‘Subdivision by stealth’ loophole sparks call for state review

A ‘LOOPHOLE’ in dual occupancy laws has sparked calls for the state government to review residential density targets.

Cr Jon Raven speaks with Max Jackwitz, a resident of a dual-occupancy property in division 5.

A “LOOPHOLE” in Logan’s dual occupancy laws has sparked calls for the state government to review residential density targets.

Division 5 councillor Jon Raven made the call after last week’s City Growth committee which discussed dividing a 903 sqm Rochedale South block into two.

Under current local laws, subdivisions which result in lots under 500 sqm will not be approved unless they pass an impact assessment or the applicant skirt the rules and applies for dual occupancy.

The proposed subdivision would meet the minimum lot size of 350 sqm but not the required average lot size of 500 sqm for a low-density residential zone.

Cr Raven said local laws allowed “subdivision by stealth”, resulting in extra dwellings on lots deemed too small to subdivide. “There are loopholes in the Planning Scheme which allow clever developers to bypass the minimum and average lot size requirements which are causing a lot of angst in the community,” he said.

“We are seeing the dual ccupancy provisions in the planning scheme being used to have two dwellings on blocks that are very small.”

Crestmead resident Max Jackwitz knew too well of the frustrations of dual occupancy. He said a neighbour, who constructed an auxiliary unit on a 680 sqm lot, was able to rent out the unit separately to the main house. “This means the auxiliary unit is only on 300 sqm of land which includes about 70 sqm of driveway and is well below the minimum lot size,” Cr Raven said.

“There’s no room for the kids to play, and you just don’t know what kind of social problems are going to arise if every 600 sqm lot does the same. They don’t even have to pay infrastructure charges.”

The application for the Rochedale South residential subdivision was given initial approval but goes to the full council for a vote on Tuesday, August 1.