Original source · versioned page text
2019-09-10 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
AGENDA
Planning & Environment
Committee Meeting
Tuesday, 10 September 2019
commencing at 9.30am
Committee Room, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin
Committee: Crs Brian Stockwell (Chair), Jess Glasgow, Ingrid Jackson, Tony Wellington
“Noosa Shire – different by nature”
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 75 sections
Section 2
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM PAGE
ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES -
PRESENTATIONS -
DEPUTATIONS -
REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMITTEE 3
1 UPDATE TO INFRASTRUCTURE CHARGES RESOLUTION 3
2 OPW17/0150.01 MINOR CHANGE TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR
OPERATIONAL WORKS PRESCRIBED TIDAL WORKS - EXTENSION TO
EXISTING JETTY AT 180 GYMPIE TERRACE NOOSAVILLE 9
3 MCU19/0081 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR
16 ANCILLARY DWELLING UNITS AT 64 GATEWAY DRIVE NOOSAVILLE 25
4 OPW19/0046 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO 1802 OF 2019
REFUSAL OF APPLICATION FOR OPERATIONAL WORKS FOR SIGNAGE AT
1/100 RENE ST, NOOSAVILLE 35
5 MCU18/0204 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO 2352 OF 2019 -
REFUSAL OF APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR OFFICE,
RESTAURANT & SHOP AT 6 HERON ST, PEREGIAN BEACH 60
6 ENVIRONMENT GRANTS POLICY 62
CLOSED SESSION -
Page 2 of 76
Section 3
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMITTEE
1 UPDATE TO INFRASTRUCTURE CHARGES RESOLUTION
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator, Oddbjorn Ludvigsen
Environment and Sustainable Development Department
Index ECM/ Subject/ 66.02 - Infrastructure Charges Instruments & Policy
(Council/State)
Attachments 1. Noosa Shire Council Charges Resolution (No.4) 2019
(30 page attachment provided separately to this agenda)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2019 and adopt the “Noosa Shire Council
Charges Resolution (No.4) 2019” provided at Attachment 1 to the report, to take effect on
Monday 23 September 2019 replacing the “Noosa Shire Council Charges Resolution (No.3)
2018”.
REPORT
Council issues infrastructure charges on development under its “Charges Resolution” to help
fund provision of “trunk” infrastructure identified in its Local Government Infrastructure Plan
(LGIP).
Legislative amendments to infrastructure charges requirements regularly occur and it is therefore
appropriate that Council also regularly review and update its “Charges Resolution” accordingly to
ensure continued best compliance with the current Planning Act 2016 and Planning Regulation
2017.
A review of Council’s current “Charges Resolution” has been triggered by the following recent
events:
a) Amendment of the Planning Regulation 2017 where the prescribed amounts (i.e. maximum
infrastructure charge rates) have been updated to the current 2019-2020 financial year.
The maximum prescribed amounts have increased by approximately 2.25% on average.
b) Unitywater having adopted its own Infrastructure Charges Schedule to better comply with
its respective legislation, the “South-East Queensland Water (Distribution and Retail
Restructuring) Act 2009” (SEQ Water Act). This has resulted in some aspects of Council’s
“Charges Resolution” becoming redundant and no longer applicable. The only item that
continues to bind Council and Unitywater is the actual “Break-up Agreement” in Section
10.2 and Table 10.1.
c) Recent Court Judgements on infrastructure charges appeals have highlighted the
importance of clarity in resolution details in issuing charges, particularly on non-specific
types of development.
Staff have reviewed Council’s current “Charges Resolution (No.3) 2018” and recommend it be
updated and replaced with the amended “Charges Resolution (No.4) 2019” provided as
Attachment 1 to this report. The amended sections are highlighted in yellow shading for
reference and are summarised below:
Page 3 of 76
Section 4
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Section 1.3
Update the date that this resolution will commence to have effect.
Section 1.5
Update referenced section/s to change title descriptions to clarify the items now only relate
to Council charge rates and levied charge and no longer includes Unitywater who now
govern these items under their own “infrastructure charges schedule”.
Update the base date to simply reference “Section 10.4” so as to have only one location
where the actual date is specified.
Amend “intended” to “capable” for use in the definition for a dwelling unit to better reflect
the wording and intent under the current Planning Regulation.
Section 2.5
Update referenced section/s to change title descriptions to clarify the items now only relate
to Council and no longer Unitywater.
Update to refer to wording contained in the current Planning Regulation.
Section 8.1
Include reference to Unitywater’s “Infrastructure Charges Resolution”.
Update referenced section/s to change title descriptions to clarify the items now only relate
to Council and no longer Unitywater.
Section 8.2
Update referenced section/s to change title descriptions to clarify the items now only relate
to Council and no longer Unitywater.
Remove references to water supply & sewerage networks.
Section 8.3
Update referenced section/s to change title descriptions to clarify the items now only relate
to Council and no longer Unitywater.
Update to refer to wording contained in the current Planning Regulation.
Remove references to water supply & sewerage networks.
Section 8.4
Clarify that the credit relates to the development use and quantity of the adopted charge
and not just the amount of an adopted charge.
Update referenced section/s to change title descriptions to clarify the items now only relate
to Council and no longer Unitywater.
Update to refer to wording contained in the current Planning Regulation.
Section 8.5
Clarify that any past contribution must relate to “current” trunk infrastructure.
Section 9.3 (b)
Update the due date trigger for payment to include “prior to occupancy”.
Page 4 of 76
Section 5
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Section 10.3
Amend to state that infrastructure charges are provided for provision of trunk infrastructure
in accordance with:
o Unitywater’s Netserv Plan and Infrastructure Charges Schedule as determined by
Unitywater; and
o Council’s LGIP and generally Table 10.2 with final allocation and spending
determined and administered by Council’s Finance Department.
Amend Table 10.2 to just specify Council’s networks.
Section 10.4
Amend to just specify Council charge and networks.
Update the base date to 1 July 2019 for the 2019-2020 financial year to match the current
Schedule 16 of the Planning Regulation.
Amend Table 10.3 to just specify Council’s charge rates by:
o Adding “Reconfiguration of a Lot” details for Residential and Non-residential
development.
o Including the “Detached house” use with other similar uses under the Residential
Development class.
o Correcting details for “Secondary dwelling to a detached house” by removing it as a
defined use and correcting it to a unit of measure under the “Detached house”
residential “Use”.
o Updating Column 4 to the Planning Regulation’s current prescribed amounts for the
2019-2020 financial year.
o Amending Column 5 deleting previous Unitywater charge rates to Council
Apportionment percentage (%) as specified under the breakup agreement per Table
10.1.
o Updating Column 6 Council Charges to current 2019-2020 financial year. All
previous Council reductions (highlighted in red font) have maintained the same
proportions.
o Updating Column 7 to current Non-residential Stormwater charge rates and correct
that this column does not apply to residential uses.
o Amending “Special” to “Other” uses and to reflect the Planning Regulation’s current
wording and decide the similar use and appropriate rate to apply.
Section 13.3 & 13.6
Correct to specify the relevant clause/s under Planning Act 2016 and not the former
Sustainable Planning Act 2009.
Whilst these amendments are considered minor, they will strengthen and clarify Council’s
Charges Resolution under the current planning legislation.
Page 5 of 76
Section 6
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting Minutes, 28 August 2014, Item 2, Page 6
That Council note the report by the Priority Infrastructure Planning and Infrastructure Charges
Officer to the Planning & Organisation Committee dated 28 January 2014 and:
1. Adopt the “Noosa Shire Council Adopted Infrastructure Charges Resolution (No.1) 2014”
(provided at Attachment 1 to the report) to replace the “Sunshine Coast Regional Council
Adopted Infrastructure Charges Resolution (No.4) 2011” applying to development governed
by The Noosa Plan;
2. Publicly notify the adoption of the “Noosa Shire Council Adopted Infrastructure Charges
Resolution (No.1) 2014” and forward a copy to the Chief Executive, Department of State
Development, Infrastructure and Planning in accordance with section 648D of the
“Sustainable Planning Act 2009”;
3. Adopt Noosa Council policy positions regarding Extensions to Relevant Periods (through
infrastructure agreements) and/or subsequent Infrastructure Charge Notices triggered by
Building Permits, to charge development for all networks, including those previously missing
where:
a) missing networks are to be charged at the current Adopted Infrastructure Charges;
and
b) the missing network charge is limited so that it does not cause the total amount
payable for the development to exceed the total maximum adopted charge
permissible under the “Statutory Planning Regulatory Provision (adopted charges)”.
4. For development requesting to transfer to an alternative infrastructure charges regime to
that previously applied under an existing development approval, Council:
a) require a new development application to be lodged; and
b) offer a 50% reduction to the application fee for these new development applications,
provided there is no change to the development previously approved and no
additional assessment is required to that previously undertaken under The Noosa
Plan; and
c) request the applicant to cancel their previous development approval under sections
379 and 380 of the “Sustainable Planning Act 2009” at no cost to the applicant, once
a dew development approval takes effect.
5. Note the State Government’s review of the current Adopted Infrastructure Charges regime
is likely to impact the level of infrastructure charges that can be levied on future development
and priority infrastructure planning requirements. A further report will be provided to Council
once the outcome is known.
Ordinary Meeting Minutes, 12 February 2015, Item 1, Page 6
That Council note the report by the Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator to the Planning &
Organisation Committee Meeting dated 3 February 2015 and adopt the “Noosa Shire Council
Charges Resolution (No.2) 2014” (provided as Attachment 1 to the report) to take effect on
Monday 16 February 2015 replacing the “Noosa Shire Council Adopted Infrastructure Charges
Resolution (No.1) 2014”.
Page 6 of 76
Section 7
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Ordinary Meeting Minutes, 20 October 2016, Item 5, Page 16
That Council note the report by the Principal Strategic Planner to the General Committee dated
17 October 2016 and:
A. Proceed to adopt the Planning Scheme Amendments, as provided at Attachment 1 to the
report, in accordance with the Ministerial conditions; and
B. Authorise changes to Table 10.3 of Council’s Charges Resolution for secondary dwellings,
community residences and intensive cultivation uses, as provided at Attachment 2
(Amended) to the report.
Ordinary Meeting Minutes, 20 September 2018, Item 5, Page 14
That Council note the report by the Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator to the General
Committee Meeting dated 17 September 2018 regarding amendment to the Infrastructure
Charges Resolution and:
A. Adopt the “Noosa Shire Council Charges Resolution (No.3) 2018” provided at Attachment
1 to the report, to take effect on Monday 24 September 2018 replacing the “Noosa Shire
Council Charges Resolution (No.2) 2014 (Amendment 1)”;
B. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to:
1. Review infrastructure charge notices issued from 8 June 2018 (the date the current
LGIP took effect) and where applicable for developments located outside the PIA,
issue “Amended Infrastructure Charges Notices” removing the stormwater component
of the charge;
2. Apply the annual indexation methodology in line with item 9.5 (3) “Automatic
increase provision of levied charge” contained in the new “Noosa Shire Council
Charges Resolution (No.3) 2018” for all infrastructure charges remaining to be
paid that were issued from 1 July 2011 under all previous adopted “Council
Charges Resolutions”; and
3. Continue to apply quarterly indexation using variations in the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) for:
i. all infrastructure contributions and/or infrastructure charge notices remaining
to be paid that were issued prior to 1 July 2011 under the former Planning
Scheme Policies (PSP’s) contained as a condition of a development permit
and/or under the former Coastal Major Road Network Infrastructure Charges
Plan (CMRNICP); and
ii. all infrastructure charges and/or contributions being paid under delayed
staged payment or other infrastructure agreements.
Finance
Council is required to have an adopted a Charges Resolution that is compliant with current
planning legislation to issue infrastructure charges and impose conditions about trunk
infrastructure on development. The infrastructure charges revenue is estimated in the order of $2
million per annum.
Risks & Opportunities
Regular reviews with appropriate updates to Council’s Charges Resolution will reduce the risk for
potential legal appeals being lodged against infrastructure charges issued on development.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Wakefield Sykes – Council’s Solicitor
Page 7 of 76
Section 8
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Internal Consultation
Manager, Development Assessment
Director, Environment & Sustainable Development
Manager, Financial Services
Director, Corporate Services
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services X Corporate Services
Executive Officer Director x Director
Executive Support Community Development x Financial Services
Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services X Environment & Sustainable Development Infrastructure Services
Director x Director Director
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service x Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 8 of 76
Section 9
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
2 OPW17/0150.01 MINOR CHANGE TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR
OPERATIONAL WORKS PRESCRIBED TIDAL WORKS - EXTENSION TO EXISTING
JETTY AT 180 GYMPIE TERRACE NOOSAVILLE
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Planning Coordinator, Patrick Murphy
Environment and Sustainable Development
Index ECM/Application/OPW17/0150.01
Attachments 1. Approved plans
2. Proposed plans
APPLICATION DETAILS
Application No. OPW/17/0150.01
Development Approval Operational works – Prescribed Tidal Works – Extension to
existing jetty and new pontoon
Applicant Kodiak Trust
Request Received On 7 August 2018 (not properly made until 24 July 2019)
PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address Jetty 180 Gympie Terrace Noosaville
RP Description Lot 163 on CP907408
Land Area 1703m2 lease area
Existing Use of Land Jetty and Pelican Boat Hire
STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation Regional Landscape and Rural Production Area
Locality Noosaville
Zone Open Space Conservation
Overlays Biodiversity (riparian over river bank)
Natural Hazards – Acid Sulfate Soils and Flood Hazard
Assessment Type Minor Change to Development Approval
Page 9 of 76
Section 10
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment
Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2019 regarding Application No. OPW17/0150.01 to
make a minor change to an existing approval for extension to an existing jetty situated at Jetty
180 Gympie Terrace Noosaville and:
A. Refuse the change for the following reasons:
1. The proposed works do not represent a minor change to the development approval
because the change results in a substantially different development as it extends the
use beyond the boundary of the lease and therefore results in the application
applying to a new parcel of land.
2. The proposed works will result in a commercial activity outside the existing
commercial lease area and have the potential to increase the overall scale and
intensity of commercial operations contrary to the following provisions of the
Noosaville Locality Code:
(i) Overall Outcome 11.7.2(hh) as it will not protect the Noosa River and
foreshores from the cumulative impacts of development;
(ii) Specific Outcome O27(d) and (f), O28 and O29;
3. The proposed development is contrary to Specific Outcome O5(a) and (b) of the
Waterway Works Code as the works are contained outside the boundaries of the
existing lot and the berthing of vessels encroaches over the boundaries of the lot.
4. The proposal is contrary to Schedule 3 of the Coastal Protection and Management
Regulation 2017 as certification that the completed works comply with the
requirements of the regulation has not been provided.
5. The proposal is contrary to Performance Outcomes P03 and P09 of the Waterways
Works Code of the draft New Noosa Plan whereby all commercial activities for a jetty
are to be confined to the commercial lease areas of the respective commercial
operation.
B. Advise the applicant that the structure must be modified to comply with the Development
Permit for Operational Works (OPW17/015) and approved plans within 6 months.
C. Write to the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and request that the
Department review the current commercial operations of Jetty 180 to ensure compliance
with the current lease conditions.
D. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
REPORT
1. PROPOSAL
The applicant seeks approval to change the existing Operational Works approval for a jetty along
Gympie Terrace Noosaville, to permit the jetty to extend to the full length of the lease area. This
increase in length will result in vessels utilising the pontoon to be located outside the lease area.
An extract of the approved jetty is detailed in figure 1 below which provides a 2.6 metre setback
to the northern lease boundary. Figure 2 details the proposed change plan with no setback to the
northern lease boundary.
The applicant indicates that the changes are required as a result of the builder constructing the
jetty incorrectly and locating the extended structure within the required 2.6 metre setback.
Page 10 of 76
Section 11
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 1 - Approved Proposal Plan
Page 11 of 76
Section 12
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 2 - Proposed Change to Approved Plan
The applicant has submitted a letter from the operator of the facility who advises:
The structure is not a navigation hazard and is outside the main navigation channels.
Vessels are never moored on the outside of the pontoon overnight or for any extended
period.
The exterior edge of the pontoon is unsuitable for long term mooring as the wake from
passing boats causes unacceptable safety risks due to its lateral placement to boat wake.
The Noosa Ferry relies on the pontoon being kept clear.
The upgrade to the fuel system and bowsers has improved safety and environmental
aspects.
The facility is the only marine diesel station between Mooloolaba and Tin Can Bay and the
largest and busiest fuel station on the Noosa River. Any variation to the current facility
would require the structure and fuel system to be dismantled and rebuilt as Code
compliance requires single piece dual skinned vacuum fuel hoses from the tank to the
bowser. These cannot be readily adjusted or changed.
