Thursday, 30 August 2012

Demolition Code for the demolition of a "pre-war" building in Brisbane

Reblogged from mondaq

 Australia: Interpreting the Demolition Code for the demolition of a "pre-war" building in Brisbane

22 August 2012
Article by Tim Quirk

Introduction

Assessment of a development application for the demolition of a "pre-war" building located within a Demolition Control Precinct (DCP) is carried out against the Demolition Code. It is fair to say that interpreting and applying the Demolition Code is a challenging exercise.
The focus of this article is to provide some clarity and guidance in relation to the Demolition Code's key performance criteria by summarising recent and leading decisions from the Planning and Environment Court.

Background

Given the iconic status of the Queenslander style house, the protection of timber and tin character housing plays a critical part in preserving Queensland's relatively young identity. In Brisbane, this responsibility lies with Brisbane City Council as planning authority and the framework for its protection is found in Brisbane City Plan 2000 (City Plan).
Balancing the need for progressive inner city residential development against the desire to preserve houses for historical purposes is a difficult task for Council. The majority of DCPs identified in City Plan cover inner city residential locations that are prime targets for residential development. The high cost of smaller residential lots attracts high expectations in terms of site usability and modern living requirements which are generally incompatible with historic houses. Accommodating these expectations often necessitates the demolition of historic houses.
DCP's are mapped in an effort to capture the majority of historically significant traditional houses constructed prior to 31 December 1946. Understandably, this mapping exercise is based upon a review of Council's historical records rather than a physical inspection of every house included within the precinct. In recognition of this imprecision, and presumably to achieve performance based outcomes, a house located within the DCP can be demolished if it is not caught by the Demolition Code.
For development assessment, inclusion in a DCP is a trigger for assessment against the Demolition Code and the Residential Design – Character Code. The intent of the Demolition Code is to maintain the character of traditional pre war streetscapes by controlling demolition, relocation and removal of buildings that contribute character. Conversely, the Residential Design – Character Code focuses on ensuring that new buildings are compatible in appearance with existing character buildings.
Considering whether a proposed development is caught by the Demolition Code is no simple task. Although the Code itself is not lengthy, the performance criteria contained within it include uncertain terms such as 'traditional building character' and 'must not contribute positively to the visual character of the street'. The uncertainty associated with interpreting and applying these terms is evident by the volume of decisions from the Planning and Environment Court which consider the Demolition Code.

Demolition Code

Performance criteria P1 of the Demolition Code provides:

Performance Criteria Acceptable Solutions

P1 The building:

  • must not represent 'traditional building character'; or
  • must not be capable of structural repair; or
  • must not contribute positively to the visual character of the street.

Acceptable Solutions

  • A1.1 The building has been substantially altered and/or does not have the appearance of being constructed in or prior to 1946.
OR
  • A1.2 An engineering report must be submitted demonstrating that the building is structurally unsound and not reasonably capable of being made structurally sound.
OR
  • A1.3 The demolition of a building will not result in the loss of:
  • traditional building character within the Demolition Control Precinct where in a Low Density Residential Area or Character Residential Area; or
  • traditional 'timber and tin' building character within the Demolition Control Precinct where in a Low Medium Density Residential Area.
OR
  • A1.4 The street has no traditional building character.

