Council Report MCU20 0027

MCU20/0027 & RAL20/0004 MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE COMMERCIAL BUSINESS TYPE 2 MEDICAL INVOLVING BUILDING WORK ASSOCIATED WITH RELOCATION OF A BUILDING IN A HERITAGE CHARACTER AREA & RECONFIGURING A LOT (4 LOTS INTO 2) AT 45 & 47A MAPLE ST & 9 MYALL ST COOROY

Document information

Author	Coordinator Planning, Patrick Murphy
Environment and Sustainable Development Department

Index	ECM/ Application/ MCU20/0027 and RAL20/0004

Attachments	1. 	Proposal Plans

APPLICATION DETAILS
Applicant	Medicentre Property No 2 Pty Ltd
Proposal	Material Change of Use - Commercial Business - Type 2 Medical involving Building Work associated with the relocation of a building within a Heritage Character Area and Reconfiguring a Lot (4 lots into 2)
Properly Made Date	21 April 2020
Information Request Date	13 May 2020
Information Response Date	24 June 20209
Decision Due Date	29 September 2020
Number of Submissions	6 properly made and 1 not properly made
PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address	45 Maple St Cooroy (2 titles) 9 Myall St Cooroy 47a Maple St Cooroy
RP Description	Lot 18 C 5605 Lot 2 RP 99323 Lot 1 RP 99323 Lot 15 C 5605
Land Area	1156m² 377m² 243m² 1335m²
Existing Use of Land	Residential dwelling at 45 Maple Street Vacant land at 47A Maple Street Commercial premise at 9 Myall Street
STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation	Urban Footprint
Locality	Cooroy and Lake Macdonald
Zone	Community Services Zone
Overlays	Heritage Overlay – Character Area (excluding 9 Myall Street)
Assessment Type	Impact
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 6 October 2020 regarding Application No, MCU20/0027 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Commercial Business - Type 2 (Medical) involving Building Work associated with the relocation of a building within a Heritage Character Area and Development Permit for Reconfiguring a Lot (4 lots into 2) situated at 45 and 47a Maple Street and 9 Myall Street Cooroy and:
A.	Refuse the application for the following reasons:
The proposed development is not consistent with the Desired Environmental Outcomes 3.1.3(d)(i) and (ii) of the Noosa Plan 2006 as it does not protect the heritage character building and provide for adaptive re-use of the existing building.
The proposed development is not consistent with the Overall Outcomes 6.7.2(n) and (r) of the Cooroy and Lake Macdonald Locality Code of the Noosa Plan 2006 as the proposed development does not maintain or compliment the traditional country streetscape and building forms of Cooroy.
The proposed development is not consistent with Specific Outcome O16 of the Cooroy and Lake Macdonald Locality Code of the Noosa Plan 2006 as it does not provide a traditional roof form which contributes positively to the local skyline or complement the character of the locality.
The proposed development is not consistent with Overall Outcomes 13.16.2(f)(i), (ii), (iv), (v) and (viii), Specific Outcomes O5, O6 and O7 of the Heritage Overlay and Specific Outcome O63 of the Community Services Zone of the Noosa Plan 2006 as it:
does not retain the existing heritage character building;
will adversely impact on the streetscape character;
proposes a built form which is not reflective of the historic architectural features in Cooroy; and
does not maintain a domestic character and form consistent with the Queensland vernacular specifically sought in Maple Street.
The proposed development is not consistent with Overall Outcomes 14.110.2 c) and d) and Specific Outcomes O7 and O8 of the Driveways and Carparking Code of the Noosa Plan 2006 as:
the proposed car parking arrangements will not meet the reasonable requirements of the proposed use with the number of tandem spaces excessive; and
suitable manoeuvring areas for waste collection and service vehicles has not been demonstrated.
6.	The proposed development is contrary to the Noosa Plan 2020 provisions which similarly seek to protect the heritage qualities of the site and the streetscape character.
B.	Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.