Page 12 of 76
Section 13
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The applicant has also submitted a letter of support from the Manager of the Noosa Ferry service
that details that:
the new structure does not pose any navigation hazards in its current form.
the new structure improves the essential marine infrastructure available in the Noosa River.
such infrastructure is essential to larger vessels such as our boats, the Coast Guard and
visiting cruisers as it is the only diesel fuel supply on the river and is able to provide deep
water access all year round and during all tides.
the complex and expensive upgrade to its fuel lines and bowsers in order to meet current
Code requirements is a significant improvement and benefit to all river users and the
environment generally.
its design of flat surfaces, ramps and large pontoons significantly improves public safety,
accessibility and amenity for locals and tourists.
the design and installation of PWD accessible jetties and pontoons provides a significant
benefit to locals and visitors.
The following images detail the site before and after the completion of the new works:
Figure 3: 2017 aerial 2018 aerial
2. BACKGROUND
A development approval for Prescribed Tidal Works – extension to existing jetty and new
pontoon was approved by Council in October 2017 (refer figure 1). During assessment of the
original application the previous applicant (Pile-It Pty Ltd) was advised that Council staff were not
Page 13 of 76
Section 14
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
supportive of the application and requested changes to the 1.4 metre setback to the northern
lease boundary. This resulted in an increased setback of 2.6 metre setback being provided to the
northern lease boundary, which was required to enable vessels to moor within the lease area.
The approved extensions were not carried out in accordance with the approved plans, as the
completed works provide a 3cm setback to the northern lease boundary. A Show Cause was
issued by Council on 12 October 2018 and the minor change application is lodged in response to
the Show Cause notice and seeks approval for the as constructed works.
For this application to be considered properly made the applicant was required to provide
landowner consent. In this instance the landowner is the Department of Natural Resources,
Mines and Energy (DNRME). The landowner consent is for the application to be made and does
not mean support or otherwise for the application. The Department have advised that landowner
consent was provided to enable assessment of the application to be made.
2.1. Instruments for Statutory Assessment
Under the Planning Act 2016 the application must be assessed against each of the following
statutory planning instruments to the extent they are relevant to the development:
State Planning Policy;
South East Queensland Regional Plan;
Planning Regulation 2017;
The Noosa Plan.
Schedule 3 of the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2017
2.2. Statutory Process
The applicant has requested to make a minor change to a development approval under s78 of
the Planning Act 2016. An application for a minor change to a development approval can only be
made in circumstances where a change would constitute a ‘minor change’.
The proposed change to the development approval requested by the applicant is determined to
not constitute a minor change on the grounds that the development would result in substantially
different development. The works result in the associated use extending beyond the boundary of
the lease and therefore results in the application applying to a new parcel of land.
2.3. Statutory Instruments
The subject site is located in the Noosaville Locality and takes on the zoning of the adjoining
foreshore land which is Open Space Conservation Zone. The relevant codes and regulations are:
Noosaville Locality Code
Watercourses Works Code
The original application was assessed against each of the above applicable codes and
considered to comply with the outcomes provided all vessels could moor within the confines of
the lease area. This requirement was also consistent with the terms of the lease which detail that
all vessels attached to moorings must not encroach beyond the boundaries.
Noosaville Locality Code
The proposed change is not considered consistent with Overall Outcome 11.7.2(hh) and Specific
Outcomes O27, O28 and O29 of the Noosaville Locality Code as detailed below:
11.7.2 The overall outcomes sought for the Noosaville Locality are the following —
hh) The Noosa River and foreshores are protected from the cumulative impacts of
development and activities and are protected in a way that promotes and provides for
low impact nature-based recreation activities in and around the Noosa River over
other forms of recreation;
Page 14 of 76
Section 15
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
O27 Commercial development on and adjacent to the Noosa River is designed to –
a) provide for uses for marine facility purposes only;
b) be compatible with the scenic values of the waterway;
c) provide a high level of amenity, including ensuring low ambient noise levels;
d) not increase the overall scale and intensity of commercial operations;
e) ensure no additional commercial leases on the Noosa River;
f) ensure no net increase in the gross floor area of buildings or structures;
g) use materials, natural finishes and colours that blend with the surrounding natural
landscape; and
h) reflect the character and setting of the locality (such as timber and tin construction
with a traditional pitched roof design).
O28 Commercial development does not extend beyond existing commercial lease areas.
O29 The loading and unloading of passengers is confined to the commercial lease areas
of the respective commercial operation.
The proposed change, reflecting the as constructed pontoon located 3cm from the lease
boundary, results in commercial activities occurring beyond the lease boundary. A fuel bowser is
situated at the end of the new timber jetty and results in water craft being situated outside the
lease area when refuelling. Furthermore, the loading and unloading of passengers may now
occur beyond the existing commercial areas.
It is acknowledged that the Noosa Ferry stops at this location and that the ferry would not be able
to be fully accommodated within the lease area even if the development were constructed in
accordance with the approved plans due to the size of the ferry vessel. However, this has long
been an accepted practice for stops along the commuter ferry route. It is noted that the
commercial activity of the ferry operator is conducted from within the lease area, including the
loading and unloading of passengers, at the Noosa Marina in Tewantin.
Watercourses Works Code
The proposed change is not consistent with Specific Outcome O5 of the Watercourses Works
Code as detailed below:
O5 Prescribed tidal works are designed and sited to ensure—
a) they are contained within the prolongation of boundaries of the lot;
b) that when a vessel is berthed it does not encroach over the prolongation of
boundaries of the lot;
c) a high level of visual amenity is maintained when viewed from the watercourse
and adjoining lands;
d) they avoid conflicts with uses in the water and on the foreshore and adjoining
lands;
e) cluttering of watercourses is avoided;
f) excessive traffic volumes within foreshore areas and adjoining lands are avoided;
g) materials blend with the natural surrounds; and
h) they reflect the character and setting of the immediate surrounds or the locality.
The applicant submits that the constructed works and berthed vessels are located within the
lease boundaries however the proposed change in jetty length results in the actual use of the
jetty extending beyond the boundaries of the lease area. The applicant indicates that a berth is a
vessels allotted place at a wharf and that all berthed vessels are able to be contained within the
lease area. The applicant therefore argues that the temporary docking of vessels does not
constitute berthing and complies with the outcome. Further the applicant submits that the existing
2.6 metre setback would not have allowed the coast guard or ferry to dock within the lease area.
The applicant’s comments are noted, however it has been Council’s practice to ensure that all
berthing, mooring and docking activities associated with jetties are located within the lease area
to minimise impacts and congestion of the waterways. Whilst the coast guard and ferry are
unable to dock in the lease area associated with this jetty these are not commercial activities
Page 15 of 76
Section 16
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
conducted by the operator of this jetty and would not be confined to the lease areas of other
jetties on the Noosa River.
The commercial activities undertaken at this jetty include a bowser which is located at the
northern end of the jetty and now results in commercial activity occurring external to the lease.
This is contrary to the advice received during the assessment of the initial application when the
applicant advised that:
the widest vessel in their fleet that could possibly moor on the end of the jetty is 2.6m
wide…our client would be happy to reduce the length of the jetty/pontoon by a minimum
2.6m enabling their widest vessel to moor in the end of the jetty and still be within their
allocated lease area.
The applicant’s argument that vessels be permitted to utilise the jetty outside of the lease area is
not consistent with the Planning scheme outcome or Council’s intent for the area. The expansion
of jetties to the extent of their lease area necessitating commercial activities to occur outside the
lease area leads to cluttering of the waterway and adversely affects public access to the Noosa
River and the Noosa River’s character and amenity.
Marine Facility Lease
The applicant has entered into a Marine Facility lease with the Department of Natural Resources,
Mines and Energy which includes a number of conditions with which the proposed change
conflicts. These conditions are detailed below:
Regulatory Conditions
6. Compliance with Laws: The lessee must comply with all lawful requirements of the:
a. Local Government; and
b. any department within the Queensland or Commonwealth governments (including the
department administering the Land Act 1994), local authority or statutory
instrumentality having jurisdiction over the land, or the development, use and
occupation of the land, in regard to its use, occupation and development of the land.
Special conditions
7. The lessee must ensure that the development and use of the land meets with the Planning
Scheme, Local Laws and requirements of the Noosa Shire Council, binding the lessee.
Tidal requirements
7. The lessee must, take all reasonable action to ensure that all vessels attached to moorings
within the boundaries of the land must be moored wholly within such boundaries and that
such vessels or any part/s thereof must not encroach beyond the boundaries of the land.
The proposed change and as constructed works conflict with the above stated conditions as the
works do not comply with the Noosa Council Planning Scheme and vessels utilising the jetty are
regularly outside the lease area. It is recommended that Council inform DNRME the constructed
works may result in non-compliance with conditions of the lease. Discussions with a DNRME
officer have confirmed that the department would investigate a concern raised by Council. It is
noted that a joint compliance review of marine facility leases, undertaken by DNRME and Noosa
Council, is scheduled for December 2019.
It is acknowledged that the lease holder could make an application to DNRME to extend the
lease area. The process to extend an existing lease area was discussed with a DNRME officer
who advised that any application to extend a lease area would be assessed by the department
against the Land Act 1994 and would involve consultation with Council.
Existing leases along the river vary in shape and size due to mainly historical reasons reflective
of existing structures and the like. The existing lease for Jetty 180 is approximately 24 x 64
metres and is irregular in shape. The length of this lease is the longest of all the leases between
Tewantin and Noosa Heads and extends substantially into the river, though several leases in this
area are wider than the width of this lease.
Page 16 of 76
Section 17
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The following table details the dimensions and areas of commercial leases within this area:
Location Length (m) Width (m) Area
9 Cardell Road Tewantin 50 37 1157m2
Jetty 88A Hilton Terrace Noosaville 36 19 920m2
Slipway Mill Street Noosaville (x2) 39 63 2539m2
40 35 1301m2
Yacht and Rowing Club Gympie Terrace Noosaville 33 60 2202m2
172 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 46 23 981m2
180 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 64 28 1703m2
186 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 54 21 1208m2
194 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 49 43 1794m2
Gympie Terrace Noosaville 23 20 375m2
222 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 39 45 1656m2
244 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 21 17 182m2
248 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 31 21 487m2
256 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 38 17 545m2
290 Gympie Terrace Noosaville 34 59 1857m2
14 Hastings Street Noosa Heads 18 53 695m2
The following image details some of the marine facility leases on Noosa River:
Figure 4: (L-R) 172, 180, 186 and 194 Gympie Terrace Noosaville
An application to change the lease area to accommodate the commercial activities associated
with the new pontoon would require the length to be extended. Extension of the lease further into
the river is not desirable to support the continued expansion of commercial activities, given the
potential for commercial activities to collectively impact on safety, amenity and clutter on the river
and ultimately on the high environmental value of the river. The draft Noosa River Plan
recognises these potential issues and proposes that Council will investigate a statutory means of
managing the size and type of commercial fleet operating on the river in the future.
Schedule 3 of the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2017
The regulation sets out a number of performance outcomes and acceptable solutions for the
works. The regulation and the existing conditions require certification of the completed works, to
date this has not been submitted to Council.
Page 17 of 76
Section 18
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Change to conditions
An assessment of the applicants request to change condition 1 and 2 is further detailed below.
Condition 1
Vessels associated with the marine use of the facility must only be moored within the approved
lease area.
Applicant’s Request
The applicant requests modification of Condition 1 to reference berthing instead of mooring as
detailed above.
Assessment of Request
The applicant’s request is not supported as the terms of lease, planning scheme requirements
and Concurrence Agency Response refer to mooring and not berthing. The terminology should
therefore be consistent and refer to mooring.
Condition 2
Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the
approved plans of development. The approved plans are listed in the following table unless
otherwise amended by these conditions.
Plan No. Rev. Plan/Document Name Date
26236-J1 D Jetty Plan and Details prepared by SCG Consulting Engineers 12 October 2017
26236-S2 C Jetty Plan and Details prepared by SCG Consulting Engineers 12 October 2017
Applicant’s Request
The applicant seeks to amend the approved plans to detail no setback to the northern lease
boundary as detailed above.
Assessment of Request
As previously detailed the applicants request is not supported as all mooring temporary or long
term should be provided for within the lease area to minimise further cluttering of the Noosa
River. As demonstrated by the aerial photograph below, the jetty is an area that already contains
a number of commercial jetties in close proximity to each other that currently have all boats and
services located within their respective lease areas.
Figure 5 – Aerial photograph of subject site and surrounding jettys
Page 18 of 76
Section 19
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The proposed length of the jetty and reduced setback is not consistent with Council’s approach to
jetties and works within the Noosa River and further extends the commercial use and structure
into the waterway. The jetty will result in boats refuelling being located outside the lease area and
into the public waterway.
3. DRAFT PLANNING SCHEME
The Draft Noosa Plan includes the site in the Recreation and Open Space zone. Under the Draft
Plan the use of a jetty, wharf, boardwalk, boat ramp etc is considered a material change of use
for a Landing. A Landing is detailed as being impact assessable within the zone with
Performance Outcome of the Waterways Works Code detailing:
P03 All commercial activities including, the loading and unloading of passengers and boat
docking is confined to the commercial lease areas of the respective commercial operation.
PO9 Prescribed tidal works are designed and sited to ensure—
they are contained within the prolongation of boundaries of the lot;
a. that when a vessel is berthed it does not encroach over the prolongation of boundaries
of the lot;
b. a high level of visual amenity is maintained when viewed from the waterway and
adjoining lands;
c. they avoid conflicts with uses in the water and on the foreshore and adjoining lands;
cluttering of waterways is avoided;
d. public access to beaches and foreshores is not impeded, including the pocket sandy
beaches and other foreshores along the Noosa River;
e. excessive traffic volumes within foreshore areas and adjoining lands are avoided;
f. materials blend with the natural surrounds; and
g. they reflect the character and setting of the immediate surrounds of the locality.
The proposed works do not comply with Performance Outcomes P03 and P09 of the Waterways
Works Code as the siting of the works results in commercial activities occurring outside the
commercial lease area.
4. CONSULTATION
4.1. Referral Agencies
The original application was referred to the Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and
Planning (SARA), the development application was referred to the department under the
following provisions of the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009:
Schedule 7, Table 2, Item 13—Tidal works, or development in a coastal management district
Schedule 7, Table 2, Item 15—Tidal works, or development in a coastal management district
The current application was forwarded to the of Department of Infrastructure, Local Government
& Planning (SARA) for comment to which SARA advised on 23 November 2018 that they were
no longer an affected entity under the Planning Act 2016. SARA also advised that as the
proposal plans were not in accordance with their approved plans and conditions, a separate
application to amend the State conditions and plans would be required. This application would be
assessed by Maritime Safety Queensland to assess impacts on navigation. Council would be an
affected entity in relation to the change application to SARA.
It is noted that the SARA approval includes condition 12 which states:
The construction, operation or maintenance of the structure, and any ship moored at this
structure, must not impede the safe navigation of other ships or restrict safe access to or
from neighbouring structures.
All vessels must be moored within the water allocation plan to ensure safe access to vessel
mooring at adjacent structures.
Page 19 of 76
Section 20
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
On 29 April 2019 the applicant sought confirmation that the amended plans could be considered
Generally in Accordance with the initial referral response. On 6 June 2019 SARA advised the
applicant that the amended plans were Generally in Accordance with their original referral
response. As such, the applicant is not required to make further application to SARA although it
is noted that the following was included in the SARA response.
The department would like to advise that all vessels must remain moored inside the water
allocation area as a result of the amended siting of the existing jetty and new pontoon as
per the amended plans referenced above and agreed to in this generally in accordance
letter.
5. CONCLUSION & REASONS FOR DECISION
The applicant advises that due to a construction error, an extension to a jetty was not built in
accordance with the approved plans issued by Council. The applicant now seeks to amend the
approved plans to reflect the constructed jetty, which has been built to the lease boundary
instead of providing a 2.6 metre setback to the northern lease boundary. The location of the jetty
results in refuelling and mooring activities being undertaken outside of the commercial lease
area.
