Skip to the record
Search everything, all in one place.

Original source · versioned page text

2019-12-16 General Committee Agenda

of 51

Page text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                 16 DECEMBER 2019




The applicant subsequently appealed the decision seeking that the pool and deck extension be
approved. During the course of the appeal court mediation was attended with the appellant and
the court registrar and an expert joint report was subsequently prepared by the coastal
engineering consultants for the applicant and Council.
The outcome of the joint expert report process is agreement by the coastal engineering experts
that the pool can be built subject to extensive geotechnical works including substantial micro-
piling. In light of this agreement, Council’s Barrister was asked for advice on the likely prospects
for the appeal as the joint report by the coastal engineers is the key factor in this appeal.
The following parts of the coastal engineering joint expert report is particularly instructive:
Notably through the appeal review process with Council’s experts and legal team, the applicant
was advised that Council no longer sought to rely on reasons 4, 7 and 8.
Assessment in Relation the Reasons for Refusal
Our agreed position in relation the reasons of refusal area as follows:
1.    The proposal is in conflict with the assessment benchmarks of the State Planning
      Policy as it proposes development in an Erosion Prone Area and Natural Hazard
      Area.
      While this reason is correct, the proposed geotechnical design ensures that, irrespective of
      coastal erosion and subsequent slop failure and reprofiling, the pool structure will remain in
      place following a 100 year storm tide and wave erosion event.
2     Development seaward of the Coastal Building Line is contrary to the building
      setbacks contained in the Planning Scheme and the setback provided under State
      Code 8; Coastal Development and Tidal Works of the State development assessment
      provisions.
      This is a matter for the planners and Court to consider.

                                                                                        Page 30 of 51
Log in to download the original file

2019-12-16 General Committee Agenda(PDF, 4MB).pdf · 4.4 MB (large file)

Large file: the download may take up to a minute.

Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.