REPORT
PROPOSAL
The application proposes to remove a character building within a Heritage Character Area and develop a new building for use as a medical facility.
In place of the character building a new building is proposed, which is a split level building with a lower level car parking area with an entrance lobby, lift and toilets and three separate tenancies located above. The total gross floor area of the proposed building is 968m2, with total use area of 880m2 and site cover of 1020m2.
32 car spaces and 7 motorbike parking spaces are to be provided in the basement car park and an additional 11 car spaces, 1 motorbike space and an ambulance park are provided external to the building.
Due to the slope of the site part of the proposed new building will present to the street as low set and part as high set. The building will have a maximum height of 8m above ground level.
The applicant advises that the building has been architecturally designed to respect and integrate with the surrounding historical streetscape character….Building elements, materials and finishes include pitched roofs with custom orb profile, flat sheet cladding with cover battens, linea board wall cladding, off form concrete to columns and low height entry walls and sandstone cladding to some external screening. Soft muted colours are proposed.
It is also proposed to reconfigure the 4 lots subject to the application into 2 lots, comprising a 2,252m2 lot fronting Maple Street for the proposed medical centre and an 867m2 lot fronting Myall Street containing an existing dwelling.
The applicant has not advised where the character building is proposed to be relocated to.
The applicant has provided the following documentation in support of the application:
Development Assessment report
Architectural proposal plans
Reconfiguration Proposal Plan
Heritage Impact Assessment
Landscape Concept Plan
Noise Report
Stormwater Management Plan
Structural Report
Traffic Engineering report
Additional information regarding re-use of existing building for medical facility
The following images detail a Locality Plan and plans of the proposed development.

Figure 1: Locality Plan detailing the 4 lots subject to the application

Figure 2: Basement Plan

Figure 3: Ground Floor/Lobby Plan

Figure 4: Upper Floor Plan

Figure 5: Streetscape Render (artist impression)

Figure 6: Elevation perspectives

Figure 7: Elevation perspectives

Figure 8: Reconfiguration Plan

site details
Background
A pre-lodgement was conducted on 26 November 2019.  The meeting raised a number of issues for the application to address relating to:
Heritage character requirements
Car parking
Traffic
External frontage works
Stormwater Management
Existing sewer main and connection
Waste Management
Fire safety and protection
With regards to the site being located within the Heritage Character Area the following advice was provided:
The site is also included in the Heritage Overlay (Character Area) for Cooroy under the Noosa Plan. For this area, the Noosa Plan seeks to protect the streetscape character area by retaining the existing buildings that contribute positively to the character.  Review of the site and existing house following the meeting shows that the existing building is of a Queensland vernacular style timber and iron house on stumps with many features typical of this era and which contribute to the character of Maple Street.
It is therefore unlikely Council would support relocation or demolition of the existing house.  It is therefore recommended that the existing house be retained for the proposed medical use.
Site Description
45 Maple St Cooroy (2 titles)	Single storey residential dwelling located to the front of the site. Site is located within a heritage character area
47a Maple St Cooroy:	Vacant land of approximately 245m2 in area which has a battle-axe shape
9 Myall St Cooroy:	Dwelling house which has previously been used for commercial uses
Surrounding Land Uses
The area within proximity of the site on the same side of Myall Street is generally characterised by residential development.  There has been little new development since the commencement of the Noosa Plan 2006 and dwellings within the Heritage Character Area have all been retained.
The opposite side of Myall Street is similarly zoned Community Services with the Eden Private Hospital being situated directly opposite the subject site. The land to the north of the hospital is zoned Business Centre.
assessment
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 2006.
State and Other Statutory Instruments
State Planning Policy
The Noosa Plan 2006 is generally consistent with the State Planning Policy July 2017 (SPP) and the SPP raises no further issues relevant to the proposed development.
South East Queensland (SEQ) Regional Plan
The site is located within the Urban Footprint area of the SEQ Regional Plan. The proposal is consistent with the regional policies of the SEQ Regional Plan.
Planning Regulation 2017
The proposal is for urban activity within the Urban Footprint and is consistent with the assessment benchmarks contained in the Planning Regulation 2017 for the SEQ Region.
Statutory Instruments – Planning Scheme
The application  was lodged under The Noosa Plan 2006 prior to the commencement of the Noosa Plan 2020 and so must be assessed against the whole of the Noosa Plan 2006 to the extent the provisions are relevant to the development, but regard may be had to the Noosa Plan 2020.
The subject site is located in the Cooroy and Lake Macdonald Locality and is zoned Community Services. The proposed use is identified as a consistent use with the zone and is required to follow an impact assessable application process.
Land use
In terms of the proposed land use the following outcomes are the relevant Overall Outcomes of the Cooroy and Lake Macdonald Locality Code:
6.7.2
v) Cooroy services much of the hinterland of Noosa providing low to medium order goods and some higher order goods and services such as vehicle sales, rural supplies, community, medical, and educational facilities as well as specialty items such as handmade furniture;
x) The town of Cooroy provides a range of community services, schools, medical facilities, sporting and recreational facilities, which service the hinterland and beyond;
oo) For the Community Services Zone—land committed or planned for community purposes—
i is protected and managed to enable the efficient and timely delivery of community services; and
ii is consistent with the indoor recreation, education, health, social and safety needs of the local community, including people with special needs
The proposed use is consistent with the relevant overall outcomes as it provides for a medical facility which will service the health needs of the local community and nearby hinterland areas. The use is appropriately located within the Community Services Zone and notably situated opposite Eden Hospital which provides convenience and accessibility for patients and practitioners.
Heritage
The proposed relocation of the existing dwelling situated at 45 Maple Street Cooroy is the critical issue in the assessment of the application. The site is subject to the Heritage Overlay which designates the site and surrounding area as a Heritage Character Area.
The following image details the site within the context of the Heritage Character Area in which it is located:

