major amendment package b – retirement and aged care · web viewcouncil sought feedback on the...

Major Amendment Package B – Retirement and Aged Care

Report on submissions

Brisbane City Council22 October 2018

This report has been produced by:

City Planning and Economic Development ,City Planning and Sustainability, Brisbane City CouncilBrisbane Square, 266 George Street, Brisbane QLD 4000GPO Box 1434, Brisbane QLD 4001

For enquiries about the contents please contact:

Strategic Planning on (07) 3403 8888 or email [email protected]

Disclaimer: This document is solely for the purpose of facilitating strategic policy and land use planning by Strategic Planning, City Planning and Economic Development, City Planning and Sustainability, Brisbane City Council.

Table of contentsReport on submissions........................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Glossary...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................5

Executive summary..............................................................................................................................................................................................................6

1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................................................................7

2 Major Amendment Package B – Retirement and Aged Care overview...........................................................................................................................7

3 Statutory public consultation.......................................................................................................................................................................................8

4 Process for reviewing submissions................................................................................................................................................................................9

5 Submissions summary and responses.........................................................................................................................................................................105.1 General........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 105.2 Levels of assessment and public consultation..............................................................................................................................................................................................115.3 Zoning, precincts and land use mix.............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 235.4 Building height............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 415.5 Building height transitions......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1105.6 Setbacks and building separation requirements........................................................................................................................................................................................1155.7 Building length and articulation................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1195.8 Site cover................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1265.9 Built form, building design, appearance and bulk......................................................................................................................................................................................1295.10 Integrated development for residential care and retirement facilities....................................................................................................................................................1365.11 Character................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1435.12 Diversity of housing types........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1475.13 Communal and private open space..........................................................................................................................................................................................................1645.14 Landscaping and deep planting................................................................................................................................................................................................................1685.15 Car parking............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1695.16 Traffic and transport................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1805.17 Care co-located uses................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1845.18 Location of retirement and residential care facilities...............................................................................................................................................................................201

3

5.20 Rezoning.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2045.22 Brisbane’s Future Blueprint...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2065.23 Ageing in place......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2155.24 Dementia care.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2195.25 Incentives for retirement and residential care facilities...........................................................................................................................................................................2235.26 Affordability............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2335.27 Other Issues............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 234

4

GlossaryAbbreviation Term

City Plan Brisbane City Plan 2014

Council Brisbane City Council

LGIP Local government infrastructure plan in Part 4 of Brisbane City Plan 2014

Planning Act Planning Act 2016

Sensitive use As defined in Brisbane City Plan 2014: A use that is a childcare centre, a community care centre, a community residence, a detention facility, a dual occupancy, a dwelling house, a dwelling unit, an educational establishment, a health care service, a hospital, a hotel, to the extent the hotel provides accommodation for tourists or travellers, a multiple dwelling, a relocatable home park, a residential care facility, a resort complex, a retirement facility, rooming accommodation, rural workers' accommodation, short term accommodation or a tourist park.

Residential care facility Residential care facility means the use of premises for supervised accommodation, and medical and other support services, for persons who—

(a) cannot live independently; and

(b) require regular nursing or personal care.

Examples of a residential care facility— convalescent home, nursing homeNote—The use term is defined in the Planning Regulation 2017 - Regulated Requirements

Retirement facility Retirement facility means a residential use of premises for—

(a) accommodation for older members of the community, or retired persons, in independent living units or serviced units; or

(b) amenity and community facilities, a manager’s residence, health care and support services, preparing food and drink or staff accommodation, if the use is ancillary to the use in paragraph (a).

Note—The use term is defined in the Planning Regulation 2017 - Regulated Requirements

Use The way land is developed and used including the types of activities occurring (e.g. residential, commercial, industrial etc.)

Executive summaryCouncil sought feedback on the major amendment to City Plan – Package B – Retirement and Aged Care (the Amendment Package) during the statutory public consultation period from 18 June 2018 to 21 September 2018. Public consultation on the Amendment Package attracted 99 submissions (93 of which were properly made) from land owners, residents, planning consultants and stakeholder interest groups across Brisbane.

During the public notification period, Council also received two petitions consisting of 103 signatures and 273 signatures respectively. Both petitions requested Council to limit building height and not allow six to seven storey development of retirement and residential care facilities on sites adjacent or opposite sites in low density residential housing areas. In addition to raising concern about shops, food and drink outlets, clubs and other commercial premises as part of new development.

The most common matters raised in submissions included the following. Support for the proposed initiatives including additional height and supporting land uses for residents. Development supported within the inner city, in centres, in Medium and High density residential zones, where located near public transport. Concern about changes in some levels of assessment to code assessment. Concern about the proposed building height in the Community facilities zone of four storeys greater than the allowable building height on the

adjoining sites, where adjacent to Low density residential or Character residential zoned land. Concern about high-rise retirement and aged care developments on land adjacent to or across from Low density residential zoned housing areas. Requests that the proposed site cover is reduced from 50% to 45%. Requests for increases to and also removal of building height transition provisions. Concern about building length of 90 metres near lower density residential areas. Development for retirement and residential care facilities within the Emerging community zone should take into consideration the potential

impacts on surrounding neighbourhoods. Development of shop, food and drink outlets, clubs and other commercial premises as part of new retirement and residential care developments in

low density residential areas. Concern that amendments are inconsistent with Brisbane’s Future Blueprint principle ‘protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’ and

its associated action ‘ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’.

6

1 IntroductionThe purpose of this report is to provide a summary of the submissions received on the Major Amendment Package B – Retirement and Aged Care Amendment Package and Council's response to these submissions. This report includes: a brief overview of the Amendment Package (section 2) details about the process for undertaking consultation and considering submissions (sections 3 and 4) a complete summary of issues raised in each submission, the response to the issues raised, and what changes are proposed to the Amendment

Package (section 5).

2 Major Amendment Package B – Retirement and Aged Care overviewOn 18 June 2018, following approval from the Minister for State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning on 6 April 2018, Council released the proposed Amendment Package for comment. The proposed amendments to City Plan offer a more streamlined approach and support the delivery of retirement and aged care accommodation for Brisbane’s ageing population.

The number of Brisbane residents over the age of 65 increased by 19,272 between 2011 and 2016. An increasing proportion of Brisbane residents need assistance with core activities (either in their own home or via supported living), up from 3.6% of the population in 2011 to four per cent in 2016.

In some parts of Brisbane in the future, older people may struggle to find housing to suit their needs, so it’s important to plan now. The need for retirement and aged care housing options is expected to increase by 50% by 2027. This equates to more than 3,600 extra older people each year that may require dedicated retirement or aged care accommodation.

The Amendment Package supports the Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) action to ‘Cater for an ageing population with a Retirement and Aged Care Incentive Scheme’.

Highlights of the Amendment Package include the following. Update the Strategic framework in City Plan to emphasise the important need that the city has to facilitate well-located retirement living and aged

care accommodation. Create a new Retirement and residential care facility code, with specific provisions tailored to such facilities, to replace the use of multiple codes. Encourage the refurbishment and extension of existing retirement and residential care facilities.

7

Broaden the zones in the city where a retirement facility and residential care facility is envisaged to encourage new retirement and residential care facilities in Brisbane neighbourhoods.

Provide for retirement and residential care facilities in Low density residential and Low-medium density residential zones as code assessable where they meet existing height requirements.

Increase allowable building height as code assessable for residential care facilities and retirement facilities in the Medium density residential and High density residential zones.

Facilitate co-location of small-scale supporting uses, such as coffee shops and recreational activities, in retirement facility and residential care facility developments.

Facilitate integration with existing facilities, such as churches, health care precincts and educational facilities. Facilitate retirement facilities and aged care facilities in well serviced areas, near existing shops, public transport and key services.

3 Statutory public consultation Council sought feedback on the Amendment Package during the extended public notification period from 18 June 2018 to 21 September 2018.

The opportunity to provide feedback on the Amendment Package was promoted to the community through a number of channels, to ensure that everyone had the opportunity to have their say on planning for the future for retirement and aged care. The statutory public notification period was supported by a number of community engagement and communication activities which are outlined below. Four City Plan Talk to a Planner sessions, providing the opportunity for the community to talk to a Council planner or technical specialist about the

proposed amendments:- 2pm-4pm and 5pm-7pm, Monday 23 July 2018 at Colmslie Hotel Function Centre, corner of Wynnum and Junction Roads, Morningside- 12pm-2pm and 5pm-7pm, Tuesday 14 August 2018 at Brisbane City Hall, 64 Adelaide Street, Brisbane City

- 2pm-4pm and 5pm-7pm, Wednesday 29 August 2018 at Western Districts Rugby Football Club, Memorial Park, Sylvan Road, Toowong- 12pm-2pm and 5pm-7pm, Wednesday 5 September 2018 at Brisbane City Hall, 64 Adelaide Street, Brisbane City.

A print advertisement in The Courier-Mail on 18 June 2018. A print advertisement in Brisbane Seniors on 2 September 2018. A project update email sent to 5,664 subscribers on 18 June 2018 advising of the public notification and submission period. A project update email sent to 5,797 subscribers on 31 August 2018 reminding them of the closing date for submissions. King George Square, Queen Street Mall and CityCat advertisements from 24 August 2018 to 21 September 2018. Social media publications from 21 August 2018 to 21 September 2018.

8

Letter to landowners of 16 properties proposed for rezoning sent on 18 June 2018.

4 Process for reviewing submissions Public consultation on the proposed amendments attracted 99 submissions. Of these, 93 submissions were properly made, which included two petitions consisting of 103 signatures and 273 signatures respectively, received during the statutory public consultation period from 18 June 2018 to 21 September 2018. Three additional submissions were received after the close of the submissions period. A total of 41 submissions relate to the development proposal at Lota House at 162 Oceana Terrace, Lota, and 18 submissions were received from industry representatives. Of the total submissions, 31 submissions identify support for specific aspects of the Amendment Package.

The methodology for considering submissions is as follows. Each submission received was entered into a database. Each submitter that provided contact details to Council was sent a submission acknowledgement correspondence. Each submission received has been reviewed and considered. Issues raised in submissions were reviewed to determine whether further investigations were required and to formulate a preliminary response. Proposed responses to submissions and relevant changes to the proposed amendments were approved in accordance with Council processes.

This report provides a summary of the submissions, the key issues raised and an indication of whether changes are made to the Amendment Package in response to submissions.

If you made a submission, you can identify the matters you raised within this report using the submission reference number sent to you via letter or email from Council.

Where submissions were in relation to a similar issue, the submissions (or relevant parts of submissions) have been grouped together in order to make this report clearer and more concise. Individual submission reference numbers are still included to make it easy for you to find the relevant response.

For general information and feedback on Council’s activities please contact Council's Contact Centre on (07) 3403 8888 or email [email protected].

9

5 Submissions summary and responses5.1 General

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.

Submission summary Response Amendments to package

1.1 MB-059 Plans should be made accessible to the public use public friendly language.

City Plan is a legal document that outlines the land-use aspirations for the city and how development applications will be assessed. City Plan uses technical language which is detailed in Queensland Government legislation. The proposed amendments reflect this language. Factsheets accompanied the proposed amendments to provide a simplified overview of the initiatives. There were four Talk to a Planner sessions where residents could attend and ask questions about the amendments.

No change

1.2 MB-078 Council should openly engage with its citizens as proposed in Brisbane’s Future Blueprint.

Proposed amendments to City Plan follow the Queensland Government’s statutory amendment process, which includes the process and format of statutory public consultation. Council sought feedback on the amendment package during the extended public notification period from 18 June 2018 to 21 September 2018. The proposed amendments were communicated widely to ensure that everyone had the opportunity to have their say on planning for the future for retirement and aged care. The statutory public consultation period was supported by four Talk to a Planner sessions where residents could attend and ask questions about the amendments.

No change

10

5.2 Levels of assessment and public consultation

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


General levels of assessment and public consultation

1.3 MB-087 Supports the level of assessment for residential care facilities to be reduced, where on a lot larger than 3,000 m2, from impact assessment to code assessment in the Low-medium density residential zone.

Thank you for your support. The level of assessment for a retirement facility in the Low-medium density residential zone remains code assessable where meeting the provisions in 9.3.18 Retirement and residential care facility code including Table 9.3.18.3.B—Maximum building height. The amendments propose to replicate this provision for a residential care facility.

No change

1.4 MB-041

MB-060

MB-083

Recommends that retirement facilities should be impact assessable as retirement living is not aged care.

The proposed amendment aims to support integrated facilities, with both retirement and residential care, to allow people to access varying levels of care onsite without leaving their homes. To support the integration of facilities the amendment aligns the level of assessment for retirement and residential care facilities in appropriate zones.

No change

1.5 MB-083 Supports aged care to be code assessable. Thank you for your support. No change

1.6 MB-090 Supports code or accepted assessment in place of impact assessment.

Thank you for your support. No change

1.7 MB-077 Aged care facilities are an intensive form of urban development and should remain impact assessable. Recommends that the proposed amendments allow for the community to have the opportunity to review and provide comments to Council on aged care housing developments, as this takes a form of a

The need for retirement and aged care housing options is expected to increase by 50% by 2027. In response to this housing need, the proposed amendments broaden the zones in the city where retirement and aged care facilities are supported by lowering the category of development assessment. Code assessment is used to facilitate a more streamlined assessment process for residential care

No change

11

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


multiple dwelling. facility and retirement facility developments in locations where these facilities are encouraged and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The lowered level of assessment also facilitates the co-location of retirement and residential care facilities on the same site, and enables the transition of residents from retirement to a residential care facility within the same location.

To ensure that impacts on adjoining sites are mitigated, the proposed amendments have increased setbacks, building separation and landscaping and deep planting requirements, in addition to requiring building height transitions for developments over three storeys, where adjoining a site with an allowable building height of two storeys.

1.8 MB-041

MB-060

Development proponents should provide evidence that they have participated in community consultation during a pre-lodgement planning phase as part of an impact assessable development.

Council cannot regulate the level of community consultation undertaken prior to lodgement of an application. Public notification is required as part of an impact assessable development and is regulated by the Planning Act.

No change

1.9 MB-060 Council should require development proponents to submit an independent needs analysis as part of a development application demonstrating the need for the proposal. This should be made publicly available prior to lodgement of a development application.

The need for retirement and aged care housing options is expected to increase by 50% by 2027. In response to this housing need, the proposed amendments provide for a broader range of housing choice to allow for ageing in neighbourhood.

Code assessment is used to provide a more streamlined assessment process for residential care facility and retirement facility developments in locations where they are encouraged and meet best-practice design requirements.

No change

1.10 MB-035 Code assessment is not supported as it removes the right of residents to appeal, protest or object against

Code assessment is used to facilitate a more streamlined assessment process for residential care facility and retirement facility

No change

12

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-059

MB-065

MB-082

MB-083

developments outlining basic items such as loss of view, character, vegetation, increasing traffic, impacts on local businesses and surrounding residential streets.

Proposed amendments should allow for community input.

developments in locations where they are encouraged and meet best-practice design requirements. To ensure that impacts on surrounding neighbourhoods are mitigated, the proposed amendments have increased setbacks, building separation, building height transitions and landscaping and deep planting requirements.

The community may make a submission on code assessable development applications. In assessing development requiring code assessment, Council considers all matters relevant to the development, including those raised in submissions made by the community.

1.11 MB-077 If the proposed development meets the code requirements it will get approved. Code assessable development proposals do not get assessed against the whole of the planning scheme. The proposal wouldn’t be assessed against the balance of City Plan which outlines the need to maintain and enhance the greenspace network of the city and lists numerous strategies, desired environment outcomes and specific outcomes to be achieved.

The citywide greenspace system is protected by its inclusion in the relevant zones, such as the Conservation, Environmental management and Open space zones. Retirement and aged care facilities will remain impact assessable in these zones. Additionally, greenspace areas and their values are also protected by the relevant City Plan overlays (e.g. Biodiversity areas, Waterway corridors and Wetlands overlay codes) that apply irrespective of zoning. These overlays apply to both code and impact assessable development.

The amendments do not propose variations to these established provisions in City Plan that seek to protect and enhance the greenspace system.

No change

1.12 MB-098 Lowering the level of assessment from Impact assessable to Code assessable is not supported. Despite the code’s intention to prioritise 'good design', commercial imperatives will inevitably take priority.

Code assessment is used to facilitate a more streamlined assessment process for residential care facility and retirement facility developments in locations where they are encouraged and meet best-practice design requirements. To ensure that impacts on adjoining sites are mitigated, the proposed amendments have

No change

13

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


increased setbacks, building separation and landscaping and deep planting requirements, in addition to requiring building height transitions for developments over three storeys, where adjoining a site with an allowable building height of two storeys. Applicants need to demonstrate compliance with the proposed Retirement facility and residential care facility code to obtain a development approval. The community may make a submission on code assessable development applications. In assessing development requiring code assessment, Council considers all matters relevant to the development, including those raised in submissions made by the community.

1.13 MB-060

MB-069

The proposed amendments will limit or abolish the requirement for development applications and plans to advertise and community comment sought. The proposed amendments are to ensure that this does not reduce the obligation to consult and inform the community or intrude on the rights of the community to evaluate and input into developments.

Code assessment is used to facilitate a more streamlined assessment process for residential care facility and retirement facility developments in locations where these facilities are encouraged and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The lowered level of assessment also facilitates the co-location of retirement and residential care facilities on the same site, and enables the transition of residents from retirement to a residential care facility within the same location.


No change

1.14 MB-066

MB-078

Transparency and engagement are important when commercial interest benefit from development, as such it is essential to involve local communities rather than favour developers. The amendments provide an

Code assessment is used to facilitate a more streamlined assessment process for residential care facility and retirement facility developments in locations where these facilities are encouraged and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The lowered

No change

14

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


easy approval process for applicants. level of assessment also facilitates the co-location of retirement and residential care facilities on the same site and enables the transition of residents from retirement to a residential care facility within the same location.


1.15 MB-078 Transparency on donations to political parties requested as part of each development submission so that the public can readily assess if undue influence is a factor in the approval process.

This is not a matter for this amendment or City Plan. No change

1.16 MB-087 The level of assessment for residential care facilities should be code assessable, in the Low-medium density residential zone, where no more than three storeys, and 11.5 m where the site has a frontage to a road with a reserve of 15.5 m or more.

The level of assessment for a retirement facility in the Low-medium density residential zone remains code assessable where meeting the provisions in 9.3.18 Retirement and residential care facility code including Table 9.3.18.3.B—Maximum building height. The amendments propose to replicate this provision for a residential care facility.

No change

1.17 MB-079

MB-087

The proposed amendments to allow for retirement village and a residential care facility to be accepted development in a number of zones as stated, ‘If involving a retirement facility in an existing facility premises with increase in gross floor area’ is supported where the term ‘premise' is removed, to clarify the Level of Assessment to relate to existing

Under schedule 2 of the Planning Act a premises means— (a) a building or other structure; or (b) land, whether or not a building or other structure is on the land.

No change

15

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


buildings.

1.18 MB-030 Development proponents should be required to provide evidence that they have participated in community consultation during a pre-lodgement 'planning' phase for any such impact assessable development.

The process for an impact assessment application, including requirements for public notification of such applications, are identified in Queensland Government legislation including the Planning Act, Planning Regulation 2017 and the Development Assessment Rules. The process of public notification allows members of the community to make submissions about development applications, which Council will consider in deciding the application. In addition, any submitters obtain the right to appeal the decision to the Planning and Environment Court. While Council encourages community consultation about relevant development applications, Council does not have the power to require a development proponent to carry out community consultation prior to a development application being made.

No change

1.19 MB-068 The proposed amendments for residential care and retirement facilities in the Low density and Low-medium density residential zones for impact assessment does not reflect the outcome for height provided in AO8 and Table 9.3.18.3.C Building height transitions in the Retirement and residential care facility code. The triggers for impact assessment should reflect the outcomes within the Retirement and residential care facility code.

Building height, frontage width and 400 m pedestrian access triggers in the Tables of assessment are consistent with the allowable building heights set out AO8 and Table 9.3.18.3.B—Maximum building height. The building heights set out in Table 9.3.18.3.B, only apply to portions of the site not subject to the building height transitions in Table 9.3.18.3.C. Building height transitions apply in the Low density residential zone and Low-medium residential zone, where adjoining a lot containing a dwelling house, reducing the building height to 9.5 m and two storeys within 10 m of a common boundary.

No change

1.20 MB-056 Neighbouring residents should have a say in any proposal.

Code assessment is used to facilitate a more streamlined assessment process for residential care facility and retirement facility developments in locations where these facilities are encouraged and

No change

16

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


where they meet best-practice design requirements. The lowered level of assessment also facilitates the co-location of retirement and residential care facilities on the same site and enables the transition of residents from retirement to a residential care facility within the same location.


The community may make a submission on code assessable development applications. In assessing development requiring code assessment, Council considers all matters relevant to the development including those raised in submissions made by the community.

1.21 MB-059 Concern about the intent of the amendments to “remove unintended barriers to the establishment of retirement facilities and aged care facilities in desired locations” as published on Council’s website. This means communities have no say and this might be expedient but leads to corruption. These are not plans that can be devoid of community input. Developers don't know about aged care, unless that's their specialty business. Aged care facilities are not very profitable, and governments should not pretend they are. They are an act of social service and developers

Code assessment is used to facilitate a more streamlined assessment process for residential care facility and retirement facility developments in locations where these facilities are encouraged and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The lowered level of assessment also facilitates the co-location of retirement and residential care facilities on the same site and enables the transition of residents from retirement to a residential care facility within the same location.

There are still locations in the city where these facilities are impact assessable.

No change

17

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


notoriously support non-social politics. To ensure that impacts on adjoining sites are mitigated, the proposed amendments have increased setbacks, building separation and landscaping and deep planting requirements, in addition to requiring building height transitions for developments over three storeys, where adjoining a site with an allowable building height of two storeys.


1.22 MB-037 The proposed amendment package to streamline retirement and aged care high-rises without the need to consult or refer to local residents relative to their requirements and expectations is not supported.

To allow a small group of developers to not follow the current planning systems in place to involve the local community in the planning processes is undemocratic.

To allow for the local community to be able to object developments as part of the process.



The community may make a submission on code assessable development applications. In assessing development requiring code

No change

18

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


assessment, Council considers all matters relevant to the development including those raised in submissions made by the community.

Level of assessment in the Community facilities zone

1.23 MB-008

MB-017

MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-039

MB-040

MB-055

MB-060

MB-076

Concerned the level of assessment has been reduced to Code assessment in the Community facilities zone, where utilising additional height allowances. This is inconsistent with Council's approach for greater public engagement in the development process.


To ensure that impacts on adjoining sites are mitigated, the proposed amendments have increased setbacks, building separation and landscaping and deep planting requirements, in addition to, requiring building height transitions for developments over three storeys, where adjoining a site with an allowable building height of two storeys.


No change

1.24 MB-030 Retirement facilities should be impact assessable in the Community facilities (Health care purposes) zone as this use is inconsistent with the general

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet

No change

19

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


interpretation of what is supported in this precinct. best-practice design requirements.

A retirement facility and residential care facility is already supported in specialist zones such as the Community facilities (Health care purposes) zone precinct, which acknowledges the close relationship such facilities often have with health care services and providers.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.

1.25 MB-080 Code assessable supported for a retirement facility and residential care facility where new premises in the Health care purposes zone precinct and the Community Purposes Precinct of the Community facilities zone.


Level of assessment in the Low density residential zone

1.26 MB-005 Dual occupancy should be Code Assessable in the Low density residential zone, where on an 800 m2 block or 600 m2 block, within 200 m of a centre (greater than 2,000 m2).

Dual Occupancy is currently supported in City Plan, in zones such as the Low-medium density residential zone and Medium density residential zone.

Two key actions in Council’s Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) include:

Facilitate a wide range of housing types and sizes to cater for all Brisbane residents.

Create and implement a housing strategy to ensure supply for

No change

20

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


people at every stage of life.

These actions will consider the housing needs of the community and inform future planning for the provision of different housing types and forms in different areas to meet identified needs. Importantly, the community has provided feedback through the consultation process for BFB that townhouses and apartments are not supported in areas intended for single homes. Furthermore, higher-density housing forms are encouraged in appropriately-zoned and well-serviced locations in proximity to centres, services and public transport. This strategy maximises the efficient use of land with such attributes.

Level of assessment for care co-located uses

1.27 MB-083 Code assessment of retirement facilities and residential care facilities is not supported as developers do not have to inform or consult with the local community and residents have no formal right of appeal.

Provision of a childcare centre, set of shops, offices and cafes as part of retirement facilities and residential care facilities is also not supported.


To ensure that impacts on adjoining sites are mitigated, the proposed amendments have increased setbacks, building separation and landscaping and deep planting requirements, in addition to requiring building height transitions for developments over three storeys, where adjoining a site with an allowable building height of two

No change

21

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


storeys.


The intention for the new activity group Care co-located uses is to provide ancillary support facilities serving the needs of the predominate use for retirement facility and or residential care facility.

The Care co-located uses will enable access, active participation, and social interaction with the wider community by residents.

1.28 MB-083 Allowing businesses with the use of a childcare to be code assessable is not supported. To make them code assessable would create two sets of rules: one for the businesses that operate inside an aged care facility and another, more stringent set of conditions for businesses that operate outside. Peak hour traffic flows, road conditions and child safety must be considered in any such application.

A key objective of the amendments is to generate interaction between residents of retirement and residential care facilities and the surrounding community by encouraging the local community to utilise services, such as shops and childcare centres, onsite.

Childcare centres that are included in the Care co-located uses activity group, continue to be subject to assessment against prescribed secondary codes including the Childcare centre code and Transport, access, parking and servicing code.

The benefits of supporting the co-location of small-scale commercial uses and services (i.e. ‘care co-located uses’) is two-fold.

Firstly, they provide easy access for residents to key facilities and services (such as hairdressers/chemists) and support involvement by residents in a variety of activities that they may otherwise not access (such as community-based activities).

Secondly, they generate interaction between residents and the

No change

22

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


surrounding community by encouraging the local community to visit services onsite (such as child care and coffee shops).

The amenity of surrounding areas and existing commercial centres and uses are protected by a number of proposed provisions applicable to Care co-located uses that limit their scale and intensity including the following.

The size of the co-located uses must not adversely impact on nearby centres and must be integrated with and subordinate/secondary to the size and operation of the retirement facility or residential care facility onsite.

As such, these uses are only code assessable where meeting the allowable size of 250 m2 each for a club, community use, food and drink outlet, health care services, office or shop, and 400m2 for a place of worship or child care centre.

Additionally, the allowable combined area for these uses should not exceed 800 m2 or 10% of the site area, whichever is the lesser. Any foreseeable impacts of proposed developments need to be addressed irrespective of category of development.

5.3 Zoning, precincts and land use mix

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.29 MB-090 The amendments facilitate seniors’ housing on existing sites in the Low density residential zone with a

Under the Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) principle ‘Give people more choice when it comes to housing’, Action 04 identifies catering for an ageing population with a Retirement and Aged Care Incentive

No change

23

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


site area greater than 3,000 m2 which is at odds with the apparent intention of the Brisbane Future Blueprint action to reduce additional allowances on these large sites. The allowance for greater density in larger sites is sound planning practice, as any increased amenity or other effects are able to be internalised within the large site.

Scheme. The proposed amendments progress this action.

