MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
The 4470 meeting of the Brisbane City Council,
held at City Hall, Brisbane
on Tuesday 9 June 2015
at 2pm
Prepared by:
Council and Committee Liaison Office
Chief Executive’s Office
Office of the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer
[4470 (Ordinary) meeting – 9 June 2015]
/
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE ?? MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY ??
AT 2PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRESENT:
OPENING OF MEETING:
MINUTES:
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
QUESTION TIME:
CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS:
ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE
ASTORES BOARD SUBMISSION – PROVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS
BSTORES BOARD SUBMISSION – SUPPLY AND MAINTENANCE OF SPECIALIST MOBILE PLANT TO QUARRIES AND ASPHALT PLANTS
CANNUAL OPERATIONAL PLAN PROGRESS AND QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 2015
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
ACOMMITTEE PRESENTATION – PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN TIMERS PROJECT UPDATE
BPETITIONS – CLEVELAND STREET, GREENSLOPES
PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE
ACOMMITTEE PRESENTATION – QUT CITYCAT TERMINAL PROJECT
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE
ADEVELOPMENT APPLICATION UNDER SUSTAINABLE PLANNING ACT 2009: MULTIPLE DWELLING (555 UNITS), CENTRE ACTIVITIES (COMMUNITY USE, FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, OFFICE AND/OR SHOP) AND BUILDING WORK ON QUEENSLAND HERITAGE PLACE (MIDDENBURY HOUSE) (2 STAGES) ON LAND AT 600 CORONATION DRIVE, TOOWONG - SUNLAND DEVELOPMENTS NO. 8 PTY LTD
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
ACOMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BRISBANE BOTANIC GARDENS
FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE
ACOMMITTEE PRESENTATION – FIRE PREPAREDNESS – PLANNED BURN SESSION BRIEFING 2015
BPETITION – OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED TREE PLANTING IN FRONT OF THE RIVER GALLERY APARTMENTS AT 6MERTHYRROAD, NEW FARM
BRISBANE LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE
ACOMMITTEE PRESENTATION – YOUTH DEVELOPMENT TEAM - YOUTH ENTERPRISE PROGRAM
FINANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
ACOMMITTEE PRESENTATION – UPDATE ON COUNCIL’S EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS
BCOMMITTEE REPORT – FINANCIAL REPORTS (ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, RATES, INVENTORY, ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, PROVISIONS AND MALLS) FOR THE PERIOD END MARCH 2015
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:
GENERAL BUSINESS:
QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:
[4470 (Ordinary) meeting – 9 June 2015]
- 1 -
PRESENT:
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) – LNP
The Chairman of Council, CouncillorMargaretdeWIT (Pullenvale Ward)– LNP
LNP Councillors (and Wards) / ALP Councillors (and Wards)Krista ADAMS (Wishart)
Matthew BOURKE (Jamboree)
Amanda COOPER (Bracken Ridge)
Vicki HOWARD (Central)
Steven HUANG (Macgregor)
Fiona KING (Marchant)
GeraldineKNAPP (The Gap)
Kim MARX (Karawatha)
PeterMATIC (Toowong)
Ian McKENZIE (Holland Park)
David McLACHLAN (Hamilton)
Ryan MURPHY (Doboy)
Angela OWEN-TAYLOR (Parkinson)(Deputy Chairman of Council)
Adrian SCHRINNER (Chandler) (Deputy Mayor)
Julian SIMMONDS (Walter Taylor)
Andrew WINES (Enoggera)
NormWYNDHAM (McDowall) / Milton DICK (Richlands)(The Leader of the Opposition)
Helen ABRAHAMS (The Gabba) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition)
PeterCUMMING (Wynnum Manly)
KimFLESSER (Northgate)
SteveGRIFFITHS (Moorooka)
VictoriaNEWTON (Deagon)
ShayneSUTTON (Morningside)
Independent Councillor (and Ward)
Nicole JOHNSTON (Tennyson)
OPENING OF MEETING:
The Chairman, Councillor Margaret de WIT, opened the meeting with prayer, and then proceeded with the business set out in the Agenda.
MINUTES:
641/2014-15
The Minutes of the 4469 meeting of Council held on 2 June 2015, copies of which had been forwarded to each Councillor, were presented, taken as read and confirmed on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY, seconded by Councillor Kim MARX.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Mrs Josette Mathers - Development proposed for 153 Taylor Street, Bulimba
File number: 137/220/701/223
Chairman:I would like to call on Mrs Josette Mathers who will address the Chamber on a development proposed for 153 Taylor Street, Bulimba. Orderly, would you please show Mrs Mathers in.
Mrs Mathers, you have five minutes; please proceed.
Mrs Josette Mathers:Thank you. Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors; thank you for your time. Thank you also to the supporters in the gallery who have made the effort to come today. I really appreciate it. I am here in my capacity as a member of the Morningside Ward Development Advisory Panel to request that Council vigorously defend its refusal of a development application for 153Taylor Street, Bulimba, currently before the Planning and Environment Court.