Performance Criteria

The elements of P1 are considered below. However, some general principles from the Court's decisions should be noted. They include:
  • In cases where the determining features are such concepts as building character, the Court must bear firmly in mind that it must act on the evidence and not its own opinions;
  • The view undertaken by the Court in a matter involving building character is not evidence but merely an aid to understanding the evidence;
  • That a site might be suitable for redevelopment for broader reasons and is capable of being sympathetically redeveloped does not satisfy the requirements in order to justify demolition; and
  • The performance criteria operate alternatively not cumulatively.
"Must not represent traditional building character"
  • It is not necessary that the street or the dwelling are in pristine condition for the demolition to be refused;
  • A building need not exhibit each of the features identified within the description of "traditional building character" contained in City Plan, in order to be classified as such;
  • A pre 1947 building, even if not aesthetically pleasing, is still only to be assessed against those factors identified in the Demolition Code;
  • The term "traditional building character" as provided for in City Plan is not a definition and is only general in nature. It does not suggest a prototype from which only minor variations in style are permitted; and
  • The existence of remnant characteristics of a former traditional timber and tin building does not necessarily mean that traditional building character is maintained.
"Must not be capable of structural repair"
  • The test is an objective one;
  • If the cost of repairing the premises is unreasonably high, the applicant is taken to have established that the building is not capable of being made structurally sound; and
  • Items that may indicate that a building is not structurally sound include extensive areas of decay, intensive white ant attack, excessive differential settlement, cracked foundations or walls that may possibly collapse.
"Must not contribute positively to the visual character of the street"
  • The Code does not require a house to have architectural merit;
  • There is no requirement that a pre 1947 building be "remarkable" or "unique";
  • The presentation of a house to the street may be given greater weight than the presentation of the house at the rear, which is out of view from the street; and
  • For the purposes of this performance criteria, a street may be divided into segments, such that it may be possible to claim that the segment which the subject house is located in has no visual character.

Acceptable Solutions

Each of the elements of the acceptable solutions to P1 are considered below.
"The building has been substantially altered and/or does not have the appearance of being constructed in or prior to 1946?
  • Alterations are relevant in an assessment;
  • On one construction of the provision, it is fatal to a demolition application if the second limb of the test (i.e. "does not have the appearance of being constructed in or prior to 1946?) is not met. However, this interpretation has been left open in subsequent decisions;
  • If the second limb of the acceptable solution is met, the acceptable solution as a whole is met; and
  • That an alteration which has been made to the building is easily reversible is not of much relevance.
"An engineering report must be submitted demonstrating that the building is structurally unsound and not reasonably capable of being made structurally sound"
  • The question of whether a building is structurally unsound and is not reasonably capable of being made structurally sound must be answered objectively;
  • It would be inconceivable that City Plan intended to accept as appropriate, restoration to a level where premises lacked the capacity for safe occupation;
  • Structural soundness does not require structural perfection. This provision is aimed at engineering safety rather than a complete and faithful restoration of the building to its original condition;
  • The very nature of testing reasonableness will vary with the circumstances of each case and it is impossible to set boundaries or attempt specific tests;
  • Reasonable is a word of common usage and should bear its ordinary and everyday meaning;
  • The personal financial circumstances of the applicant are not relevant in determining reasonableness;
  • The provision does not provide a requirement that the standard of structural soundness must meet present day building codes and standards;
  • The subjective preferences of an individual owner are irrelevant and form no part of the acceptable solution; and
  • It is not relevant that with unlimited resources, structural soundness may be achieved. Structural soundness must be able to be achieved "reasonably". In this way, what is "reasonable" depends on a number of factors including the physical ability of the work to be carried out, cost and complexity.
  • With respect to cost, the Court has determined that costs of:
$100,000 were not reasonable;
$53,000 were reasonable;
However, each matter requires individual assessment.
"The demolition of a building will not result in the loss of:
  • traditional building character within the Demolition Control Precinct where in a Low Density Residential Area or Character Residential Area; or
  • traditional 'timber and tin' building character within the Demolition Control Precinct where in a Low Medium Density Residential Area"

  • There is an interesting and important distinction between the performance criteria and this acceptable solution. The performance criteria focuses on the character of the street whereas this acceptable solution focuses on character within the Demolition Control Precinct;
  • This provision should not be interpreted as preventing any loss of traditional building character, no matter how trivial;
  • This provision should not be interpreted as allowing the loss of traditional building character by reason of demolition so long as the loss is not "the straw that breaks the camel's back";
  • The provision prevents loss of traditional building character that is significant, concerning or unacceptable rather than preventing any loss at all;
  • This acceptable solution calls for an assessment of the loss which demolition would cause in the context of the Demolition Control Precinct. The extent to which the Demolition Control Precinct otherwise exhibits traditional building character is relevant. In the same way, the extent to which the street features post 1946 buildings is a relevant factor in assessing this acceptable solution; and
  • It is not correct to interpret this acceptable solution on the basis that demolition will be acceptable unless it results in a total loss of the relevant traditional timber and tin building character within the Demolition Control Precinct.
"The street has no traditional building character"
  • It is relevant to enquire whether the street in question has been robbed of its traditional character by the extent of the redevelopment in it; and
  • In determining the street's character, the task is to consider the visual character of the street as a whole.

