2022-12-06 Planning & Environment Meeting Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT                                     6 DECEMBER 2022


         5.   takes the form of small separate buildings,
              rather     than    large   single     bulky
              development; and
         6.   sits within a landscaped setting.




 Address                        Site Cover              Plot Ratio      Date Approved
 1 Margit Crescent              30%                     0.46:1          02/02/1988 (TPC 1989)
 4 Margit Crescent              31%                     0.36:1          01/11/1996 (TPC 1391)
 5 Margit Crescent              45%                     0.42:1          22/08/1991 (TPC 2723)
 7 Margit Crescent              34% (aerial)            Not available
 8 Margit Crescent              34%                     0.27:1          21/04/1994 (TPC 2677)
 10 Margit Crescent             45%                     0.33:1          21/01/1981 (TPC 1295)
 11 Margit Crescent             40%                     0.45:1          MCU20/0037 - NP2006
 12 Margit Crescent             23%                     0.23:1          21/02/1980 (TPC 1077)
 14 Margit Crescent             Not available
 15 Margit Crescent             31%                     0.26:1          17/09/1980 (TPC 1195)
 16 Margit Crescent             26%                     0.20:1          14/04/1980 (TPC 1021)
 17 Margit Crescent             33%                     0.40:1          02/02/1988 (TPC 1991)
 21 Margit Crescent             38%                     0.23:1          24/02/1980 (TPC 1158)
 23 Margit Crescent             27.8%                   0.39:1          08/12/0988 (TPC 2150)
 5 Ventura Street               35%                     0.45:1          26/02/2020 (MCU19/0143)    -
                                                                        NP2006
 23 Ventura Street              30%                     0.37:1          15/09/1994 (TPC 2743)
                    Table 1 – Comparison of Plot Ratios in Surrounding Area
As a result of Council’s decision to refuse the application, the applicant has now lodged an appeal
to the Planning & Environment Court. The applicant seeks that the development be approved
subject to reasonable and relevant conditions.
It is relevant to note that this is the second appeal lodged by this applicant against a refusal of a
dual occupancy on a property in Margit Crescent, Sunrise Beach for non-compliance with built form
and design parameters. This first appeal was eventually settled by Council when amended plans
were lodged by the applicant meeting the planning scheme’s Noosa Plan 2006 built form and
design requirements.
It is in order for Council to defend the appeal and the recommendation is worded accordingly.
Previous Council Consideration
Not Applicable
Finance & Risk
It is premature at this stage to provide advice on the likely prospects of the appeal. There will be
costs associated with defending the appeal, particularly if the matter proceeds to trial.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Thynee Macartney – Tim Quirk




                                                                                          Page 9 of 33