6 - LEGAL ADVICE ABOUT COVENANT - Christopher Hughes QC Advice

Christopher Hughes Q.C. Michael Williamson

Barrister-at-Law

Level 8 Byth Chambers
Inns of Court Level 8
107 North Quay Quay Central
BRISBANE QLD 4000 95 North Quay
Phone: (07) 3210 0788 BRISBANE QLD 4000
[email protected] Phone: (07) 3236 2888

[email protected]

21 May 2015

Gantt Legal

Level 22

69 Ann Street
BRISBANE QLD 4000

Attention: Cliff Wirz

Dear Cliff,

RE: _W DONALD MILLIGAN PTY LTD ~ 136 TOP FORESTRY ROAD,
RIDGEWOOD

We refer to your email transmission received on 14 May 2015.

Your client has made a development application to the Noosa Shire Council for the purposes
of obtaining an approval to develop its land at 136 Top Forestry Road, Ridgewood with a
poultry farm.

In your email transmission of 14 May 2015, you note that a query has been raised by the
Council in its assessment of your client’s development application. The query relates to the
ability to utilise a covenant by registration under s.97A of the Land Title Act 1994 to manage
odour impacts of the development for land which is not the subject of your client’s
development application, but is controlled by it and will function (cither in whole or part) as
an odour buffer for the proposed poultry farm.

It is a well recognised principle of town planning that when a particular land use causes, or
has the potential to cause amenity impacts on surrounding land uses (particularly residential
uses) then there should be not merely appropriate mitigation measures at the source of the
impact (be it noise, light, odour of visual impact) but that an appropriate buffer in terms of
distance ought to be provided. Traditionally, it is regarded as reasonable, if not essential, that
the buffer be provided on the land the subject of the proposed use, or on land otherwise
controlled by the intended user.

In this case, happily, your client controls land in a location suitable for preservation as a
buffer.

Liability limited by a Scheme approved under professional standards legislation