2020-04-30 Ordinary Meeting Agenda

ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA                                                                 30 APRIL 2020


     3.    The proposal is inconsistent with assessment benchmarks (3) and (4) natural hazards,
           risk and resilience of Part E of the State Planning Policy as the development does not
           facilitate an appropriate disaster management response and recovery capacity and
           capabilities as the emergency access points are unable to be implemented.
     4.    The proposed development will adversely impact upon koala habitat, does not maximise
           the retention of existing vegetation, and proposes to prematurely clear significant
           vegetation inconsistent with the needs of the community contrary to Overall Outcomes
           13.7.2a)i, 13.7.2a)iii, 13.7.2a)iv, 13.7.2b), 13.7.2c), 13.7.2d) i, 13.7.2d)vii, 13.7.2g), and
           Specific Outcomes O1b, O2, O3, O7, O8b), O11, O16, O18a), O18b), O18f), O18h),
           O19b), O19c), O19d), O19g) and O19i) of the Biodiversity Overlay Code.
     5.    The proposed development is inconsistent with the Overall and Specific Outcomes of the
           Noosaville Locality Code in the following respects:
           i.     The proposal does not provide a satisfactory pedestrian and cycle network for the
                  future development of the area and fails to provide satisfactory linkages with the
                  existing development in the Shire Business Centre contrary to Overall Outcomes
                  11.7.2j) and tt)viii), Specific Outcomes O25, O100, O101, O127, O138 and O156.
           ii.    The proposal fails to ensure a high level of residential amenity as it does not
                  provide for acoustic fencing to lots 17, 18 and 19 or provide any noise mitigation
                  measures to existing plant equipment and loading dock areas and fails to address
                  the future amenity of Lot 21, contrary to Specific Outcome O1.
           iii.   The proposal does not retain suitable existing vegetation to ensure future
                  development will be within a park like setting contrary to Specific Outcome O3,
                  O22 and O125.
           iv.    The proposal will adversely impact on the site’s environmental values contrary to
                  Overall Outcomes 11.7.2a)iv and 13.7.2a)ii, Specific Outcomes O3, O22 and
                  O125.
     6.    The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the Reconfiguring a Lot Code as:
           i.     Insufficient provision has been made for walking and cycling linkages with the
                  existing development in the Shire Business Centre as the proposed network and
                  linkages are unable to be implemented contrary to Overall Outcomes 14.181.2f),
                  Specific Outcomes O8 and O9.
           ii.    The proposed lots will have a significant adverse impact on the natural environment
                  and will not retain the sites natural environmental values contrary to Overall
                  Outcomes 14.181.2g), Specific Outcomes O21b and O22.
     7.    Bushfire mitigation measures do not satisfactorily address the risk of bushfire contrary to
           Overall Outcomes 13.30.2a), 13.30.2c), Specific Outcomes O4, O7, O8, O9, O11 and
           O12 of the Natural Hazards Overlay Code.
     8.    Bushfire mitigation measures result in the removal of vegetation contained within OS3
           as detailed in Schedule 4 (Shire Business Centre Map) of the Noosa Plan.
     9.    The proposed development is contrary to the draft Noosa Plan provisions, which support
           the refusal of the development application for the same reasons as those applicable
           under the current Noosa Plan because of non-compliance with requirements for
           pedestrian/cycle links, an appropriate response to the site’s natural hazards and
           protection of the site’s environmental values including vegetation retention.
     10.   The proposed development cannot be conditioned to comply with the above assessment
           benchmarks.
     11.   There are no matters that would warrant approval of the development application
           notwithstanding the noncompliance with the assessment benchmarks.
B.   Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
                                                                                         Page 49 of 60