The applicants request is not supported as all activities associated with the jetty are required to
be located within the lease area consistent with the Noosaville Locality Code, the Watercourses
Works Code, the Marine Facility lease and the draft Noosa Plan.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services Corporate Services
Executive Officer Community Development Financial Services
Executive Support Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws x Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services Environment & Sustainable Development Infrastructure Services
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service x Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 20 of 76
Section 21
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 1
Page 21 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 1
DRAWING SIZE - A2
ST AT = WEES SOTE) CTHEP TE ALL Theme SHALL OE OueAaUTY “Las Fr
~t wt APRN) SECES a0 HAVE 4 VINO STRESS F406 CF FI on
1 A as A= e i in mee AEC eon ure sh
; | | | AN) ENONEDING STaNOARDG FR TDaL WK
Lex | I, ¢ Ley | ly ¢ ) ALL STARLESS STEEL BOLTS, 9005, GRACKETS, ETo SHALL GE 4?0\E)
= L163 sa | Lgt 163 "a webs cs sted a cre ores
! r= ‘| | pet | | RUSS
| eee EF ‘ | aye aT We uy “4 MBecdons 4N0 LEVELS SHALL WoT GE SCAUED PidW THESE Dpawhs
He NOqeMLLE 000 4! = woul 100g
| js | | - LOADING CRITERIA
i ! _ Ue Lis = kPa
| | ' | | | ] : SERTHING VELOCITY == O Sm/se
i i | ' - |
| ern || | | j Tee em |
al | | py} |
| | | | i oil | Taser |
| i | | | | | | NOOSA COUNCIL
| i | 3 | | | APPROVED PLAN
tig | | | merece | | Bj | OPW17/0150 23 OCT 2017
sli Ie | rl | Seron | | = | |
5 | 5 |
2 | pt |* | on
I | ta || ! [tai | aden
| I | pase | | | | cae or eee
I | | ee — | ae aig |_| | ste POY | a8
| ° jt J _ 4 | | F = —T mi + —
| | | ie eS ere |
! | = acre =| |
| | SS ar | a
| A —— J es ee
' \ ' a ————— 1 [Rewson | Descrpton | ate
| ' pee mes ES! "Fr ' lssue:
v [. | [ g ' j O SCG Ph (07) S455 S604
Bi CS ! = woo =
EXISTING SITE PLAN PROPOSED SITE PLAN
Page 21 of 76Section 22
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 22 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
DRAWING SIZE - A2
Heorab
ta ate a
LOADING CRITERIA: ee Se SS SE Se ES ss
ETTY
tT tT TT wT BASTHG _ _
WOORED VESSEL (Max —— TT. iy. 1. —. 7 °°» FP
PERTHING VELOCITY — = 0.5Im/se === SSS J 4 ") | _ pan tl
a Eon SS SS SSS SS SS SSS 0 - -_— eo | -— m1)
WEOHT = 1500Kg SS SS SS SSS SS SSS 3 (Pt) (P2) -| , tr) (Pt) (Pt) Ph
== . Vm Ss, “4 as (m) : — — — = 1 ~ i I {| . 1]
———— a TN OO _ iH gj
Ss yy SEE I i 11 I ' e| | a} I
2:53 | 11 1 | el 1 | | Z| noo 1 | tt ital I! I i
Heed SESE 4 a} tt i || tel tt es} ayy i Uj
con NDEI Se HER S| VY. el LS IT I | |i Hood
60)» 7S (FI4) WOBTS @ Poets [Cent) ber A = fpr} & (Pt) 83 Py) BS (PI) Ul UI im il i
We = SS Se FRONT ELEVATION
[ane ra nan ae (at . 2 30 (4 Hm —_A~ Om Oz NOOSA COUNCIL
>_> == ne to i APPROVED PLAN
~ PTT OPW17/0150 23 OCT 2017
a PI tt / Ege >) S
: {sl \-™ sete SS
| “baat RSS EES
Fee fee Bat | mepthi
: Dos Mele — BSc
ml Theo L f _— ty S< {| 4 s i 1s SP
{ . | ia ¢. \ |i IL i
| & tS iit) THE Heat ot a tr | | <t fi _ Py 6
3 { | | { i fl TM HOCH (FTE ots
a - JS fete we te ban te
ry Val bon TT gw 7 cokes nati ay
a id pee Hi
a Bet tt pgp || --- T)\SPUCE JOINT DETAIL
J PREREY PTT | On
pr! rrr (Pi Syst 5 S/S BRACKET .
ARERR TSA 3 He
{ult ttre) a ;
| bons si SH BE %
mL} beet tthe - wie SS & _ h —
poe oS b QU, ; ( ay
oa | | on (At | ~t [= [Remotes reeset Pra
rs Lf LL sw om a
Sn annem l | a i “x Issue: CONSTRUCTION
SL en L area i O SCG Messe renews
Gympie Tce, Noosaville
Page 22 of 76Section 23
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 2
Page 23 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
<<< Attachment 2 °
DRAWING SIZE - A2
ri ar
OE | Woe
' ! 1 UNLESS NOTED OTHENASE ALL TWEE WAIL GE SUNAOMMTY CLASS 9 oF
<1 | wt #09016) SSBIES AN0 HAE & WNDb STHESS OTHE CF Fe ve
22 Ne -|2 ft ALES NOTED OTMERNKE ALL ONSTIONION SHALL CoveLY MH THE
=| i = ; BOPOWE\TAL PROTEIN A0Bcrs O° BaTOaL PoUbr - TUL
i | [. | 0) EXCESS STAAOAAIS FOR THA. WOFKS.”
| Lat 165 | Sa] “| Lat 163 | sa VES 2 ee WL PEt HME
=a to a2! Ho ta © ALL STANLESS TBR. SOUT, FDS SRACHETS. Te SHALL APSE
| ae or ~lo | ate =| 6 Te oF AES SHALL SE SEALED #0 PULL cP FLASHED 0 AED
t P pret ls t #6 | g WMH 4) AL bm ALLOY OF STAINLESS STEEL pats
| a re WE t . 14 | 8 ae 1 ¢ S UMEVSIONS AND LEVELS SHALL SOT SE StalED Prov THEE osaviuc
ely opus oa ati vo ALE oi
ant aw vf UE Liao = 200
|" ° Low x =I : ; Law a VESSEL (Way)
| * =+—--—--—- : 4 “le SaaS : ‘| WELHT =! Kg
| | SSS j |
| i ! | i po ! SENTHNS VELOCITY = = Ste fone
| came |! | | | ____! TRAlE AEA ETT |
' ' 7
: rl ! : 7) fj}
| | | FEMA |
' | | ' caper — |
| ' | | Lee} '
\ | | ' a ; 4 |
| - | |. - |
ot 1G i moro | E |
|e is mT ' eatin WET | 3 my '
is | Ei | | | Bi | | |
| ' a | | a ermebes De
| i | SET ET we | | | | sp eT as Sepa Plans Amended by Project BA
' { FLL bowed ‘ ' i of FEL sows ' for Minor Change Application
| | . |g +|2 vaptha =|! Annotated 12/10/2018
' | ade - ne 218 | |. exe | as
a | i | PROJECT
- ' - . — eae BETO |
! | ees | —BA.——
| | r — PF OE) FEL sSEWE! * |
| | —_- = or fo Eb 1 [> _| 2emorF SET TOREAR BDAY | [21017 |
| | | ——J_ es | lc __ [eastwarpensancen [racer |
| ' $= ' [a [woresamencen | arcaa7 |
| | a —$— 9 | [A_[.errvano rawr awenceo |vecoi7 |
' je a SSS \ ae sh SO
| ——— an 7h. CONSTRUCTION
b | Leite 1d], —=
vy { ' ee an a ~ : SCG Ph (07) S455 S604
| Y i at So
ay —_
EXISTING SITE PLAN PROPOSED SITE. PLAN a [OO gece |
) Proect Lot 163 Pelican Boat Hi
; ANNOTATED
Page 23 of 76Section 24
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 24 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Pri)
Noosa River x
Bs 5 2
& m
232 | W/o
os 4 VLE
——S)_ 6.92
13.51 w timber jetly=
—
=
=
=
2
Ee:
163 ES
opgo7408
=
Le
a :
:
=
os
yea | of new Jetty & Pontoon
Sue As Constructed Surve
Ce5eo in Lot 163 on CP907408
fa = pCALIT) 20 180 Gympie Terrace
cxinin'singe’ TR) remguanemnma ease [sewn oe [oom |
Cadastral Surveyor Owe C7 S471 2277 «© [email protected]
iain ae re)
Page 24 of 76Section 25
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
3 MCU19/0081 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR 16
ANCILLARY DWELLING UNITS AT 64 GATEWAY DRIVE NOOSAVILLE
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Manager Development Assessment, Kerri Coyle
(Report drafted by external planning consultant)
Environment and Sustainable Development Department
Index ECM/ Application MCU19/0081
Attachments Nil
APPLICATION DETAILS
Application No. MCU19/0081
Applicant 64 Gateway Drive Pty Ltd TTE
Proposal Material Change of Use – 16 Ancillary Dwelling Units
Properly Made Date 10 July 2019
Information Request Date The applicant has opted to not accept an information request
for this development application as provided for by the Planning
Act 2016
Information Response Date N/A
Decision Due Date 12 September 2019 (extensions agreed to 19 September 2019)
Report Completed Date 14 August 2019
Number of Submissions Not Applicable
PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address 64 Gateway Drive, Noosaville Qld 4566
RP Description Lot 13 SP 170295
Land Area 12,350 m²
Existing Use of Land Vacant
STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation Urban Footprint
Locality Noosaville Locality
Zone Industry
Overlays Biodiversity Overlay – Environmental Protection
Natural Hazards Overlay - Flood Hazard Area
Natural Hazards Overlay – High and Low Potential Acid Sulfate
Soils
Assessment Type Code
Page 25 of 76
Section 26
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by Manager Development Assessment to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2019 regarding Application No
MCU19/0081 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use for 16 Ancillary Dwelling
Units situated at 64 Gateway Drive Noosaville and
A. Refuse the application for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is not for Ancillary dwelling units as defined under section
2.11.5 of the Planning Scheme because:
(i) multiple dwelling units are proposed on the premises;
(ii) the proposed dwelling units are not subordinate to the non-residential use.
2. The proposed development is for Multiple housing which under Table 11.9 of Division
10 of the Noosaville Locality Plan is an inconsistent use in the Industry Zone requiring
impact assessment.
3. The proposed development is inconsistent with the Noosaville Locality Code in the
following respects:
(i) The proposed use will be incompatible with other uses and works on the
premises contrary 11.7.2(a)(i) of the Overall Outcomes Division 16;
(ii) The proposed use fails to protect the subject premises for industrial functions to
the exclusion of incompatible uses contrary to 11.7.2(vv)(ii) of the Overall
Outcomes Division 16;
4. The proposal is inconsistent with Overall Outcomes 14.51.2(a) and (b) of the
Detached House Code as land zoned industrial is not suited for residential use and
would be located in the vicinity of land uses which would adversely impact the
occupation and use of buildings and the site by residents and would result in the
residential development preventing or inhibiting the conduct of existing land uses.
5. A number of the proposed dwelling units contain upper level storage levels directly
accessed by internal stairs which would not meet fire separation requirements of the
Building Code of Australia.
6. There is no planning need for the proposed development.
7. The proposed development is inconsistent with the existing development approval in
effect for the development of the site for industrial uses and represents a piecemeal
development.
8. The proposed development is contrary to PO7 of the Low Impact industry Zone Code
of the draft New Noosa Plan provisions which reinforce that caretakers uses are to be
subordinate to the industrial uses on the site and include only one caretaker per site.
B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
REPORT
1. PROPOSAL
The applicant seeks a Development Permit for a Material Change of Use for 16 Ancillary
Dwelling Units on premises located at 64 Gateway Drive, Noosaville and described as Lot 13 on
SP170295. The vacant site currently has an approval for a two storey industrial development
comprising 42 industrial tenancies and the applicant seeks to convert the upstairs portion of 16 of
these units into Ancillary Dwelling Units for caretaker or employee residences. Each residence is
proposed to be less than 65m2 in gross floor area, comprises two bedrooms and includes a
balcony. Six of the units also have a large storeroom of 45m2 accessible from the living area.
No external changes are proposed to the approved building form.
Page 26 of 76
Section 27
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The applicant indicates that:
The ancillary dwelling units are located and designed to adjoin the environmental reserve
and the residential zones. The units are to be only used as caretaker accommodation to
the approved industrial unit and are separated to avoid significant changes to the light, air
quality, noise access or other conditions of adjoining industrial units or nearby residential
premises.
The units are proposed to be occupied by the owner or persons employed in the future industrial
use on the premises.
Figure 1 below illustrates the site’s location and characteristics whilst figures 2 and 3 illustrate
the proposed layout of the units and their location within the complex.
Figure 1 - Site Plan and Locality plan
Page 27 of 76
Section 28
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Figure 2 - Typical caretaker unit layout
Figure 2 - Location of caretaker’s units (annotated as ‘C’ on Mez level) within complex
Page 28 of 76
Section 29
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The applicant indicates that the units are ordinarily expected in this part of the industrial estate
with ancillary uses compatible with industrial businesses and details that Council has approved a
number of Ancillary Dwelling Units within a 300m radius of the site.
2. SITE DETAILS
2.1. Background
The site has the following background in relation to recent development approvals:
132007.738 – on 2 July 2008 Council approved an application for Industrial Business Type
1 – Warehouse and Industrial Business Type 2 – Production, Alteration, Repackaging &
Repairing)
132007.738.01 - On 9 April 2013 Council changed Condition 22 to extend the relevant
period to 2 July 2016.
132007.738.02 – On 14 June 2016 Council changed Condition 22 to extend the relevant to
2 July 2020.
132007.738.03 – Minor change application returned as fees not paid
132007.738.04 – In 2018, Council approved changes to the approved plans and conditions
to update the external facades, increase Gross Floor Area, increase carparking on site and
stage the development. A further extension of 2 years until 2nd July 2022 was also
approved.
2.2. Site Description
The subject site comprises a predominately rectangular shaped lot located at the northern end of
Gateway Drive. The Gateway Drive cul-de-sac head extends into the southern portion of the site
creating an irregular southern boundary. The site is currently vacant and gently slopes down to
Lake Doonella to the north.
The site is currently vegetated and proposed to be cleared under Operational Works approval
OPW19/0098.
2.3. Surrounding Land Uses
Lake Doonella Park is located along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site with
industrial development located along the southern boundary. A residential complex known as
‘Bushlands Manor’ is located along the western boundary.
3. ASSESSMENT
3.1. Instruments for Statutory Assessment
Under the Planning Act 2016 the application must be assessed against each of the following
statutory planning instruments to the extent they are relevant to the development:
State Planning Policy;
South East Queensland Regional Plan;
Planning Regulation 2017;
The Noosa Plan.
State Planning Policy
The Noosa Plan is generally consistent with the State Planning Policy 2017 (SPP) and the SPP
raises no further issues relevant to the proposal.
South East Queensland (SEQ) Regional Plan
The subject site is located within the Urban Footprint in the SEQ Regional Plan.
Planning Regulation 2017
The application is consistent with the assessment benchmarks and the regulatory provisions
contained within the Planning Regulation 2017.
Page 29 of 76
Section 30
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
3.2. Statutory Instruments – Noosa Plan
The Noosa Plan defines an Ancillary Dwelling Unit as follows:
Ancillary dwelling unit means the use of premises for a caretaker’s residence or employee
residence associated with a non-residential use on the same premises where:
There is no other dwelling unit on the premises, except where the non-residential use
is an agricultural use;
The gross floor area of the dwelling unit does not exceed 150m2;
The dwelling unit is subordinate to the non-residential use;
The dwelling unit is attached to or within 25m of the non-residential use; and
The dwelling unit is occupied by the owner of the non-residential use or somebody
employed in the non-residential use.
A caretaker’s residence is defined as:
caretaker’s residence means a dwelling unit situated on the same premises as a business
use, community use or infrastructure use where it is occupied by the owner or employee of
the business or operation for reasons of ensuring security and maintenance of the business
or operation.
The applicant seeks approval for 16 x 2 bedroom Ancillary dwelling units across the entire site.
Whilst it is acknowledged that one Ancillary dwelling unit for caretaking purposes may be suitable
for the development, concerns are raised as to how the multiple units conform with the Planning
scheme definition.
Specifically no information has been provided as to:
The nature of future industrial uses on the site;
Why these future industrial uses require multiple caretakers for security purposes;
Why these future industrial uses requires on site accommodation for an employee;
The role of the persons that will reside on site;
How the caretaker or employee is subordinate to the non-residential use;
Why 16 x 2 bedroom dwelling units are necessary for the site.
Concerns are also raised as to whether 10 of the proposed dwelling units are subordinate to the
non-residential use. Specifically the dwelling units detailed below all have floor areas that are
greater than 50% of the approved industrial use.
Unit number Ancillary dwelling unit floor Industrial floor area
area
8,11,12,13,16,17,18,21,22 64m2 80m2
Concerns are also raised as to the design of the upper level storage areas for units 9,
10,14,15,19 and 20, which are directly accessed off the internal stairs to the residential units. The
location of these stairs would not meet fire separation requirements however modification to the
plans and location of the stairs within the industrial tenancy may overcome this area of non-
compliance.