Conclusion

The significant volume of recent Court decisions concerning this area suggests that Council has adopted and maintains a position that is staunchly against the demolition of historic houses. In the circumstances, when proceeding with a development application that will be assessed against the Demolition Code, it is prudent to prepare the application on the basis that it will probably (in all but the clearest cases) be refused. Supporting the application with the appropriate expert reports and specialised legal guidance will significantly improve your prospects of negotiating an early resolution in the event of a refusal by Council and subsequent appeal to the Planning and Environment Court.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
Do you have a question for the author?

Tuesday, 28 August 2012

Excellent Granny flat DEALS


"IF YOU ARE GETTING BLOG VIA EMAIL CLICK ABOVE HEADING FOR MISSING PICTURES AND VIDEO"  


The full article is below but you can go direct if you like since this is a reblog article from
http://www.propertyobserver.com.au
People
Companies

Eight two-income granny flat investment offerings for under $200,000 across Australia

By Alistair Walsh
Monday, 27 August 2012
Buying a house with a granny flat can allow buyers to earn an income from their property while still living there. It’s a double whammy.
Or investors can buy one property and earn two incomes off the one site.
In rural areas properties with granny flats can be bought for as little as $69,000, though significant work may have to be undertaken.
Property Observer has found eight houses with granny flats – either recently sold or currently for sale – that could earn buyers an income for less than $200,000.
1. 8 Little Snowy Creek Road, Eskdale, Vic 3701
$69,000
It’s not pretty, but it’s very cheap. The “quaint” weatherboard home comes with an equally quaint self-contained bungalow. It needs renovation, but it’s in a beautiful location in the Mitta Valley at the foothills of Mt Bogong. The property comes with views over the nearby caravan park. Eskdale is a town of 200 people, 50 kilometres south-east of Albury-Wodonga.
Its being market as a great investment for someone looking to do some hard work but in return the potential income would be for the house about $160 a week and the flat rental of about $100 a week. Agent Murray Bingham from RMB Realty Jindera is selling the property.
2. 18 William Street, Lismore, Vic 3324
$110,000
In somewhat better condition this post-war vinyl-clad home comes with a large granny flat that’s currently being used as a workshop. The house comes with a country garden with established roses and various plants. Ray White Ballarat agent Trevor Booth is selling the property and says self-contained flats like this can be a great opportunity to earn income.
“It does have the advantage of being able to reduce mortgage payments by generating extra income from the flat. Though sometimes they’ll be used for the exact purpose they were intended for – elderly relatives that may have sold up their property and want to be more accessible to their immediate family.”
He says the flat could earn around $70-$80 a week and the house would rent for around $150 a week.
3. 313 Finley Road, Deniliquin, NSW 2710
$155,000
An “understated” home with a separately tenanted granny flat is up for sale in Deniliquin, the rice-growing town 66 kilometres north of the Victorian border at Echuca. The town recently reopened the rice mill, one of the largest in the southern hemisphere, after a break in the 10-year drought.
The owners have apparently kept the rents for the properties low with elderly residents in both.  The main house is rented at $150 per week and the granny flat is $105 per week. With some renovation work, the main house could rent for $180 per week, and the flat at $120 per week.
With the rice mill reopened, demand for rental properties has increased. And for the first time in years farmers have been given their full water allocation and are expecting a bumper crop.
4. 443 Wood Street, Deniliquin, NSW 2710
$165,000
In the same town by the same agent, this three-bedroom house includes a two-bedroom self-contained flat. Each is fully fenced with garden sheds and its own carport. Agent Trent Lloyd of TLC real estate says the flat could rent for $110 per week while the main house would rent for $160 per week.
5. 23 Ronald Street, Robinvale, Vic 3549
$165,000 to $185,000
Back in Victoria, this time in Robinvale, this three-bedroom family home comes with a three-bedroom bungalow out the back. The bungalow is currently set up with a canvas annex covering a purple sofa. It’s on 590 square metres.
Agent Chris Katis from Barry Plant Mildura says Robinvale is an interesting case where properties tend to be rented out by the head rather than by the room. Up to nine people have been living in the cottage, each paying $60-$70 per week, giving a potential of more than $500 a week.
“We’re very short of housing here, and there’s a big demand for labourers on the farms,” Katis says.
“The rental situation happens a fair bit because of the lack of housing.”
6. 184 Nelson Street, Nhill, Vic 3418
$169,000
In Nhill, halfway between Adelaide and Melbourne, this three-bedroom period homes come with a self-contained unit. The main house comes with a large living area and a formal dining room.
Andrew Seers from Aaron Lewis Property Agents Horsham is selling the property.
7. 15 Dobbs Street, Mount Morgan, Queensland
$180,000
In Mount Morgan, 32 kilometres south of Rockhampton, a three-bedroom metal-clad home just sold for $180,000, with a fully separate granny flat. The house comes with a deck, air-conditioning, steel stumps and a fully concreted handyman's work area. The whole block is 814 square metres.
The utility meters on the property were recently changed to allow for separate renting. Agent Raine and Horne agent Kerri-Anne Percival says the property market in Mount Morgan is booming. She says a possible new mine site nearby and the purchase of Mt Morgan Mines could drive prices up quickly.
8. 6 Noakes Street, Childers, Queensland, 4660
$180,000
This house in the mining town of Childers recently sold for $180,000. The granny flat needs a new kitchenette, which agent Michael Vella says would cost $4,000, but once that’s done the flat would rent for $180 a week while the house would rent for $220 per week.
Vella says there is a massive shortage or rental properties in the town driven by mining in surrounding areas. One rental agency in the town has no  empty properties, while the others have just a handful.

