enjoying the quiet life in Oxenford Sold my property for a profit and moved somewhere else Living in Oxenford Retired and living the dream Travelling Retiring Sitting in s beach! Downsizing. Quiet retirement Semi retired Retired Moving Enjoying a peaceful retirement on my acreage Enjoying retirement without the worry of mowing acerage hopefully no mortgage due to selling Traveling To enjoy life Travelling Living in Northern NSW. None of your business Same as now, thinking about downsizing Retired Bringing up our kids, enjoying outdoor spaces, walking, riding bikes. Renovating our house. Moving Retiring and travelling Working! Bringing up our young kids in great area Moving to a newer house semi retiring Enjoying retirement in peace Enjoying my Oxenford acreage property Selling after subdivision Living in Oxenford Downsizing Enjoying Granny flat on my Oxenford block. Enjoying my life the same as I am doing todq Retired 10 years Retirement at oxenford Travelling Enjoying my current acreage property enjoying my as I do today with my hobbies traveling

58 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 303 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Living in the area in a different house or townhouse Living somewhere else Living in something newer with same convenient access to shops, highway & work Retired Hopefully redeveloping Sitting on a beach Ok Ok Living in Oxenford Ok Living where I am Living where I am N\a Still working here Retired Living peacefully on an acre in Oxenford Enjoying our life Travelling, Retired Retired already Retire and travel Retiring The same, still working, kids starting to leave home Enjoying my retirement. Pushing up daisys Buy more property Working travelling living here Living here and working living same house Maintain similar lifestyle stay healthy Pushing up dai Working, raising a family, mowing the lawn, watching development grow around us, hoping traffic congestion isn't bad Subject to what the council decide in changing there rules for living Retire Watching property values increase and for us to have future development potential for our property to aid in our retirement if required. Wanting to be here as long as i can . Enjoying our life

59 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 304 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Q9 If a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while you are living in your current house, what are the benefits you would expect to gain?

Nil benefits None Capital growth None None None None Increase property value None None Increase in property value Sewerage Increase property price Increased value of my property. Future development of my own property Increase in the value of my property for redevelopment. Increase in land value and Sewerage What benefits! Increase in land value None None. Unfortunately more neighbor's. None Sell mine to the developer None..maybe more chance of selling it Nothing Capital gains for my current house No benefits none. missed the boat New fence Contact the developer! New neighbors Possible sewerage None None really Uplift in price Nil None - Noise, traffic, congestion, pressure on infrastructure redevelop mine as well but with good price None hopefully add value

60 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 305 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

No benefits None None Sewage None High fences !! The sewerage would have gone through, and we would be able to develop our property. None what so ever None Hopefully higher price for mine None Property values increase Sewer, better road.

Q10 If a neighbouring property was to be redeveloped with higher density housing while you are living in your current house, what are the concerns you would have?

Reduced quality of living None NONE Noise Traffic & noise Nouse None Noise, loss of views Noise Dust Noise More traffic, and neighbouring noise tooo late Noise dirt disruption loss of trees nature traffic Loss of peace and serenity. More neighbors, more noise, more cars Noise. Dirt dust. Loss of space & privacy Reduced services Noise, litter, loss of lifestyle, traffic Construction noises Personal disruption None I don't want change, over population Density of dwellings on that block...noise Traffic noise nuisance Ensuring my development rights weren't infringed

61 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 306 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Noise, traffic. Dust Increased noise more neighbourhood children and teenagers noise traffic Noise, traffic, pressure on infrastructure Noise Noi se Loss of country atmosphere D traffic, strangers How many houses / unit would be developed Noise Loss of something special and not able to be resurrected , ever. Forcedcto sell. More people in the area, traffic, noise. Chinese. Increased traffic, noise, crime, disruption to privacy, loss views, more crime, litter, Increased traffic Decrease in value loss of view Noise, increased traffic, loss of street parking, proximity of neighbours and buildings Loss of life style loss of privacy None None Construction Noise Increased traffic in street, crime, noise Parking for workers Traffic, NOISE, rentals, type of development next door Approval Water retention Noise Increased traddic Crime noice rental Just noise and services disruption for a short time hopefully Lack of privacy.noise. traffic. Water retension The whole atmosphere of the community would change

62 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 307 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Thank you!

