Skip to the record
The gold standard in government transparency.

Original source · versioned page text

2017-07-11 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

of 78

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

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                      11 JULY 2017


RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment
Committee Meeting dated 11 July 2017 and refuse Application No. 152006.1991.01 for an
Extension to the Relevant Period for Development Permit to Reconfigure a Lot (52 lots and park),
situated at 191 Hollett Road Noosaville for the following reasons:
1.    The approval is not consistent with the South East Queensland Regional Plan as the
      development would result in the creation of an urban settlement within an area where the
      intent is to protect the landscape and the capacity for rural production.
2.    The approval is not consistent with the Noosa Plan 2006 as the proposed urban
      development is not located within an established village and would result in fragmentation
      of land holdings outside of areas already allocated for such purpose by the Noosa Plan.
      The development is also partly located within the Riparian Buffer area identified for
      protection by the Biodiversity Overlay
3.    The approval is contrary to the South East Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning
      Regulatory Planning Provisions as the development will result in the removal of non-
      juvenile koala habitat trees.
4.    Different bushfire hazard mapping to that used for the initial approval applies as the State
      Planning Provisions came into effect after the original approval and results in a higher
      hazard rating. The higher hazard rating may require changes to setback/buffer areas and
      an amended subdivision layout. An updated bushfire management plan has not been
      submitted to enable an assessment of the current bushfire hazard.
5.    Significant time has lapsed since the ecological assessment reports were originally
      submitted and the information in these reports is now outdated. Updated ecological reports
      have not been submitted.
6.    The community is unlikely to be aware of the proposal given the significant time that has
      lapsed, the Noosa Plan’s current zoning and no works have commenced on site.


REPORT
1.    PROPOSAL
The application seeks to extend the relevant period of a Development Permit to reconfigure a lot
for 52 rural residential type lots and park by 2 years so that the development will not lapse until 5
July 2019.
The report submitted with the application advises…our client has been in discussions with
potential purchasers of the site who need more time to act on the approval should they proceed
to contract……
The site is now zoned as Rural under the Noosa Plan 2006. Despite the change to the zoning
under the current planning scheme, the development layout and design is considered to be
consistent with current State and Council design requirements for development on land subject to
environmental constraints.
In this respect it is noted that the approved development:
    Is predominantly located in disturbed areas of the site.
    Incorporates setbacks for bushfire management.
    Layout and design of allotments has been generally designed around already cleared
      vegetation areas and environmental constraints;
    The conditions placed on the development appropriately address all relevant environmental
      concerns;


                                                                                      Page 38 of 78
Log in to download the original file

2017-07-11 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda(PDF, 6MB).pdf · 6.2 MB (large file)

Large file: the download may take up to a minute.

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”.