Skip to the record
The first. The best. The only NoosaWatch™.

Original source · versioned page text

Statement Letter

of 5

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

           Appendix B – Substantially Different Development.
                                        DA Rules - Schedule 1
                            Substantially Different Development Test
1. An assessment manager or responsible entity may determine that the change is a minor
   change to a development application or development approval, where – amongst other criteria
   – a minor change is a change that would not result in ‘substantially different development’.
2. An assessment manager or responsible entity must determine if the proposed change would
   result in substantially different development for a change—
       a. made to a proposed development application the subject of a response given under
            section 57(3) of the Act and a properly made application;
       b. made to a development application in accordance with part 6;
       c. made to a development approval after the appeal period.
3. In determining whether the proposed change would result in substantially different
   development, the assessment manager or referral agency must consider the individual
   circumstances of the development, in the context of the change proposed.
4. A change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the proposed
     change:
a) involves a new use; or        The proposal does not involve a new use.


b) results in the application           The proposed development does not require an application
   applying to a new parcel of land;    for a new parcel of land.
   or
c) dramatically changes the built       The proposed change will not dramatically increase in the
   form in terms of scale, bulk and     scale, bulk or appearance of the development.
   appearance; or
d) changes the ability of the           The minor change will not affect the ability of the
   proposed      development       to   development to operate as intended.
   operate as intended; or
e) removes a component that is          The proposal does not remove an integral part of the
   integral to the operation of the     development.
   development; or
f) significantly impacts on traffic     The proposal does not impact the existing use of the site.
   flow and the transport network,      There will be no increase to the traffic to the site.
   such as increasing traffic to the
   site; or
g) introduces new impacts or            The site was approved for a residential use and this use will
   increase the severity of known       remain. The are no new impacts
   impacts; or
h) removes an incentive or offset       There are no incentives or offsets removed as part of the
   component that would have            proposed minor change.
   balanced a negative impact of
   the development; or
i) impacts      on    infrastructure    There will be no impact on the existing infrastructure.
   provisions.
Log in to download the original file

Statement Letter.pdf · 313 KB (small file)

Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.