Skip links and keyboard navigation

Skip to primary navigation | Skip to secondary navigation | Skip to content | Skip to content | Skip to footer | Use tab and cursor keys to move around the page (more information)
Skip Navigation LinksDepartment of Housing and Public Works > Construction > Building and plumbing > Appealing local government building application decisions > Dispute resolution decisions > Amenity and aesthetics decisions

 Amenity and aesthetics decisions

Appeal Subject Type and size
​25-16 ​This is an appeal under section 526(a) of the Sustainable Planning Act (SPA) in relation to the direction by the Concurrence Agency (Council) to Mr Gerhardt, acting as the Assessment Manager, to refuse the building development application for a metal roof awning on the subject property (Building DA).
Committee decision appealed to the Planning and Environment Court - Appeal number 607/2017.

(PDF, 234KB)

​(PDF, 151KB)

​20-16 ​Alterations, additions and demolition to rear existing house class 1a refused by Council under Brisbane city plan section 1.7.4 regarding extreme adverse effect on amenity and in conflict with locality character. ​(PDF, 667KB)
42-15 ​Decision Notice issued by Vermeer Building Certification Pty Ltd refusing an  application for the proposed extension to an existing dwelling and siting of a new shed as a result of advice from Ipswich City Council because it did not comply with Council's Amenity and Aesthetic provisions. ​(PDF, 197KB)
​27-15 ​Council refusal (concurrence) of development application for garage. ​(PDF, 230KB)
15-15 ​Council refusal (concurrence) of request to change existing development approval to include class 10a structure being two shade sales. ​(PDF, 327KB)
​45-14 ​Council refusal (concurrence) of development application for construction of shed which conflicts with the Amenity and Aesthetics Policy of the Local Authority. ​(PDF, 188KB)
​25-14 ​Council refusal (concurrence) of development application for construction of shed which conflicts with the Amenity and Aesthetics Resolution of the Local Authority. ​(PDF, 147KB)
25-10 Council refusal of an application for relocation of a building on amenity and aesthetic grounds.
(Refer Planning and Environment Court Judgement 77 of 2009).
(PDF, 116KB)
3-09-048 Council refusal of an application for a covered deck on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 122KB)
3-07-63 Imposition of a condition by council on a Preliminary Development Permit for proposed a shed (class 10a structure) on the shed was twice the allowable size under the criteria for domestic out buildings. (PDF, 75KB)
3-07-38 Council refusal of the proposed re-siting of a detached dwelling (class 1) on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 59KB)
3-07-24 Council refusal of the relocation of a class 1 building on grounds that it would be in extreme conflict with the character of the locality. (PDF, 67KB)
3-06-109 Council refusal of an application for a proposed shed, on the grounds that it will have an extremely adverse effect on the amenity or likely amenity, of the locality and be in extreme conflict with the amenity and aesthetics character of the area. (PDF, 66KB)
3-06-93-a Council refusal of a siting variation application for building works, on the grounds that it would have an extreme adverse effect on the amenity or likely amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood.

Appeal has 2 parts—A&A and Siting decisions are decided separately
(PDF, 65KB)
3-06-84 Toowoomba City Council refusal of an application for an entertainment pavilion on both amenity and aesthetic and siting grounds. (PDF, 69KB)
3-06-65 Council refusal of an application for the approval of a class 10a building on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 56KB)
3-06-60 Council refusal of an application for a class 10 building on the grounds that the proposal is in council’s opinion a detached dwelling and is therefore not an ancillary use to the primary dwelling, and related amenity and character concerns relating to the proposal. (PDF, 161KB)
3-06-55 Council refusal of an application for a class 10 building on the grounds that the structure will have an extreme adverse affect on the amenity or future amenity of the proposed building’s neighbourhood. (PDF, 64KB)
3-06-22 Council refusal of an application for a class 10 building under Section 21 of the Standard Building Regulation 1993 (SBR) in application of its Amenity and Aesthetics Policy under Section 50 of the SBR. (PDF, 74KB)
3-06-5 Council refusal of an application for a proposed garage, on the grounds it will have an adverse effect and be in conflict with the amenity and aesthetics of the area. (PDF, 65KB)
3-05-59 Council refusal of an application on for the location of a shipping container on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 63KB)
3-05-50 Council refusal of an application for amenity and aesthetics assessment, before allowing construction of a shed. (PDF, 56KB)
3-05-48 Council refusal of an application for building a relocatable dwelling on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 59KB)
3-05-47 Council refusal of an application for building of a class 10 metal framed and clad shed on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 77KB)
3-05-35-AA Council refusal of a relaxation for the height and location of a proposed garage on amenity and aesthetics grounds.

