►
Description
00:00 Meeting Commences, Attendance/Apologies, Leave of Absence, Confirmation of Minutes, Conflict of Interest Declarations, Committee Forward Planning Schedule, Reports and Presentation 6.4, Closed Session Report 7.1
04:00 Report 6.1
05:00 Report 6.2
26:00 Report 6.3
1:20:00 Meeting Adjourned
1:35:00 Meeting Recommenced, Report 6.3
1:42:00 Report 6.5
2:04:00 Report 6.6
2:19:00 Report 6.7
3:09:00 General Business 8.1, 8.2, 8.3
A
I
suppose
I
have
no
attendance
or
apologies
snow
leave
of
absence.
We'll
do
the
confirmation
of
minutes
so
do
I.
Have
someone
that's
happy
to
confirm
the
minute
to
the
previous
meeting,
councilor
vorster
seconded
by
councilor
O'neill,
all
those
in
favor
councilor,
Gates
and
councilman
Jones
you're
happy
with
the
minutes
previous
meeting,
very
good
counselor
Curtis.
You
don't
vote
on
this
one,
not
a
member.
Oh
sorry,
we
have
appointed
you
this
committee,
haven't
we
yeah
I,
have
my
apologies:
councilor
Curtis
I
forgot
you're
a
fully
pledged
member
of
planning
committee.
Now.
A
A
Rude
of
me:
yes,
okay,
so
that's
the
committee
committee
minutes
of
the
last
meeting
conflict
of
interest
decorations.
We
have
a
dcui
from
councilor
Gates
that
we'll
deal
with
at
6.2
Community
forward
planning
schedule.
We
don't
need
to
worry
about
so
we'll
kick
straight
into
reports
and
presentations
are.
A
A
A
A
F
No
presentation
but
I
did
want
to
draw
the
meeting's
attention
to
page
181
of
the
agenda:
paragraph
5.1.3
The
Varsity
Lakes,
Business,
Center
Place,
making
opportunities
paragraph
councils.
You
may
recall
that
I
have
made
a
declarable
conflict
of
interest
declaration
in
the
past
concerning
I
suppose
Place,
making
initiatives
in
this
Precinct.
F
That
is
because
I
have
a
long
time
family
friend,
who
owns
and
operates
a
business
University
like
CBD,
who
is
a
an
electoral
donor
as
well,
and
my
brother
owns
a
office
suite
in
the
CBD
I
did
make
that
Declaration
of
the
time
Council
supported
my
continuing
involvement
in
the
in
investment
decisions
there,
but
I
did
want
to
bring
people's
attention
to
that.
Just
in
case
there
was
a
view
that
I
might
need
to
make
a
fresh
declaration.
F
A
B
E
I
pose
a
question
to
the
council.
I
saw
you,
of
course,
thanks
chairman
Council.
Have
you
met
with
or
discussed
this
proposal
with
the
donor?
Certainly
not.
Thank
you,
chairman
I'm,
happy
to
move
a
procedural
motion
that
Council
Gates
May
participate
in
the
vote,
because
the
conflict
is
minor
of
a
minor
nature
and
her
input
is
valuable
to
the
outcome
in.
G
A
Can
we
just
just
drop
that
quickly,
so
councilor
Council,
Peter
Young
you're
happy
with
that?
That's
was
your
intent.
Yes,
that's
fun!
Very
good
and
Council
Lauren
Jones
you're,
happy
to
Second,
very
good
to
say,
move
councilor,
Petty
young
second
Council
Owen
Jones
there'll
be
a
division
on
this
because
the
Declaration,
so
all
those
in
favor
counselor,
Hamill,
Council,
Owen,
Jones,
councilor,
Curtis,
councilor,
Peter,
Young,
councilor,
Paul
and
Young
counselor
in
Newland,
councilor
vorster,
please
note
councilor
Gates
did
not
vote
the
item
at
hand.
A
D
A
H
Thank
you
councilors
through
the
chair
item.
6.2
is
a
material
change,
use
for
multiple
dwellings,
code
assessment,
627
units
food
and
drink
Outlet,
Child,
Care,
Center
shop,
being
a
neighborhood
store
at
162,
the
Esplanade
surface
Paradise,
the
subject
site
you
can
see
on
the
screen
here
today
is
made
up
of
four
allotments.
It's
got
three
frontages
and
shares
one
common
boundary
to
them.
So
sorry,
I'm.
F
F
A
A
A
A
F
Mr,
chair
I've
previously
made
a
declaration
with
respect
to
this
site,
but
now
we're
dealing
with
a
markedly
different
development
scheme,
so
I'm
taking
the
step
of
making
a
fresh
declaration.
The
nature
of
this
particular
DCI
is
that
a
reasonable
person
may
form
the
view.
I
have
an
interest
in
this
matter,
because
my
father-in-law
lives
in
a
unit
adjacent
to
the
subject
site
and
overlooks
the
proposed
development.
F
The
name
of
the
related
parties,
John
Bond,
he's
my
father-in-law
and
he's
an
adjacent
property
owner
not
of
the
whole
unit
complex,
but
just
a
one
unit
and
I'm,
taking
the
step
of
voluntarily
deciding
not
to
participate
in
making
a
decision
about
the
matter
and
I
will
now
leave
the
room.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Councilor.
A
H
H
Our
local
contacts,
the
site
is
within
the
hide
NC
res
Zone
at
the
most
northern
end
of
surface
Paradise
Additionally
the
sites
within
the
light,
rail
urban
renewal
overlay
area,
the
frame
area
and
situated
within
the
transport
Hub.
It's
approximately
550
meters,
north
of
the
surface
Paradise
Center.
H
H
This
is
the
typical
ground
floor
plan,
as
you
can
see
the
ground
floor,
Tendencies
interfacing,
with
the
Esplanade
to
the
north
to
the
east.
Sorry,
it
shows
all
the
commercial
Tendencies
lobbies
to
each
Tower
access
to
the
servicing
Arrangement,
which
is
all
on
site
under
the
podium
and
access
to
the
podium
to
the
north
of
the
Esplanade.
H
H
The
typical
Tower
floor
plate
is
on
the
screen.
It's
made
up
of
approximately
six
units
per
floor
plate
for
each
Tower
and
you
can
see
the
Western
sorry.
The
southern
Tower
is
set
back
closer
to
the
western
boundary,
which
improves
the
views.
Northern
views
for
the
High
Surf
development
located
to
the
South.
H
Just
expanding
a
bit
more
on
the
built
form.
There's
four
images
on
the
screen.
Here:
you
can
see
the
transition
in
the
podium,
design
and
form
lodgement
was
December
21.
The
changes
to
the
podium
design
were
due
to
the
basement,
reducing
from
nine
to
four
levels
of
basement
due
to
dewatering
requirements,
so
there's
obviously
more
parking
above
ground.
H
Now
our
city
officers
have
taken
I,
guess
a
thorough
assessment
of
the
podium
itself
and
are
supporter
of
it,
its
design,
incorporating
a
mixture
of
finishes
textures
and,
as
we
go
up
the
podium
it's
set
back
even
further
from
the
streetscape
Podium
level.
One
provides
the
awnings
around
the
ground
level
to
brighter
comfortable
pedestrian
experience.
H
Submission
through
the
share
submissions
or
letters
of
concern
received
approximately
around
the
July
to
November
when
construction
actually
commenced
on
site
because
of
a
previous
approval.
So
the
previous
approval
that
was
mentioned
prior
is
underway
in
the
basement
construction,
so
I've
got
a
ba
for
that
and
the
basement
aligns
with
the
current
da.
H
H
A
H
So
in
terms
of
this
proposal,
the
original
tower
Southern
Tower
was
a
lot
further
forward
to
the
Esplanade,
which
has
been
set
back,
which
has
increased
the
setback
to
the
tower
between
22
to
28
meters
to
High
Surf
for
the
podium
itself.
It
ranges
between
one
and
eight
meters,
with
the
minor
encroachments
relating
to
planter
beds.
Only.
A
H
A
H
Yeah,
the
transport
code
offers
A
reduced
car
dependency
within
the
transport
Hub
area,
and
these
are
three
travel
demand
measures.
The
acceptable
outcome
within
the
transport
code,
4.1
talks
about
bundling
of
car
parking.
The
term
bundling
means
it's
an
arrangement
where
you
can
have
a
car
park.
That's
purchased
separately
from
the
unit,
so
it's
giving
the
buyers
an
option
to
purchase
a
unit
without
a
car
park.
Should
they
not
require
one
there's,
actually
an
admin
definition
within
the
back
of
the
city
plan.
H
A
H
H
Through
uma's
chair,
that's
right,
so
the
applicants
proposed
73
tandem
Arrangements,
which
require
to
be
allocated
to
one
unit
if
it's
tandem,
yeah
and
then
The
Proposal
is
71
short
of
the
AO
provision,
but
because
of
the
a04
provision
of
bundling,
we
determine
it
meets
the
PO.
So
a
demand
travel
demand,
measure.
I
H
I
I
would
say
that
as
a
concern
actually,
especially
in
Holiday
times,
and
things
like
that,
if
you've
got
child
care
and
the
building's
full
of
you
know,
people
who
are
on
holidays
and
that
there's
not
going
to
be
an
excess
of
car
park.
So
I
would
imagine
for
people
to
be
parking,
bringing
kids
in
so
but
I.
Suppose
that's
up
to
the
building
to
manage.
A
A
A
J
J
J
The
applicants
propose
a
subdivision
that
includes
81
residential
lots
and
two
open
space:
lots
for
stormwater
detention
and
a
range
of
lot
sizes
have
been
provided
typically
between
400
to
750
meters
squared.
However,
some
large
lots
have
been
provided.
Road
Connections
have
also
been
provided
to
the
existing
road
to
the
South
being
delivered
court
and
to
the
east,
where
there's
existing
approved
subdivision,
providing
a
similar
outcome
to
what
is
proposed.
J
The
Afghans
propose
to
establish
the
development
in
in
four
stages,
as
shown
on
this
proposed
staging
plan.
Overall
officers
have
considered
that
the
development
complies
with
the
relevant
outcomes
of
the
Strategic
framework
and
of
the
city
plan,
in
that
inappropriate
density
is
provided
in
a
form
that
is
consistent
with
the
surrounding
development
pattern
and,
as
such
offices
are
recommending
approval
for
the
reconfiguring,
lock
component
of
the
development
there's.
Also
the
preliminary
approval
component
for
dual
occupancies,
which
officers
are
recommending
to
refuse.
J
The
reason
for
this
is
this
plan
is
extent
of
information.
That's
been
provided
for
this,
and
this
preliminary
approval
isn't
a
request
to
vary
the
city
plan,
but
it's
it.
It
doesn't
really
afford
the
applicant
any
any
further
abilities.
It
still
requires
an
impact
accessible
application
for
dual
occupancies
would
be
required
once
this
approval
is
undertaken.
So
on
that
basis,
for
the
lack
of
information
officers
are
recommending
that
this
component
be
refused
and
were
there
any
questions.
C
Questions,
and
also
we
just
want
to
acknowledge
that
this
site
already
has
an
existing
approval
on
it
for
shops
and
I.
Think
a
38
lot
body
corporate
type
subdivision
as
well
I
can't
it
wasn't
in
the
report,
but
unless
maybe
you
have
it
yeah
I
should
have
that
yeah
so
that
that
was
approved.
Some
do
you
remember
when.
C
Yeah
cool
all
right,
cool
excellent,
so
my
I've
just
got
a
list
of
just
questions
that
are
a
little
bit
informed
by
quite
a
lot
of
community
feedback.
Gilston
has
a
really
active,
Facebook
page
and
we've
tried
to
have
a
pretty
open
and
transparent
dialogue
about
this
process
for
some
time,
and
some
of
the
people
in
the
community
have
raised
some
questions.
So
some
of
the
questions
I
ask
you
today,
I
probably
know
the
answers
to,
but
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
have
a
public
record.
C
That
kind
of
addresses
some
of
those
Facebook
queries,
so
I
can
actually
refer
people
to
the
YouTube,
video
and
say
hey.
This
is
what
the
officer
said
about
this
and
that
helps
me
and
helps
the
community
understand
the
interface
between
our
planning
scheme
and
the
state
planning
Provisions,
so
I'm
going
to
start
with
a
question
about
the
area
to
the
South.
So
the
connection
proposes
a
road
in
this
development
that
connects
to
Dollar
bird
Court.
