►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
B
Did
you
want
a
presentation
counselor
on
jones?
Okay?
So
so
I
spoke
to
council
mcdonald
this
morning.
She
raised
concerns
with
the
density
as
well,
so
perhaps
caitlyn.
If
you
could
just
talk
us
through
the
approach
to
density
on
this
site,.
B
C
C
Okay
through
the
chair,
the
application.
Well,
the
subject
side
is
located
within
a
residential
density
overlay
of
rd5
being
your
one
bed
per
50
square
meters.
The
development
is
proposing
a
density
of
one
bed
per
13.35
square
meters,
so
they
are
proposing
an
alternative
outcome
to
density.
When
we
look
at
density,
we
do
take
it
to
the
purpose
and
the
overall
outcomes
of
the
zone
code,
specifically
looking
at
those
ones
that
are
more
so
in
relation
to
when
we're
looking
at
design,
character,
amenity
and
also
infrastructure.
C
So
an
assessment
of
this
application
did
determine
that
the
design
of
the
proposal
was
appropriate
for
the
character
of
the
locality,
and
we
also
assessed
this
infrastructure
within
the
local
network.
Looking
at
sewer
water
and
transport
and
those
items,
I
guess,
satisfy
the
overall
outcomes.
A
So,
mr
chair,
I
think
part
of
the
challenge
is
explaining
to
the
residents
how
density
interacts
with
the
town
plan
and
that
my
understanding
is
that
we've
never
had
a
successful
appeal
by
refusing
something
just
on
density.
Is
that
the
are
you
aware
of
any
case
where.
A
B
The
technical
people
can
probably
speak
better
about
this,
but
from
my
perspective,
when
you
look
at
what
the
impacts
are
of
the
development,
it's
very
hard
to
illustrate
that
when
you've
got
a
code,
accessible
height,
that's
forecast
and
it
meets
that
and
it
meets
other
parameters
like
car
parking
and
setbacks
that
it's
hard
to
argue
that
the
density
is
causing
a
negative
impact
off
the
site
and
so
on.
From
that
perspective,
density
alone
becomes
a
very
difficult
component
of
the
planning
factors.
B
D
E
Through
you,
mr
chair,
councillor,
gates,
it's
not
and
there's
certainly
other
examples
of
other
cities
and
regional
areas
that
don't
have
density
in
the
planning
scheme,
so
it
would
be
up
to
us
as
a
city
to
formulate
a
city
plan
and
work
with
the
state
government,
but
I
don't
think
there's
anything
specific
that
says
that
we
have
to
include
it
the
way
we've
included
it.
That
would
obviously
be
up
to
negotiation
with
the
state.
E
B
So
so,
if
that
you
know
everyone
needs
to
be
careful
what
they
wish
for
probably,
I
would
expect
that
really
density
is
a
measure
of
whether
the
toilets
can
flush
and
whether
the
taps
will
run
like
after
we
go
through
the
process
of
upgrading
all
of
the
storm
water,
sorry
sewage,
outflow
capacity
at
some
of
our
treatment
plants
that
would
potentially
give
a
huge
uplift
in
density
capacity.
So.
E
And
through
institute
council
guys
also
had
a
chat
to
director
heaton
yesterday
about
this
particular
development
in
terms
of
the
treatment
plant
that
it
will
hook
into,
and
the
director
did.
Let
me
know
that
there
is
capacity
in
that
area
and
they
work
very
closely
with
our
team
and
our
officers
through
the
development
process
to
make
sure
that
everything
is
able
to
be
accommodated.
D
Yeah,
look,
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
it
and
it's
in
a
location
that
I
think
can
support
the
type
of
development
that's
being
proposed
here.
I
just
I
just
get
a
little
weary
of
seeing
the
old
density
card
thrown
all
the
time,
and
I
don't
know
why
we,
while
we
actually
have
the
stipulations
we
have
within
city
plan.
When
so
often
we
have
a
greater
capacity
available
anyway.
F
I'm
used
to
it
by
now,
so
three,
mr
chairman,
perhaps
to
councillor
gates,
I
mean
it
intriguing
suggestion
and
I've
often
been
a
fan
of,
I
think,
miami's
approach
to
town
planning,
which
uses
what's
called
a
form-based
code,
which
looks
at
how
a
development
is
sympathetic
to
the
character
of
the
area
and
the
aspirations
of
the
area
and
is
less
prescriptive
on
things
like
setbacks
and
density,
because
it
looks
at
how
development
fits
in
rather
than
really.