Retirement and residential care facilities are built according to specific Queensland Government standards for residents. This is a separate form of housing to townhouses which the BFB does not envisage in Low density residential zoned areas.

The building height for retirement facilities and residential care facilities in the Low density residential zone remains at two storeys which is equivalent to a dwelling house. The draft code contains increased standards for building setbacks and separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and open space.

1.30 MB-003 Council has recently announced they are relooking at rezoning certain suburbs to Character residential (Infill housing) zone. Allow character ‘granny flats’ to be built in backyards, where feasible, to provide the correct type of accommodation for ageing people.

The media and the majority of the ageing population would prefer to remain in their homes until they have to move on to aged care facilities highlighted in Council’s Planning for Brisbane's Ageing Population fact sheet.

Government encourages people to stay in homes and receive home care.

The proposed amendments do not affect existing provisions in the City Plan that already support a range of other accommodation forms such as secondary dwellings (i.e. ‘granny flats’) being provided in conjunction with dwelling houses where meeting requirements of the Dwelling house code and Dwelling House (small lot) code including:

an allowable gross floor area of 80 m2; located within 20 m of the dwelling house; occupied by one or more members of the same household as the

dwelling house.

Similarly, Dual Occupancy is already supported in City Plan in zones such as the Low-medium density residential zone and Medium density residential zone.

There are options to receive home care assistance in other accommodation arrangements.

The trend towards downsizing by older people through different life

No change

24

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


stages is acknowledged. Two key actions in Council’s Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) actions include:

Facilitate a wide range of housing types and sizes to cater for all Brisbane residents

Create and implement a housing strategy to ensure supply for people at every stage of life.

These actions will consider the housing needs of the community and inform future planning for the provision of different housing types and forms in different areas to meet identified needs. Importantly, the community has provided feedback through the consultation process for BFB that townhouses and apartments are not supported in areas intended for single homes.

1.31 MB-002 There is a large demand for older people to move from large houses to smaller ones in the same neighbourhood. However, the proposals do not address restrictions in City Plan which make it difficult to build duplexes and townhouses in Low density residential zones.

Under the Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) principle ‘Give people more choice when it comes to housing’, action 04 identifies catering for an ageing population with a Retirement and Aged Care Incentive Scheme. The proposed amendments progress this action. Under the BFB principle ‘Protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’, action 01 to ‘stop houses and apartments being built in areas of single homes’. This emphasises the need to locate these dwelling types in appropriate zones.

Two key actions under the principle ‘Give people more choice when it comes to housing’ are:



No change

25

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


These actions will consider the housing needs of the community and inform future planning for the provision of different housing types and forms in different areas to meet identified needs. Importantly, the community has provided feedback through the consultation process for BFB that townhouses and apartments are not supported in areas intended for single homes.

Retirement and residential care facilities are built according to specific Queensland Government standards for residents. This is a separate form of housing to townhouses, which the BFB does not envisage in areas of single homes such as Low density residential zoned areas.

1.32 MB-013 The proposed amendment with the intent for aged care facilities in existing communities are supported


1.33 MB-006 To allow for multi storey units in Residential A areas (Low density residential areas) for better use of land, as opposed to four to five townhouses in a 40 perch block.

Whilst standards in relation to height have been increased in other zones, the building height for retirement facilities and residential care facilities in the Low density residential zone is intended to remain at two storeys. This ensures that development in the Low density residential zone does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties or the public realm.

No change

1.34 MB-009

MB-047

Development in the Community facilities zone is supported near existing aged care accommodation where development is similar to adjacent built form and no greater than the maximum acceptable outcome for building height on the adjoining sites.

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low

26

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


The allowable building height for a dwelling house in the Low density residential zone is two storeys.

For development sites located in the Community facilities zone (Community purposes zone precinct, Health care purposes zone precinct and Major health care zone precinct), Specialised centre zone (Major education and research facility zone precinct) or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.

Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater and adjoining or opposite a site in the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height has been reduced to two storeys; and

Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater in any other situation, the allowable additional height will continue to be four storeys.

While building heights in some locations have increased to meet the growing need for retirement and aged care facilities, the draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.

density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone

1.35 MB-008

MB-009

MB-014

MB-015

Development supported within the inner city, in centres, medium and high density residential zones, where located near public transport.

Proposed amendments not supported in the Community facilities zone and are inconsistent with

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code encourages development of retirement and residential care facilities in areas that are conveniently located in relation to activity centres, community facilities and services, public spaces and public transport, to enable residents’ access, and active participation and social interaction with,

No change

27

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-017

MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-029

MB-036

MB-039

MB-040

MB-042

MB-047

MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

other elements of the City Plan. the wider community.

The proposed amendments facilitate retirement and residential care facilities in additional zones, including the Community facilities zone, to provide housing diversity and enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their life cycle. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

28

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-076

MB-085

1.36 MB-025

MB-050

Retirement units, retirement villages, care residence developments heavily impact on a quiet suburban area and low density housing.

Commercial development should only be allowed in areas that are currently designated for those uses.

The need for retirement and aged care housing options is expected to increase by 50% by 2027. In response to this housing need, the proposed amendments facilitate retirement and residential care facilities in additional zones to provide housing diversity and enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their lifecycle.


No change

1.37 MB-098 Supports the proposed amendments in Medium density residential and High density residential zones.

The proposed amendments are not supported to be extended to Low density residential or Low-medium density residential zones.

The proposed amendments facilitate retirement and residential care facilities in additional zones, including the Low density residential and Low-medium density residential zone, to provide housing diversity and enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their life cycle.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and Residential Care Code. This code includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.

No change

29

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.38 MB-025 The proposed amendments for retirement units and or addition commercial premises are not supported in Wynnum North residential area as these services are available in the Wynnum North and Wynnum Central.

The proposed amendments facilitate retirement and residential care facilities in additional zones to provide housing diversity and enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their life cycle.

A key objective of the amendments is to generate interaction between residents of retirement and residential care facilities and the surrounding community by encouraging the local community to utilise services, such as shops and childcare centres, onsite. These services (care co-located uses) also provide easy access for residents to key facilities and services and support involvement by residents in a variety of activities that may otherwise not access.



As such, these uses are only code assessable where meeting the allowable size of 250 m2 each for a club, community use, food and drink outlet, health care services, office or shop, and 400 m2 for a place of worship or child care centre.

Additionally, the allowable combined area for these uses should not exceed 800 m2 or 10% of the site area, whichever is the lesser.

No change

30

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.39 MB-030

MB-063

Should not allow Retirement and Residential care facilities in additional zones.

Do not support residential care facilities where adjacent to private residences, due to car parking issues, noise and ambulances.

The proposed amendments facilitate retirement and residential care facilities in additional zones, including in residential zones, to provide housing diversity and enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their life cycle.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, aim to mitigate offsite impacts. This includes specific provisions that will require new development to manage noise and odour emissions resulting from a development including car parking. The provisions also control hours of operation or delivery vehicles and Care co-located uses associated with retirement and residential care facilities.

It is outside of Council’s jurisdiction to manage the noise associated with emergency services vehicles.

No Change

1.40 MB-026 Does not support proposed development at Lota by Anglicare, as if the development goes ahead it will devalue the area.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s PD Online website to monitor the progress of this development application. Please note that this is not a matter for consideration as part of the proposed amendments package.

Council is not aware of any evidence that development of retirement facilities and/or residential care facilities has the potential to impact property values in surrounding areas.

No change

1.41 MB-023 Retirement villages being priced out of the inner city has no correlation to a developer wishing to build a retirement village in an outer suburb such as

The need for retirement and aged care housing options is expected to increase by 50% by 2027. In response to this housing need, the proposed amendments facilitate retirement and residential care

No change

31

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Wynnun/Manly.

Why should a citizen over 50 of sound mind and body be provided with a facility that is detrimental to the surrounding neighbourhood? If a citizen wants to sell his property, in whatever form it currently exists, so that he/she can move into a retirement village, they should not be given an advantage over a younger citizen wanting to buy an apartment in the same area.

facilities in additional zones to provide housing diversity and enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their lifecycle.


The proposed amendments facilitate retirement and residential care facilities in additional zones, including the Community facilities zone, to provide housing diversity and enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their life cycle.

1.42 MB-090 An additional two-storey height incentive could be facilitated in the Low-medium density residential zoning, as this zone is generally well located to services and facilities.

The building height for retirement facilities and residential care facilities in the Low-medium density residential zone was not proposed to be changed in the proposed amendments. The Low-medium density residential zone provides a transition between higher and lower density residential areas and no additional building height is proposed.

No change

1.43 MB-090 Allow for the change of use from hotel, commercial or other uses to aged care facility.

The proposed amendment aims to support integrated facilities, with both retirement and residential care, where people can access varying levels of care onsite facilitating ageing in place. The support of integrated facilities allows existing retirement facilities to change to residential care facilities, and vice versa, as ‘Accepted development, subject to compliance with identified requirements’.

No change

32

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.44 MB-037 Recommends that the proposed amendments are consistent with the existing zone plans.

Currently, retirement and residential care facilities are supported in City Plan zone codes, including the Low density residential zone, Low-medium density residential zone, Medium density residential zone, High density residential zone, Community facilities zone and Centre and Mixed use zones. The proposed amendments aim to further support development in these zones through the alignment of the level of assessment with the intent and by strengthening the supporting provisions in zone codes.

No change

1.45 MB-008

MB-014

MB-015

MB-017

MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-029

MB-036

MB-039

MB-040

MB-049

The proposed amendments for high-rise towers in the Community facilities zoned sites or urban areas is not supported as this is not suitable for aged care and retirement outcomes such as Lota House, e.g. seven-storey development.




Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater and adjoining or opposite a site in the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone

33

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-042

MB-047

MB-057

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

MB-076

height has been reduced to two storeys; and



The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s PD Online website to monitor the progress of this development application.

1.46 MB-059 Supports aged care facilities and not retirement facilities in every neighbourhood.

Thank you for your support.

Brisbane’s current 70-plus population of 90,080 is projected to increase by 49% (or 43,759 persons) to 2027. That is an average increase of 3,647 persons who may require dedicated retirement or residential care accommodation and/or care and support services each year to 2027.

Facilitating integrated residential care and retirement facilities provides additional accommodation options to address community need, notwithstanding that there are options to receive home care assistance in other accommodation arrangements.

No change

34

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


The initiatives provide support for residential care and retirement facilities in a range of appropriate zones across the city, to make it easier to respond to need and place downward pressure on affordability.

The intent of the incentives is to make it more feasible for retirement facility and residential care facility operators to compete with the multiple dwelling developers in purchasing sites.

1.47 MB-014

MB-015

MB-029

MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-060

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

New development for retirement and residential care facilities within the Emerging community zone have not taken into consideration the potential impacts.




Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater in any other situation, the


35

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


allowable additional height will continue to be four storeys.

The draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.

1.48 MB-041 The proposed amendments in section 5.5 should clarify that all proposed developments in Communities Facilities zones are for the care of elderly rather than high-rise unit blocks.

The proposed amendments encourage retirement and residential care facilities that comply with Queensland Government legislation to meet resident needs. Multi-storey apartments not specifically providing for the elderly do not comply with the proposed amendments.

No change

1.49 MB-050 The use of Sport and recreation zoned land for retirement units for retirement villages is not supported. Suburbs should remain as they are.

Council is not progressing amendments to facilitate the development of retirement facilities and residential care facilities on privately-owned Sport and recreation zoned land.

No change

1.50 MB-079 Recommends Council amend City Plan to facilitate merit based assessment for retirement facilities and residential care facilities, where located with and facilitating the ongoing operation of the associated sporting and recreation activity. There is a lack of available land suitable for these types of land uses, being land close to urban services as well as having suitable site characteristics. Land excess to sporting facilities purposes can be repurposed to the benefit of the community.

Council is not progressing amendments to facilitate the development of retirement facilities and residential care facilities on privately-owned Sport and recreation zoned land.

The proposed amendment intended to provide support for residential care and retirement facilities in a broader range of appropriate zones across the city, making it easier to deliver these forms of accommodation, to help respond to need and place downward pressure on affordability.

No change

1.51 MB-080

MB-081

Recommend Council reconsider supporting the co-location of retirement and residential care facilities

Council is not progressing amendments to facilitate the development of retirement facilities and residential care facilities on

No change

36

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


on Sport and recreation zoned land, to facilitate and encourage the integration of retirement and aged care with existing facilities and support the ongoing financial viability of private recreation and sports facilities.

privately-owned Sport and recreation zoned land.

1.52 MB-096 Council’s position for the utilisation of privately owned open space land (e.g. schools and university ovals) for the use by residents of residential aged care and retirement facilities is supported. Often such land is underutilised and would benefit from more frequent use by those living nearby in retirement and residential care facility developments.

Thank you for your support. However, Council is no longer progressing amendments to facilitate the development of retirement facilities and residential care facilities on privately-owned sport and recreation zoned land.

No change

1.53 MB-096 Council previous proposed amendments in 2016 allowed for the establishment of retirement facilities and residential care facilities within the Sports and recreation zone were supported. This policy was supported because it was a good use of often well located land, which is large enough to mitigate amenity impacts and allow for co-located uses to be established.

Thank you for your support. However, Council is no longer progressing amendments to facilitate the development of retirement facilities and residential care facilities on privately-owned sport and recreation zoned land.

No change

1.54 MB-059 Retirement facilities should follow the same laws as they always have, an ageing population does not mean an increase in facilities. It is only when the elderly are ill or moving towards death they need comfortable, purpose built facilities.

Brisbane’s current 70-plus population of 90,080 is projected to increase by 49% (or 43,759 persons) to 2027. That is an average increase of 3,647 persons who may require dedicated retirement or residential care accommodation and/or care and support services each year to 2027. In response to this housing need, the proposed amendments aim to incentivise development and ensure suitable

No change

37

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


housing supply is available for people at every stage of life.

1.55 MB-075 Supports opportunities for retirement and residential care facilities to be established in suburban living areas, including code assessment in the Low density residential zone.


1.56 MB-077 The land use strategy is silent on what is defined as well-located. Greater guidance should be provided in where such facilities should be located. While scale and built form are to be sensitive to character and amenity, no such qualification is provided in achieving well located and is open to interpretation. Given the land use strategy is to be read in conjunction with other land use strategies, it should be reinforced well-located is not to compromise ecological values and land use strategies seeking to achieve green space systems.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code, overall outcomes, encourage development of retirement and residential care facilities in areas that are conveniently located in relation to activity centres, community facilities and services, public spaces and public transport, to enable residents’ access to, and active participation and social interaction with, the wider community.

The Citywide greenspace system is protected by its inclusion in the relevant zones (such as the Conservation, Environmental management and Open spaces zones). Furthermore, sites with ecological values outside of the relevant zones are protected by the relevant City Plan overlays (e.g. biodiversity, waterway corridors and wetlands overlay codes) that apply irrespective of zoning and supported development outcomes in each zone to protect the values of these important areas. The amendments do not propose variations to these established provisions in City Plan that seek to protect and enhance the greenspace system.

No change

1.57 MB-083 Living in a Low density residential area next door to care located uses such as a childcare centre, shops, offices and cafes is not supported.

A key objective of the amendments is to generate interaction between residents of retirement and residential care facilities and the surrounding community by encouraging the local community to utilise services, such as shops and childcare centres, onsite.

No change

38

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Childcare centres that are included in the Care co-located uses activity group, continue to be subject to assessment against prescribed secondary codes including the Childcare centre code and Transport, access, parking and servicing code.

MB-086 The proposed amendments allow for development in all existing zones to be open to wide interpretation.

There are suitable places such as the Gold Coast, where overdevelopment might be acceptable. The proposed amendments are not supported in Brisbane.

Brisbane’s current 70-plus population of 90,080 is projected to increase by 49% (or 43,759 persons) to 2027. That is an average increase of 3,647 persons who may require dedicated retirement or residential care accommodation and/or care and support services each year to 2027.

The proposed amendments encourage retirement and residential care facilities to provide housing diversity and to enable people to remain within their local neighbourhood throughout their life cycle. Currently, retirement and residential care facilities are supported in City Plan zone codes, including the Low density residential zone, Low-medium density residential zone, Medium density residential zone, High density residential zone, Community facilities zone and Centre and Mixed use zones. The proposed amendments aim to further support development in these zones through the alignment of level of assessment with the intent and by strengthening the supporting provisions in zone codes.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, include specific requirements to ensure that any offsite impacts are mitigated. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.

No change

39

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.58 MB-093 Support the ability for an existing building to change from a retirement facility to an aged care facility.


1.59 MB-093 Support for broadening the zones where retirement facilities and aged care facilities can be built. However, recommends development be kept to low density living (not more than three storeys high).




Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater and adjoining The draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.


1.60 MB-095 Council, with an intention to activate under-utilised land within the city, have made gross oversights on the potential impacts the proposed development parameters may have on existing neighbourhoods. This chiefly takes the form of new development for Retirement facilities and Residential care facilities within local area plans such as Wynnum Manly and the current planning requirements within the Manly CBD.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity

40

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


There are suitable locations for higher density aged care/retirement outcomes in Brisbane – in the inner City, in centres such as Wynnum where the proposed building heights are currently allowed, and near public transport. The Manly CBD is remote from any support infrastructure such as Railway Stations and established bus routes. It simply is not a suitable site and by implementing a city Wide planning environment for retirement and old age developments many of them (if not most) will be established where the developer can get the higher return, e.g. Lota and Manly, and not where the proposed elderly residents will have the necessary community services.

impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.


5.4 Building height

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.61 MB-056 The proposed height increase to allow for six-storey developments in Low density residential areas does not respect the built form of Brisbane residential neighbourhoods that have character or heritage significance.


Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential

41

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.




Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater where adjoining or opposite a site in the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height has been reduced to two storeys; and



The current City Plan provisions for the Heritage overlay remain unchanged in the amendment package. Development on a heritage place triggering assessment against the Heritage overlay code will still be required to demonstrate the

zone or Emerging community zone.

42

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


development does not detract from the heritage significance of the heritage place.

1.62 MB-001 The proposed amendments will create permanent inconsistent height distortions in each planning zone (Medium density residential and High density residential).

Defined use should be irrelevant in determining building height suitability.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to optimise housing choice, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.

Council has amended the provisions to allow for neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the height. An additional two storeys will continue to be supported in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify a building height.

Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

1.63 MB-008

MB-011

MB-014

MB-015

MB-017

Additional height in the Community facilities zone, where adjacent to Low density residential or Character residential zones is not supported. The allowable maximum height in the Community facilities zone should be capped at two storeys, or to be no greater than the maximum acceptable outcome of the neighbourhood plan listed height, and to

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone,

43

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-029

MB-036

MB-039

MB-040

MB-042

MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-060

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

MB-076

remain sensitive to the neighbourhood area.

The proposed amendments to allow for a four-storeys uplift in the Community facilities zone adjoining a two-storey area, but only a two-storey uplift in Medium density residential and High density residential zones is unreasonable and unwarranted as multiple dwellings are not a competing interest in the Community facilities zone.

Larger developments are 'alien outcomes' in low density areas, providing long term blight to the city character.

result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.





Character residential zone or Emerging community zone.


44

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


While building heights in some locations have increased to meet the growing need for retirement and aged care facilities, the draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.


1.64 MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

New development for a retirement facility or residential care facility are to take a built form of two storeys, with appropriate building breaks to minimise the building bulk to be sensitive to existing built form of the neighbourhood.

Building height uplift for four and six stories abutting hard against two-storey development presents unattractive building form that destabilises the neighbourhood character.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone.

Amend Tables of

45

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.






Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

46

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.



1.65 MB-095 Growth of the aged care industry can be supported but should occur in an appropriate form. In particular, urban development should be sensitive to established built form of the neighbourhood.

The Amendment Package seeks to introduce a four storey building height uplift for Retirement and Residential care facilities on sites with an area greater than 7,000 m2. It is evidenced in various locations throughout Brisbane that four and six stories abutting hard against two-storey development presents an unattractive building form that destabilises the neighbourhood character. These sudden changes in building form present overlooking, overshadowing and other loss of amenity issues such as impact on existing views over Moreton Bay which are explicitly protected in the Manly neighbourhood plan. The additional four storeys in Manly would present a stark contrast in building form experienced elsewhere in the city.

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. This is a citywide amendment package and not specific to any area of Brisbane. Accordingly, the draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties.

This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.

The allowable building height for a dwelling house in the Low


Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density

47

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


density residential zone is two storeys.





Council has amended the provisions to allow for neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the height. An additional two storeys will continue to be

zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

48

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


supported in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify a building height.

1.66 MB-056 Objection to allowable building height increase in Community facilities zones where they are adjacent to Low density or Character residential zones with the maximum height being that of existing residential buildings.

Multiple (six) storey buildings do not respect the built form of established Brisbane residential neighbourhoods, particularly that of buildings that have character or heritage significance.

Multiple storey developments in low density areas should be at the very least minimum impact assessed. The neighbouring residents should have a say in any proposal to build.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.


For development sites located in the Community facilities zone (Community purposes zone precinct, Health care purposes zone precinct and Major health care zone precinct), Specialised centre zone (Major education and research facility zone precinct) or Emerging community zone, the allowable



49

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.



The draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.


The current City Plan provisions for the Heritage overlay remain unchanged in the amendment package. Development on a heritage place triggering assessment against the Heritage overlay code will still be required to demonstrate the development does not detract from the heritage significance

50

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


of the heritage place.

1.67 MB-027 The proposed seven-storey development at E.M. Memorial Tooth Memorial Home at Oceana Terrace, Manly, is not supported and is inappropriate in that street.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in the City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s PD Online website to monitor the progress of this development application. Community concerns in relation to this application will be carefully considered as part of the decision on the application.

No change

1.68 MB-036 To allow for six-storey aged care/retirement development adjacent to established low density, two-storey housing does not respect the built form of established Brisbane neighbourhoods.




Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility

51

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.







Council has amended the provisions to allow for neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the

to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

52

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


height. An additional two storeys will continue to be supported in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify a building height.

1.69 MB-047

MB-049

To allow for six-storey aged care/retirement development adjacent to established low density, two-storey housing does not respect the built form of established Brisbane neighbourhoods.

Development design to be consistent with reasonable expectations for built form, site layout, landscape design of development on surrounding land.

The proposed amendments to enable appropriate building breaks to minimise building bulk to be sensitive to existing built form of the neighbourhood.

The allowable four storeys against six storeys against a two-storey building is unattractive building form and destabilises neighbourhood character.

The proposed changes to building form presents overlooking, overshadowing, and other loss of amenity issues such as noise from vehicle movements to established Low density residential uses.




For development sites located in the Community facilities zone (Community purposes zone precinct, Health care purposes zone precinct and Major health care zone precinct), Specialised centre zone (Major education and research facility


Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify

53

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


zone precinct) or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.





building height.

1.70 MB-009 Supports additional levels within transport corridors to allow for profit, affordability and functionality. Support

Thank you for your support. No Change

54

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


density in areas which can be serviced. The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

1.71 MB-011

MB-047

Objection to high density and mid-rise development adjacent to low set development.





Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density

55

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.






Council has amended the provisions to allow for neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the height. An additional two storeys will continue to be supported in the Medium density residential zone or High

zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

56

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify a building height.

1.72 MB-013 Supports the height increase of more than two storeys provided the process of an impact assessment are undertaken to assess issues of traffic, aesthetic, and land use compatibility.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.





57

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.






1.73 MB-023 The proposed amendment to allow additional height is unreasonable. Proposed amendments will justify height increases and property density in locations. This has a particular effect on the corner of Cardigan Parade and Stratton Terrace which would allow for an additional four

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a

Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility

58

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


stories over the 10.5 m height limit impacting on subsequent loss of bay views within Manly.

careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes



to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

1.74 MB-025

MB-028

The proposed amendments to allow for up to seven storeys are not supported specifically around Nazareth House (272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum North) or anywhere in the Wynnum North area.

The proposed maximum building height does not keep in with the area plan imposing on significant traffic, property shadowing, and inconvenience on existing busy areas.

Nazareth House at 272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum North, is subject to existing approvals associated with application no. A003214281. Details of this application is available on Council’s PD Online website.

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and

No change

59

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Building in Wynnum North should only be allowed a maximum height of surrounding heights of 9.5 m above natural ground level. The proposed addition four storeys, allowing for seven storeys buildings to be built are not supported.

where they meet best-practice design requirements. This is a citywide amendment package and not specific to any area of Brisbane. Accordingly, the draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.



The draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.

1.75 MB-028 Does not support seven storey retirement villages and nursing homes in the Brisbane area, and more specifically, within the Wynnum Manly Ward.

Increasing the number of individuals in Wynnum Manly area would challenge the primary care space and

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low

60

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


emergency services, and require significant infrastructure likely costing the taxpayer more in the long run.

Considers smaller facilities in the region of two to three storeys are more appropriate.

residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.






density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone.


61

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.




1.76 MB-095 Concerned the amendments package enables higher developments than currently allowed within Local plan areas such as the Manly centre, which is limited to 10.5 m. Opposed to development being code assessable as residents are unable to voice their opinions regarding these types of developments.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation,


Amend Tables of

62

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.






Council has amended the provisions to allow for

Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

63

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the height. An additional two storeys will continue to be supported in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify a building height.

1.77 MB-030

MB-041

Aged-care codes should specify height limits for residential-care facilities and not allow for additional storeys, in any jurisdiction, irrespective of the size of the site.




For development sites located in the Community facilities


Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density

64

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


zone (Community purposes zone precinct, Health care purposes zone precinct and Major health care zone precinct), Specialised centre zone (Major education and research facility zone precinct) or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.




Council has amended the provisions to allow for neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the height. An additional two storeys will continue to be supported in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan

residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

65

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


does not specify a building height.

1.78 MB-031 The proposed amendment to allow for an additional height of four storeys adjoining low density housing area in Wynnum North is not supported. Does not want traffic to be increased on the Wynnum North road as a result of the development.

The proposed new building at Nazareth House should be restricted to 9.5 m above natural ground level, and to remain the same as surrounding properties.


Development applications lodged to Council may be required to provide a traffic impact assessment, which demonstrates that there will be no adverse impacts on road carrying capacity and traffic safety (to a 10-year planning horizon). The proposed amendments do not vary these existing requirements in City Plan.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting to provide a quality built form and visual


66

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


amenity.





The draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.

1.79 MB-033 The proposed amendments to allow for four or more storeys for retirement villages or nursing homes adjoining or adjacent from low density is not supported.

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building

67

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.





Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater in any other

height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone.


68

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


situation, the allowable additional height will continue to be four storeys.



1.80 MB-041 The allowable height does not support the purpose for the Retirement and residential care facility code to provide a home-like environment. The code must be amended to deliver low set, home like accommodation without increase in allowable heights.

The sections of the performance codes in the proposed amendments that deal with height need to specify what is an acceptable height for a residential care-facility, as this is not clear.

The surrounding suburb should be used as a guide to what




69

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


is an acceptable height when assessing a fit for purpose residential care accommodation.

The proposed amendments should specify a maximum height of no more than three storeys for all aged-care facilities, irrespective of zone and density of the surround area to meet dementia enabling best practice principles. Size of the land should not matter when determining the acceptable height. An example is the development application at Manly (Lota House) where the site is 7,000m2 or more the amendments would allow for four extra storeys. The proposed amendments do not achieve best practice aged care accommodation for elderly people.






While building heights in some locations have increased to meet the growing need for retirement and aged care facilities, the draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better


70

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.