C
C
K
Through
you,
Mr
chair,
the
Land
Development
guidelines
over
the
years
have
changed
yes,
and
currently
the
road
with
is
16
points.
The
whole
Road
profile
is
16.5
meters,
with
a
carriageway
of
7.5
meters
that
ties
in
with
Queensland
streets,
the
dollar
bird
court
and
that
subdivision
to
the
to
the
rear
or
the
South.
That
was
constructed
at
a
time
where
the
lggs
had
a
lesser
requirement.
So
dollar
bird
quarters
actually
has
a
road
profile
of
14
meters
with
a
carriageway
of
around
5.5.
K
Our
reasoning
for
supporting
that
is
that
there's
a
drainage
Park
on
one
side
of
it
and
it's
very
unlikely
that
you're
actually
get
two
cars
parking
within
that
5.5,
Carriage
Way.
So
in
our
opinion,
appliances
or
rubbish
trucks
will
still
be
able
to
pass
through
there.
That's
why
officers
are
supporting
that
so.
C
I've
got
two
follow-up
questions
that
relate
to
that
person.
The
question
relates
to
the
stormwater
basins,
so
the
the
area
where
the
storm
water
basin
is
adjacent,
that
dollar
board
court
connection
is,
is
high
land
and
then
dollar
bird
court
is
lower
land.
In
what
way
will
there
be
mechanisms
to
stop
that
stormwater
Basin
from
overflowing
and
then
flowing
into
the
lower
land
where
the
established
residents
are
how's
that
going
to
work.
K
K
C
Great
so
part,
two
of
my
question
that
relates
to
this
this
interface.
This
connection
is
that
quite
a
number
of
the
feedback
you
know
pieces
we
got,
and
some
of
the
objections
talked
about
objecting
to
that
connection
on
the
basis
that
it's
already
a
quiet
cul-de-sac
and
also
acknowledging
that
there
is
a
street
that
just
dead
end
Street
finishes
there.
C
It's
not
a
cold,
say
not
a
finished
cul-de-sac,
it's
just
a
road
that
you
know
any
reasonable
person
submitting
to
that
straight
would
probably
quite
you
quite
fairly,
have
expected
that
the
road
would
continue
eventually,
but
it
seems
like
it
isn't
actually
an
important
connection,
given
that
it's
a
5.5
meter
width,
there's
actually
a
storm
water
basin
on
it.
It
doesn't
seem
like
any
real
urban
planning
reasons
why
that
connection
should
occur.
Could
you
give
me
some
help
about
that?
Help
me
understand
why
that
connection
should
be
there
a.
K
K
It's
also
an
important
subdivision
concept
to
actually
have
connectivity
between
subdivisions,
so
we're
not
just
limited
to
one
access
in
and
one
access
out
that
there
are
options
in
case
of
emergencies.
So,
even
though
we
don't
think
this
will
be
heavily
used
by
a
lot
of
residents
because
most
will
use
Wally,
Drive
and
and
get
onto
gilston
road,
but
it
is
sound
planning
and
subdivision
principles
to
have
a
range
of
different
options
for
people
to
move
around
subdivisions.
C
Yeah
so
I
think
I
think
the
concern
wasn't
necessarily
pedestrian
I
think
everyone
expected
there
should
be
a
pedestrian
connection
if
I
think
the
vehicle
connection
is
the
is
the
issue
there,
and
some
of
the
issues
that
were
raised
were
actually
the
interface
between
I
think.
It's
called
fairy
Wren
court
and
Peter
Mills,
which
is
the
the
southern
exit
onto
the
broader,
thorough
Affairs.
L
Through
the
chair,
I
understand
that
most
of
the
the
the
traffic
impact
assessment
was
in
relation
to
Wally
drive
and
well
the
intersection,
the
gilston
road
in
section
yeah,
and
that's
right
so,
and
that
was
seen
to
be
operating
yeah
well
well
within
capacity.
Yes,
I
think
generally,
the
amount
of
traffic
that
this
development
is
likely
to
generate
was
not
going
to
impact
on.
You
know
the
design
standards
of
that
particular
existing
Ferry
Wren,
Road,
Network
yeah.
C
C
Some
of
the
members
of
the
community
raised
some
concerns
about
the
traffic
impact
or
the
increase
in
traffic.
That's
expected
from
this
development
and
its
impact
on
the
roundabout
at
gilston
Road,
and
they
raise
it
in
the
context
of
multiple
bus
stops
being
nearby.
We've
just
delivered
a
six
million
dollar
path.
Sorry,
four
million
dollar
pathway
that
goes
down
gilston
Road,
but
What
stopped
us
from
imposing
on
this
developer
an
obligation
to
deliver
a
traffic
light
solution.
Instead
of
a
roundabout
solution
at
gilston,
Road.
L
Through
the
chair,
just
looking
at
on
page
576
of
the
agenda,
there
was
some
excerpts
from
the
analysis
that
our
transport
assessment
Branch
provided
Us
in
relation
to
their
assessment
of
the
of
the
transport
impact
assessment
report,
and
out
of
that,
it
was
identified
that
that
intersection
as
well
is
working
well
within
with
ample
spare
capacity
through
to
2033
and
they're,
not
anticipating
that
beyond
that,
only
sort
of
minor
delay.
So
from
that
it
was
a
case
of
you
know.
L
C
Cool
so
part,
two
of
my
question
in
relation
to
that
is
that
I
accept
that
traffic
lights
aren't
required
because
we've
just
delivered
this
pathway
that
goes
down.
Is
there
a
center
Island
on
warley
drive?
That
means
that
a
pedestrian
can
move
from
the
northern
side
of
the
intersection
to
the
southern
side
intersection
without
having
to
cross
both
incoming
outgoing
traffic,
and
is
that
would
that
be
considered
a
reasonable
condition
like
a
a
small
Center
refuge
for
a
pedestrian
on
that
road?
Is
that
is
that
a
reasonable?
C
Yeah,
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
that,
because
there's
an
increase
in
traffic
and
because
council's
delivered
the
pathway
along
that
north
to
south
it
would
it
be
a
reasonable
condition
on
this
developer.
Given
the
that
increase
in
with
his
81
lots
and
I'm
assuming
that'll,
be
somewhere
in
the
presidency
of
120
cars,
maybe
150
cars,
would
it
be
a
reasonable
condition
to
have
a
center
Refuge?
Just
on
that,
it
seems
like
a
very
simple
thing:
it's
straightforward!
Is
that
reasonable
or
not
reasonable?
C
K
Through
you,
Mr
chair,
we've
discussed
this
with
our
Traffic
Engineers.
They
don't
think
it
is
needed,
okay,
because
of
the
amount
of
people
that
are
likely
to
be
traversing
overworldly
drive,
but
we
have
conditioned
a
a
pedestrian
Crossing,
okay,
which
is
a
defined
Crossing
space
that
we
think
is
in
a
safe
location
for
people
to
walk
across
as
a
compromise.
L
Yes,
that's
correct:
there
isn't
a
specific
location
for
it,
because
obviously
there
will
be
some
traffic
modeling
analysis
to
work
out
exactly
where
that
needs
to
be
yes,
but
the
condition
requires
it
to
be
generally
in
the
vicinity
of
that
Crossing.
So
you'll
see
Park
Lot
900
just
to
the
north
of
Wally
Drive,
which
is
when
duradine
I
think
Park
Reserve.
Yes
pronounce
it
right.
Where
you
know
officer
of
the
view,
that's
probably
the
most
likely
destination
on
a
number
of
accounts,
because
this
site
also
doesn't
have
active
Parks
land
within
it.
L
It
wasn't
mapped
as
requiring
trunk
infrastructure
for
open
space.
It's
not.
It
doesn't
achieve
100
Lots,
which
is
a
threshold
for
providing
open
space,
active
open
space
within
the
development.
So
with
that
Park
Lot,
which
is
about
six
thousand
or
so
square
meters,
it's
got
Playground
Equipment,
Plus,
sort
of
active,
open
space
areas,
you're,
probably
well
aware
of
you
know
we
offers
are
of
the
view
that
you
know
that's
probably
a
likely
destination
for
a
lot
of
residents,
sort
of
circulating
and
walking
outside
of
this
development.
L
So
that's
mums
and
dad's
taking
their
kids
to
the
park.
Precisely
so,
if
there
is
a
a
Crossing
that
has
been
and
I
think,
that's
conditioned
21
yeah
so
that
talks
about
a
Crossing
in
that
General
location,
but
the
specifics
of
it.
So
that's
probably
around
around
between
so
lot
s
Lots
one
and
four
somewhere
around
there
or
wherever
the
traffic
analysis.
C
And
they'll
be
able
to
work
that
out,
so
the
traffic
analysis
will
come
in
they'll
recommend
where
that
is
now.
That's.
If
that's
condition,
21.
is
there
a
like?
Is
that
required
that
they
would
put
a
light?
So
that's
lit
so
even
in
the
early
evening
or
in
early
morning
of
someone
we're
crossing
that
to
go
for
a
run,
I
mean
that
it
would
be
lit.
L
Again
through
the
chair
condition,
21
doesn't
specifically
say
within
some
of
those
various
Australian
standards.
There
is
when
you
read
through
the
documents
there
are,
it
is
sort
of
implied
that
it
is
lighting
is
to
be.
You
know,
should
be
provided,
but
acknowledge
that
the
condition
doesn't
explicitly
say
it.
So
maybe
for
for
clarity.
We.
L
E
D
C
Okay,
so
that's
going
in
there,
so
the
last
question
I
have
actually
relates
to
the
lot
sizes,
and
it's
been
you
would
have
seen
in
the
submissions
and
the
objections.
How
frustrated
people
were
because
the
clam
that
you
referred
to
before
talks
about
larger
Lots
on
sloping
sites,
so
the
conceptual
land
use
map
the
Clum
for
Gilson,
says
larger
Lots
on
swiping
sites
and
looking
at
this
81
lot
subdivision,
where
more
than
50
percent
of
the
lots
are
under
450
square
meters
and
I.
Think
it's
80
of
the
lots
are
under
550
square
meters.
C
J
Through
the
chair
to
the
councilor
you're
correct,
that's
the
climb
up
on
the
screen,
and
that
note
there
says
Suburban
neighborhood
accommodating
large
lots
and
sloping
sites.
So
two
parts
to
this
within
the
framework
for
emerging
communities.
It
provides
a
density
range
so
for
for
a
site
like
this,
it's
15
to
25
dwellings
per
hectare
so
not
including
the
Dual
occupancies
they're,
providing
17.5
ish
dwellings
per
hectare.
So
we
consider
it
compliance
with
that
component
of
the
framework
and
also
in
the
context
of
the
Clum
as
a
whole.
C
K
The
chair,
a
small
lot,
is,
is
defined
as
something
400
square
meters
or
less.
So
a
large
lot
is
not
I'd,
just
like
to
point
out
that
the
planning
scheme,
as
Nathan
has
said
as
two
ways
of
it's,
expressing
what
larger
lots
are
or
or
lot
size
expectations,
and
one
is
the
actual
square
meterage,
but
also
as
Nathan
has
said,
that
the
city
plan
looks
at
it
as
a
broad
hectare
approach
and
as
Nathan
also
said,
the
expectation
is
15
to
25
dwellings
per
hectare.
K
This
application's
at
the
lower
end
of
those
expectations
at
just
over
17
dwellings
per
hectare.
So
you
could
actually
argue
that
it's
almost
un
undercooked
in
relation
to
our
hectare
approach
to
what
lot
sizes
are
also.
Yes,
there
are
some
minute
steep
parts
to
this
site,
but
this
site
overall
is
not
steep
slope,
helping
in
our
opinion
overall
compared
to
some
of
the
other
Lots
within
the
area.
So
that's
why
we've
emphasized
that
it
is
appropriate
to
have
lot
sizes
of
of
the
proposed
size,
because
many
of
the
Lots
won't
have
significant
slopes
right.
K
The
chair,
the
original
intent
of
linking
lot
size
to
slope,
was
that
if
you
have
a
very
small
site
and
it's
heavily
constrained
with
the
slope,
you
can
have
massive
retaining
walls
or
massive
engineered
outcomes
to
get
an
appropriate
pad
for
a
dwelling.
So,
in
our
opinion,
the
retaining
walls
as
a
result
of
all
the
lots
are
actually
acceptable
and
not
overly
done
in
our
opinion.
That's
why
the
lots
are
lots
proposed
are
actually
acceptable.
Yeah,
okay,.
C
I
think
there's
a
there's,
a
misunderstanding
from
the
community,
and
probably
part
of
that
is
how
we
describe
some
of
this
language
in
our
planning
scene.
