Information Response - Lodgement

Page 2

1.1 Development Sequencing

At this stage, it is proposed that up to 26 individual building format plans (i.e. BFP phases) be registered with the
delivery of the development; however, it is likely that multiple BFP phases would register concurrently depending
on the status of construction of the multiple dwellings and associated infrastructure provision. In all
circumstances, sealing of BFPs will not occur in the absence of necessary infrastructure and access (as required by
the associated MCU approvals) for individual units.

Sequencing of development will be dictated by the physical construction and servicing constraints for individual
units and market response. It is therefore intended that a particular sequence of development not be nominated
by the reconfiguration approval, with this being controlled by what is physically delivered ‘on the ground’ in line
with the associated MCU approvals. In making this request, however, Council can be assured that the intent of
current condition 4 of 132005.1133.5 will be fulfilled, as the common resort facilities will be completed and
operational prior to or at the time of the construction of the 64th Unit within Precinct F of the development.

In relation to condition 4 of 132005.1133.5, we note that there appears to be some disconnect in terms of the
intent of this condition as described below:-
• Condition 4 states “….. Where the development is staged, the common resort facilities must be completed and
     operational as part of the first stage or after construction of the 64th Unit”.
• As part of the current request for a permissible change (Council Ref. 132005.1133.5), the applicant requested
     that the condition be amended to enable these facilities to be in place prior to the commencement of the 64th
     dwelling unit
• The Council assessment report dated 6 December 2016 states that this was ”…considered reasonable and
     ensures that the facilities will be constructed almost halfway through the development”.

Our client intends to delivery these facilities within this timeframe (i.e. prior to the 64th dwelling unit). Whilst we
note that a condition similar to condition 4 could be included on the reconfiguration approval, we contend that it
unnecessary given that the matter is addressed by condition 4 of the MCU approval in any case.


1.2 Need for Reconfiguration Approval

Registration of the individual (or concurrent) BFPs (and associated CMS’s) does not itself trigger an application for
a Reconfiguration of a Lot (ROL) pursuant to the provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) and the
Land Title Act 1994 (LTAct).

It is the ‘balance lot’ that is created as a consequence of the registration of the BFP that necessitates ROL
approval, as indicated below.

We note that, if the BFP’s were to be registered across the entire development at the same time, no
reconfiguration application would be triggered to be lodged pursuant to the provisions of SPA. As such, we
contend that the proposed reconfiguration is primarily an administrative response to the requirements of SPA
and the LTAct in order to realise the staged delivery of building format plans (which results in creation of up to 26
balance lots) and the preferred titling outcome for our client.




JFP Ref: M2652                                                                                                    Page 2

Page 3

Statutory Requirement

Pursuant to section 10 of SPA, “reconfiguring a lot” and “lot” are defined as follows (nb. applicable references
relating to ‘balance lot’ creation are highlighted in yellow):-

          reconfiguring a lot means—
          (a) creating lots by subdividing another lot; or
          (b) amalgamating 2 or more lots; or
          (c) rearranging the boundaries of a lot by registering a plan of subdivision; or
          (d) dividing land into parts by agreement rendering different parts of a lot immediately available for
              separate disposition or separate occupation, other than by an agreement that is—
              (i)     a lease for a term, including renewal options, not exceeding 10 years; or
              (ii)    an agreement for the exclusive use of part of the common property for a community titles
                      scheme under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997; or
          (e) creating an easement giving access to a lot from a constructed road.

          lot means—
          (a) a lot under the Land Title Act 1994; or
          (b) a separate, distinct parcel of land for which an interest is recorded in a register under the Land Act
              1994; or
          (c) common property for a community titles scheme under the Body Corporate and Community
              Management Act 1997; or
          (d) ….

Schedule 2 of the Land Title Act 1994 defines a lot as:-

          lot means a separate, distinct parcel of land created on –
          (a) The registration of a plan of subdivision; or
          (b) The recording of particulars of an instrument;
          and includes a lot under the Building Units and Group Titles Act 1980.