Council has justifiably refused this application as it does not comply with relevant requirements of Brisbane City Plan 2000 or the Sustainable Planning Act 2009. However, the applicant is treating the planning process with disdain by stating in the notice of appeal that even if the application does conflict with City Plan, it should be approved. For those unfamiliar with the area, the site is prime, north-facing river front land within six kilometres of the CBD, immediately to the east of Bulimba Barracks site which is soon to be redeveloped, and directly opposite the International Cruise Terminal and developments at Portside and North Shore, Hamilton.
The type of development proposed is inappropriate for this location, given its close proximity to existing residential areas and its potential for future residential development. The DA is for the construction of two large warehouses with 20 loading bays. The facility will operate 24-7 and be serviced by 19-metre long articulated vehicles using roads that are not designed to carry heavy vehicles, and are not mapped as primary freight access routes.
The applicant has refused Council's request for a two-hectare land dedication for a public park and most recent plans still show a significant portion of riverfront as inaccessible to the public, in contravention of numerous planning guidelines and policies, including the Bulimba District Neighbourhood Plan and the Brisbane River Corridor Planning Scheme Policy. Councillor Amanda COOPER is on record as stating that Council would require redevelopment of the BulimbaBarracks site to provide public parkland and community access to the river's edge; this same requirement should apply to 153 Taylor Street.
Contrary to the applicant's claim in the notice of appeal, the site is highly visible from residential areas to the north, south and west. Council, in its refusal, has acknowledged that it is unlikely that screening and buffering can address this adequately. Our local community is extremely concerned by the intrusion of heavy vehicles into a residential and light industrial area. We are already subjected to heavy vehicles using local residential streets to access light industries which have outgrown their current location in Taylor Street. Roads are blocked while trucks are unloaded. Trucks reverse the full length of residential blocks. They lie idle outside houses in the early hours of the morning waiting for businesses to open. They double park along Taylor Street daily.
Council has been provided with photographic evidence of these occurrences, and Council's contact centre is regularly called. The current configuration of Taylor Street and difficulty in manoeuvring means that truck drivers prefer to use residential streets. It is already impossible to police and will only worsen if this application is successful.
The applicant in the notice of appeal has stated that traffic will not intrude into residential areas because access will be via Taylor Street. This statement is misleading, because in order to reach Taylor Street, trucks have to pass existing houses on the south side of Lytton Road.
Road safety is a major concern of residents and commuters who use LyttonRoad. It is the route to take local children to Balmoral State High and Bulimba State School, and it is also the route for Brisbane City and private school buses. Adults and children alike cross Lytton Road from their homes to their bus stops. The road is a major cycle route, and with a lack of dedicated turning lanes, vehicles are frequently forced into cycle lanes to pass around turning vehicles, endangering cyclists. Adding a minimum of 240 heavy vehicles daily to this situation increases the risk of accidents.
The community has been vocal in their opposition to this development. Two community petition submissions have been circulated, one following Council's information request, and another following the applicant's response. These were signed by more than 730 and 540 people respectively. In total, 192 valid objections were submitted to Council. Some 433 people like the Facebook page created to inform people about this development.
The LORD MAYOR and Councillor COOPER can confirm that many people emailed them requesting that the DA be refused outright, and that any appeal be vigorously defended in the Planning and Environment Court. On behalf of local residents, I am again requesting that Council listens to ratepayers and provides sufficient resources to defend its decision to refuse this inappropriate development application. Thank you.
Chairman:Thank you, Mrs Mathers; if you would like to just take a seat for a moment. Councillor COOPER, would you like to respond?
Response by Councillor Amanda Cooper, Chairman of the Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment Committee
Councillor COOPER:Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I would like to thank Mrs Mathers for coming in to address Council this afternoon. I would also like to thank those in the public gallery who also came along to support you because I understand it can be a bit daunting coming into the Council Chamber.
Before I speak on this matter, it is just important to note that this is an application that was refused by Council and is now being appealed to the Planning and Environment Court. So it is a matter that is before the court, and any outcome of that matter will be a decision of the court. So Council cannot speak of it in terms of determining the outcome; the court will determine the outcome.
Council did refuse this application, and of course we will be going forward and participating in the process in response to follow through on our decision to refuse that application. There were a number of people that provided feedback, and that feedback was certainly carefully considered by the Council officers. The application itself was lodged with Council on 26 June last year, and it was lodged under the former planning scheme, Brisbane City Plan 2000.
It was an application to carry out building work and for a material change of use under the former City Plan. It was a code application. The site sits within the Bulimba District Neighbourhood Plan which was adopted in May 2012. Of course, it was supported, I am delighted to say, by all the Councillors in this place, including your local Councillor. I know that your local Councillor was so happy with the outcome of the Neighbourhood Plan that she gave the Council officers chocolates, and she loves me to say that, Mrs Mathers, because she is very proud of that Neighbourhood Plan.
In this application, the developer proposed four stages: one stage each for a warehouse, a stage each for hard stand area and the site itself is over 4.1hectares. This site is zoned under Brisbane City Plan 2000 as general industry, and it has been zoned for this type of use since I believe the 1970s. So of long standing, it has been an area that has been zoned for some kind of industrial outcome.
