Response to Information Request [As Published] · 132007.2399

However, the architectural form of Noosa Springs was established by the Architectural
Design Report (approved by Noosa Council) and there is an expectation that those design
principles will continue throughout the project. The principles are embodied in strictly
enforced vendor covenants and development control by-laws of the body corporate for
earlier stages of residential development. It is the applicants desire to ensure the
architectural theme and development form is maintained.
Our assessment indicates that two aspects of the Noosa Plan may be inconsistent with
the building expectations.
1. The roof form of Noosa Springs does not have a 600mm wide overhang as required
   by the Noosa Plan. It is noted that Precinct C and Precinct D of Noosa Springs is
   excluded from this requirement in the Noosa Plan.
2. The building setbacks from the boundaries may vary marginally from the Noosa Plan.
A condition of development approval may be acceptable that requires the Noosa Plan to
be applied to the assessment of residential development provided the proposed
development is excluded from the requirement to have 600mm roof overhangs and the
building setbacks are generally in accordance with the Indicative Building Setback
Drawing No. 447-SK02 (Contained in Appendix 2).




4. A written summary of planning grounds to support the proposed development, given
that preliminary assessment finds the proposal is not fully consistent with the Plan of
Development for the site and the 1997 Strategic Plan objectives for Open Space –
Recreation.
Appendix 3 comprises a letter from Jones Flint Pike, which summarises the planning
grounds to support the development proposal.
It is noted that there are good planning grounds to support the proposed development.




Response to Information Request (Noosa Springs – Precinct J)                         Page 7 of 14