In consideration of the above, the proposed approach to registration and titling across the development is
defined as a reconfiguration of a lot only due to the resultant creation of ‘balance lot/s’ which will occur with the
registration of each BFP phase. The resultant balance lots will incrementally decrease in area with the
registration of each relevant BFP.

We note that we have previously provided an example as to how the proposed sequencing of development may
occur over time. An updated set of these plans is attached for Council’s information. At this stage, a complete
sequence through to completion has not been provided, as the sequence of registration to completion will
depend on market response and is not yet known.

To further articulate the form of the proposed reconfiguration of a lot, we offer the following example of
sequencing for the initial stages of the development (i.e. first 6 steps of registration).




JFP Ref: M2652                                                                                                     Page 3

Page 4

Indicative Staged Plan Sealing and Registration – Component requiring RoL approval from Council
Step 1: Create Principal CTS Parkridge Noosa (nb. requires 2 lots and common property)

Note:
• Approval required from Council to facilitate creation of Lot 201 (i.e. part of future subsidiary CTS 200) and Balance Lot
    8000. Nb. to create a CTS requires both registration of a CMS and ‘scheme land’ (i.e. 2 or more lots and common
    property) pursuant to the requirements of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997.
Step 2: Commence Subsidiary CTS 200 (Parkridge Villas Noosa) – BFP over blocks 7, 8 and 9 and extension to Principal CTS.

Note:
• This step will happen immediately after Step 1.
• Only the resultant balance lot from the registration of the BFP is defined as a reconfiguration of a lot pursuant to the
     provisions of SPA.
Step 3: Complete Subsidiary CTS 200 (Parkridge Villas Noosa) – BFP over blocks 10, 11 and 12 and extension to Principal
CTS.

Note:
• Only the resultant balance lot/s from the registration of the BFP is defined as a reconfiguration of a lot pursuant to the
     provisions of SPA.
• Consequential reduction in Lot 6 and balance Lot 8000
Step 4: Commence Subsidiary CTS 300 (Parkridge Residences Noosa North) – BFP over block 3 and extension to Principal
CTS.

Note:
• Only the resultant balance lot from the registration of the BFP is defined as a reconfiguration of a lot pursuant to the
    provisions of SPA.
• Consequential reduction in balance Lot 8000 only (i.e. Lot 6 remains as is)
Step 5: Commence Subsidiary CTS 100 (Parkridge Terraces) – BFP over block 15 and extension to Principal CTS.

Note:
• Only the resultant balance lot from the registration of the BFP is defined as a reconfiguration of a lot pursuant to the
    provisions of SPA.
• Consequential reduction in balance Lot 8000 only (i.e. Lot 6 remains as is)
Step 5: Complete Subsidiary CTS 300 (Parkridge Residences Noosa North) – BFP over block 4

Note:
• Only the resultant balance lot from the registration of the BFP is defined as a reconfiguration of a lot pursuant to the
     provisions of SPA.
• Consequential reduction in balance Lot 8000 only (i.e. Lot 6 remains as is)
ETC.

As the above demonstrates, it is only the resultant ‘balance lot’ creation that necessitates approval for a
reconfiguration of a lot from Council, notwithstanding the additional requirement to register an access easement
in accordance with conditions of MCU approval 132005.1133.5 over Precinct F.



2.0 PROPOSED RECONFIGURATION – SUGGESTED APPROVAL STRUCTURE

We suggest that the proposed reconfiguration is most appropriately defined, and able to be approved as follows:-

          Development Permit for a Reconfiguration of a Lot (Access Easement and 26 ‘Balance Lots’ to create a
          Layered Community Title Scheme)




JFP Ref: M2652                                                                                                           Page 4

Page 5

It is contended that this is not a change to the type and form of reconfiguration proposed with the initial package
of lodgement material, but provides greater clarity for all parties moving forward in the titling and registration
process.

It is also requested that Council structure the approval such that the reconfiguration of a lot is not required to
occur in a particular sequence, to offer flexibility for our client in the delivery of their development. We note that
any BFP registered over the subject land (and consequentially creation of a ‘balance lot’) will not occur until such
time as the relevant phase of built form is delivered in accordance with the associated MCU approvals over the
subject land, which already acknowledge a staged delivery of the development.