As part of the application, the developer proposed just 2,870 square metres of park fronting the river as opposed to the two hectares—so significantly more—required under the Priority Infrastructure Plan. The developer argued that the remaining park required by Council could and should be provided by the Bulimba Barracks site, should it be redeveloped. Council issued an information request on 7 August 2014, and requested the proposal be substantially redesigned, given the infrastructure requirements which included a two-hectare park, a sewer upgrade for QUU, road widening and road works to Taylor Street, a six-metre minimum vegetation buffer to protect the mangroves along the tidal drain, an acoustic report, a stormwater management plan.
They sought to clarify the proposed hours of operation, as well as ensuring the proposed warehouses would be in line with surrounding residences. So, a number of significant issues that the applicant was required to respond to.
There was a response to the information request on 5 March this year. The officers considered this response and, of course, the submissions made by local residents such as yourself, and there was a range of different views. Some people had quite diverging views as to what was appropriate. But Council officers made a decision to refuse the application, which was done on 30 April. Of course, as you pointed out, it has been challenged in the Planning and Environment Court, and Council will, as it always does, have all resources appropriate to defend that decision in the court. Of course, I understand that the local Councillor has sought for Council to vigorously defend the application. That is always the case that Council does go along to the court and does enter into all of the requirements that it must do to defend its decision in this regard.
There has also been another application in the local area that did go through this process, down at Byron Street. That was an application that took nearly three years to be resolved through the court process. Council did defend that at considerable expense to ratepayers. I understand that the local Councillor was comfortable with the outcome as a consequence of that. So this process will be followed through with this application. It is certainly something that Council has no hesitation in undertaking. Thank you very much for coming in this afternoon.
Chairman:Thank you, Mrs Mathers.
Mr Andrew Gilbert - Development Application number A003997103, 174 Logan Road, Woolloongabba
File number: 137/220/701/225
Chairman:I would like to call on Mr Andrew Gilbert who will address the Chamber on a development application at 174 Logan Road, Woolloongabba.
Mr Gilbert, you have five minutes; please proceed.
Mr Andrew Gilbert:Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors. I am presenting on behalf of the Woolloongabba Community Action Group regarding the impact of over-development of Woolloongabba next to character residential houses, namely the development of South City Square. The developers are misrepresenting the community's support for their over-developed small sites neighbouring longstanding character timber and tin communities.
We argue there is no evidence of any community support in this case. SouthCity Square is not appropriate due to it actually being so close to character residential properties and it has actually been characterised as 2 to 5 flood zone. They want to build an underground full service supermarket right where the site floods the most. Our local community has made it clear that we want the developers to play within the rules and the city and neighbourhood plans, but it remains clear that, if they tick a simple box on an application, that all becomes redundant, especially where over-development next to timber and tin residential houses are concerned.
The community feel these developments deny us the basic rights to privacy, sunlight, ability to grow lawns and trees, and solar panels on our roofs. The developer has asked for a relaxation on heights, scale and bulk, yet wants 15years to complete this development.
Furthermore, the development applicant has recently responded to Council's information request with amended drawings in a report, but the height, bulk and scale of the proposed buildings have not changed. The Council's information request for a reduction in height and scale has not been addressed or considered at all in the applicant's response.
Therefore, we request the following changes to the proposed development before it is approved: all heights on our eastern boundary need to be reduced. The required road widening of Deshon Street and a bus indentation on LoganRoad needs to happen prior to any construction to minimise the traffic disruption. Stormwater upgrades have recently been completed. This could have happened at the same time.
Eastwood Apartments and Quest Apartments have recently been completed nearby. The landscape plans clearly showed hard-planted trees and benches, but now they are completed, there are none there. Not only have they told the Council that Eastwood is 100 per cent sold, it is yet to lease out one of the last commercial spaces which has taken two years. The apartments are now short-term accommodation to fill the building. This shows signs of no demand in the area. This is not an indication of high demand. They never applied for a material change of use for short-term accommodation. It is things like this that create mistrust from our community.
Community groups are gaining more support by merging together. This indicates our groups and Brisbane residents united will make this Council accountable for its actions in the future, particular in regards to applications that are performance-based, with no actual visibility to communities having a guideline to be able to create properly formed submissions.
To conclude, I would like to leave you with some issues to ponder: does this site protect my neighbours from floods? We do not think it will. It will greatly reduce the value of our properties and, more importantly, diminish our quality of life and that of our families and neighbours. Our parking is restricted to the point where, in some streets, you cannot get a fire truck down the street when it is at capacity. Thank you.
Chairman:Thank you, Mr Gilbert; if you would like to just take a seat. CouncillorCOOPER, would you care to respond?
Response by Councillor Amanda Cooper, Chairman of the Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment Committee
Councillor COOPER:Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you Mr Gilbert for coming in today and speaking about this application. I understand that you were due to come into Council last week, so you were scheduled to come in last week but you had to cancel due to your work schedule. I understand that, of course. But you did actually meet with me the very next day, so we did get to catch up and have a conversation. So I very much appreciate you being such a strong advocate on behalf of your local area. I think that is absolutely appropriate.