F
I
I
want
to
say
arbitrary
because
they
are
all
arbitrary,
but
all
these
arbitrary
measures
that
can
then
cause
consternation
in
the
community
when
we
then
fall
back
to
performance
outcomes.
So
I've
always
been
a
proponent
of
that
form-based
approach
which
will
overcome.
I
think
some
of
these
concerns,
but
also
think
with
the
planning
scheme.
F
It's
not
that
we're
refusing
an
application
or
that
we'd
be
more
likely
to
refuse
it.
But
at
least
there'd
be
more
rigor
around
the
assessment
of
density
being
delivered.
Far
and
above
what
I
guess,
you
could
call
the
target
density
again,
I'm
not
arguing
for
it,
but
I
think
if
there
was
low
low-hanging
fruit
to
assuage
community
concern,
it
would
be.
You
know,
changing
that
assessment
threshold.
That
might
do
sense.
G
G
I'm
just
not
sure
if
I've
seen
a
report
where
it's
specifically
mentioned
the
hours
and
minutes
that's
going
to
be
seen
today
and
that's
seen
as
acceptable.
So
what
I'm
interested?
What
number
would
have
been
not
acceptable
like
would
four
hours
have
been
too
little?
Would
three
and
a
half
hours
have
been
the
number?
Because
if
it's
listening
in
there
that
four
and
a
half
is
acceptable,
there
must
be
a
reverse
number
on
that.
C
Yeah
through
the
chair,
we
don't
have,
I
guess,
a
set
time
or
hours
a
day
which
we
would
consider
to
be
acceptable.
It's
probably
just
taking
into
consideration
the
winter
solstice
summerstolsis
and
the
equinox
period,
and
I
guess,
sort
of
just
having
an
overall
look
at
those
periods
throughout
the
year
and
then
those
hours
which
are
supported
throughout
the
day.
So
we
do
acknowledge
within
the
winter
periods
that
usually
the
shadow
has
that
longer
length
of
stay
on
properties.
So
it's
just
about
trying
to
find
that
middle
ground.
G
And
mr
chairman,
could
let's
get
confirmation
that
I
think
I
might
have
read
that,
even
if
the
ao
setbacks
would
have
been
on
this
building
that
the
shadow
impact
would
still
be
the
same.
C
Through
the
chair,
that's
correct,
the
shadow
diagrams.
It
may
be
a
bit
hard
to
or
a
bit
difficult
to,
I
guess
really
sort
of
visualize
what
they're
trying
to
demonstrate.
But
if
you
do
have
a
look,
we've
got
the
black
outline,
which
is
the
proposed
shadow
of
the
proposed
development.
But
then,
if
you
look
at
that
that
red
outline
that's
where
we've
got
oops
yes,
so
the
red
outline
is
a
compliant
shadow.
So
that's
site
cover
and
setbacks
and
height
achieving
the
acceptable
outcome.
B
G
A
difficult
kind
of
chair
I
have
no
problem
with
it
and
then
what
the
building
that's
already
there
would
be
shadowing
it
as
well.
It
was
just
interesting
that
a
time
frame
was
mentioned
where
normally
it's
not.
Mr
chair
of
final
question,
just
in
regards
to
open
communal
space.
So
I'm
maybe
it's
more
of
a
question
for
you
to
the
director.
G
But
why
is
the
formula
for
the
ao
formula
for
communal
space
like
on
this
one
on
page
174
says
that
it'd,
be
you
know
to
meet
ao
10.2
would
require
1500
square
meters
of
communal
open
space.
So
that
seems
huge
in
this
when
the
proposal
is
only
for
298.
So
is
that
formula
going
to
be
adjusted
in
the
future,
because
we
always
see
that
it
says
it
should
be
huge,
but
it
turns
out
that
we
don't
need
anywhere
near
that
much
once
we
actually
look
at
usage.
E
Through
you,
mr
chair,
councilor
hamill,
I
believe
and
don't
quote
me
on
it.
