Gold Coast development: New legal advice reveals Palm Beach development wave can’t be stopped

Residential towers can continue to be approved in Palm Beach and given extra height — and no limit placed on numbers of the new developments, according to new legal advice.

Residents arguing against taller high-rises in Palm Beach have been dealt a major blow with legal advice to council that there is no limit on the number of towers that can be given an “uplift” in the southern suburb.

Councillors have been sent a private email from City planners outlining legal advice from a leading Brisbane law firm in relation to the Palm Beach battle.

The brief was circulated as Councillor Josh Martin opposed a 50 per cent uplift being given to developers to increase their building from 10 to 12 levels at 107 Jefferson Lane.

Some councillors were concerned a “refusal” would spark a million-dollar legal case funded by ratepayers.

A super majority at full council earlier this month backed an approval for the increase.

However, almost 1000 residents opposing the Jefferson Lane tower – along with Mr Martin – had argued Palm Beach was not included in a section of the City Plan on “City Shape”.

They claimed supertowers (above 50 storeys) were only allowed under the plan at Southport, Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach.

Tall buildings could also occur in Labrador, Main Beach, the Burleigh to Miami-Nobby headland and Coolangatta and Rainbow Bay.

But Palm Beach is not mentioned.

City planning committee chair Mark Hammel said he had sought legal advice.

“This independent legal advice confirmed that Palm Beach is not excluded from high-rise development under the City Plan,” he said.

Palm Beach councillor Josh Martin and a submitters map showing residents opposed to high rise in the Gold Coast suburb.

Lawyers said the City Plan does not say that residential towers “will only be accommodated in” suburbs like Surfers Paradise, Broadbeach and Southport.

The Urban neighbourhoods designation applies to several suburbs including Palm Beach and “allows for a 50 per cent increase in the applicable height limit” of proposed buildings.

The Planning Court had been consistent when in “limited circumstances” – where all the criteria was met – the “uplift” would be given, lawyers said.

“Nor has the Court imposed such a numerical limit. If the proposed development meets the criteria, the ‘uplift is available’,” lawyers wrote.

Officers estimated council had received 13 “uplift” applications along the Palm Beach beachfront – all but one approved prior to Jefferson Lane.

Changes in height proposed for a beachfront residential tower at Jefferson Lane in Palm Beach on the Gold Coast.

But Mr Martin wants council planners to carefully scrutinise whether an application, like Jefferson Lane, reinforces the local character and identity to be granted the height uplift.

“There were 977 resident objections against it, mostly from Palm Beach,” he said.

“That’s a significant number and I shared the view of those objections that the height increase of this beachfront site did not reinforce the local character, instead it would detract from it.

“You can clearly see how the community felt about it by looking at the submitter map.”

Mr Martin acknowledged the legal risk was raised as a refusal could be appealed by the developer in the Planning Court.

“Naturally we don’t want to waste rate payer funds on legal fees if there’s a risk of losing in court, but it goes both ways,” he said.

“There are cases where council approved a development application and it was later overturned by the court, like the Nexus tower in Palm Beach not too far from this site.

“My view is we were on strong legal ground to refuse this application due to the unique location and existing built form along the beach, however the majority of councillors resolved to approve it. I suppose time will tell if this decision is challenged.”

Examples of recent towers approved at Palm Beach on the Gold Coast.

Examples of recent apartment towers approved at Palm Beach on the Gold Coast.

Mr Martin said he was not against urban renewal and development but sought a balance to ensure that the coastal village identity of Palm Beach was not lost along the way.

“I won’t say that I am permanently opposed to the uplift, but I expect that there is a fair trade off,” he said.

“If we are allowing developers to go above the mapped building height, then the community deserves a fair offset. Things like significantly reduced setbacks at the lower levels, less site cover, generous landscaping depth at ground level — not just cosmetic building facade improvements,” he said.

“The next City Planning Scheme will be crucial in shaping future development in our City, none more so than Palm Beach.

“When the community consultation information has been determined I will be actively asking our community to get involved in calling for the changes they want to see. I just hope they don’t lose all faith before then.”

Follow @PaulWestonGC 

 

Originally published as Gold Coast development: New legal advice reveals Palm Beach development wave can’t be stopped