Case Study 1
A client sought help from Urbanesque as his application for a motel was about to be refused by a Council. The problem, he was told, was that the manager's flat within in the motel would constitute a dwelling house and dwelling houses are not permitted under the zoning controls. We were able to articulate to the council the concept of "ancillary use" which is a use that is subordinate to but required to support the dominant use being the motel in this case. The application was approved.
Case Study 2
A client is based overseas but wants to progress a development proposal while away. Urbanesque Planning is able to act as the primary consultant and source competitive quotes from sub consultants such as architects, heritage experts, environmental consultants etc to prepare a development application. Urbanesque co-ordinates each consultant's work, prepares the necessary planning reports, lodges and manages the application through the Council for the client.
Case Study 3
A client wants to develop a property in a prestigious suburb with a multimillion dollar upmarket residence designed by internationally renowned architects. All is going well but the local heritage lobby applies pressure on the Council to refuse the application. The application ends up on appeal in the Land and Environment Court. With other relevant experts, Urbanesque was able to provide expert town planning evidence in the Court hearing to secure a resounding win for the client.
Case Study 5
Sometimes proposals for sex industry related premises such as brothels are in the "too hard" basket for many consultants. One such client approached Urbanesque with a difficult but meritorious application. We were able to achieve a positive staff recommendation but Council refused the application. We were then able to guide the client through the Court appeal process and the matter was able to be resolved and approved by the Court without it going to a full hearing.
Case Study 4
A supermarket developer faced fierce opposition to his development proposal for a second supermarket in a small country town. Needless to say, the opposition came from the other supermarket operator who had a monopoly in the town. Urbanesque Planning was able to provide the client with an economic impact analysis and report for his application. This provided appropriate justification to support the supermarket proposal which was subsequently approved.
Case Study 6
A Council approved an application for a client for a tourist facility and applied a rather excessive developer levy of over $200,000. This made the project unviable. The client approached Urbanesque to review the validity of the developer levy. We found that the Council misunderstood its own policy and had therefore misapplied the policy. We successfully challenged the contribution and had it reduced from $200,000 to $40,000 which was the rightful contribution amount.