It
is
in
amendment
two
and
three
where
we
have
adjusted
the
communal
open
space.
I
don't
know
if
anyone
yet
is
and
that
that's
been
a
long
running
concern
of
officers
that
the
the
amounts
were
so
high
compared
to
what
we
actually
believed
in
what
we
were
getting
on
ground.
So
I
think
it
is
in
two
and
three,
but
I
can
take
that
on
notice
and
confirm
that.
H
In
regards
to
well
shadow
and
things
like
that,
I'm
just
referring
to
page
171
and
the
table
at
the
bottom
of
the
page,
which
talks
about
the
multiple
accommodation
code
and
there's
a
requirements
there
for
certain
outcomes
to
be
achieved
in
building
form,
optimizing
orientation,
privacy
and
utility
of
open
space
and
so
forth,
and
over
the
following
page.
There's
a
description
of
how
this
particular
development
meets
those
criteria.
H
So
would
we
be
achieving
subtropical
design
excellence
by
providing
significant
shadow
to
the
property
to
the
south,
and
are
we
confirming
the
best
privacy
and
utility
of
open
space
by
having
this
building
in
its
position,
as
is
anticipated
with
its
height
and
shadow
impacts
and
so
forth?
Is
there
an
obligation
on
us
to
contemplate
those
sorts
of
things
in
terms
of
outside
of
the
proposed
built.
I
Form
through
you,
mr
chair
councillor,
young,
it's
my
opinion
that
the
po4
it
relates
to
the
particular
site,
the
particular
development.
A
Counselor
under
so
I'm
happy
to
move
it.
Clearly,
it's
code
accessible,
it's
something,
that's
been
also
can
it
and
then
you
can
speak
to
it.
Thank
you.
Miss
chair.
It's
something!
That's
been
long
expected
for
palm
beach,
so
in
2016
the
height
was
lifted
to
allow
for
for
the
nine
stories,
but
prior
to
that
it
was
seven
stories
in
the
2003
scheme
and
it
was
impact
accessible
for
seven
stories
in
the
1994
scheme.
A
So
in
in
to
some
degree,
I'm
surprised
that
it's
come
before
us
because
it
actually
complies
and
it
complies
well.
A
I'm-
and
I
thank
her
for
that,
but
unfortunately
not
everything
has
come
to
committee,
because
council
mcdonnell
isn't
here
at
committee
talking
to
it,
so
so,
if
if
she
want
to
to
come
to
committee
so
that
we
could
discuss
it
and
if
there
were
issues
with
it,
it
would
be
helpful
if
she
was
here
but
she's.
Not
so
the
the
scheme
requires
57
car
spaces.
It's
got
72
car
spaces
density
is
the
only
thing
that
doesn't
strictly
comply
with
the
scheme.
A
But
then,
when
you
go
up
through
the
various
levels
of
assessment,
it
clearly
does
comply.
So
I
think
it's
beholden
on
us,
as
elected
representatives,
including
councillor
mcdonnell,
to
help
explain
to
the
population
that
she
represents
in
in
that
palm
beach
area,
that
there's
a
scheme
that
we
have
to
comply
with
and
it
has
to
be
assessed
and
that's
what
we're
doing
so
and
we
have
to
have
the
same
conversation
full
council.
We
should,
but
so
we
get
criticized
all
over
the
city
for
density.
A
B
A
B
B
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
just
throw
you
to
the
director.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I'm
properly
understanding
this
body
of
work
and
I'll
just
say
from
the
outset.
F
This
is
a
a
good
example
of
how
the
council
identified
an
issue
on
the
back
of
community
feedback,
brought
it
to
the
table,
and
city
offices
have
gone
away
and
done.
I
feel
a
great
job
and
prepared
a
well
at
least
what
they've
done
is.
They
have
engaged
with
the
industry,
they've
engaged
with
all
of
the
other
prevailing
building
codes,
and
you
know
regulatory
instruments
and
they've
presented
us.
I
think,
with
a
very
focused
set
of
recommendations
that
can
meet
these
concerns
in
the
community.
F
J
Thank
you
through
you,
mr
chair.
The
discussions
for
master
builders
took
place
some
time
ago
after
the
first
report
went
to
council.