1.81 MB-042 Supports nursing care units that are low in height. The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.



Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two

71

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.






Council has amended the provisions to allow for neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the height. An additional two storeys will continue to be supported in the Medium density residential zone or High

additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

72

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify a building height.

1.82 MB-042 Does not support seven-storey proposed building at 162 Oceana Terrace, Manly.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in the City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s PD Online website to monitor the progress of this development application. Community concerns in relation to this application will be carefully considered as part of the decision on the application.

No change

1.83 MB-043

MB-044

MB-045

MB-046

Does not support six to seven-storey retirement and aged care developments on land adjacent or across from Low density residential housing areas.




Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility

73

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.








and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

74

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.



1.84 MB-047

MB-064

Does not support the proposed uplift of four storeys additional in the Community facilities zone for sites greater than 7,000 m2, due to the impacts the height will have on the community, heritage, traffic and infrastructure.







75

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.







building height.

1.85 MB-047 Does not support the four storey uplift in a two-storey area, with development of a scale, height and bulk not greater

The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new

Amend the Retirement and residential care

76

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


than surrounding development.

Building height uplift in the Community facilities zone where adjacent to low density or character residential zones should have a maximum building capped and no greater than the maximum acceptable outcomes for building height on the adjoining sites (two storeys in a two-storey neighbourhood).

retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.




Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater and adjoining or opposite a site in the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height has been reduced to two

facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone.


77

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


storeys; and




1.86 MB-048 Supports more low level accommodation for the aged. The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging

78

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.







While building heights in some locations have increased to meet the growing need for retirement and aged care

community zone.


79

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


facilities, the draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.


1.87 MB-055 Objection to overriding neighbourhood plan building heights and allowing additional height around existing Low density residential zonings. The additional four storeys is excessive.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual


80

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


amenity.


1.88 MB-056 Objection to the building height increase in Community facilities zone where adjacent to Low density residential or Character residential zones with the maximum building height of existing residential buildings.



The allowable building height for a dwelling house in the Low


81

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


density residential zone is two storeys.





1.89 MB-057 Luxury retirement high-rise towers for aged community are not supported. Make use of land where the residents are encouraged to enjoy their surroundings and outdoor areas, not in high-rise buildings.


No change

82

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.


1.90 MB-058 Support proposed increase in building heights as an incentive for development of Retirement and residential care facilities.


1.91 MB-059 High-rise retirement and aged care facilities are not supported unless each floor has the type of dwelling that supported care needs and is built to suit supported living and architecturally designed in a completely different arrangement than normal apartments i.e. one bedroom apartments with shared kitchens and dining.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to optimise housing choice, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.


No change

83

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.92 MB-060 A Retirement facility or residential care facility needs to take a built form of two storeys, with appropriate building breaks to minimise the building bulk in an effort to be sensitive to the existing built form of the neighbourhood.

Concerns that the amendments will encourage high density and mid-rise development directly adjacent to low-set residential development and residents will be unaware of this eventuality until it actually arises.

Development within the Community facilities zone should be sensitive to the predominant building form of the neighbourhood, as is already required under the Communities facilities zone code, and is expected by the recently released Brisbane’s Future Blueprint. It is also not clear that what is being proposed is compatible with the SEQ Regional Plan (ShapingSEQ) especially as it relates to high-rises being remote from community hubs.

Allowing for six-storey aged care/retirement developments adjacent to established low density, two-storey houses does not respect the built form of established Brisbane neighbourhoods. Brisbane and other cities have multiple examples of where larger developments are provided as ‘alien outcomes’ in low density areas, which provides a long-term blight to the city character. Such outcomes are inconsistent with Council’s recently released Brisbane’s Future Blueprint, which seeks to ‘ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’. It is inconceivable that a six-storey, 90 m long building adjacent





Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater and adjoining or opposite a site in the Low density residential zone,



84

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


to a two-storey house is compatible. Character residential zone or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height has been reduced to two storeys; and




Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) includes a principle ‘Protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’. A key related action to achieve this principle in BFB is to ‘Ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’ which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low Density Residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify

85

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Emerging Community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not compromise this objective.

1.93 MB-066 Seven-storey developments in low density residential housing areas are not supported.




For development sites located in the Community facilities zone (Community purposes zone precinct, Health care purposes zone precinct and Major health care zone precinct),


Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood

86

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Specialised centre zone (Major education and research facility zone precinct) or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.





plan does not specify building height.

87

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.94 MB-068 A08 (a) and (b) need to be read in conjunction to ascertain the maximum building height on a site. Current wording does not consider the height provided for under (b) could be greater than that provided for under (a). It is considered that these points should be combined to ensure consistency of application. Recommendation: Insert a new point (a) as follows: "the maximum building height specified in Table 9.3.18.3.B and applicable building height transitions as specified in Table 9.3.18.3.C and in a neighbourhood plan where applicable.

City Plan, part 1.3.3 Punctuation provides the following guidance on how to read the City Plan. Refer to (1) which states: A word followed by ';' or ‘, and’ is considered to be 'and'.

No change

1.95 MB-076 There has been an application by developers to destroy heritage place in our suburb to create four high-rise apartment blocks.

Allowing code assessment high-rise in two-storey low rise high-rise will negatively affect many of the leafy suburbs.

In low rise suburbs extra height and density changes the nature of the suburb and a huge building will impact on privacy, traffic, aesthetic value, light, breeze and noise.

The current City Plan provisions for the Heritage overlay remain unchanged in the amendment package. Development on a heritage place triggering assessment against the Heritage overlay code will still be required to demonstrate the development does not detract from the heritage significance of the heritage place.





88

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.







While building heights in some locations have increased to meet the growing need for retirement and aged care facilities, the draft code has increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better


89

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.


1.96 MB-080 Supports the two-storey height increases in MDR and HDR.

Recommends the Retirement and residential care facility code and related levels of assessment for code assessment be amended to support additional height increases.

MDR: 7 storeys or the building height specified in a relevant neighbourhood plan plus two storeys (i.e. extend height bonus in neighbourhood plans)

HDR: If no greater than 10 storeys in the Up to 8 storeys zone precinct and 17 storeys in the Up to 15 storeys zone precinct’, or the building height specified in a relevant neighbourhood plan plus two storeys, whichever is the greatest (i.e. extend height bonus in neighbourhood plans).

Major Centre: If no greater than 12 storeys, or the building height specified in a relevant neighbourhood plan plus two storeys, whichever is the greatest.

District Centre: If no greater than six storeys in the






90

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


District zone precinct and seven storeys in the Corridor zone precinct, or the building height specified in a relevant neighbourhood plan plus two storeys, whichever is the greatest

Mixed use zone, if no greater than seven storeys in the Inner city zone precinct, seven storeys in the Centre frame zone precinct and six storeys in the Corridor zone precinct, or the building height specified in a relevant neighbourhood plan plus two storeys, whichever is the greatest.

Recommends removal of the 24 m maximum height in the Medium density residential zone and the height allowance for zones in the Centres zones category or Mixed use zone be amended to state:

Height as specified in the Centre or Mixed Use code; or Height as specified in the Centre or Mixed Use code plus

2 storeys where in the District Centre Zone, Major Centre Zone or Mixed Use Zone.

Supports overall outcome (k) of the code and the intent to support greater building heights on larger sites where impacts can be mitigated through transitioning of height.








91

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.



1.97 MB-083 High-rise living does not suit older people with complex needs and low rise facilities offer domestic environments that older individuals want.

Additional building height where adjacent to Low density or Character residential zones is not supported. The maximum building height for Community facilities zoned land should be the same as the suburb/district in which it’s located.

Supports avoiding unacceptable impacts arising from building of particular heights on residents in the development or neighbouring people.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for minimum site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.





92

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.





While building heights in some locations have increased to meet the growing need for retirement and aged care facilities, the draft code has increased standards for allowable setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a better balance of built form, open space and visual amenity.


building height.

1.98 MB-086 The increase to building heights is not supported. The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new

Amend the Retirement and residential care

93

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements. The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for allowable site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.



Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater and adjoining or opposite a site in the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height has been reduced to two

facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone.


94

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


storeys; and




1.99 MB-087 Supports the additional two storeys within the Medium and High density residential zones.


1.100 MB-088 Concerned with maximum building height on sites in the Community facilities zone, Specialised centre zone and Emerging community zone where the sites are 7,000 m2 or greater.


Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to reduce the allowable building height for other zones

95

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


The proposed amendments for the additional maximum building height of four storeys than the surrounding area particularly in the Low density residential zone are not supported.

The maximum height for a Low density residential of 9.5m, plus four storeys is excessively high in the middle of a low density area. The height limit adjacent to a low density area should be limited to 9.5m.

The proposed height will cause problems with amenity, shadowing, loss of breeze and views.

careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.

The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for allowable site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.




Where on a site 7,000 m2 or greater in any other situation, the allowable additional height will continue to

adjoining the Low density residential zone, Character residential zone or Emerging community zone.


96

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


be four storeys.



1.101 MB-089 Objection to six to seven-storey retirement and aged care developments on land adjacent or across from Low density residential housing areas.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards


97

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


for allowable site area, setbacks, building transitions, building separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.







98

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.



1.102 MB-090 Support for specific increases in height, however incentivising aged care facilities above five storeys is impractical as is current operator models for aged care developments in urban areas are limited to two to five storeys.

Thank you for support.

The lowered level of assessment also facilitates the co-location of retirement and residential care facilities on the same site and enables the transition of residents from retirement to a residential care facility within the same location. Increased allowable heights also facilitates the vertical integration of these facilities.

No change

1.103 MB-091 The draft Code specifies maximum building height in storeys and metres for the Low density residential, Character residential, Low-medium density residential and Medium density residential zones. The draft Code also specifies a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.7 m, however it is typical that floor to ceiling heights in retirement and residential care facilities will exceed this to accommodate new and additional technology and servicing requirements.

On the basis that general community perception of building height is defined by the number of storeys rather than metres, and that higher floor to ceiling heights are required,

Floor-to-ceiling heights have been included to facilitate desired amenity outcomes for residents such as reducing the need for mechanical heating, cooling and lighting by ensuring access to sunlight and natural heating, cooling and ventilation. Council has not set floor to floor heights acknowledging the need to provide overhead services such as air-conditioning and medical equipment.

Including building heights in both storeys and metres for Low density residential, low-medium density residential and medium density residential zones are included to ensure the character and built form of the localities is preserved.

No change

99

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


as well as encouraged, it is recommended that reference to metres as a maximum building height requirement be deleted.

1.104 MB-092 Objection to development proposal at 272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum (Nazareth House), including permitting retirement and aged care developments to build an extra four storeys in effect permitting seven-storey buildings.

Nazareth House at 272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum North, is subject to existing approvals associated with application no. A003214281. Details of this application is available on Council’s PD Online website. Under this proposed amendment, a site in the Community facilities (Health care purposes) zone and adjoining Low density residential zone area (such as the Nazareth House site), would have an allowable building height of four storeys.

No change

1.105 MB-093 Objection to building heights more than three storeys high and increasing building heights for retirement facilities and aged care facilities to a Medium and High density residential zone.

Retirement facilities and aged care facilities should live in well serviced areas.

Does not support aged care retirement facilities looking like hospitals and jails and their location in medium to high density and what would happen in a fire.




Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility

100

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.








and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

101

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.



It is mandatory requirement under Queensland building laws for all new buildings to have sufficient fire safety systems installed to ensure the safe evacuation of occupants in the event of a fire emergency. These systems will need to be assessed and approved by a private building certifier before the building is constructed and then inspected by Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES) before the building is allowed to be used or occupied. In addition to these requirements, QFES will also ensure that building owners have in place an ‘up to date’ fire and evacuation plan for the building

1.106 MB-094 Objection to any building height uplift to the Community facilities zone, particularly where adjacent to Low density residential or Character residential zones, and the maximum building height for this zone should be capped at two storeys.


The new provisions, including a new Retirement and residential care code, ensure that development does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties. This includes specific provisions that increase the standards for site area, setbacks, building transitions, building.


102

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, to provide a quality built form and visual amenity.






Council has amended the provisions to allow for neighbourhood plans to override the building heights for sites


103

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


located in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone where a specific precinct varies the height. An additional two storeys will continue to be supported in the Medium density residential zone or High density residential zone areas, where a neighbourhood plan does not specify a building height.

1.107 MB-095 Concerns with allowing higher developments than currently allowed within Local plan areas such as Manly, which is limited to 10.5 m. Clarification is required for the four-storey uplift in an area currently restricted to a height of 10.5 m, whereas only a two-storey uplift is given to sites in 5, 8 and 15-storey zones.

The proposed amendments to allow for a two-storey uplift in an eight-storey zone (ie.an additional 35%) or in the 15-storey area (an additional 13%) is less perceptible compared to the 100% uplift in a two-storey neighbourhood. The proposed maximum uplift of four storeys on sites with an area greater than 7,000 m2 is unreasonable, unwarranted and not supported.

Objects to building height uplift in the Community facilities zone where adjacent to low density or character residential zones, the maximum building height should be capped no greater than the maximum acceptable outcome for building height on the adjoining sites (i.e. two storeys in a






Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas,

104

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


two-storey neighbourhood) zone precinct) or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.





where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

1.108 MB-096 The use of building height as an incentive to establish Retirement facilities and Residential care facilities is supported. Although it’s not the main intention, this policy


105

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


also encourages other supported fundamental planning outcomes supported. For example, it will allow for more intense development within well serviced areas of the city.

1.109 MB-012 Support high-rise and other community services attached. Thank you for your support. No change

1.110 MB-038 Current building restrictions protect residents from building that reduce lifestyle changes and devalue properties. Buildings in residential areas without the current controls is not supported.




For development sites located in the Community facilities zone (Community purposes zone precinct, Health care purposes zone precinct and Major health care zone precinct),


Amend Tables of Assessment allowable building height for a Residential care facility and Retirement facility to support two additional storeys for sites in Medium density zone and High density residential zone areas,

106

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Specialised centre zone (Major education and research facility zone precinct) or Emerging community zone, the allowable additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.





where a neighbourhood plan does not specify building height.

107

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.111 MB-048 Not supportive of high-rises and the use of lifts in the case of a fire.

It is mandatory requirement under Queensland building laws for all new buildings to have sufficient fire safety systems installed to ensure the safe evacuation of occupants in the event of a fire emergency. These systems will need to be assessed and approved by a private building certifier before the building is constructed and then inspected by Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES) before the building is allowed to be used or occupied. In addition to these requirements, QFES will also ensure that building owners have in place an ‘up to date’ fire and evacuation plan for the building.

No change

1.112 MB-055 Supports greater weight on local neighbourhood plans.

Supports development for increased heights and commercial uses.

Supports undertaking public notification and on the opportunity to submit on proposed neighbourhood plans.




108

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.




1.113 MB-093 Not supportive of medium and high densities in the case of a fire.

Objection to development proposal at 162 Oceana Terrace, Lota, as the development application proposes high-rise apartments, and is not near any key services and without infrastructure in place.

It is mandatory requirement under Queensland building laws for all new buildings to have sufficient fire safety systems installed to ensure the safe evacuation of occupants in the event of a fire emergency. These systems will need to be assessed and approved by a private building certifier before the building is constructed and then inspected by Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES) before the building is allowed to be used or occupied. In addition to these requirements, QFES will also ensure that building owners have in place an ‘up to date’ fire and evacuation plan for the building.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed

No change

109

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in the City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s PD Online website to monitor the progress of this development application. Community concerns in relation to this application will be carefully considered as part of the decision on the application.

5.5 Building height transitions

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.114 MB-008

MB-017

MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-039

MB-040

Building height transition provisions are inadequate, and should provide greater depth and less height.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. While standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities, other standards have been adjusted to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting compared to the current City Plan standards, to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Requirements for building height transitions are considered appropriate having regard to

No change

110

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


other standards that have also been adjusted.

1.115 MB-008

MB-011

MB-014

MB-015

MB-029

MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

MB-076

MB-095

Building height transitions should be made more stringent to reflect allotment configuration within Low density residential zones by ensuring only one additional storey is permissible within 20 m of a common boundary, only two storeys permissible within 40 m of a common boundary, and only one additional storey is permissible within 20 m of a front boundary, and only two additional storeys are permissible within 20 m of a front boundary.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. While standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities, other standards have been adjusted to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting compared to the current City Plan standards, to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Requirements for building height transitions are considered appropriate having regard to other standards that have also been adjusted.

No change

1.116 MB-014

MB-015

MB-029

MB-047

Considers the City Plan zones and their supported building heights provide a transition of building heights so that adjoining areas contain compatible built forms.

Conversely, it is noted the proposed provisions for the Community facilities zone for sites exceeding 7,000 m2

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. While standards in relation to height have been increased as

No change

111

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-060

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

would support six storey developments to occur within 20 m of two-storey dwelling houses.

Recommends alternate transition elements beyond the existing requirements should be considered for the Community facilities zone.

part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities, other standards have been adjusted to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting compared to the current City Plan standards, to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Requirements for building height transitions are considered appropriate having regard to other standards that have also been adjusted.

Please also note, for development sites located in the Community facilities zone (Community purposes zone precinct, Health care purposes zone precinct and Major health care zone precinct), Specialised centre zone (Major education and research facility zone precinct) or Emerging Community Zone, the allowable additional height for a retirement facility or residential care facility has been amended as follows.



1.117 MB-081 Notes that Council is seeking to achieve stepped built form As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and No change

112

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


outcomes as a transition between adjoining lower scale development. While this type of outcome can be achieved for commercial buildings at a smaller scale it is not suited to retirement or residential care facilities as the profile and servicing is consistent over all floors and therefore cannot be stepped. Recommends that the stepped built form outcome is removed as a requirement for Low density residential and Medium density residential zones.

residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks/separation and building height transitions have been reviewed to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. The acceptable outcomes for such standards simply define the allowable permitted envelope where a building may occur without adversely impacting on surrounding properties or the public realm. This does not necessarily define the building form and applicants may require a design outcome that does not entirely fill the permitted building envelope due to other design requirements such as standard floor plate designs for each floor level rather than a tiered or stepped approach.

1.118 MB-096 Table 9.3.18.3C—Building height transitions could raise unintended negative consequences for the built form of local areas. The table allows for taller buildings in relation to setback from common boundaries. It is possible these substantial setbacks could result in tall buildings surrounded by large undeveloped private areas. Although this may not seem as though it is a poor outcome, it may not be the best outcome considering the same density, or greater density, could be achieved from lower rise buildings with smaller setbacks.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. While standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities, other standards have been adjusted to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting compared to the current City Plan standards, to provide a better balance of

No change

113

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


built form and open space overall. Open space buffers to taller buildings created by setbacks and building separation create opportunities to provide landscaping and deep planting for improved amenity outcomes for residents and surrounding properties. Setbacks and building separation standards are less at lower storeys and for small-scale buildings.

1.119 MB-098 Despite the code’s intention to prioritise good design, commercial imperatives will inevitably take priority and even in Medium density residential zones building height transitions may be far from neighbourly (e.g. the TriCare application on Seven Oaks Street, Taringa, where the proposed towers overshadow and deny sunlight and breezes to the neighbouring five-storey apartments on Swann Road).

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. While standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities, other standards have been adjusted to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for setbacks, building transitions and separation, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

It is important to note the proposed amendments are not in effect at this stage and any existing development applications will be assessed on their merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged.

No change

114

5.6 Setbacks and building separation requirements

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.

Submission Summary Response Amendments to Package

Setbacks

1.120 MB-051 Recommends reviewing boundary setbacks, building separation requirements and siting requirements for car parking, to normalise the setbacks over height to remove the 'wedding cake' diagram for buildings. This is not appropriate pragmatically in practice relative to these types of uses. Detailed recommended changes to the tables for these standards in the draft code are provided.

As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks and separation (among others) have been reviewed to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. The acceptable outcomes for boundary setbacks and building separation simply define the allowable permitted envelope where a building may occur without adversely impacting on surrounding properties or the public realm. This does not necessarily define the building form and applicants may require a design outcome that does not entirely fill the permitted building envelope due to other design requirements such as standard floor plate designs for each floor level rather than a tiered approach.

No change

1.121 MB-080 Recommends that setbacks in PO8/AO8 in the Retirement and residential care facility code be amended to be in accordance with the Multiple dwelling code.

As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks and separation (among others) have been reviewed to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface

No change

115

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


with the public realm are more carefully considered. Building height transitions assist in avoiding impacts arising from height increases but have been considered together with standards for side boundary setbacks, to ensure that complementary standards are contained in the new code.

1.122 MB-080 Recommends that PO8/AO8 in the Retirement and residential care facility code be amended to include provisions with respect to front setbacks to secondary frontages in accordance with the Multiple dwelling code.

As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks and separation (among others) have been reviewed to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. The front setback standards in the new code ensure that there is an appropriate balance of built form and open space.

No change

1.123 MB-080 Recommends that setbacks in PO8/AO8 in the Retirement and residential care facility code for open car parking at ground level to a side boundary be amended to 1 m consistent with the Multiple dwelling code.

As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks and separation (among others) have been reviewed to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. Increased car parking setbacks also facilitate a better balance of built form, hardstand and open space, allowing additional space for deep planting.

No change

116

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.124 MB-087 Recommends that a note be added to Table 9.3.18.3.D that where balconies are not appropriate, the setback can still be as per the balcony requirements where articulation and design outcomes are met. In some high care facilities, the provision of open balconies to rooms is not appropriate for safety reasons and penalises the development potential and footprint of such facilities.

Boundary setbacks are measured to the edge of the balcony or balustrading, whichever is closer to the boundary as noted under Table 9.3.18.3.D. Therefore, there are no relaxed setback standards applicable to balconies compared to a building wall and no disadvantage to the permitted building envelope in the case where balconies are not provided in appropriate circumstances.

No change

1.125 MB-090 Concerns raised about proposed increases in minimum setbacks, open space requirements and minimum lot size. These changes are considered to reduce site design and development flexibility, reducing the scope for innovative performance-based solutions.

As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks, open space and lot size (among others) have been reviewed to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm is more carefully considered.

No change

Building Separation Distance

1.126 MB-079 The Multiple Dwelling Code includes the ability to offset balconies and habitable rooms to be outside of the cone of vision (A08.1 of Multiple Dwelling Code). It is considered that this same ability to offset should be provided to RV and RACF uses, as these uses are residential type developments that include a mix of habitable and non-habitable spaces.

Furthermore, given the nature of RACF where residents are high care patients, often fully dependant on assistance by others, it is considered that the matters of privacy are generally limited to RV uses and as such RACF could be

Privacy conflicts are equally relevant to residential care facilities as they are to retirement facilities and the code appropriately deals with screening for both uses.

It is possible to provide a screening solution to achieve the benefits of privacy whilst still allowing penetration of natural light. It is important to recognise that screening is only required where privacy conflicts cannot be avoided by building separation and setbacks alone. Where screening is required in relevant circumstances, it must provide a privacy outcome and solutions that compromise this outcome (for all

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to remove sill height requirements for residential care facilities and allow increased flexibility for privacy solutions including offsetting balconies and habitable

117

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


excluded from these specific design provisions.

On the same basis it is requested that the transparency of privacy screening be increased from 25% to at least 50% for RACF developments, with many of the residents within these facilities being bed-bound and as a result the only natural light available is that filtered through bedroom windows. By the same token, it is requested that the minimum sill height be lowered to 1.2 m for RACF to cater for residents who are wheelchair bound.

residents and levels of care that may occupy the space) defeat the purpose.

AO9.3 of the code is amended to support outcomes that allow outlook for residents in a residential care facility whilst maintaining the privacy of adjoining residential uses.

rooms.

1.127 MB-080 Recommends that Table 9.3.14.3.F be updated to be consistent with the Multiple dwelling code.

As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks and separation (among others) have been reviewed to ensure the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. The proposed building separation requirements have been specifically drafted in consideration with other varied standards in the new code.

No change

5.7 Building length and articulation

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.128 MB-008 Building length of up to 90 m is inappropriate near low The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes Amend the Retirement

118

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-011

MB-017

MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-039

MB-040

density housing.

Building length should be reduced where visible from the Low density residential zone or the Character residential zone.

Reducing the minimum length before requiring substantial articulation on buildings to 10 m where adjacent or opposite the Low density residential zone or the Character residential zone.

a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. While allowable building length for a residential care facility has been increased from 30 m to 60 m in the Low density residential, Character residential and Low-medium density residential zones, and from 50 m to 90 m in other zones, requirements for substantial articulation every 15 m has been strengthened.

Furthermore, the draft code contains increase standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

Council has revised provisions for building articulation and separation to clarify and strengthen design requirements for building articulation to ensure that the appearance of building bulk is in keeping with the form and character of the area and facilitate proposed allowable building lengths.

and residential care facility code, to clarify and strengthen design requirements for building articulation.

1.129 MB-014

MB-015

A building length of 50 m for Retirement facilities and 90 m for Residential care facilities, where adjacent or opposite a Low density residential zone, will result in an overbearing bulk in a neighbourhood where properties have a general width of 15 m. This built form outcome is not consistent with the character of the area.

Retirement facility and a Residential care facility should have the same building length requirements, as there is no

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. The larger building length allowed for Residential care facilities meets their operational needs and efficiencies of providing common service areas/facilities to number of aged care beds/rooms on one level. While allowable building length for

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code, to clarify and strengthen design requirements for building articulation

119

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


discernible difference between the uses when viewed from an adjacent property or the street.

Development adjacent to lower density zones should only have a maximum building length commensurate with the provisions provided within the Multiple dwelling code and the Centre and mixed use code.

Building length should be reduced to 30 m where visible from the Low density residential zone or the Character residential zone.

The proposed amendment to enable development to provide substantial articulation once every 15 m has the potential to be overbearing in building bulk, where properties have a general width of 15 m. Development building length are to be commensurate with the provisions within the current Centre or mixed use code for AO12.2 stating to provide modulation and articulation with variation in the wall and roof plane every 10 m.

a residential care facility has been increased from 30 m to 60 m in the Low density residential, Character residential and Low-medium density residential zones, and from 50 m to 90 m in other zones, requirements for substantial articulation every 15 m have been strengthened. Furthermore, the draft code contains increase standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.


1.130 MB-029

MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-061

MB-067

A building length of 50 m for retirement facilities and 90 m for residential care facilities, where adjacent or opposite a Low density residential zone, will result in an overbearing bulk in a neighbourhood where properties have a general width of 15 m. This built form outcome is not consistent with the character of the area.

Retirement facility and a residential care facility should have the same building length requirements, as there is no discernible difference between the uses when viewed from

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. The larger building length allowed for Residential care facilities meets their operational needs and efficiencies of providing common service areas/facilities to number of aged care beds/rooms on one level. While allowable building length for a residential care facility has been increased from 30 m to 60 m in the Low density residential, Character residential and


120

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-070

MB-074

an adjacent property or the street.

Development adjacent to lower density zones should only have a maximum building length commensurate with the provisions provided within the Multiple dwelling code and the Centre and mixed use code.


The proposed amendment to enable development to provide substantial articulation once every 15 m has the potential to be overbearing in building bulk, where properties have a general width of 15 m. Development building length are to be commensurate with the provisions within the current Centre and mixed use code for AO12.2 stating to provide modulation and articulation with variation in the wall and roof plane every 10 m.