The subject site is located in the Noosaville Locality and is zoned industry. Ancillary Dwelling
units are identified as a consistent use within the zone and required to follow a code assessable
application process. The Table of Assessment for the Industry zone details that the following
code is applicable for assessment of Ancillary Dwelling units:
Detached House Code
The most relevant Overall Outcomes of the Detached House Code are detailed as ensuring that
detached houses:
Page 30 of 76
Section 31
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
a) only occur on land that is suited for the intended form of development and the
occupation and use of the building and site by the residents.
b) are only developed on land which is not located in the vicinity of land uses—
i. which would adversely impact the occupation and use of buildings and the site by the
residents; or
ii. which would result in the residential development preventing or inhibiting the conduct
of existing land uses.
c) are attractive and consistent with the developed character of the particular
neighbourhood;
d) retain the natural landscape character and visual quality of hill slopes and ridgelines;
e) offer high levels of amenity, safety and security for the occupants;
f) have an adequate supply of water;
The proposal is not considered to meet items a) and b) of the Code. The site is zoned industry
and located on the northern edge of an existing industrial estate with industrial uses surrounding
the site to the east and south.
In assessing the application, it is appropriate to review the proposal against the Overall
Outcomes of the Industrial zone to determine if the industrial zoned site is suitable for the
intended form of development.
The Overall Outcomes of the Industry zone detail that land in this zone:
i. consists of the Noosaville Industrial Estate, being Noosa’s principal industrial centre;
ii. is protected for industrial functions including Industrial business Type 2 to the exclusion
of incompatible uses including Residential Uses, Community Uses, Commercial
business and most sport and recreation uses and Retail business uses;
vi. provides important industries and service-related businesses to the whole of Noosa, but
particularly the coastal area and the north-east area of the former Maroochy Shire; and
The site has been approved for industrial development which is consistent with the intent of the
zone and planning scheme. The Outcomes state that land in this zone is to be protected for
industrial function to the exclusion of incompatible uses including Residential Uses. The proposal
seeks approval for 16 x 2 bedroom Ancillary Dwelling units which essentially creates a residential
community of approximately 32 persons on the industrial site. The establishment of such a level
of residential units has the potential to create an unacceptable residential environment on site
and change the nature of the development in the industrial area. Further this number of
residential units and people may have the ability to impose significant constraints on industrial
uses on the site and compromise the integrity of the industrial area.
The Gateway/Venture Drive area is a busy industrial area which is rapidly growing with a range
of new industrial buildings and industrial uses occurring. The proposed number of residential
units are not considered to accord with the Overall Outcomes of the Detached House Code.
The proposal has further been reviewed against the Detached House Code with Outcome 26 the
most relevant.
Outcome 26 states:
O26 Detached houses (including any secondary dwelling) and Ancillary dwelling units are
located, designed and operated to avoid significant adverse changes to the light, air quality,
noise, accessibility or other conditions enjoyed by users of associated, adjoining or nearby
premises;
The proposed dwelling units will not adversely impact on the surrounding area in terms of light,
noise or air quality, however as detailed above the number of units are considered to create
reverse amenity issues for existing and future industrial uses that may wish to operate from the
site.
Page 31 of 76
Section 32
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
With reference to amenity, the applicant indicates that the units will not change the amenity of the
surrounding area and are to be expected in an industrial estate. Further the applicant submits
that a number of industrial developments in the area have been approved with Ancillary dwelling
units as detailed in the extract from the planning report accompanying the application.
Figure 3 - Extract Applicants report – location of approved ancillary dwelling units (marked in red)
The applicant has submitted as justification for the application, that Council has approved
multiple ancillary dwelling units on individual industrial sites within the locality. It is noted that
three developments MCU17/0560 (4 ancillary dwelling units), MCU17/0078 (2 ancillary dwelling
units) and MCU 18/0062 (3 ancillary dwelling units) have been approved in the locality however
the approval of these other units is not sufficient justification to continue to approve residential
development in the area. As detailed previously concerns are raised as to the encroachment of
residential uses into the industrial area and the potential reverse amenity issues that may arise.
Carparking has been assessed for the development based on rates detailed by Council’s
consultant traffic engineer for assessment of the original approval. This report identified
carparking rates of 1 space per 30m² for tenancies 150m² or less and 1 space per 50m² for
tenancies greater than 150m² for an industrial development. Whilst there are some minor
discrepancies between the plans and the applicant floor area calculations, carparking is
considered to comply based on the following areas:
Units over 150m2 3084m2 1:50m2 61.68 spaces
Unit below 150m2 1446m2 1:30m2 48.2 spaces
Caretakers 1: unit 16 spaces
Total 125.8 spaces
Provided 125 spaces plus 16 scooter spaces
4. DRAFT PLANNING SCHEME
The Draft Noosa Plan defines Caretakers Accommodation as:
Caretaker’s accommodation means the use of premises for a dwelling for a caretaker of a non-
residential use on the same premises.
The Plan includes the site in the Low Impact Industry zone and details that caretaker’s
accommodation is subject to impact assessment. The Performance Outcomes for the Low
Impact Industry zone detail:
Development for caretaker’s accommodation:
is directly associated with and subordinate to the industry activity on site;
2. demonstrates a demand for 24 hour care of buildings, operations, plant or
equipment;
Page 32 of 76
Section 33
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
3. is not separately let for other accommodation activities;
4. includes no more than one caretaker’s accommodation per site; and
5. has a maximum gross floor area of 65m2.
5. CONSULTATION
5.1. Referral Agencies
Nil referrals
5.2. Other Referrals
The application was forwarded to the following internal Council officers:
Building Certifier
6. CONCLUSION & REASONS FOR DECISION
The applicant seeks approval for 16 x 2 bedroom Ancillary Dwelling Units within an approved
industrial development located on a site at northern end of Gateway Drive, Noosaville. The
proposed dwelling units are proposed to be located inside the approved building and do not
propose any alterations to the external built form.
Ancillary Dwelling Units are detailed as being code assessable uses in the Industrial zone in
which the site is located. Whilst it is recognised that there may be the need for one caretakers
residence to be provided on site for security reasons, there appears to be no demonstrable need
for a further 15 x 2 bedroom caretakers or employees residences to be provided on the site.
The applicant has not provided sufficient information that demonstrates the proposed 16 x 2
bedroom units will be used in accordance with the Planning Scheme definition which details the
units are to be occupied by the owner of the non-residential use or somebody employed in the
non-residential use. The size of the dwelling units is also not considered to be in accordance with
the planning scheme definition which details that the units are to be subordinate to the non-
residential use. In this instance the two bedroom units have an area that is over 50% of the
industrial floor area. The proposed units are better defined by the Noosa Plan as multiple
dwelling units which are an inconsistent use in the Industry zone and required to be publicly
notified.
The 16 x 2 bedroom units do not meet the Overall Outcomes of the Detached House Code as the
industrial land is not suited to the residential density proposed by the application. The potential
for 32 people to reside on the site and within the industrial estate erodes the ability of the
industrial area to function and attract industrial uses. Significant concerns are also raised as to
the potential impacts associated with reverse amenity especially as the industrial development
has not commenced, it is not clear as the nature of the industrial uses that may be undertaken on
the site and new residential owners may not anticipate noisy industrial uses.
The proposal is further inconsistent with the existing development approval for industrial uses for
the site and represents a piecemeal development.
The application is therefore recommended for refusal.
Page 33 of 76
Section 34
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services Corporate Services
Executive Officer Director Director
Executive Support Community Development Financial Services
Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services X Environment & Sustainable Development Infrastructure Services
Director Director Director
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service X Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 34 of 76
Section 35
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
4 OPW19/0046 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO 1802 OF 2019
REFUSAL OF APPLICATION FOR OPERATIONAL WORKS FOR SIGNAGE AT 1/100
RENE ST, NOOSAVILLE
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Manager Development Assessment, Kerri Coyle
Environment & Sustainable Development Department
Index ECM/ Application/ OPW19/0046/ Case/ Reece
Attachments 1. Sign Plan
2. Visual Impact Assessment Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2019 regarding Planning & Environment
Court Appeal No. 1802 of 2019 and agree to settle the appeal generally in accordance with the
following:
A. Include the following conditions on a Development Permit for Operational Works (Signage):
Nature and Extent of Approved Development
1. This approval authorises the following sign as defined by the planning scheme and
shown on the Approved Plans:
a. One wall sign
No additional advertising devices must be erected on the site.
Approved Plans
2. Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply
with the approved plans of development. The approved plan is listed in the following
table
Plan No. Rev. Plan/Document Name Date
Work Order 26754 Item 1 1 Plan prepared by SignSite Group 16/08/2018
3. The approved sign must not exceed the dimensions and sign areas as shown on the
Approved Plans.
Illumination
4. The approved sign must not be illuminated in any way.
Maintenance
5. The approved sign must be properly maintained by the owner of the property to
ensure the signs continue to comply with the Approved Plans and conditions of this
Decision Notice.
B. Confirm with the appellant that the existing window sign must be removed within 30 days of
the judgement.
C. Acknowledge the appellant may erect a sign for their business on the existing pylon sign at
the entrance to Noosa Metro Innovation Park.
Page 35 of 76
Section 36
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
REPORT
On 18 April 2019, Council at its Ordinary Meeting, resolved to refuse an application for an
existing Advertising Device in the form of a Wall Sign located on the side of a building located at
Noosa Metro Innovation Park, Rene Street Noosaville due to the sign being inconsistent with the
Noosa Plan’s Advertising Devices Code.
The sign measured 5.6m in width and 1.57m in height providing a total signface area of 8.792m 2
and was refused due to a number of reasons but principally as the sign conflicted with the Code’s
overall outcome for “signs with a signface area exceeding 4m2 are not located in Noosa Shire.”
The applicant’s plan of the sign is included as Attachment 1.
The applicant subsequently appealed the decision seeking that the sign be approved. The
Appellant submitted that the application should be approved pursuant to a proper assessment
under the Planning Act 2016:
1. Because the proposed wall sign complies with the assessment benchmarks in the
Advertising Devices Code under the Noosa Plan, as inter alia, the proposed wall sign is
appropriately designed to result in:
(i) Acceptable visual impacts having regard to surrounding development and the natural
and built environment of Rene Street, which is predominately larger format
warehouses and industrial business uses;
(ii) Bulk, scale and form in its context;
(iii) Complementary character, having regard to the surrounding locality; and
(iv) Identification of the business having regard to the location and orientation of the
subject building to the road;
2. Because the extent of non-compliance with an assessment benchmark in the Advertising
Devices Code under the Noosa Plan, if any, is minor and should not militate against
approval of the application pursuant to section 60(2)(b) of the Planning Act; and
3. Having regard to:
(i) An existing development approval for a material change of use which permits
installation of 2 wall signs on the subject building within close proximity to one
another. This approval contemplates a combined signface area of 8m2. Approval of
the application resolves the potential conflicts that the other development approval
caused with the advertising Devices Code and results in the reduction of visual clutter
of signs by consolidation; and
(ii) Advertising devices which are established on adjoining properties to the land.
During the course of the appeal court mediation was attended with the appellant and the court
registrar which resulted in the appellant proposing to submit a Visual Report to demonstrate that
the sign did not detract from the area or result in visual clutter and was legitimately needed to
provide directions and business identification.
The appellant’s Visual Impact Assessment Report prepared by Nick McGowen of Insight Design
and Assessment Services is included as Attachment 2.
The Visual Impact Assessment Report concludes that the sign is, in all circumstances,
acceptable in terms of visual amenity issues. This visual report sets out a number of reasons
why the proposed sign will have limited adverse visual impacts and in summary draws from the
following observations:
The proposed sign has a particularly limited visual catchment and the visual catchment has
a low sensitivity to signage of this type. This indicates that any impacts that would be
generated by the sign would have limited significance to the wider area.
The visual setting is a low quality visual environment that is diverse and that is substantially
characterised by signage and looks entirely appropriate in this visual setting.
One of the few appealing features of the visual environment is the bushland to the south
and east of site which provides a green backdrop to some views. The proposed sign does
not detract from this feature.
Page 36 of 76
Section 37
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The proposed building is a relatively modest, almost inconspicuous element of the visual
environment and, rather than amplifying the proposed signage, it will provide a muted and
uncluttered backdrop for the sign.
The proposed sign does not represent a significant exceedance in terms of dimensions or
overall area compared to approved signs. Specifically, the proposed sign is just 1.6m
wider, and 0.57m higher. Furthermore, the proposed sign represents a consolidation of
signage on the proposed building – instead of the 2 approved signs. Such an approach
reduces the potential for visual clutter within the site and reflects a less obtrusive signage
outcome.
The proposed sign will have a similar perceived size to the approved sign on the western
façade, when viewed from the internal road adjacent the site. The perceived size of an
object depends primarily on the visual angle subtended by the object on the viewer’s retina.
Being located on the northern façade of the building, the proposed sign will have less of an
impact on the streetscape of the internal road (than the 2 approved signs do). It will be
more identifiable from Rene Street (where street trees obscure views towards the site), but
would not be more impactful on the Rene Street streetscape. See photos below for
comparison.
Page 37 of 76
Section 38
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The Visual Impact Assessment Report provided by the appellant is quite compelling and
inspection of the area and the sign suggests that the sign does not significantly appear out of
place or greatly contribute to the visual clutter in the area. While this is in part due to some
existing non-compliant signage in the area which is to be addressed through the signage audit,
the sign is in context with the existing approved or compliant signage in the area, the scale of the
building, and character of the area. Further, compliance with the signage requirements would not
necessarily lead to a superior or significantly less impactful visual outcome.
The appellant has also offered that on the basis of Council agreeing to settle the appeal:
the existing non-compliant window sign will be removed within 30 days of final judgement.
No other signage will be erected on the premises, noting though that a sign may be
included for the business on the existing combined pylon sign at the entrance to Noosa
Metro Innovation Park. See the photo above of the existing pylon sign.
It is therefore recommended that Council settle the appeal on this basis.
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting Minutes, 18 April 2019, Item 2, Page 13
That Council note the report by the Contract Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee
Meeting dated 9 April 2019 regarding Application No. OPW19/0046 for a Development Permit for
Operational Works - Signage, situated at Noosa Metro Innovation Park, 1/100 Rene Street,
Noosaville and:
A. Refuse the application for the following reasons:
1. The application proposes an Advertising Device in the form of a Wall Sign in excess
of 4m2 signface area which is inconsistent with:
i. Overall Outcomes of The Noosa Plan’s Advertising Devices Code, being that:
a. The proposed advertising device does not complement and detracts from
the desirable characteristics of the natural and built environment in which
the advertising devices are exhibited;
b. The proposed advertising device is not designed and integrated into the
built form so as to minimise visual clutter;
c. The proposed Advertising Device exceeds the legitimate need to provide
directions and business identification in a manner that is consistent with
achieving the codes overall outcomes; and
d. Signs with a signface area exceeding 4m² are not located in Noosa Shire.
ii. Specific Outcomes of The Noosa Plan’s Advertising Devices Code, being that:
a. Signs with a signface area exceeding 4m² are inconsistent with the
overall outcomes sought by this Code and are not located in Noosa Shire;
b. The proposed sign is not compatible with the existing and future planned
character of the locality in which it is situated;
c. The proposed sign is not designed, sited and integrated to not contribute
to the proliferation of visual clutter and to not unduly dominate the visual
landscape; and
d. The proposed sign is not of a scale, proportion and form that is
appropriate to the streetscape in which it is located.
iii. Probable Solutions of The Noosa Plan’s Advertising Devices Code, being that:
a. Advertising devices do not include signs with a signface area exceeding
the Acceptable Solutions of this Code or 4m², whichever is the lessor; and
Page 38 of 76
Section 39
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
b. General design and amenity complies with the specific requirements for
all types of advertising devices, including a Wall Sign, do not exceed a
maximum signface area of 4m².
B. With regard to the other existing Window Sign advise the applicant to:
1. Make the Window Sign compliant with the Advertising Devices Code’s Acceptable
Solutions; or
2. Remove the Window Sign; or
3. Lodge a development application seeking approval for the Window Sign.
C. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
Finance & Risk
Council’s solicitor for the appeal advises that “unless we intend to engage a visual expert to
make an assessment, I strongly recommend that we accept the without prejudice offer.
However, I consider it unlikely that another visual expert is going to reach a different conclusion
and that, in terms of the issue of costs and prospects in the matter, I recommend that the
Appellant’s report be accepted”.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Wakefield Sykes Solicitors
Internal Consultation
Nil
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services Corporate Services
Executive Officer Director Director
Executive Support Community Development Financial Services
Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services x Environment & Sustainable Development Infrastructure Services
Director x Director Director
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service x Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 39 of 76
Section 40
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 1
Page 40 of 76
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
venare Colours
© -AMYK (None Specified)
® FRE BOTDOOR ® PARE FINE TALL EXTERNAL 5 | 1 - Red: Dibond (Traffic Red).