There
was
a
brief
media
article
that
included
the
master
builders,
so
I
went
and
met
with
a
local
regional
manager
at
the
time
and
discusses,
and
the
feedback
that
I
gave
him
was
the
feedback
that
we
got
from
a
few
of
the
builders
that
they're
actually
at
a
disadvantage
with
the
current
requirements,
because,
although
they're
using
best
practice,
there's
some
builders
who
don't
so
they're
not
as
competitive
so
master
builders.
J
F
Yes
right,
as
opposed
to
the
construction
stage,
so
I'd
like
to
get
a
sense
of
how,
as
a
directorate,
we
might
engage
with
the
architectural
community
that
may
be
involved
in
regular
developments
along
the
coastline
to
inform
them
of
this
policy
position.
As
opposed
to
you
know
your
typical
proponents
and
the
construction
firm
like
is
that
worth
doing
and
do
we
have
the
capacity
to
do
that.
J
Yeah,
that's
definitely
worth
doing
sorry.
I
might
just
take
one
step
back
and
just
introduce
myself
properly.
Darren
wright
is
my
name
and
I'm
the
principal
building
surveyor
at
the
city
of
gold
coast.
So
I've
had
a
lot
to
do
with
this
report
and
going
through
it.
But
yes,
definitely
providing
this
information
to
industry
is
one
of
the
key
parts
of
it,
because
if
the
engineers
are
aware
of
these
design
requirements,
the
architects
the
draftsman
all
of
those
involved
in
that
design
process,
it
can
be
designed
for
at
a
very
early
stage.
J
So
that's
one
of
the
benefits.
If
we
can
give
that
proactive
involvement
early
by
letting
those
various
institutes
become
aware
of
the
changes
before
it
becomes
as
an
actual
project
to
them,
then
we
can
get
get
ahead
of
the
curve
and
forewarn.
E
Through
mr
chair
council
officer,
absolutely
we've
also
got
our
database
where
we
send
out
our
industry
alerts.
So
if
this
is
moved
by
council
on
on
tuesday,
we
would
send
an
alert
out
through
that
process.
We're
also
happy
to
let
the
the
presidents
or
the
various
associations
that
darren
referred
to
know
as
well.
F
F
Should
we
wish
to
condition
developments
to
use
this
construction
method?
Because
I
guess
we
can't
condition
it
because
it's
not
referred
to
in
the
code,
we've
done
a
great
body
of
work.
Can
we
or
should
we
be
lobbying
for
the
code
to
be
changed
so
that
we
can
get
in
the
business
of
conditioning
that
preferred
approach.
K
Three,
mr
chair,
we
we
can
include
in
in
the
stakeholder
engagement
that
we'll
do.
We
can
write
an
additional
letter.
Darren
works
with
the
the
building
industry,
so
we
can
certainly
share
that
with
them
and
encourage
them,
perhaps
to
consider
it
in
a
further
review
of
their
codes,
but
that's
probably
the
extent
so.
F
Mr
chairman,
through
you
to
perhaps
alicia
or
mack
or
darren,
who
would
be
the
responsible
body
that
would
have
carriage
over
this
part
of
the
building
code?
Just
for
clarity.
J
Sure
through
you,
mr
chair,
there's
a
number
of
agencies
that
deal
with
building
code
regulations,
the
australian
building
codes
for
deal
with
it
at
a
federal
level,
but
generally
it's
for
the
safety
of
the
occupants
within
the
building
that
building
law
is
focused
on.
So
it
would
be
difficult
at
that
level
at
a
state
level.
There's
various
queens
and
development
codes
that
are
addressed
to
deal
with
particular
problems
within
queensland,
so
it
that
may
be
the
best
approach.
F
So
the
department
of
housing,
public
works
and
energy?
Yes,
so,
mr
chairman,
I'm
not
sure
what
your
disposition
is,
but
I
wouldn't
mind
moving
the
officer
recommendation
with
a
second
part
which
essentially
calls
for
the
the
city
to
provide
a
copy
of
the
report
to
the
relevant
department
for
consideration
in
a
future
update
to
the
relevant
building
codes.