articulous.com.au Level 1, 123 Charlotte Street, Brisbane

63 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 308 AttachmentEconomy, Planning D: Proposed & Environment Planning PrioritiesCommittee for MeetingOxenford 5 InvestigationJune 2019 Area Major Update Scope ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment D (1 of 2)

iSPOT:#73343051 v4 - ATTACHMENT D PROPOSED OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA MAJOR UDPATE SCOPE Page 1 of 2 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 309 AttachmentEconomy, Planning D: Proposed & Environment Planning PrioritiesCommittee for MeetingOxenford 5 InJunevestigation 2019 Area Major Update Scope ADOPTED REPORT

Fringe Riversdale A Riversdale B Georgina Street Russell Hinze Park Michigan Reserve Business Criteria 1: Strong Support (at least √ √ √ √ √ √ 50 per cent of 100% (2) Supportive 51% (29) Supportive (5‐15 years) 63% (12) Supportive (5‐15 years) 73% (8) Supportive (5‐15 years) 61% (19) Supportive (5‐15 years) 53% (8) Supportive (5‐15 years) responses* for (5‐15 years) 10% (6) Supportive (15‐25 years) 5% (1) Supportive (15‐25 years) 9% (1) Supportive (15‐25 years) 6% (2) Supportive (15‐25 years) 20% (3) Supportive (15‐25 years) properties are 39% (22) Not supportive or only 32% (6) Not supportive or only 18% (2) Not supportive or only 32% (10) Not supportive or only 27% (4) Not supportive or only Gate 1 supportive of a change *Undecided or no after 25 years after 25 years after 25 years after 25 years after 25 years for urban development response (3) *Undecided or no response (23) *Undecided or no response (7) *Undecided or no response (6) *Undecided or no response (26) *Undecided or no response (2) in 5-15 years). Criteria 2: √ ? ? X X √ Parts of this precinct are close to Parts of this precinct are close to Located further away from Located further away from Ease / cost of servicing Already approved Parts of this precinct are close to existing sewerage mains existing sewerage mains existing sewerage infrastructure existing sewerage infrastructure the area with sewerage for commercial existing sewerage mains however, may be difficult to however, may be difficult to and/or difficult typography to and difficult typography to infrastructure development service due to topography service due to topography service service Criteria 3: ? ? ? Parts of this precinct are close to Parts of this precinct are close to Proximity to existing Parts of this precinct are close to √ √ existing open space, however existing open space, however X local shopping and/or existing shopping areas and the area is not close to local the area is not close to local community facilities open space shopping shopping

Gate 2 Criteria 4: ? √ √ X Limited environmental Slope constrained land, √ Some areas have slope Some land affected by flooding vegetation and proximity to Slope constrained land and constraints (slope, √ Some areas affected by flooding constraints or flooding and some land may be required Coomera River will limit vegetation will limit extent of flooding, significant constraints constraints for stormwater management development opportunities for development opportunities vegetation) part of the area Criteria 5: ? ? Access to public √ √ Located in between two bus √ Part of the area is close to a bus X transport stops, possibility to improve stop, possibility to improve public transport public transport Proposed planning Plan for commercial Prepare a Detailed Precinct Plan Prepare a Detailed Precinct Plan Prepare a Concept Plan to assist Prepare a Concept Plan to assist Prepare a Concept Plan to assist response develop of this area for short term (5‐15 years) for short term (5‐15 years) with infrastructure planning with infrastructure planning with infrastructure planning and how to development opportunities development opportunities implications and to identify the implications on the wider area. implications on wider area. integrate with a new which responds to which responds to extent of environmental community. environmental constraints and environmental constraints and constraints. Identify the area as a future Identify the area as a future infrastructure planning. infrastructure planning. strategic opportunity post 2031. strategic opportunity post 2031. Further investigation of how to The timeframe for development The timeframe for development Further investigation of how to service the area with sewerage is of this area will be influenced by of this area will be influenced by service the area with sewerage is required to determine the the rate of growth in other the rate of growth in other required to determine the timeframe for this area to precincts. precincts. timeframe for this area to transition to urban. transition to urban. *Undecided responses (or no response) were not included in the calculation to determine strong support, longer term support or not supportive.

iSPOT:#73343051 v4 - ATTACHMENT D PROPOSED OXENFORD INVESTIGATION AREA MAJOR UDPATE SCOPE Page 2 of 2 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 310 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 CITY PLANNING CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

Refer 93 page attachment

1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY

1.1 I recommend that this report be considered in Closed Session pursuant to section 275 (1) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the reason that the matter involves

(h) other business for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government or someone else, or enable a person to gain a financial advantage.