This
idea
of
larger
lots
and
sliding
sites
in
that
club
is
really
it's
confusing
to
people
and
I
appreciate
you've,
given
us
a
cogent
response
now,
but
people's
expectations
of
larger
lots
are
not
400
square
meter
locked
and
the
fact
that
76
of
this
development
has
lots
under
550,
which
is
doc.
That's
three
quarters
of
it
less
than
550
and
I
appreciate.
We
need
to
deliver
this
anymore
questions.
C
Of
course,
the
last
question
I
have
is
actually
about
that.
None
of
the
slides
or
in
the
report
showed
what
you
just
talked
about
this
idea
of
retaining
walls.
So
because
of
the
way,
this
slope
of
this
site
interfaces
with
the
other
side.
Could
you
show
us
some
of
the
Cross
sections
where
the
retaining
wall
connects
with
the
established
sites
nearby
and
what's
that
going
to
look
like
from
a
fencing
point
of
view,
so
help
me
understand
what
that
looks
like
through.
J
The
chair
to
the
council,
this
shows
the
retaining
walls.
It's
kind
of
a
little
bit
hard
to
see.
The
purple
shows
the
retaining
wall
so
generally,
where
it's
adjacent
to
the
existing
properties,
to
the
South
and
to
the
West.
It's
at
one
point:
just
a
single
maximum
height
1.5
meter
retaining
wall
down
to
the
southeast
corner.
There
is
a
small
section
where
it
is
a
tiered,
where
the
t
is
a
Max,
1.5
meters
in
height
and
a
detailed
section.
J
These
are
engineering
drawings
that
are
kind
of
a
little
bit
hard
to
actually
see,
but
it
just
kind
of
shows
the
general
interface
showing
up
where
it's
a
Max,
1.5
meters,
the
footings
are
set
50
mil
off
the
boundary,
so
the
actual
retaining
will
be
will
be
slightly
more
stepped
in.
So
if
you
just
go.
C
Back
to
the
previous
slide,
all
the
houses
to
the
left
of
that
are
established
and
all
the
houses
to
the
South
are
established.
The
north
is
a
road.
So
when
someone
who
lives
to
the
left
or
my
left
of
that
development,
looks
at
this
development
they're
going
to
see,
are
they
going
to
see
a
1.5
meter
returning
wall
plus
a
1.8
meter
fence?
Is
that
what
they're
going
to
see
yeah?
What
are
they
going
to
see.
L
That's
there
so
in
some
respects,
in
our
view,
it's
a
case
of
yes
it'll,
be
a
1.5
meter,
high
return,
retaining
wall
at
maximum
and
then
the
fence
on
top
of
that
I
guess.
The
owners
of
the
new
lot
they've
in
some
respects,
they've
gained
and
they'll,
probably
gain
themselves
a
little
bit
of
land
technically
which,
if
they
wish
they
could
probably
plant
out,
but
we
just
don't
want
to,
because
if
we
require
the
applicant
to
landscape,
say
set
the
land
the
retaining
wall.
In
say,
600
mil,
so
you
could
get
a
landscape
Edge.
L
C
Look,
there
is
a.
There
is
a
property
boundary
with
a
fence
on
it.
Currently
they've
got
1.8
ferment
offenses
there,
and
so
what
you're
proposing
is
that,
after
the
fences
that
already
exist,
there's
going
to
be
some
sort
of
Gap,
then
there's
going
to
be
an
up
to
1.5,
meter,
retaining
wall
and
then
there's
going
to
be
up
to
1.8
meter
fence
am
I.
Reading
that
correctly.
So
there's
like
this
weird
gap
between
The
Back
Fence
at
the
top
of
the
retaining
wall
for
the
new
properties,
who's
going
to
maintain
that
Gap
like
these.
B
Cannot
contribute
at
that
point
I
have
this
situation
at
kumara
in
a
couple
of
very,
very
early
development
applications
and
I
can
tell
you
who
maintains
it?
No
one
right,
absolutely,
no
one
maintains
it
and
you
end
up
with
very
high
weeds
and
muck
and
grass
growing
up.
That
is
of
great
concern
to
the
community.
So.
C
I'm
trying
to
think
of
how
I
can
practically
manage
this
all
these
people
that
live
in
this
place
right
now,
like
the
Western
and
the
South
they
already
live
here,
and
what?
What
is
a
reasonable
condition
that
we
can
impose
to
make
sure
that
that
section
between
The
Back
Fence
at
the
top
of
the
retaining
wall
and
The
Back
Fence
at
the
bottom
of
the
retaining
wall,
naturally
is
looked
after.
K
You
Mr
chair,
it
is
challenging
because
the
Land
Development
guidelines
require
retaining
walls
to
be
set
back
from
the
boundary.
So
that's
why
you
will
get
this
outcome
and
it
does
happen,
I
suppose,
to
have
a
pragmatic
solution
to
that.
We
could
look
at
stepping
the
retaining
wall
or
fence
into
the
site
a
little
more,
so
you
actually
have
more
than
just
a
small
gap
between
the
two,
the
two
fences.
C
What
I'm,
what
I'm
trying
to
achieve
is
there's
not
dead
space
that
no
one
looks
at
because
it's
out
the
back
of
someone's
fence,
because
what
happens
when
we
have
that
sort
of
Dead
Space,
particularly
at
the
bottom
of
a
retaining
wall
which
I'm
assuming
will
have
some
sort
of
drainage
solution
in
the
bottom
of
it.
It'll
be
soggy
and
wet
and
it'll,
be
a
mosquito
issue
and
it'll
be
not
nice
to
look
at
so
to
me
that
does
need
to
be
solved.
C
C
These
are
all
young
families.
Moving
into
this
space,
we
have
to
come
up
with
a
suitable
solution.
It's
not
impractical.
Surely
we
can
do
something,
but
sometimes
we
look
at
this
reconfiguration
of
a
lot
plan
and
we
forget
that
everyone
who
already
exists
and
they're
presenting
Lots
actually
already
have
fences
they're
already
there,
so
whether
it's
a
vegetated
solution
that
is
relatively
self-managing
or
whether
it's
some
sort
of
alternative
solution
that
I'm,
not
a
town,
planner
I,
can't
come
up
with
then
I
think
there
needs
to
be
something
in
that
space.
A
B
Not
going
to
do
it
and
the
same
thing
is
on
Foxwell
Road
out
at
coomera,
where
fence
lines
have
been
put
inside
the
individual
property
boundaries,
leaving
a
landscape
condition
on
the
outside
of
their
fence.
But
it's
on
their
private
property
and
no
one
maintains
it
and
then
the
complaints
roll
in
about
the
unsightliness
of
the
overgrown
space
and
our
officers
can't
address
it
because
we
don't
own
the
land
and
the
residents
don't
think
it's
their
land.
They
think
their
land
ends
at
their
boundary
fence
and
it
doesn't
so.
C
Yeah,
that's
a
problem:
I'm
not
I'm,
not
opposed
to
the
development
in
principle.
I
understand
the
justification.
You've
made
for
approval
seems
sound
I,
don't
think
the
state
plan
Provisions
led
us
to
knock
about
even
if
it
did
get
refused
and
we
took
it
to
the
planning
environmental,
Court,
I'm
sure
they'd,
you
know
the
state
planning
Provisions
would
ultimately
get
us
in
all
sorts
of
strife
there.
But
I
think
this
is
a
solvable
problem.
What
is
the
problem?
What
is
the
solution?
A
So
proposed
action
on
this
because
we're
not
going
to
come
up
with
something
on
the
Fly
here
today
to
solve
that,
so
we
have
until
full
Council
for
councilor
Tozer
to
work
with
officers
on
what
that
might
look
like
yeah,
because
I
don't
want
to
come
up
with
something
that
isn't
going
to
work.
So
let's
take
that
time
and
further
conversations
can
happen
about
that
specific
point
and
then,
if
there
is
a
change
to,
if
there's
a
change
or
a
condition
to
be
made,
it
can
be
made
at
full
Council.
C
And
honestly,
that's
all
my
questions
at
the
moment.
I
feel
like
you,
thank
you
for
being
so
gracious
with
me
to
put
on
the
public
record
some
of
those
answers
in
relation
to
how
the
state
State
legislation
interfaces
with
Council.
But
if
we
can
come
up
before
full
Council
a
solution,
then
I'm
sure
yeah.
We
can
have
a
look
at
it.
D
K
J
D
They
haven't
proposed
and
I
accept
the
applicant
can
keep
the
house,
the
large
house
lot
and
all
of
that
I
suppose
I
was
particularly
interested
in
whether
or
not
there
would
be
any
unforeseen
challenges
in
the
future,
with
a
zigzag
type.
Street
entry
coming
into
that
stage.
Four
and
this
plan
doesn't
appear
to
be
because
questions.
E
C
C
there
was
a
blue
dot
on
the
map
in
Gilson
they
talked
about
shops
being,
and
it
was
over
if
you're
familiar
with
the
area
over
near
what
is
now
the
gilston
hall,
the
gilston
hall
and
the
new
playground
there,
and
there
was
feedback
saying
we
do.
There
was
feedback
from
the
community
saying
they
would
like
us,
small
shops
in
gilston,
and
so
it
was
provisioned
in
the
city
in
the
city
plan.
C
The
community
was
much
more
comfortable
with
the
the
body
corporate
private
development
outcome,
then
what
they
are
currently,
but
also
there
was
an
agreement
as
I
understand,
struck
between
the
owner
of
this
property
and
the
owner
of
another
property
elsewhere
that
wanted
to
deliver
the
shops
that
necessitated
the
reconfiguration
of
this
into
entirely
residential,
so
that
other
location
closer
to
the
previous
Blue
Dot
could
deliver
the
shop
solution
which
is
not
dissimilar
to
that.
In
the
other
location,
there
was
lots
of
objections,
but
there
was
also
submissions
for
a
shop
and.
E
L
C
E
A
That's
the
young,
obviously
we're
in
a
position
to
do
whatever
we
want
with
conditions
as
this
committee,
but
we
yeah
that,
like
the
reconfiguration
of
a
lot
code,
is
very
clear
that
if
you're
under
100
Lots,
you
don't
have
to
provide
active,
open,
Green,
Space,
so
I
think
our
chances
of
Defending.
That
position
would
be
incredibly
low,
appreciate
the
intent
but
I,
don't
think
that's
a
path.
We
necessarily
want
to
go
down
with
this.
G
B
B
K
Three
Mr
chair,
difficult
question:
the
rol
code
defines
that
when
you
have
over
a
hundred
Lots
it
requires
a
park.
A
dual
occupancy
on
one
lot
is
two
dwellings,
but
it's
still
only
one
lot.
So
look.
We've
done
a
sort
of
a
a
rough
sketch.
In
our
opinion,
opinion
the
maximum
amount
of
lots
that
you're
likely
to
achieve
in
this
subdivision
is
about
94.95
under
the
hundred
Lots
look,
we
don't
have
an
ability
to
recommend
a
park
because
they're
complying
with
the
rol
code.
Okay,.
K
Through
you,
Mr
chair,
that's
well,
I,
don't
know
anyone's
entitled
to
make
an
application.
This
is
what
the
applicant
sort
of
envisaged
for
for
dual
occupancy,
Lots
I,
suppose
down
the
down
the
track.
If
somebody
wants
to
put
an
application
in
we'll
assess
it
on
its
on
on
its
merits.
At
that
time,.
A
A
K
Through
you
Mr
chair,
that's
an
extremely
difficult
question
for
us
to
respond
to
it's
highly
likely.
They'll
do
bulk
Earthworks
all
at
the
same
time,
they'll
likely
earthwork
the
whole
site.
So
when
you
talk
about
amenity
protection,
I
think
it
is
a
guarantee
that
the
amenity
impacts
of
bulk
Earthworks
will
actually
be
done
all
at
once.
Are
there
any
other
specific
amenity
issues
you're
looking
at
so.
F
If
we
can
just
go
to
the
staging
diagram
again,
if
you
wouldn't
mind
so
say
stage,
one
gets
built
and
because
I
don't
know
the
economy
is
in
the
toilet
or
capsule
becomes
difficult
to
access.
Maybe
stage
two
and
three
are
deferred.
Bulk,
Earth
Works
have
been
carried
out.
Hopefully
we
haven't
Disturbed
any
imported
red
fire
ant
nests.
C
K
Through
you
Mr
chair,
this
is
what
the
applicants
applied
for.