In light of the above, we suggest possible wording of relevant conditions of approval as follows:-

     1. Staging – the proposed reconfiguration of a lot is able to occur in any order, provided that the resort
        facilities approved by development approval 132005.1133.5 are provided prior to or at the time of
        registration of the reconfiguration plan resulting from the registration of the BFP associated with the 64th
        dwelling unit approved under development approval 132005.1133.5.
     2. Balance Lot Creation – the maximum number of ‘balance lots’ able to be created by registration of BFPs is
        26, with individual BFP phases to be generally in accordance with those nominated on the Approved Plan;
     3. Access Easement – the proposed access easement as indicated on the Approved Plan, is able to be
        provided incrementally as the development proceeds, but must be fully in place prior to the completion
        of development;

A revised proposal plan is attached to this response to Councils information request which incorporates feedback
provided by Council at the meeting of 9 August 2017 in relation to the extent of common property to be provided
with the principal CTS. The proposed plan also includes some further minor amendments to boundaries of the
proposed Subsidiary Community Title Scheme areas to align more closely with physical constraints boundaries
that will be established through the construction of the associated MCU delivery.

We trust that the above provides greater clarity and information to inform Council’s assessment of the proposed
development application. An itemised response to the items raised by Council in the information request is
provided below.

3.0 ITEMISED RESPONSE TO INFORMATION REQUEST

Council Issue
The application proposes a Community Title Scheme where the initial Principal Common Property excludes the
majority of the Principal Common Property attributed to the lot which will contain the Club Facilities Building. It is
considered that this area should be included in the initial Principal Common Property.

Furthermore the application proposes that sections of the access road are added to the Principal Common
Property as each lot is subdivided from the balance lot. It is also noted that the land between the access road the
property boundary is excluded from the Principal Common Property.

It is considered that the proposed formation of the Principal Common Property will be problematic with regards to
on-going implementation of the Bushfire Management Plan and potentially stormwater and other services.




JFP Ref: M2652                                                                                                    Page 5

Page 6

The current proposal will result in multiple body corporates each undertaking bushfire management related to
their individual lots for matters that are also related to other lots. The management of the Bushfire Management
Plan should be managed by the master body corporate to ensure a coordinated approach.

Information Required
1. An amended proposal which:
       a. Allocates all common property in the initial allocation of Principal Common Property.
       b. Allocates the land between the access road and the property boundary in the initial Principal Common
           Property.

Response
As indicated in Sections 1.0 and 2.0 above, this application seeks approval of up to 26 ‘balance lots’, with areas of
Common Property notated on the plan primarily provided for information purposes to inform Council as to the
approach to the proposed layered Community Title Scheme.

It is intended that a phased approach to the registration of common property will occur to align with the
construction sequencing of the proposed units to which this proposed reconfiguration of a lot application relates.
The areas of Principal Common Property notated on the proposal plan align with those areas required for
vehicular access and communal space adjacent to the approved resort facilities, with components to be delivered
in a staged approach as development proceeds. To allocate (or register) these areas of common property prior to
the completion of works would represent a titling approach that is ‘out of sequence’ and highly unusual.

Furthermore, we note that the proposed reconfiguration is simply seeking the approval of the resultant ‘balance
lots’ created as a consequence of BFP registration, and theoretically the areas of common property do not require
Council approval (as they do not form a reconfiguration of a lot as defined by SPA).

Notwithstanding, Council will note that the proposal plan has been updated to identify that the following areas
are intended to form Principal Common Property under the Principal CTS:-

    The land between the access road and the property boundary;
    Areas of the site identified by the approved MCU’s as accommodate areas identified for permanent
     stormwater detention basins for the development. Please note, the detailed design of final location of the
     basins is yet to be completed, and as such, we note that additional areas may be included in principal
     common property. Our client would be happy to accept a condition to this effect.