Low-medium density residential zones, and from 50 m to 90 m in other zones, requirements for substantial articulation every 15 m have been strengthened. Furthermore, the draft code contains increase standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.


1.131 MB-047 Objection to a 90 m long building occurring adjacent to a two-storey house.

Acceptable outcome AO12.1 enables retirement facilities to have a maximum building length of 50 m, and Residential care facilities to have a maximum building length of 90 m where located within the Community facilities zone, and when adjacent to or opposite the Low density residential zone. Considers this has the potential to produce an overbearing building bulk in a neighbourhood where properties have a general width of 15 m.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. The larger building length allowed for Residential care facilities meets their operational needs and efficiencies of providing common service areas/facilities to number of aged care beds/rooms on one level. While allowable building length for a residential care facility has been increased from 30 m to 60 m in the Low density residential, Character residential and Low-medium density residential zones, and from 50 m to


121

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Using 162 Oceana Terrace as an example, the site is sited opposite the Low density residential zone, where the predominant form is of buildings with a maximum width of 12 m on properties with widths of 15 m. Considers enabling a building to have a width of 90 m directly opposite these properties would present a building form that is nowhere near to being consistent with the character of the area.

Considers there is no discernible difference from a Retirement facility and a residential care facility when viewed from an adjacent property or the street. The two uses should have the same building length requirements.

Considers that a development adjacent to or visible from lower density zones should only be afforded a maximum building length commensurate with the provisions provided within the current wording of the Multiple dwelling code and the Centre and mixed use code.

Detailed recommendations are provided for changes to table 9.3.18.3.H and AO12.2.

Supports building length for a retirement facility of 50 m, and residential care facility 90 m for ‘any other zone’ and where not visible from the Low density, Character residential and Low-medium density residential zones.

90 m in other zones, requirements for substantial articulation every 15 m have been strengthened. Furthermore, the draft code contains increase standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.


1.132 MB-051 Recommend increasing the building length for Retirement facilities to 60 m, as 30 m is not practical.

Retirement facilities generally have a built form consistent with multiple dwellings. The proposed building length standards of 30 m in the Low density residential, Character residential, Low-medium density residential zones and 50 m in

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code, to clarify and strengthen design

122

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


any other zone are generally consistent AO15.1 and AO15.2 of the current multiple dwelling code in City Plan and are considered appropriate on this basis having regard to development outcomes that are sensitive to the scale and density of development occurring in surrounding areas.


requirements for building articulation

1.133 MB-060 Building length of up to 90 m is inappropriate near low density housing.

Retirement facility and a Residential care facility should have the same building length requirements, as there is no discernible difference between the uses when viewed from an adjacent property or the street.


The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. The larger building length allowed for Residential care facilities meets their operational needs and efficiencies of providing common service areas/facilities to number of aged care beds/rooms on one level. While allowable building length for a residential care facility has been increased from 30 m to 60 m in the Low density residential, Character residential and Low-medium density residential zones, and from 50 m to 90 m in other zones, requirements for substantial articulation every 15 m have been strengthened. Furthermore, the draft code contains increase standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to


123

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.


1.134 MB-076 Development within the Communities facilities zone must remain sensitive to the neighbourhoods in which they are located. Reducing the minimum length before requiring substantial articulation on buildings to 10 m where adjacent or opposite the Low density residential zone or the Character residential zone is recommended.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. While allowable building length for a residential care facility has been increased from 30 m to 60 m in the Low density residential, Character residential and Low-medium density residential zones, and from 50 m to 90 m in other zones, requirements for substantial articulation every 15 m have been strengthened.

Furthermore, the draft code contains increase standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.



124

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.135 MB-090 Supports provisions for additional wall length on the boundary.


1.136 MB-095 Development within the Manly CBD must remain sensitive to the neighbourhood in which it is located. Recommends reducing the permissible building length to 30 m where visible from the Low density residential zone or the Character residential zone.

The proposed changes to building height for residential care and retirement facilities do not apply to development in the Manly harbour village precinct, where an allowable building height of 10.5 m prevails, as specified in the Wynnum—Manly neighbourhood plan.

Furthermore, the draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. The larger building length allowed for Residential care facilities meets their operational needs and efficiencies of providing common service areas/facilities to number of aged care beds/rooms on one level. While allowable building length for a residential care facility has been increased from 30 m to 60 m in the Low density residential, Character residential and Low-medium density residential zones, and from 50 m to 90 m in other zones, requirements for substantial articulation every 15 m have been strengthened. Furthermore, the draft code contains increase standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

Council has revised provisions for building articulation and separation to clarify and strengthen design requirements for


125

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


building articulation to ensure that the appearance of building bulk is in keeping with the form and character of the area and facilitate proposed allowable building lengths.

5.8 Site cover

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.137 MB-008

MB-011

MB-017

MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-039

MB-040

The proposed allowable site cover of 50% is greater than the anticipated for Multiple dwellings in higher density areas (45%) and is inappropriate where near low density housing.

A site cover of 50% applicable in ‘all other zones’ other than the High density residential zone is part of incentives to support the community need for residential care facilities and retirement facilities. Although the site coverage is five per cent greater than that identified in the Multiple dwelling code, it is important to acknowledge the proposed Retirement and residential care facility code also contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

No change

1.138 MB-014

MB-015

MB-029

The proposed amendments enable for the Community facilities zone adjacent to Low density residential zoning as stated in AO7 to achieve 50% site cover, although the Multiple dwelling code achieves a maximum coverage of

A site cover of 50% applicable in ‘all other zones’ other than the High density residential zone is part of incentives to support the community need for residential care facilities and retirement facilities. Although the site coverage is five per

No change

126

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-076

MB-080

MB-095

45%. The proposed amendments should be reduced to 45% to maintain consistency throughout City Plan.

cent greater than that identified in the Multiple dwelling code, it is important to acknowledge the proposed Retirement and residential care facility code also contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

1.139 MB-047

MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

The proposed site cover of 45% for the High density residential zone and 50% for any other zone is not supported. Recommends the proposed acceptable outcome AO7 be amended to 40% in the High density residential zone and 45% for any other zone.

A site cover standard that is 5% greater than the standards in the Multiple dwelling code is part of incentives to support the community need for residential care facilities and retirement facilities. Although the site coverage is 5% greater than that identified in the Multiple dwelling code, it is important to acknowledge the proposed Retirement and residential care facility code also contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

No change

1.140 MB-058 Support proposed increase in site cover, as an incentive for development of Retirement and residential care facilities.


1.141 MB-079 The maximum site cover for development within the High-density residential zone has been reduced from 50% to 45% (as per A07 of RRCFC). It is not considered in keeping with the overall intent of Council to provide for planning framework that supports the growth of RV and RACF in

The allowable site cover requirement for locations in the High density residential zone in the draft Retirement and residential care facility code has actually been increased by 5% compared to the current City Plan standards. The existing Multiple dwelling code identifies an allowable site cover of

No change

127

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Brisbane by reducing the overall site cover where within the High density residential zone. As such, it is suggested that the status quo for site cover within the High density residential zone be maintained at 50%.

It should also be acknowledged that Residential care facilities, by their operational model, have common infrastructure on each floor (i.e. nurses station, dining room, activity rooms, medication rooms etc.) that can challenge site cover requirements. While the amendments increase building heights, it does not provide scope to simply increase yield. We would recommend that due to the operational requirements of a residential care facility the acceptable outcome for site cover in the High density residential zone should be increased to 50%.

40% in AO14 compared to an allowable 45% in AO7 of the draft code. A 5% site cover increase is considered reasonable to meet operational needs given proposed heights supported in the High density residential zone. Heights will still be relevant to yield regardless of standard layout models.

1.142 MB-090 Supports increased site cover.

Objection to increase in minimum lot size from 600 m2 to 800 m2 in the Low-medium density residential zone.

Support for increased site cover noted.

The standard for lot size in any other zone has been increased having regard to the higher intensity of development being supported in relation to height and site cover increases. This ensures that the site area is sufficient to accommodate a development layout that does not compromise outcomes in relation to setbacks/building separation, provision of adequate car parking, provision of communal/private open space and deep planting etc. A development may be able to demonstrate a smaller site area does not compromise these outcomes where addressing the corresponding performance outcome.

No change

128

5.9 Built form, building design, appearance and bulk

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.143 MB-010 Development is not opposed, provided that proposals are reviewed by people who understand the impact on existing ratepayers and the culture of the area. Concern that there seems to be little regard for streetscape, the setting, the style of building, the boundaries, heights, impact on light and breeze, privacy etc. Some of the developments allowed to proceed are unsuitable.

The proposed retirement and residential care facility code that forms part of the proposed amendments contains a rigorous set of standards in relation to the matters mentioned to ensure that a development application can be properly assessed in relation to its surrounding context. The standards contained the draft code have been tailored to specifically ensure high quality design and living environments for residents of proposed retirement and residential care facilities without adversely impacting on the surrounding community. In particular, standards in the draft code in relation to aspects such as building setbacks, building separation distances, deep planting requirements and communal open space have been increased when compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space for improved amenity outcomes.

No change

1.144 MB-014

MB-015

MB-029

The assessment benchmarks within the amendments package anticipate development in the Community facilities zone would take the following form:

A maximum building height of six storeys where on a lot greater than 7,000 m², including;

o Up to three storeys within 10 m of the side boundary;

o Update to four storeys within 20 m of the side boundary;

The standards contained the draft code have been tailored to specifically ensure high quality design and living environments for residents of proposed retirement and residential care facilities without adversely impacting on the surrounding community. In particular, standards in the draft code in relation to aspects such as building setbacks, building separation distances, deep planting requirements and communal open space have been increased when compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space for improved amenity outcomes.

No change

129

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


o Up to four storeys within 10 m of the front boundary;

o Up to six storeys elsewhere;

Site cover of 50%; Maximum building lengths of 60 m for Retirement

facilities and 90 m for Residential care facilities; Be accompanied by food and drink outlets totalling

250 m² of GFA; and Providing vehicle parking in accordance with the

Transport, access, parking and servicing code.

A development described above would not be consistent with overall outcome (4)(i)(iii) of the Community facilities zone code, as the development is not of a scale, height and bulk that provides a high level of amenity (‘amenity’ being defined by City Plan, and including that the development must ensure a high level of light, daylight, breeze and shade, and freedom from hazard or risk – which it is devoid of achieving, to a high level, given the impacts that it creates on the locality). Similarly, the development is grossly inconsistent with overall outcome (4)(i)(iv) of the Community facilities code, as the development is not consistent with the character of the area.

These revised standards are considered to support achievement of the overall outcomes of the Community facilities zone code to ensure that development is consistent with the character of the area and result in high amenity outcomes.

1.145 MB-032 The current and proposed Aged care codes do not deliver building designs that are best practice to enhance the health and the well-being of aged care citizens.

The standards contained the draft code have been tailored to specifically ensure high quality design and living environments for residents of proposed retirement and residential care

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to refer to

130

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


facilities without adversely impacting on the surrounding community. In particular, standards in the draft code in relation to aspects such as building setbacks, building separation distances, deep planting requirements and communal open space have been increased when compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space for improved amenity outcomes.

Council is also providing infrastructure charges reductions for eligible residential care and/or retirement facilities that demonstrate design excellence and the creation of high quality living environments. Generally, this means that compliance with the relevant provisions of City Plan is required, including compliance with the applicable acceptable outcomes (e.g. regarding boundary setbacks and car parking provision), with some performance outcomes also being allowed. Secondary to compliance with the provisions of City Plan, Council may favourably consider design elements which demonstrate an improvement on meeting acceptable outcomes such as provision of private open space, responding to Brisbane’s subtropical climate and lifestyle, ease of access to transport and other services or encouraging opportunities for social and community integration.

Furthermore, the Retirement and residential care facility code has been amended to refer to best practice design guidelines, including Council’s New World City Design Guide - Buildings that Breathe and the Livable Housing Australia’s Livable Housing Design Guidelines.

best practice design guidelines.

131

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.146 MB-051 Solid balustrading is an important tool in securing privacy for lower floors. Recommends that AO9.1 of the Retirement and residential care code be reviewed to allow 100% solid balustrade at level 1 above ground.

Solid balustrading is an important tool in securing privacy for lower floors. Recommends that AO9.1 of the Retirement and residential care code be reviewed to allow 100% solid balustrade at level 1 above ground.

AO9.1 seeks to address the visual impacts of solid balustrading by limiting the extent. This allow the strategic placement of solid balustrades for privacy control, whilst avoiding the adverse impacts of continuous solid balustrading. Solid balustrading is not limited where facing a side boundary in most circumstances.

No change

1.147 MB-051 Recommend reviewing provisions for screening and overlooking of dwelling houses, set out in AO9.3 of the Retirement and residential care code, to only apply to Retirement facilities. Screening of this nature is not suitable for Residential care facilities as it blocks views for residents who spend a high proportion of time in bed.

The screening requirements apply in circumstances where there is a risk of privacy conflicts such as where the development does not meet building separation requirements and habitable rooms face one another. These circumstances can’t always be avoided and therefore where there are privacy conflicts screening measures are necessary (i.e. residents can’t have both a direct outlook to adjoining dwellings and privacy). There are screening options available that provide privacy whilst still allowing natural light.

No change

1.148 MB-051 The podium diagrams, set out in AO15 of the Retirement and residential care code, do not work functionally for these types of buildings, as there is no requirement for a deep built to boundary floor plate for the first three floors. Recommends deletion of AO15.

The intent of the acceptable outcome is to identify a solution that can reduce the appearance of building bulk for taller buildings and help improve the interface with the street. These outcomes are reflected in PO15. It may be possible that in different site contexts, an alternate building form can demonstrate these outcomes in PO15 and the acceptable outcome does not prevent this.

No change

1.149 MB-051 Recommends rewording AO16 of the Retirement and residential care facility code to ‘includes interesting forms

Comments noted. The solution suggested is quite specific in relation to desired outcomes for the design of building

No change

132

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


created through layering of balconies and screens to punctuate the roof line/ parapet or their features’.

rooftops and building caps to which the acceptable outcome relates. The intent of the acceptable outcome is to identify general outcomes that provide design guidance and it does not prevent a creative solution that can address the performance outcome.

1.150 MB-080 The Retirement and residential care facility code specifies under AO15 that development which has buildings over eight storeys contains a podium that is a maximum of three storeys. This does not facilitate alterative design solutions that do not include podium/tower form and reflects a requirement not currently present in the Multiple dwelling code. Recommends that PO15/AO15 be removed.

The intent of the acceptable outcome is to identify a solution that can reduce the appearance of building bulk for taller buildings and help improve the interface with the street. These outcomes are reflected in PO15. It may be possible that in different site contexts, an alternate building form can demonstrate these outcomes in PO15 and the acceptable outcome does not prevent this.

No change

1.151 MB-087 The proposed A014 does not state how many of the design elements are to be met to achieve the acceptable outcome. If not clarifies the proposed elements to be moved to the PO.

The acceptable outcome identifies options for different design elements that can help address the performance outcome. ‘A number’ is commonly defined as several or many and more than two. Accordingly, compliance with the acceptable outcome is a measurable determination and remains appropriate. The acceptable outcome is consistent with the Multiple dwelling code.

No change

1.152 MB-087 AO41 the proposed wording of 'high level' and 'interesting and varied' are subjective resulting to an unclear direction for the applicant e.g.:

b) addresses all elevations, with front, side and rear facades all displaying a high level of modulation and articulation.

d) provides an interesting and varied skyline and

The acceptable outcome provides guidance on design elements and outcomes that can help address the performance outcome and has a purpose in this way. It is accepted that compliance with the acceptable outcome relies on assessment against qualitative statements which is appropriate in relation to these design matters where a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach is inappropriate.

No change

133

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


silhouette

1.153 MB-093 Aged care retirement facilities should not look like hospitals and jails.

The proposed Retirement and residential care facility code contains a number of requirements to ensure that development does result in an institutional appearance. In particular, overall outcome (2)(c) states:

The retirement facility and/or residential care facility provides buildings that are designed to integrate with the character of the locality, present as non-institutionalised and provide home-like environments, a sense of belonging, privacy, independence, comfort and safety.

No change

1.154 MB-094 Supports Council’s review of provisions for residential care and retirement facilities in the light of Brisbane’s ageing population.

Recognises that the growth of the aged care industry can be supported but should occur in an appropriate form. In particular, urban development should be sensitive to the established built form of the neighbourhood subject to the proposal.

Considers that Council, with an intention to activate underutilised land within the city, has made gross oversights on the potential impacts the proposed development parameters may have existing neighbourhoods. This chiefly takes the form of new development for Retirement facilities and Residential care facilities within the Emerging community zone.


The Retirement and aged care amendments package to City Plan proposes to provide greater encouragement for new retirement and aged care facilities in preferred locations and where they meet best-practice design requirements.


The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance that meets the needs for retirement and


134

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


residential care facilities, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes.






135

5.10 Integrated development for residential care and retirement facilities

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.155 MB-059 Aged care facilities should be purpose built, not retirement facilities. Plenty of units are currently available for people who want to downsize. These units can be adjusted to accommodate resident needs as their health declines.

Brisbane’s current 70-plus population of 90,080 is projected to increase by 49% (or 43,759 persons) to 2027. That is an average increase of 3,647 persons that may require dedicated retirement or residential care accommodation and/or care and support services each year to 2027.

The amendments are intended to provide broader support for residential care and retirement facilities in a broader range of appropriate zones across the city, making it easier to deliver these forms of accommodation to help respond to need and place downward pressure on affordability.


There are key differences and advantages for older residents where accommodation is provided by a ‘retirement facility’ compared to a ‘multiple dwelling’ (or standard units) including the following.

The ability to incorporate additional onsite services and facilities to meet the needs of older residents including the following included in the definition of ‘retirement facility’:

“amenity and community facilities, a manager’s residence, health care and support services, preparing food and drink or staff accommodation”.

No change

136

The support for Care co-located uses (such as community use, club, food and drink outlet or shop) on the same site through the proposed amendments to facilitate higher levels of service and amenity as well as greater opportunity for social interaction between residents and wider community.

The compatibility with residential care facilities integrated on the same site and economies of scale this provides to support a diversity of accommodation options with different levels of care, which provides additional opportunities for ‘ageing in place’ by residents of those integrated facilities.

Facilitating integrated residential care and retirement facilities provides additional accommodation options to address community need notwithstanding there are options to receive home care assistance in other accommodation arrangements.

1.156 MB-030 Retirement units and residential care facilities are not considered the same in the general community, and should not be treated within a common code within the Planning Scheme.

The linking of retirement living, and residential care facilities is unjustified and appears to be an attempt to distort the general interpretation of what might be included in health care facilities.

A ‘residential care facility’ and ‘retirement facility’ are defined as separate uses.

Under City Plan, a retirement facility is currently subject to the Multiple dwelling code. This does not recognise the differences between a retirement facility and a multiple dwelling (standard units/apartments). A residential care facility is subject to the Residential care facility code. When in the Community facilities zone, both facilities are then also subject to the Community facilities code.

The creation of a single code will simplify the assessment process for applicants and ensure that the specific design considerations for such uses are addressed. The new single

No change

137

code identifies specific design requirements applicable to each individual use were appropriate.

1.157 MB-032 The proposed retirement and aged care amendments should not pair aged care facilities with retirement villages.

The proposed amendments have no logical basis for the justification of ‘ageing in place’ for combining retirement living and aged care.

Ageing people will retire at home, however the one in twelve who needs care will move into an aged care facility.

The amendments to combine retirement Living with aged-care facilities creates distortion aimed at demonstrating an urgent need that does not exist.

The proposed Aged care code should not deal with Retirement of assisted living arrangements. The aged care and retirement living should be dealt with under separate codes.

Aged care facilities (nursing homes) should be built as lowset stand-alone buildings holding up to 15 residents having easy access from their rooms to the outdoor landscaped areas to enjoy their freedom and benefit from the natural environment.

The proposed amendments to allow for aged care facilities and retirement villages are affecting existing residents, disrupting local services, pressure on existing infrastructure, and amenity.







The support for Care co-located uses (such as community

No change

138

use, club, food and drink outlet or shop) on the same site through the proposed amendments to facilitate higher levels of service and amenity as well as greater opportunity for social interaction between residents and wider community.



1.158 MB-041 Aged care codes should only apply when developers are building fit-for-purpose residential care facilities providing beds, not 'retirement' living units.

The proposed amendments do not make the appropriate distinction between 'retirement living' and 'aged care'.

A ‘residential care facility’ and ‘retirement facility’ are defined as separate uses.

Under City Plan, a retirement facility is currently subject to the Multiple dwelling code. This does not recognise the differences between a retirement facility and a multiple dwelling (standard units/apartments). A residential care facility is subject to the Residential care facility code. When in the Community facilities zone, both facilities are then also subject to the Community facilities code.

The creation of a single code will simplify the assessment process for applicants and ensure that the specific design considerations for such uses are addressed. The new single code identifies specific design requirements applicable to

No change

139

each individual use were appropriate.

1.159 MB-042 The Village Development Group for stage 2 providing accommodation with multiple bedrooms does not come under ‘care of aged’, this should not be referred as nursing care.


No change

1.160 MB-060 It is imperative that the planning codes guard against ‘gaming’ of the system where developers make applications with building components that are clearly not ‘specifically built and designed for older people’ and yet are accorded an assessment process that suggests they are.

Concerns how Council is justifying the treatment of retirement facilities similar to aged-care facilities.

The creation of a single code will simplify the assessment process for applicants and ensure that the specific design considerations for such uses are addressed. The new single code identifies specific design requirements applicable to each individual use were appropriate.

Where an applicant applies for a residential care or retirement facility, they are bound by the definition of those uses in City Plan. In particular, a retirement facility is defined as follows.

Retirement facility means a residential use of premises for:

a) accommodation for older members of the community, or retired persons, in independent living units or serviced units; or

b) amenity and community facilities, a manager’s residence, health care and support services, preparing food and drink or staff accommodation, if the use is ancillary to the use in paragraph (a).

Furthermore, the proposed Retirement and residential care facility code states: ‘A retirement facility is a development that operates under the Retirement Villages Act 1999.’

No change

140

1.161 MB-083 Considers the aged care amendments do not appropriately address the differences between retirement and aged care accommodation.






No change

141





1.162 MB-086 Objection to the approach for 'Aged care' definitions. The definitions for ‘retirement facility’ and ‘residential care facility’ are mandatory definitions required to be part of City Plan, consistent with Queensland Government legislation (i.e. the Planning Act and the Planning Regulation 2017). Council does not have discretion to vary these mandatory definitions determined by the Queensland Government.

No change

1.163 MB-090 Considers the proposed Retirement and residential care facility code, and definitions for these uses, do not adequately address a diversity of accommodation options

The definitions for ‘retirement facility’ and ‘residential care facility’ are mandatory definitions required to be part of City Plan, consistent with Queensland Government legislation (i.e.

No change

142

that are possible for older persons and overemphasises outcomes for integrated facilities.

It is also noted that with the exception of retirement villages (under the Retirement Village Act 1999), the exclusion of persons from the housing on the basis of age is prohibited by the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991. Also, residential care and retirement villages, in any event regularly accommodate disabled but not aged persons.

The definition of what may be covered by the amendment, and the Retirement and residential care facility code should be amended to reduce emphasis on integrated facilities specifically built and designed for older people.

The definition and code should be refined to reflect accessible housing that will suit and assist aged persons. This is largely already addressed in the definition in seeking Gold level of performance in the Livable Housing Australia’s Livable Housing Design Guidelines.

the Planning Act and the Planning Regulation 2017). Council does not have discretion to vary these mandatory definitions determined by the Queensland Government.

The note in the code provides assistance about how Council interprets when premises are providing accommodation specifically for ‘older members of the community’, or ‘retired persons’ consistent with the definition of ‘retirement facility’. This is only one example of a living arrangement considered to be consistent with the definition. The code and note do not vary the definition, and it is up to applicants to demonstrate consistency with the definition where applying for a ‘retirement facility’.

Accommodation that is not exclusively a retirement facility and which provides accommodation for people of different ages (other than a Residential care facility) will also require approval for other uses (e.g. a multiple dwelling). This is not a conflict with the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991, but simply an additional approval requirement.

5.11 Character

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.164 MB-092 Objection to the development proposal at 272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum (Nazareth House), on the basis of Impacts on the ambience of the locality:

increased density and units numbers in the area;

Nazareth House at 272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum North, is subject to existing approvals associated with application no. A003214281. Details of this application are available on Council’s Planning and Development Online website.

No change

143

overlooking existing houses resulting in privacy impacts that devalue properties;

traffic impacts and associated noise; and adverse amenity impacts from commercial uses on

residential areas.


1.165 MB-026 Objection to the proposed amendments and to a retirement village proposed for a heritage site (Lota).

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s Planning and Development Online website to monitor the progress of this development application.

No change

1.166 MB-026 The proposed development on the site at Lota by Anglicare will affect the surrounding neighbourhood and its quietness, tranquillity, and privacy.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s Planning and Development Online website to monitor the progress of this development application.

No change

1.167 MB-035 Objection to the amendments as it introduces potential changes to existing planning rules, which will materially change the 'look and feel' of many precincts.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Whilst standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that this does not result in adverse amenity impacts on surrounding properties or the public realm. In particular, the draft code contains increased

No change

144

standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

1.168 MB-037

MB-076

Aged care and retirement living development should not be granted rights that supersede heritage protection for development sites, with this affected heritage sites cannot be recovered.

The current City Plan provisions for the Heritage overlay remain unchanged in the amendment package. Development on a heritage place triggering assessment against the Heritage overlay code will still be required to demonstrate the development does not detract from the heritage significance of the heritage place.

No change

1.169 MB-042 A previous request by the Anglican Church to build a block of units in front of Lota House site was refused due to the previous proposal inhibiting the views from the Heritage Building.

The Village Development Group application does not consider the impact that a seven-storey building would have to the surrounds of the Heritage house called Lota House.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged.

Heritage provisions within the amendment package remain unchanged.

No change

1.170 MB-063 Objection to any changes that will impact character residential or areas within the Heritage overlay.

The loss of Brisbane's character is accelerating which makes existing pre-war homes more precious.

Streets are often congested with traffic and high population density. If Brisbane is to retain what subtropical character it has left, further over development of a finite space will completely destroy it.

Heritage provisions within the amendment package remain unchanged.

The level of assessment provisions for the Character residential zone remain unchanged, where all proposals for retirement facility or residential care facility development are impact assessable in this zone.

The proposed amendment increases existing provisions around building separation distances, landscaping and deep planting, car parking setbacks to complement surrounding

No change

145

areas.

Provisions in City Plan require development to provide appropriate number of car parking spaces and to have regard to the demand likely to be generated from development, the activities on the land and the nature of the locality.

1.171 MB-084 The submitter owns land at 15 Hawthorne Street, Woolloongabba, in the Pre-1911 building overlay and wishes to consolidate the site with the submitter’s adjoining land at 23 Hawthorne Street and 19 Gibbon Street, Woolloongabba, to extend an existing residential care facility.

The Pre-1911 building overlay and the Dwelling house character overlay are considered impediments to the proposed expansion and Council (through the proposed amendment package) is requested to consent to the relocation of the 15 Hawthorne Street pre-1911 house to a suitable site within the Dwelling House Character overlay allowing for the extension of the aged care facility.