We
believe
it
complies
with
the
city
plan
and
the
Land
Development
guidelines
and
we're
recommending
approval
based
on
that
staging
plan.
Officers
don't
have,
in
our
opinion,
the
ability
to
change
the
staging
layout
that
that's
an
applicant's
prerogative,
can.
F
We
just
return
to
my
question,
though,
for
a
moment
and
I
appreciate
the
council
taxes,
local
councilor,
trying
to
reorder
the
staging
to
better
see
this
community,
but
would
it
be
reasonable
for
us
to
attach
a
new
condition
to
ensure
that
the
undeveloped
stage,
two
and
three,
while
undeveloped,
is
maintained
to
some
standards
that
we
don't
have
weed
cover
proliferation,
fuel
load?
All
of
these
complaints
that
can
sit
alongside
established
homes,
for,
in
my
experience
decades.
M
Yeah
three
Mr
chair,
there's
no
City
plan
standard
that
comes
to
mind,
but
if
the
committee
was
minded
to
it
could
put
on
a
condition
similar
to
what
you've
just
said,
Council
of
vorstrand,
that
if
any
of
the
stages
remain
undeveloped,
that
the
landowner
keep
them
in
a
neat
and
tidy
state.
But
I
don't
have
a
town
planning
standard
to
refer
to.
F
In
deference
to
the
chair,
I
don't
propose
to
screw
around
with
wording
today,
but
perhaps
if
there
are
words
being
developed
to
support
councilor
toes
at
full,
Council
I
think
that
would
be
an
important
bit
of
amenity
protection
not
only
for
the
existing
residents,
but
the
future
residents
there
and
hopefully
hurry
along
the
development
right
and
again.
This
is
this
is
not
me
trying
to
make
life
difficult
at
the
Breakwater
development.
F
Those
Parcels
set
undeveloped
for
probably
two
decades
and
the
amount
of
complaints
that
I
received
about
Vermin
and
fire
and
pest
trees
and
all
the
rest.
It
actually
created
a
a
burden
on
us
as
an
organization
to
respond
to
those
complaints.
It
can
be
proactive,
I
think
that's
a
better
outcome
for
the
community
and
the
administration.
A
A
L
A
J
A
C
In
the
little
green
space
to
the
immediate
west
of
the
site,
yep
right
next
door
to
it
effectively,
what
will
happen
is
this
development
and
that
existing
Council
Reserve
will
become
one
reserve
and
my
understanding
is
they
won't
that
won't
be
fenced
and
they'll
become
effectively
one
Council
drainage
asset
between
the
two.
There
is
a
path
that
goes
through
there,
so
there's.
A
E
J
E
D
K
D
K
D
Before
and
they
may
but
like
in
10
years
or
15
years
time,
when
it
when
it
ultimately
gets
redeveloped,
because
it's
the
last
7
000
square
meter
block
or
whatever
it
is
in
the
street,
and
it's
hemmed
in
on
the
western
side
by
an
existing
small
lot.
Development
it'll
get
developed
and
we'll
end
up
with
a
poor
configuration
of
Road.
B
B
A
Can
I
make
a
proposal
movies
forward
that
blocky
is
above
the
400
square
meters?
Can
we
propose
in
the
conditions
and
amended
drawings
plan
or
amended
plan
where
they
have
to
cut
that
section
off
and
line
it
up
with
the
one
next
door
that
still
keeps
it
in
the
relevant
size?
That
is
cut
the
top
of
it?
Would
that
make
everyone
happy.
A
They
can
Roger.
Do
you
seek
the
intent
I'm
saying
for
so
we're
going
to
take
a
10
minute
break
because
there's
a
couple
change
recommend
a
couple
conditions
to
change.
We'll
look
at
that
one
too
and
then
we'll
come
back
to
our
new
recommendation
to
go
into
debate
on
meeting
adjourner
for
10
minutes.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
K
K
K
K
K
K
A
F
F
An
outcome
is
not
the
best
one
and-
and
all
members
really
today
have
contributed
to
I
think
an
overall,
better
outcome,
and
we've
done
so
Bound
By,
Land
Development
guidelines
and
restrictions
that
the
state
plays
on
us
so
I
think
what
we're
proposing
today
is
fair,
it's
reasonable
and
it
reflects
our
best
attempt
at
this
committee
stage
to
get
a
good
outcome
for
our
community
and
that's
only
been
informed
by
the
representations
by
councilor
Tozer.
Today,.
C
I'd
love
to
thank
you,
cancer.
Hamill.
Look
there's
no
doubt
in
my
mind
that
the
members
of
the
gilster
community
Who
currently
live.
There,
have
mixed
feelings
about
development
of
this
nature.
The
lot
sizes
in
this
development
are,
whilst
compliant
with
Land
Development
guidelines
and
the
hectare,
averages
and
Such
Thing
per
hectare.
Averages
are
significantly
less
than
the
existing
development
outcomes
that
are
in
gilston
right
now
and
I.
Think,
probably
quite
quite
rightfully.
The
community
has
expressed
some
concern
about
that.
C
I
have
been
really
great
to
communicate
with
they've
been
really
open
and
communicative
and
I
also
want
to.
Thank
you
know
now
this
today
or
yesterday's
Facebook
conversation
will
probably
constitute
the
fourth
different
Community
consultation
I've
had
with
the
broader
gilston
community
on
Facebook
about
this
issue,
and
it
was.
It
was
very
gracious
of
you
to
answer
that
question
so
openly.
C
One
thing
I
would
say
is
that
there
is
no
doubt
in
our
city
right
now
that
there's
some
a
lack
of
available
housing
Supply
is
an
issue
and
the
idea
that
today
we're
approving
80
Lots
in
the
center
of
the
city
outside
of
Skyridge,
which
has
got
3
500
dwellings
coming
into
it.
There's
not
many
sites
in
division,
nine
and
or
the
central
part
of
the
city
that
that
are
that
are
able
to
provide
that
dwelling
Supply,
particularly
west
of
the
highway.
C
We've
got
some
really
great
schools
and
great
Community
assets
that
I
know
that
people
love
living
around
so
I'll
be
pleased
to
support
this.
Ultimately,
despite
those
mixed
feelings
on
full
Council,
but
I
do
hope
that
the
community
can
see
the
transparency
that
we've
delivered
today
and
have
some
reassurance
about
this
being
frankly,
one
of
the
last
Lots
in
gilston
that
can
be
developed,
there's
not
really
anything
else
in
Gilson
inside
the
conceptual
land
use
map
that
can
actually
be
done,
or
the
emerging
Community,
Zone
and
I'm.
A
A
Okay,
councilor
Petty
young.
Are
you
against
this
one
or
for
this
one?
Okay?
So
that's
right,
so
that
is
carried
councilor
young.
Were
you
looking
for
your
name
to
be
noted
on
that
one,
please
note,
counts
the
pity
young
voted
against
officers.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
We
appreciate
your
efforts.
As
always
as
we
muck
around
with
things
on
the
floor.
D
D
A
A
N
Through
the
chair
good
morning,
councilors,
my
name
is
Troy
and
I'll
provide
an
update
on
the
northern
marine
Precinct
Master
planning
project.
You
can
see
the
location
up
on
screen
protecting
Southern,
modern
Bay,
Southwick
coverage
tree
Point
Village.
If
you
want
a
reminder
of
the
project
of
the
project
area
itself,
it
is
on
page
672.
The
agenda.
N
But
first
just
on
background
on
the
project
approach.
So
in
December
of
last
year,
Council
endorsed
the
proposed
approach
for
the
master
planning
project.
Today's
update
is
while
stage
to
a
technical
investigations,
are
ongoing,
including
project
Communications,
completed
opportunities
to
refine
the
technical
investigation
or
approach
highlighted
in
green
across
stage.
2A
and
2B
engage
with
key
stakeholders
to
date
and
the
bringing
forward
of
tailored
community
and
stakeholder
engagement,
as
outlined
in
green,
including
engaging
with
project
area
landowners
and
occupants.
N
N
Importantly,
this
provided
the
opportunity
for
any
interested
stakeholders
to
sign
up
for
future
project
updates,
Access
Project
information
to
date
and
be
informed
of
any
future
engagement
activities.
The
key
engagement
actions
shown
on
this
slide
were
completed
between
April
and
May
of
this
year.
The
city's
project
webpage
provided
available
project
information,
including
FAQs
and
previous
Council
reporting,
alongside
a
dedicated
phone
line
and
email
for
any
inquiries.
N
With
regard
to
technical
investigations
in
progress
stage,
2A
involves
a
further
investigation
of
the
topic
shown
on
this
slide.
Through
this
process,
it
will
assist
the
ongoing
identification
and
confirmation
of
opportunities
and
challenges.
Further.
The
process
enables
the
consideration
of
supporting
technical
investigations
to
commence
earlier
and
the
benefits
of
bringing
forward
a
tail
and
engagement
activity
before
I
provide
an
outline
of
the
preferes
tailored
engagement
approach.
As
highlighted
in
red,
this
diagram
represents
the
tailored
stakeholder
input,
which
includes
our
internal
stakeholders
into
technical
investigations,
as
listed
here.
N
All
technical
engagement
outcomes
will
inform
the
preparation
of
land
use
Concepts
to
refine
through
the
next
stage
of
Master
planning.
Project
work,
Taylor
community
and
stakeholder
engager
proposed
provides
an
early
opportunity
to
gather
feedback
to
guide
land
use
outcomes,
as
shown
within
the
benefits
of
the
engagement
process.
On
this
slide.
Opportunities
and
challenges
are
a
focus
alongside
enabling
insights
and
ideas
to
be
shared
and
to
have
buy-in
into
the
master
planning
process.
N
The
approach
will
be
specifically
tailored
for
feedback
from
Project
error,
landowners
and
occupants
residents
of
the
local
area,
such
as
cabbage
tree
Point,
Village,
recreational
boat
users
and
the
Marine
industry,
business
Community
city-wide,
including
key
businesses
within
the
cooma
Marine
Precinct,
the
engagement
methods,
utilize
GC,
have
you
say
for
input
on
how
the
community
and
stakeholders
relate
to
and
experience
the
area.
The
survey
will
be
supported
by
an
interactive
mapping
tool
to
allow
comments
on
a
specific
place
or
feature
within
or
surrounding
the
project
area.
N
N
Additional
tools
include
supporting
Communications
and
engagement
collateral
and
talk
to
the
planner
sessions
for
project
area
landowners
and
businesses
to
meet
with
City
officers
directly
and
engagement.
Summary
is
included
in
attachment
too
on
page
669
at
the
agenda
linking
to
Stage
2A
technical
Project
work
currently
underway,
including
the
landing
strategy
and
place-based
design
report.
Four
Precinct
themes
were
used
to
develop
the
survey
questions
I've
shown
on
this
slide.
The
precinct
themes
were
identified
to
help
capture
Focus
feedback
and
build
on
the
opportunities
and
challenges
with
map
pins,
also
themed
and
reflect
survey
questions.
N
This
slide
outlines
the
four
Precinct
themes
linked
to
the
technical
investigations
on
the
right
to
shape
the
survey
and
map
pins
for
the
community
and
stakeholder
engagement
approach
and,
together
with
draft
opportunities
and
challenge
mapping
to
assist
with
providing
feedback.
An
example
will
be
shown
shortly
with
a
map
paired
for
each
theme
based
on
key
preliminary
investigation
findings.
N
Feedback
from
the
survey
at
map
pins
will
inform
the
draft
Laney's
vision
and
guiding
principles.
It's
been
included
in
summing
recommendation
reporting.
The
draft
opportunities
and
challenges.
Mapping
to
be
finalized
is
included
in
attachment
3
from
page
667
of
the
agenda.
This
is
an
example
of
the
business
and
employment
theme
map
with
a
relating
information
sheet
to
provide
supporting
images.
N
In
summary,
of
next
steps,
feedback
from
the
survey
and
supporting
engagement
tools
will
be
key
to
refining
the
initial
land
use.
Concepts
further
feedback
from
internal
and
external,
targeted
stakeholders
and
opportunities
and
challenges
will
be
considered.
A
report
to
pack
in
early
next
year
will
include
the
findings
of
the
tailored
community
and
stakeholder
engagement,
as
well
as
the
outcomes
of
stage
2A
technical
work.
D
D
There
there's
been
issues
with
dredging
and
and
the
connectivity
of
the
dredged
area
to
the
cadastral
map,
so
I
don't
know
whether
or
not
we
should
give
some
consideration
to
extending
the
area
to
include
to
the
center
line
of
the
channel.