3 -White eo
I Materials
i - ~ } “ te seal -3mm Giberd Aon (Traffic Red).
| Paseo Caled dl ~ fluminum abriested Sub-Frame,
| | - 40x40x3mm Alurninium Angle.
| PrRADE CANOPY CANDY. - 25x25x3mm Aluminium SHS.
A ” = i - White Calendered Vinyl.
(= - g I Pal tte il ~ Gloss Black Paint.
i : i ie I
er 7 ao RAO mle omer coc Description
| puto som0 tees WOE "Actrof* . Non iftumi ,
serenenom oeicaie feLprnve: son — roueyrwe, —! sain a, : 3mm Dibond "Traffic Red” ACM jhiminium 2 sub fame cadded face"
3 m SU SOITE FIG cladding with SOmm returns. and return in red dibond with 6mm
Fixed to aluminium subframe. white acrylic graphics fixed to face.
(nts NORTHERN ELEVATION: 6mm White Acrylic router cut.
\oL/ GENERAL OVERVIEW Fined to face of ACM cladding,
White SAV graphics
applied to face of ACM cladding.
5500 mm
E 3mm ACM Cladding. Painted gloss black. Quantity Page
Erg i 1 1of2
8 (we, ISOMETRIC VIEW:
~ (oC) GENERAL OVERVIEW
(ws, TOP VIEW: Scale
\.@_/ GENERAL OVERVIEW NOTTO SCALE
5600 mm File Location
1400 mm 1470 mm 1330 mm 1400 mm 109 gam ae heap on al
5 - Proofs
Client
™ Reece Group
Project
E § E E ACTROL - Noosa
So o o Work Order #
& $ B 2 26754
Item #
1
= Version #
* 1
Date
326 326 16-08-2018
(wes, FRONT VIEW: (ws SIDE VIEW: osianet
\.@/ GENERAL OVERVIEW \&_/ GENERAL OVERVIEW d
N/A
PC JLEJTLIAL)
© All ertmark ramsina the property of SignSite. Capyright ia raserved by SignSite.
Unless authorised by SignSite in writing. no reproduction or dhacloaure to ary third perty ia permitted.
SignSite PREY REE pale
Grour Wwww.signsite.com.au eosiving your design epprovel. So please take extre care in cheoléng ell info , indluding caloure, sizes, quantities, eto. We will endeavour to match your colour ta our
= best ability, however due to the limitation of the technology we cannot guerantee a perfect match.Thank you
Eee (ol x) : :
Page 40 of 76Section 41
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 41 of 76
VA \\\%s N Tor
4 \ \ \= ' \,
t \ \ a
' \ \\3, 4 9
\ i on ah w\ [i
AP prostrate BLUR lave ie a X a _—————————— ]
Plate creer ony! Hele Ve an 17 \ a> aT
ee esas T eS, sa sp230643 \ ee aera Er [re
wes ' ; sie Seat Tavel
a—= at \, \ eww | Ves Yes
“A ied, \ 5 N as
Q at nhes por ot fe ane \ 2 a
oF | Tipe ca 4 x \ Pere — rs 1 4s —| ts J}
\ ) le i Rar 250RCp ca aes Se SP222982 a
Oo i as ie xan ke cewncrats lid a pate _(_— Se [eee |e stein J
i = ah- ~ poe erpented +332 \ ae Tr
-. . pect —| [fe ——J
a (= a . |. i
NS \ 8 jes +03 mp a } sea J] NS cys a
1 “78 '*) Bo a af Ses ——278°50'5¢7 as \ Spe a a
a: eo | 2 ame ~ aX ST 2.874 1 Fae p Ne oe fn ¥ r—afetd Se Tsien Hse
t i ,» a- ~ . a7” — T= a‘ : < \
8 —k., 4 Bl 4 53 xe Rs as ~ amo =—-~ 92.26 ‘ Ge 223 a eee ‘se a | | — 7
& Eg pi Zs oe Poh me = ‘ asp } : ter f | | —
he [Fe — Pe St = BONE US |e
Uj pa % ae 1x asoacp 9 ¥ | IN, Zee Typcal Box Kerb Typical Tratirc
f nf | ss ef Co - Ro aces a qi ee te pa The trot Tiesto Isiond Kerb
x | 3} \f ——, aie Ta RB Rf SoS
© j of a of ae MAES A ieee oS, ah Sy "| 7OG=Tap of Gutter
| —_—_ SEAVER Atay 9 4072 ne teri omte anos Poe) BE 4 hy o RR=Root Fi
& : fo 4 a“ a0 S—— orm SN AN ee re gs:
! | i Ener PMN ASsrnger +345 eee Lat ypc
Q J | } | 3 5P2 <i Potted trem recs ee... ‘ core sowh] tg Fora to, | MOumiadle Kart
; j ete 22982 aig \ comet | 4 a| Semowr" | kes
‘ | I Be ne mea ee”: oo tm 378 —ix an wi ® at Eloctnicty Box ei]
‘ RJR zs er mc +38 eo a 3 Elect. Light Pote iF
5 ass aod ~-—. s nee ‘a
O f x \"e “jf Storrmenter pit oe eS ‘ja se BO} it 4& eS Electricity Pt —)
= t / / Bagge me peyateloa a a Ae. . «56 "eo sly ec (os Aa | Electricity Pole By
= ) } { J ‘ we art \4 le & ul Fre Hydrant °
i ifs : =~ ...] \ {Sie Gas f
Oo ‘ x bide { Ze ) eh ok Bre ae ey Pa | 5 eS Guy Pt Backstore) BB
- j ‘ +398 a 439 ‘Stach pikes - choan fit 0 s | st
0 , 88 j ree [/[ 88! a aay amra\~-hi o | ‘ Gully Fit (Conte of Grane) i
o Jidi¢ L48 = 4-4) \\ colt {Ef cum Peat)
sg Sy fe j/f= 1 sae 337 } \ Se =S¢_ _ a2 Inpecton Opening €
a ¥/ > jf ! “ sao 4 ff
' é a: = i 1 2
f we fi B ” j | - iki vol. aay i z | 4922 Sewerage MH 2
! ip ge ; ' # Sea oe ol # my Stormwater MH
’ is Ve fa ! me 1 : « FF | Tetstre Pit iu]
‘ ; , ae & ; ‘sn 1 4 — eae ake iy a Tree fot
MT aN eRT « SP230643 tn Vate “
/ gf “nae r ' + -~ rr 7 f
i b ~ fed i 19 Viator Matar id]
? » ' *a70 i ceeeseenl 2 |
} és fi /\ By ) 1,585m? 365 Se) ~ i Edge of Concrete
f i / fepyx , = Top cf Bank ~------
' / hsyau iF BotomalGenk —————-——
! Ast f v4)
' / / Pr} : iz = Ges 7
t f } fa : +360 af8 Exetica E
i if 9} / ' so 8 Im Seretege nes Gomme
: e/f f / — “ , +328 Eye Oren
t is fy gy | Stormwater = ———- J —
! Y fe fe 8 I 35"6osq° + a | Cian: 1
{ Y } 400 | an yasT ‘ é H Overhead Wires § —————\__
} i ‘ Cromn of Rood ——— —— ——
/ ff ‘ied oe — a as . +348 | Coding for Trees
* ry i : t : ° |
ty if ral — fas 1 om Paces SO=Sitey Ook &
ea | *| i | FIG=Fig Tine 7
Pe orf ‘Sl err \ aa - —— as e | rl
gy f / i ::] 2 ? Adie : i i: 7 LE= Lecpard Tree f.
be se zs G
, » 2] SP230643 sit 109g ae iia ee oy J t hiae 1B =trontark egé
/ , 3 tromvect * 3% ae ed / J =Jocaranda os cf
d / , ff ea Voches _ - _ ‘ahs | 5 M -tengo Tree i ¢ 43 .
/ ! 2 ~ I CA=Ca mar Li ot eS v
P | #} 1190 = a7 | sP222982 Lien Leak
df rf 2; : a7e 1 | PA =Pat Tree | i Ss
Ai / ; 3 i 7 ieee Wf SB-Sirqy Bok oM-0203085
MiP J Fo 0 2 4) 6 CB 19 SOME 1200 when plotted at A3 size a } $943 TT =Tea Tres Lise kegent
0 eal Basing ps po oR ed | pac teen PO=Poincana Tree
/ @| { Comatnectine - cormese! UTR =Unknown Treo
S. Dimensions and postion of subject lot as gus ‘ ”
mast be verified by an Kentification Survey SG > Real Property Descnptton Chent #0 Architects
eo t = planieg, surveying prior to design or construction | ane itticert.con| sae = aveirtivet cst] see viet cor Lot t on SP230643 Detail and 1 Su
¢ 1 Ss lopment Level Survey
= Notes: The uscerround: have been compded fore a cartesaton of - Locality. Noosaville
Brisbane ‘vot levels and pps aos of Nedrauhes havo boon Setorvéned | ¥ Tad eurcey \croecet posto, Wit a one eulonb aaehuapeuatimen ee
Meckay 4 should bo noted Tox OHAS iesincts eetry lo-contined spaces Where pips detaks have been oltaned rom count records. the plan has been noted accondheghy Datum for Levela PM100227 Fi14.229 AHD
pa iacekan wai ceidcisskees “ pauaavencamshas Galland The accuracy ol nervice abgreverts shares on thas phe erory «3fy depending on the sauron ofthe dara Pot hading sical abacays be unvdertiean to eeeify the = :
on OT 9118 0608 ° <—_ oe ane rae —— Wc sll capt hus bates tfhen ta regress! tes fetales! ob ol mealegrare aivicen SaSer soceusmeyerst os FOuh | LBcch io | De | Saveyor
teshannsstzant com ay iin aed si tie Dourdates ware red reared ue Tre Lire of survey and have boa danerried Yur the original searrary plas cine ity For tecatore of bourntas 2 Proyect No. Crag Ho. Pare
i i inachadoczcht cima | sr eetsirato savey foconended Tove Coomnre and eras 30 Wo Verena he sated reared irs Os eed by OUHRB IDC. oa. PHBITOR) PMck 1:200 | 16/8/2017 Pick BNE170330 sossz.az | oSection 42
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 42 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Noosa Council documents
r NOOSA COUNCIL
APPROVED PLAN
132007.1841.7 16 FEB 2018
26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 26m 25m 25m 25m 24m 24m 24m
\ ' GRATEDDRAINS TOCIVL ENGS DETALS (GRATED DRAINS TO CIML ENGS CETARS : v
\ \ NEW SECURITY FENCING ‘ye _ A
\ w os vs a os a + is a os + a vs * vs a ie f y
\\ ¥ { ° 4
\\ s \\ b
\ : ‘S Af z
no ! = | a o
on ' ACCESS PATH S| Sr
ww CAR PARKING Q eres —
z f ; Reo §
2 enue 7 a , ' a
oO tu rece ==: E Jf w
= i S yay t\ ae =
s ¢
_ ~ (A)- z Line OF UL ON HELO) | 3 A Ww
wi e 52 500) \ f o
wu #3 | 4 a ° =
Ow | a” oe 5.0 nl ~ h _ a
— oO Se
ad tu E | L i | io ‘\ s
=m ao Ss | & = z i ° )
° | ;
= | ef 3 Ne we
= | 23 Ba: 3 Se
fo) | ~o MS : i f °
oO Hf pn Si yO. \ = =
| ‘ne —_—
- » 59m barren 43.4m EAVES GUTTER som | { °
TT
ADJACENT VACANT PROPERTY Ss
’ : SITE PLAN ee
WG ARCHITECTS cD LOT 1 / 100 RENE STREET NOOSAVILLE, GLD, 4566 | #755 Ss 1S C)
Voson:2. V [Eee = icf ><f| Print Date: 23 Februsry 2018, 223 PM
Page 42 of 76Section 43
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 2
Page 43 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 2
Insight
Visual Impact Assessment
of
Proposed Wall Sign
for
1/100 Rene St, Noosaville
5 August 2019
Page 43 of 76Section 44
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 44 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
Preliminaries
This Report:
a) has been prepared for Reece Limited;
b) may only be used and relied on by Reece Limited and their representatives for the purposes
agreed;
c) must not be copied to, used by, or relied on by any entity other than Reece Limited without the
Prior written consent of the author.
To the maximum extent permitted by law the author expressly disclaims responsibility for or liability
a) any error or omission in connection with assumptions, or
b) reliance on the Report by a third party, or use of the Report other than for the purpose
described in the report.
The author otherwise disclaims responsibility to any entity other than Reece Limited arising in
connection with this report. The author also excludes implied warranties and conditions, to the extent
legally permissible.
The services undertaken by the author in connection with preparing this report were limited to those
specifically detailed in the report and are subject to the scope limitations set out in the report.
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this report are based on conditions encountered
and information reviewed at the date of preparation of the report. The author has no responsibility or
obligation to update this report to account for events or changes occurring subsequent to the date that
the report was prepared.
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this report are based on assumptions made by
the author, as described in this report. The author disclaims liability arising from any of the assumptions
being incorrect.
The author has prepared this report on the basis of information provided by Reece Limited and others
{as noted), which has not been independently verified or checked beyond the agreed scope of work. The
author does not accept liability in connection with such unverified information, including errors and
omissions in the report that were caused by errors or omissions in that information.
2o0f 17
Page 44 of 76Section 45
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 45 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
Table of Contents
1 Introduction and Background one nee ene eee ene nen nnn neeeneeneeeneeeneeeetneneeeenennee
2 The Visual Comte nt ooo nee c eect ec eee tne nen naneenneneneeneeeeee nneennenaeeeneeenenanesneeteanesneetneeeneesennnee &
ZL The Locality nee e cee enee nen nen nena eens nneennenenenensnenseeeneeeneesnesnnesnecsnensnenseetesesaeeseee O
QQ The Streetscape nee eeeneeenee eee nnn enna eaennneenneeneenneeseennnerneeenereeanereeneee LL
2B The Butibediag nna neta eneneneene eens enennenennnenanennenneetneesnennesneesnensnenseeeneeeneenseene LZ
3 Potential Visual Impacts —_ nen teen ene enenneenentneeeneenennnenenereeneetneeeeeeeeee LB
= Come siO MS one ene nnn nee neennennneeneennentneaenneennetenesnnenetereees LT
Figure Index
Figure 1 - The proposed sign. o-oo. eee eee nen tenn nnn een eneennennennenetneenneeneesneesneneeeteesteeseeeneee
Figure 2 — Aerial image showing location and context of the subject site. 2
Figure 3 - Tradeliink at 10/100 Reme Street. nnn eneneeenenenenenceetneeneetneeneee D
Figure 4 - Storage First - 78-80 Reme Street 28 n oe een nena nneenneeneeeneennenneeneeeneenenee B
Figure 5 - Aerial image indicating approximate visual catchment of the subject sign... 8B
Figure 6 - Aerial image identifying viewpoints for Figures 7-11 below. eee
Figure 7 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north-east of the site (VP1). Sign not
WISI eee eee een een ene tneennenenetneennenaenaneeeeetnennneneeneesnetneeeneeteermneenee D
Figure 8 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north of the site (VP2). Sign partly visible
but would be obscured by any development on vacant land to north of the subject site... 10
Figure 9 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north of the site (VP3). Sign visible but
would be obscured by any development on vacant land to north of the subject site. ........... 10
Figure 10 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north-west of the site (VP4)_
Figure 11 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from west of the site (VPS). Sign generally
ODSCUT ER. on nee een nnee eneenneeneeeneesneetseteeteneeneesneesneestereteereeneeee LL
Figure 12 — Existing view toward the Actrol building with the proposed sign in place. ...........--.....-..... 14
Figure 13 - Photomontage from Figure 12 viewpoint showing the approved signs... 14
Figure 14 - Existing view toward the Actro! building with the proposed sign in place... 15
Figure 15 - Photomontage from Figure 14 viewpoint showing the approved signs... 1S
Figure 16 - Diagram illustrating size perception of proposed sign compared to approved sign. This
exercise considers sign height only. The comparison of sign length is not possible
presents squarely to the viewpoint. 2c eee eens LG
3o0f 17
Page 45 of 76Section 46
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 46 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
1 Introduction and Background
1 This assessment relates to an appeal by Reece Limited (the Appellant) against Noosa Council's decision
to refuse a development application seeking a development permit for operational works - advertising
device (the proposed sign) in respect of land located at 1/100 Rene Street Noosaville (the subject site).
2 Insight DAS has been engaged by Reece to undertake an assessment on the potential and significance of
visual impacts arising from the proposed sign.