It is requested the proposed amendment be amended to the effect ‘that houses in the Dwelling House Character overlay map be relocated to facilitate the expansion of aged care facilities in circumstances where the Brisbane City Council is satisfied that the house will be relocated to another site within the Dwelling House Character overlay’.

Please note that this site-specific matter is not a matter for consideration as part of the proposed amendments package.

Please note the submission identifies a misinterpretation of provisions applicable to the site including the ability to relocate pre-1911 buildings in some circumstances. For town planning advice in relation to the subject site, please contact Council on (07) 3403 8888 and request to speak with a town planner.

No change

1.172 MB-023 Considers that the amendments facilitate overdevelopment in outer suburbs to the detriment of the surrounding neighbourhood.

The proposed amendment increases existing provisions around building separation distances, landscaping and deep planting, car parking setbacks to complement surrounding neighbourhoods.

No change

146

There have been some further changes made to the amendment package to increase these provisions based on feedback received in submissions.

1.173 MB-035 Objection to the amendment as it introduces potential changes to existing planning rules which will change the "look and feel" of many precincts and materially disadvantage existing residents financially and by impacts on utility/lifestyle.

The proposed amendment increases existing provisions around building separation distances, landscaping and deep planting, car parking setbacks to complement surrounding areas. There have been some further changes made to the amendment package to increase these provisions based on feedback received in submissions.

No change

5.12 Diversity of housing types

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.174 MB-062 The package does not adequately consider the option to age in place. The changes only look to facilitate the construction of large scale facilities, they do not look at making planning adjustments to lot size and density in a suburban scale.

Reducing lot size and/or allowing duplex style development would introduce a range of smaller housing stock, that would be suitable for retirees, at a suburban scale.




No change

147

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.







Facilitating integrated residential care and retirement facilities provides additional accommodation options to address community need notwithstanding there are options to receive

148

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


home care assistance in other accommodation arrangements.

1.175 MB-003 Granny flats in backyards would allow people easier access and lower maintenance facilities. Owners will have the option for their family to move into the current house to be close or to rent out the house for additional income, lessening reliance on aged pension.

The proposed amendments do not affect existing provisions in City Plan that already support secondary dwellings (i.e. ‘granny flats’) being provided in conjunction with dwelling houses where meeting requirements in the Dwelling house code and Dwelling House (small lot) code including:

an allowable gross floor area of 80 m2; located within 20 m of the dwelling house; (c) occupied by one or more members of the same

household as the dwelling house.

No change

1.176 MB-005 Dual Occupancy would allow retirees to live in lower density area, in low-maintenance dwellings with shared recreational spaces. Leniencies should be included in the Dwelling house and Dwelling house (small lot) codes to encourage inclusion of secondary dwellings, to increase housing options for retirees or the elderly who choose not to reside in retirement or aged care facilities.

The proposed amendments do not affect existing provisions in City Plan that already support secondary dwellings (i.e. ‘granny flats’) being provided in conjunction with dwelling houses where meeting requirements in the Dwelling house code and Dwelling House (small lot) code including:

an allowable gross floor area of 80 m²; located within 20 m of the dwelling house; occupied by one or more members of the same household

as the dwelling house.

Similarly, dual occupancy is already supported in City Plan in zones such as the Low-medium density residential zone and Medium density residential zone.

The trend towards downsizing by older people through different life stages is acknowledged. Two key actions in Council’s Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) include:

No change

149

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.




These actions will consider the housing needs of the community and inform future planning for the provision of different housing types and forms in different areas to meet identified needs. Importantly, the community has provided feedback through the consultation process for BFB that townhouses and apartments are not supported in areas intended for single homes. Furthermore, higher density housing forms are encouraged in appropriately zoned and well-serviced locations in proximity to centres, services and public transport. This strategy maximises the efficient use of land with such attributes.

1.177 MB-059 Objects to exclusive living, such as retirement facilities, as exclusive living and segregation of any group breaks down communities. When inclusion is the norm, undesirable social behaviours are less likely and where poor behaviour is reported societies helpers like police intervene. Multi-age and multicultural communities give community members a chance to learn from each other.

Considers there is an opportunity for Government to convert larger houses to aged care facilities. These would be better than high-rise buildings because of the social aspect. A cluster of aged care facilities could exist in suburbs without being on the same site, with shared



The intent of the incentives is to make it more feasible for

No change

150

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


services.

Recommends building homes for all homeless people, as retirees don't need this unless they are homeless. Expensive high-rise apartments will not assist the aged as people with homes rarely want to switch to apartment living, due to body corporate fees. Those who desire to live in apartments will already be in apartments before they get too old.

retirement facility and residential care facility operators to compete with the multiple dwelling developers in purchasing sites.






151

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.



1.178 MB-062 The proposed amendments are limited in that they only look to facilitate the construction of larger scale facilities and do not amend lot size and density in the suburban scale.

Recommend reducing lot size and/or allowing duplex style development to introduce a range of smaller housing stock, that would be suitable for retirees, at a suburban scale.

The proposed amendments do not affect existing provisions in City Plan that already support a range of other accommodation forms such as secondary dwellings (i.e. ‘granny flats’) being provided in conjunction with dwelling houses where meeting requirements in the Dwelling house code and Dwelling House (small lot) code including:

an allowable gross floor area of 80 m2; located within 20 m of the dwelling house; occupied by one or more members of the same household






Create and implement a housing strategy to ensure supply

No change

152

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


for people at every stage of life.

These actions will consider the housing needs of the community and inform future planning for the provision of different housing types and forms in different areas to meet identified needs. Importantly the community has provided feedback through the consultation process for BFB that townhouses and apartments are not supported in areas intended for single homes. Furthermore, higher density housing forms are encouraged in appropriately zoned and well-serviced locations in proximity to centres, services and public transport. This strategy maximises the efficient use of land with such attributes.

1.179 MB-069 Large multi-story aged care nursing homes are not in the best interests of the elderly and should be a last resort.

Retirement facilities – single story and gardens are advantageous and very large complexes best avoided. The impact on community is an important consideration.

Recommendation 4. The size and type of structure should be tailored to the needs of those to be served and of the community. Expert advice should be sought. It should be the sort of facility that the elderly in the community will use and that will not intrude adversely into the amenity and lifestyle of the community. Genuine consultation is required and there is no place for highhanded commercial tactics.




No change

153

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


There are key differences and advantages for older residents where accommodation is provided by a retirement facility compared to a multiple dwelling (or standard units) including the following.

The ability to incorporate additional onsite services and facilities to meet the needs of older residents including the following included in the definition of retirement facility:




Facilitating integrated residential care and retirement facilities provides additional accommodation options to address community need notwithstanding there are options to receive

154

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


home care assistance in other accommodation arrangements.

1.180 MB-071 This plan does not appear to address a major need for retirees - an affordable and manageable retirement home of their own. Retirement villages and aged care centres meet the needs of a portion of retirees. Many of us cannot afford the high cost of ‘all the bells and whistles’ leasehold apartments, and would rather have something like a villa or smaller house that is freehold, but meets the needs of our ageing.

Much of the existing, and somewhat limited, stock of villas in Brisbane are tiny, with small rooms that are very difficult to furnish while leaving enough space for a person with decreasing mobility to move around safely. Such villas need to be designed with the needs of ageing residents in mind, so that access with mobility aids is practical, as well as being easy for service providers to manage needed care. This sort of design is seen in the modern retirement villages, and should be extended into the design of freehold villas.

Providing more options where residential care and retirement facilities can locate through the proposed amendments package provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services, levels of care and price points to meet a broader cross-section of the community.

Infrastructure charges reductions are also in place for eligible retirement and residential care facilities that demonstrate design quality and fit-for-purpose living environments. Any increase in affordability arising from these incentives would be dependent on to what degree the reduced development costs arising from infrastructure charge reductions for retirement facilities are directly passed on the end owners.

Research on retirement independent living units identifies that they are usually marketed below comparison multiple dwellings. The financial models with associated buy-back provisions may be a contributing factor to this difference.

Council has committed to actions to improve affordability outcomes across the City in Brisbane’s Future Blueprint. Key relevant actions include:



Help Brisbane residents own their own home by

No change

155

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


continuing rates discounts for owner-occupiers and continuing the most generous pensioner rates discount in Australia.

Where relevant, these actions will consider a range of options in relation to possible incentive mechanisms to improve affordability.

1.181 MB-075 Concerned the amendments do not appear to unlock opportunities for alternative housing solutions for older persons, particularly those not yet reliant upon the formal structure of an integrated retirement or residential rare facility, such as smaller lower maintenance residential lots, duplexes and auxiliary dwelling units to enable income earning capacity through a secondary dwelling.

The proposed amendments do not affect existing provisions in City Plan that already support a range of other accommodation forms such as secondary dwellings (i.e. ‘granny flats’) being provided in conjunction with dwelling houses where meeting requirements in the Dwelling house code and Dwelling house (small lot) code including:






Facilitate a wide range of housing types and sizes to cater

No change

156

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


for all Brisbane residents. Create and implement a housing strategy to ensure supply



1.182 MB-082 Recommends Council favours quality aged care, rather than facilitating larger scale facilities, with nominal aged care and predominantly units, that do not otherwise comply with the Brisbane City Plan or neighbourhood plans.



The intent of the incentives is to make it more feasible for retirement facility and residential care facility operators to

No change

157

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


compete with the multiple dwelling developers in purchasing sites.






158

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.



1.183 MB-090 Proposes further support for development of smaller scale retirement facilities to permit a wider variety of housing to meet the needs of seniors in keeping with the strategic framework intentions for suburban living areas.

Proposes better acknowledgement that people with disabilities are regularly accommodated in residential care facilities.








Create and implement a housing strategy to ensure supply

No change

159

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.




1.184 MB-091 Supports opportunities for retirement facilities and residential care facilities to be established in suburban living areas, including code assessment in the Low density residential zone. Recommends expanding the land use strategy to support alternative housing solutions for elderly persons, particularly those not yet reliant upon the formal structure of an integrated retirement or residential care facility.

Concerned that the draft Code will not support smaller, and more informal and accessible housing solutions for the ageing and elderly.

Expects that a substantial volume of elderly housing stock can be delivered through adaptive re-use of homes as well as the establishment of duplex detached (or attached) product in Low density residential areas. As this type of

Support and additional comments noted.





No change

160

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


development is currently not envisaged under the draft Code or any other code, it is recommended that any future amendments make the necessary allowances to support such development.

The community survey undertaken by Ellivo Architects highlights ‘small detached house on its own block of land’ as the overwhelming majority preferred form of downsizer dwelling type. The results of this survey, including establishing opportunities for duplex detached (or attached) product in Low density residential areas, should be an important consideration in the development of the new housing strategy, as it provides a new form of housing for the ageing and elderly.






1.185 MB-096 Supports the introduction of residential aged care and retirement facilities within zones like the Low density residential zone and several precincts within the Community facilities zone as code assessable. However, the particular circumstances such as within existing facilities or if meeting a large minimum lot size discourages the


No change

161

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


establishment of new small scale facilities which could integrate into neighbourhoods. There are many current examples within our suburbs where these small scale facilities can fit on regular size lots or within existing dwellings without impacting on the amenity of the area. These smaller scale uses are also a good way of allowing the ageing population to remain in their local communities. It is suggested that the table of assessment and code make provision for these smaller scale uses, which could even operate out of standard dwellings.

Acceptable outcome AO5 requires a minimum site area of 3,000m² within the Low density residential zone if uses are being established as assessable development. As stated above, this policy is prohibitive to the establishment of Residential care facilities and Retirement facilities within the Low density residential zones, particularly smaller facilities which integrate into the local community.








These actions will consider the housing needs of the community and inform future planning for the provision of different housing types and forms in different areas to meet identified needs. Importantly, the community has provided feedback through the consultation process for BFB that townhouses and apartments are not supported in areas intended for single homes. Furthermore, higher density housing forms are encouraged in appropriately zoned and well-serviced locations in proximity to centres, services and public transport. This strategy maximises the efficient use of

162

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


land with such attributes.

1.186 MB-097 Developers recognise the demand for more affordable housing and to meet the demand and are opting to build townhouse accommodation. However, this does introduce another problem as developable land is being used for townhouses which doesn’t address our true looming problem of our ageing population because townhouses have stairs which will not be a suitable living option for most ageing people.

Our city has a major shortfall with the types of available property options for retirees wanting to stay close to the inner city suburbs they love. There simply isn’t enough retirement/aged care living within our inner-city suburbs. We have seen many new unit developments built over the last several years but not enough that cater for over-55 living where somebody can look to move into a property and stay there for the duration of their lives.

Recommends the Low-medium density residential zone and Medium density residential zone support accessible housing for over 55s on freehold lots (i.e. individual blocks of units that offer freehold title allowing only over 55s to come together and look after one another in a smaller community environment where outside care can be introduced into their own homes as required).

The amendments, by facilitating retirement and residential care facilities in more locations at different scales and densities, provide greater diversity of housing choice for our ageing population.





5.13 Communal and private open space

163

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.187 MB-012 Allow for outdoor open areas. The proposed amendments provide for an increase in communal open space from 5% of the site area or 40 m2 (whichever is the greatest) to 10% of site area or 100 m2 (whichever is the greatest). This increase is provided to align with the residents’ needs and to allow for social, aesthetic, and recreational needs.

No change

1.188 MB-032 Allow for aged care facilities (nursing homes) to have easy access from their rooms to outdoor landscape areas for benefit from the natural environment and enjoyment of freedom.

The proposed amendments include provisions around Communal Open Space, which provide opportunity for incorporating green space and landscaping requirements. Communal Open Space requirements have increased from 5% of the site area or 40 m2 to 10% of the site area or 100 m2 (whichever is the greatest). The proposed provisions for communal open space require 50% to be open to the sky; and 25% to be landscaping; and 25% to be shaded by trees within five years.

Other landscaping provisions include deep planting requirements where 4 m is required to protect the amenity of adjoining properties, provide a landscape buffer, and to allow for screening purposes.

No change

1.189 MB-051 The definition of communal open space, set out in AO26 of the Retirement and residential care code, is too prescriptive. How communal facilities are arranged is site specific. Recommends that wording be changed to a subjective performance outcome with no specifics.

The acceptable outcome for communal open space provides clear, measurable standards to ensure functional spaces that will contribute to social and recreational opportunities and support the well-being of residents. The code does not prevent creative alternate solutions that address the performance outcome.

No change

1.190 Recommend revising the open space provisions set out in The code does not seek to prevent the utility function (e.g. air No change

164

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


AO27.1 of the Retirement and residential care code, as follows.

AO27.1 (a) Recommends revising to state that air conditioning plants may not be on balconies and that screening should only be to balustrade heights.

AO27.1 (b) Recommends deletion of this provision as it is unachievable on virtually every site. Maximising northern exposure is in the interests of every project and will be achieved without this type of perspective overlay.

conditioning, clothes drying) commonly provided as part of private open spaces but seek to ensure that there are no adverse amenity outcomes where provided. Other screening requirements in the code continue to apply and must also be considered.

In relation to AO27.1(b) the code aspires to maximising northern orientation and it is accepted that in some cases this may not be possible and alternate solutions that address the performance outcome will be considered.

1.191 MB-081 The definition of communal open space, set out in AO26 of the Retirement and residential care facility code, is too prescriptive. How communal facilities are arranged is site specific. The performance outcomes provide the guidance that is needed to achieve the desired outcome.

Recommends deletion of AO27.1(b) as it is unlikely to be achieved on any site.

The acceptable outcome for communal open space provides clear, measurable standards to ensure functional spaces that will contribute to social and recreational opportunities and support the well-being of residents. The code does not prevent creative alternate solutions that address the performance outcome.

No change

1.192 MB-058 Supports the reduced reliance of private open space and greater reliance on communal space to meet opens space needs of residents. Agree that where quality common spaces are available, that they can offset no or limited private open space, given the social benefits to residents.


1.193 MB-073 Recommends revising PO5 of the Retirement and residential care code to add an acceptable solution for communal open space. Some examples of criteria for such

The proposed Retirement and residential care code includes provisions for Communal Open Space where minimal space dimensions, facilities, and landscaping requirements are

No change

165

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


acceptable solutions could be minimum space dimensions, facilities such as barbecues and/or areas for quiet contemplation, and landscaping requirements.

outlined. This is prescribed under AO26, where designated communal open space are to allow for 50% open to the sky; 25% of landscaping to be provided; to provide 25% of shade by trees within five years; and to provide a range of recreational facilities such as seating, barbeque, swimming pool and vegetable garden.

1.194 MB-079 Orientation of Outcome Living Area (A027.1[b]), to position an outdoor living area and/or primary living area to the north or north-east in a minimum of 75% of dwellings cannot be reasonably be imposed and is dependent on the orientation of the site.

We recommend this provision (b) be deleted.

The acceptable outcome aspires to maximising northern orientation and it is accepted that in some cases this may not be possible and alternate solutions that address the performance outcome will be considered.

No change

1.195 MB-080 Recommends that AO26 be amended to be in accordance with the Multiple dwelling code to further clarifying that communal open space calculations include internal communal recreation facilities. (e.g. recreation spaces for residents such as theatres, gymnasiums, indoor swimming pools, games rooms, libraries, men’s sheds, craft rooms and so on)

AO26 supports a 25% of communal open space as internal recreation space. A note confirms that ‘internal spaces may include a gymnasium, movie room or entertainment room’.

1.196 MB-080 Recommends that AO27.1 should not nominate a minimum area of overall private open space which is supported in that it gives operators the option of providing private open space allocations in response to user needs.


1.197 MB-090 A027.1 is not supported - requirement for 75% of retirement dwellings to have an outdoor living area and/or

The acceptable outcome aspires to maximising northern orientation and it is accepted that in some cases this may not

No change

166

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


primary area to north/north-east orientation. This may not be achievable on all sites nor required for some residents.

Proposes that there should be allowance for quality design with appropriate air flow/shading with the target of 50% of retirement dwellings required to meet the standard.

be possible in which case alternate solutions that address the performance outcome will be considered.

1.198 MB-098 Proceeding with the two- storey height bonus, developments must provide areas of outdoor and indoor active recreation space and a swimming pool proportionate to the number of residents so that residents can participate in beneficial active recreational pursuits (such as tai chi, bowls, croquet or aqua-robics) on site.

Provisions for spaces to encourage social interaction in high-rise independent living accommodation with sophisticated security locks may be virtually absent or limited to residents on the same floor.

The proposed amendments allow for communal open spaces, which allow for facilities such as seating, barbeque, swimming pool and vegetable garden. The amendments also have provisions around communal open space where 50% are open to the sky, and that provide for landscaping, in which residents have recreation opportunities. Communal open space is made available for all residents of the facility.

No change

5.14 Landscaping and deep planting

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.199 MB-042 Seven storeys will destroy over 100 trees under the Brisbane City Council Vegetation Protection Order if the Lota House building is approved.

Stage 3 Lota House will reduce vegetation surroundings.


No change

167

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.200 MB-056 This type of amendment will allow developers to go against what we need for our future. The amendments will destroy local communities because it contradicts Brisbane City clean green community living, with plenty of green space for families to be raised and live in.

We need to protect our bushland, parks and green spaces to protect bio diversity and the health and wellbeing of the community.

The citywide greenspace system is considered to be protected by its inclusion in the relevant zones (such as the conservation, environmental management and open spaces zones). Furthermore, greenspace areas outside of the relevant zones are protected by the relevant City Plan overlays (e.g. biodiversity, waterway corridors and wetlands overlay codes) that apply irrespective of zoning and supported development outcomes in each zone to protect the values of these important areas. The amendments do not propose variations to these established provisions in City Plan that seek to protect and enhance the greenspace system.

Please note the Retirement and residential care facility code is being amend to:

strengthen provisions for a balance of built form, natural features and open space; and

protect and establish large subtropical shade trees.

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to express outcomes for a balance of built form and natural features.

1.201 MB-080 Recommends that landscaping width to open ground level car parking or vehicle movement areas to a side boundary be amended to 1 m. (consistent with Multiple dwelling code)

As part of incentives to address the need for retirement and residential care facilities across the City, supported heights and site cover for these uses have been increased and building length for residential care facilities has been increased. Consequently, standards relating to building setbacks (including car parking setbacks) and building separation (among others) have been reviewed to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. Increased car parking setbacks also facilitate a better balance of built form, hardstand and open space allowing additional space for deep

No change

168

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


planting.

5.15 Car parking

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.202 MB-012 Owner and visitor parking. The current City Plan identifies parking rates for retirement and residential care facilities including parking rates that specify or account for resident, staff and visitor parking. No changes are proposed to existing parking rates for these uses.

No change

1.203 MB-051 The arrangement of parking on-ground requires an individual site assessment. Recommends revising the following provisions of the Retirement and residential care code:

AO19 (b)(ii) - Delete as it is too prescriptive. AO19 (b)(iii) - Should include a 1.5 m landscape buffer,

as 3 m is an impractical setback. AO20 (a) - Should include a 1.5 m landscape buffer, as

3 m is an impractical setback.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city. Consequently, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Accordingly, requirements for car parking setbacks have been intentionally increased to provide a better balance of built form and open space with increase

No change

169

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


landscaping and deep planting opportunities.

1.204 MB-051 Recommends deletion of AO39.2 of the Retirement and residential care code, as it is not required, as users will determine adjacency of car parking.

The acceptable outcome helps avoid impacts on parking for the retirement or residential care facility use or impacts on the privacy or security of residents. The acceptable outcome does not prevent an appropriate alternate solution in relevant circumstances.

No change

1.205 MB-081 Notes the arrangement of car parking on-ground requires individual site assessment and therefore recommend the following changes:

AO19 (b)(ii) should be deleted as it is too prescriptive. AO19 (b)(iii) a 3 m buffer is impractical and should be

amended to 1.5 m. AO20 (a) a 3 m buffer is impractical and should be

amended to 1.5 m.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Standards in relation to height been have increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city. Consequently, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Accordingly, requirements for car parking setbacks have been intentionally increased to provide a better balance of built form and open space with increase landscaping and deep planting opportunities.

No change

1.206 MB-081 It is noted that Care co-located uses do not attract a reduced car parking rate where associated with a

Parking rates for Care co-located uses rely on existing standards in City Plan, reflecting that:

No change

170

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


retirement village or residential care facility. As the intention is for these uses to co-locate with and service the residents, a reduced car parking rate is encouraged.

these uses are able to attract outside visitation that may otherwise not have occurred

supported locations occur where parking on local streets is sought to be avoided

dedicated parking avoids impacts on parking for residents and employees of a retirement or residential care facility.

1.207 MB-051 The proposed amendment for AO20 (a) should include a 1.5 m landscape buffer, as 3 m is an impractical setback.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Standards in relation to height been have increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city. Consequently, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Accordingly, requirements for car parking setbacks have been intentionally increased to provide a better balance of built form and open space with increase landscaping and deep planting opportunities.

No change

1.208 MB-051 Recommends deletion of AO39.2 of the Retirement and residential care code, as it is not required as users will determine adjacency of car parking.

The acceptable outcome helps avoid impacts on parking for the retirement or residential care facility use or impacts on the privacy or security of residents. The acceptable outcome

No change

171

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


does not prevent an appropriate alternate solution in relevant circumstances.

1.209 MB-058 Recommends reducing carparking rates, where:

sites are well located to high frequency public transport; or

development provides affordable housing for seniors; or

a facility is 'managed' and therefore provides an opportunity for shared resident and visitor car parking, to respond to the likely diminishing need for car parking as residents age.

Supports shared opportunities for shared resident and visitor car parking.

Parking rates are not proposed to be changed as part of the amendment. Council will have regard to factors that may reduce parking demand such as proximity to high frequency public transport and the operation of managed facilities in cases where it can be demonstrated these factors reduce parking demand of the use.

Affordable housing, while encouraged, may not necessarily have a relationship to the parking demand of a given use and therefore would only be considered where relevant to particular circumstances.

No change

1.210 MB-068 AO19 does not adequately deal with the location of visitor spaces. The acceptable outcome indicates that only one visitor space is able to be provided between the front boundary and the street whilst point (c) states visitor parking cannot be located partially or fully above ground and therefore, all other visitor parking must be located within a basement. This does not appropriately address the need for visitor parking (as per the requirements of the Transport, access, parking and servicing PSP) at ground level and for it to be available at all times.

Amend AO19 (c)(iv) to provide for visitor parking to be provided in areas partially or fully above ground.

Part (c) of the acceptable outcome applies to parking ‘at ground level’ and part (b) applies ‘above ground level’ (e.g. podium parking). Visitor parking is supported ‘at ground level’ where screened and landscaped to the street, but not ‘above ground level’ (e.g. not in a podium above ground level) to ensure that visitor parking is easily located by visitors.

No change

172

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.211 MB-075 Concerned the amendments do not reduce car parking provisions, despite the important role planning policy can have in encouraging behaviour changes. In relation to car parking provision, we strongly believe there is a great opportunity to encourage behaviour change regarding reliance on private vehicles, through this policy. While we understand further work is being undertaken by Brisbane City Council in terms of studying parking demand for these types of facilities, we recommend that a policy led approach be adopted to encourage behaviour change, rather than a behaviour led approach to writing policy for our New World City.

Parking rates are not proposed to be changed as part of the amendment. Council will have regard to factors that may reduce parking demand such as proximity to high frequency public transport (e.g. for a retirement facility use) and the operation of managed facilities in cases where it can be demonstrated these factors reduce parking demand of the use.

No change

1.212 MB-079 As Care co-located uses are required to be located on the site of, and associated with, and subordinate to a Retirement Village (RV) or Residential Care Facility (RCF), it is not considered reasonable that the carparking rates applied to these uses be calculated at the same rate as a standalone use.

Feedback from existing operators of retirement village and residential care facility indicates that these care co-located uses (e.g. café, small boutique shop etc.) are primarily owned and operated by separate entities than that of the aged care accommodation provider. The business plan for these care co-located uses is based on providing facilities/services first and foremost for the residents of the facility in which the is located within, with approximately 70%-80% of clients being residents of the facility itself.

Parking rates for Care co-located uses rely on existing standards in City Plan reflecting that:




No change

173

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


It should be acknowledged that where a care co-located uses provides a service tailored to seniors, these services will be provided via an appointment. This operational model means there will be no ‘walk ins’ and the need for appointments will allow for a managed need for car parking. Therefore, given that the Care co-located uses are required to be tied to the retirement village or residential care facility in a very specific manner (located on the same site, associated with and subordinate to) and there is a focus to provide services primarily to the residents, it is recommended the car parking rate for each care co-located use be reduced by a minimum of 50% from the standard rate currently prescribed under the Transport, Access, Parking and Servicing Planning Scheme Policy.

1.213 MB-079 (A039.2) – Location of parking for Care co-located uses should be at operator discretion.





No change

1.214 MB-079 Car Parking Design (A019)(b)(ii) – The acceptable outcome is very prescriptive when the location of parking is subject to the site constraints.

There will be a need for parking forward of the building line

The acceptable outcome provides useful standards for managing the impacts of parking and does not prevent alternate solutions necessary to address the particular circumstances or site constraints of individual applications

No change

174

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


to provide legibility to visitors, at a minimum. Recommends that provision (b)(ii) be deleted.

where still demonstrating the performance outcome.

1.215 MB-079 AO19:

(b)(iii) Conflicts with a nil setback to side boundary required under AO22.2 under the Multiple Dwelling Code for visitor parking.

Conflicts with AO23.2 of Multiple Dwelling Code that requires a 1.0 m wide landscape strip alongside boundary where there is a vehicle manoeuvring area where an acoustic treatment is not provided.