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

City Plan policies play an important role in supporting the interpretation of code provisions and contain information that:

 states what information Council may request for a development application;  specifies standards identified in a code; or  provides guidelines or advice about satisfying assessment benchmarks in City Plan.

In February 2019, City Officers sought Council’s endorsement to prepare a package of six (6) planning scheme policy amendments to City Plan (referred to here as City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package). This recommendation was endorsed by Council on 6 February 2019 (G19.0212.011).

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement for the first four (4) proposed amendments to the following City Plan policies (Schedule 6):

 Amend SC6.7 - Ecological site assessments;  Amend SC6.11 - Land development guidelines;  Amend SC6.15 - Solid waste management; and  Delete SC6.5 - Community benefits bonus elements.

The other two (2) policy amendments relating to the new Site context and urban design policy and deletion of the Site analysis policy, are currently being refined through internal stakeholder review. A separate report (Part B) will be tabled to the Economy, Planning & Environment Committee (EPEC) on 24 July 2019 seeking Council endorsement for these two policy amendments. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 311 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

Public consultation for the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package is proposed to occur at the same time as consultation for the Major update 2 & 3 amendment package, which is anticipated to occur in September 2019.

3 PURPOSE OF REPORT

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement for four (4) City Plan policy (Schedule 6) amendments for inclusion in the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package, which is proposed to support proposed changes outlined in the Major update 2 & 3 amendment package. Additionally, this report provides a brief summary of the outstanding two (2) policies which will be reported back to EPEC on 24 July 2019.

4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS

On 13 June 2017, in relation to Phase 1 of the Community Benefit Bonus Elements Policy Review, Council resolved (G17.0613.012): 1 …. 2 That the following option be endorsed with City Plan changes to be investigated as part of Phase 2 of the project:

(a) remove the existing Policy from City Plan

(b) incorporate additional design elements into the relevant City Plan Codes; and

(c) include a level of assessment trigger in City Plan for development that exceeds density on the Residential density overlay map.

3 That a Design and Urban Context Policy be prepared and presented to Council at a future meeting. 4 …. 5 ….

On 17 October 2017, Council resolved to implement a staged approach to the development of the policy direction for building height through the Building Height Study (G17.1017.013). As part of the staged approach Phase 2, sought to:

1 …. 2 …. 3 …. 4 …. 5 …. 6 Remove the optional Community Benefits Bonus Policy and replace with improved built form provisions that can be applied more broadly. 7 …. 8 …. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 312 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

On 23 March 2018, Council resolved (G18.0323.027):

1 …. 2 …. 3 …. 4 …. 5 ….

That a City Plan policy – Design and context, be prepared to be presented to 6 Council at a future meeting for endorsement prior to being included in a Major Schedule 6 City Plan Policy amendment. 7 …. 8 …. 9 …. On 6 February 2019, Council resolved (G19.0212.011): 1 … 2. That Council decides to make or amend the following City Plan policies (Schedule 6) in accordance with section 22 of the Planning Act 2016 and the process prescribed by the ‘Minister’s Guidelines and Rules’ July 2017:

a Amend City Plan policy SC6.7 - Ecological site assessments b Amend City Plan policy SC6.11 - Land development guidelines c Amend City Plan policy SC6.13 - Site analysis d Amend City Plan policy SC6.15 - Solid waste management e Make a new City Plan policy - Site context and urban design f Delete City Plan policy SC6.5 - Community benefits bonus elements

3 That the final drafted content of the Major update to City Plan policies (Schedule 6) be brought back for Council’s endorsement prior to commencing public notification of the Major update 2 & 3 amendment package.

5 DISCUSSION

5.1 Background

As specified in Section 4e of the Planning Act 2016, planning scheme policies are planning instruments that set out policies for all or part of a local government area, that support:

 planning and development assessment policies under the planning schemes; and  action by a local government in making or amending local planning instruments; and  action by a local government under the development assessment system.

