Ipswich City Council continue to have significant issues with corruption, hardly surprising given the targeted and poorly conducted CCC investigation. I worked with Ipswich City Council at the time of the CCC investigation, and saw first-hand how poorly handled it was. It was only ever intended to get the most prominent and embarrassing (to the state government) offenders. The investigation and subsequent actions were incomplete, incompetent, and contradictory to the principles fundmental to good public admistration. As a result of such a poor investigation and cover-up, there remains no accountability within Ipswich City Council, no integrity, and no fear of getting caught for those engaged in nefarious activity.
In 2009 ICC recognised that the development application for the new estate could not comply with the Specific Outcomes relating to Privacy contained in Subsection (13) of
Section 12.6.4 of Part 12 Division 6 – Residential Code of the Ipswich Planning Scheme. After objections from Springfield Land Corporation, council inexplicably removed the development conditions that would have protected existing residents on the western boundary and would have ensured that homes in the new estate would be compliant with all development conditions. Despite recognising there would be a problem in 2009, ICC now turn their back on residents.
ICC attempted to cover-up the ‘strict conditions’ applicable to the original development application, highlighted in the ICC document ‘Augustine Heights development approved with strict conditions.’ Council restricted access to this document after the developer flooded the downstream estate neighbourhood a second time.
Council provided no communication or notice on how drastically the final development approval conditions differed to the original and provided no advance warning to existing residents on such plans.
ICC refused to investigate the developer for environmental breaches caused by two separate floods, citing ‘insufficient evidence’. There was only ‘insufficient evidence’ as ICC never had any intention to investigate these floods.
Individuals within council who were involved with the removal of the original three conditions signed off on Prema Estate, Augustine Heights, despite knowing there were still numerous issues of non-compliance.
Officers from ICC lied to me, other residents and the Ombudsman.
Council refused to enforce property maintenance laws regarding the upkeep of vacant blocks. The vacant blocks behind my property have been used by the developer as a dumping ground. The weeds on these lots are still over 2-metres in areas.
ICC failed to investigate any of the issues of non-compliance, instead expending vast amounts of effort covering up their own failures and attempting to divert attention with noise.
Individuals within the planning department showed an uncomfortable level of familiarity with the developers representative onsite.
ICC enabled Springfield Land Corporation to present fake legal documents, including a document referenced in one of the development conditions that remains non-compliant.
Council refused to conduct any site inspections or conduct any meetings with us despite knowing multiple floods from this estate have decimated our property and ongoing runoff and erosion continues to be a major problem.
Council ignored numerous breaches of construction hours, dust control and erosion control that were reported by multiple residents.
ICC ignored the advice of two hydraulic engineers, allowing the developer to opt for the cheaper stormwater solution that has failed and flooded our property at least three times.
Given the significant cost savings to the original land developer due to three of the ‘most stringent conditions ever imposed’ being removed from the original development approval, and the failure of the same council to enforce compliance on the one remaining condition, I can only conclude that at least one person within council has been paid by the developer/s to remove and ignore these development conditions.
And unfortunately the Complaints Management Unit within the organisation did nothing to investigate or assist with any of my complaints, despite their false claims of doing so. The image below shows the fill that the developer dumped onto my property, this was one of the complaints they never investigated, as was the fence shown with the exposed footings. This used to be retained by a fence well inside the boundary. Council did actually respond to the complaint of my fence being used to retain this property eighteen months after it was lodged, long after I had removed the fence.. They only did this to be shown to not ignore complaints to the ombudsman.
When the land that became the Prema Estate was originally approved for development in 2009 by Ipswich City Council, they claimed it was approved with ‘the most stringent conditions ever imposed on a residential development in the city.’
In his role as Planning and Development Committee Chairperson, Councillor Paul Tully proudly announced the approval with conditions that would have protected both existing residents on the border on the new estate, and investors in the new estate. Inexplicably, Springfield Land Corporation made Ipswich City Council remove a number of conditions, despite knowing it would immediately make the new development non-compliant with the privacy requirements documented within the Ipswich Planning Scheme (Division 6 - Residential Code). As it transpires, not only is the development that became Prema Estate not compliant with this condition of the Ipswich Planning Scheme, the poor design and development of the site has left my property at a heightened risk of flooding and runoff, as has been proven repeatedly.
The entire situation was only possible due to continued corruption within Ipswich City Council. Councils officers were responsible for removing the conditions that would have safeguarded existing residents privacy at the request of Springfield Land Corporation. In addition, they signed-off on the Prema Estate without a number of development conditions having clearly not been met.
After the first flooding event from Prema Estate, Ipswich City Council removed public access from their 2009 media statement. Fortunately I had a copy before they had a chance to remove it.
Going forward, my intentions and objectives are very simple;
- Introduce accountability within Ipswich City Council. Departments such as Planning and Compliance and the Complaints Management Unit were not investigated as part of the targetted CCC investigation. It is very clear from my experiences as a worker with ICC and as a resident that these two departments in particular need to be investigated and held accountable for the decisions they make.
- Mandate local councils advise residents of special undocumented powers of council officers, and remove them where they are easily adapted to encourage corruption. This was the case in Prema Estate with one of the non-compliant conditions being ignored with the excuse of 'generally in accordance with the requirements'.
- Introduce proper accountability
Latest topics
About
Add your product description that will be useful for your customers. Add the exclusive properties of your product that will make customers want to buy it. Write your own text and style it in Store properties on Style tab.
200
Consultancy
25
Total cases
100
Members
75
Happy clients
Subscribe
Replace this text with information about you and your business or add information that will be useful for your customers.