Figure 9: Subject site’s location within Character Area
The following provisions within the planning scheme are relevant to the assessment of the heritage aspect of the application:
Desired Environmental Outcomes
3.1.3 d) HERITAGE
The indigenous and non-indigenous history, culture and traditions are reflected in the built and natural heritage of Noosa Shire and are preserved for future generations by –
i. protecting heritage sites and places that have significance and value and contribute to our understanding of who we are and how Noosa Shire has evolved; and
ii. providing opportunities for economically viable adaptive re-use of buildings where it is compatible and sensitive
The relevant Overall and Specific Outcomes of the Cooroy and Lake Macdonald Locality Code are:
6.7.2
n) Key streetscape characteristic of Cooroy township are maintained by new development including –
i. the country town character including the rural, almost rustic quality to some of the original buildings in town;
r) The traditional built form of Cooroy is retained and new development complements traditional streetscape and building forms;
Specific Outcome O16
Roof form O16 Roof forms—
a) contribute positively to the local skyline;
b) complement the low rise character of the locality;
c) use simple traditional roof designs, such as hipped, gabled or skillion; and
d) do not create opportunities for residents to overlook the private open space areas of neighbouring properties
The Overall Outcomes of the Heritage Overlay include:
13.16.2 f) For Cooroy-Maple Street Character Area:-
The historic business centre of Cooroy extending from Marara St in the north to Crystal Street in the south, including 9-73 Maple Street and 19 Crystal Street, as shown on Heritage Overlay Map OM3.2 is retained and protected;
business, community and residential buildings from the early to mid-twentieth century, which influence the character of the area are retained;
Development reflects country town character elements reminiscent of Cooroy’s heritage characteristics;
Development maintains and reflects the historic architectural features in Cooroy including the traditional building designs of a predominately low rise and low impact scale, typified by lightweight construction, with a timber frame, generally raised above ground on stumps, many featuring verandah elements, sunhoods and awnings to window and wall openings and simple roof designs, either gabled or hipped. Typical materials used include timber for cladding and corrugated iron for roofs;

Development along Maple Street, south of the business centre maintains a domestic scale and form consistent with the Queensland vernacular with landscaped setbacks and front yards without front fences, and low impact domestic scale buildings that contribute to the open character of this part of the character area;
Specific Outcomes O5, O6 and O7 of the Heritage Overlay state:
Specific Outcome O5	Retention, relocation & demolition
O5 	The valued streetscape character within character areas are protected through the retention of buildings that contribute positively to that character.
Specific Outcome O6	Adaptive reuse
O6 	Character buildings are conserved and protected by adaptively reusing such sites, provided any new use—
a) does not impact on the cultural heritage significance of the site;
b) respects the valued streetscape character;
c) is compatible with the amenity of adjacent uses; and
d) provides for adequate buffer areas and buffer elements between nearby uses.
Specific Outcome O7	Building Works within character areas
O7 	Building works to premises within character areas, are designed to be sympathetic to the valued streetscape character through—
a) respecting the form, bulk, scale and height of heritage sites or character buildings within the streetscape;
b) complementing original roof forms and pitch within the streetscape;
c) conforming with the original fencing, veranda and façade design and detailing within the streetscape;
d) using materials that reflect the valued character; and
e) retaining existing mature vegetation around the site
Specific Outcome and Probable Solution O63 of Community Services Zone:
O63 	Uses are located, designed and operated to—
a) provide focal points for the community;
b) relate to the setting and heritage of the locality; and
c) be accessible and functional for a wide range of users and uses
The Noosa Plan (2006) explicitly seeks to protect the streetscape character within heritage character areas through the retention of buildings that contribute positively to that character.
The zoning of the site and surrounding area recognises that the buildings may no longer be used for residential purposes however the application of the heritage overlay seeks for the community uses to occur within these existing character buildings.
While the exact date of the construction of the dwelling is unknown, the dwelling type, being an Asymmetrical Bungalow with L-Shaped veranda, was a popular style of residential construction in South East Queensland from the Federation era until the 1930’s. The Structural Assessment report submitted with the application notes the timber house is a low set timber building that is understood to be pre-war and constructed at least 100 years ago. Aerial photography confirms that some modifications were carried out to the dwelling pre 1956, with the modifications being at least 64 years old. The following images detail part of the front elevation, rear elevation and separate garage.