Under City Plan, development codes and overlay codes identify when a planning scheme policy provides guidance or advice about satisfying an assessment benchmark.

To support the various amendments contained in the endorsed City Plan Major update 2 & 3 amendment package, Council’s endorsement was sought to make and amend the following City Plan policies (Schedule 6):

 Amend SC6.7 - Ecological site assessments  Amend SC6.11 - Land development guidelines  Amend SC6.15 - Solid waste management 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 313 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

 Make a new policy - Site context and urban design  Incorporating SC6.13 Site analysis into new policy ‘Site context and urban design’  Delete SC6.5 - Community benefits bonus elements

This proposed scope for the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package, was endorsed by Council on 6 February 2019 (G19.0212.011).

5.2 Nature of proposed amendments to City Plan policies (Schedule 6)

City officers now seek endorsement for the first four (4) proposed amendments within the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package, being:  Amend SC6.7 - Ecological site assessments;  Amend SC6.11 - Land development guidelines;  Amend SC6.15 - Solid waste management; and  Delete SC6.5 - Community benefits bonus elements.

Table 1 below provides a summary of the drafted amendments. Attachment (A) provides further details of the proposed changes. Attachment (B) provides proposed amendments to the policies in Tracks changes.

A brief summary of the two (2) outstanding City Plan policies have been included below in Table 2 (as items 4 & 6).

Table 1: Scope and nature of the proposed updates to City Plan policies (Schedule 6) (PART A) ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED UPDATES Amendments to existing Schedule 6 - City Plan policies

This amendment relates to City Plan Major update 2 & 3 amendment package item 2 – ‘Biodiversity areas’ and item 21 – ‘Vegetation management mapping’.

SC6.7 - Ecological site REDACTED 1 assessments

A copy of the amended policy is included in Attachment (B).

Proposed amendments to the Land development guidelines (LDG) were originally limited to the changes required to support the amendments associated with the Driveways and vehicle crossings code, which was included as an item in the Major update 2 & 3 amendment package. SC6.11 - Land 2 development guidelines However, due to timing an additional change is now proposed to address an emerging improvement proposed by the Water and Waste Directorate. The amendment relates to the ‘As constructed data capture guidelines’, endorsed by the Water and Waste Committee on 21 February 2019 (WW19.0221.006). 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 314 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

The proposed changes were endorsed by the Water and Waste Committee on 21st February 2019 (WW19.0221.006). The Committee resolved the following: 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 315 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

1 That Council endorses the proposal for Water and Waste to manage the water and sewer as-constructed information as agreed with Economy, Planning and Environment.

2 Council approves the planned amendment to the Land Development Guidelines and the As-Constructed Data Capture Guidelines as outlined in Attachment 1 of this report.

A copy of the proposed amendments to the LDG is outlined within Attachment (B).

SC6.15 - Solid waste As a result of the proposed changes to City Plan, the Solid waste 3 management management policy requires amending to reflect the updated terminology associated with building heights.

Attachment (B) outlines the proposed changes to the solid waste management policy.

Table 2: Scope and nature of the proposed updates to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) (PART B) ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED UPDATES

New Schedule 6 - City Plan Policies

Council endorsed the creation of a new Site context and urban design policy for inclusion in the City Plan (refer to section 4 of this report - G17.0613.012 and G18.0323.027). This proposed policy was endorsed to be included within the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major Update amendment package.

This new policy will support changes proposed in City Plan Major update 2 & 3 amendment package, specifically item 24 – ‘Built form and urban design outcomes’ (G18.0323.027). SCXX - Site context and 4 In summary, the new policy will provide guidance on how a urban design development can deliver built form outcomes that appropriately respond to its individual site and context. The policy is based on six (6) key urban design principles that were introduced as part of the City Plan Major update 2 & 3 amendment package , and collectively underpin a design process that encourages best practice in the analysis, development and reporting of a development application. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 316 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

Deleted Schedule 6 - City Plan policies

As part of the Community benefit bonus elements policy review, Council resolved on 13 June 2017 (G17.0613.012) to remove the existing policy from City Plan.

The Community benefit bonus elements policy review determined the policy was not delivering the outcomes intended as originally drafted. The review identified that:  it remained unused while it was optional; SC6.5 - Community 5  was poorly aligned with City Plan; and benefits bonus elements  was not expected to deliver innovative and world class design across the City.

