Original source · versioned page text
2020-05-18 General Committee Meeting Notes
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
RECOMMENDATIONS ONLY – NOT THE FINAL DECISION OF COUNCIL
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING 18 MAY 2020
2. The proposal does not comply with Specific Outcomes O15 and O77 of the
Cooroy & Lake Macdonald Locality Code, as the proposal is not responsive to
the natural topography, and proposes significant earthworks to create a house
site.
3. The proposal does not comply with Overall Outcome 13.30.2a) and b) and
Specific Outcomes O1and O2 of the Natural Hazards Overlay Code, as proposed
lot 2 is located in a landslide hazard area and significant earthworks are proposed
to create the house site potentially placing people and property at risk from future
landslides. .
B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
Carried unanimously.
8 MCU20/0008 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR
ANCILLARY DWELLING UNIT AT 1/33 GATEWAY DRIVE, NOOSAVILLE
Committee Recommendation
Moved: Cr Jurisevic
Seconded: Cr Stewart
That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the General Committee Meeting
dated 18 May 2020 regarding Application No. MCU20/0008 for a Development Permit for
Material Change of Use – Ancillary Dwelling Unit, situated at 1/33 Gateway Drive, Noosaville
and:
A. Refuse the application for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is not for an Ancillary Dwelling Unit as defined under
section 2.11.5 of the Noosa Plan because:
a) A detached house is proposed on the premises;
b) The proposed dwelling unit is not subordinate to the non-residential use;
2. The proposed development is for a detached house 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:
a) The proposed use will be incompatible with other uses and works on the
premises contrary to 11.7.2(a)(i) of the Overall Outcomes Division 16;
b) 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.
Page 5 of 6
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.