Figure 10: Front, rear and separate garage

Figure 11: View of the building from the road reserve
A Heritage Impact Assessment (Vault March 2020) was provided in support of the application, with further supporting letter dated 1 June 2020. These documents include assertions that:
The house has no heritage significance as it has not been placed on the Noosa Council LHR
The character area has been already substantially eroded by prior contemporary redevelopment
Streetscape analysis supports removal
This is no longer a residential precinct and the removal of the house won’t impact on the character values
The statement that the dwelling is of no heritage significance because it is not on the Local Heritage Register (LHR) is erroneous.  The LHR and Character Precincts are two separate protections of heritage values within the planning scheme and need to be assessed under their respective requirements.  A place may be on the LHR and not within a Character Precinct.  However, a building within a Character Precinct is considered a character building and protected under the planning scheme which seeks the retention of these buildings.
The Vault reports make continued reference to a ‘character house’ (and how that could be better preserved through relocation) and fail to acknowledge that this house is part of, and contributes to the aesthetic of, a heritage character area.  Its requirement for protection under the overlay currently stems from it being an important element of the character area. This does not mean it does not have individual significance, only that it has not yet been assessed for its individual significance and potential listing as a heritage site on the Local Heritage Register.
The Vault reports have not demonstrated any evidence of undertaking an assessment of the significance of the building.
Specific Outcome 05 of the Heritage Overlay Code states:
Retention, relocation & demolition
O5 The valued streetscape character within character areas are protected through the retention of buildings that contribute positively to that character
The three Probable Solutions to this Specific Outcome are:
S5.1 Character buildings and heritage sites within character areas are retained (see Figure 13.1 for some examples of character buildings);
OR
S5.2 Where a character building or heritage site cannot be practicably retained on its existing premises, the building or structure is relocated to an alternative location within the Noosa Shire and reinstated to a standard that is suitable for reuse, provided relocation of the character building or heritage site will not result in the loss of valued streetscape character; OR
S5.3 Demolition only occurs where the— a) building or structure cannot be practicably retained on the existing premises; and b) the premises are physically constrained such that the building or structure cannot be relocated to an alternative location; or c) the building or structure is structurally unsound and not capable of economic repair
The applicant maintains that there are three probable solutions and that the proposed development complies with Probable Solution S5.2.
Whilst the applicant is correct insofar as there are three probable solutions related to Specific Outcome O5 it is not merely about meeting one of the probable solutions in order to meet the Specific Outcome. Whilst the probable solutions are separated by an ‘or’ there is a sequence of assessment required before transitioning through the probable solutions. In the first instance the probable solutions S5.1 seeks character buildings within character areas to be retained. Where character buildings cannot be practicably retained on existing premises S5.2 permits the relocation of the building to be relocated to an alternative location within the Shire.
In this regard, the question as to whether the building can be practicably retained needs to be resolved.
The applicant provided a Structural Engineering Report (Bligh Tanner 24 February 2020) assessing the ability to relocate the house. The report was based on a visual inspection of areas that were easily accessible at ground level only. The report notes the following:
… the visible original structure appears to have been constructed using quality timber and workmanship resulting in a dwelling that has weathered well.
... There were no visible structural concerns that would preclude a continued use of the building. The seemingly sound condition of the hardwood framing of the house would mean that the house can be relocated to a new site provided the correct preparation was undertaken by a qualified and experienced house removal contractor.
The separate garage structure is in poor condition and if it is to be relocated, it would need significant strengthening/replacement of the floor framing and rectification of the chamferboard cladding and flooring.
In response to Council officer’s Information Request the applicant further advised that the reasons the building cannot be practicably be retained include:
The inability to retrofit the building to provide for universal access to comply with AS1428 Design for access and mobility and the Disability Discrimination Act
Access to the building does not meet AS1428 Design for access and mobility requirements with substantial building modification required to achieve this and which would impact on the existing external appearance
Internals of the house do not meet compliance with AS1428 and would require substantial modification
The building does not meet the current structural code requirements for a Class 5 building
The building will not conform with Class 5 Type C construction fire rating
The building has timber stump foundations which would require compete removal and new footings and foundations installed to accommodate the proposed use