It is not intended that these areas form the initial allocation of Principal Common Property. Rather, these areas
will be added to the Principal Common Property under the Principal CTS incrementally with the staged
construction delivery (associated with the MCU’s over the land) and associated BFP registrations.


2. Draft principals of the Community Management Statement for the master body corporate detailing how the
   Bushfire Management Plan and stormwater will be managed across the entire site.

Response
As discussed at our meeting of 9 August 2017, the proposed development is intended to be the subject of a
Layered Community Title Scheme. It is anticipated that the Community Management Statement (CMS) associated
with the Principal Community Title Scheme will include bylaws that require that the Body Corporate
acknowledges and agrees to comply with the Bushfire Management Plan and Stormwater Management Plans
approved with the associated MCU’s over the subject land.




JFP Ref: M2652                                                                                                  Page 6

Page 7

At this stage, we have obtained a copy of the draft bylaws from our clients solicitor for the proposed CMS for the
Principal Community Title Scheme, as follows:-


                                             Bushfire Management Plan
•    The Body Corporate, Owners and Occupiers acknowledge they are aware of the Management Plan and agree
     to comply with the Bushfire Management Plan to the extent that it applies to them. The Owners and Occupiers
     are to be informed about:-
      the requirement for the approved Bushfire Management Plan to be complied with at all times for the life
         of the Scheme and the use of the premises;
      the potential bushfire hazard on the site;
      their responsibility for fire management; and
      the measures available for ongoing fire hazard mitigation.
•    This by-law was included to satisfy condition [to be inserted] of the development approval for the Scheme,
     being the decision notice dated [to be inserted].


                                      Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP)
•    The Body Corporate, Owners and Occupiers acknowledge they are aware of the Management Plan and agree
     to comply with the Storm Water Management Plan to the extent that it applies to them. The Owners and
     Occupiers are to be informed about the requirement for the approved Storm Water Management to be
     complied with at all times for the life of the Scheme and the use of the premises.
•    This by-law was included to satisfy condition [to be inserted] of the development approval for the Scheme,
     being the decision notice dated [to be inserted].


We further note that any proposed CMS required for the development pursuant to the Body Corporate and
Community Management Act 1997, must be submitted to Council for endorsement through the plan sealing
process. As such, this offers Council the opportunity to review the bylaws and ensure that appropriate
mechanisms are in place.

Notwithstanding, the MCU approvals to which the abovementioned reports specifically relate, and are
appropriately referenced required that the principles of the Bushfire Management Plan and Stormwater Report
are appropriately implemented in any case. This offers a two-fold mechanism to ensure compliance with
conditions.

3. Details of all proposed access easements between lots.

Response
Refer to the amended proposal plan which identifies the extent of proposed access easement. The length of
access easement proposed aligns with the requirements of conditions of 132005.1133.5 and further extends
across Lot 6 to the end of Resort Drive (for completion). This length of easement is intended to be provided
incrementally as the development proceeds, but is anticipated as being fully in place prior to the completion of
the development.

As discussed at our meeting of 9 August 2017, further access easements over remaining driveway areas are not
intended as being provided, as these will be appropriately managed through their inclusion in areas of Principal
Common Property under the Principal CTS. Pursuant to the Body Corporate and Community Management Act
1997, it is noted that such areas of common property are effectively owned by all persons (or entities) that are a
party to the CTS as tenants in common (in shares proportionate to their interest).




JFP Ref: M2652                                                                                                Page 7

Page 8

This correspondence and attachments represent a response to all the information requested, in accordance with
s278 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

We trust the above and enclosed information satisfactorily addresses Council’s Information Request
requirements. However, should you require any further information or clarification in order to complete your
assessment, please contact our office to discuss.

Yours faithfully,




GRAEME BEWS
Associate Director – Planning & Urban Design
JFP URBAN CONSULTANTS PTY LTD




ENCL:     Proposal Reconfiguration Plan M2652-02 Issue G, prepared by JFP and dated 23 August 2017
          Example sequencing Plans prepared by JFP

CC:       Altum Properties (Att: Rob McCready)




JFP Ref: M2652                                                                                             Page 8