{"id":26987,"date":"2013-03-20T16:56:23","date_gmt":"2013-03-20T06:56:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/southburnett.com.au\/news2\/?p=26987"},"modified":"2020-12-21T13:03:30","modified_gmt":"2020-12-21T03:03:30","slug":"developer-wins-reprieve","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/southburnett.com.au\/news2\/2013\/03\/20\/developer-wins-reprieve\/","title":{"rendered":"Developer Wins Reprieve"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"41-43<\/a>
These two vacant lots in Wickham Street, Nanango, will have six units built on them after council reversed a decision today (Photo: Google Street View)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

March 20, 2013<\/strong><\/p>\n

A developer who had lost a permit to build six units at 41-43 Wickham Street, Nanango, after seven years of inaction won a reprieve from the South Burnett Regional Council today.<\/p>\n

The SBRC overturned a decision it made last month to refuse a two-year extension to the Develoment Approval after the property owner presented evidence it had begun work on the project.<\/p>\n

EHA Developments first gained a Development Approval from the former Nanango Shire Council in November 2006.<\/p>\n

But at last month’s meeting, Council was told the reason the company had given for requesting a two-year extension was difficulty finding finance to proceed with construction.<\/p>\n

Councillors thought this wasn’t sufficient reason after such a long period of inaction and refused the request.<\/p>\n

However, this month EHA produced documentation which showed the company had signed a building contract on October 31 last year before the development permit expired, and that plumbing work had recently commenced.<\/p>\n

The company also produced other documentation showing that BSA Construction Insurance and Long Service Leave payments had been made; and that it had a Building Approval (Private Certifier) still current until December 2013, which was capable of being extended for a further two years by the Building Certifier if needed.<\/p>\n

Speaking in support of the decision, Cr Barry Green said if councillors had known these things at last month’s meeting they wouldn’t have had any objection to granting the two-year extension.<\/p>\n

“However we didn’t know about these things, and neither did Council’s staff, because the owner didn’t include this information with their request.”<\/p>\n

Cr Cheryl Dalton noted some applicants didn’t seem to realise that when they asked the council to grant a Development Application extension, they had to provide this type of information when they lodged the request.<\/p>\n

“We should make the public more aware of this,” she said.<\/p>\n