F
L
And
thank
you
I'm
through
the
chair,
I'm
not
sure
who
to
direct
it
at,
but
if,
with
the
sheet
piling
as
opposed
to
the
the
board
type
piling,
is
there
one
particular
group
of
of
contractors
that
would
take
care
of
of
one
type
and
another
the
other,
so
that,
if
we
sort
of
pushed
along
to
say
that
we
want
to
have
all
say
sheet
piling
that
we
are
actually
going
to
burden
those
companies
that
do
the
board
piling
or
is
it
potentially
company
a
is
doing
both?
J
Through
you,
mr
chair,
my
understanding
is
that
companies
tend
to
do
both
of
the
types
of
piling
so
that
they
don't
particularly
deal
with
one
type,
whether
it's
sheep
filing,
but
they
will
will
deal
with
both
because
on
certain
sites,
may
lead
themselves
more
to
one
type
than
the
other
type
in
some
situations,
or
they
will
they'll
actually
do
both
types
of
piling
on
different
sites.
L
Another
question
and,
and
is
that
the
type
of
piling
they
do
is
that
potentially
to
do
with
setbacks
and
that
with
the
size
of
the
sites
as
to
why
they
will
choose
one
over
the
other.
J
I
think
it's
more
down
to
cost,
but
I'm
sorry
I
can't
speak
to
particular
setbacks.
The
enquiries
that
I
have
made
is
that
it
makes
very
little
difference,
but
I'm
sorry,
I
can't
provide
an
expert.
G
Mr
chairman,
I'm
interested
in
so
this
is
focusing
fairly
strongly
on
the
industry
and
engineers
and
architects
beforehand
doing
the
right
thing,
but
if
it
becomes
part
of
development
conditions
and
there's
a
compliance
aspect
as
well
needs
to
be
considered.
So
I'm
interested
in
if
this
did
become
a
development
condition
or
something
along
this
line.
And
then
someone
puts
a
complaint
in
from
a
neighboring
building.
What
is
our
actual
capability
from
a
development
compliance
point
of
view
to
enforce
this
kind
of
development
condition
if
it
was
ever
introduced.
J
Through
you,
mr
chairman,
this
is
one
of
the
real
positives
from
this
change
in
that
we're
requesting
that
the
builder
actually
provide
monitoring
for
the
side
and
because
we
have
a
particular
value
that
needs
to
be
achieved,
and
it's
been
recorded
that
the
compliance
officers
from
council
when
they
attend
site,
can
actually
compare
the
logs
that
have
been
taken
on
site
from
the
design
values.
So
very
clearly,
we
can
see
if
there's
a
breach
or
not.
So
it
empowers
council
to
act
in
a
lot
of
situations
where
currently
we
it's
a
lot
more
difficult.
G
That's
that's
right,
and
it
was
just
the
part
that
I
didn't
quite
get
from
that
part
there.
Just.
Finally,
on
that,
mr
chair
did
we
have
I
see
from
time
to
time
where,
in
other
industries,
where
there's
self-regulation
or
self-monitoring
of
these
things
that
there's
always
conjecture
around
that
they'll
tend
to
put
telemetry
monitoring
stations
in
places
that
best
suits
them.
Would
we
have
any
kind
of
oversight
of
when
this
management
plan
is
put
in
place
of
saying?
J
Through
you,
mr
chairman,
that
the
way
I
understand
it,
the
acoustic
consultant
will
provide
the
locations
on
where
the
the
monitoring
is
going
to
be
and
that's
assessed
by
some
people
within
the
lifestyle
and
community
directorate
who
have
some
acoustic
knowledge
as
part
of
the
the
process.
So
if
there
was
an
issue
with
the
location,
it
can
be
stopped
at
that
approval
stage,
but
I'm
sorry
I'm
not
yeah.
I
don't
have
that
kind
of
knowledge
technically
on
on
the
location
of
them
and
and
just
how
that
effect
works.
G
Just
a
bonus,
mr
chair,
I'm
with
those
monitoring
stations
with
the
data
from
that
be
public
information
at
all,
so
instead
of
the
community
having
to
contact
their
local
council
or
contact
council
thinking
that
there's
a
vibration
issue,
would
they
be
able
to
see
that
data
themselves
and
then
not
have
to
contact
us
if
they
can
clearly
see
that
it's
under
the
prescribed
limits
through.