Tuesday, 21 August 2012

NSW Longhall mine Illawarra Russell Vale...600 employees


Longhall mine Illawarra Russell Vale.

Gujarat bonanza: record production

01 Aug, 2012 12:00 AM

Gujarat longwall plan moves ahead

29 Mar, 2012 03:00 AM
Gujarat NRE has been thrown a lifeline with an application to begin longwall mining at Russell Vale given the green light.The Department of Primary Industries yesterday announced it had approved the company’s subsidence management plan (SMP), a crucial step needed to use $90 million worth of new equipment.
The decision is a major victory for the company, which has been battling financial difficulties and operational delays.
Executive chairman Arun Jagatramka said the approval ensured the future growth of the business and secured the permanent employment of more than 600 employees.

One of the Illawarra's biggest coalminers has reported its highest quarterly coal production, more than doubling volumes compared to the same period last year.Gujarat NRE Coking Coal's result follows the start of longwall mining at its Russell Vale colliery after delays earlier this year.
In a statement to the Australian Securities Exchange the company said coal production from its two mines in the region had topped 362,000 tonnes between April and June.
The figure was almost 250 per cent more that during the same period in 2011 and almost 150 per cent higher than in the first three months of 2012.
Commissioning the longwall at Russell Vale was a critical step for Gujarat after it announced in May that it had experienced a 60 per cent profit slump for the financial year ended March 31, down to $9.77 million.
That result was caused in part by lower total production, which was restricted to just above one million tonnes when workers were diverted from coal production to help bring the new piece of machinery online.
The latest quarterly report said longwall production at Russell Vale had ramped up to 216,000 tonnes over the three months.
Geotechnical and operational conditions were better than expected and there were "only minor commissioning issues" experienced with the new equipment.
"It is anticipated a longwall change-out will commence in the next quarter, supporting the extraction of the next longwall block," the report said.
It is understood the shift to the next longwall panel depends on approval from the Department of Planning. Gujarat lodged an application to modify its approval in May.
The application included the new mining block and the development of roadways "to ensure longwall extraction continuity" between the current longwall and future panels, the company said.
In March, the Department of Primary Industries ruled Gujarat could use its new longwall equipment in just one underground panel at Russell Vale.
Approval for the company's major expansion project, to increase production at the mine to three million tonnes annually, lies with the planning department.

