Skip to the record
The definitive source for everything Noosa Council.

Council archive · source document

Information Response · MCU25/0020

of 7

Text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Item 2

Based on the above basement amendments, the area of the front setback showing a ‘pond
and planter’ should return to landscaped areas (PO9) to provide more space for more
substantive landscaping to occur to assist with softening the front façade presentation to
the street.

Response: The front setback of the basement has been significantly increased from 1.65m to 6m
(compliant). The Ground Level achieves 4.65m of soft landscaping to the entry stairs and feature ponds
and planters that highlight the entry point. Overall, the development provides 26.4% soft landscaping
across the site, where only 20% is required. The building wall is setback 6m, however, the front landing
and step access is required to achieve pedestrian access from the street to the dwelling entry. The
combination of soft landscaping and the pond/planter entry feature provides a high quality dense
landscape outcome that provides a visually pleasing streetscape presentation.

Item 3

Confirm that the maximum height of the building does not exceed more than 7.5 metres
above ground level and if so amend the plans and elevations to comply with a minimum side
setback of 2.5 metres.

Response: As per the attached updated proposal plans, the dwelling achieves compliant side setbacks
with the exception of the minor ensuite screening device and 500mm high planter, which is setback 1.5m
in lieu of the preferred 2m set out in AO9.3 of the Low Density Residential zone code. Despite this small
non-compliance, the screening device is deemed necessary for the following reasons:

    ●​ To achieve suitable privacy to the master bedroom ensuite from the adjoining neighbour, whilst
       allowing natural lighting to this room;
    ●​ The screening device has an approximate width of only 2.5m to the southern adjoining
       neighbour, which is considered a minimal encroachment;
    ●​ This element will be a lightweight timber-look aluminium screen, and will assist in providing
       articulation to the bulk and scale of the southern elevation, and does not unreasonably obstruct
       viewlines; and
    ●​ Landscaping along the side boundary can still be achieved.

Figure 1 below shows an elevation view including compliant setbacks in red, and the extent of the ensuite
screening outside of the preferred setback.




                                  Figure 1: Side setback - elevation profile



                                                                                                        2

Used in these records

About this file

File size
3.1 MB (large file)
File type
PDF

No other editions are linked here.

Original file

Log in to download the original file

Information Response.pdf · 3.1 MB (large file)

The download may take up to a minute.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.