Report · MCU19/0088.02

Page 2

  Item                    Detail
                          Easement A on RP896525
  Owner                   1.515 ha
  Local Government        Noosa Shire Council
  Planning Scheme         The Noosa Plan
  Zone                    Business Centre
  Local Plan              Noosaville Locality Plan
  Overlays                •    Natural Hazard: Bushfire & Acid Sulfate Soils Overlay
                               -   High Potential Acid Sulfate Area 0-5m AHD
                          •    Natural Hazard: Landslide & Flooding Overlay
                               -   Flood Hazard Area (1% AEP to year 2100)

3.0       Justification for the proposed changes
Inconsistencies with the approval conditions and/or approved drawings of MCU19/0088.01 were
identified by Noosa Council during the final civil certification inspection. The opportunity to rectify these
inconsistencies through a minor change application is appreciated. Justification for the current works
to be accepted as is and approved through a minor change application are provided below.
1.       Two fewer parking spaces included on the site than shown on the approved site plan
         (A00.12)
Response:
To ensure that all fire codes are complied with for QFES access to the hydrant pump during an
emergency situation the two car spaces directly in front of the installed pump were required to be a
clear zone with no parking.
Application of minimum parking rates under the Noosa Plan requires 209 parking spaces for the total
development. A total of 232 parking spaces are provided on site which is 23 spaces greater than the
required provision. In addition, Rytenskild Traffic Engineering carried out car parking surveys of the
existing development in March 2018 (refer to response to information request dated 17 October 2019).
The surveys were carried out during a typical week between Wednesday and Sunday. As shown by
the results presented in the response, a peak parking generation of 121 spaces was recorded during
the survey, and this occurred during the Friday lunchtime period. At that time, the car park was less
than 50% full and 132 spaces were available.
On this basis, removal of two parking spaces for installation of the hydrant pump will not adversely
affect the parking provision on the site. Whilst the increased mezzanine area was not included in the
original car parking assessment, the mezzanine area will only be used to house AC plant and is not
designed to be accessible by customers. As such, it is not included in the total use area calculation
and does not have a material impact on the parking assessment provided with the original application.
2.       The hydrant pump location is in breach of condition 7 of MCU19/0088.01 which reads “All
         mechanical equipment and other service infrastructure located on the site must be:
         a.   located not less than 2 metres from a property boundary
         b.   fully enclosed or screened such that they are not visible from the street frontages nor
              adjoining properties. Where screened by landscaping, landscaping beds must be at
              least 1.5 metres wide”
The applicant was required to install a hydrant pump to the location adjacent to the site Hydrant valve
when it was established that the required flow and pressure for the site could not be obtained. The
location of the pump was the only feasible location it could be installed to comply with QFES
requirements. It is noted that there was already existing hydrant infrastructure in the vicinity of this
location within 2 metres of the property boundary not fully enclosed or screened by landscaping (refer
to Google Streetview image captured December 2018 in Figure 1)



2 of 9

Page 3

                  Figure 1 Hydrant infrastructure located within 2 metres of the front property boundary

3.       The light poles, on the footpath between the building and the southern row of carpark
         spaces, have been installed in the middle of the footpath and not against the back of kerb
         as per the approved plans.
The light poles were relocated when it was identified that nose in parking of large four-wheel drive
vehicles with bull bars installed could potentially hit the light poles in the approved location, resulting in
a potential safety and ongoing maintenance issue. The new location of the poles complies with
Australian Standards requirements for installation and located with sufficient clearance for wheelchairs
and trolleys either side of the pole and footing (1m clearance between edge of concrete/kerb and pole
footing to both sides).
4.       The northern building façade does not have reclaimed timber posts and precast panels
         with alternating paint finish as per approved elevations (A20.01).
The timber posts were required to be removed as they were a combustible element/material which is
not allowable on a commercial build under the current National Construction Code (NCC). The
alternating paint finish of the precast panels was removed in discussion and coordination of the
signage package with Noosa Council. The existing outcome remains consistent with The Noosa Plan’s
streetscape and character provisions outlined in S84.1 of the Noosaville Locality Plan in consideration
of the following:
         -   The landscaping area in front of the northern building façade will adequately soften the built
             form (refer to Figure 1). It is noted that a range of medium sized screening trees have been
             planted at regular intervals along the building facade including several Elaeocarpus eumundii
             which is a fast-growing evergreen species likely to grow to in excess of 10m in height. The
             height of the building wall in this location is 5.8m. Layered understorey planting will also
             serve to provide visual and textural interest.
         -   It is noted that the Dan Murphy’s is consistent with the bulk and scale of other large box retail
             buildings located along Mary Street including the adjoining Rivers retail shop and the Noosa
             Home Maker Centre. The proposed extension also presents a consistent building alignment
             fronting Mary Street in-line with adjoining large box retail buildings in the Homemaker Centre.




3 of 9

Page 4

               Additionally, the façade is largely screened from view from the streetscape by existing
               mature vegetation within the front boundary landscaping buffer.




