08/1704 - Operational Works - Prescribed Tidal Works - Transport Type 5 - Domestic Marine (Properly Made) [As Published] · 142008.1704

 

 

 

Sunshine Regional Coast Council Emanate Legal =:
Attention: Denis Wallace 28 November 2008 =
PRC:KMG:080471:1127.01 Page 2 [ Eh]

 

Concurrence Agency Response

We note an early concurrence agency response has been obtained from the EPA (refer to
Attachment Four).

It is noted that the EPA supports the Development Application as concurrence agency.
Maritime Safety Queensland (MSQ)

We note MSQ approval has been obtained (refer to Attachment Five).

The proposed structures have been assessed in accordance with MSQ’s navigation
requirements, are appropriately allocated within the prolongation boundaries of the Land,

and address marine safety issues.

It is noted that the Development Application have satisfactorily addressed MSQ concerns,
which is evident in their approval.

Noosa Planning Scheme Policy 4

We refer to discussions between Denis Wallace (Council) and Kayla Gulliver (Emanate).
We note Council has advised the Application will be refused on the basis that the
Application does not comply with the Policy 4.

Pursuant to section 2.1.23 of the Integrated Planning Act 1998 (IPA) (refer to Attachment
Six), which states a planning scheme policy may only do 1 or more of the following inter
alia, (4) include guidelines or advice about satisfying assessment criteria in the
planning scheme.

A planning policy cannot regulate development on the Land.

EPA as Concurrence Agency and as the administering Department for the state resource
has approved the Application.

. Strand Gardens requests a relaxation of the design dimensions identified in Policy 4
of the Planning Scheme.

° Strand Gardens proposes an 8m long by 2m wide pontoon, an additional area of 1m’,
then that, defined in Policy 4 of the Planning Scheme.

Merits of Development Application

The proposed structures will not impact on the existing amenity of the area nor will they
pose a detrimental impact on adjoining lands and uses.

The setback of 5.985m on either side of the Land provides sufficient clearance between
adjoining Lands and dramatically reduces the possibility of encroaching on adjoining lands
and uses.