3 As noted in the application material, the proposed sign is a wall sign with a face area of 8.792sqm
(measuring 5.6m wide x 1.57m high), positioned on the northern wall of an existing industrial building
{the Actrol building) on the subject site (refer Figure 1). The Actrol building is a relatively new building
located within a pocket of industrial development accessed from an interna! road off Rene Street. The
subject site is within the Shire Business Centre of the Noosaville Locality Plan, indicating that it is within a
precinct or principle business centre for Noosa with a focus on industrial businesses.
| v =f
ee eLLE
1 fi ‘ 3 i - <4.
| et ae at
- i —
a — Z
Figure 1 - The proposed sign.
o In February 2018, Council approved minor changes to the Actrol building. The approval induded two
advertising devices (the approved signs}: a 4sqm sign (measuring 4m wide by 1m high) on the northern
elevation of the building, and a 4sqm (measuring 4m wide by 1m high) sign on the western elevation of
the building. The Appellant subsequently applied for approval to change the signage for the building,
seeking to replace the two approved signs with a single, larger sign on the northern elevation. In April
2019, Council decided to refuse that application.
5 The following are reasons for refusal from Council's Decision Notice that are of relevance to visual
amenity concerns (underlining has been added to highlight critical aspects of the issues):
The application proposes an Advertising Device in the form of a Wall Sign in excess of 4m2
signface area which is inconsistent with:
i Overall Outcomes of The Noosa Plan's Advertising Devices Code, being that:
a. The proposed advertising device goes not complement and detracts from the
desirable characteristics of the natural and built environment in which the
advertising devices are exhibited;
4o0fi7
Page 46 of 76Section 47
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 47 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
b. The proposed advertising device is not designed and integrated into the built form so
inimice visual ci
c....
d. Signs with a signface area exceeding 4m2 are not located in Noosa Shire.
ii. Specific Outcomes of The Noosa Plan's Advertising Devices Code, being that:
a. Signs with a signface area exceeding 4m2 are inconsistent with the overall outcomes
sought by this Code and are not located in Noosa Shire;
b. The proposed sign is not compatible with the existing and future planned character
of the locality in which it is situated;
c. The proposed sign is pot designed, sited ond integrated to not contribute to the
Qrolifergtion of visual clutter and te not unduly domingte the visual landscape: and
d. The proposed sign is not of a scale, proportion and form that is appropriate to the
Streetscape in which it is located.
iii. Probable Solutions of The Noosa Plan's Advertising Devices Code, being that:
a. Advertising devices do not include signs with a signface area exceeding the
Acceptable Solutions of this Code or 4m2, whichever is the lessor; and
b. General design and amenity complies with the specific requirements for all types of
advertising devices, including a Wall Sign, do not exceed a maximum signface area of
4m2.
Sofi7
Page 47 of 76Section 48
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 48 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
2 The Visual Context
6 In order to consider the particular concerns raised in Council's reasons for refusal, it is first necessary to
appreciate:
i. The visual qualities (particularly character) of the locality (existing and future);
ii ‘The visual qualities (particularly scale, proportion, form) of the streetscape; and
iii, The visual qualities of the building on which the sign is located.
2.1 The Locality
7 The subject site has an area of 1,585 sqm within the Noosa Metro Innovation Park — part of a larger
industrial area extending southward from Eenie Creek Road in Noosaville and comprising large format
warehouse developments (refer Figure 2). The Innovation Park, comprises eleven industrial lots and
effectively forms a pocket of industrial development at the south-eastern corner of this larger industrial
area. To the west of this pocket is a large storage facility (Storage First Noosa). To the east and south of
this pocket is the Eenie Creek Bushland Reserve.
8 Immediately north of the subject site is a vacant site. To the west of the site, across the internal road is
2 Tradelink building (refer Figure 3 below). Other warehouses with prominent signage in the area
include: Storage First at 78-80 Rene Street (refer Figure 4 below), and Self Storage at 64-66 Rene Street
and at 77 Rene Street.
9 The visual environment of the Innovation Park, like most industrial areas of this nature, is a busy and
manoeuvring areas, and prominent signage. It is not a high quality visual environment and apart from
the green backdrop provided by the bushland surrounding (visible from only some locations), it lacks
any memorable features.
10} ~—- Within this locality, the subject sign (and the Actrol building generally) have a very limited visual
catchment (shown on Figure 5). Specifically, views to the building and the sign are only available for a
stretch of approximately 110 metres along Rene Street, and for approximately 40 metres along the
internal road.
1 Figure 7 - Figure 11 below depict views to the subject site from within this catchment. As shown in
these figures, the visibility from Rene Street is already interrupted by street tree planting, and will be
substantially reduced once a building is constructed on the vacant site between the subject site and
Rene Street.
12 While the provisions in the Advertising Devices Code mention existing and future character of the
locality, it would seem that the character of the local area is unlikely to change substantially from the
character that currently exists. Of particular note, there is no potential for further development or
Signage to the east of the subject site, meaning the proposed sign will not be seen in the context of
further signage in the future.
6o0f17
Page 48 of 76Section 49
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 49 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
- i see + a ne . a ay
fe Ma eh Oe | hs ete l pt Ire
Be AS, a - hg TPE ag (AE,
ce a Wo erst} = SLs Spee tes fF
ie ys eg ee La Tt ue 2
a) S89 So BSE Se.
a Wise Id = ~- =. =) =, . ‘a ei
4 ea, ge ee eg Se Bom & - es
Be ss S be he Pde Se a! ' sa a.)
aa Sane . I =e 7 To
ome gt |B SE Bear 2
4 j 2 eee io. 3 han — ' a iF3 i
= Steph : ela he
Of et Pe Ee
ta) ae kt SS ee ee
eS Sea ee kt ee
* A J a hx LE 4 Pi me ee
; VR. Vy ‘Meese +i UE RTE e .
. 4 « &e me, es — 7 aa ad
siomiemmge]) |
~~ be i Hf ei i ATi —=1 s
du oa ate | ie ae nies? Ste |
MR celle be i ‘pe.
"ye ‘ee Saf
oe ee, ae neal
a" ry _—
ye. — ——
. F om -
Figure 2 — Aerial image showing location and context of the subject site.
= Urner
Lt Bel Jan |
ae ; a |
= — — = =ai
Figure 3 - Tradelink at 10/100 Rene Street.
7of 17
Page 49 of 76Section 50
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 50 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
(1 jy > GOD oe ay " Afieech te
cl J : ig We 1
Figure 4 - Storage First - 78-80 Rene Street
| bet Set b=] : Pet
ie wert, i: A — , Ne
ce Me 7 ; ay ye thas ii
Pr d—A | Eber i
; = ab fo ET Ea) @ S - i {3 . a
ae Ty ——- E re
* me, ie Ja] 3 rp ; } . nm
Ci : ba) oh ii 4 a ¥ = 7 aS ee
nh Fa a er ih hee ees ”
Cine Prom me - a Nir ee eet
ea te rs
as a sf —
te wal? | TP |
. el ' i!
aii - Aerial image indicating approximate visual catchment of the subject sign.
Bof 17
Page 50 of 76Section 51
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 51 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
3 simi I a a ” ae | " a Py ~. ry “a om”! faa
ait a Fae A
aa ar Note Pe ‘7,
ee rend Pe Pr a
Rte nl mae: i a le ee ok Le
A Tl Se | a. , <7
ins tn |e wis, Ny
pt ee Peay Ea
hE Viet rs eee Sem
se i"T' ie 28): TAs poo .
y Ae ge aE Rie as Co!
si _ ~ ‘4 = 3 Sas T~ a
oa iS I led a)
? So pe I
Figure 6 - Aerial image identifying viewpoints for Figures 7-11 below.
B | . ti a
fod doe me
| Pt on — = FS), ik
eae ae > ; a — = ~
aa % a” B) re oe oF a ile
> ee 3 Py aE es = . Ee, . ay
Figure 7 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north-east of the site [VP 1). Sign not visible.
Ssofi7
Page 51 of 76Section 52
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 52 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual impact Assessment
’ PF a :
+ Ea 7
bs .
- hid
, =A P
. F F
~ 4 ie
“a -
5 ; = * ud
—_* , 7
— Bri 2
of ' Se , rr ©
rt | ys ei eZ ; < ‘
ee ie es ae
‘ oe) aa ey POT
= he! ha 4 “ae a
Se ieee ee
; = aR . = nna
f, = ‘ Ss
A a or):
> al — np oe ‘ ; a i
Figure 8 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north of the site (VP2}. Sign partly visible
but would be obscured by any development on vacant land to north of the subject site.
A ee ee
Se Sp a Hs
ay ee Ps
ci td Se Se e
Pee | pee a be
eee | Mee Yh mr sl eR Sf 2 ger
cee Fall See
= sr [ae ° Se ) <i
tie e ~~ - - . :
lee eerie bc \ _
ease :
ail Pash :
od
Figure 9 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north of the site (VP3). Sign visible but
would be obscured by any development on vacant land to north of the subject site.
10 of 17
Page 52 of 76Section 53
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 53 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual impact Assessment
° ; ; oo
d ° — we
=| f= ieee JW 3 a
- ar - : r os = | ; as : : | ens oe
ee } <a 2 “ae
" — een Se — io
— —— —
i a eS ——
a — i ~
a _
Figure 10 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from north-west of the site [VP4).
N
| Ps ge “
ae oa ae ye
= = mm eerie or ba
et | * oe , = } ="
—_— A a; #5
A sf ae |
ee eS oP / ~y SL ee eg
as ‘ i , i — nee
" i, -— saree ie .
“ By! oa
7 x
Figure 11 - View towards subject site from Rene Street from west of the site (VP5). Sign generally
obscured.
2.2 The Streetscape
B As for the locality, the streetscape (of both Rene Street and the internal road providing access into the
Innovation Park) have a busy and diverse character. Generous road landscaping along Rene Street does
much to screen and integrate the large building forms, but entry points, parking areas, and signage are
still obvious features of the streetscape. The landscaping along the internal road is less prominent and
liofi7
Page 53 of 76Section 54
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 54 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
less effective at screening the existing built form. While the streetscape of this internal road is
dominated by the built form and hardstand areas, views to the green backdrop of the bushland reserve
are an attractive feature.
14 It is relevant to note that both Rene Street and the road providing access to the site are internal to the
wider industrial area. These roads are not major roads through residential areas, rural areas, or natural
landscapes, where a traveller might not expect to see industrial development and accompanying
signage. Rather, the only reason for someone to travel along those roads would be to attend one of the
industrial tenancies, and their sensitivity to and their expectations of the visual environment would be
formed accordingly.
2.3 The Building
15 ~—s The building upon which the proposed sign is to be located is a relatively uncomplicated building — it is a
simple rectangular form with limited variation in wall planes, limited fenestration or other detailing, and
treated with a limited (almost singular) block colour palette of muted tones. As a consequence, the
building itself is particularly recessive in the visual setting. Such an outcome is in contrast to some of the
other buildings in the locality (such as the Tradelink building opposite the subject site) where the
building is treated to effectively present as an amplification of the corporate branding that is depicted in
the signage.
16 =©The approved drawings show landscaping along the western part of the subject site, including three
medium to large trees (Harpulia pendula) between the road verge and the building/carparking area.
These trees will further screen and soften the appearance of the building.
17 ~—s As noted, the proposed sign is 5.6m wide and 1.57m high. It is located on the northern elevation of the
Actrol building, which is approximately 43m wide and 9.2m high. As noted in the application material,
the proposed sign represents just 2.5% of the entire northern facade of the building. While larger than
4sqm, the proposed sign presents as a modest addition to the building facade, and the facade provides a
large, uncluttered backdrop for the sign.
12 of 17
Page 54 of 76Section 55
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 55 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
3 Potential Visual Impacts
18 There are several critical observations to make about the visual context, the proposed sign and the
potential visual impacts that are generated:
i. The proposed sign has a particularly limited visual catchment, and the visual catchment has a
low sensitivity to signage of this type. These factors indicate that any impacts that would be
generated by the sign would have limited significance to the wider area. Notably, the visual
catchment of the sign will be even further reduced when the vacant site to the north of the
subject site is developed.
ii. The visual setting is a low quality visual environment that is diverse and that is substantially
characterised by signage. Setting aside Council’s signface area limits [of 4sqm) the proposed
sign looks entirely appropriate in this visual setting and would be consistent with expectations
for this type of environment. As it exists, the proposed sign fits within this environment and
does not cause any change to the character or amenity of that environment.
iii. One of the few appealing features of the visual environment is the bushland to the south and
east of the Innovation Park, which provides a green backdrop to some views from the local
area. The proposed sign does not detract from this feature of the visual environment.
lv. The proposed building is a relatively modest, almost inconspicuous element of the visual
environment and, rather than amplifying the proposed signage (as occurs with some buildings
in the local area), it will provide a muted and uncluttered backdrop for the sign.
v. The proposed sign does not represent a significant exceedance in terms of dimensions or
overall area compared to the approved signs. Specifically, the proposed sign is just 1.6 wider,
and 0.57 higher than the approved signs. Furthermore, the proposed sign represents a
consolidation of signage on the proposed building - instead of the two approved sign, with a
combined area of 8sqm, the proposed sign is a single sign with a similar combined area. Such
an approach reduces the potential for visual clutter within the site, and reflects a less obtrusive
Signage outcome. This is confirmed in Figure 12 - Figure 15 below which show the proposed
sign (Figure 12 and Figure 14) compared to the two approved signs (Figure 13 and Figure 15).
Related to this point, it is relevant to note that the area of the proposed sign is noticeably less
than the total overall signage allowance for the site of 10sqm contemplated in the Advertising
Devices Code*.
vi. The proposed sign will have a similar perceived size to the approved sign on the western
facade, when viewed from the internal road adjacent the site. The perceived size of an object
depends primarily on the visual angle subtended by the object on the viewer's retina. The
visual angle is mainly affected by the actual size of the object and the distance of the object
from the viewer. The building sits approximately 10-12 metres from the pavement of the
internal access road. A sign on the western facade of the building would be approximately 10.2
metres from the road. By comparison, the proposed sign would be at least 15.2 metres from
the road (some 50% further than an approved sign). Considering only the height of the
proposed and approved signs, the visual angle of the proposed sign (with a height of 157m ata
distance of 15.2m) will have practically the same visual angle as the approved sign on the
western facade (with a height of 1m at a distance of 10.2m) (refer Figure 16 below).
vii. Being located on the northern facade of the building, the proposed sign will have less of an
impact on the streetscape of the internal road (than the two approved signs do). It will be
more identifiable from Rene Street (where street trees obscure views towards the site), but
would not be more impactful on the Rene Street streetscape.
2 O6e) and $6.1 of the Advertising Devices Code.
13 of 17
Page 55 of 76Section 56
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 56 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
hi . . i. A :
Pet ain a : i 45 ,
% re 7 =
1 a 4 af Tea 6 D
V _
= ; | a
1 aie ‘a rr) avi / yas io
} | Me TT eet) | ) ™
——
be as
Pe
Figure 12 — Existing view toward the Actrol building with the proposed sign in place.
Lak ; ia
Pe. Te
_ \ a | a ee ¥ : - oe "
. ~ i ACTROL pvser at |
= | Vv —s
: eer ; a ae
os = | 5 : P| A i : " | oe =
te Tt Pe | ree
cae —
pe ou
Sees
Figure 13 - Photomontage from Figure 12 viewpoint showing the approved signs.
14 of 17
Page 56 of 76Section 57
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 57 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
i i
“| Mi
tl as ——
bt a , re & A tiley ese smelt 75
Fa pee BE nal Rene nm |
Figure 14 - Existing view toward the Actrol! building with the proposed sign in place.
a A
|
. . »
P i 2
" PS Oo tier
rem eee) ee *: See eno
. = aa p Cc = a aT
Figure 15 - Photomontage from Figure 14 viewpoint showing the approved signs.
15 of 17
Page 57 of 76Section 58
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 58 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visua uct 1
Proposed sign with height of 1.52m, View from road
15.2m from road
Approved sign with height of 1.0m,
| from road
isn Om Sn Om
Figure 16 - Diagram illustrating size perception of proposed sign compared to approved sign. This
exercise considers sign height only. The comparison of sign length is not possible because
the proposed sign extends away from the viewpoint, while the approved sign presents
squarely to the viewpoint.
