Grassroots appeal to stop ‘obscene overdevelopment’ failed

An angered resident’s appeal over what he called an “obscene overdevelopment” of a 27-storey building in one of Brisbane’s oldest suburb, was dismissed at a Brisbane court.

AN OUTRAGED local has lost a court battle with Brisbane City Council and a major Canberra-based developer over a 27-storey tower which he called an “obscene overdevelopment” in one of Brisbane’s oldest suburbs.

Neil Warren Peach last week had his appeal dismissed at the Planning and Environment Courts over the approved development of a 27-storey high-rise office tower at 152 Wharf Street, Spring Hill.

Dr Neil Peach last week had his appeal dismissed at the Planning and Environment Courts.

Owned by Canberra-based Morris Property Group, Wharf Investment Corporation’s proposal to redevelop the vacant land into the commercial office tower was approved in 2018.

Peach alleged the approved development had a list of non-compliances with the Brisbane City Council’s City Plan 2014, launching his appeal in May 2018.

The approved development, if built would front Turbot and Wharf Streets and Astor Terrace with one basement level; two split ground levels; three podium levels of carparking; twenty levels of office space, each having floor in excess of 1400m2; a rooftop garden and recreation area; and a roof plant and lift overrun.

The features would include horizontal and vertical sun shading fins, inset balconies and planter boxes and the glazed facade will be faceted to follow the curved boundary of the land, according to the Judgement handed down on Wednesday.

“The facade will appear pleated, rather than as a continuous vertical wall of glass.”

An artist’s impression of 152 Wharf Street commercial tower.

To date Peach raised $7070 via anonymous donations towards his goal of $25,000 for the long-running saga against the development application.

In the grassroots campaign against the Council approved development, Mr Peach said online that the “obscene overdevelopment” in the heritage suburb did not comply with the new Spring Hill Neighbourhood Plan, implemented in 2018.

According to the judgment, the character of the suburb was described by visual amenity experts as being at “an interface of city centre and city fringe.”

“(It’s) an area where low-intensity uses (churches and open space) meet high-intensity commercial, hotel and residential towers, street front activation and busy intersections and where older low-rise built forms are being progressively replaced by newer high-rise developments.”

Spring Hill residents are having to take their fight over two development applications in Wharf St to the P&E Court.

And Judge Michael Williamson was satisfied that Wharf had established the appeal should be dismissed, stating the proposed development would not give rise to any unacceptable impacts on the amenity or character of the local area.

“It will set a new benchmark for building design in Spring Hill and act as a catalyst for redevelopment.”

“This is precisely what is envisaged by the SHNP (Spring Hill Neighborhood Plan) code, and the Principal centre zone code.”