Monday, 20 August 2012

WA REPORTS 2011 Regional HotSpots Land Supply Updates


"IF YOU ARE GETTING BLOG VIA EMAIL CLICK ABOVE HEADING FOR MISSING PICTURES AND VIDEO"  

Regional HotSpots Land Supply Updates

 DATA IS FROM 2010 and 2011 but is a great guide to Karratha.


Karratha Regional HotSpots Land Supply Update




Prepared as part of the Urban Development Program, and encompassing the former Country Land Development Program (CLDP), the Regional HotSpots series reports on major regional centres across the State on an as required basis.

HERE YOU WILL FIND SOME GREAT MAPS 
   Maps 1 - 5  (5039.45 KB)
   Maps 6 - 11   (5502.58 KB)
   Karratha 2010 Report   (5167.04 KB)
All pictures are in above pdf files





  The Urban Development Program (UDP) coordinates and promotes the development of serviced land in a sustainable manner for the guidance of state infrastructure agencies, public utilities, local governments and the private sector. It tracks demand, land supply, development and infrastructure in Western Australia’s major urban centres to deliver a more effective use of land, better staging of development and prioritisation of infrastructure investment to support urban growth.

The Department of Planning prepares the UDP for the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Infrastructure Coordinating Committee to support inter-agency decision-making about urban development and the provision of services to the community.


Monday, 13 August 2012

NSW Penrith gets a new SUB DIVISION worth a look !!!



"IF YOU ARE GETTING BLOG VIA EMAIL CLICK ABOVE HEADING FOR MISSING PICTURES AND VIDEO"  



NSW Penrith gets a new SUB DIVISION worth a look !!!
Have a look at 
Mountainview Crescent
Penrith NSW 2750

This is the site of a new Sub Division for Penrith
Site above for location.
And a close look.


Now what is Planned Below
Stage 2A of the North Penrith Mixed Use Development.

The proposal involves subdivision, civil and infrastructure works specifically involving:

- 27 residential lots;
- 3 integrated housing lots;
- 1 lot for apartments;
- 1 heritage lot;
- 1 open space lot;
- bulk earthworks and retaining walls;
- construction of internal roads and intersections;
- road network connections to existing or approved intersections and adjoining stages;
- drainage and stormwater management works; and
- landscaping works.

Also another picture of House Land layouts

Wonder what effect this will have on Perimeter houses around this area.
Prices up or Down?



   


Sunday, 12 August 2012

SA A look at Adelaide new hight limits


"IF YOU ARE GETTING BLOG VIA EMAIL CLICK ABOVE HEADING FOR MISSING PICTURES AND VIDEO"  

Follow up to Height Limit Changes

Here's a follow up to the previous article.  Some of the finer details from today's announcement.

Central Business Area
King William Street (currently 11-29 stories)- Airport Heights in in the Central Business area and 15 for the rest.
Morphett Street (currently 3-15 stories)- 3-15 Storeys
Pulteney Street (currently 4-15 stories)- Airport Heights in the Central Business area and 15 for the rest.
Grote/Wakefield Street (currently 4-20 stories)- Airport Heights in Central Business area and 15 for the rest.
Currie/Grenfell Street (currently 6-29 stories)- Airport Heights in Central Business area and 15 for the rest.
Franklin/Flinders Street (currently 7-20 stories)- Airport Heights in Central Business area and 15 for the rest.


Main Streets
Rundle Mall (Currently 6 storeys) -> Airport Heights, 6 storeys on the Mall.
Rundle Street (Currently 4-6 storeys) -> 6-12 Storeys
Hindley Street (Currently 3-8 storeys) -> 6-15 Storeys
Gouger Street (Currently 5-8 storeys) -> 6-15 Storeys
Sturt/Halifax Street (Currently 4-5 storeys) -> 6 + catalyst sites
O'Connell Street (Currently 3 storeys) -> 6 storeys (south of tynte street) + catalyst sites.

*catalyst sites are allowed to exceed height limits.

