Amenity and aesthetics
AppealSubjectType and size
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 icon 66 KB
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 icon 64 KB
3-04-027A Appeal is against a decision of Caboolture Shire Council not to grant an approval to construct a carport. 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 icon 61 KB
3-04-023 Appeal, under section 4.2.9 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (IPA), 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 icon 71 KB
3-04-016 In accordance with section 4.2.34(2)(a) of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (IPA), 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 icon 73 KB
3-03-076 Appeal, under the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (IPA) and section 21 of the Standard Building Regulation 1993 against the decision of Cairns City Council, to refuse an application under its amenity and aesthetics policy for approval to relocate a house. PDF icon 42 KB
3-03-059 The 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:
  1. The proposed development is not in keeping with the existing character of the buildings neighbourhood
  2. Proposed building's construction materials are inconsistent with existing buildings in the neighbourhood.
 PDF icon 80 KB
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:
  1. the carport shall not exceed 2.9 metres at the road front boundary, to the top of the parapet
  2. the carport width is not to exceed 6.8 metres along the road front boundary.
PDF icon 25 KB
3-03-047 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 600mm.
 PDF icon 28 KB
3-03-015 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 icon 51 KB
3-03-007 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 icon 44 KB
3-02-022 Appeal is under 4.2.9. of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (IPA) against the decision of Isis Shire Council to refuse an application to resite a dwelling. Council considers 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 icon KB
3-02-001 Appeal is under section 4.2.9. of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (IPA) against the decision of Caboolture Shire Council to refuse an application for a boundary relaxation for the erection of a carport. PDF icon 48 KB
3-01-003

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 icon 27 KB
3-00-032 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. 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 icon 21 KB

Further information

Building Newsflash No. 92 - Amenity and Aesthetics Assessment (PDF icon 20 KB)

Last Updated ( Friday, 15 May 2009 )