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.
The Prema Estate was poorly developed and poorly planned, with Springfield Land Corporation (SLC), Ipswich City Council (ICC) and JLF all ignoring the advice of expert engineers. Council are in the unique position that not only were their own approved plans for the development of the area that would become Prema Estate overruled by Springfield Land Corporation, they then ignored at least three conditions of compliance when they signed off on the estate.
Unfortunately there are few laws to protect existing residents or investors in these types of developments. Whilst I will continue to lobby politicians to introduce laws to regulate developers, particularly investment developers, there is nothing to protect residents from such companies. We had to take the developer to court and that was a complete waste of time and money, their lawyer toyed with ours and we simply ran out of money to continue fighting. As such, we are tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket due to the previous floods and have had to spend thousands more to mitigate the risk of future flooding and provide protection for the future collapse of up to four properties on our boundary.
I am horrified at the poor quality of the Custodian/Home Corp investment properties, and would be stunned if owners did not have issues with movement and subsidence. Owners need to be vigilant a year or so before the end of the builders warranty. I would highly recommend getting the levels of the houses inspected, particularly if there are visible cracks or movement of the retaining walls and/or slabs. If the builder is unwilling or unable to resolve the issues, owners need to go to open a case with the QBCC. We are nearing a conclusion or our own QBCC case with our own home which had to be underpinned because of movement and poor design, and this was with a reputable developer and builder.
When/if owners in the Prema Estate begin to get problems because of the poor design or workmanship of the estate, I hope this site and my corresponding Facebook page is useful. I have further documents which will also prove useful should legal action be required against any of these organisations or the shell companies they try to hide behind.