SA A look at Adelaide new hight limits 

City Edges
South Terrace (currently 6-7 storeys) -> 10 storeys
North Terrace (currently 6-20 storeys) -> Airport heights in business area and 15 for the rest
West Terrace (currently 5-8 storeys) -> 8-15 storeys
Hindmarsh Square (currently 12 storeys) -> Airport heights
Light Square (currently 12 storeys) -> 15 storeys
Hurtle/Whitmore Square (currently 4 storeys) -> 8 storeys
Tuesday, 27 March 2012 14:27
At 1pm today Minister John Rau announced significant reforms to the Adelaide City development plan.
The key reforms are :
    Unlimited Height for parts of the CBD (CASA Aviation Limits Permitting)
    Significant Height Increases throughout the rest of the CBD
    *Much* Faster approval times
    Less duplication
    Recognise signficances of streetscape
    For full list see the release below.. or join the discussion on the forum.
Here is the topology of the proposed changes.
This is also a workflow diagram for the new DA approval process (this process could take 180 days under the current system).
This comes shortly after the announcement of a new City Design Review Panel to assess all development applications before the DAC.
We anticipate there will be more announcements in the days to come. This is truly an exciting time to be in South Australia.

source: sensational-adelaide
   

Saturday, 11 August 2012

Xstrata breaking the record in New MINES and the IMPORTANT The Glencore factor


Wednesday, 8 August 2012

NSW Alert!!! Save this website you might need it !!!

NSW Alert!!! Save this website you might need it !!!

Ok, so I always have people come up to me and ask where do I get my information from.
My list would go on for days.
Basically I am an Infoholic, yes new word Infoholic.

I love information and this website helps with my addictions.
My drug is information and its FREE.

I don't need to go down to the street corner to get it.
Its all on my trusty APPLE computer or my iPhone or my iPad or my Apple TV.
Hopefully this will be the addiction of the year that does not harm others.
Maybe it does the opposite !
I love this link below.

Why? What does it do?

Ok so you type in the suburb you are interested in and it pops up all the LEP tracks in that area.
This type of information can lead to a further investigation into Real Estate possibilities or even
get you to rethink this area or surrounding streets.
It might show you a recent development approval that could mean that an area might be better or worse to invest in. Maybe a new LEP gave allowance to development oppotunity

so here it is.
Type in your area in the search bar on the left . See what you come up with. Could be GOLD.

http://leptracking.planning.nsw.gov.au/PublicList.aspx


Tuesday, 7 August 2012

NSW New plan UPDATES East Leppington Precinct.

East Leppington Precinct.

East Leppington 

East Leppington Precinct was one of two precincts released for planning in November 2011 by the Minister for Planning & Infrastructure.
The 463-hectare precinct sits across three local government areas – Campbelltown (64 per cent), Liverpool (23 per cent) and Camden (13 per cent). 
It is bounded to the west by Camden Valley Way and St Andrews Road to the south. Its northern boundary is formed by a water canal from Camden Valley Way to Denham Court Road. 
Approximately three-quarters of the Precinct is in single ownership, however there are also small rural holdings, market gardens, bushland and some residential areas. 
Fully developed, East Leppington is expected to accommodate some 3,000 dwellings and approximately 8,000 future residents.
East Leppington Precinct is being planned simultaneously with the adjoining Leppington Precinct.
Both Precincts sit south of the South West Rail Link and Leppington North Precinct, which is currently being planned to include a future Major Centre and railway station.
The simultaneous release of Leppington and East Leppington Precincts represents a logical progression because of their proximity to transport and a planned Major Centre at Leppington.  
Future residents will be able to access Camden Valley Way and the South West Rail Link, and support the early development of the Leppington Major Centre.


East Leppington draft Precinct Plan on exhibition


The East Leppington draft Precinct Plan is on exhibition for public comment from 18 July until 15 August 2012.

The draft Precinct Plan is available for viewing online at www.planning.nsw.gov.au/Development/Onexhibition or during business hours at:

•    Department of Planning - Level 5, 10 Valentine Avenue, Parramatta
•    Department of Planning – Information Centre, 23-33 Bridge Street, Sydney
•    Liverpool City Council – Level 2, 33 Moore Street, Liverpool
•    Campbelltown City Council – 91 Queen Street, Campbelltown
•    Camden Council – 37 John Street, Camden

For a copy of the Guide to the Precinct Planning Exhibition brochure click here.
You are invited to ‘drop-in sessions’ at any time during the dates and times listed below to speak to staff about the draft Plan.