The depth of the landscape strip should be reduced to limit the constraints on manoeuvring areas where they also need to cater for service vehicles (VAN) and refuse vehicles. To increase the provision from that found with residential development will unreasonably constrain the development for no real improvement to residential amenity.

AO2 already requires a 2 m high acoustic screen along boundary with sensitive land uses, which we believe negates the need for such a significant landscape buffer.

Recommend provision (b)(iii) be deleted.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Whilst standards in relation to height and site cover have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Accordingly, standards for car parking setbacks and associated landscape buffers in AO19 are part of the strategy to offset increases in other standards such as building height and site cover to ensure an appropriate balance of built form and open space.

No change

1.216 MB-080 Recommends that the parking rate for Retirement Facility where care suite or assisted living unit be nominated at 0.5 spaces per dwelling. In addition, the car parking rate for Retirement Facility should also allow for parking reductions where developments facilitate car sharing by allocating spaces for short-term car share services such as ‘go get’.

Parking rates are not proposed to be changed as part of the amendment. Council will have regard to factors that may reduce parking demand such as proximity to high frequency public transport (e.g. for a retirement facility use) and the operation of managed facilities in cases where it can be demonstrated these factors reduce parking demand of the

No change

175

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


These dwelling types provide for supported living with residents having access to in home care, cooking, laundry and cleaning services. In particular, residents of the care suites require a certain level of care which means that residents are typically not able to drive thereby resulting the parking rate that is more aligned with that of the visitor and staff parking space allocation for retirement facility or that of a residential care facility. This is consistent with Council’s previous assessment of car parking for Care Suites where a rate of 0.5 spaces per dwellings is typically approved.

use.

1.217 MB-087 AO19, AO20, AO21, AO22.1, AO24.1 The proposed provisions appear to duplicate other assessment benchmarks from other codes and are unnecessarily repeated in this code. The proposed are to be removed or only to include provisions which be depart from the taps code, taps policy or landscape codes.

Similar provisions are currently contained in the multiple dwelling code; however, the proposed Retirement and residential care facility code is proposed to replace the multiple dwelling code for the assessment of the retirement and residential care facilities. Accordingly, the standards are not duplicated and are relevant standards for the proposed new code.

No change

1.218 MB-087 AO39.2 It is unclear if the entire car park is required to be provided within 40 m of the use or just the edge of the car park. This should be clarified.

The standard refers to the ‘car parking’ which means all car parking (i.e. all spaces) is within 40 m.

No change

1.219 MB-090 Carshare schemes and a relaxation of car parking requirements should be given greater consideration for retirement and aged care developments. Traffic modelling to support an alternate provision for car parking requirements at co-located sites should be supported

Parking rates are not proposed to be changed as part of the amendment. Council will have regard to factors that may reduce parking demand such as proximity to high frequency public transport (e.g. for a retirement facility use) and the operation of managed facilities in cases where it can be

No change

176

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


where supporting community uses are proposed. For example, peak traffic movements and car parking requirements for child care centres is different to RAC/retirement living residents and visitors and there should be recognition of the ability to share spaces rather than requiring dedicated parking for the uses.

demonstrated these factors reduce parking demand of the use.





1.220 MB-091 Consider that the existing car parking rates for retirement and residential care facilities are excessive and/or disproportionate to the actual demand (i.e. resident verse staffing and visitor requirements).

The Retirement and residential care facility code, and the amendments package more broadly, is silent with respect to car parking rates for ‘care co-located uses’ (activity group). Therefore, the provision of car parking will default to the minimum car parking rates specified in the TAPS PSP for each individual land use.

Recommend that the Retirement and residential care facility code be amended to incorporate a performance outcome considering space sharing arrangements for ‘care co-located uses’.

Parking rates are not proposed to be changed as part of the amendment. Council will have regard to factors that may reduce parking demand such as proximity to high frequency public transport (e.g. for a retirement facility use) and the operation of managed facilities in cases where it can be demonstrated these factors reduce parking demand of the use.





No change

177

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.221 MB-098 A good deal of social activity in retirement consists of home

entertaining, sometimes enforced by lack of personal mobility or the loss of driving license.

Thus, in a medium or high density independent retirement living facility it can reasonably be assumed that at any one time no less than 10% of occupants will be hosting overlapping morning or afternoon teas, lunches, dinners, card games, mah-jong games, book club meetings and the like. From experience, such hosted activities are likely to generate a need for two to three car spaces. This is in addition car spaces required to accommodate individual visits to residents of the whole complex by relatives and friends, cleaners, deliveries and service personnel.

This being so, in addition to a minimum resident car parking provision of one car space per residential unit a minimum provision of 0.33 spaces per residential unit should be provided. With regard to resident car parking provision it can reasonably assumed that almost all residents will have a car and those that don't may still demand a car space to ensure a guaranteed parking space for visitors especially if they are becoming infirm.

Parking rates are not proposed to be changed as part of the amendment. Existing parking rates take into account factors such as resident, visitor and employee parking demand to ensure adequate standards. Council will only have regard to factors that may reduce parking demand such as proximity to high frequency public transport (e.g. for a retirement facility use) and the operation of managed facilities in cases where it can be demonstrated these factors actually reduce parking demand of the use.

No change

1.222 MB-079 The basis for a 3 m landscape buffer to rear boundary is unclear. The manoeuvring areas will experience car and service vehicle movements that are not dissimilar to that of a residential development. The services vehicles are typically a VAN. Given that there is a provision for an

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Whilst standards in relation to height and site cover have

No change

178

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


acoustic screen along property boundaries with sensitive uses, such a significant landscape buffer will add little value and will constrains manoeuvring on the site.

We recommend the landscape buffer be reduced in depth to 1.5 m.

been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm are more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall. Accordingly, standards for car parking setbacks and associated landscape buffers in AO19 are part of the strategy to offset increases in other standards such as building height and site cover to ensure an appropriate balance of built form and open space.

5.16 Traffic and transport

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.223 MB-004 Concerns about Oxford Street, Bulimba, and how teenagers and children travel along the footpath. Submitter suggests that signs be erected (40 kph) stating that ‘Footpaths are for pedestrian use only and cyclist must dismount’. This should be taken into consideration where narrow pavements currently exist in Brisbane.

While this matter does not relate to the proposed amendments to City Plan, your comments have been forwarded to the relevant section of Council, which will respond to you separately.

No change

1.224 MB-037 Concerns about traffic-related safety risks and lack of Where development involves high traffic generation, a traffic Amend the Retirement

179

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


requirements in the amendment package that force developers to mitigate consequences stemming from the unavoidable increase of traffic when being allowed to increase the population of a suburb significantly.

impact assessment is required to be submitted with a development application, demonstrating that there will be no adverse impacts on road carrying capacity and traffic safety (to a 10-year planning horizon). The proposed amendments do not vary these existing requirements in City Plan.

Please also note that the Retirement and residential care facility code has been amended to ensure that adequate parking and manoeuvring are integrated into the site (including provisions for porte-cocheres), to avoid offsite traffic impacts as a result of vehicles seeking to access the site.

and residential care facility code to ensure that development provides sufficient access, parking and manoeuvring onsite.

1.225 MB-042 The proposed amendments will allow for an increase in traffic.

Where development involves high traffic generation, a traffic impact assessment is required to be submitted with a development application, demonstrating that there will be no adverse impacts on road carrying capacity and traffic safety (to a 10-year planning horizon). The proposed amendments do not vary these existing requirements in City Plan.

No change

1.226 MB-048 The proposed amendments are not supported due to the extra traffic generated from multi storey retirement villages.


No change

1.227 MB-066 Intense commercial enterprises generate more traffic than most residential areas are able or want to cope with

Development applications may be required to lodge a traffic impact assessment, which demonstrates that there will be no adverse impacts on road carrying capacity and traffic safety (to a 10-year planning horizon). The proposed amendments

No change

180

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


do not vary these existing requirements in City Plan.

1.228 MB-072 Objection to development of high-rise towers in suburban areas where the roads are already congested with traffic.


No change

1.229 MB-083 Allowing for commercial components to an aged care facility ignores traffic, parking, road infrastructure.

The proposed amendments to allow for businesses with child care uses included are to consider peak hour traffic flows, road conditions and child safety within the application.

Development applications may be required to lodge a traffic impact assessment, which demonstrates that there will be no adverse impacts on road carrying capacity and traffic safety (to a 10-year planning horizon). The proposed amendments do not vary these existing requirements in City Plan.

No change

1.230 MB-025

MB-028

Since previous area plan changes, Council approval of split blocks in the Wynnum North area, the allowance of a light industrial zoning adjoining a key residential precinct off Wynnum North Road, the 200 m unit building allowance within a train line and the allowance of a multi-unit development on the old Wynnum North school site have all markedly increased traffic and noise in our immediate residential area. In fact, they have started to compress what was a beautiful and quiet area with a significantly greater number of residents and corresponding traffic.

Development applications lodged to Council may be required to provide a traffic impact assessment, which demonstrates that there will be no adverse impacts on road carrying capacity and traffic safety (to a 10-year planning horizon). The proposed amendments do not vary these existing requirements in City Plan.

No change

1.231 MB-087 The locational requirements for a care facility are not such that they need to be in proximity to public transport. This

The proposed overall outcome (2)(g) was amended to confirm that the outcome is to support access for residents, workers

Amend Retirement and residential care facility

181

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


statement should be limited to retirement facilities only as those residents may be mobile enough to use public transport (9.3.18.2 Purpose (2)(g)).

It is recommended that this statement be clarified to ensure that this purpose statement is only applied to development where it is appropriate.

and visitors, which is relevant to both retirement and residential care facilities.

code purpose and overall outcomes to support access for residents, workers and visitors

1.232 MB-087 If AO22.1 is applicable to retirement facility uses only, this should be stated upfront in the sentence. It is recommended to re-word the acceptable outcome to state ‘For retirement facilities, development provides...’ (as per the drafting style used for AO27.1).

Comment noted. The intent is for the provision to only apply to a retirement facility.

Amend Retirement and residential care facility code to refer to development for a retirement facility.

1.233 MB-088 Commercial premises are not viable unless they attract many customers from the surrounding area, potentially providing an outcome of increasing traffic in the surrounding streets.


No change

1.234 MB-092 Objection to the development proposal at 272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum (Nazareth House), due to concerns of vehicle access and increased traffic.


Where development involves high traffic generation, a traffic impact assessment is required to be submitted with a development application, demonstrating that there will be no adverse impacts on road carrying capacity and traffic safety.

No change

182

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.235 MB-096 It is important that provision is made within the facility to provide private group transport, such as buses. Amendments to the code could make provision for private on site group transport, or at least encourage this to be considered.

The provision of group transport is an operational matter and not within the scope of matters the planning scheme can regulate or Council can require/enforce. Council supports the provision of group transport in appropriate circumstances, but this will be at the discretion of aged care providers.

The Transport, access, parking and servicing planning scheme policy requires that development provide internal vehicle manoeuvring and access for Long Rigid Vehicles, which is therefore suited to accommodate most group transport vehicles, such as minibuses, at the discretion of operators.

No change

5.17 Care co-located uses

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.236 MB-033

MB-043

MB-044

MB-045

MB-046

MB-089

Are concerned or opposed to shops, food and drink outlets, clubs and other commercial premises being built as part of new development near Low density residential housing areas.

The benefits of supporting the co-location of small-scale commercial uses and services (i.e. ‘care co-located uses’) are two-fold.

Firstly, they provide easy access for residents to key facilities and services (such as hairdressers/chemists) and support involvement by residents in a variety of activities that may otherwise not access (such as community-based activities).

Secondly, they generate interaction between residents and the surrounding community by encouraging the local community to visit services onsite (such as child care and coffee shops).

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code purpose and overall outcomes to ensure that Care co-located uses involving commercial cooking manage offsite air quality and odour emissions.

183

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.





Additionally, the allowable combined area for these uses shouldn’t exceed 800 m2 or 10% of the site area, whichever is the lesser.

The code has been amended to ensure that care co-located involving commercial cooking appropriately locate exhaust vents or meet air quality and odour criteria to avoid adverse impacts on residential areas.

1.237 MB-048 Objection to 800 m2 of commercial development (food and drink outlets, clubs, shops and childcare centres. This would not allow oldies to get to know the surrounding suburbs if everything is contained.

Commercial premises would not be viable unless they attracted customers from other parts of the district.


Firstly, they provide easy access for residents to key facilities and services (such as hairdressers/chemists) and support involvement by residents in a variety of activities

No change

184

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


that may otherwise not access (such as community-based activities).






The viability of Care co-located uses at different locations will vary across the city and applicants are able to make this determination.

185

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.238 MB-031 Wynnum North does not need any more shops or commercial premises.

The benefits of supporting the co-location of small-scale commercial uses and services (i.e. ‘care co-located uses’) is two-fold.



The Retirement and aged care amendments package is a citywide amendment and not specific to single local area of Brisbane. However, the amendment package ensures the amenity of surrounding areas and existing commercial centres and uses are protected by a number of proposed provisions applicable to Care co-located uses that limit their scale and intensity including the following.


As such, these uses are only code assessable where meeting the allowable size of 250 m2 each for a club, community use, food and drink outlet, health care

186

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


services, office or shop, and 400 m2 for a place of worship or child care centre.


The viability of Care co-located uses at different locations will vary across the city and applicants are able to make this determination.

1.239 MB-051 Consider revising the wording of 9.3.18.2 Purpose (2)(e)(iv) to ‘the non-residential use complements the uses within nearby centre activities and encourages the local community to engage with occupants of the retirement facility and/or residential care facility’. Current wording could discourage all forms of related uses, as it suggests that nearly all non-residential uses might compete with nearby centre activities.

Comments noted and accepted. Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code purpose and overall outcomes to ensure that Care co-located uses do not impact on the economic viability of nearby centre activities.

1.240 MB-051 Recommend deletion of AO37 or conversion to a subjective performance outcome as per PO37.

AO37 is fundamental to Care co-located uses being able to be supported as part of retirement and residential care facilities i.e. Care co-located uses are integrated and provided to the benefit of development for residential care and retirement facilities. The acceptable outcome provides useful measures that can demonstrate integration and does not prevent alternate strategies that are able to demonstrate compliance with PO37.

No change

187

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.241 MB-051 Recommend increasing both (a) and (b) in AO38.1 of the Retirement and residential care code to 500 m2. Currently, these uses are not technically recognised as co-location in the industry but rather related communal uses.

It is important that where Care co-located uses also serve the broader community this does not adversely impact on the economic viability of the city’s established Centres and existing Centre activities uses. Accordingly, it is appropriate that the scale of these uses is managed consistent with other non-residential uses occurring outside centres (e.g. a shop or office locating in the Low density residential zone are currently limited to 250 m2 gross floor area in City Plan).

No change

1.242 MB-055 Objection to developments incorporating commercial uses not related to retirement and aged care.




The amenity of surrounding areas and existing commercial centres and uses are protected by a number of proposed provisions applicable to Care co-located uses that limit their scale and intensity including the following

The size of the co-located uses must not adversely impact on nearby centres and must be integrated with and

No change

188

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


subordinate/secondary to the size and operation of the retirement facility or residential care facility onsite.



1.243 MB-059 Does not support non-residential services on aged care sites.




The amenity of surrounding areas and existing commercial centres and uses are protected by a number of proposed provisions applicable to Care co-located uses that limit their

No change

189

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


scale and intensity including the following.




1.244 MB-060 The list of allowable uses to share and integrate with retirement and residential care facilities is questioned and needs to be justified especially the inclusion of small businesses services and community facilities in retirement and aged-care facilities as this makes it, in essence, a mixed development and not a retirement and aged-care facility.

Linking of residential care with health facilities has merit provided this isn’t ultimately to be used to then include multi-unit residences that can be accessed by external helpers.




No change

190

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.






1.245 MB-066 Commercial developments in Low density residential areas are not supported.



Secondly, they generate interaction between residents and the surrounding community by encouraging the local

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code purpose and overall outcomes to ensure that Care co-located uses involving commercial cooking manage offsite air quality and odour emissions.

191

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


community to visit services onsite (such as child care and coffee shops).





It is also important to acknowledge that some small-scale non-residential uses are already supported in the Low density residential zone code where limited to less than 250 m2 GFA, serving local residents’ needs and not undermining the viability of a nearby centre.

The code has been amended to ensure that care co-located involving commercial cooking appropriately locate exhaust vents or meet air quality and odour criteria to avoid adverse

192

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


impacts on residential areas.

1.246 MB-069 The co-location of nursing homes and other businesses with retirement villages has advantages but also some risks. These applications should be assessed in the same way as other nursing home and retirement village applications and not be influenced by board members with a conflict of interest.

The assessment of planning applications is undertaken entirely by Council’s Development Services Branch and no persons with a conflict of interest are able to take part in the assessment. All applications are assessed independently on their merit against the requirements of City Plan.

No change

1.247 MB-071 Recommends that the amendments do not allow new specific recreational facilities being built into a retirement and aged care centre when they already exist within a very short distance to the centre. For example, TriCare wishes to include a bowling green in the proposed Salving Park development when a good suburban club is only two minutes up the road. I am sure the local, established group would welcome new members from Salvin Park.

Recommends residential care and retirement facilities should be encouraged to provide group transport services to enable residents to make the most of existing suburban facilities, as well as for outings further afield.

Using existing amenities encourages a connection to the wider community, and vice versa, while supporting local businesses and clubs.

A bowling green is defined as a club in City Plan. Under the proposed amendments, a club will be included in the Care co-located uses activity group definition. The viability of existing centres activities (such as existing clubs) are protected by a number of proposed provisions applicable to Care co-located uses that limit their scale and intensity including the following.



Additionally, the allowable combined area for these uses shouldn’t exceed 800m2 or 10% of the site area, whichever is the lesser.

No change

193

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.248 MB-075 Supports improving opportunities to co-locate care related activities within new and existing retirement and residential care facilities.


1.249 MB-079 Supports the introduction of the new care co-located activity group definition to provide for the co-location of small-scale retail and community activities with retirement and residential care facilities.


1.250 MB-079 The level of assessment tables provides guidance on where a care co-located use is supported (i.e. code assessable) by stating:

“If located on the site of and associated with and subordinate to a residential care facility or retirement facility, where the cumulative gross floor area (existing and proposed) on the site for all uses in the activity group does not exceed 800 m2 or 10% of the site area, whichever is the lesser”.

While the intent of the above clause is supported, it is suggested that the wording be clarified as it is presently unclear what is intended and what the value is by using the term ‘associated’, particularly when the co-location is required to be on the same site as the retirement village/residential care facility and there is the term ‘subordinate’ also used. It is recognised that there are provisions with the new code that refer to the location of an entrance and proximity of the care-located use to the primary land uses, however, replacing the term ‘associated’

It is acknowledged that there is some subjectivity in the level of assessment trigger; however, this provides sufficient guidance to make a determination on the level of assessment and prevent independent non-residential uses seeking approval through code assessment under the guide of the Care co-located uses activity group.

No change

194

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


with the term ‘co-located’ to retain a consistent approach and relationship of these land uses.

1.251 MB-079 Detailed comments on code provisions for Care co-located uses (AO37).

The configuration of Care co-located uses relative to the design of the development will be dependent on individual operator requirements, should be less prescriptive. Accordingly, we recommend the following changes.

Sub-Clause (a):

Shared entry may not be preferred by some operators. While there are already provisions within the code that require the care co-located use to be on the same site and relate to the primary land use, this aspect of AO37 should not be as prescriptive. This aspect of AO37 could require the entry to be in close proximity to the main entrance of the development.

Sub-Clause (c):

Visibility from the street is appropriate, but the extent of the transparent materials is inappropriate and onerous when it is understood that Council may not be seeking a care co-located use to be located in the RV of RCF building. This provision will depend on whether Council is seeking the care co-located use to be readily identifiable from the street or integrated in the primary development. We suggest the wording of this clause could seek to ensure that the ‘shop front’ of the care co-located use does not

AO37 is fundamental to care Co-located uses being able to be supported as part of retirement and residential care facilities i.e. Care co-located uses are integrated and provided to the benefit of development for residential care and retirement facilities. The acceptable outcome provides useful measures that can demonstrate integration and does not prevent alternate strategies that are able to demonstrate compliance with PO37.

No change

195

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


dominate the streetscape and the primary use is the dominant built form.

Sub-clause (d):

Unnecessary as we understand this would be addressed by the Building Code of Australia or similar.

Not we or I language recommend this sub-clause be deleted.

Sub-clauses (e):

As per Sub-clause (d) above and should be deleted.

1.252 MB-081 Given the form of these developments is becoming more outwardly facing and engaging with the community, the introduction of the Care co-located uses (activity group) is supported. The recognition that operators are pursuing development outcomes that encourage these developments to interact with the community is important to integrating these developments within the broader community. Providing the nominated uses at a Level of Assessment that aligns with appropriately located retirement and residential care development is also supported.

Thank you for your support. Comments noted. No change

1.253 MB-081 Recommend amend the wording of overall outcome (ii) - While there is evidence to suggest that there are health benefits that come from older people interacting with children this may not be enough to satisfy the code when developers are proposing a childcare centre to be co-

It is expected that the ancillary benefits of child care centres (such as supporting visitation and community interaction) are able to be justified and where they can’t (such as a scale inconsistent with serving such benefits) the overall outcome is appropriate.

No change

196

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


located in the development.

1.254 MB-081 Amend the wording of overall outcome (iv) – lt is likely that many of the uses that are being encouraged to co-locate with retirement villages will compete with nearby centre activities. Therefore, the wording of this provision should be amended.

Noted. The overall outcome (2)(e)(iv) and PO38 are amended to state:

“do not impact on the economic viability of nearby centre activities”

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to protect the economic viability of nearby centre activities.

1.255 MB-081 AO37 - location and design of Care co-located uses

The type and placement of care uses is at the discretion of the provider and owner therefore, this provision should be deleted or only refer to care facilities that can be accessed by the community.

AO37 is fundamental to Care co-located uses being able to be supported as part of retirement and residential care facilities – that is, Care co-located uses are integrated and provided to the benefit of development for residential care and retirement facilities. The acceptable outcome provides useful measures that can demonstrate integration and does not prevent alternate strategies that are able to demonstrate compliance with PO37.

No change

1.256 MB-081 AO38.1 – max GFA of care co-located uses

Suggest increasing both (a) and (b) to 500 m2.

It is important that where Care co-located uses also serve the broader community this does not adversely impact on the economic viability of the city’s established centre and existing centre activities uses. Accordingly, it is appropriate that the scale of these uses is managed consistent with other non-residential uses occurring outside centres (e.g. a shop or office locating in the Low density residential zone are currently limited to 250 m2 in City Plan).

No change

1.257 MB-087 Supports the care co-located used as a defined activity group to co-locate with retirement facilities and residential care facilities.


197

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Supports the proposed A03 for a residential care facility or care co-located use to ensure that food or cooking odour is released, exhaust vents etc. vertically directed away from sensitive use - to be applied to retirement facilities and residential care facilities.

1.258 MB-088 Does not support allowing commercial development of up to 800 m2 with retirement and residential care facilities.






As such, these uses are only code assessable where

No change

198

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


meeting the allowable size of 250 m2 each for a club, community use, food and drink outlet, health care services, office or shop, and 400 m2 for a place of worship or child care centre.


1.259 MB-090 The increased allowance for the integration of small business activity and community facilities in retirement facilities is supported. Considers this could be expanded; particularly, if the development proposal is not near a centre where including commercial uses can contribute substantially to the facility and the community. Refers to the example of Duhig Village in a predominantly low-density zone area at 85 Seville Rd, Holland Park, which provides a café adjacent to a park, Council library and local centre serving very well its occupants, visitors as well as visitors to the park, library and local area.

Thank you for your support. The proposed amendment strikes a balance between supporting the benefits to retirement and residential care facilities through Care co-located uses whilst also protecting the economic viability of existing centres and centre activity uses as well as the amenity of surrounding areas (particularly in Low density residential contexts). Accordingly, the proposed amendments contain provisions that limit the scale and intensity of Care co-located uses consistent with these outcomes and consistent with how existing non-residential uses are currently supported outside centres.

No change

1.260 MB-091 We support the proposed adoption of the ‘Care Co-located uses’ activity group and associated Code assessment opportunities in the various land use zones. However, we believe it is important to clarify that if Care co-located uses are incorporated, this serves to demonstrate that the site is ‘conveniently located’ in relation to activity centres and community facilities and services.

Thank you for your support. Comments noted. No change

1.261 MB-092 Does not support the development proposal at Nazareth House at 272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum North, No change

199

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


272 Wynnum North Road, Wynnum (Nazareth House), including 'commercial premises' being located as part of new retirement and aged care development due to impacts on the ambience of the locality.

is subject to existing approvals associated with application no. A003214281. Details of this application is available on Council’s PD Online website. This matter is not part of this planning scheme amendment.


1.262 MB-093 Supports suitable small businesses, services and facilities to share sites and integrate with retirement facilities and aged care facilities as long as the infrastructure is in place.

Thank you for your support. Comment noted. No change

1.263 MB-096 Supports the Care co-located uses activity group and the range and scale of uses it allows when associated with residential aged care and retirement facility developments. This will help to create integrated community hubs, and foster the cohesion of different generations in a community setting for social benefit and inclusion. The new Care co-location activity group will enable the development of complementary land uses within one urban setting.


5.18 Location of retirement and residential care facilities

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.264 MB-006 Support all changes that enable retirees to stay within 10 km of the inner city, and to purchase retirement unit (no


200

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


stairs) worth 80% of their home. If the value for residential aged care facilities are of $700k, near public transport people would move, and free up larger home for young people. Downsize, not downgrade standard of living.

1.265 MB-007 Supportive of co-location of non-for-profit (ONLY) aged care facilities near local shopping centres and public transport, as there is little need for a car, safer communities and reduces the isolation of the elderly.

Comments noted. The intent of the amendments is to help incentivise residential care and retirement facilities in more locations across the city. However, supported densities and heights relate to the underlying zones, which in turn vary depending on proximity to centres and public transport. This ensures that higher density and building height occurs in locations that maximise residents’ access to these services.

No change

1.266 MB-059 Supports retirement and aged care facilities being located near existing services. Every suburb has a local shopping and service district where high-rise is appropriate.

Residents of aged care facilities need products and services brought to them no matter how close services are located.

Apartments are for well people and can be built in appropriate areas that don't break heritage or environmental laws.

Comments noted. No change

1.267 MB-063 Recognises the need for retirement and aged care facilities in well-serviced locations, however, residential areas are not suitable given ample building and amenity infrastructure exists in light industrial areas. The placement of new facilities should parallel the zoning for adult entertainment, such as brothels, which under City Plan are situated in industrial areas, many of which fulfil the criteria

Brisbane has a limited supply of industrial land, currently demand for industrial uses is projected to overtake supply of industrial zoned land available in Brisbane by 2041. Development in industrial zones protects the viability of existing and future industry by excluding incompatible development.

No change

201

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


outlined in the amendments.

Aged care residents do not require closely integrated transport and shopping options, as their needs being met by private motor vehicle or care workers.

Retirement and residential care facilities are considered sensitive uses under the City Plan. Sensitive uses are uses that are vulnerable to environmental harm or environmental nuisance, from impacts such as noise, odour and light emissions. Therefore, retirement and residential care facilities are incompatible with the primary function of industrial zones.

