D/A "unlikely to be approved"

Has anyone had a site they found, spoke with their town planner and developed a proposal well within the zoning guidelines and still be knocked back from council?

Well I have!

On approaching council my reply was "unlikely to be approved" and we can't figure out why?

It's not the first time they have been wrong with me- but can you be turned down for no reason?

We have a good relationship with council, yet it's very closed in communication with this issue.

Has anyone got similar stories?

Should I gain approval from neighbors to help with the application?

Many thanks

 

I can tell you, that was exactly what happened to me on my Parramatta thread development. I was doing my DD with council during the acquisition of the property and the senior town planner as well as the guy in charge of easements at council said "99% the easement wont get approved", (as i needed the easement from council). The proposal was also completely within the zoning guidelines. I sought some legal council and basically was advised that they would really have to give me a legal point of discharge. So I took the risk and went ahead.

When I lodged the formal application, they were mega ******, it did take longer for the DA due to the easement but in the end after hooing and haring they approved it. I think they just didn't want me to formally lodge the application so they wouldn't actually have to deal with it.

What's the actual reason why they indicated that to you? Something to do with the neighbors land?

 

Well we didn't actually get a reason, that's whats frustrating. It's IN1 zoning, so basic commercial within a commercial hub. The two priorities either side are old residentials that fell into original zoning prior to buffer zone having been created a few years back. Having said that, they are now under the commercial zoning now anyways.

Best I can think of in the situation?

Thanks for sharing.

 

It's the danger of assumption. Always have a "Plan B" for your property. Buying on the basis of "needing a DA for the purchase to make sense" is dangerous. At the very least, you want to be able to hang onto the property and rent it out if needs be.

 

So you haven't actually lodged for DA and been formally refused?
If you and your town planner are confident then lodge. If the Council refuses then they must state why. If you think that they are still wrong then you appeal to the relevant body that handles the appeal process.

I have been 'approved' by Council town planners then refused by the Councillors on 2 sites. That is indeed frustrating! One I won on appeal and mediation. The other is due to go to court in April but I am doing a backup concept and DA before then.

 

I've negotiated the property as subject to D/A (thankfully).. So we can go for it, sounds like that's the challenge.

I'll find out Monday!

 

Good advice above.

Nice one getting subject to DA. Would have reduced the risk even further if the clause said something like "subject to DA being satisfactory to purchaser". But maybe it does say that already.

 

As a vendor, "subject to something" which isn't quantifiable, isn't sold.

 

At the moment in Brisbane, all the time. Some of City Plan 2014 codes seem to have lost political support. There are applications that absolute tick every box that we have to appeal in court. Gets resolved prior to mediation as a rule or at mediation.

 

Hi @Scott No Mates

Are you saying that if the subject to clause isn't quantifiable in numbers then it won't hold up if it goes to court? Just curious to know.

.thanks mate

 

Sounds like a lot of extra $$$

 

I agree. Whenever I bought a development site, I always made sure I had plan 2, 3 and 4 for it eg, Make sure its in a good location for medium to long term growth if I need to hold, buy under market value so if I need to flick it try to get out at least break even, possibly reno and sell etc. Personally, I wouldn't buy a site where if I couldn't get a DA then I'm stuck with a massive cash drain with no exit in sight.

 

It's not nailed down ie the documentation which is to be submitted must have more than a snowball's chance in hell of getting up ie complying development, within the realms of the LEP etc. If the clause is so wide that you could drive a D9 through it then it's almost as good as not having an agreement - so the preferred path would be to accept an option.

 

@Scott No Mates i do like using options mate. I must admit they confused me the first time I tried but in the end its quite simple really.