Sessions will be held at the Leppington Progress Association Hall, 123 Ingleburn Road, Leppington on:
  • Wednesday 1 August 2012        4.30-7.30pm
  • Saturday 4 August 2012             10am- 1pm
The Department of Planning & Infrastructure encourages community members to put in a submission about the draft Precinct Plan. Submissions must be received by close of business on 15 August 2012 and can be:

•    Submitted online at www.planning.nsw.gov.au/onexhibition
•    Mailed to Strategies & Land Release GPO Box 39, Sydney NSW 2001
•    Faxed to (02) 9895 7670
•    Emailed to community@planning.nsw.gov.au

For tips on how to write a submission please click here.  
source: NSW  Planning and Infrastructure

Monday, 6 August 2012

QLD Clive Palmer plans Coolum high-rollers casino, hotel and amusement park

"IF YOU ARE GETTING BLOG VIA EMAIL CLICK ABOVE HEADING FOR MISSING PICTURES AND VIDEO"  

Clive Palmer plans Coolum high-rollers casino, hotel and amusement park


  • The Australian 
  • August 03, 2012 8:38PM
  • watch Video below



    source:
    BILLIONAIRE Clive Palmer has today unveiled $2.5 billion plans for a new airport, beachfront hotel and retail development, casino, theme park, water park, aviary and aquarium at Coolum.
    Professor Palmer said the project, which would also include a monorail, would create 9000 construction jobs and help make the Sunshine Coast one of the most popular tourism regions in the world.
    He said the beachfront hotels would add 1000 new rooms. The land will need to be purchased, including state government land on the Coolum beachfront.




    Mr Palmer also unveiled plans for a Sunshine Coast International Airport.
    "The new airport will be capable of taking A380s and 747 Jumbo jets from Singapore, Beijing and Tokyo directly to the Sunshine Coast,'' Mr Palmer said.
    The mining magnate also detailed plans for a convention centre to accommodate 5000 people.
    He said employment at the Coolum Palmer Resort would grow to 2500 people.
    Plans include a high rollers casino, an aquarium offering an "unforgettable experience", an aviary to accommodate multiple species of native Australian birds in a sustainable environment, a beachside water park and a theme park.
    "The theme park has been designated for an 80 acre area and our options include family orientated attractions,'' he said.
    Mr Palmer signalled he would invest in a new international airport for the Coast.
    "Hawaii and other Pacific nations have taken all the real tourism growth out of the Australian and Queensland economies,'' Professor Palmer said.
    "We have not been able to compete with the beachfront development at Waikiki in Hawaii or with Fiji and other destinations because of restrictions.''
    "We also plan to build a convention centre which can accommodate 5000 people and have underground parking for up to 3000 cars,'' he said.
    "We aslo plan to operate an ocean-going hovercraft service with capacity for up to 400 people from the Brisbane CBD to Coolum,'' he said.
    Mr Palmer said the redevelopment plans featured a significant boost to the dining offerings currently available at the Palmer Coolum Resort.
    "We want people at Noosa to come here to shop and eat,'' he said.
    "The new resort will boast international retail brands and a wide spectrum of food and entertainment experiences,'' Mr Palmer said.
    He said the development proposals would be put to the Sunshine Coast community for consideration.
    "We will spend the next six months seeing if the community wants the Sunshine Coast to lead the world," he said.
    "The construction phase would take approximately three years."