Appeal has 2 parts—A&A and Siting decisions are decided separately
(PDF, 66KB)
3-05-35 Council refusal of a relaxation for the height and location of a proposed garage on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 71KB)
3-05-23 Council refusal of a preliminary development approval for a class 10 metal framed and clad shed on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 62KB)
3-05-22 Council refusal of an application for the location of two shipping containers on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 68KB)
3-05-11-AA Council refusal of a preliminary application for construction of a class 10 carport on both siting (see 3-05-11 under Siting Decisions) and on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 61KB)
3-04-054A The appeal is against the decision of the Caboolture Shire Council not to grant a siting relaxation for a proposed garage as council's amenity and aesthetics policy states the building or structure, when built, will be in extreme conflict with the character of the proposed building's neighbourhood (see also 3-04-054B under Siting requirements). (PDF, 66KB)
3-04-046A The appeal is against the decision of the Caboolture Shire Council not to grant an approval to construct a carport building or structure, as when it is built it will have an extremely adverse effect on the amenity or future amenity of the proposed building's neighbourhood and the aesthetics of the building or structure, when built, will be in extreme conflict with the character of the proposed building's neighbourhood (see also 3-04-046B under Siting requirements). (PDF, 64KB)
3-04-027A This appeal is against a decision of Caboolture Shire Council not to grant an approval to construct a carport. The decision considers that:
  1. the building or structure, when built will have an extremely adverse effect on the amenity or future amenity of the proposed building's neighbourhood
  2. under Section A1(c) of the Queensland Development Code there are alternative locations on the site to locate a carport in compliance with A1(c)(ii) and therefore the carport does not comply with Part 12 A1(c) of the Queensland Development Code (see 3-04-027B under Siting requirements for details of this part of the decision).
(PDF, 61KB)
3-04-023 This appeal under Section 4.2.9 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 is against the decision of the Caboolture Shire Council to refuse an application for the conversion of part of a class 10 building to class 1, on aesthetic and character grounds, in that a shed converted to a dwelling would not be in keeping with the street and would set a precedent. (PDF, 71KB)
3-04-016 In accordance with Section 4.2.34(2)(a) of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 the tribunal confirmed a decision appealed against. The appellant made a request to Gladstone City Council on 21 January 2004 seeking an amenity and aesthetics assessment for the relocation of a removal house. (PDF, 73KB)
3-03-076 This appeal under the Integrated Planning Act 1997 and Section 21 of the Standard Building Regulation 1993 is against the decision of Cairns City Council to refuse an application under its amenity and aesthetics policy for approval to relocate a house. (PDF, 42KB)
3-03-059 This appeal is against the decision of the Gold Coast City Council to refuse an application for preliminary building work under its amenity and aesthetics policy because the proposed:
  1. development is not in keeping with the existing character of the buildings neighbourhood
  2. building's construction materials are inconsistent with existing buildings in the neighbourhood.
(PDF, 80KB)
3-03-048 The appeal is against the decision of the Gold Coast City Council to impose the following conditions on Preliminary Building Application No 23/12156, Development Application No 23/02860, for the construction of a carport. The carport:
  1. length shall not exceed 2.9 metres at the road front boundary to the top of the parapet
  2. width is not to exceed 6.8 metres along the road front boundary.
(PDF, 25KB)
3-03-047 The appeal is against the decision of Hervey Bay City Council to impose a condition on an amenity and aesthetics approval for a removal dwelling requiring the maximum floor height above natural ground level, measured at the front of the dwelling, to not exceed 600 millimetres. (PDF, 28KB)
3-03-015 The appeal is against the decision of Caboolture Shire Council to refuse an application for the relocation of a removal dwelling on amenity and aesthetics grounds. (PDF, 51KB)
3-03-007 The appeal is against the decision of Logan City Council to refuse an application seeking an amendment to delete a portion of the front veranda and the entire right-hand side veranda in relation to a previous approval dated 23 October 2002, for an amenity and aesthetics assessment of a class 1a removal dwelling. (PDF, 44KB)
3-02-022 The appeal is under Section 4.2.9. of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 against the decision of Isis Shire Council to refuse an application to resite a dwelling. The council considers that the relocation of the dwelling would be prejudicial to the amenity and aesthetics of the area in which the dwelling is to be resited. (PDF,KB)
3-02-001 The appeal is under Section 4.2.9. of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 against the decision of Caboolture Shire Council to refuse an application for a boundary relaxation for the erection of a carport. (PDF, 48KB)
3-01-003 The appeal is under Section 21 of the Standard Building Regulation 1993 against the decision of Townsville City Council to refuse an application for the proposed erection of a dwelling and retaining wall for the following reasons, in relation to amenity and aesthetics:
  • the visual impact created by the bulk of the building and associated works, as per the design submitted, is considered to have an extremely adverse effect on the amenity or likely amenity of the building's neighbourhood.
(PDF, 27KB)
3-00-032 The appeal is lodged against the decision of Crows Nest Shire Council not to grant a development approval for building work to relocate a railway carriage for the following reasons:
  1. the council considers the railway carriage will be a relative's accommodation
  2. the relocation of the railway carriage in Ballantyne Court would be in extreme conflict with the character of the area.
(PDF, 21KB)


Last updated 13 April 2017    Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)


Copyright |  Disclaimer |  Privacy |  Right to information |  Accessibility |  Jobs in Queensland |  Other languages

© The State of Queensland – Department of Housing and Public Works 2009–2017

Queensland Government