Residents of residential care facilities (aged care) require varying levels of service and care dependant on their mental and physical health. As such, they require the same access to services and facilities, including public transport, as all residents of Brisbane. It is particularly important to acknowledge that it is important not to isolate residents of such facilities, as this has been seen to be detrimental to the health and wellbeing.

1.268 MB-090 Supports encouraging retirement and aged care facilities, located near key services and amenities in our neighbourhoods


1.269 MB-060 Considers that the facilitation of retirement and aged-care living is being based on economic outcomes rather than seeking a balance with social outcomes. Considers justification for the amendments based on need would be better served if the general location of such facilities could be identified and inappropriate impediments removed from their implementation at those locations.

Considers the community expectations on where

The need for additional retirement facilities and residential care facilities across the city is already recognised by Council, as outlined below:

• Brisbane’s current 70-plus population of 90,080 is projected to increase by 49% (or 43,759 persons) to 2027. That is an average increase of 3,647 persons that may require dedicated retirement or residential care accommodation and/or care and support services each

No change

202

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


retirement and residential care facilities might be appropriately placed, and under what conditions would apply in such circumstances, is not being adequately met through performance based assessment utilising codes.

It is understood that since the BCC introduced its aged care incentives in September 2016, numerous spurious development applications have been submitted—and some approved—on the basis of ‘need’. While the evidence tells us there is a need for aged-care beds, no such credible evidence exists to support a need for retirement units.

BCC should request development proponents to submit an independent needs analysis demonstrating a need for an aged-care development as part of their development application for the site and ideally be made public through planning announcements prior to lodgement of a development application.

year to 2027.• Within Brisbane, 11.9% of the population, or 245,586

people, are over 65 years and approximately 6.6% of them live in a retirement village. There are around 6,321 dwellings promoted to retired and ageing persons, catering to around 8,217 persons. The average age of residents living in retirement villages in Queensland is 80 years, with average entry age 73 years.

• As at 2015, Brisbane had 9,616 operational residential aged care allocations (i.e. funded bed spaces) with a further 2,238 provisional allocations (i.e. allocated to a provider but not actually provided). It is projected that the undersupply of places will reach 2,436 by 2027.

Council’s strategy is to ensure that retirement facilities and residential care facilities are supported in preferred locations at an appropriate scale and density within their site context in response to known citywide need. Accordingly, where retirement facilities and residential care facilities seek to locate in identified preferred locations, an independent needs analysis is considered unwarranted.

5.20 Rezoning

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.270 MB-068 Requests rezoning of the following sites in LDR, LMR, MDR or EC to CF7 (Health care purposes):

Existing lawful uses may continue, regardless of zoning, and the identified sites are all located in zones where the

No change

203

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


52 Ridley Road, Bridgeman Downs

120 Albany Creek Road, Aspley

469 Sandgate Road, Albion

24 Free Street, Newmarket

51 Norman Parade, Clayfield

1 Moore Street, Taringa

19 Banchory Court, Carindale

108 and 112 Whites Road, Manly West

356 Blunder Road, Durack

7 Braddock Street, Robertson

239 McCullough Street, Sunnybank

This supports the outcome sought in the new S03 of 3.7.6 Element 5.5 - Brisbane's Suburban Living Areas in that it provides for supporting ageing in place and ageing in neighbourhood given its location in an existing developed neighbourhood in proximity to services and facilities.

Given the existing use of the premises it is considered the most appropriate zone is CF7 Community facilities (health care purposes) zone. The planning scheme amendments proposed by Council have not considered the existing lawfully established use of the premises.

proposed amendments specifically provide opportunity for future extensions for residential care and/or retirement facilities that are code assessable. The amendments also incentivise future development by supporting increase standards in relation to height, site cover and building length for example, as well as facilitating Care co-located uses.

This is not considered to be a planning basis to support rezoning of the nominated sites to the Community facilities zone.

1.271 MB-077 The rezoning of Emerging community zone to proposed Community facilities zone potentially provides greater ease

The proposed rezoning of some properties in the Emerging community zone to the Community facilities zone relates to

No change

204

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


upon which developers can do pre-emptive clearing or reduce biodiversity values of land which then lead to the loss or an ability to establish urban green networks that includes urban tree canopies, wildlife corridors and waterways. Land that is identified as having values for open space on green space should be protected or enhanced rather than potentially compromised (see appendix B of submission).

established residential and retirement facilities on those properties (rather than vacant Emerging community zone land). The rezoning gives established premises a better opportunity to support future changes (such as from a retirement facility use to a residential care facility use or vice versa) as well as allowing for future extensions on already developed sites.

The City Plan overlays such as the biodiversity, waterway and wetlands overlays continue to apply to green spaces and waterways reflecting the values of these areas and ensuring their protection and enhancement through future development.

1.272 MB-090 Supports encouraging retirement and aged care facilities, located near key services and amenities in our neighbourhoods, and the proposed zones in the amendments package.


5.22 Brisbane’s Future Blueprint

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.273 MB-008

MB-014

MB-015

Additional building height in low density areas is inconsistent with the Brisbane's Future Blueprint which seeks to ‘ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’.

Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) includes a principle to ‘Protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’. A key related action to achieve this principle in BFB is ‘Ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’

No change

205

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-017

MB-018

MB-019

MB-020

MB-021

MB-022

MB-029

MB-039

MB-040

MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low density residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify Emerging community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not compromise this objective.

In particular, the draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Whilst standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the City, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm is more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

1.274 MB-014

MB-015

MB-029

Allowing for six-storey retirement and aged care developments adjacent to established low density, is inconsistent with the Brisbane's Future Blueprint which seeks to ‘protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique

Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) includes a principle to ‘Protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’. A key related action to achieve this principle in BFB is ‘Ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’

No change

206

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


MB-049

MB-052

MB-053

MB-054

MB-060

MB-061

MB-067

MB-070

MB-074

character’. which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low density residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify Emerging community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not compromise this objective.

In particular, the draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Whilst standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm is more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

1.275 MB-036 Additional two to four storeys in a low density, two-storey area are inconsistent with the Brisbane's Future Blueprint which seeks to ‘ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’. A six-storey, 90 m long building

Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) includes a principle to ‘Protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’. A key related action to achieve this principle in BFB is to ‘Ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’

No change

207

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


adjacent to a two-storey house is not compatible. which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low density residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify Emerging community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not compromise this objective.


1.276 MB-042 The proposed amendments to allow for a seven-storey, 90 m long building to be allowed in the Low density residential or Character residential zone where the maximum building height should be capped to two storeys


No change

208

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


does not meet the Brisbane's Future Blueprint. which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low density residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify Emerging community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not compromise this objective.


1.277 MB-047 Development within the Community facilities zone (often occurring adjacent and within two-storey neighbourhoods) are to be sensitive to the building form of the neighbourhood as expected under the Community facilities


No change

209

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


zone code and Brisbane's Future Blueprint.

Allowing six-storey aged care/ retirement developments adjacent to established low density, two-storey houses is inconsistent with the Brisbane's Future Blueprint ' ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings'

Opposed to code assessable development (Lota House) as the Brisbane's future blueprint to ‘protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’

which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low density residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify Emerging community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not compromise this objective.


1.278 MB-060 Development within the Community facilities zone should be sensitive to the predominant building form of the neighbourhood, as is already required under the Communities facilities zone code, and is expected by the


No change

210

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


recently released Brisbane’s Future Blueprint. which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low Density Residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify Emerging Community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not compromise this objective.


1.279 MB-076 The amendment package should not be exempt from eight highly commendable principles set out in Brisbane’s Future Blueprint.

The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities are considered complementary to the principles and actions in Brisbane’s Future Blueprint and the Blueprint provides the opportunity for future additional

No change

211

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


amendments that align with the principles and actions.

The draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the City in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Whilst standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm is more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

1.280 MB-083 Allowing six-storey aged care/retirement developments adjacent to established low density, two-storey houses does not respect the built form of established Brisbane neighbourhoods is inconsistent with Council’s recently released Brisbane’s Future Blueprint, which seeks to ‘ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’.

Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) includes a principle to ‘Protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character’. A key related action to achieve this principle in BFB is to ‘Ensure that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’ which in turn relates to a more specific Council action to ‘Audit Emerging Community land and rezone to Low density residential land where appropriate’. This will help identify Emerging community land located in low density contexts to provide certainty about appropriate scale and intensity in these relevant locations. The proposed amendments in relation to retirement and residential care facilities do not

No change

212

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


compromise this objective.

In particular, draft Retirement and residential care facility code strikes a careful balance to encourage new residential care and retirement facilities across the city in response to community need, while enhancing built form and amenity outcomes. Whilst standards in relation to height have been increased as part of incentives to meet the need for residential care and retirement facilities across the city, other standards have been adjusted to ensure that the amenity of adjoining residents and the interface with the public realm is more carefully considered. In particular, the draft code contains increased standards for site area, setbacks, building separation requirements, communal open space, car parking setbacks and deep planting, compared to the current City Plan standards to provide a better balance of built form and open space overall.

1.281 MB-091 Supports opportunities for retirement and residential care facilities in Low density residential zoned areas, to ensure that we meet community housing needs through all phases of the life cycle, not only across the City as a whole, but in the place or neighbourhood we call home. We are therefore pleased to see that the draft Code currently supports retirement and residential care facilities on sites greater than 3,000 m² and requires ‘the retirement facility and/or residential care facility to be conveniently located in relation activity centres, community facilities and services, public spaces and public transport […]’.

Thanks you for your support.

The action in Brisbane’s Future Blueprint (BFB) to ‘Stop townhouses and apartments being built in areas for single homes’ will not apply to retirement and residential care facilities in the nominated zones in the amendment package.

No change

213

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


Concerned of the contrary statements contained within Brisbane’s Future Blueprint which instigates a ‘stop townhouses and apartments in areas for single homes’ and ‘ensures that suburban development fits in with its surroundings’. It is unclear how this more recent policy action will affect the proposed amendments for retirement and residential care facilities, which we appreciate were originally drafted well before the release of the Blueprint.

5.23 Ageing in place

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.282 MB-041 Proposes that all development in Communities facilities zones must demonstrate that the proposed development is for the care of the elderly rather than the development of high-rise unit blocks. This distinction is not made clear in the proposed code in section 5.5.

Proposes to ensure that code revisions protect against inconsistent development outcomes.

The creation of a single code will simplify the assessment process for applicants and ensure that the specific design considerations for such uses are addressed. The new single code identifies specific design requirements applicable to each individual use were appropriate.

Where an applicant applies for a residential care or retirement facility, they are bound by the definition of those uses in City Plan. In particular, a retirement facility is defined as follows.

Retirement facility means a residential use of premises for:

a) accommodation for older members of the community, or retired persons, in independent living units or serviced units; or

b) amenity and community facilities, a manager’s residence,

No change

214

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


health care and support services, preparing food and drink or staff accommodation, if the use is ancillary to the use in paragraph (a).

Furthermore, the proposed Retirement and residential care facility code states: ‘A retirement facility is a development that operates under the Retirement Villages Act 1999.’

There are key differences and advantages for older residents where accommodation is provided by a ‘retirement facility’ compared to a ‘multiple dwelling’ including the following.




The compatibility with residential care facilities integrated on the same site and economies of scale this provides to support a diversity of accommodation options with

215

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


different levels of care, which does provide additional opportunities for ‘ageing in place’ by residents of those integrated facilities.

These differences and advantages are equally relevant in the Community Facilities Zone as they are in other supported zones across the City.

1.283 MB-048 Concerned the Lota House development outcome will lead to affordability issues if amendment package is successful.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged.

The proposed amendments are intended to provide broader support for residential care and retirement facilities in a broader range of appropriate zones across the city, making it easier to deliver these forms of accommodation and place downward pressure on affordability. Development provided at a lower density and therefore lower yield is likely to adversely impact on affordability. Supporting a greater diversity of housing forms and densities as well as supporting the redevelopment of existing facilities is necessary to meet the needs for additional retirement and aged care living across the city.

No change

1.284 MB-060 Concerns over development applications that are inconsistent with aged-care outcomes. This approach is evident where a developer proposes to build a residential care facility for high-needs residents and then also proposes on the same site, a high-rise building for ‘retirement living’


The ability to incorporate additional onsite services and facilities to meet the needs of older residents including

No change

216

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


simply for profits without a community need. Considers the proposed TriCare development in Seven Oaks Street, Taringa, to be one such example.

Proposes the amendments need to ensure that its code revisions protect against the conduct of developers and these outcomes.

the following included in the definition of ‘retirement facility’:



The compatibility with residential care facilities integrated on the same site and economies of scale this provides to support a diversity of accommodation options with different levels of care, which does provide additional opportunities for ‘ageing in place’ by residents of those integrated facilities.

1.285 MB-082 Concerns about the nature of incentivisation for particular types of aged care developments. Concerns that some aged care development outcomes are similar in nature to commercial unit developments.



“amenity and community facilities, a manager’s residence,

No change

217

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


health care and support services, preparing food and drink or staff accommodation”.



1.286 MB-085 Supports retirement and care accommodation in locations that enable residents to age and transition within their own suburbs.


5.24 Dementia care

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.287 MB-030 Proposes the aged care codes should comply with dementia-enabling principles by requiring low-set, home-like residential-care facilities.

The proposed amendments to City Plan identify broad parameters for residential care facilities in relation to outcomes such as height, setbacks and building separation to

No change

218

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


ensure that development in different zones is an appropriate height and scale in relation to its surrounding context for example. The proposed amendments do not prevent facilities incorporating design outcomes specifically for dementia care.

By providing more options where residential care facilities can locate this provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services and levels of care to meet a broader cross-section of the community. Importantly, approval from the Australian Government is required to become a provider of aged care services. This approval process helps to ensure that the services that approved providers provide (including dementia care services) will meet the needs of residents receiving care.

1.288 MB-041 Concerns that guidelines are required to ensure that aged care developments meet best practice for aged -care facility design outlined in ' Investigating Services Provided in the Residential care Environment for Dementia (INSPIRED) study.

Proposes the amendments focus on aged care beds in dementia enabled accommodation.

Proposes aged care codes need to comply with dementia enabling principles by providing low-set, home like residential care developments in all Community Facility Zones. Concerns that anything other than low-rise accommodation is detrimental to the wellbeing of elderly people suffering from dementia.

The proposed amendments to City Plan identify broad parameters for residential care facilities in relation to outcomes such as height, setbacks and building separation to ensure that development in different zones is an appropriate height and scale in relation to its surrounding context for example. The proposed amendments do not prevent facilities incorporating design outcomes specifically for dementia care.

By providing more options where residential care facilities can locate this provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services and levels of care to meet a broader cross-section of the community. Importantly, approval from the Australian Government is required to become a provider of aged care services. This approval process helps to ensure that the

No change

219

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


services that approved providers provide (including dementia care services) will meet the needs of residents receiving care.

1.289 MB-060 Aged-care codes need to recognise the interests of dementia residents through the provision of low-set, home-like aged-care developments in all Communities facility zones and should only apply to build fit-for-purpose residential-care facilities providing beds, not ‘retirement living’ units. Considers allowable heights are inconsistent with this approach.

The codes need to be amended to explicitly require developers to deliver low-set, home-like accommodation without any increase in allowable heights.

The amendments package does not indicate the health-related expertise of those involved in its preparation. Details on who was consulted to provide expert medical opinion on the appropriateness of the codes would be of interest to the community.



No change

1.290 MB-069 Proposes the amendment package needs to accommodate the requirements of dementia patients. Outlines the difficulty to manage in larger facilities. Proposes research suggesting that they are best accommodated in well-designed small facilities of 10 to 15 beds staffed by nurses with experience and training in dementia. Proposes when making decisions for dementia sufferers the insights from research should be considered and experts in the field consulted.


By providing more options where residential care facilities can

No change

220

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


locate this provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services and levels of care to meet a broader cross-section of the community. Importantly, approval from the Australian Government is required to become a provider of aged care services. This approval process helps to ensure that the services that approved providers provide (including dementia care services) will meet the needs of residents receiving care.

1.291 MB-082 Proposes the amendment package address the wellbeing of residents who acquire dementia with practical implementation of the 'Dementia Enabling Environmental Principles'.

Suggests the proposals rely on general aged care, and are very light on provision of specialist aged care, e.g. Catering to 52% of aged residents with dementia.



No change

1.292 MB-083 Proposes that high-rise living does not suit older people with complex care needs. Outlines Dementia Australia statistics that people with dementia account for a large

The proposed amendments to City Plan identify broad parameters for residential care facilities in relation to outcomes such as height, setbacks and building separation to

No change

221

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


proportion of all residents in residential aged care facilities. Outlines ways to improve housing and living conditions for people with dementia including:

A direct relationship with nature is one of them. The ability to move safely in clearly defined areas

where boundaries and barriers are concealed. Requirement to address emergency evacuation in case

of fires for example.

ensure that development in different zones is an appropriate height and scale in relation to its surrounding context for example. The proposed amendments do not prevent facilities incorporating design outcomes specifically for dementia care.


It is mandatory requirement under Queensland building laws for all new buildings to have sufficient fire safety systems installed to ensure the safe evacuation of occupants in the event of a fire emergency. These systems will need to be assessed and approved by a private building certifier before the building is constructed and then inspected by Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES) before the building is allowed to be used or occupied. In addition to these requirements, QFES will also ensure that building owners have in place an up-to-date fire and evacuation plan for the building.

5.25 Incentives for retirement and residential care facilities

222

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.293 MB-075 Concerned the amendments appear to be relatively silent on design excellence and should incentivise world-leading architecture, landscape and urban design outcomes. Sustainability should also be further encouraged in the draft, through additional incentives for sustainability features such as reduced resource usage of water energy and materials.

Council is committed to facilitating quality developments for retirement and aged care accommodation. In order to qualify for infrastructure charges reductions, development must demonstrate that a proposal provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and contributes towards design excellence within the industry. In practice, this means that an application would largely demonstrate compliance with the applicable acceptable outcomes (e.g. regarding boundary setbacks and car parking provision) with some performance outcomes also being allowed.

Secondary to compliance with the provisions of City Plan, Council may favourably consider design elements which demonstrate an improvement on meeting acceptable outcomes such as provision of private open space, responding to Brisbane’s subtropical climate and lifestyle, ease of access to transport and other services or encouraging opportunities for social and community integration.

No change

1.294 MB-082 Considers demand for ‘retirement’ places is being driven by property developers to gain planning and scale concessions for large unit developments by including a token aged care component. Does not consider that ratepayer funds should be expended in concessions for such developments which are a means of circumventing planning requirements in residential streets.



“amenity and community facilities, a manager’s residence, health care and support services, preparing food and

No change

223

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


drink or staff accommodation”.



Providing more options where residential care and retirement facilities can locate through the proposed amendments package provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services, levels of care and price points to meet a broader cross-section of the community.

Council is committed to facilitating quality developments for retirement and aged care accommodation. In order to qualify for infrastructure charges reductions, development must demonstrate that a proposal provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and contributes towards design excellence within the industry. In practice, this means that an application would largely demonstrate compliance

224

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


with the applicable acceptable outcomes (e.g. regarding boundary setbacks and car parking provision) with some performance outcomes also being allowed. Secondary to compliance with the provisions of City Plan, Council may favourably consider design elements which demonstrate an improvement on meeting acceptable outcomes such as provision of private open space, responding to Brisbane’s subtropical climate and lifestyle, ease of access to transport and other services or encouraging opportunities for social and community integration.

1.295 MB-001 Proposes amendments place minimum quality standards (e.g. minimum aged care room sizes, minimum floor plan and sizes for retirement unit) to qualify for code approvals, or other concessions and incentives, to avoid poor design outcomes.

The proposed retirement and residential care facility code sets out rigorous assessment benchmarks that development must achieve in order to gain approval and avoid poor design outcomes. Council is committed to facilitating quality developments for retirement and aged care accommodation and is providing a reduction of infrastructure charges for qualifying development for a retirement facility and/or residential care facility. In order to qualify and demonstrate that a proposal provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and contributes towards design excellence within the industry, compliance with the relevant provisions of City Plan is required. In practice, this means that an application would largely demonstrate compliance with the applicable acceptable outcomes (e.g. regarding boundary setbacks and car parking provision) with some performance outcomes also being allowed. Secondary to compliance with the provisions of City Plan, Council may favourably consider design elements which demonstrate an improvement on meeting acceptable

No change

225

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


outcomes such as provision of private open space, responding to Brisbane’s subtropical climate and lifestyle, ease of access to transport and other services or encouraging opportunities for social and community integration.

1.296 MB-041 Proposes developers must comply with best-practice in residential care facility design before awarded ratepayer-funded infrastructure cost reductions.

References the Lord Mayor Graham Quirk’s introduction of an initiative which reduces infrastructure charges by 33% for retirement and aged care accommodation.

Proposes no reductions should be given to aged care developers unless developments meet best practice guidelines in residential care facility design.

Council is committed to facilitating quality developments for retirement and aged care accommodation. In order to demonstrate that a proposal provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and contributes towards design excellence within the industry, compliance with the relevant provisions of City Plan is required. In practice, this means that an application would largely demonstrate compliance with the applicable acceptable outcomes (e.g. regarding boundary setbacks and car parking provision) with some performance outcomes also being allowed. Secondary to compliance with the provisions of City Plan, Council may favourably consider design elements which demonstrate an improvement on meeting acceptable outcomes such as provision of private open space, responding to Brisbane’s subtropical climate and lifestyle, ease of access to transport and other services or encouraging opportunities for social and community integration.

No change

1.297 MB-058 Support reduced infrastructure charges and streamlined development processes. Recommends enhanced incentives be made available for 'affordable seniors living' products. Enhanced incentives could include a further infrastructure change rebate of 50% for the provisions for affordable retirement living dwellings. This incentive could be tied to a

Thank you for your support. Whilst additional infrastructure charges incentives are not planned at this time, Council has committed to actions to improve affordability outcomes across the City in Brisbane’s Future Blueprint. Key relevant actions include:

Facilitate a wide range of housing types and sizes to cater

No change

226

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


percentage of the Median house price (currently $535,000) in Brisbane. This additional incentive would encourage well located affordable retirement options for Seniors.

for all Brisbane residents. Create and implement a housing strategy to ensure supply

for people at every stage of life. Help Brisbane residents own their own home by

continuing rates discounts for owner-occupiers and continuing the most generous pensioner rates discount in Australia.

Where relevant, these actions will consider a range of options in relation to possible incentive mechanisms to improve affordability.

1.298 MB-060 Questions the legitimacy of development outcomes for aged care purposes. Suggests there is more need for aged care beds and not retirement units.

Developers should be given incentivise to meet this need rather than making spurious claims of need for ‘retirement living’ apartment developments.




There are key differences and advantages for older residents where accommodation is provided by a ‘retirement facility’

No change

227

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


compared to a ‘multiple dwelling’ including the following.





1.299 MB-075 Supports incentives to reduce red tape and financial costs associated with providing Retirement and Residential care facilities.


1.300 MB-081 Proposes a key issue preventing the development of new retirement and aged care facilities is the ability to purchase


228

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


affordable land when competing against the residential development sector.

Suggests that retirement and aged care development is considerably different to other forms of residential development. The proposed amendment package is strongly supported as it will assist in delivering the seniors' housing that Brisbane will need into the future.

1.301 MB-090 Supports the non-planning scheme measures being taken to support retirement and aged care accommodation including:

promotion of retirement and aged care opportunities free pre-lodgement meetings 33% reduction in infrastructure charges assisted development assessment processing.


1.302 MB-090 Recommends that infrastructure charge discounts apply for new accessible housing (provided in accordance with standards under the Livable Housing Design Guidelines) and an infrastructure agreement ensure retention of the home for aged persons for 10 years.

Council has reduced infrastructure charges for eligible retirement facility and/or residential care facility developments by 33%. Development for a retirement facility and/or aged care facility, which is compliant with the relevant provisions of City Plan, provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and provides design quality, may be eligible for reduced infrastructure charges.

The proposed Retirement and residential care facility code seeks outcomes for design excellence in the overall outcomes. Meeting the Gold level of performance in the Livable Housing Australia’s Livable Housing Design Guidelines is one of the

No change

229

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


ways in which applicants can demonstrate design excellence.

Whilst additional infrastructure charges incentives are not planned at this time, Council has committed to actions to meet housing needs across the City in Brisbane’s Future Blueprint. Key relevant actions include:



Help Brisbane residents own their own home by continuing rates discounts for owner-occupiers and continuing the most generous pensioner rates discount in Australia.

Where relevant, these actions will consider a range of options in relation to possible incentive mechanisms to address housing need on matters such as accessible housing and affordability.

1.303 MB-091 Encourages any incentive to promote retirement and aged care housing options. However, believes the current incentives are isolated to formal, integrated retirement and residential care facilities, inadvertently discouraging the establishment of alternative smaller, and more informal and accessible housing solutions, housing forms for older people, which will make downsizing and ageing in place more affordable.

Council is committed to facilitating quality developments for retirement and aged care accommodation. In order to demonstrate that a proposal provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and contributes towards design excellence within the industry, compliance with the relevant provisions of City Plan is required. In practice, this means that an application would largely demonstrate compliance with the applicable acceptable outcomes (e.g. regarding boundary setbacks and car parking provision) with

No change

230

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


The reduction of infrastructure charges for retirement and aged care accommodation developments is supported. However, it is recommended that a more transparent eligibility process be implemented. The current process does not guarantee the 33% reduction on Council infrastructure charges until the development application is in the decision stage. This introduces significant uncertainty and volatility in project feasibility assessments where there is ambiguity around the established criteria. It is recommended that a Pre-lodgement design process be introduced and where eligibility agreements are entered into, which will allow proponents to obtain greater clarity and assurance in qualifying for a reduction of infrastructure charges prior to securing a site and/or outlaying the costs incurred in a full development application.

some performance outcomes also being allowed. Secondary to compliance with the provisions of City Plan, Council may favourably consider design elements which demonstrate an improvement on meeting acceptable outcomes such as provision of private open space, responding to Brisbane’s subtropical climate and lifestyle, ease of access to transport and other services or encouraging opportunities for social and community integration.

It is reasonable and practical that eligibility for the infrastructure charges reduction be determined by Council through the development application process. It is often the case that development proposals change and evolve through the application process and the onus is on the applicant to demonstrate a proposal provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and contributes towards design excellence.

Council provides pre-lodgement meeting services where expectations and design outcomes can be discussed to provide greater certainty for applicants and help with feasibility planning.

1.304 MB-030 Proposes that developers be required to comply with best-practice in residential-care facility design before being awarded ratepayer-funded infrastructure cost reductions.

Suggests Council should seek advice from health and medical professionals with experience working with the elderly and in aged care in developing its aged-care code/s to ensure that the needs of the elderly are met through

Council is committed to facilitating quality developments for retirement and aged care accommodation. In order to demonstrate that a proposal provides a quality living environment that is fit for purpose and contributes towards design excellence within the industry, compliance with the relevant provisions of City Plan is required. In practice, this means that an application would largely demonstrate

No change

231

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


best-practice aged care accommodation. compliance with the applicable acceptable outcomes (e.g. regarding boundary setbacks and car parking provision) with some performance outcomes also being allowed. Secondary to compliance with the provisions of City Plan, Council may favourably consider design elements which demonstrate an improvement on meeting acceptable outcomes such as provision of private open space, responding to Brisbane’s subtropical climate and lifestyle, ease of access to transport and other services or encouraging opportunities for social and community integration.

