All recent comments on applications from Redland City Council, QLD

The claims in document 20250207 RAA Statement for CAR25_0069 by Buildcert are manifestly inaccurate and misleading. The mature trees noted in the statement are totally misleading in that they are mature palm trees around 10m tall and will do nothing to obscure the view of a 12.254m long by 3.99m high black wall. The statement uses the trees to support the siting to the eastern boundary and that it will have no effect to the owners of 17 Miles St, whereas the western boundary of 15 Miles street adjoining 13 Miles St is in fact fully treed and those trees would fully hide the long side of the shed. There has been no contact with the owner of 17 Miles St with regards the sighting or aesthetic, light and ventilation impacts which will be severe.
The statement from 20250207 RAA Statement for CAR25_0069 by Buildcert is very untrue!!
"where it (a 12.254m long by 3.99m high shed) will be partially shielded by mature trees and minimal sight lines not interrupting the outlook of neighbours. It will not adversely impact on the amenity and privacy of the adjoining lots"

The mature palm trees on the eastern boundary will not hide a 12.254 black wall and it is very misleading to claim that they will.

The claims in document 20250207 RAA Statement for CAR25_0069 by Buildcert are manifestly inaccurate and misleading. The mature trees noted in the statement are totally misleading in that they are mature palm trees around 10m tall and will do nothing to obscure the view of a 12.254m long by 3.99m high black wall. The statement uses the trees to support the siting to the eastern boundary and that it will have no effect to the owners of 17 Miles St, whereas the western boundary of 15 Miles street adjoining 13 Miles St is in fact fully treed and those trees would fully hide the long side of the shed. There has been no contact with the owner of 17 Miles St with regards the sighting or aesthetic, light and ventilation impacts which will be severe.

The statement from 20250207 RAA Statement for CAR25_0069 by Buildcert is very untrue!!
"where it (a 12.254m long by 3.99m high shed) will be partially shielded by mature trees and minimal sight lines not interrupting the outlook of
neighbours. It will not adversely impact on the amenity and privacy of the adjoining lots"

Council engineers have made no provision for the excess stormwater runoff (estimated excess 70%) also at time's of flooding all "Water Storage" has been stolen by landFILL.
The downstream land owners (Wang & Beatty) were never consulted or considered by RCC, and Water AFFLUXES have been bodgyed by dodgy Development Engineers. RCC is Liable for inaccurate information provided by The Development Engineer's.

Hello
I also agree with the previous gentleman’s comments.
Dividing these 2 blocks into 3 blocks Would bring no extra benefits to the drive and or to the residents. It would not be in keeping with the other homes on Masthead Drive.
Adding a 3rd home would further add more unnecessarily pressure to the existing problems of parking and congestion experienced on Masthead Drive residents and visitors to the popular area.
Respectfully I think it should stay as two blocks not be divided into 3 smaller blocks.
I think the waterside behind the homes needs to be considered as well, a 3 division would create very smaller keylines, everthing would be bunched up with smaller pontoons and challenges to mooring for these home owners, especially for the home in the middle. This could impact on water safety and the wellbeing for all.

Hello,
The division of this land into three blocks will allow the construction of homes which are totally out of character to the rest of the street. Two houses built on the existing sub-division would fit in with the existing homes.
Please note that there is traffic and parking problem existing as the park opposite is fully used.

Dear Sir/Madam
Could you please explain why the Application for the Building Plan for 19 Channel Street, Cleveland, was only approved on 15/4/2024 and yet the building has been completed for some weeks/months prior to this date? The building is currently occupied (17/04/2024).

The application in question is Application Number: POS24/0034.

Thanks in anticipation.

We live directly across the road and are concerned about the number of units proposed - we have struggled with people parking in our street and in front of our house just with the existing house and its numerous residents and do not see how 15 units will not create more problems in our small street for parking.

