Planning application at 29 Joseph Street, Margate QLD 4019
April 30, 2018, 7:56 a.m.
At least the size of the block is >800sqm. I was living in Albert St and the developer somehow managed to squeeze 6 units on a block across the road at 4 Albert St which is <700sqm! To compound issues, not only did the size of the block not qualify for such a development, the road frontage was 15 metres wide; when 20sqm was the default required size. Then the developer who eventually developed the approved units encroached closer to the adjoining boundary than the approved DA requirement without relaxation. The Site Cover (footprint) of the development increased without relaxation. This also resulted in less recreational and landscape area to create buffers from the neighbour. I pity the adjoining neighbours, as there is no way the Acoustic Reports required could be compliant; as the Acoustic Report was compiled prior to the DA being approved; and then the developer encroached closer after the DA was approved, without further Acoustic tests being performed to factor a reduced side boundary. With 6 units having to share 6 wheelie bins in total; when all bins are out (for general, and recycle week) they take up all the footpath (add the double driveway). And the original developer who had the DA approved is on the record for 'swapping' houses with the mayor? The second developer who eventually bought the DA approved block also removed the adjoining 1.8m boundary fences without the required paperwork to the neighbours, and did not consult with the neighbour. A new combination retainer-fence was erected and exceeds 2.5-2.7m in places on the neighbours side, and no relaxation to exceed a combined 2.0m was approved by MBRC. This is the dark side of developments that councillors and the planning authority need to address. The development did not exceed the required height to trigger Impact assessment; and was approved under a Code Assessment. Code Assessments do not require signs to be placed outside the front of the property to advise the public of the proposed development. Neighbours, and the general public are kept in the dark. Planningalerts.com.au has to be commended for making such developments public knowledge. I am sure there would be potential compliance problems when it comes to Fire Safety Compliance. After watching the Grenfell Towers in London debacle, I have concerns about the private certifiers who certify such developments. Gone are the days of Council Building Inspectors. Developers now pay the Private Certifiers.
From Zobeyda Khan to local councillor Brooke Savige