5.26 Affordability

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.305 MB-048 Believes if the amendment package is successful, then Lota House, Brisbane, would become a luxury unit development that will not be affordable requiring local residents (including existing Lota House residents) needing care to relocate outside of Lota therefore not supporting ‘ageing in place’.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s PD Online website to monitor the progress of this development application. Community concerns in relation to this application will be carefully considered as part of the decision on the application.

Providing more options where residential care and retirement facilities can locate through the proposed amendments package provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services, levels

No change

232

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


of care and price points to meet a broader cross-section of the community.

1.306 MB-059 Suggests expensive high-rise apartments will not assist the aged as people with homes rarely want to switch to apartment living because of body corporate fees for one thing and most would already be in apartments if they wanted this living arrangement before they get too old. Proposes the need for aged care when support is required and there is not enough of this type of dwelling.

Considers downsizing from large homes to smaller dwellings doesn't need incentives for developers. Recommends smaller homes are good for any age if there is a shortage of affordable housing. Considers developers should build high-rise according to laws that exist now.

Agrees, aged care facilities are needed, but not high-rise aged care unless it is built to suit supported living and architecturally designed that way meaning a completely different arrangement than normal apartments.

By providing more options where residential care and retirement facilities can locate through the proposed amendments package this provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services, levels of care and price points to meet a broader cross-section of the community.

Infrastructure charges reductions are also in place for eligible retirement and residential care facilities that demonstrate design quality and fit-for-purpose living environments. This incentivises higher quality development outcomes that better meet the needs of residents.

No change

5.27 Other Issues

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.307 MB-032 Considers evidence of a pressing need is scant.

The proposed retirement and aged care amendments

There are key differences and advantages for older residents where accommodation is provided by a ‘retirement facility’

No change

233

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


should not pair aged care facilities with retirement villages.

Considers the proposed amendments have no logical basis for combining retirement living and aged care based on justification around ‘ageing in place’.

Ageing people will retire at home, however the one in twelve who needs care will move into an aged care facility.

The amendments to combine retirement living with aged-care facilities creates distortion aimed at demonstrating an urgent need that does not exist.

Recommends aged care and retirement living be dealt with under separate codes. That way, the developers can separately build profit-making high-rise.

compared to a ‘multiple dwelling’ including the following





By providing more options where residential care and retirement facilities can locate through the proposed amendments package this provides the potential for a greater diversity of facilities at different scales providing different services, levels of care and price points to meet a broader cross-section of the community.

234

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.308 MB-034 Submission on the Lota house development application at Oceana Terrace, Lota making the following comments.

Three storeys high would suit the area and be in keeping with all the streets around it.

Extra commercial uses are not needed, and courtesy buses would be provided for residents.

Recommends the development should be small easy to maintain units—one or two bedrooms—not resort style luxury units for those not needing care.

Recommends limiting the impact to existing trees so that around 85% remain.

Recommends locking the land and buildings use for age care for 99 years or a similar minimum period.

Recommends integrated resort style residential care and retirement facilities should be prevented consistent with Brisbane’s Future Blueprint action to ‘stop townhouses and apartment being built in areas for single homes’.

Recommends:o keeping the suburbs as houses with gardens for

families o using more land for development rather than

increasing densities in existing areas.

The development application on the Lota House site is currently under assessment. This application will be assessed on its merits against the assessment benchmarks in City Plan as adopted at the time the application was lodged. Please take advantage of Council’s PD Online website to monitor the progress of this development application. Community concerns in relation to this application will be carefully considered as part of the decision on the application.

No change

1.309 MB-087 The proposed AO27.3 stating the 'large openings' is unclear and to be reworded.

PO27 provides the outcomes sought by providing ‘large openings’ which aids interpretation of what would be an appropriate solution in compliance with the acceptable

No change

235

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


outcome.

1.310 MB-087 The proposed AO30.3 (development for a 'retaining wall is maximum 0.6 m height.') is not consistent with existing provisions in City Plan where a standard of a maximum height of 1 m for a retaining wall applies. It is unclear why retirement and aged care facilities are not treated the same. Recommends the max retaining wall height of 1 m.

A 0.6 m height requirement only applies where directly abutting the edge of an adjoining road reserve verge which is consistent with AO34.3 of the Multiple dwelling code.

No change

1.311 MB-073 Recommends revising AO11.1 (b) of the Retirement and residential care code to increase 1.5 m to more than 3 m. An existing habitable room (presumably with a window) could have a 3 m high fence 1.5 m distant, resulting in a significant loss of amenity.

Comments noted. The code was amended to ensure that built to boundary walls are not supported along a common boundary to a lot in the Low density residential zone or Character residential zone. This will ensure that walls in this context meet setback and building separation requirements and will not be subject to the standards for built to boundary walls including the 1.5 m setback from a dwelling house for a wall up to 3 m.

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code, to ensure that built to boundary walls are not supported where adjoining a Low density residential zone or Character residential zone.

1.312 MB-051 Recommends deletion of AO13 of the Retirement and residential care facilitiy code, as proposed wind strategies are not guaranteed to provide desired outcome.

AO13 provides guidance about wind mitigation strategies that can help meet PO13 and that Council may accept without requiring the submission of a wind impact assessment. The intent is to avoid the need to carry out an assessment against PO13 involving a detailed wind impact assessment for every application.

No change

1.313 MB-051 Recommends reviewing the proposed dedication line in Figure h in the Retirement and residential care facility code, as per the below figure.

The proposed corner dedication requirement ensures that there is a clear delineation of public and private realm including ensuring responsibility for public streetscape asset

No change

236

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


ownership and maintenance can occur.

1.314 MB-081 Recommends reviewing provisions for screening and overlooking of dwelling houses, set out in AO9.3 of the Retirement and residential care code, to only apply to Retirement facilities. Screening of this nature is not suitable for residential care facilities as it blocks views for residents who spend a high proportion of time in bed.

The screening requirements apply in circumstances where there is a risk of privacy conflicts such as where the development does not meet building separation requirements and habitable rooms face one another. These circumstances cannot always be avoided and therefore where there are privacy conflicts, screening measures are necessary (i.e. residents cannot have both a direct outlook to adjoining dwellings and privacy). There are screening options available that provide privacy whilst still allowing natural light.

No change

1.315 MB-007 Facilities should stipulate pet friendly or pet free, provide a Communal Pet/Menagerie, Community Vegie Garden and Chooks.

These are aspects of land use that are generally not regulated by the planning scheme where carried out at a domestic scale. It is therefore up to individual operators to support such outcomes and beyond the scope of what can be achieved through the proposed amendments to the planning scheme.

No change

1.316 MB-010 Supports development provided there is an understanding of the impacts and culture of the area.

In Brisbane there seems to be very little regard for streetscape, the setting, the style of building, the boundaries, heights, impact on light and breeze, privacy etc.

Some of the developments allowed to proceed are unsuitable and should not be allowed to continue.

Your support is noted. Council has listened to similar concerns raised by the community during the consultation for Brisbane’s Future Blueprint which proposes a number of actions to address such design outcomes including:

Mandate best practice design that fits surroundings and meets community standards.

Create a design rating scheme to ensure buildings comply with higher design standards.

Furthermore, the proposed amendments include a number of changes to previous standards for aspects such as setbacks

No change

237

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


and building separation to ensure that residential care and retirement facilities more comfortably sit within their site context without introducing adverse amenity aspects on surrounding areas.

1.317 MB-012 Supports high-rise; facilitating other associated community services; outdoor open areas; dementia safety; and owner and visitor parking.

Thank you for your support for the proposed amendments. No change

1.318 MB-024 Requests that Council extend the footpath in Alcheringa Place Park to Didbrook Street, and to provide two or three lights along the footpath.

Notes that Alcheringa Place Park is the main route to Robertson School.

Notes the existing footpath provided in the park does not provided a continuous north/south connection to nearby streets requiring access across bumpy lawn and grass coming up to knee-high which can be dangerous given the uneven surface.

Thank you for raising this concern. Please note that this matter does not directly relate to the proposed retirement and aged care amendments package but will be considered as part of future works programs.

No change

1.319 MB-030 While simplification of the codes is to be encouraged, retirement units are not considered by the general community to be the same as residential-care facilities and should not be treated as such within a common code.

Residential care and aged care facilities are often delivered in an integrated campus style facility and identifying standards in a common code streamlines and simplifies the assessment of such applications. Importantly, the code is appropriately structured with appropriate variation of standards to address different circumstances manage potential impacts and meet the varying needs of different uses.

No change

1.320 MB-030 Developers should be required to submit an independent The need for additional retirement facilities and residential No change

238

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


needs analysis demonstrating a need for an aged care development as part of their development application.

care facilities across the city is already recognised by Council, as outlined below.

• Brisbane’s current 70-plus population of 90,080 is projected to increase by 49% (or 43,759 persons) to 2027. That is an average increase of 3,647 persons that may require dedicated retirement or residential care accommodation and/or care and support services each year to 2027.

• Within Brisbane 11.9% of the population, or 245,586 people, are over 65 years and approximately 6.6% of them live in a retirement village. There are around 6,321 dwellings promoted to retired and ageing persons, catering to around 8,217 persons. The average age of residents living in retirement villages in Queensland is 80 years, with average entry age 73 years.

• Aa at 2015, Brisbane had 9,616 operational residential aged care allocations (i.e. funded bed spaces) with a further 2,238 provisional allocations (i.e. allocated to a provider but not actually provided). It is projected that the undersupply of places will reach 2,436 by 2027.

Council’s strategy is to ensure that retirement facilities and residential care facilities are supported in preferred locations at an appropriate scale and density within their site context in response to known citywide need. Accordingly, where retirement facilities and residential care facilities seek to locate in identified preferred locations, an independent needs

239

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


analysis is considered unwarranted.

1.321 MB-041 Developers should be required to submit an independent analysis demonstrating a need for an aged care development as part of their development application.Residents living in small group homes, helping with cooking and washing clothes, improves their health and wellbeing.People prefer to age in their own home.

Council has not provided evidence sought from experts on the technical aspects of the code and fitness for elderly residents or aged care accommodation.

The need for additional retirement facilities and residential care facilities across the city is already recognised by Council, as outlined below.

• Brisbane’s current 70-plus population of 90,080 is projected to increase by 49% (or 43,759 persons) to 2027. That is an average increase of 3,647 persons that may require dedicated retirement or residential care accommodation and/or care and support services each year to 2027.

• Within Brisbane 11.9% of the population, or 245,586 people, are over 65 years and approximately 6.6% of them live in a retirement village. There are around 6,321 dwellings promoted to retired and ageing persons, catering to around 8,217 persons. The average age of residents living in retirement villages in Queensland is 80 years, with average entry age 73 years.

• As at 2015, Brisbane had 9,616 operational residential aged care allocations (i.e. funded bed spaces) with a further 2,238 provisional allocations (i.e. allocated to a provider but not actually provided). It is projected that the undersupply of places will reach 2,436 by 2027.

Council’s strategy is to ensure that retirement facilities and residential care facilities are supported in preferred locations at an appropriate scale and density within their site context in response to known citywide need. Accordingly, where

No change

240

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


retirement facilities and residential care facilities seek to locate in identified preferred locations, an independent needs analysis is considered unwarranted.

1.322 MB-060 Genuine consultation with the community on amendments requires specific details to be provided on how each of the outcomes are to be achieved through the plan; how the existing plan is to be modified to give effect to these; and the likely impacts of the changes. The amendments package does not adequately explain the consequences to existing residents of those policy changes.

The proposed amendments are prepared in accordance with Queensland planning legislation and formal standards to give effect to future amendments to City Plan (i.e. the planning scheme for Brisbane). It is acknowledged that in this format, the proposed amendments contain significant detail. Accordingly, Council has published a fact sheet on the website for the proposed amendments that seeks to provide an overview and explain the effect of the proposed amendments. It can be found here:

https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning-building/planning-guidelines-tools/brisbane-city-plan-2014/amendments-city-plan-2014/city-plan-amendments-progress/retirement-aged-care-amendments-package

Council has also held a number of Talk to a Planner sessions across the City during the public consultation period, to help explain the proposed amendments and respond to questions and concerns raised by the community.

No change

1.323 MB-063 Suggests that there is an excessive amount of legalese in the document used for public consultation. It is not reasonable that a layperson can be expected to make an informed choice from reading the 'Retirement and aged care amendments package' some 301 pages in length. It is incumbent on the Council to produce a precise document

The proposed amendments are prepared in accordance with Queensland planning legislation and formal standards to give effect to future amendments to City Plan (i.e. the planning scheme for Brisbane). It is acknowledged that in this format the proposed amendments contain significant detail. Accordingly, Council has published a fact sheet on the website

No change

241




Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


that sets out clearly how these changes affect individual householders.

for the proposed amendments that seeks to provide an overview and explain the effect of the proposed amendments. It can be found here:


Council has also held a number of Talk to a Planner sessions across the City during the public consultation period, to help explain the proposed amendments and respond to questions and concerns raised by the community.

1.324 MB-068 Identifies that AO17.3 incorporates requirements in relation to doors, windows and cross ventilation and is a new requirement.Proposes this to be a building matter and is best dealt with as part of the building application for the development.Recommends deleting AO17.3.

These are considered to be matters within the scope of what a planning scheme can regulate to support sustainable design and to respond to our subtropical climate for the benefit of residents living in residential care and retirement facilities. Importantly, these outcomes are not considered to cut-across building regulation matters or obligations to address any building regulation aspects.

No change

1.325 MB-068 Identifies that A030.1 may conflict with the requirements of A02 (b) which requires a two m high fence to a boundary adjoining a sensitive use. The requirement does not take into the operational requirements of residential care facilities to provide a secure environment for residents which may require higher more secure fencing in certain circumstances. Further, P030 does not acknowledge the operational requirements of these uses with respect to

Comments noted and accepted. Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code, to support fence heights to 2 m where adjoining sensitive uses.

242




Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


fencing.

Recommends the acceptable outcome should be applicable to the interface with public spaces such as at the road frontage to ensure that the normal operations of these facilities is not unduly restricted. An additional point could be added to P030 as follows: ‘provides for the operational requirements of the facility to ensure a safe and secure environment for all residents.’

1.326 MB-069 Recommends that those with any conflicts of interest should not participate or be members of advisory or decision making bodies and that community members be well represented on the Inclusive Brisbane Board, some of whom should have expertise in the service to be provided and the type of building required.

It is standard Council policy that Council officers are not involved in decision-making on matters where there is a conflict of interest. In addition, Council maintains a register of interests of financial and non-financial particulars of senior contract and other employees as required and persons related to them.

The Inclusive Brisbane Board is an advisory board addressing community issues associated with development and planning, including land use, affordability, community facilities, economic viability, safety, the arts and community cohesiveness of Brisbane. Whilst community members are well represented by the membership of the Inclusive Brisbane Board, the board does not have a role in the assessment of development applications, which is instead managed by Council’s Development Services. The proposed amendments contain the tests for development (rather than individuals), to ensure that Council officers can make impartial decisions on development applications against standards that ensure appropriate outcomes for the community.

No change

243

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.327 MB-069 Recommends that the regulations make provision for the approval process to examine the track record (probity) of applicants when deciding whether to approve their application to build facilities. When making assessments local (and when necessary international) regulatory data bases should be examined, internet searches performed and those with information be given an opportunity to supply it.

Approval to become an aged care provider is required from the Australian Government, and Council does not have a role in this assessment. Approved providers are required to meet detailed accreditation standards. Further details can be found here:

https://agedcare.health.gov.au/

No change

1.328 MB-073 The format of the amendment could be significantly improved by stating in ‘plain English’ a shortened version of the actual changes proposed from the existing ‘rules’.

The proposed amendments are prepared in accordance with Queensland planning legislation and formal standards to give effect to future amendments to City Plan (i.e. the planning scheme for Brisbane). It is acknowledged that in this format the proposed amendments contain significant detail. Accordingly, Council has published a fact sheet on the website for the proposed amendments that seeks to provide an overview and explain the effect of the proposed amendments. It can be found here:


Council also held a number of Talk to a Planner sessions across the City during the public consultation period, to help explain the proposed amendments and respond to questions and concerns raised by the community.

No change

1.329 MB-073 Recommends revising PO4 of the Retirement and Pool pumps are part of the umbrella of ‘services and related No change

244




https://agedcare.health.gov.au/

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


residential care facility code to explicitly refer to reduction of noise from pool pumps.

structures’ that the performance outcome addresses. The performance outcome (through Acceptable Outcome AO2), therefore requires that pool pumps are appropriately located and/or screened to ensure that there are no adverse amenity impacts.

1.330 MB-075 Proposes the encouragement of sustainability in the draft amendments, through additional incentives for sustainability features such as reduced resource usage of water, energy and materials.

The draft code contains a number of requirements promoting subtropical design outcomes, which can assist sustainability in relation to energy use. Importantly, specific standards in relation to water and energy efficiency and building materials in relation to sustainability outcomes are addressed in the building assessment provisions under the Building Act 1975, which are outside the scope of what a planning scheme can regulate. For example, the Queensland Development Code (QDC) contains part MP 4.1 Sustainable Buildings, which is a mandatory part containing energy and water efficiency requirements applicable to class 2 buildings (i.e. retirement facilities).

No change

1.331 MB-077 The proposed change will facilitate a process that will likely see a loss of the city-wide greenspace system, rather than strengthen protection of such land. Such changes are considered to not advance the purpose of the Planning Act, as well as compromising outcomes of the SEQ Regional Plan and Strategic Framework of City Plan.

The citywide greenspace system is considered to be protected by its inclusion in the relevant zones (such as the conservation, environmental management and open spaces zones). Furthermore, greenspace areas outside of the relevant zones are protected by the relevant City Plan overlays (e.g. biodiversity, waterway corridors and wetlands overlay codes) that apply irrespective of zoning and supported development outcomes in each zone to protect the values of these important areas. The amendments do not propose variations to these established provisions in City Plan that seek to

No change

245

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


protect and enhance the greenspace system.

1.332 MB-079 Recommends deletion of PO40 (Identified in a Neighbourhood Plan), PO42 (Significant Corner Site) and PO43 (Corner Land Dedication).

It is not considered necessary for development parameters to be included where already required under a neighbourhood plan. No additional value is added by reiterating the same requirements that are already prescribed under the relevant Neighbourhood Plan.

The removal of these sections of the code will provide for a more concise and less repetitive code.

The provisions in the draft code in relation to these particular outcomes in neighbourhood plans are consistent with the other use codes (e.g. the multiple dwelling code) and the structure of City Plan in relation to these provisions. The neighbourhood plans identify relevant locations in the mapping and the use codes contain the assessment benchmarks. This ensures that the assessment benchmarks remain consistent across the city.

No change

1.333 MB-079 The odour control criteria prescribed under Table 9.3.14.3.J is not ‘called up’ in any performance outcome or acceptable outcome under the Retirement and residential care code. As such the criteria in this table are considered superfluous and it is recommended that this table be deleted from the amendment package.

The odour criteria are called up by PO32 in relation to addressing odour impacts on sensitive uses (e.g. food/cooking odour from commercial scale cooking or car parking basement vents) where located in centres or the mixed use zone.

No change

1.334 MB-079 Requests that the wording of AO30.1 (fence height) be amended so that this provision relates to front fences only to avoid conflict with requirements for dementia courtyard fencing.

Comments noted and accepted Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to support fence heights to 2 m where adjoining sensitive uses.

1.335 MB-051 Recommends that AO30.1 of the Retirement and residential care facility code only refer to fencing to road frontages.

Comments noted and accepted Amend the Retirement and residential care

246

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


facility code to support fence heights to 2 m where adjoining sensitive uses.

1.336 MB-079 Identifies A036 (Graffiti and Vandalism Prevention Techniques) is not relevant given the buildings will be privately-owned, the management and mitigation of graffiti and vandalism will be managed by the owner.Recommends this AO be deleted.

Graffiti and vandalism prevention techniques include both measures through the design and layout of development (relevant for regulation through the planning scheme), as well as ongoing operating management measures.

No change

1.337 MB-051 Recommends deletion of AO36 of the Retirement and residential care facility code, as the owners are best placed to facilitate prevention of graffiti.

Graffiti and vandalism prevention techniques include both measures through the design and layout of development (relevant for regulation through the planning scheme), as well as ongoing operating management measures.

No change

1.338 MB-080 Suggests that PO9/AO9.1 identifies site characteristics that may not facilitate preferred orientation of balconies, windows or private open space away from side boundaries and screening is a suitable alternative. Recommends the acceptable outcome is amended as follows:

Development positions the primary balcony, window, or private open space to face the street frontage, rear boundary, communal open space or adjoining public open space or where positioned face a side boundary provides screening in accordance with AO9.3.

Development limits solid balustrading of any such balconies facing the street or adjoining public space to a maximum of:

The preferred outcome is for primary balconies, windows, or private open space to be oriented away from side boundaries. Secondary spaces may be oriented to side boundaries where meeting separation distances and/or screening requirements. In cases where primary spaces face the side boundaries, the outcome will be tested against the performance outcome to ensure that this does not compromise privacy/amenity or opportunities for passive surveillance of the street.

No change

247

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


a) 50% of the balconies on the first three storeysb) 25% on the fourth storey and above.

Refer to Figure c.

1.339 MB-080 Recommends that the floor to ceiling height in AO17.1 is reduced from 2.7 m to 2.4 m consistent with the Multiple dwelling code.

Floor to ceiling heights have been included to facilitate desired amenity outcomes for residents such as reducing the need for mechanical heating, cooling and lighting by ensuring access to sunlight and natural heating, cooling and ventilation. Alternatively, development may also meet dual aspect windows or habitable rooms with two windows or openings in accordance with AO17.1.

No change

1.340 MB-051

MB-081

Recommends that the floor to ceiling height in AO17.1 be revised to a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.6 m.

Floor to ceiling heights have been included to facilitate desired amenity outcomes for residents such as reducing the need for mechanical heating, cooling and lighting by ensuring access to sunlight and natural heating, cooling and ventilation. Alternatively, development may also meet dual aspect windows or habitable rooms with two windows or openings in accordance with AO17.1.

No change

1.341 MB-081 Proposes the location of trunk services are often beyond the control the developer. However, refuse and recycling locations can be controlled. Suggests these two items should be split into two categories (AO4 – Services).

PO4 and AO4 have been amended to provide separate outcomes for refuse, recycling and services and related structures. In addition, measurable standards in relation to the street frontage extent and preferred locations are identified to provide sufficient flexibility for locations that meet operational requirements of third parties.

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to provide more specific guidance and measurable standards for locating refuse storage, services and related service structures.

248

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


1.342 MB-051 Considers that the location of trunk services is beyond the control of the designer. Recommends splitting trunk services and refuse, identified in AO4 of the Retirement and residential care facility code, into two categories. The AOs should state that trunk services should be well screened and integrated into fencing, and refuse should not be visually obtrusive as per current AO wording.

PO4 and AO4 have been amended to provide separate outcomes for refuse and services and related structures. In addition, measurable standards in relation to the street frontage extent and preferred locations are identified to provide sufficient flexibility for locations that meet operational requirements of third parties.

Amend the Retirement and residential care facility code to provide more specific guidance and measurable standards for locating refuse storage, services and related service structures.

1.343 MB-051 Recommends deletion of provisions in the Retirement and residential care code that are covered under the National Construction Code, including AO22.1, AO22.2, AO26 (h), AO32 (a) and (b), and AO33 (a) and (b).

These requirements are not considered to affect requirements under the National Construction Code, and are additional, separate requirements to meet the particular needs of development for residential care facilities and retirement facilities.

No change

1.344 MB-081 A022.1, A022.2, A032 (a) and (b), and A033 – All these AOs are covered by the National Construction Code and should be deleted.


No change

1.345 MB-079 Gradient level (A022.1-A022.2) – These will be addressed as part of the Australian Building Code and equitable access requirements.

We recommend that this be deleted to avoid conflicts and duplication.


No change

1.346 MB-085 Supports the proposed amendments recognising the Thank you for your support. No change

249

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


overwhelming need for appropriate seniors’ accommodation.

1.347 MB-087 Concerned that the proposed amendments do not reflect the nuances or the operational requirements of the sector.

Does not support 9.3.18.2 Purpose (2)(b), as it is unclear how the development of a High Care Facility can meet this purpose. High care facilities are required to maintain controlled access points between the site and public areas for safety. Unstructured connections would only be provided where safe and depends on the health care needs and may not be appropriate in all circumstances. This statement is to be clarified to ensure that this purpose statement is only applied to development where it is appropriate.

Overall outcome 2(b) is not considered inconsistent with the operational requirements of high care facilities with access control. Visitors and the wider community can still have the opportunity for interaction with residents notwithstanding access control (including through formal arrangements such as services provided to residents or where residents are outside of a controlled environment on the site such as where Care co-located uses are provided). Furthermore, different levels of care are commonly provided from one facility; therefore, there are different opportunities applicable to different circumstances.

No change

1.348 MB-087 Proposed AO42 'to emphasise the corner setting of a significant corner site identified in a neighbourhood plan' this repeats the performance outcome. It is recommended that further direction be provided in the AO which sets out one way to meet the PO or alternatively no AO be provided.

Noted. No change

1.349 MB-090 Supports applying one code to simplify the assessment process for applicants.


1.350 MB-096 Considers it is vital that this amendments package continue to observe, monitor and adapt to changes in our age profiles in order to better focus policy and program efforts. It is critical that the best available data be continued to be

Council undertakes monitoring activities that include tracking the demographic profile of the community to inform planning activities and projects as well as regular monitoring of City Plan to track its performance and guide ongoing amendments

No change

250

Item ref.

Submission ref. no.


monitored with regards to ageing population, with specific focus on future levels of fertility, mortality, overseas and internal migration. The needs of older people from a range of different cultural backgrounds increasingly needs to be considered.

for community benefit.

1.351 MB-097 Considers that inner-city houses are in short supply and many families believe that a good alternative to townhouse living would be to see large house size units built on top of one another in Medium rise developments as a great alterative. Medium size developments of house size units consisting of four bedroom, two bathroom, two living area and large balcony units would be in great demand.

Proposes a new zoning class of MFR (Medium Family Residential) could provide great economic stimulus based on families wanting this product for the benefits of a large house without the worry of maintaining a yard. Suggests there could also be a commercial arrangement on the ground floor level to allow for a Child Care Centre to house the building’s growing families. A cluster of three or more of the older unit blocks in Coorparoo could potential become ideal sites in the future for these types of developments as it would be economical feasible to in the future decades knock down these unattractive old brick boxes and build up new family dwellings.

There are a number of zones in inner-city areas that support outcomes for a mix of different apartment sizes including larger apartments to support the needs of larger households as well as owner/occupier market preferences. Relevant zones include the Low-medium density residential zone, Medium density residential zone and High density residential zone as well as the centres zones and the mixed use zone. The planning scheme actively supports the provision of a variety of dwelling sizes and the market generally responds to community demand in this regard. Although larger apartment sizes are commonly preferred, the prevailing trend is that household sizes are becoming smaller, reducing the underlying need for apartments with a larger number of bedrooms. Key actions of Brisbane’s Future Blueprint include:



Implementing these actions will ensure the best match between community needs and the support for different housing types across the city.

No change

251

major amendment package b – retirement and aged care · web viewcouncil sought feedback on the...

Documents