So
you
have
on
your
slide
10.
You
had
a
an
image
that
showed
the
hatched
blue.
It's
actually
not
dissimilar
to
that
type
of
presentation.
D
But
what
happened
at
kumara
is:
is
the
Gold
Coast
waterways
Authority
in
conjunction
with
the
city
cleaning
the
channel,
and
then
there
was
a
there
was
a
gap
of
Maintenance
between
the
sea,
Battle
Ace
and
the
and
the
dredge
Channel
which
didn't
allow
for
vessels
to
move
from
the
Clear
Channel
to
the
cleared
seabed
lease.
So
so
I
think
that
that
interact
that
interface
between
the
center
of
the
channel
and
the
land-based
activity
is
important
and
and
should
form
part
of
that
does.
A
That
make
sense,
so
it
doesn't
and
I
know
true
it's
something
we
have
spoken
about
a
couple
times,
but
if
you
just
want
to
talk
to
council
Owen
Jones
on
that's
one
of
the
key
objectives
of
the
talking
with
the
different
state
agencies
and
all
the
way,
this
already
is
not
to
repeat
that
mistake.
Yeah.
D
See,
there's
probably
some
state
agencies
that
don't
see
it
as
being
a
mistake.
You
know
so
Des,
for
example,
were
quite
militant
in
regards
to
the
seabed
and
and
dredging
outside
of
the
seabed,
which
is
again
we
we're
doing
this
because
we
want
to
create
industry
and
we
want
to
create
jobs.
But
if
you,
if
you
effectively
can't
you
utilize
all
of
that
water
area
and
because
somebody
gets
excited,
you
know
so
so
I
think
that
we
should
be
very
explicit
in
that
regards.
A
N
It's
true,
the
chair,
counselor,
will
be
very
early
in
the
process,
so
I
guess,
as
part
of
our
technical
work,
is
to
explore
all
opportunities
and
challenges.
So
part
of
that
is
definitely
well.
What
is
the
current
opportunity
that
the
existing
navigation
channel
is
shown
on
Blue
on
screen
provides
in
terms
of
access
to
the
area,
so
at
current
defs
it
allows
access
for
certain
size
of
vessels.
N
Is
that
the
opportunity
to
continue
into
the
future,
or
is
there
a
need
to
consider
a
deeper
Channel
depth
for
larger
vessels?
We
don't
have
those
answers
at
present,
but
it
is
something
be
considered
in
terms
of.
Ultimately,
what
size
of
vessels
is
required
to
be
accommodated
as
part
of
future
planning.
D
B
Thanks
chairman,
through
you
as
part
of
the
technical
investigations,
I'm
presuming
and
and
councilor
Owen
Jones
and
I
discussed
this
with
officers
during
the
week,
the
need
to
protect
their
residential
community
and
especially
the
properties
backing
on
from
Royal
Palm
Drive
onto
that
northernmost
parcel
of
land
to
protect
them
from
any
of
the
smelly
Industries
like
fiberglassing
or
all
the
like.
So
will.
The
next
report
have
a
layout
that
identifies
what
type
of
users
are
proposed
to
which
parts
of
that
layer.
N
Through
the
chair,
the
outcome
of
this
work
is
an
initial
land
use
concept,
so
we'll
show
a
general
layout
of
what's
intended
in
terms
of
future
planning,
noting
that
technical
investigations
will
still
be
ongoing
at
that
point
before
delivering
a
master
plan
in
terms
of
the
interface
to
the
local
Village.
That
is
there
if
I
just
refer
to
the
Place
characteristics,
engagement
theme,
but
you
can
see
on
the
left
in
terms
of
the
interface
that's
being
highlighted
in
green,
so
that
is
going
to
be
a
key
consideration
in
terms
of
well.
N
That
is
definitely
a
challenge.
What
does
that
interface?
Look
like
as
part
of
the
concept
plans,
but
equally
provides
an
opportunity
in
terms
of
what
does
that
mean
with
the
position
of
different
uses,
acknowledging
that
Marine
interview
users
generally
can
have
an
impact
on
sensitive
uses.
So
it
is
definitely
a
key
consideration
be
considered
through
this
early
technical
work.
A
I
think
councilor
Gates.
Obviously
you
represented
that
Community
for
12
years
and
I've
now
represented
them
for
nearly
a
term
and
I
actually
think
it's
the
biggest
opportunity
in
this
entire
piece
of
work.
By
doing
this
so
far
in
advance
that
when
this
land
maybe
need,
is
to
make
sure
we
get
that
right.
A
But
one
thousand
percent
agree
with
your
sediment
and
it
is
the
by
far
been
the
biggest
concern
raised
by
residents
there,
but
I
hope
will
lead
to
the
biggest
opportunity
to
make
sure
that
we
get
the
correct
buffers
and
the
correct
interfaces
and
the
correct
land
uses
in
the
future.
Castle
Aaron
Jones
back
to
you.
D
D
A
And
may
lead
to
to
pick
up
on
your
point:
Council
Owen
Jones
that
maybe
after
the
technical
investigations
are
done.
If
that
buffer
does
have
to
be
that
wide,
we
may
need
to
look
at
moving
that
yellow
dash
line
to
the
other
side
of
the
road
to
make
sure
we've
actually
got
enough
land
to
make
this
feasible.
All
that
will
flush
out
in
the
future.
So.
D
So
yeah,
so
to
me
it's
the
type
of
Industry,
so
it
may
very
well
be
that
you
can
do
a
a
12
meter,
high
boat
storage,
which
doesn't
create
any
of
those
dramas
close
to
that
existing
hatched
area.
That
transition
error,
and
that
makes
sense
you
know,
but
I'm,
allowing
people
to
grind
fiberglass
you
know-
may
not
necessarily
be
what
you
want
to
do
in
that
area.
Other.
A
D
D
D
If
we're
going
to
go
through
the
process
of
creating
more
opportunity
and
more
jobs
in
the
north
of
the
city
that
we
learn
from
some
of
the
some
of
the
last
couple
of
Decades
of
work.
So
they
may
have
some
very
clear
views
on
how
the
state
agencies,
for
example,
may
be
able
to
better
facilitate
outcomes
for
employment
and
I
think
it
would
be
best
if
we
took
those
up
and
brought
them
forward
as
part
of
the
consultation
report.
B
Oh
very
well
Co
his
sentiment
that
we've
had
huge
investment,
huge
capital
investment
from
the
kumara
people,
and
it's
very
important
that
we
protect
what's
already
there,
and
my
understanding
is
that
this
will
be
a
very
different
type
of
Precinct
and
I.
Think
they
need
to
be
fully
informed
about
what
is
proposed
early
in
the
piece.
A
Yes,
absolutely
do,
and
just
one
final
comment
of
this
stage:
I
wanted
to
thank
Troy
for
his
work
on
this
particular
project
to
date
and
for
his
exceptionally
higher
level
of
communication
with
me
with
residents
on
this
one.
Obviously,
those
residents
becoming
aware
of
this
investigation
stirred
up
a
lot
of
questions.
A
lot
of
concerns
Troy
and
the
team
have
done
an
excellent
job
in
responding
as
best
they
can
to
those
concerns.
A
A
A
A
A
I
feel
there
is
a
reasonable
need
to
just
defer
this
item
for
a
couple
more
committee
meetings
to
allow
some
further
Road
testing
to
be
done
between
our
city
assessment
branch
and
our
strategic
branch
on
this
item.
The
proposed
recommendation
still
sees
this
item
come
back
to
us
before
the
end
of
this
year,
so
it
can
be
set
up
for
State
interest
check.
A
It
simply
allows
an
opportunity
for
some
further
review
work
and
Road
testing
work
to
be
done
with
our
city
assessment
Branch,
who,
in
the
end
other
brands
that
have
to
use
the
new
policy
and
the
new
codes
attached
to
it.
So
that's
the
reason
for
the
change
recommendations
happy
to
take
questions
now:
councilor
vorster.
F
A
D
So
I
I
actually
don't
see
the
downside
of
saying
internal
because
that's
I
I
actually
don't
want
it
to
sprawl
into
disparate
parts
of
the
industry.
Deciding
that
a
review
also
potentially
includes
them.
We're
trying
to
make
sure
that
it
works
for
the
city
and
the
administration.
So
I
think
the
internal
isn't
necessarily
a
step
too
far.
So.
E
I
had
a
question
about
the
mapping:
that's
been
provided
and
by
the
time
we
get
to
the
next
presentation
of
this
I'd,
like
this
matter,
taken
on
board
and
perhaps
addressed,
there's
no
index
to
the
maps
which,
and
so
it's
very
confusing.
So,
for
example,
if
you
go
to
page
1061,
the
first
map
is
showing
Alberton
and
the
next
map
is
coombaba,
so
there's
no
geographical
relationship
and
then
the
next
one
from
that
is
molendino,
so
they're,
not
consecutively,
ordered
and
normally
at
least
you'd
have
an
index
map.
B
I
I,
don't
know
that
it
actually
clearly
describes
what
I
believe
was
the
important
factor
in
the
briefing
that
we
had,
and
that
was
that
our
development
assessment
officers
had
an
opportunity
not
to
review
the
whole
package
but
to
to
Really
test
on
the
ground.
The
way
that
the
codes
work
during
the
assessment
phase,
cancer.
A
A
It
is
one
of
the
most
significant
policy
shifts
pushed
on
to
local
governments
by
the
state
government
in
a
long
long
time,
which
this
comes
in
the
back
of
two
major
Brisbane
flooding
events
and
other
flooding.
Events
in
our
region,
so
an
incredibly
important
piece
of
policy
work
that
will
make
an
incredible
difference
to
our
city
and
all
other
cities
in
Queensland
into
the
future.
A
Because
of
its
importance
and
because
it
is
such
a
significant
policy
shift
position.
I
think
it
is
very
important
to
make
sure
that
the
people
who,
in
the
end,
have
to
use
the
policy
and
use
the
assessment
tables
being
our
assessing
officers,
have
had
every
opportunity
possible
to
make
sure
that
anything
that
could
be
refined
to
make
their
job
easier
in
the
future.
To
make
sure
they
understand
the
intent
better
to
be
ready
for
when
this
policy
in
the
future
hits
hits
the
road
which
is
still
is
a
little
while
to
go.
A
This
is
only
to
send
at
the
state
interest
check
when
it
comes
back
in
the
future,
but
for
the
sake
of
a
couple
months,
to
give
our
assessment
grants
a
bit
of
extra
time
I
believe
it's
a
worthwhile
thing
to
do.
Can
I
put
it
on
the
record
too
I
appreciate,
probably
the
frustration
of
our
strategic
planning
section
for
the
delay,
but
I'm
of
the
very
firm
opinion
that
it's
the
right
thing
to
do
at
this
time
and
for
the
sake
of
a
a
couple
more
months
that
will
improve
outcomes.
B
Chairman
I
just
wanted
to
also
highlight
that
we're
cognizant
of
the
need
for
the
community
to
be
aware
of
the
risk
that
we
know
exists
from
the
most
recent
modeling
that
we
trust
that
modeling
and
that
this
will
enable
us
to
move
forward
and
get
this
document
on
display
fairly
quickly
without
too
much
of
a
delay
with
the
confidence
that
there
won't
be
future
delays
in
assessment
and
that
we've
got
all
our
ducks.
In
line.
E
Chairman
I
think
the
body
work
has
that's
been
done,
is
very
impressive
and
I'm
grateful
to
the
office
for
officers
for
their
dedication
to
the
to
this
matter
for
over
a
long
period
of
time,
I
think
there's
been
a
lot
of
really
good
engagement.
I
certainly
support
the
amen.
The
proposed
motion
to
defer
this
to
have
a
bit
more
opportunity
to
prove
that
this
will
be
an
effectively
effective
way
and
it
can
be
managed
well
through
the
development
assessment
process,
which
is
critical,
but
I
just
want
to
recognize
the
great
work.
E
F
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chairman
I
also
want
to
thank
City
officers,
who
have
run
an
incredible
process
that
has
afforded
everyone
in
this
chamber.
Excluding
Council
Curtis,
of
course,
is
a
new
arrival
to
participate
and
provide
feedback.
It
has
been
a
very
engaging
process
and
I've
been
certainly
very
comforted
by
it.
I
think
the
technical
work
is
exceptional.