16 of 17
Page 58 of 76Section 59
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 59 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Visual Impact Assessment
PEA 1802 of 2019
4 Conclusions
19 The preceding section set out a number of reasons why the proposed sign will have limited adverse
visual impacts on this particular visual environment. |n the simplest terms, the proposed sign is a single,
relatively modest sign located within a visual environment where signage is expected and is already
commonplace. The proposed sign has a very limited visual catchment and would be seen as an entirely
appropriate signage outcome for that visual catchment. In fact, in comparison to a number of other
signage outcomes in the visual catchment or even the broader locality (the wider industrial area), the
proposed sign represents an exemplary outcome in so far as it is effective as a visible advertising device,
but is not overtly or unnecessarily conspicuous, as many other signs in the area are.
20 =©Turming specifically to Council's reasons for refusal and the provisions referred to therein:
i. The proposed sign will be entirely compatible with the particular visual environment
(both as it exists and as it is likely to develop) and will appropriately complement the
desirable characteristics (such as the bushland backdrop). It would therefore satisfy
Overall outcome 14.74.2a) and Specific outcome O2a) of the Advertising Devices Code.
i. The proposed design is an appropriate format and scale for the building it is located on
and, as compared to the two approved signs will present less visual clutter. It would
therefore satisfy Overall outcome 14.74.2b) and Specific outcome 02d) of the
iii. The proposed sign will have less of an impact on the streetscape of the internal road
(than the two approved signs do). It will be more identifiable from Rene Street (where
street trees obscure views towards the site), but would not be more impactful on the
Rene Street streetscape. It would therefore satisfy Specific outcome O2c) of the
Advertising Devices Code.
iv. ‘The sign does not meet requirements for a maximum signface area of 4sqm (such as
Overall outcome 14.74.2g) and Specific outcome O1 of the Advertising Devices Code).
However, this assessment has shown that it would be at least as appropriate in this
situation as the two approved signs (which do meet the signface requirements) would.
Ultimately, this assessment has revealed that this is not a situation where the 4sqm
signface restrictions would lead to a superior or even a less impactful visual outcome.
21 ~—s This assessment indicates that there are no compelling visual amenity reasons to refuse the proposed
development.
17 of 17
Page 59 of 76Section 60
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
5 MCU18/0204 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO 2352 OF 2019 -
REFUSAL OF APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR OFFICE,
RESTAURANT & SHOP AT 6 HERON ST, PEREGIAN BEACH
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Manager Development Assessment, Kerri Coyle
Environment & Sustainable Development Department
Index ECM/ Application/ MCU18/0204 / Case/ Andema Pty Ltd TTE
Attachments Nil
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2019 regarding Planning & Environment
Court Appeal No. 2352 of 2019 and agree to defend the appeal.
REPORT
On 5 June 2019 Council at a Special Committee meeting resolved to refuse an application to
redevelop 6 Heron St, Peregian Beach for a 3 storey building to accomodate offices, restaurant
and shop for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is contrary to the Overall and Specific Outcomes of the Eastern
Beaches Locality Code as the development is not compatible with the preferred built form
outcomes as:
i. The proposed building height exceeds 8.0 metres and 2 storeys and is not consistent
with structures on adjoining and surrounding land nor responsive to the informal
beachside character of the locality;
ii. The development presents as a 3 story building and does not contribute to an
informal village-like atmosphere that engenders a ‘sense of space’ and public focus
for local community interaction and activity;
iii. The proposed development will visually dominate the street, adjacent properties,
surrounding spaces and the existing skyline;
iv. The proposed development exceeds the allowable plot ratio and results in a building
which presents an appearance of excessive bulk to adjacent properties, roads and
other areas in vicinity of the site.
v. The proposed development does not present subtle changes in colours, textures and
materials to break up the building facades.
2. The development is contrary to the Driveways and Carparking Code as the proposal does
not provide any car parking on site and the car parking demand is likely to exceed the car
parking demand generated by the previous use of the site for a grocery store.
Notably, the matter was referred to a Special Meeting of Council due to the significance of the
site in Peregian village and as the application was required to follow a code assessment process
and there was a risk of the applicant lodging a ‘deemed approval’.
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 should
be approved.
It is in order for Council to defend the appeal and the recommendation is worded accordingly.
Page 60 of 76
Section 61
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Previous Council Consideration
Special Meeting, 5 June 2019, Item 1, Page 2
That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the Special Meeting dated 5 June
2019 regarding application MCU18/0204 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use
Entertainment & Dining Business - Type 1 Food & Beverage, Retail Business - Type 2 Shop &
Salon and Commercial Business Type 1 - Office, situated at 6 Heron Street Peregian Beach and:
A. Refuse the application for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is contrary to the Overall and Specific Outcomes of the
Eastern Beaches Locality Code as the development is not compatible with the
preferred built form outcomes as:
i. The proposed building height exceeds 8.0 metres and 2 storeys and is not
consistent with structures on adjoining and surrounding land nor responsive to
the informal beachside character of the locality;
ii. The development presents as a 3 story building and does not contribute to an
informal village-like atmosphere that engenders a ‘sense of space’ and public
focus for local community interaction and activity;
iii. The proposed development will visually dominate the street, adjacent
properties, surrounding spaces and the existing skyline;
iv. The proposed development exceeds the allowable plot ratio and results in a
building which presents an appearance of excessive bulk to adjacent
properties, roads and other areas in vicinity of the site.
v. The proposed development does not present subtle changes in colours,
textures and materials to break up the building facades.
2. The development is contrary to the Driveways and Carparking Code as the proposal
does not provide any car parking on site and the car parking demand is likely to
exceed the car parking demand generated by the previous use of the site for a
grocery store.
B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
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
Wakefield Sykes – Solicitor
Internal Consultation
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services Corporate Services
Executive Officer Director Director
Executive Support Community Development Financial Services
Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services x Environment & Sustainable Development Infrastructure Services
Director Director Director
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service x Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 61 of 76
Section 62
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
6 ENVIRONMENT GRANTS POLICY
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Craig Doolan, Environmental Services Manager
Environment & Sustainable Development Department
Index ECM/ Environment Grants
Attachments 1. Revised Environment Grants Policy
2. Draft Multi-year Collaborative Environmental Grants - Operating
Guideline
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2019 and:
A. Repeal the Environment Grants Policy adopted on 21 February 2019 and adopt the revised
Environment Grants Policy provided at Attachment 1 to the Report;
B. Note the Draft Multi-year Collaborative Environmental Grants - Operating Guideline
provided at Attachment 2 to the Report, developed by the Environment Levy Working
Group, as per the Environment Grants Policy; and
C. Approve the Environment Grants being directed towards outcomes of the Biodiversity and
Waterways, Wetlands & Coasts sections of the Noosa Environment Strategy, while the
Environment Levy remains the sole funding source for the Grants.
REPORT
Environment Grants Policy
At the Ordinary Meeting 21 February 2019, Council adopted the Environment Grants Policy, to
allow for a grant program to support the implementation of the Noosa Environment Strategy.
The first round of Environment Project Grants and Environment Organisation Alliance Grants
were held successfully early in 2019.
Currently the Environment Levy Policy only allows for the Environment Levy to fund project or
programs that protect, enhance and increase the resilience of Noosa’s natural environment.
However the purpose of the Environment Grants Policy is to implement the Noosa Environment
Strategy, which is broader than this definition, and includes outcomes, actions and targets with
regard to Sustainable Living and Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience. The Environment
Grants Policy was also adopted prior to the final adoption of the Noosa Environment Strategy.
To this point in time, all funding allocated to the Environment Grants program has come from the
Environment Levy, so project applicants have been required to align their applications with
specific sections to the Noosa Environment Strategy that align with the purpose of the
Environment Levy.
It was the intent of the Environment Grants Policy that it would be broad enough to allow for other
funding sources in the future that could therefore implement all elements of the Noosa
Environment Strategy. Some wording of the current policy does not allow for this, and the revised
version for adoption attached to this report rectifies this.
Page 62 of 76
Section 63
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Multi-year Collaborative Environment Grants
Multi-year Environment Collaborative (MEC) Projects will support longer-term, larger-scale
strategic initiatives that align with the Environment Strategy and have a significant positive impact
on the Noosa environment. These projects will have multiple community stakeholders and clear,
measurable outcomes.
This is a new program with a significant level of funding attached. The Environment Grants Policy
states that ‘a guideline for the delivery of the Multi-year Environment Collaborative Grants will be
developed and annually reviewed by the Environment Levy Working Group’. This will remain the
case, however given the importance of the program in delivering on the Noosa Environment
Strategy, the draft guideline is presented here for noting by Councillors, prior to the grants being
advertised for the first time.
It is anticipated that the Multi-year Collaborative Environment Grants will be advertised in
October, soon after the closing of the current round of project grants. This should allow on-
ground projects to begin in early 2020.
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting Minutes, 21 February 2019, Item 7, Page 19
That Council note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the Planning &
Environment Committee meeting dated 12 February 2019 and the further report to the General
Committee meeting dated 18 February 2019 and:
A. Adopt the Environment Grants Policy as set out in Attachment 1 to the report to the
General Committee meeting dated 18 February 2019 with the addition of the following
words:
“CONDITIONS OF FUNDING
All successful applicants will be required to enter into a funding deed of agreement with
Council and acquit funds within the allocated timeframes. The timeframes and acquittal
requirements are outlined in the supporting Grant Guidelines for the specific funding
program. Successful applicants will be required to actively and publicly acknowledge
Council’s support.”
B. Approve Interim Evaluation Criteria for the next round (February 2019) of Environment
Grants only, based on relevant Strategic Outcomes of the Biodiversity and Waterways,
Wetlands and Coasts themes in the Draft Environment Strategy, listed below;
Ecological linkages and connecting habitat areas are improved and rehabilitated to
increase landscape connectivity and species resilience.
Community conservation partnerships on public and private land are developed to
deliver successful biodiversity conservation outcomes.
Terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, as well as fauna and flora species, are protected
from significant human impacts.
Invasive pest species are managed strategically to reduce impacts on native species
and habitats, fisheries, recreation and tourism values.
Water quality, riparian areas and catchment health is protected and improved by
partnering with landholders and stakeholders to actively manage and rehabilitate
priority stream reaches.
Aquatic biodiversity is improved through the preservation and enhancement of
diverse instream, riparian and wetland habitats.
Point source and diffuse pollution is identified and effectively managed to reduce
impacts on waterways, wetlands and coasts.
Waterways, wetlands and coastal environments are protected, managed and
maintained in their natural state and are enhanced to support healthy and diverse
ecosystems.
Page 63 of 76
Section 64
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
The quality and quantity of groundwater, surface water and wastewater discharge is
optimised to minimise impacts to receiving waters, aquatic ecosystems and human
health.
C. As a result of the introduction of a new separate Environment Grants Program and Policy,
Council approve the amendments required to the Community Grants Policy as detailed in
Attachment 2 to the report to the General Committee meeting dated 18 February 2019; and
D. Authorise the CEO to make any required minor amendments to the Policies prior to
publication.
Finance
Noosa Council has already allocated $250,000 for the delivery of the Multi-year Environment
Collaborative Grants in the 2019/20 financial year. This report does not change this financial
commitment.
Risks & Opportunities
The Multi-year Environment Collaborative Grants provide a fantastic opportunity to partner with
the community to deliver on key environment projects over a number of years, to drive and
advance the implementation of the Noosa Environment Strategy. Relating the Grants to the
Strategy not only ensures that funds are directed in the right way, but creates a shared buy-in to
those key strategic aims, with Council and the community.
Without clear guidelines and a degree of independence, there is a risk that poor decisions could
be made with respect to the giving of ratepayers’ funds to community groups, to deliver on Noosa
Environment Strategy outcomes. The Multi-year Collaborative Environmental Grants - Operating
Guidelines provide for three persons to independently assess the applications, including one
external to Council, and also provide a transparent list of assessment criteria. All projects subject
to grant will be approved by Council.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Nil
Internal Consultation
The Multi-year Collaborative Environmental Grants - Operating Guidelines have been developed
by the Environment Levy Working Group.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services x Corporate Services
Executive Officer Director Director
Executive Support X Community Development Financial Services
Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws x Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services x Environment & Sustainable Development Infrastructure Services
Director X Director Director
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture X Environmental Services Disaster Management
X Strategic Land Use Planning Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 64 of 76
Section 65
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 1
Page 65 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 1
|
MiNeeW. Council Policy
@ | COUNCII ENVIRONMENT GRANTS
Corporate Plan Reference: Theme 1: The Noosa Environment. 20 year goal: Our
environment is protected, enhanced and valued by the
community
Endorsed by Council: <Insert Date of Ordinary Meeting >
Policy Author: Manager Environmental Services
POLICY BACKGROUND
Noosa Council has a long history of working with and supporting the community to achieve significant
environmental outcomes. The Environment Grants program aims to continue this partnership
through support and collaboration to achieve significant environmental outcomes that align with
Council's key environment strategies and plans.
This policy is guided by the Noosa Environment & Sustainable Living Policy and the Noosa
Environment Strategy-andc—eavircamentteon-Reley The Woosa Environment Strategy clearly
outlines strategies, targets and outcomes for the Noosa environment over a 10-year period. This
Policy does not apply to sponsorship, donations, advertising, naming nights and service level
agreements.
COUNCIL POLICY
The Environment Grants will support the implementation of the Voosa Environment Strategy, as well
as Council's other key environment strategiess and plans, by enabling collaboration with the
community in initiatives that_work towards the outcomes and targets identified in the Noosa
os
Outcomes of the Environment Grants program will be:
« implementation of Council's key environment strategies and plans, and the actions within
them, that are appropniately delivered through grants
e increased capacity of local groups through a collaborative approach to environmental
management
e increased funding directed to environmental activities through the opportunities of community
groups/organisations to leverage extra funding or resources.
Who Can Apply
The Environment Grants are open to not-for-profit community organisations that meet ai/ of the
following criteria:
e The project or event for which they are applying benefits the residents of the Noosa
community;
e The application meets the specific eligibility criteria of the funding programs as set out in this
Policy and the supporting grant guidelines;
e The organisation:
o isa legal not-for-profit entity
© complies with all incorporation requirements of the State and Commonwealth as at
the closing date for the grant program
Page 1
Page 65 of 76Section 66
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 66 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
COUNCIL POLICY —- ENVIRONMENT GRANTS
o be registered by an Act of Parliament
o hasan active ABN
o Has a bank account in the name of the legal entity.
lf an organisation is not eligible as per the above criteria and wishes to apply for a grant, the
organisation is able to do so provided that the application is auspiced and administered by an eligible
organisation that is willing and able to accept legal and financial responsibility for the grant and the
project or event being delivered.
All applicants (including the auspice, if required) must have:
© appropriate insurances and adhere to sound Workplace Health and Safety practices
© nodebtto Council, or has entered into scheduled payment arrangements with Council that
is being adhered to
© met acquittal conditions for any previous Council grants.
Who Cannot Apply
* commercial businesses or business trusts
* government agencies or departments of local, state and federal government
e educational, political or religious organisations, or primary health care providers, where the
application is for the organisation’s core business
* community groups that are not incorporated
e individuals.
An organisation found to be ineligible after approval will be required to return the grant payment.
Eligible Projects
In order to be eligible for funding, projects must:
« align with the strategic outcomes of Council's key environment strategies and plans and/or
contribute towards achieving the targets outlined in the Noosa Environment Strategy
e be consistent with the purpose of the Environment Levy as outlined in the Environment Levy
Policy, where the Environment Levy is the source of funding for the grant
e demonstrate value for money, and that the project is in the public interest
e have a financial or in-kind contribution to the project.
Ineligible Projects
Ineligible projects or programs include, but are not restricted to:
e Projects that do not contribute towards Council's key environment strategies and plans and
have a clearly identifiable benefit to the Noosa environment.
e Projects, events or programs run for commercial profit.
e Projects where most of the benefit will be outside the Noosa Shire.
« Activities that have already commenced prior to the grant application being submitted.
« Payment of debt.
e Political activities.
ENVIRONMENT GRANTS PROGRAM
The Environment Grants Program will consist of three main funding streams:
1. Environment Project Grants
These grants will be for projects, programs or events that align with the Noosa Environment
Strategy. as well as Council's other key environment strategies and plans, Geuncirekey
environment strategies and plans_and have a positive impact on the Noosa environment. They will
typically be completed within 12 months of commencement.
The minimum grant amount from Council under the Environment Project Grants program is $1,000
and maximum grant amount is $30,000. There is an expectation that projects will have a cash or
Page 2
Page 66 of 76Section 67
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 67 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
COUNCIL POLICY - ENVIRONMENT GRANTS
in-kind contribution by the applicant or other partners. In some instances, only part-funding of the
amount request may be offered.
Environment Project Grants will be advertised and assessed through the same process as
Council's Community Grants program, as outlined in the Community Grants Guideline.