                              Figure 2 Landscape screening in front of northern building facade

4.0       Minor Change Assessment
It is noted that the Act facilitates the following types of changes:
•        Minor change to a development approval
•        ‘Other’ change of a development approval.
It is proposed that the amendment be treated as a minor change. To support this Table 2 provides an
assessment as to compliance with the definition of a minor change as held under the Act.
In addition, Table 3 provides a commentary of the proposed works against the definition of
substantially difference development held under Development Assessment Rules.
Table 2        Minor change criteria – Planning Act 2016, Schedule 2

    Criteria                                Commentary
    Minor change means a change that –
    (b) for a development approval –
    (i) would not result in          Refer Table 3
    substantially different
    development; and
    (ii) if a development application for the development, including the change, were made when the
    change application is made would not cause—

    (A) the inclusion of prohibited         The proposed works do not constitute prohibited development.
    development in the application;         The proposed alterations retain the existing approved use (Dan
    or                                      Murphy’s) onsite and would not introduce prohibited development
                                            on to the site.
    (B) referral to a referral agency       The existing approved development application did not require
    if there were no referral               referral to any referral agencies and the proposed minor change


4 of 9

Page 5

  Criteria                               Commentary
  agencies for the development           to the existing conditions and approved drawings will not trigger
  application; or                        referral to any other referral agencies.
  (C) referral to extra referral
  agencies, agencies, other than
  to the chief executive; or
  (D) a referral agency to assess        N/A
  the application against, or have
  regard to, matters prescribed
  by regulation under section
  55(2), other than matters the
  referral agency must have
  assessed the application
  against, or have had regard to,
  when the application was
  made; or

  (E) public notification if public      The proposed development constitutes a code assessable
  notification was not required for      development application and would not require public notification.
  the development application.

Table 3      Substantially different development - Development Assessment Rules, Schedule 1

  Criteria                               Commentary
  A change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the proposed
  change:
  (a) involves a new use; or      No new uses would be introduced to the site. The use would
                                  remain as a Dan Murphy’s.
  (b) results in the application  The proposed works remain within Lot 2 on RP842280.
  applying to a new parcel of
  land; or
  (c) dramatically changes the    The works will not dramatically change the scale, bulk and
  built form in terms of scale,   appearance of the building. The treatment of the northern façade
  bulk and appearance; or         of the building remains consistent with Specific Outcome 84 of the
                                  Noosaville Locality Code (Streetscape and Character) despite the
                                  remove of the reclaimed timber panel covers and alternating paint
                                  colour finish of the precast panels (refer to Section 3.0 for
                                  justification).

  (d) changes the ability of the         The works will not change the ability of the development to
  proposed development to                operate as a retail premises (Dan Murphy’).
  operate as intended; or
                                         The hours of use, access, and site arrangements would remain
                                         consistent the approved development. Additionally, it has been
                                         demonstrated that the removal of the two car parking spaces will
                                         not result in a shortfall of parking spaces against the requirements
                                         of The Noosa Plan.

  (e) removes a component that           All existing development components integral to the operation
  is integral to the operation of        remain on-site. It has been demonstrated that the removal of the
  the development; or                    two parking spaces will not result in a shortfall of spaces that
                                         would hinder the serviceability of the development.
  (f) significantly impacts on           The TUA of the premises will remain the same. On this basis, the
  traffic flow and the transport         proposed change will not impact traffic flow to the site and the
  network, such as increasing            surrounding road network.
  traffic to the site; or


5 of 9

Page 6

    Criteria                            Commentary
    (g) introduces new impacts or       The proposed changes do not introduce new impacts or increase
    increase the severity of known      the severity of known impacts on the site.
    impacts; or
    (h) removes an incentive or         The area of the works is not an incentive or offset component of
    offset component that would         the original development.
    have balanced a negative
    impact of the development; or
    (i) impacts on infrastructure       The proposed changes do not result in any additional impacts to
    provisions.                         infrastructure provisions across the site.

5.0       Amendments to existing approval conditions
It is requested that Condition 7 (Building Appearance) of MCU19/0088.01 is either removed entirely or
the wording of Condition 7 is amended (bold type) as follows to allow for the existing location of the
hydrant pump infrastructure in this location:
“7. All mechanical equipment and other service infrastructure located on the site must be:
a.       located not less than 2 metres from a property boundary with the exception of hydrant pump
         infrastructure that has a functional requirement to be within 2 metres of the property
         boundary
b.       fully enclosed or screened such that they are not visible from the street frontages nor adjoining
         properties. Where screened by landscaping, landscaping beds must be at least 1.5 metres wide”
6.0       Amendments to approved plans
To address the identified minor inconsistencies between the constructed development and the
approved plans, a revised set of architectural plans has been included as Appendix B for approval.
The following items have been amended in the architectural plans to reflect the development as
constructed:
•        Hydrant pump has been added to the site plan
•        The two removed car parking spaces has been reflected as a clearance area for the hydrant
         pump
•        The relocated carpark light poles have been shown on the site plan reflecting the installed
         locations which remain compliant with relevant Australian Standards
•        The reclaimed timber feature elements and alternating paint treatment notes have been removed
         from the elevation drawings.
7.0       Summary
On the basis of the assessment provided in this letter, we request determination of this Minor Change
Application for the Noosaville Dan Murphy’s.
I thank you in advance for your consideration of this request. Please feel free to contact me if you
require any further information.




6 of 9

Page 7

Kind regards



Cliff Schmidt
Senior Planner
[email protected]
Mobile: +61 411 952 964
Direct Dial: +61 7 3553 3342




7 of 9