F
It
is
a
must,
really
set
the
standard,
I
think
nationally
and
that's
something
that
should
be
lauded
I'm
sure
in
the
fullness
of
time
it
will
become
award-winning,
and
perhaps
the
example
we
set
here
on
the
Gold
Coast
will
be
the
standard
that
others
will
have
to
follow
across
the
state.
I
did
also
want
to
acknowledge
the
work
of
the
council,
apart
from
the
incredible
work
done
from
city
offices,
because
some
of
the
policy
Direction
captured
in
this
body
of
work
has
come
about
because
of
decisions.
F
We've
made
on
specific
planning
matters
and
I
can
think
of
one
example
to
do
with
recreational
space
and
I
can
think
of
another
one
to
do
with
a
retirement
village
that
was
proposed
to
be
constructed
over
water
on
a
weir
and,
while
I
think
the
councilors
who
supported
that
development
were
Keen
to
support
city
offices
and
were
worried
about
unnecessary
legal
expenses.
To
my
mind,
it
just
demonstrates
that
sometimes
it's
worth
putting
a
D.A
through
the
rigor
to
settle
a
policy
position
and
whatever
we
might
have
invested
into
that
process.
F
We're
reaping
that
as
a
dividend
as
an
asset
in
the
policy
that
we're
presented
with
today,
so
I
hope
and
expect
that
there
will
be
no
material
delay
to
the
adoption
of
this
policy.
The
chairman
has
given
me
a
reassurance
that
that
won't
be
the
case
and
I
really
look
forward
to
settling
the
way
we
deal
with
Hazard
to
ensure
that
we
can
support
development
while
also
protecting
vulnerable
people
moving
forward.
Thank
you.
A
A
B
B
I
had
a
question
and
I
briefly
raised
it
with
Catherine
I
noted
that
number
17
on
our
list
of
our
submission.
The
summarized
submission
had
some
words
around
it
about
the
Stapleton
Jacobs
Well
Road
and
exit
38,
and
yesterday
with
councilor
Owen
Jones
I
had
a
meeting
with
our
transport
infrastructure.
People
who
recognize
and
who
are
dealing
with
the
state
government
now
about
the
significance
of
the
kumara
town
center
and
all
the
road
Network
around
it.
P
A
You
it
doesn't
seem
like
a
lot
of
sense
for
the
state
government
to
introduce
a
new
cluster,
but
not
talk
about
the
their
infrastructure
to
it.
So,
for
the
exact
same
reasons
why
the
exit
38
staple
Jacksboro
road
is
in
there
because
the
state
government
wants
to
see
it
as
part
of
their
future
work.
I
can
see
the
sense
in
that
so
we'll
let
that
sit
there
for
everyone
to
digest
and
we'll
go
to
questions
in
the
meantime,
councilor
vorster
you
who
are
hand
up
first.
F
There
was
a
document
that
related
to
the
transport
infrastructure,
mapping
I,
think
that
was
the
title
of
the
document,
because
I'm
I
know
when
we
develop
a
city
plan,
for
example,
we're
required
to
deliver
a
local
government
infrastructure
plan
to
align
an
infrastructure
Pipeline
with
the
population
that
we
seek
to
deliver
at
specific
locations.
So
when
you
jam,
people
in
you
need
to
offset
those
amenity
impacts
with
trunk
infrastructure.
F
So
when
I
looked
to
the
southeast
Queensland
Regional
plan,
the
state
government's
proposed
draft
is
very
interested
to
see
what
they
might
have
envisaged
for
transport
infrastructure
to
help
us
meet
these
population
targets.
But
the
document
that
I
saw
published
on
the
state
government
consultation
portal
was
a
transport
infrastructure
map
that
was
current
as
of
2017.,
not
2023
and
I.
Just
wondered
whether
city
offices
were
provided
with
any
updated
mapping
to
suggest
that
we
would
see
additional
transport
infrastructure
over
and
above
what
was
in
that
2017
map.
Q
Let
me
try
that
again
through
the
chair.
I
can
confirm
that
the
transport
mapping
within
the
shaping
seq
documentation
has
been
updated
since
the
2017
version,
and
it
does
include
components
like
the
high-speed
East-West
connections
now,
so
there
are
some
additions
to
it.
In
addition
to
that,
the
southeast
Queensland
infrastructure
supplement
does
include
a
little
bit
of
detail.
It's
not
a
lot,
though.
Okay.
F
So
when
I
suppose
do
you,
that
document
was
that
public
made
publicly
available.
It
really
concerns
me
that
the
consultation
opened
and
there
was,
for
a
moment
at
least
outdated
mapping.
Do
we
know
whether
they're
at
what
date,
the
new
mapping
was
publicly
released
and
how
soon
that
was
before
the
close
of
submissions
through.
Q
The
chair
I
believe
it
was
made
available
right
at
the
beginning.
What
may
cause
confusion
is
some
of
the
maps
are
really
low
resolution.
The
state
government
did
provide
the
mapping
in
high
resolution,
but
you
needed
to
download
them
separately.
They
were
all
still
on
the
website.
So
that's
that's
where
we
gained
them
from
as
well.
Okay,.
F
I
would
I
would
appreciate
if
you
could
send
me
those
links
so
that
I
can
correct
my
own
thinking,
because
when
I
downloaded,
the
individual
documents
I
didn't
see,
for
example,
I'm
going
to
pull
out
a
project
here.
Heavy
rail,
Beyond,
Varsity
Lakes,
so
does
that
project
appear
on
the
state
government's
updated
Maps
through.
Q
F
So
so,
there's
no
notional
commitment
just
that
there
will
be
planning
and
I
think
that's
kind
of
reflected
actually
now
just
turning
to
page
11
when
the
officers
reported
says.
Importantly,
the
connection
for
the
heavy
rail
to
the
Gold
Coast
Airport
has
not
been
committed
to
within
the
draft
documents.
Okay,
what
about
light
rail
from
Burley
to
the
airport.
Q
F
Q
F
The
East-West
links
I'm
intrigued
about
so
can
you
walk
me
through
that?
Because
there
has
been
this
two
million
dollar
commitment
from
Council
for
the
East
West,
the
Gold
Coast
Central
East-West
passenger
transport
study,
the
East-West
Connections
in
that
plan,
reflective
of
the
work
that
we're
doing
in
that
join
project
yeah.
F
F
The
other
question
I
had
concerning
the
the
regional
plan
is
its
relationship
to
the
actual
infrastructure
plan
which,
if
I
go
visit
the
state
government
website.
There
are
a
couple
of
regional
infrastructure
plans
that
are
published,
but
the
one
for
Southeast
core,
the
south
east
of
Queensland,
basically
says
it
will
come
at
some
point
in
2023..
F
Q
Through
the
chair
very
good
question,
so
I
guess
it's
worth
noting
that
last
Regional
plan
review
we
didn't
actually
have
any
infrastructure
supplement
or
plan
was
released
at
the
same
time.
So
the
fact
that
we
have
an
seq
infrastructure
supplement
draft
seq
infrastructure
supplement
is
actually
a
good
thing.
It's
really
good.
Unfortunately,
there
isn't
a
lot
of
detail
in
it.
It
is
early
in
the
development.
The
state
have
really
identified
the
need
to
combine
the
two
infrastructure
planning
with
region
of
growth
planning,
but
it's
a
work
in
progress.
Q
The
original
aim
was
to
develop
a
full
infrastructure
plan,
but
that
has
been
reduced
to
this
infrastructure
supplement.
The
state
have
indicated
that
there
is
likely
to
be
significant
change
from
the
infrastructure
supplement
that
we
have
at
the
moment
compared
to
the
release
the
final
and
then
the
the
full
infrastructure
plan
will
be
developed
in
2025.
and.
F
It's
so
funny,
because
from
from
a
local
government
perspective,
we
wanted
to
to
hold
planning
and
infrastructure
together
and
a
it.
Concerns
me
that
we're
we're
locking
in
this
Regional
plan
and
just
hoping
that
the
infrastructure
plan
comes
good,
would
that
a
release
of
a
fundamentally
different
infrastructure
plan
trigger
some
form
of
consultation
either
for
that
plan
or
because
the
regional
plan
might
need
to
be
amended
in
some
way.
Q
Through
the
chair,
I
believe
that
the
regional
plan
is
a
statutory
process
and
it
has
a
requirement
for
the
consultation.
I,
don't
believe
the
infrastructure
supplement
has
that
statutory
requirement,
so
I
don't
know
whether
they
will
have
any
additional
period
periods.
They
certainly
don't
have
to
so.
F
Now
just
read
from
the
report,
while
the
state
government
has
engaged
with
city
offices,
the
nature
of
the
consultation
has
not
been
ideal,
primarily
due
to
the
very
tight
time
frames.
The
provision
of
information
from
the
state
government
has
been
sporadic
with
data,
often
incomplete
inconsistent
from
previous
advice
or
provided
without
supporting
evidence.
F
While
it
is
clear
that
the
state
government
offices
and
Associated
subject
matter,
experts
are
doing
the
best
that
they
can
within
challenging
conditions.
The
time
frames
allowed
for
this
review
are
inadequate
to
allow
proper
consideration
of
various
complex
policy
positions
and
I
won't
carry
on.
Thank
you
for
the
full
Frank
and
fearless
advice
can
I
say.
Thank
you.
My
question
is:
what
risks
might
we
have
progressing
a
new
city
plan
based
on
this
Regional
plan,
given
this
Frank
and
fearless
advice,
and
we
expect
some
shifting
Sands,
because
this
process
has
been
so
rushed.
P
Through
the
chat,
so
a
new
planning
scheme
would
be
relied
upon
to
basically
align
with
any
of
the
new
Regional
planning
or
estate
planning
instruments.
Even
the
current
planning
scheme.
They
can
make
a
directive
for
all
planning
schemes
to
be
realigned
to
this,
so
they
can
do
that
through
their
their
process
of
approval.
P
In
terms
of
our
programmer
work,
we
are
actually
more
I
guess
in
a
better
position
than
other
Southeast
Queensland
councils,
because
we
are
yet
to
commence
our
planning
schema
review.
There
are
other
councils
that
have
completed
or
are
about
to
adopt
their
planning
scheme,
which
will
be
required
to
then
go
back
and
realign
it
with
a
new
Regional
plan
in
terms
of
our
sort
of
response,
there's
also
a
lot
of
unknowns,
there's
potential
changes
to
the
planning
regulation
and
model
codes
and
all
that
sort
of
stuff.
F
For
me,
the
regional
plan
is
critically
important
because,
while
that
Central
Robina
area
Falls
outside
of
our
planning
scheme,
it's
enveloped
by
the
regional
plan
and
I
was
a
little
bit
and
hopefully
I've
got
this
wrong.
But
I
was
a
little
bit
concerned
not
to
see
I.
Suppose
some
of
our
aspirations
for
the
central
part
of
Robina,
captured
in
the
recommendations
here
and
in
the
report
fully
acknowledge
that
we've
got
the
East-West
public
transport
connections
and
the
acceleration
of
the
green
heart
I'm
thankful
for
that.
F
These
are
State
interests
that
sit
within
Robina.
They
deliver
services
that
are
important
to
the
southeast
corner
and
I.
Don't
see
that
wholesomely
or
fulsomely
I
should
say
reflected
in
this
report,
and
my
question
is
at
full.
Council
might
City
officers
entertain
in
the
same
way
we're
entertaining
at
committee
today
some
stronger
reference
to
the
work
that
we're
doing
with
the
Robina
Central
planning
area
and
the
Robina
Town
Center
Gateway
study
to
finally
pin
the
government
down
on
these
essential
infrastructure
upgrades
that
we
need
to
allow
them
to
make
the
most
of
their
land.
R
Just
through
the
chair,
so
the
comments
from
councilor
Gates
and
the
additional
recommendation
relate
to
the
regional
economic
cluster
in
the
same
sense
for
Robina
to
Varsity.
That's
another
Regional
economic
cluster.
So
we
actually
could
address
that
through
the
enabling
infrastructure
to
support
that
cluster
looking
forward.
So
it
would,
it
could
potentially
be
quite
a
similar
type
of
wording
that
could
actually
address
that
I.
F
A
B
A
S
Thank
you
through
you,
chair
with
this
time
frame,
so
I
understand.
At
the
moment,
you
haven't
been
provided
quite
a
bit
of
material
that
you
would
actually
require
to
respond
properly.
So
my
understanding
is,
you
haven't
been
provided
population
projections,
they
haven't
been
finalized
by
the
state
government.
Yet
nor
have
the
employment
benchmarks
been
provided
for
the
24
2046
planning
Horizon,
the
proposed
regulated
regulatory
changes
haven't
been
provided
and
targets
for
social
housing.
