2019-02-12 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                12 FEBRUARY 2019


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 following assessment benchmark from the Planning Regulation 2017 applies to the
application:
    SEQ Development Area
The proposal is for urban activity within the Urban Footprint and is consistent with the assessment
benchmarks contained in the Planning Regulation 2017.
3.3. Statutory Instruments – Planning Scheme
Locality Provisions
The subject site is located in the Noosa Heads Locality and is zoned Detached Housing. The
overall outcomes for the Detached Housing zone seek that detached housing prevails to maintain:
    a low impact, low density development form of domestic scale,
    a high level of residential of amenity
    allotment sizes and densities which are consistent with the character of the particular
      neighbourhood
    building styles befitting the character of the locality and which respond to, and are integrated
      with, site characteristics including slope, vegetation and water frontage where applicant; and
    landscaping amongst buildings, retaining trees and vegetation wherever practical.
The proposed lot sizes are consistent with the character of the particular neighbourhood with lot
sizes to the north and south of the site of a similar or lesser area to the lots proposed.
Reconfiguring a Lot
The Reconfiguring a Lot Code requires lots to have the appropriate area and dimensions to provide
for the intended use, be not less than 600m2 for detached house lots and 800m2 for battle-axe
shaped lots excluding any access handle and provide for private open space.
The proposed battle-axe lots all fall below the minimum lot size and lot 1 is not considered to have
an appropriate area to provide for its intended use, as lot 1 has a large overland drainage flow path
that traverses the site, as reflected by the drainage easement initially proposed and covers the
whole of Lot 1 and an the eastern portion of Lot 2 as shown in Figure 3 below. While there are
some relevant grounds for a lesser lot size, given the surrounding lot sizes, proposed lot 1 is not
considered a suitable lot. The proposed lot has no useable outdoor area for use by residents, with
no works such as pools, garden sheds, cubby houses and the like able to be constructed within
the overland drainage flow path due to the potential impact on drainage in the area.
Figure 3 shows the extent of inundation in a 1% AEP event.




                                                                                        Page 7 of 94