Deeply concerned of Willard Road having social housing in close proximity to housing commission units at Denison Crt on Bowen St off Old Cleveland Rd East Capalaba. This area of wall to wall units from 4-way intersection to Denison Crt has frequent visits from police due to violent disputes. Two shootings have taken place at Denison Crt and recently there was a knifing incident. These are wall to wall units with no insulation between depriving residents of privacy that leads to social unrest. Multiple units built along same lines as Denison Crt on Willard Rd can only result in more of the same where people have no privacy particularly worrying in today's climate of drugs and vaping addictions..

We currently live in 27 Conley Avenue Thornlands within the Grosvenor Park Estate. We object to the proposed development in its current form.

Our concern is that the proposal calls for the development by subdivision into 39 house lots ranging from 437m² to 660m² (with an average size of just 516m²) with a combined land size of 20,118m². The road width through the proposed development is a mere 6 metres and wIll open onto the top of Lind Street along the park. The proposed development will exit onto Ziegenfusz Road at the Conley Avenue roundabout. The size of the proposed housing lots will also mean a reduced minimum set back from each lot’s boundaries.

The current estate comprises 83 houses (excluding the 2 large properties on Gretchen Cct) ranging in size from 601m² to 1,290m² (with an average size of about 762m²). The existing road width is about 9metres (kerb to kerb). The minimum set backs from each house lot boundary is understood to be 6m from the front, 4m from the rear and 1.5m from the sides.

Our abiding concern with this development proposal is entirely around the feasibility of adding just shy of 50% more houses, into an area one-third the size of the existing estate, and then having the attendant 60-70 additional vehicles all trying to enter and exit the estate through the Ziegenfusz roundabout.

We’re not against development of the vacant lot conceptually however our concern is the overwhelmingly and undeniably negative impact it will likely have on existing residents, as well as users of Ziegenfusz Road more broadly. The proposal is not in keeping with the existing house lot sizes, detracts from the street appeal of the exisiting estate and it will create irreversible congestion entering and exiting the estate from Ziegenfusz Road.

Why should the developers, who probably don't live in the estate themselves, be allowed to foist this onto local residents. It's unreasonable that residents should have to accept a reduced living experience just for the sake of the developers, profiing at residents expense.

I was told this was planned as there is an outdoor electric point up there and the builder stated this to the people around. With the noise of parties and loud music it will devalue the surrounding properties. Furthermore, in relation to the trees in the area, there were none when that area was sold off by the Queensland government. As Snapper Street connected Timbin Road all those cliff trees were cut down. They are not, as stated on a sign on the fence, hundreds of years old. Can they have a fence in that area? This 'car park' building has over ridden the RCC bye laws.

This application has come as a surprise. Willard Homestead is State Government Heritage listed and as such, surely no Tom, Dick or Harry is eligible to be involved in restoring a home built in mid-1800s, without being qualified for this particular kind of work. In Brisbane, there are few with ability to restore dwellings of yesteryear. Activists within RCC have been anxious to see Willard Homestead demolished so in my view, its a miracle that its been saved with funds made available for restoration purposes...if wisely used. The Birkdale land is precious, surrounded by a concrete jungle and road pollution....the only place left in Capalaba/Birkdale area where, if permitted, present and future generations can appreciate the natural environment enhanced to way it was during time of first European settlement with historical values to pass on to citizens of all ages....

I agree with not continuing the road through Diana Street for the above reasons from Jamal

Acess to the property should not be allowed via diana street. Excessive road traffic presents a danger to kids that play in the street, also the construction will limit access to the two houses at the end of diana Street closest to the proposed development.

This lot was labelled by Redland City Council as having a flood overlay and was NOT permitted to be subdivided. On auction day this was made very clear to all who attended the auction, including the buyers who are now the current owners.
Council should keep it's ruling and it should NOT be allowed to be subdivided as it does flood and if divided with a raise in soil level would cause flooding to the next door block, no. 1. It would also cause water to come up the street more and across the road to the house on the corner of Base St and Pelican St. (the yellowish house). The opposite side of the street is at a lower level than the No. 3 side is.
No. 1 Base also has a partial flood overlay.
If this goes ahead will Council foot the bill for damage to other properties that may be affected in the event of flooding.
Flooding has occurred several times in Pelican St and I have seen it come more than 3/4 of the way up Pelican St.
There has already been two blocks divided in the St and with their soil level raised it already causes excess water to go over the other side of Pelican St and up Pelican St.
I therefore request Council to do thorough research with the outcome of denying no. 3 to be divided.