So
my
question
is:
have
they
given
you
any
indication
of
when
they're
going
to
give
this
to
you?
S
Given
we
don't
have
another
planning
committee
meeting
before
you've
got
to
submit
this
back
so
effectively.
You
need
to
get
all
this
information
from
them
to
reconsider
your
work
before
a
council
meeting,
because
otherwise
you're
effectively
doing
it
blind.
Have
they
given
you
any
indication
if
they're
going
to
give
you
the
information
you
need
to
to
do
this.
Q
R
R
Oh
yeah,
thank
you
through
the
chair,
I
guess.
The
key
issue
on
that
front
is
the
expectation
that
the
local
governments
would
consider
providing
a
housing,
Supply
statement
as
part
of
our
submission
to
the
state
and
that
that
would
be
prepared
during
the
console
touch.
Excuse
me
during
the
consultation
period,
the
issue
for
us
is:
we
have
been
provided
some
data,
but
it's
incomplete
and
it's
not
actually
reflective
of
the
current
overall
2046
projection
for
shaping
seq,
and
it's
also
come
with
a
confidentiality
Clause.
R
So
the
challenge
for
us
is
in
bringing
forward
to
council
anything
with
relying
on
that
data,
even
that
it
would
have
to
be
confidential,
but
we
don't
have
that
option
when
we
bring
planning
reports
planning
policy
to
council
the
other.
The
other
issue
we
face
is
the
housing
Supply
statement
is
intended
to
provide
two
five
and
ten
year
responses
from
the
city.
In
terms
of
you
know
the
housing
crisis
around
the
region,
but
we
haven't
actually
been
provided
the
benchmarks
that
we
would
work
towards
for
five
and
ten
year
periods.
R
So
what
we've
been
concerned
about
And
discussing
with
the
state?
Is
we
really
need
that
information
we've
proposed
through
this
report
that
we
would
use
the
time
between
now
and
the
next
council
meeting,
which
is
in
October
late
October,
to
do
what
we
can
to
work
on
a
housing,
Supply
statement,
but
we're
also
continuing
to
engage
with
the
state
about
the
information
that
we
would
need
to
be
able
to
provide
a
meaningful
statement
as
well.
S
Thank
you.
A
follow-up
to
that
I
do
find
another
thing
with
the
timing
of
it.
That
I
find
somewhat
odd,
is
I
would
think
that
a
resident
in
our
city
who
would
want
to
make
a
a
submission,
would
be
interested
in
knowing
what
the
City
of
Gold
Coast
submission
would
be.
First,
but
effectively
our
residents
are
asked
to
make
a
submission
without
knowing
what
ours
is.
First.
Does
that
make
sense
to
you.
R
P
S
Okay,
two
other
questions.
So
the
first
one
is:
we've
got
on
page
21
in
the
table,
the
the
details
on
housing
dwellings
per
population
which
was
provided
to
the
mayor
from
Minister
Leanne,
Enoch
26th
of
April
22,
and
from
memory
that
took
at
least
12
months
to
get
that
data
after
we
asked
we
finally
got
it,
and
it
shows
us
that
the
City
of
Gold
Coast
has
less
than
half
the
social
housing
dwellings
per
capita.
Then
Brisbane
does.
S
Q
Q
So,
amongst
other
things,
one
of
our
recommendations
is
that
they
focus
on
the
social
housing
component
at
the
moment
and
that
for
the
city
it
needs
to
be
at
least
nine
percent.
Yes,
and
that's
to
address
the
lag
as
well
as
what
we'd
need
for
future
growth,
which
is
I,
think
off
the
top
I
had
about
14,
000
dwellings,
okay,.
S
Again,
they're
asking
you
to
provide
submissions
without
giving
you
that
information,
okay
and
then
the
the
last
the
last
one
is
regarding
you've
made
up
the
point
here
that
we
would
want
the
state
government
to
commit
to
a
comprehensive
and
Urgent
review
of
infrastructure
charges.
I,
remember
many
conversations
in
here
and
many
requests
to
the
state
government
for
us
for
that
to
happen.
So
my
understanding
is
that
their
their
response
to
our
last
one
will
actually
maybe
I.
Suppose
I'll
ask
you
the
question.
O
O
B
I'm
just
interested
in
on
page
47
in
the
additional
points
of
submission
it
mentions
under
consolidation
and
expansion,
dwelling
growth
ratio
and
aspirational,
move
to
70,
30
consolidation
expansion
we
were
taking
out
or
that
the
state
had
suggested
removing
any
specific
percentage
targets,
with
a
preference
for
us
to
focus
on
diversity
in
housing.
Supply,
so
I
want
to
know
why?
That's
there.
Q
Through
the
chair-
yes,
you
summarize
it
perfectly
in
terms
of
the
different
local
government
areas.
They
have
taken
out
the
reference
to
consolidation,
expansion
for
the
regions,
the
sub-regions,
but
at
the
overall
seq
region,
they've
kept
the
target
of
70
to
30
was
was
60
40
and
now
it's
moving
towards
70
30.
Q
B
B
A
E
Chairman
I
just
wanted
to
get
my
head
around
this
gentle
density
concoction
in
our
city
plan.
Now
we've
got
low
density
and
I'm
thinking
about
areas
like
Pacific
lines.
The
whole
suburb
is
covered
by
that
there's
a
low
to
medium
I
think
in
fact,
and
we
have
a
nine
meter
limit.
What
does
gentle
density
mean
true?
That
sort
of
area
through.
Q
The
chair,
gentle
density,
while
it
is
a
new
term,
that's
been
introduced.
It
really
is
very
similar
to
the
missing
middle
terminology.
If
you
recall
that
so
our
city
plan
does
already
incorporate
a
lot
of
those
Provisions,
but
one
of
the
areas
that
the
state
have
indicated
they
will
be
targeting
is
those
low
density
or
low
medium
density,
residential
areas,
and
they
are
looking
at
changing
things
like
Building
height.
So
at
the
moment,
as
you
mentioned,
we've
got
nine
meters
or
two
stories
and
they
might
look
to
change
that
to
three
stories.
R
So,
just
adding
to
that
through
the
chair.
This
is
what
we
were
talking
about
in
terms
of
the
regulatory
Provisions
that
we
haven't
actually
received
yet
to
review.
But
that's
also,
the
state
have
signaled
that
in
the
draft
shaping
a
secure,
Regional
plan
that
they
are
looking
at,
potentially
the
low
density,
Zone
and
the
low
medium
zone
for
those
regulatory
changes
to
apply,
and
that's
where
the
state
have
said.
But
if
a
local
government
prepares
a
housing
Supply
statement
that
they
would
not
necessarily
apply
those
to
that
local
government.
R
So
this
is
why
we're
looking
at
the
housing
Supply
statement
and
looking
to
put
our
best
foot
forward
as
best
we
can
to
actually
respond
to
that
request,
albeit
it's
very
difficult
for
us
to
respond
to
that
request
in
the
consultation
period,
because
I
think
it
from
memory
closes
on
the
9th
of
October.
We
haven't
got
the
data
right
now
in
terms
of
the
benchmarks
that
we
need
to
work
towards
and
and
the
next
council
meeting.
That's
like.
We've
rushed
really
hard
to
get
just
this.
R
This
few
weeks
of
work
done
to
get
it
onto
this
agenda
and
it
was
a
supplementary
agenda
because
we
needed
every
minute.
We
could
to
prepare
this,
but
we
really,
you
know
we're
putting
our
best
foot
forward,
we're
saying
that
we're
working
with
the
state
to
try
and
do
this,
but
it
won't
be
possible
to
do
it
within
the
9th
of
October
period,
because
the
next
council
meeting
is
the
25th
of
October
and
we
are
Keen
to
get
that
information
from
the
state
to
help
us
actually
prepare.
It.
E
F
E
I
just
want
to
clarify
the
mapping
that
supports
this.
Shaping
scq
review
does
not
include
our
biodiversity
corridors,
even
though
we've
identified
them
as
critical
and
we've
provided
the
mapping
data
to
the
state,
and
we've
adopted
those
and
endorsed
them
repeatedly
over
many
iterations
of
the
city
plan.
The
state
government's
seq
review
doesn't
include
those
corridors.
Is
that
right.
Q
Through
the
chair,
that's
correct
in
terms
of
an
image,
so
they
do
reference
each
of
the
corridors
in
terms
of
text,
which
is
good,
but
what
we
were
seeking
was
to
reflect
that
in
the
mapping
and
that
still
isn't
done,
even
though
it
is
done
in
some
other
areas.
So
we
would
we'd
like
to
continue
to
liaise
with
the
state
to
get
that
so.
E
Q
Through
the
chair,
I'm,
not
sure
I
suspect
with
some
of
them
it's
the
urban
footprint,
but
even
though
our
Corridor
that
passes
through
the
into
urban
break
isn't
shown.
But
that
is
something
that
we'd
like
to
continue
to
speak
to
them
and
it's
one
of
our
points
of
submission.
So
we
are
hoping
to
see
that
reflected
in
the
final.
Thank.
B
F
F
So
could
I
just
skip
Clarity
on
what
information
is
confidentially
held
by
the
state
government
and
whether
or
not
those
con
those
I
suppose
I
know
the
answer.
But
what
would
the
nature
be
of
the
confidential
information
that
has
not
been
captured
in
this
report?
A
report
that
we're
relying
on
in
order
to
make
a
decision
today
so.
R
F
R
F
I'm
not
trying
to
put
you
in
a
difficult
position
so
feel
free
to
just
reject
through
Mr
chairman
reject
answering
to
this
question
at
all.
But
but
what
I'm
trying
to
understand
is
for
what
reason
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
that
the
motivation
here.
For
what
reason
would
the
government
want
to
not
release
this
information?
If
I
to
has
it
a
guess?
R
F
And
in
the
absence
of
that
information,
just
help
me
understand
the
risk,
because
again,
I'll
go
back
to
this.
This
problem
of
having
to
align
a
city
plan
with
a
regional
plan,
and
for
me
this
is
like
the
foundation
stone,
give
script
the
foundation
you
end
up
with
a
house
of
cards
above.
So
what
is
the
risk
to
us
as
we
progress
our
work
on
City
plan
amendments?
In
the
absence
of
this
information.
R
Through
the
chair,
I
guess
for
us,
like
things
like
a
whole
of
City
plan,
review
would
come
after
the
final
data
is
actually
decided
on
and
provided
through
the
final
shaping
seq
update.
So
it's
on
consultation
at
the
moment,
so
we'll
know
where
they've
landed
with
their
projections.
The
issue
for
us
is
the
overall
projection.
The
2046
number
is
not
too
dissimilar
to
what
we
already
have
in
our
general
growth.
R
What
we
don't
have
is
the
detail
around
the
five
and
ten
years
ahead,
which
they
want
the
housing
Supply
statement
about
and
for
which
the
these
regulated
Provisions
are
sitting
there
that
we
don't
know
anything
about.
So
it's
really
our
ability
to
provide
a
a
well-considered
housing,
Supply
statement
that
addresses
the
shorter
term
response
to
housing
for
the
region
and
for
the
Gold
Coast
in
particular,
and
understanding
within
that,
what
types
of
dwellings
and
how
much
they
require.
We
don't
have
that
information
right.
F
So
we've
got
a
housing
crisis,
a
need
to
deliver
housing
in
the
short
and
medium
term.
The
state
has
put
that
onus
on
us.
We
stand
ready
to
respond,
but
in
truth
we
don't
know
how
to
respond
in
a
way,
that's
consistent
with
their
aspirations
and
projections,
because
in
terms
of
dwelling
type
to
secure
that
housing
diversity
they've
not
shared
that
information
with
us.
F
R
O
F
A
You
could
finish:
counselor
I'm,
going
to
pull
that
up.
Did
you
have
another
question?
Okay,
so
I'm
going
to
pull
this
up
there,
questions
for
me
now,
because
we
have
a
few
gbis
to
get
to
and
I
want
to
give
us
a
break
before
next
committee.
So
if
we
can
go
back
to
the
recommendation,
please
now
councilor
Gates
I'd
already
accepted
you
as
the
Mover
of
this
with
your
change.
Are
you
happy
to
accept
Council
of
horses
Edition
most.
A
B
Thanks
chairman
I
want
to
say
thanks
to
the
officers
for
putting
together
a
submission
for
us
in
extremely
difficult
circumstances.
