Developer Sherpa Property offers cash to Currumbin Sands residents to agree to drop court appeal

A nasty stoush is brewing at Palm Beach, where a developer has offered cash to nearby residents in exchange for dropping a court appeal against his 14-storey project. DETAILS:

A stoush is brewing at Palm Beach, where a developer has offered $5000 cash to nearby residents in exchange for them dropping a court appeal against his 14-storey project.

Sherpa Group’s sold-out 34-unit Nexus development was approved by Gold Coast City Council in March, and the body corporate of neighbouring Currumbin Sands Holiday Apartments lodged an appeal in the District Court the following month.

Residents said the proposed 43.5m building was too high, and would result in shadowing, loss of privacy and loss of visual amenity to existing buildings.

The body corporate held an extraordinary general meeting on June 8 to retrospectively approve the April 21 court filing against the development, which comprises 30 three-bedroom and four four-bedroom apartments.

Sherpa Property Group director Christie Leet wrote to residents on May 23, saying he’d engaged a “leading QC and specialist junior barrister” to fight their appeal at an estimated cost of $450,000.

Mr Leet’s letter said some of the buyers in the project had offered to help fund his court battle and that he was confident of a win.

It said, if residents voted against continuing the court action, he would consider making “a financial contribution towards your body corporate”, saying his company’s architects were “working on a design on how this may look for you”.

Mr Leet added that such an arrangement would be “more worthwhile than me funding this appeal”.

“I recommend you vote `no’ to continuing with the cost of an appeal at your Extraordinary General Meeting and I contribute to your body corporate,” the letter said.

The Sherpa Property website separately offered residents $5000 cash if they agreed to vote against the continuation of the appeal, as long as the appeal did not go ahead and the development was allowed to continue.

“Say NO to throwing money at legal costs and pocket $5000 cash for yourself instead,” the since-deleted web page said, along with an agreement for owners to sign.

A developer offered cash to residents.

A developer has offered cash to residents in exchange for dropping a court appeal.

A developer has offered cash to residents next to his project in exchange for dropping a court appeal.

The day before the June 8 EGM, body corporate chairman Andrew Lester penned a letter of his own to residents, urging them to vote in favour of the development appeal.

“Why would the developer be offering cash ... if he was so confident he would be successful?,” he claimed in the letter.

“The town planner, Arnold Development, and lawyer, Mills Oakley, that we have engaged have been successful against a number of developers in getting heights reduced and setbacks increased.

“The development will most likely have a negative impact on the value of our units … and that impact will far outweigh any cash the developer is willing to (give).

“Think very hard about your vote.”

Mr Lester could not be contacted on Friday. The Bulletin understands residents voted in favour of continuing the court appeal.

Mr Leet told the Bulletin he’d offered the cash to residents as a way of avoiding legal costs for both sides. He said he could have provided funds for the body corporate to help it fund security cameras or other capital improvements.

Currumbin Sands Holiday Apartments.

“There are some people in Currumbin Sands who may be affected during the construction and my view is I’d much rather make a contribution to those people than to the court,” Mr Leet said.

The body corporate’s appeal was combined with similar joint court action by Ashley Ruffin, Peter Apostolou and Mary Pappas, lodged the same day. The council is also a respondent in the appeal.

Mr Leet said his developments were “resident friendly”.

“The resident friendly way of going about things is to try and negotiate an economic settlement early.

“There are a number of members of the committee who are very anti-development and that’s their prerogative, but that should be their personal position, not the body corporate’s position.”