RFI - Appendix 2 - Caravan Parks v Rockhampton Regional Council Anor 2018 QPEC 52 · MCU19/0117

                                                   21

                 “use, in relation to premises, includes any use incidental to and necessarily
                  associated with the use of the premises.”

 [97]   To satisfy the definition of use, the RV accommodation was required to be
        ‘unavoidably’ or ‘inevitably’ involved in the park use22. No party contended this test
        was satisfied. The evidence did not suggest otherwise.

 [98]   The RV accommodation use, when started, involved a new use of the land. The new
        use was, by definition in s.10 of SPA, a material change of use. As to the proper
        characterisation of the new use, it did not fall within the definition of Caravan/Cabin
        Park in the 2005 Planning Scheme. In July 2014, the definition of this use was in the
        following terms:


                   Caravan / Cabin Park                       Any premises used for the parking
                                                              and/or siting of caravans (with or
                                                              without annexures), relocatable
                                                              homes, onsite cabins or tents for the
                                                              purpose of providing residential
                                                              accommodation for fee or reward.
                                                              The term also includes any
                                                              manager’s office and residence, any
                                                              amenity       buildings     and     any
                                                              recreation, entertainment, kiosk or
                                                              other facilities that cater exclusively
                                                              for    the     occupants      of     the
                                                              Caravan/Cabin Park.

 [99]   RV accommodation did not fall within the definition above because, whilst it involves
        premises used for the parking of caravans (and the like) for the purpose of providing
        residential accommodation, it does so for no fee or reward.

[100]   There was no other defined use in the 2005 Planning Scheme that properly
        characterised the RV accommodation use when it started in July 2014. The use was
        therefore an undefined use for the purpose of that planning scheme. This was fairly
        conceded by Mr Ovenden.

[101]   The making of a material change of use for an undefined use in the North
        Rockhampton Residential Consolidation Area in the 2005 Planning Scheme was
        assessable development, requiring an impact assessable development application.
        The Council at no stage during the life of the 2005 Planning Scheme obtained a
        development approval to authorise the carrying out of this assessable development.

[102]   The start of the RV accommodation use in late July 2014, being a new use of the land,
        occurred without the required effective development approval. This contravened
        s.578(1) of SPA. This provision relevantly provided at the time:




 22
        Boral Resources (Qld) Ltd v Cairns City Council [1997] 2 Qd R 31, 35 and Brisbane City Council v
        Bemcove Pty Ltd (1998) 104 LGERA 1, [5].