Request to Change Existing Approval · MCU22/0140.01

Page 2

3.0         COMPLIANCE WITH DEFINITION OF ‘MINOR CHANGE’ (SCHEDULE 2 OF PA 2016)

Schedule 2 of the Planning Act 2016 provides a definition of a ‘minor change’, which contains a series of criteria
to determine what constitutes a ‘minor change’ to an approval detailed as follows:

            minor change means a change that—

            (b) for a development approval—

            (i) would not result in 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 development in the application; or
                   (B) referral to a referral agency, other than to the chief executive, if there were no referral
                   agencies for the development application; or
                   (C) referral to extra referral agencies, other than to the chief executive; or
                   (D) a referral agency to assess 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 notification was not required for the development application.

An assessment of the proposed change with reference to the above criteria is provided as follows:

      (i)       (The change) would not result in a substantially different development

When determining what constitutes a substantially different development, Schedule 1: Substantially Different
Development of the Development Assessment Rules. Schedule 1 provides a list of criteria that may constitute
a substantially different development as follows:

      ➢     Involves a new use; or
      ➢     Results in the application applying to a new parcel of land; or
      ➢     Dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance; or
      ➢     Changes the ability of the proposed development to operate as intended; or
      ➢     Removes a component that is integral to the operation of the development; or
      ➢     Significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport network, such as increasing traffic to the site;
            or
      ➢     Introduces new impacts or increase the severity of known impacts; or
      ➢     Removes an incentive or offset component that would have balanced a negative impact of the
            development; or
      ➢     Impacts on infrastructure provisions.

An assessment is provided as follows:

Involves a new use

The ‘proposed change’ will not alter the approved use of the site and will not impact upon the approved
development’s ability to operate as intended.

Results in the application applying to a new parcel of land

The ‘proposed change’ does not involve a new parcel of land.

Dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance

Whilst the ‘proposed change’ will result in changes to the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance,
these changes are not considered ‘dramatic’.

Changes the ability of the proposed development to operate as intended

Page 3

The ‘proposed change’ does not impact upon the approved development’s ability to operate as intended.

Removes a component that is integral to the operation of the development

The ‘proposed change’ does not remove a component that is integral to the operation of the development.

Significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport network, such as increasing traffic to the site

The ‘proposed change’ does not change the traffic generated by the proposed development.

Introduces new impacts or increase the severity of known impacts

The ‘proposed change’ does not generate any new or additional offsite impacts.

Removes an incentive or offset component that would have balanced a negative impact of the development

The ‘proposed change’ does not remove an incentive or offset component.

Impacts on infrastructure provisions

The ‘proposed change’ does not alter the required provisions of infrastructure.

    (ii)       if a development application for the development, including the change, were made
               when the change application is made would not cause—

    1.     the inclusion of prohibited development in the application

The application if remade including the change would not comprise prohibited development.

    2.     referral to a referral agency, other than to the chief executive, if there were no referral
           agencies for the development application

The original application did not trigger referral and the proposed change does not trigger referral to a referral
agency.



    3.     referral to extra referral agencies, other than to the chief executive

The ‘proposed change’ does not trigger referral to a referral agency and the approved development did not
require referral.

    4.     a referral agency to assess 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

The original application did not trigger referral nor does the proposed change.

    5.     public notification if public notification was not required for the development application.

Public notification was not required for the original development application. If the development application
were to be remade to include the changes, the application would remain code assessable and not require public
notification.

Page 4

4.0     CHANGES TO APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS




   -             -      Landscape Plan, prepared by KoPLAN                              8/11/24
   -             -      Area Schedule, prepared by KoPLAN                               8/11/24
   -             -      Design Details, prepared by KoPLAN                              8/11/24
Comment:

As part of the ‘proposed change’ the Landscape plan in the above table are to be replaced by the new Landscape
Plans prepared by KoPLAN and included at Appendix B

Page 5

5.0     CHANGES TO APPROVED CONDITIONS
Condition 29 – Landscaping Works



29. The development site must be landscaped generally in accordance with the
concept plan prepared by Ausmar (Issue B Landscaping, prepared by Ausmar)
KoPLAN (Landscape Plan, prepared by KoPLAN). The works must be
undertaken in accordance with an Operational Works approval and the Noosa Plan
PSP2 – Landscaping for this specific area and must include in particular:
   a) Front fences or walls must be set back an average of 1 metre and
      articulated, stepping the design at a maximum of 5m intervals;
   b) An average 1 metre wide landscaping strip along the both road frontages
      exclusive of the access driveway and generally uncompromised by
      infrastructure items;
   c) Screening landscaping for side boundaries must include screening plants
      which grow to a minimum height of 4m at maturity and provided at
      maximum 1.5m centres. Palms are not permitted to be utilised for
      screening;
   d) Provision of 4 x 45 litre street trees (2 on each frontage);
   e) Appropriate species that meet PSP2 – Landscaping policy or endemic to
      Noosa;
   f) No use of synthetic turf;
   g) Adequate vegetative screening of tanks.

Comment:

Condition 29 is to be amended to reflect the new Landscape Plan prepared by KoPlan.

Page 6

5.0      SUMMARY

Pursuant to Section 78 of the Planning Act 2016, we hereby request Council issue a ‘Change to the Existing
Approval Notice’ in support of the ‘proposed change’. Should further information or clarification be required in
relation to the above / enclosed documentation please don’t hesitate to contact me on (07) 5441 2188.

Yours faithfully,



Chris Page BRUP, M.P.I.A.
Senior Town Planner
MURRAY & ASSOCIATES (QLD) PTY LTD