Skip to the record
Accept no imitations.

Original source · versioned page text

4.0 Planning Report

Attached to the e-mail Amended DA Form 1 & Planning Report - MCU18-0062 & OPW18-0084.msg.

of 38

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

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

transport other than a motor vehicle. Further, given the small nature of the proposed tenancies
being approximately 180 sq.m (including mezzanines) and the anticipated low staff and or
visitor numbers based on intended use, we believe further bicycle parking is not warranted
and should be reconsidered in this context.


The proposed development does not comply with Probable Solution 7.1 of the Driveways and
Parking code (Table 14-51 Vehicle Parking Requirements). The proposal has provided a total
of 20 car parks and 3 motorcycle parks. Table 14-51 determines the industrial activity GFA
attracts 18 car spaces with an additional 3 spaces required for the caretakers residences
(Ancillary dwelling unit). To achieve compliance with Noosa Councils Motorcycle and
Scooter Parking Policy the proposal replaced a vehicle car park for 3 motorcycle spaces. As a
result the total number of parking is 1 short of the planning schemes requirement.


We believe the proposed development complies the Specific Outcome (7) of the Driveways
and Parking code as sufficient parking (all vehicle types) are provided for onsite based on the
intended activity and intensity of the use. At this time the exact business types are unknown,
however due to the small nature of the proposed tenancies, it is not anticipated that being 1
car space short will have negatively impact on surrounding business nor future on-site
businesses.


The proposed development does not comply with the Probable Solution 1.1 of the Building
Works code – Schedule 1, Minimum Boundary Setbacks. The subject sites front boundary is
not parallel to the rear boundary. As such has resulted in parts of the building fronting the
street having a setback of less than 6.0M. The specific dimensions of the conflict can be seen
on the attached Building Design Plans by Building Suncoast Green. In summary the building
is setback from the street 6.5M and an average of 4.5M. However, the building has been
designed to mitigate the visual impacts of this encroachment via stepping the building. The
building also includes 600mm eaves overhang which reduces the visual bulk of the
encroachment. We believe the proposal complies and achieves the specific outcomes of this
code.




                                                                        Building Suncoast Green   13
Log in to download the original file

4.0 Planning Report.pdf · 2.4 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”.