The building does not meet the energy efficiency requirements for the National Construction Code Internal room sizes do not suit the equipment or functional requirement of an imaging and medical centre
Inability to add lead lining to existing walls required for x-ray equipment due to additional weight impact on existing inadequate structure
Inability to install, service or replace imaging equipment due to existing roof framing
Electrical system is inadequate for proposed use
Plumbing and drainage system is inadequate and unsuitable
A range of WHS issues that would require modification to the existing building
Suspicion of existing lead paint beneath external (an internal) finishes which would be required to be completely removed or encapsulated which would substantially change the appearance of the building
None of the interior or exterior walls would achieve the required acoustic ratings for imaging and medical centre
Commercial grade specialist solution mechanical system is required for medical and imaging fit outs which could not be accommodated within the existing building fabric
The applicant provided a further report from Bligh Tanner dated 21 July 2020 which provided a structural assessment of the existing house for adaptive re-use as a medical centre. This report identified the following upgrade works as being required:
The complete dwelling should be raised and temporarily supported while the existing stumps and block walls are removed, after which new footings, stumps and perimeter block walls should be installed. The floor will require re-levelling.
All floor framing members would need to be strengthened for the increased live loading allowance (e.g. allow for splicing existing timber bearers and joists with members to match existing size to increase the capacity). - All floorboards would need to be removed and replaced to allow for the increased live load allowance.
Majority of internal walls would need to be demolished and temporary propping of existing roof structure and external walls required. Transfer beams, roof support framing and internal walls would all need to be designed to suit proposed medical centre floor layout.
External wall cladding would require removal and replacement for installation of acoustic treatment and thermal insulation and installation of bracing wall elements.
Remove and replace external walls with walls achieving required FRL where walls are within 3m of fire source feature (e.g property boundary).
Upgrade roof framing to strengthen where required and upgrade to current codes and building practices. Allow for strengthening of roof framing to specialist equipment areas where support from roof structure is required (CT scanner, X-ray gantry).
Remove and replace external cladding due to widespread visible damage, paint flaking, discolouration and rust stains around nail heads.
Modifications to front entry to comply with provisions for universal access (e.g. installation of ramps or lift access).
These documents were referred to Council’s Building Certifier and to Council’s Heritage Coordinator for review and comment. The comments note that it is commonplace for existing buildings to be altered, particularly where involving changes of classification, whereby the existing building is modified to achieve compliance with relevant legislation. In this regard the comments noted the following:
Unclear as to why it would not be possible to alter the existing building to achieve compliant access for persons with disabilities.  The current proposal identifies an access ramp at the front of the building.  It appears the proposed building is intended to have a floor level at or above the floor level of the existing building.  This seems to identify that the provision of compliant access is achievable, and it would appear then to be a design exercise to incorporate the new construction into the character of the existing building.
Restumping of existing buildings is undertaken regularly and would not usually be considered a difficult task.
It stands to reason that the existing building may not be suitable for additional loading brought about by the change in classification. However, this again would simply be a design/engineering exercise to upgrade the existing building to suit.
If it were not possible for the building to be modified to suit the additional loading associated with the imaging/x-ray equipment it is noted that the imaging/x-ray component is a small part of the overall development footprint. In this regard, the existing building could be repurposed for a suitable use such as reception/office/storage/consulting rooms.
It would be standard practice to install mechanical ventilation system components within the roof space.  Traditionally, older buildings have a reasonable roof pitch which can easily cater for ductwork.  In the instance the existing building has a raked ceiling, and there may be options to install false ceilings to conceal services.
Structural upgrading can be undertaken to suit the intended use.
It is not unusual for internal modifications to be undertaken.
The existing building envelope would need to be considered for the purposes of energy efficiency.  Given the extent of the proposed development, upgrading of the existing building is unlikely to be cost prohibitive.
For this type of development, the replacement of existing electrical systems and plumbing/drainage would be commonplace.  It could be assumed that the same installations would be applicable to the new build.  There may be minor cost increase due to working with the existing building.
Whilst some works would be required to address the risk attributed to lead paint the presence of lead paint would not preclude the use of the building for alternate purposes.
It is not uncommon for Queenslanders to be adaptively re-used for alternate purposes and WHS requirements complied with.