This amendment therefore implements the Councils decision of 13 June 2017 (G17.0613.012) to delete the policy.

Attachment (B) outlines the proposed deletion of Policy SC6.5 - Community benefits bonus elements.

The proposed Site context and urban design policy (which is currently being refined for Council’s future consideration) will incorporate key content from the existing Site Analysis policy currently contained in the City Plan.

As a result, the existing Site analysis policy will become SC6.13 - Site analysis 6 redundant and it is proposed to be deleted.

Please note that formal withdrawal of the Site analysis policy will be sought on 24 July 2019, so Council can consider the proposed Site context and urban design policy together with the deletion of the existing related policy. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 317 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

The remaining two (2) City Plan policy amendments that make up Part B of the package are currently being refined and undergoing internal stakeholder reviews. These two (2) amendments form the last part of the City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package. Part B will include:

 Creation of new policy – Site context and urban design; and  Deletion of SC6.13-Site analysis policy).

A separate report will be presented at the EPEC meeting on the 24 July 2019 seeking Council’s endorsement for these two remaining policy amendments and to proceed to public consultation with the Major update 2 & 3 amendment package, once approved by the State and Council.

The recommended changes to the above City Plan policies will:

 provide more guidance on satisfying assessment benchmarks;  provide up-to-date and contemporary standards;  improve useability; and  ensure accurate cross referencing between the policies and codes in City Plan.

6 ALIGNMENT TO THE CORPORATE PLAN, CORPORATE STRATEGIES AND OPERATIONAL PLAN

The City Plan is identified as a key deliverable in ensuring the themes of the Corporate Plan are achieved. The City Plan is an initiative of the Operational Plan. The proposed City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package aligns with the Corporate Plan, specifically with the following vision statements and objectives: 1.1 Our city provides a choice of liveable places; 2.3 We have infrastructure that supports productivity and growth; 3.1 Our city is safe; 3.2 We are proud of our city; and 3.3 Our community is inclusive and supportive.

The proposed amendments also align with Council’s delivery statement “What we want to see by 2022”, specifically:

 A) We plan for the future of the city; and  B) We manage the city responsibly.

7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS

Not applicable.

8 RISK MANAGEMENT

This activity supports the mitigation of Planning and Environment Directorate Risk number CO000510:

‘City Plan delivers inadequate and/or ineffective strategic/development policy’ (e.g. poor planning, built form, growth, social and environmental outcomes - including flood impacts). 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 318 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

9 STATUTORY MATTERS

The statutory process for undertaking an amendment to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) is governed by Section 22 of the Planning Act 2016 and the process prescribed in Chapter 3, Part 1, of the Ministers Guidelines and Rules (MGRs). These key processes include:

 The local government must decide to make or amend a PSP and then prepare those proposed PSP or amendments;  The local government must carry out public consultation on the proposed PSP or PSP amendment for a period of at least 20 days and notify the public in accordance with the Act;  The local government must consider every properly made submission and prepare an accompanying report about how they have dealt with these submissions at the end of public consultation;  The local government may make changes to the proposed PSP or PSP amendment to: address issues raised in submissions, amend a drafting error, or address new or changed planning circumstances or information;  After completing the relevant actions under this part, the local government must decide to adopt or not to proceed with the proposed PSP or PSP amendment, and must notify the public of their decision in accordance with the Act and Schedule 5 of the MGRs; and  The local government must, within 10 days of giving public notice under this section, give the chief executive a copy of the public notice, and a certified copy of the amended or adopted PSP, including all relevant electronic files and attachments.

To allow appropriate integration of the City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package into the City Plan, a separate Minor and Administrative amendment in accordance with the section 20 of the Planning Act 2016 and Chapter 2, Parts 1 & 2 of the MGRs will be required.

10 COUNCIL POLICIES

Not applicable.

11 DELEGATIONS

Not applicable.

12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION

Internal stakeholders from City Planning (Environment Planning), and the Water and Waste Directorate have been engaged throughout the preparation of the proposed City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package.