Please can you advise how long building work will take? We live across the road we are disability pensioners and due to pain meds we sleep awkward hours during the day. We welcome our new neighbours to this beautiful island and recognise this is a transportable home as opposed to new build and therefore probably a quicker build. Please can you advise if there is a commencement date and how long building works will take approximately? Many thanks.

Why? Is this a joke? Having a development on a main road area of Point Lookout will change the "feel", "look" and attraction of the area. It is in a low lying flood prone area that will cause all sorts of social issues to people affected by climate change. Councils, insurance companies and banks are looking at development in flood prone areas like this so it is surprising that there is a development application here. Or Toondah Harbour! The place needs to be brought into the 2022's with sewerage. Finally, there are diplomas in "Town Planning", the "Environment", "Economics", "Politics" etc that could be undertaken by everyone with a Grade 10 education could read, before such applications are permitted to proceed. As a consultant I would reduce my fee as this affects me and my lifestyle and level of rates I must pay. From Anon

Residents concerned approving 2nd lot at 20 Tremont St will add more traffic onto busy Sutphin St accessing Finucane Rd intersection at Elmhurst St where there are no lights & scene of many road fatalities over the years. Premier referred to it as a 'dangerous' road & family members visiting refer to Finucane Rd as a 'death trap'.Turnaround built just short of Elmhurst St intersection closing off Willard Rd after truck turning right into flowing traffic killed a 25-yr old young man. Unit development underway on this stretch across from intersection with more housing planned on St Anthony's Drive, Alex Hills I'm told.
Passing on as politicians don't live in these parts and may not be aware of traffic volume on main road where yesterday heard sirens most of the day...with population growth noise, air pollution & road trauma will worsen as we are all dependent on personal transport. Thought you should know.

I do not agree to this further degradation of the local area. Enough damage has been done by this development. The damage, to natural fauna, flora and water courses has only had a detrimental affect.

We need to be keeping designated farming communities and land - or we risk building all the wildlife out of this beautiful area.

Council needs to invest in a proper plan and strategy to balance city urban and farming / wildlife needs.

Requesting to see plans of the dwelling.
We live close by and want to know the impact to our home.

Requesting to see plans of the dwelling.
We live close by and want to know the impact to our home.

We already have storage units why approve more
We need more accommodation

This is part of the Fiteni development from 337 Old Cleveland Rd East an area congested in a.m. peak hour with cars banked up from near 4-way intersection Capalaba up to the Willard Homestead that shocked road users seeing great number of trees destroyed for I'm told 16-18 houses? In this photo it looks like a great many more trees will be destroyed for future lots. Also informed today Bowen Street will have, instead of three families occupying properties, they will be transformed into housing 200 new people. Does anyone in local/State govt discuss the added volume of traffic on our already congested roads, cancer causing polluted air, how it impacts on road safety, + health of the local population when, as young man today at Keith Street Reserve said, you can hear your neighbour's arguments, etc. depriving everyone of privacy. Overdevelopment in any given area should be discouraged. Open spaces are vital for local citizens to enjoy a healthy lifestyle, to which we are all entitled..

Please ensure toilet stays for walkers.

Please keep a toilet block in this park. It is a stop off point for those in need whilst walking/jogging from Cleveland CBD along Shore St N to Clvd Point. Yes you can say there are other toilets not far up at The Point or at Raby Harbour Foreshore Park, which is true when travelling by car or bike. But when walking, time wise, they are too far away. We need toilets provided not taken away, so we can enjoy being outside in the naturally wonderful Redland’s.

Fantastic thing for them to do. We are their only immediate neighbour and they have our full support.