Planning Statement · 132007.799.1

The duplex development on the site has been constructed generally in accordance with MCU 2008/803
which provides for carparking at the front of the site with access from the northern frontage of Grant Street.
The owners of the site have however expericend significant difficulty in manoeuvring into or out of the
carparking for the southern unit (unit1) as the existing driveway layout does not physically work.

The applicant commissioned Road Pro Development to review the existing swept paths of the site and
Road Pro Development noted that the site was constrained due to slope and the existing unit location.
Further Road Pro Development advises that the southern carparks were not accessible in their current form.

The applicant therefore is seeking approval to modify the approved plans for the development and provide
two driveways for the site. Attachment 1 details plans prepared by Burleigh Design which illustrate the dual
crossovers.

In support of the proposal the following is noted:

        •    The existing carparking layout does not work;
        •    The additional driveway will enable the existing carparking spaces to be utilized;
        •    The revised layout will enable vehicles to leave the site in a forward direction;
        •    The proposal retains existing vegetation to the Grant Street frontage;
        •    The applicant is prepared to plant additional species within the Grant Street road reserve;
             and
        •    The new cross over does not remove any significant landscaping.


Sustainable Planning Act
Section 367 of the Sustainable Planning Act defines a permissible change for a development approval
as:

         (1) A permissible change, for a development approval, is a change to the approval that
        would not, because of the change—
        (a) result in a substantially different development; or
        (b) if the application for the approval were remade including the change—
                           (i) require referral to additional concurrence agencies;
                           or
                          (ii) for an approval for assessable development that previously did not require
                          impact assessment—require impact assessment; or
        (c) for an approval for assessable development that previously required impact
        assessment—be likely, in the responsible entity’s opinion, to cause a person to make a
        properly made submission objecting to the proposed change, if the circumstances allowed; or
        (d) cause development to which the approval relates to include any prohibited development.


The proposed change is considered to comply with the requirements of the Sustainable Planning Act
as detailed below:

        (a) result in a substantially different development;

            The proposed change does not result in a substantially different development as minimal
            external works are proposed and the use and building form remain the same.


        (b) if the application for the approval were remade including the change—
                           (i) require referral to additional concurrence agencies;
                           or
                          (ii) for an approval for assessable development that previously did not require
                          impact assessment—require impact assessment; or