Whilst a person’s financial circumstances cannot form part of the assessment of an application, it is noted that it is difficult to provide comment on building cost comparison due to the limited information available.  It would be usual to expect additional costs when modifying an existing building, however, given the relatively small nature of the existing building in comparison to the overall development, it is anticipated that there would not be a significant variation.
It is also noted that the applicant’s list of required works appear to apply a worst case scenario and there also appears to be recommendations within the 21 July 2020 report which conflict with the findings of the Structural Engineering Report dated 24 February 2020.  For example with regards to the cladding the 24 February 2020 report states:
The chamferboard appeared to be in relatively sound condition given its age. There was typically no evidence of insect damage or rot at key locations where such damage would normally be evident (e.g. at window edges and building corners likely exposed to pooling water). There was widespread minor defects to the chamferboards including visible damage, paint flaking, discolouration and rust stains around nail heads.
This is in conflict with the 21 July 2020 Report which states:
Remove and replace external cladding due to widespread visible damage, paint flaking, discolouration and rust stains around nail heads.
With regards to the Bligh Tanner comments that the required upgrade works would significantly alter the external appearance and impact the “Character house” appeal of the dwelling. The report does not provide any evidence of how these proposed structural changes would impact the external appearance.  External chamferboards are routinely replaced on buildings of this nature on a ‘like for like’ basis (although complete replacement would be less common but repairs to small areas are invariably required on buildings of this age).  Likewise, addition of access ramps is generally considered to be an acceptable modification of a heritage building if undertaken sympathetically and under the advice of a qualified professional heritage architect.
Accordingly, the applicant has not demonstrated that the character building cannot be practicably retained and therefore the proposed re-location of the existing character building is not consistent with the objectives and requirements of the superseded planning scheme and will erode the built heritage of the character area. Furthermore, the applicant has not adequately explored the adaptive re-use of the existing building and its proposed relocation will impact on the valued streetscape.
It is noted that the site and surrounding area are similarly zoned and are identified as a Heritage Character Area and, consequently a precedent for future development within the zone will be created based on how this application is determined.
Proposed built form
The table below summarises the key built form aspects of the proposal.
Criteria	Planning Scheme	Proposal	Complies
Site Area	N/A	3,119m²	N/A
Population density	N/A	N/A	N/A
Gross floor area or Plot ratio	N/A	N/A	N/A
Site cover	50% max	Total site cover: 45.28%	
Building height storeys metres	2 storeys max 8 metres	2 storeys 8 metres	
Boundary setbacks Frontage Side Rear	6 metres min 2 metres and 3 metres min from residential uses 2 metres and 3 metres min from residential uses	6 metres 3 metres to outside face of wall 3 metres to outside face of wall	
Roof form	12 degree roof pitch 600mm eaves to 75% of perimeter of building	Majority less than 12 degrees 30%	X X
Soft landscaping Landscaping Setbacks	min 15% of site area Average 2m width along frontage & 3m on side boundaries adjoining land in a residential zone	442m² = 19.6% approx. Average 3m to frontage and 3m to side and rear boundaries.	
Carparking Type 2 Medical: 1 space per 20m of use area or 3 spaces per medical practitioner whichever is the greater	Use area  = 880m2 44 spaces required	44 spaces provided with 12 in tandem	X
Motorcycle spaces Bicycle Spaces End of Trip Facilities* *(required only where 5 + spaces are required)	5 motorcycle spaces 20 bicycle spaces 1 locker per 2 bicycle spaces and; 1 shower cubicle with ancillary change room per 10 bicycle spaces	8 motorcycle spaces 11 bicycle spaces 9 lockers provided 1 shower provided	X X X
Lot size	None specified	2,252m² and 867m²	
Whilst the proposed development generally complies with the prescriptive built form parameters, the proposed design does not meet the general provisions of the Heritage Overlay code for ‘look and feel’ requirements of the character precinct as it has a very contemporary appearance.
The Overall Outcomes of the Heritage Overlay seeks developments which:
The valued streetscape character of character areas is protected
Reflects the country town character elements reminiscent of Cooroy’s heritage characteristics.
Maintains and reflects the historic architectural features in Cooroy including traditional building designs of a predominantly low rise and low impact scale, typified by lightweight construction, with a timber frame, generally raised above ground on stumps, many featuring verandah elements, sunhoods and awnings to window and wall openings and simple roof designs, either gabled or hipped. Typical materials used include timber for cladding and corrugated iron for roofs;
Development along Maple Street, south of the business centre maintains a domestic scale and form consistent with the Queensland vernacular with landscaped setbacks and front yards without front fences, and low impact, domestic scale buildings that contribute to the open character of this part of the character area.
The following images are perspectives provided by the applicant of the proposed building:

Figure 12: Perspective of Maple Street frontage

Figure 13: Perspective of Maple Street frontage

Figure 14: Perspective from 49 Maple Street frontage
The concerns with the built form specifically relate to:
Roof pitch is too low/flat
The skillion roofed section is too contemporary/coastal
The veranda element is not representative of the character values of the precinct – including the solid weatherboard upright sections, the railing and espalier vines
Large aluminium frame windows do not reflect character values
The concrete block work in the lower level parking area is unsympathetic to the character of the area
The horizontal battening for window screens is not characteristic of the precinct
The profile of the window hoods does not reflect heritage characteristics
Lack of retention of mature trees.  There appears to be at least two quite large mango trees on the property.  These are very much characteristic of a Queensland home/domestic property.
Accordingly, the proposed development does not provide for a development which is consistent with the streetscape or have a design, form and scale which is reflective of the historic architectural features of Cooroy or consistent with the Queensland vernacular.
The built form concerns are exacerbated by insufficient landscaping to the front of the site as a consequence of the 2 driveways and extensive hardstand between the building and the front boundary.
The applicant has indicated that they are generally willing to work with Council officers to resolve an acceptable design outcome. This was not pursued with the applicant due to the fundamental conflict associated with the proposed relocation of the existing character building.
Car parking and vehicle access
The application proposes 6 pairs of tandem (12 spaces) car parks stating that these are to be used by staff. The planning scheme permits the minor use of tandems for some uses however Commercial Business Type 2 Medical is not included in this list. Notwithstanding, in some circumstances it may be reasonable to allow for limited tandem parking where they are for staff and are functional and can operate as intended. In this instance the provision of 12 car parking spaces in a tandem arrangement is considered to be excessive and likely to result in practical issues. The applicant has also not been able to determine the exact number of staff expected on site.
The applicant has proved vehicle manoeuvring (swept path) diagrams for a rear lift waste collection vehicle, the proposed rear lift vehicle is not currently supported by Council’s waste collection contractor. Accordingly a redesign of the waste collection service is required to accommodate a front lift vehicle which is likely to result in redesign of car park area and access arrangements. Any redesign would need to consider potential conflict with ambulance bays, car parking and pedestrian movement.
The applicant was requested to provide swept path diagrams for a small rigid vehicle as manoeuvring for the proposed small rigid vehicle parking appears to be inadequate. The applicant’s Information Response did not include swept path diagrams for small rigid vehicles. Accordingly, it has not been demonstrated that manoeuvring for the proposed small rigid vehicle is satisfactory.
Proposed reconfiguration
The proposed reconfiguration of the existing 4 lots into 2 lots is a suitable response to the proposed layout of the development in light of the existing lot arrangement and raises no issues which could not be adequately resolved by conditions.
A plan of the proposed reconfiguration is detailed below:

Figure 15: Proposed reconfiguration plan
NEW planning scheme
The Noosa Plan (2020) maintains the site’s inclusion with the Heritage Overlay and designation within a Character Area. The new planning scheme heritage provisions are consistent with the superseded planning scheme. As such the proposed development is inconsistent with the Purpose and Overall Outcomes and the Performance Outcomes of the Cooroy Local Plan Code and the Heritage Overlay Code. It is noted also that the Cooroy Local Plan Code specifically calls for development within a character area to retain or reuse buildings that have cultural heritage or townscape significance. The Heritage Overlay also maintains the same hierarchy of retain, re-locate or demolish as the superseded planning scheme.
The new planning scheme maintains the site within a community type zoning (Community Facilities) however the level of assessment for the medical use has been amended from Impact to Code.
cONSULTATION
Referral Agencies
The application was referred to the following Referral Agencies:
Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (SARA)
The Department is a referral agency for development application for a material change of use within 25 metres of a State transport corridor.
The Department has responded providing conditions relating to stormwater management.
Other Referrals
The application was forwarded to the following internal Council officers:
Development Engineering
Building and Plumbing Services
Heritage Coordinator
Environment Officer
Public Notification
The application was publicly notified for 21 business days in accordance with the Planning Act 2016. 6 properly made and 1 not properly made submissions were received. The following table provides a summary and assessment of the issues raised by submitters.
Matters Raised	Comments
Support Benefit the community by increasing the scope of medical services. Will provide complementary services to those offered at the Eden Private Hospital. Will provide convenience and accessibility for practitioners and patients. Existing tenant at Eden Hospital needs to re-locate within 3 years. If required to re-locate into the town will cause car parking issues. Radiology and x-ray service – will no longer need to go to Noosa.	It is acknowledged that the proposed use may provide some community benefit by providing convenient and accessible medical services. It is noted that an existing x-ray and imaging service and additional medical services currently operate from the Eden hospital.
Object Will create more of a traffic burden on an already overloaded small town. Will increase traffic congestion – Eden hospital expanding, new supermarket and playground. Existing traffic problems. Unsafe for pedestrians as Maple Street has become more hazardous past 2 years. Should be located on the other side of the railway tracks.	The application has demonstrated that the required 44 equivalent car parking spaces can be located on site. However, there are concerns with the number of tandem spaces provided and for the capacity for both a front loading waste collection vehicle and a semi rigid vehicle to access and manoeuvre through the site without resulting in conflict. Traffic associated with the proposed development will not significantly exacerbate any existing traffic issues.
conclusion & REASONS FOR DECISION
The application seeks to re-locate an existing character building from a site located within the Heritage Overlay and develop a new building for the purpose of a medical centre. The proposed use of the site of a medical centre is a consistent use within the zone and would allow for improved medical facilities within Cooroy and would service the population of surrounding areas.
The proposed reconfiguration of the existing 4 lots into 2 lots is a suitable response to the proposed layout of the development in light of the existing lot arrangement and raises no issues which could not be adequately resolved by conditions.
However, the proposed re-location of the existing character building is not supported as it has not been demonstrated that the character building cannot be practicably retained and the applicant has not satisfactorily explored the adaptive re-use of the existing building. The removal of the building from the site will have a detrimental effect on the character of the streetscape and be contrary to the objectives of the superseded and new Noosa Plan. Furthermore, the design of the proposed new building does not respect the valued streetscape character nor have a form and scale which reflects the historic architectural features in Cooroy or demonstrate consistency with the Queensland vernacular.
A number of issues associated with the manoeuvring of waste collection and semi-rigid vehicles has not been adequately resolved whilst the proposed inclusion of 12 tandem car parking spaces is not supported.
Accordingly, the application is recommended for refusal.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
	Chief Executive Officer		Community Services		Corporate Services
	Executive Officer		Community Development		Financial Services
	Executive Support		Community Facilities		ICT
		x	Libraries & Galleries		Procurement & Fleet
			Local Laws		Property
		x	Waste & Environmental Health		Revenue Services
					
	Executive Services		Environment & Sustainable Development		Infrastructure Services
	Community Engagement	x	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
					

[word/footer1.xml]
Page 21 of 23

[word/header1.xml]
3

[word/header2.xml]
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT	6 OCTOBER 2020

[Attachment: image14.png (image text)]
VIEW FROM 49 MAPLE STREET sore roman veseunovnosien m aanorecronsss mores

 


[Attachment: image7.png (image text)]
   
    
 

VIEW FROM 49 MAPLE STREET yor niu nsnnovncons iin won ow

VIEW FROM 47 MAPLE STREET sox manson es

 

‘VIEW FROM MYALL STREET BALANCE LOT sox vznaviomunerarmaranrsicin

 


[Attachment: image8.png (image text)]
LEGEND:

 

‘PROPOSED BUILDING ENVELOPE

 

 

 

 

[BASTING BUILDING ENVELOPE.
(APPROXIMATE)

 

PROPOSED
SEWER,
EASEMENT
(INDICATIVE ONLY)

359°57'50"
244

MAPLE

‘THIS ISA PROPOSAL PLAN ONLY AND IS SUBIECT
‘TOLOCAL AUTHORITY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
AND ENGINEERING CONSTRAINTS.

[AREAS AND DISTANCES ARE APPROX ONLY

‘AND SUBJECT TO FINAL SURVEY.

os wo 2 20 40 Metres
een)
‘Original Scale 1400

     

 

 
       
  
  
 
 

Wea
270305"

3 ae ‘S™ PROPOSED

35 DRAINAGE

o832a ge 19 EASEMENT
(INDICATIVE ONLY)

5605

‘PROPOSED
DRAINAGE
EASEMENT

(ANDICATIVE ONLY)

PROPOSED
SEWER 1
EASEMENT $P161937

(INDICATIVE ONLY) \ \

ZN
‘yop