Additionally, officers from Water and Waste have carried out consultation with industry and key internal officers on proposed changes relating to Land Development Guidelines 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 319 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

Name and/or Title of the Directorate or Organisation Is the Stakeholder Satisfied Stakeholder Consulted With Content of Report and Recommendations (Yes/No) (comment as appropriate) Donald Mackenzie - Yes Economy Planning & Executive Coordinator Environment Environment Mark Johnson - Water and Waste Yes Executive Coordinator Development Services Water and Waste Sam Atkinson - Water and Waste Yes Coordinator Waste Collection Services Water and Waste

Key internal stakeholders from City Development and the Office of the City Architect are continuing to be updated on the finalisation of the new Schedule 6 - City Plan policy ‘Site context and urban design’. The draft policy will be presented at the next EPEC meeting on 24 July 2019.

13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS

13.1 Internal stakeholders

The following internal stakeholders have been and will continue to be consulted as the update progresses:

 City Planning (Environment Planning);  Water and Waste (Development Services); and  Water and Waste (Waste Collection Services).

13.2 External / community stakeholders

Under the statutory process, City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package is required to undergo a public consultation period (with all submissions considered) prior to its adoption.

Public consultation for the City Plan polices (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package is proposed to be undertaken at the same time as the City Plan Major update 2 & 3 amendment package, which is anticipated to occur in September 2019 pending endorsement from State Government and Council.

A report will be brought forward to Council for its endorsement outlining a draft engagement and public consultation strategy for the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major Update amendment package.

14 TIMING

A further report will be tabled at 24 July 2019 EPEC meeting to seek endorsement for the remaining two (2) polices of the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package (Part B). 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 320 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

As per section 13.2 above, public consultation for this Major Update to City Plan polices (Schedule 6) is proposed to be undertaken at the same time as the City Plan Major update 2 & 3 amendment package.

15 CONCLUSION

In accordance with Section 22 of the Planning Act 2016 and the process prescribed by the MGRs, City officers are seeking Council’s endorsement for the following updates to existing Schedule 6 City Plan policies (Part A) as outlined in Attachment (B):

 Amend SC6.7 - Ecological site assessments  Amend SC6.11 - Land development guidelines  Amend SC6.15 - Solid waste management  Deletion of SC6.5 - Community benefits bonus elements

A future report envisaged for 24 July 2019 will outline the changes to the two outstanding items (Part B) – relating to the introduction of a proposed new policy (Site Context and Urban Design) and deletion of the Site Analysis policy.

The report will also seek endorsement for the City Plan policies (Schedule 6) Major update amendment package to proceed to consultation with the Major update 2 & 3 amendment package. 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 321 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

16 RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that Council resolves as follows:

1 That the report be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.

2 That the following amendments to Schedule 6 – City Plan Policies outlined in Attachment B, and summarised below, be endorsed and included in the next Major Amendment to City Plan Policy (Schedule 6): a Amend City Plan policy SC6.7 - Ecological site assessments b Amend City Plan policy SC6.11 - Land development guidelines c Amend City Plan policy SC6.15 - Solid waste management d Delete City Plan policy SC6.5 - Community benefits bonus elements 3 That the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to make administrative and editorial improvements to the proposed Major update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) package prior to public consultation.

Author: Authorised by: Jessica Marshall Alisha Swain Planner Director May 2019 Economy, Planning and Environment 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 322 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 6 (Continued) CITY PLAN UPDATE TO CITY PLAN POLICIES (SCHEDULE 6) MAJOR UPDATE AMENDMENT PACKAGE - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS (PART A) PD98/1132/04/46

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION EPE19.0605.005 moved Cr Tozer seconded Cr O’Neill

CARRIED

775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 323 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

Attachment A & B: Pages 323 to 416 (1 of 93) - Redacted 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 417 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT ITEM 7 CAR STACKERS AND CAR LIFTS INVESTIGATION PD98/1132/-

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION EPE19.0605.006 moved Cr Owen-Jones seconded Cr Caldwell

That Officer’s from City Planning and Transport and Traffic undertake an investigation on the appropriateness and challenges of car stackers and lifts to meet the car parking requirements of City Plan and report back to the Economy, Planning and Environment Committee. CARRIED 775th Council Meeting 13 June 2019 418 Economy, Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 5 June 2019 ADOPTED REPORT

These Pages

Numbered 1 to 418

Constitute The Adopted Report Of The Meeting

Of The Economy, Planning and Environment Committee

Held Wednesday, 5 June 2019