    Sunday, 5 August 2012

    QLD A $1 BILLION development at Pimpama


    "IF YOU ARE GETTING BLOG VIA EMAIL CLICK ABOVE HEADING FOR MISSING PICTURES AND VIDEO"  

    QLD A $1 BILLION development at Pimpama

    source:Sarah Danckert

    CELEBRITY landscape designer and horticulturist Jamie Durie has been appointed to design the landscaping and gardens at LM Investment Management's $1 billion residential development on the Gold Coast.
    The Maddison Estate on the Gold Coast's Northern Corridor will cover 118ha and house 3500 people in a mix of housing, including apartments, when complete.
    click link to see council docs:
    http://www.councilofmayorsseq.qld.gov.au/docs/DAPR-OWLS/DAPR-OWLS-eUpdate-From-Councils-perspective-FINAL.pdf




    source:goldcoast.com.au

    A $1 BILLION development at Pimpama is set to change the shape of the Gold Coast's northern corridor.

    Maddison Estate is a 118ha master-planned residential community which will eventually house 3500 residents.

    It will have a mix of houses, townhouses, apartments, shops, restaurants and world-class sporting facilities. Approval has been granted for buildings up to five storeys close to the heart of the development.

    There will be a village square, a central park with an amphitheatre, six recreation parks and three conservation parks planned.

    A wellness park will have full-size tennis courts, netball, basketball courts and other sporting facilities.

    The central park will house an amphitheatre, a swing complex for kids and beach volleyball courts as well as a range of cafes and bars.

    Landscape designer and television host Jamie Durie and Durie Design have been hired to create the landscaped parks and gardens.

    The project is being delivered by LM Investment Management Ltd, headed by Peter Drake, on behalf of investors in the LM Managed Performance Fund.

    "Maddison will set a new standard for residential living globally and we are delighted to announce the appointment of such an iconic figure as Jamie Durie to create stand-out landscape designs and gardens for Maddison," Mr Drake said.

    Work on stage one of the project started last month and the development, expected to create hundreds of construction jobs, will be rolled out in stages over the next seven years.

    The first homes are due to be released to the market in September.

    Under a previous joint venture partnership, 31 individual, existing allotments were amalgamated over several years to form this major project, previously named Arrowtown.

    The previous joint venture partnership between LM Investment Management Ltd (LM) and Young Land Corporation was mutually dissolved in 2010.

    The project's director Luke Barnett said Maddison, bounded by Rifle Range and Nambucca roads, was a "major shot in the arm for the northern Gold Coast".

    "We believe this development will change the face of the area," he said. "It is significantly different to other offerings because the urban design and the amount and quality of the parks are pretty special."

    Mr Barnett said the project was aimed at people buying their second or third home or downsizers, rather than first homebuyers.

    "We are pitching ourselves above other estates because we believe there is already a lot of first homebuyer product in this area," he said.

    There are also hopes the project may help kickstart the long-delayed Coomera Town Centre.

    The city's northern corridor was named as the only hotspot on the Gold Coast for building and population growth.
    Recent Colliers International research found the Gold Coast had 127 development projects in the pipeline worth $13.577 billion.
    source:
     It’s anticipated, the ground-breaking Maddison Estate is expected to be finished in about seven years.

    Stage one is being launched onto the market later this year and with a highly anticipated sales rush expected from both local and international buyers.

    LM is a privately owned, Australian fund manager that holds significant property expertise through the management of its investment funds.  Via the LM Funds, LM provides senior debt funding and participates in equity opportunities across prime assets spanning the residential, commercial, aged care, industrial and retail sectors of Australia.  Over the past 14 years, LM has financed the successful delivery of some 400 projects on behalf of investors in the LM Funds.  LM holds only Australian assets with a gross realisable value in excess of A$3 billion under management.

    About LM Investment Management Ltd (LM):

    •   Markets investment products licensed IFAs and institutions, rather than the investing public.
    •   Receives investment inflows from over 70 countries, and is further expanding in the UK and the Americas.
    •   Employs 130 staff worldwide for the marketing and management of the LM funds and its assets.
    •   Operates from 10 offices worldwide – Gold Coast, Sydney and Perth in Australia, Auckland and Queenstown in New Zealand, Hong Kong, Bangkok, London, Dubai and Johannesburg.
    •   Provides Australian-only investment products across a range of asset classes: cash; savings; conservative, enhanced and retirement income – debt securities and cash; Luxembourg domiciled SICAV-SIF; Australian equities – fully protected income and capital protected growth.

    http://www.maddisonestate.com.au/

    01:01pm AEST