Given
the
time
frame,
it's
been
made
very
clear
that
the
state
wants
to
get
this
through
by
the
end
of
the
year
and
and
it's
the
shortest
ever
time
frame
for
consultation.
B
That
I
think
any
of
us
can
can
recall.
Having
said
that,
we've
got
some
good
points
that
have
been
raised
both
by
the
officers
and
today,
I
think
in
order
to
make
our
submission,
and
all
we
can
really
do-
is
encourage
the
community
to
participate
in
the
opportunity
as
it
has
arisen.
Even
though
there's
a
short
time
frame
and
I
know
that
there
was
very
limited
opportunity
in
our
respective
areas
for
people
to
actually
attend
the
pop-up.
E
E
A
A
How
about
we
try
this
a
different
way:
councilor
Gates,
based
on
what
you
just
heard
from
councilor
Peter
Young?
What
would
your
thoughts
be
on
adding
that
to
emotion?
So
so
we
don't
have
to
deal
with
it
for
Council.
Let's
do
that
then.
So,
could
you
help
the
minute
secretaries
find
the
exact
words
you're,
referring
to
council
young.
E
B
F
A
I
I
will
say
we
need
to
move
that
as
a
we're
going
to
do
this
as
a
amendment
to
councilor
Gates's
recommendations.
Yeah
now,
like
counselor
Gates,
was
happy
to
accept
that
as
an
amendment
I
think
it's
only
fair
with
the
amount
of
changes
that
I
recall
for
a
mover
and
secondary.
If
committee
members
are
happy
with
that,
I'm
happy
with
that
so
cast
The
Gates.
You
happy
for
your
your
motion
just
to.
F
E
A
E
Think
that
the
nature
of
the
changes
that
the
state
government
is
seeking
to
introduce
and
the
material
that
they've
provided
to
support
them
to
ascertain
council's
genuine
response
on
behalf
of
this
community
is
seriously
deficient
and
I.
Think
we
should
be
noting
that
and
that's
the
reason
for
the
desired
inclusion.
Thanks
chairman
for
accommodating
absolutely.
A
S
It's
my
understanding
that
housing,
Supply
population
targets
are
some
of
the
most
sensitive
concerns
for
our
community
and
I.
Do
also
want
to
stress
the
the
shocking
state
of
our
state
government.
Asking
us
to
rush
this
through
I'll.
Also
note
that
we
are
fortunate
that
we
are
a
large
Council.
We
have
a
a
large
resources
of
professional
planners
who
had
to
put
all
hands
on
deck
to
create
something
this
has
been
put
not
only
on
us,
but
every
South
East
Queensland
Council,
who
do
not
have
the
same
resources.
S
We
have
so
I
just
want
to
put
that
out
there
too,
that
this
is
a
real
concern
for
our
whole
area.
We
have,
over
the
last
few
years,
consistently
be
making
requests
on
infrastructure
charges
and
social
housing
targets,
so
we
could
be
considered
somewhere
along
the
lines
of
Brisbane
or
or
other
areas
that
we're
we're
starting
to
meet
those
targets.
S
Not
only
are
we
asked
to
do
this
now,
but
we're
asked
to
do
it
without
them.
Answering
those
questions
that
we've
been
asking
for
years.
We
don't
have
the
data
it
is.
It's
I
find
it
quite
interesting
that
in
here
it
says
that
the
state
government-
this
is
what
the
the
state
government
is
committed
to.
We've
got
one
line
in
this
document
about
what
the
state
government's
committed
to
the
state
government
remains
committed
to
the
completion
of
this
review
and
development
by
the
end
of
2023.
S
S
A
A
It
is
very
disappointing
and
I've
heard
several
points
today
about
it
raises
concerns
when
we
are
so
close
to
launching
into
a
city
plan
review
that
relies
upon
seq
documents
to
have
that
there
so
I
agree
with
all
the
community
comments
and
thank
you
for
those
contributions.
I
appreciate
the
couple
additions
in
regards
to
Helen's
Val
kumara
cluster
into
the
Robina
economic
cluster
as
well.
B
The
state
has
the
responsibility
for
delivering
social
housing
and
We
Know
by
what's
before
us
that
we're
really
really
short
in
this
city
on
that
supply
and
the
development
sector
has
to
deliver
affordable
housing,
and
we
need
help
at
a
local
government
level
to
enable
us
to
fast-track
applications
for
affordable
housing
and
I.
Think
that's
what's
been
missing.
It
has
been
raised
at
the
seq
planning
committee
meetings
that
we
need
additional
levers,
so
I
hope
that
feedback
gets
through
and
that
something
comes
through
with
the
final
plan
after
the
submissions.
B
It's
something
that
I
overlook,
checking
today
to
see
if
we've
made
that
part
of
our
submission
that
we
would
like
to
see
additional
labor.
So
maybe
that's
something
the
officers
can
consider
if
it's
not
already
there
prior
to
full
Council,
but
I
I
was
reluctant
to
move
the
amendment
due
to
my
participation
at
the
seq
level,
but
I
will
support
the
amendment.
A
A
A
A
C
C
A
F
F
A
A
F
A
You
so
in
the
family,
I
did
intend
to
raise
this
gbi
at
the
last
committee,
but
we
were
running
well
into
the
next
committee.
So
it's
on
the
back
of
that.
The
last
committee
we
had
three
different
items
that
had
car
share
schemes
proposed
under
different
land
uses
different
locations,
different
Arrangements.
A
It
was
clear
from
that
that
is
part
of
a
a
city
Plan
update
where
car
parking
will
be
looked
at
that
we
should
look
at
car
share
in
more
depth
to
understand
how
it's
used
in
other
local
governments,
how
it's
used
in
other
cities
to
hopefully
inform
a
better
outcome
in
that
City
plan.
So
Dutch
gbi
item,
one
I
will
take
a
second
or
so
councilor
Peter
Young
seconds
that
one,
let's
move
by
me.
A
E
So
it's
come
to
my
attention
that
when
people
seek
to
create
domestic
violence,
accommodation,
there
are
limitations
on
what
council
can
do.
In
fact,
I
don't
think
we
can
even
ask
for
a
planning
application
or
any
assessment
and
that's
governed
by
state
regulation
and
that's
wise,
but
we
do
apply
infrastructure
charges
and
I.
E
Think
that
that's
an
anomaly,
and
so
this
report
that
we
would
seek
will
address
that
and
any
provisions
that
we
might
put
around
that
in
a
careful
framework
to
enable
develop
infrastructure
charges
not
to
be
applied
at
the
time
of
creation
of
domestic
violence.
But
perhaps
at
the
time
when
they
ceased
to
operate
on
a
particular
property
or
whatever
other
framework
that
officers
come
up
with.
A
A
There's
that
question
there's
the
question
about
it
should
be
not
for
profit
or,
and
otherwise
all
of
those
questions
were
raised
yesterday
in
the
briefing
and
will
all
be
brought
up
in
the
report.
It's
the
reason
why
I
encourage
Council
Peter
Young
not
to
attempt
to
adjust
the
infrastructure
charges
recommendation
we
dealt
with
today
that
I
wanted
a
gbi
instead,
so
that
we've
got
a
report
back.
That
could
look
at
all
those
issues
because
there
are
other
things
involved
in
this
exactly
so
it
will.
It
will
look
at
that.
A
A
F
I
fully
support
the
need
for
us
to
assist
the
most
vulnerable
in
our
community
and
those
who
are
victims
of
domestic
and
Family
Violence
I
think
we
owe
a
special
obligation
to
particularly
because
Council
has
entered
that
Freya
note.
Counselor
toza
has
a
program
running
in
his
own
division,
the
city's
aligned
with
the
white,
Ribbon,
Foundation
and
so
on,
and
so
forth,
so
I'm,
very,
very
supportive
of
this.
F
My
question
is,
though,
through
you
to
councilor
young
weather,
whether
it
is
necessary
to
include
the
last
section
of
the
gbi,
and
that
is
the
part
that
follows
benefit
developments.
So,
in
other
words,
do
we
need
to
include
such
as
temporary
rooming
accommodation
for
domestic
violence.
Refuges
and
I
asked
that,
because
I
worry
that
other
community
organizations
serving
different
Community
needs
might
seek
from
each
of
us
a
GB
at
yeah
at
committee,
that's
relevant
to
their
needs
good.
What
surf
club's
next
is
it?
You
know
animal
refuges?
F
That
could
look
at
other
community
uses
as
well,
so
that
if
a
sector
of
our
community
approaches
us,
we
can
say
well
we're
actually
looking
at
this
holistically,
and
we
will
come
to
you
with
an
outcome,
whereas
if
we
suggest
that
it's
limited
to
DV,
then
I
think
there'll
be
a
lot
of
pressure
on
us
moving
forward
to
look
at
what
other
other
uses.
So
my
question,
through
you,
Mr
councilor
Young,.
A
Okay,
so
if
you
wouldn't
mind,
maybe
Nick,
you
might
need
your
assistance
here
with
it.
There
was
some
specific
reasons.
Officers
were
Keen
just
to
deal
with
this
at
this
stage,
because
there
is
that
state
regulation
that
provides
exemptions
that
you
know
we
can't
assess
development
in
this
space.
Yes,
I
absolutely
understand
your
intent,
I'm
just
worried
that
what
officers
were
looking
to
hope
to
clean
up
with
this
gbi
item
and
getting
some
clarity
in
the
infrastructure
charges
policy
might
get
lost
and
we
might
push
our
time
frames
so.
F
F
O
A
A
All
committee
members
are
comfortable
without
appreciating
it's
your
gbi
councilor
young,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
we
still
deliver
what
you
were
seeking
to
deliver.
But
if
there's
a
broader
piece
to
do,
then
that's
a
good
outcome
and
I'm
happy
to
second
that
if
you
need
a
second
very
good.
So
let's
let's
go
with
that.
So
that
item
is
moved
by
councilor
Peter
Young
seconded
by
councilor
vorster
I'm
going
to
go
straight
to
a
vote
on
it.
E
E
A
I'm
not
going
to
get
it
closed
for
it,
because
it's
about
a
gbi
not
about
the
application,
that's
been
approved,
so
we
need
to
keep
the
two
separate.
The
gbi
is
about
looking
forward,
not
if
you're
getting
out
there.
So
if,
if
you
can
talk
talk
about
what
we're
looking
to
achieve
in
the
future
through
your
gbi
instead
of
what
has
been
approved
or
is
in
the
assessment
process,
I
think
it'd
be
a
better
outcome.
E
Okay,
so
at
this
point
in
time,
I'll
just
say
there
was
a
proposal
for
a
very
large
Warehouse,
10
000
square
meters,
next
to
a
residential
estate
which
is
built
for
retirees,
and
it
was
going
through
the
fast
track
process,
and
it
just
astonished
me
that
it
could
get
to
there
and
that
we
would
have
to
deal
with
it
under
that
regime.
And
so
the
objective
here
is
that
officers
will
evaluate
how
we
might
firm
up
the
constraints
and
considerations
in
the
assessment
of
these
sorts
of
developments
in
the
future.
That's.
A
It
so
just
start
to
your
point.
Thank
you
for
that
cancer,
Peter
Young,
councilor,
Gates
I,
did
have
a
more
in-depth
conversation
with
Roger
and
Mick
about
this
one
and
with
Catherine
as
well.
Given
it
would
be
strategic
planning
they
need
to
look
at
this.
There
was
an
acceptance
from
all
of
them
that
this
was
a
reasonable
request
and
that
we're
not
looking
at
this
isn't
a
broadcast
policy
piece.
It's
probably
only
half
a
dozen
sites
in
the
city
that
this
is
a
possible
problem,
but
they
agreed
that
there
was.
A
A
Second,
it
was
Castle
guides
yeah,
it's
all
right,
so
I
think.
As
you
are
all
aware
now,
this
will
be
Nick's.
Last
committee
meeting
with
us
before
Alicia
Swain
returns
to
the
head
of
planning,
so
I
wanted
to
take
the
opportunity
to
thank
Nick
for
his
time
in
the
role
and
probably
apologize
for
some
of
the
headaches.
I've
caused
him
since
taking
over.
A
A
B
Nick's
focus
is
obviously
Economic
Development
and
we
are
so
lucky
to
have
him
returning
to
that
space
I
believe,
but
for
someone
to
take
hold
of
this
role,
which
is
huge
in
our
city
and
to
adapt
so
well
and
so
effectively
and
efficiently,
Nick
I
think
we
all
value
it
greatly.
So
thank
you
and
all
the
very
best
for
the
future.
Thank
you.