2. Environment Organisation Alliance Grants
These grants will provide organisational support to community groups that are primarily focused on
environment activities. Successful applicants will receive an annual grant for up to three years
where:
e the primary purpose of the organisation aligns with Noosa Environment Strategy
« the services provided by the organisation are of significant benefit to the Noosa community
(beyond their membership base)
e the organisation's services closely align with Council's strategic outcomes, identified in the
Environment Strategy
e the organisation can demonstrate value for money for all stakeholders
« the organisation can demonstrate the need for financial assistance from Noosa Council.
Applications for Environment Organisation Alliance Grants will follow the same process as other
Noosa Council alliance grants, as outlined in Community Grants Program Guideline — Three Year
3. Multi-year Environment Collaborative Projects
Multi-year Environment Collaborative (MEC) Projects will support longer-term, larger-scale
| strategic initiatives that align with the Noosa Environment Strategy and have a significant positive
impact on the Noosa environment.
These projects will have multiple community stakeholders and clear, measurable outcomes.
Projects may be funded for up to three years. Recipients will be required to provide an annual
progress report that includes a financial report, which demonstrates delivery of agreed outcomes.
Projects will be sought annually through an on open application process or EOI. If funding has
already been allocated in previous rounds (including in previous financial years), Council may
choose not to seek further applications until there are sufficient funds.
Council will retain the flexibility to receive and assess MEC Project applications outside of this
timeframe, but all projects will still be subject to Council approval.
A Guideline for the delivery of Multi-year Environment Collaborative Grants will be developed and
annually reviewed by the Environment Levy Working Group.
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Council will publicise the availability of its Environment Grants and the associated process to apply.
In assessing the grants, Council will:
* ensure public monies are allocated in a fair and equitable way
* ensure best possible value for money
* check each application against eligibility criteria as set out in the appropriate Grant
| * _seek recommendations from an expert panel on occasion or where appropriate that can
Guideline-
comprise Council officers, Councillors and/or community representatives.
Council will determine the total allocation of funds to the Environment Grants Program through its
annual budgetary processes. The number and types of grants approved will depend on the
Page 3
Page 67 of 76Section 68
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 68 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
COUNCIL POLICY —- ENVIRONMENT GRANTS
Council may also determine priority funding areas on a year-to-year basis.—_ This may include:
e direction of funding towards specific tPhemes or-stategis oOutcomes of the Environment
Strategy for any given grant period
* nominating the proportion of funding to be directed towards each of the three grant funding
streams for any given financial year.
Priority funding areas may be influenced by the source of funding available: such as the
Environment Levy, General Rates. other Council levies or altemate third-party funding sources.
Council officers are available to provide advice to applicants and help develop grant applications.
They will also assist organisations to identify additional and altemative sources of funding relevant
to their project or event.
Council officers are bound by Councils Employee Code of Conduct and are therefore responsible
for acting with impartiality and integrity and recognising and declaring any actual or potential
conflicts of interest. This may include but is not limited to, personal connections with the applicant.
Anyone having a determined conflict of interest should not debate or be involved in any
discussions on any matter relating to that application.
Council officers are required to adhere to this policy when supporting, facilitating, or delivering
grants-related activities. It is the responsibility of Council officers to ensure that grants and funding
provided from public monies:
e* are administered transparently and accountably
e align with Council's objectives, goals and priorities
e effectively advertised and promoted to the community so that potential applicants have
equal opportunity to apply for funds
* monitored for compliance against set performance measures.
RELEVANT DOCUMENTS
Queensland Government
e Local Government Regulation (2012)
e Local Government Act (2009)
e Statutory Bodies Financial Arrangements Act (1982)
Noosa Council
e Noosa Council Corporate Plan
e Noosa Council Environment Strategy
e Noosa Council Environment Levy Policy
e Noosa Council Sustainability Principles
e Noosa Council Community Grants Policy
DEFINITIONS
Acquittal
The process by which a recipient demonstrates in writing to the funding body that it has expended
the funds in accordance with the terms and conditions of the funding agreement on completion of
the activity or project. The acquittal process, when conducted correctly, demonstrates that these
monies were being used efficiently, effectively or that the community is getting value for money for
services.
Auspice
Auspice means that an organisation takes responsibility for ensuring the funds are used as specified
in the grant allocation. An auspicing organisation will be responsible for:
e sign-off on the funding agreement
e the receipt, banking and administration of all moneys
Page 4
Page 68 of 76Section 69
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 69 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
COUNCIL POLICY —- ENVIRONMENT GRANTS
* project monitoring and completion
e ensuring the applicant acquits the funding on time
e sign-off on the acquittal form.
Business
For the purpose of this policy, business is defined as an organisation or enterprising entity
engaged in commercial, industrial or professional activities for profit. This may be in the form of a
sole trader, company or partnership. (Sole trader an individual operating as the sole person
legally responsible for all aspects of the business. Company: a legal entity separate from its
shareholders. Partnership: an association of people or entities running a business together, but not
as a company).
| Business Trust
An entity that holds property or income for the benefit of others.
Community Grant Policy
A policy outlining the parameters by which a local government may provide grant funding to
community groups. For the purposes of statutory reporting, this Environment Grants Policy is a
‘Community Grants Policy’ under the definition of the Loca! Goverment Regulations (2012).
Conflict of Interest
A conflict of interest is a conflict between an officers or councillor’s personal interests (including
personal interests arising from their relationships or memberships, for example) that might lead to a
decision that is contrary to the public interest.
Environment Strategy
The Environment Strategy is the overarching Noosa Council strategic document relating to the
environment. It is divided into four Key Focus Areas, each of which have several priorities and a
target. Each Key Focus Area also has a series of Strategic Outcomes that Council is seeking to
achieve. The Environment Strategy sits alongside the Social Strategy and Local Economic Plan as
the key strategic documents of Noosa Council.
Funding Agreement
A legal agreement entered into by the successful applicant and Council noting the obligations of both
parties.
Grant
Funds provided to a recipient through a formal program for a specified purpose, directed at achieving
goals and objectives consistent with Council policy, where the recipient is selected on merit against
a set of criteria. Funding is subject to entering a written agreement with Council that outlines
accountability requirements.
In-Kind Support
In-kind support includes paid and volunteer labour, administrative support, rent-free accommodation
or donations of materials, equipment or services.
Not for profit incorporated community organisation
A community organisation that operates as a legal entity with a primary purpose of providing services
to the community. An organisation is non-profit if it is not carried on for the direct or indirect profit or
gain of its members, both in its operations and winding up.
Organisations
Page 5
Page 69 of 76Section 70
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 70 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
COUNCIL POLICY - ENVIRONMENT GRANTS
For the purposes of this Policy the term Organisations means:
« Incorporated Associations (incorporated under state legislation, commonly have ‘Association’
or ‘Incorporated’ or ‘Inc.’ in their legal name);
« Incorporated Cooperatives (also incorporated under state legislation, commonly have
‘Cooperative’ in their legal name);
« Companies (incorporated under the Corporations Act 2001 — may be proprietary company
(limited by shares or by guarantee) or public companies); and
e Aboriginal Corporations (incorporated under the Corporations (Abonginal and Torres Strait
Islander) Act 2006)
Public Interest
For the purpose of this policy, public interest refers to ‘the welfare of the general public in contrast to
the interest of an individual or group’.
Sponsorship
Sponsorship is a contractual business arrangement under which a sponsor, for a specified term,
provides a contribution in cash and/or in kind (“contra”) in return for specified commercial benefits.
Version control:
Version Reason/ Trigger Change (Y/N) Endorsed) Reviewed by Date
1.0 Draft Policy Craig Doolan 11/12/2018
1.1 Draft Policy y Input Tom)Jan Maddin, Peter | 18/12/2018
Mine. Kim Rawdings
1.2 Draft Policy ¥ Revised following Councilors | 00/01/2019
workshop and renewed
Community Grants Policy from
Ali Hambin
Page 6
Page 70 of 76Section 71
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 2
Page 71 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Attachment 2
MULTI-YEAR COLLABORATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL GRANTS — >
OPERATING GUIDELINE
Purpose of the Multi-year Collaborative Environmental Grants
Noosa Council recognises that solving the big issues confronting our local environment needs constructive
Partnerships over an extended period of time. The Multi-year Environment Collaborative (MEC) Grants
have been established to support the implementation of the Noosa Environment Strategy and the other
strategies and plans that sit under it.
The MEC grants are designed to encourage collaboration between different community and not-for-profit
groups, as well as with Council. Projects will typically have multiple community stakeholders, working
together towards a common goal, and delivering clear, measurable, environmental outcomes.
The ability to run grants over several years allows support of larger-scale, strategic initiatives, that provide
for significant, long-term positive impacts on the Noosa environment. Grants can be available for up to 3
years.
Objective of the program
The grants program will support the implementation of the Noosa Environment Strategy and other
environment-related strategies and plans. Successful projects will be aligned with the outcomes identified
in the Strategy and/or work towards the targets identified in the Strategy. Some of the implementation
actions identified within the Strategy are particularly suited to partnerships, potentially funded through
these grants.
Depending on priority and funding sources, any round of grants may focus on specific outcomes identified
within the Noosa Environment Strategy. This will be communicated at the time applications are sought.
Who is eligible to apply?
The MEC Grants are open to not-for-profit community organisations that meet al! of the following criteria:
e The project or event for which they are applying benefits the residents of the Noosa community;
© The application meets the specific eligibility criteria of the funding programs as set out in the
Environment Grants Policy;
e The organisation:
© isa legal not-for-profit entity
© complies with all incorporation requirements of the State and Commonwealth as at the
closing date for the grant program
© be registered by an Act of Parliament
© hasan active ABN
© Has a bank account in the name of the legal entity.
if an organisation is not eligible as per the above criteria and wishes to apply for a grant, the organisation is
able to do so provided that the application is auspiced and administered by an eligible organisation that is
willing and able to accept legal and financial responsibility for the grant and the project or event being
delivered.
Page 71 of 76Section 72
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 72 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
All applicants (including the auspice, if required) must have:
® appropriate insurances and adhere to sound Workplace Health and Safety practices
© no debt to Council, or has entered into scheduled payment arrangements with Council that is being
adhered to
® met acquittal conditions for any previous Council grants.
Groups that are ineligible to apply include;
® commercial businesses or business trusts
© government agencies or departments of local, state and federal government
© educational, political or religious organisations, or primary health care providers, where the
application is for the organisation's core business
® community groups that are not incorporated
© = individuals.
An organisation found to be ineligible after approval will be required to return the grant payment.
How much can be applied for?
The total pool for projects in the 2019/20 financial year is $250,000. Applicants should assume a similar
total amount will be available in subsequent financial years, when budgeting for the three years of the
project.
It is anticipated that individual projects will not generally be funded for more than $75,000 per year unless
@ very strong business case is presented.
What projects and activities are eligible?
In order to be eligible for funding, projects must:
©. align with the outcomes of Council’s key environment strategies and plans and/or
contribute towards achieving the targets outlined in the Noosa Environment Strategy
© demonstrate value for money, and that the project is in the public interest
© have a financial or in-kind contribution to the project.
Ineligible projects or programs include, but are not restricted to:
© Projects that do not contribute towards Council's key environment strategies and plans and have a
clearly identifiable benefit to the Noosa environment.
© Projects, events or programs run for commercial profit.
© Projects where most of the benefit will be outside the Noosa Shire.
© =6Activities that have already commenced prior to the grant application being submitted.
© Payment of debt.
© = Political activities.
How to apply
© Applications are to be made through the Smarty grants on-line portal.
Page 72 of 76Section 73
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 73 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
© The timing for grant applications and links to the application portal will be advertised on the Noosa
Council website, social media and in the Noosa News local newspaper.
Assessment Process and criteria
Eligible applications will be assessed against the listed criteria below by three persons;
© Amember of the Noosa Council Environmental Services team.
e A Noosa Council employee independent of the environment area, but with skills in community
engagement, grants, and/or project delivery.
© An independent third party who is not an employee of Council or involved with local environment
community groups, but has subject matter expertise.
This outcome of this assessment will be a recommendation to Noosa Council. Following adoption at a
Council meeting, applicants will be notified of their success, or otherwise. The outcome of grant
applications will be made publicly available through the minutes of the Council meeting.
Just because an application meets some or all of the priorities for funding does not automatically guarantee
funding. There is a limited funding poo! and grants will only be funded to the level of budget provided.
Where appropriate, projects may be part-funded only.
Project funding is at the discretion of Noosa Council, and there is no appeal process.
Successful applications
Project commencement
Noosa Council will provide a Deed of Agreement for each project shortly after the announcement of
successful applicants. The Deed is a legal document, setting out the terms and conditions that govern the
funding.
Funding for the first year of the project will be provided following the signing of the Deed by both parties,
and the provision of invoice to Noosa Council. Funding may be provided in stages over the term of the
project, determined by timing and the achievement of milestones. No expenditure related to the project
should be undertaken until the Deed has been signed by both parties. Milestones will be identified in the
project application and included in the Deed of Agreement.
Monitoring and Reporting
Successful applicants will be required to provide a report to Council every six months. One will be a short,
qualitative report on the project and its progress. The other will be an annual report, including tracking
against milestones and an audited financial statement. The acceptance of this annual report will allow for
payments of subsequent years of the project.
Related policies
Page 73 of 76Section 74
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 74 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Noosa Environment Strategy
Environment & Sustainable Living Policy
Environment Grants Policy
Environment Levy Policy
Page 74 of 76Section 75
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 75 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Grant assessment
Assessment is undertaken under three categories, each with several criteria with weighted scoring.
Applications must at least pass all categories for consideration (for example, a really strong environmental
outcome may not be funded for a project that represents poor value for money or has no partnerships).
1. ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES (5096)
. To what extent does the project contribute to achieving outcomes and targets of the Noosa
Environment Strategy? (25)
© The proponent will identify how the project will contribute to the outcomes identified in
the Noosa Environment Strategy. Projects that relate to multiple outcomes, or projects
with a highly significant contribution to a particular outcome, will score highly.
© The proponent will also identify whether the project will directly support the achievement
of identified targets and implementation actions identified in the Strategy.
. To what extent does the project contribute towards other conservation outcomes (such as
international agreements, threatened species management plans, etc.)? (5)
© The proponent will identify how the project will contribute towards the achievement of
other Noosa Council environment-related plans and strategies (such as the Noosa River
Plan, Pest Management Plan, Koala Conservation Action Plan) and other non-Council
environment-related plans and strategies (such as international agreements, threatened
species management plans, national strategies etc.).
© The proponent will identify how the project will contribute towards the achievement of
other Noosa Council non-environment strategies, such as the Social Strategy and Local
Economic Plan.
. Does the project demonstrate best practice environmental management? (10)
© The proponent will identify the methodology for the project and provide evidence of the
why this approach was taken over other possible methodologies. Projects that show a high
likelihood of success, based on the consideration of a range of possible options, will score
highly.
. Is there a clear indication of how the success of the project will be measured and evaluated,
using quantitative measures where appropriate. (10)
© The proponent will provide a clear monitoring and evaluation methodology as part of the
project that may include qualitative and quantitative measures. This will indicate clear
thinking about what the success or otherwise of the project looks like.
©. It may be appropriate to link the achievement of the milestones, measured as part of this
monitoring and evaluation, to annual payments for the project.
Page 75 of 76Section 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
Page 76 of 76
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 SEPTEMBER 2019
2. DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIPS (25%)
. Are multiple groups involved in the delivery of the project, and to what extent are they
collaborating? (18)
© The project application will identify all groups involved in the project and in what capacity?
Collaboration and projects that have meaningful contributions, through cash or in-kind
contribution, by multiple groups will score highly.
. Does the project involve community participation opportunities? (7)
© The project application will identify what opportunities will be available for general
community involvement in the project, beyond just the membership of the applicant
organisations. This may include information provision through media releases (lower
scoring) to field/open days, to genuine participation opportunities (higher scoring).
3. VALUE FOR MONEY & ORGANISATIONAL CAPACITY (25%)
. The percentage of the total project costs being sought as part of the grant. (10)
© The proponent will identify how much cash and in-kind contributions will be made by the
proponents or other parties towards to the overall cost of the project. Applicants that are
able to provide a significant level of contribution will score highly.
© Applicants may include the ability to leverage the funds with other future grant
opportunities, if they can demonstrate a previous history or evidence of a commitment to
this.
. Does the proponent have the demonstrated experience and organisational capacity to manage
the delivery, finance and reporting on the project? (8)
© The proponent will provide evidence of their ability to manage the project with
demonstrated experience in similar projects of a similar scale in the past.
oO The proponent will provide evidence of what management structures they will have in
place to support and manage the project they are applying for.
. Does the proponent have the ability to maintain the program/project at the end of the funding
period? (7)
© The proponent will demonstrate how the project or program will be maintained or
continued following the end of funding being provided by Council.
Page 76 of 76