K
Mr
chair,
though,
I
guess
the
vibration
management
plan
that
gets
approved
before
they
start
construction
would
be
on
pd
online,
but
the
I
guess
the
logging
information
wouldn't
be,
I
guess
readily
accessible,
but
could
be
provided
at
request.
G
Yeah,
I
just
wonder
why
it
couldn't
be
public.
You
know
what
would
be
if
it's
there
and
open
and
the
city
officer
can
come
in
any
time
and
see
it.
Why
should
the
proponent
be
scared
of
that
information
been
available
to
the
public
to
be
able
to
tap
into
any
time
and
perhaps
avoid
a
lot
of
time
being
spent
internally
going
around
in
a
circle
just
to
look
at
it?
K
Three,
mr
chair,
I
guess
the
the
compliance
system
is
driven
by
complaints,
so
we'll
have
all
these
monitoring
loggers
in
place
and
if
that
development
proceeds
without
anyone
complaining,
there's
probably
a
chance,
our
compliance
officers
might
not
need
to
attend
that
site.
So
I
guess
it's
it's
just
a
practical
issue
of
that
there'll
be
live,
logging
of
vibration
and
noise
and
how
you
get
that
live
logging
results
immediately
onto
a
pd
online
is
a
difficult
thing,
but
if
there's
a
complaint,
all
that
information
will
be
freely
available
when
and
if
asked
for.
G
Just
for
context,
yes,
joe,
is
thinking
probably
more
broadly,
outside
of
vibration,
telemetry
to
other
telemetry
and
other
industries
that
maybe
a
bit
more
public
information
being
there
could
reduce
a
lot
of
complaints
to
the
city
and
a
lot
of
internal
time
and
spent
looking
at
things.
We
don't
need
to.
H
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
we've
covered
all
the
issues
that
were
originally
anticipated
with
this
matter.
Was
there
a
concern
about
slumping
or
something
like
that?
H
Obviously
we're
dealing
with
vibration
and
noise,
but
I
just
had
the
impression
or
the
recollection
that
at
the
time
there'd
been
some
concerns
about
of
these
subsidence
yeah
caused
by
adjacent
works.
H
And
but
then
I
looked
at
the
resolutions
previously
and
there
was
no
particular
reference
to
that
side.
K
Through
here,
mr
chair
we've,
we
have
just
acted
on
the
resolution.
Darren
might
jump
in
in
a
little
bit
here,
but
I
guess
the
point
of
this
is
to
manage
the
the
amenity
impacts
of
construction,
in
particular
vibration
and
noise,
so
actual
other
damage
and
physical
damage
caused
by
a
developer
is
generally
a
civil
issue
which
this
this
policy
doesn't
address.
Yeah
yeah
thanks.
E
F
Thanks,
mr
chairman,
and
I
I
just
want
to
respond
to
the
the
point-
the
very
good
point
that
council
young
raised-
I
mean
for
me:
I
saw
the
vibration
and
construction
amenity
issues
and
the
subsidence
issues
as
one
of
the
same
subset
a
few
times
from
the
tier
liquefaction
liquef
liquefaction
liquefaction
is
a
process
where
vibration
actually
undermines
the
structure
of
soil
and
particularly
sandy
soil,
and
typically
what,
in
the
most
acute
case,
if
you've
got
an
earthquake,
that's
caused
vibration,
sand,
that's
otherwise
solid
can
turn
into
a
liquid
consistency,
and
then
you
end
up
with
all
sorts
of
structural
faults.
B
All
right,
anyone
else
got
any
questions.
Council
voices.
Do
you
want
to
speak
further?
No,
thank
you.
No
that
council
will
say,
do
you
want
to
say
look
again.
F
I
just
I
just
want
to
give
residents
some
comfort
that,
when
there
are
real
concerns
about
the
way
that
development
and
construction
unfolds
and
there's
genuine
merit
to
get
to
the
bottom
of
a
problem,
that
we've
got
a
preparedness
as
a
council
to
go
into
bat
for
them
and
here's
an
example
where
legitimate
concerns
from
predominantly
the
palm
beach
community
have
been
interrogated
by
committee
by
city
officers.
We've
worked
with
stakeholders
and
potentially
there'll
be
benefits
for
the
whole
of
queensland,
where
development
may
occur
on
the
coastline.