Planning Statement Pre Response Request · 131999.982963.5

Page 2

  Page 2

    •    Building materials will be consistent with the existing external cladding.
    •    No vegetation to be removed

PRE-REQUEST RESPONSE

Section 78 of the Planning Act 2016 details the responsible entity for assessing a changes application
after the appeal period. The Act details that the responsible entity is the Planning & Environment Court
where:

        (b) the P&E Court, if—
             (i) the change application is for a minor change; and
             (ii) the development approval was given because of an order of the court; and
             (iii) there were any properly made submissions for the development application; or

The proposed changes are minor as detailed below, the development approval was issued under a
Court Order and there were submissions to the development application. Therefore the responsible
entity for assessing the application is the Planning & Environment Court.

As part of the changes application process the Act details that anyone who proposes to make a change
application must give notice of the proposal to any affected entity. In this instance the affected entities
are the assessment manager (Noosa Council) and referral agencies and the applicant is seeking a pre-
response notice from Council detailing that they have no objection to supporting the proposed changes.


MINOR CHANGE

Section 78 of the Planning Act 2016 describes a changes application can either be either ‘minor
changes’ or ‘other changes’. The proposed changes to the development approval constitute a minor
change as detailed below.

minor change means a change that—

(b) for a development approval—

   (i) would not result in a substantially different development –

         The changes to the dwelling do not change the use or the significantly alter the appearance or
         impacts of the building on the site.

   (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

           The proposed changes do not include any prohibited development.

           (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

           The proposal does not raise any new matters for referral agencies to consider.

           (E)    public notification if public notification was not required for the development application.

           The original approval was impact assessable. The proposed changes do not significantly alter
           the building or impact on the surrounding area

The proposed changes are considered minor changes under the Act.

Page 3

  Page 3


Section 81(2) and (3) of the Planning Act 2016 specifies what the responsible entity (in this instance the
Court) must consider when assessing and deciding applications for minor changes including the
following:

      (2) When assessing the change application, the responsible entity must consider—

             (a) the information the applicant included with the application; and
             (b) if the responsible entity is the assessment manager and submissions were properly made
                 about the development application—the submissions; and
             (c) any pre-request response notice or response notice given in relation to the change
                 application; and
             (d) all matters the responsible entity would or may assess against or have regard to, if the
                 change application were a development application; and
             (e) another matter that the responsible entity considers relevant.

      (3) For subsection (2)(d), the responsible entity—
          (a) must assess against, or have regard to, the matters that applied when the development
              application was made; and
          (b) may assess against, or have regard to, the matters that applied when the change
              application was made.

The applicable planning instruments that Council must have regard to are:
         •     State Planning Regulation;
         •     State Planning Policy; and
         •     The Noosa Plan.

The proposal does not change the use or scale of impacts and is consistent with the higher order State
Planning Regulations and Planning Policies. Management plans relating to Bushfire Management,
Vegetation Protection and Koala Management exist for the site and the proposed alterations do not
affect these plans.

The Noosa Plan includes the site in the Detached Housing zone which details that a dwelling is accepted
development and required to comply with the Detached House Code. It is noted that there are no site
specific provisions in the Noosa Heads locality or Detached House Code of the Noosa Plan relating to
the Bayview Road houses and the site is only affected by the Natural Hazards Overlay with reference
to a Bushfire- Potential Impact Buffer.

The Court Order for the site includes a number of conditions and development parameters specifically
relating to the Bayview Road Houses. These conditions relate to aspects such as height as well as
colours and materials to minimize impacts on the surrounding area. These conditions along with a
comparison of the current planning requirements and the proposal are detailed in the table below:

                     Court Approval                  Noosa Plan              Proposal

 Building            As per Architectural Sketches   2 storeys               2 storeys
 Height
                     Not to exceed RL71              8 metres                Less than RL71

 Site Cover          Not to exceed Architectural     40% for two storey or   26.5% (214m2)
                     Sketch Drawings (area not       50% and 30%
                     detailed)                                               Increases site cover by 0.5%.
                                                                             New      bedroom      partially
                     26% (209m2)                                             located over existing deck

 Gross       Floor   Not to exceed Architectural     Non specified           Additional 15m2 proposed.
 Area                Sketch Drawings:                                        New      bedroom      partially
                                                                             located over existing deck
                     260M2

Page 4

  Page 4
 Setbacks        As shown on the Architectural       2.0m up 7.5m in height   Façade of building 2.0m with
                 Sketch Drawings:                                             eaves extending to within 1.0
                                                                              metre of side boundary
                 Existing side setback         of
                 approximately 2.7metres

 Colours         Muted tones of browns,              Not specified            To match existing     muted
                 greens and greys per colour                                  colour scheme
                 palette.

 Building        Colourbond roofs, timber or         Not specified            To match existing building
 Materials       powder- coated aluminum                                      materials
                 window       frames,        non-
                 reflective   window        glass,
                 timber balconies,         timber
                 screens, suns screens, stone
                 from the site for retaining wall
                 and facing, timber frame on
                 suspended timber floors with
                 timber, sheet ply and stone to
                 external walls.

 Pool            Max 3m x 3m                                                  No change


As indicated in the table above, the proposed works are consistent with the provisions of the Noosa Plan
with regard to detached dwellings. However the proposed extension does not comply with the
development parameters of the approved plans of the Court Order in terms of site cover, gross floor
area and setbacks. Condition 6.2 of the Court Order states:

        6.2 All of the Conditions are integral to and non-severable from the development approval. In
        interpretation of these Conditions or the exercise of any discretion by the Council of its officers,
        the overriding consideration shall be to ensure that the visual and environmental impact of the
        Development on the Site is minimal and to enhance and maintaining the Environmental Values
        of the site.

In support of the proposal the applicant notes:

    •   The building complies with all Noosa Plan 2006 development parameters for detached
        dwellings;
    •   The extension is minor, located over an existing deck and is well integrated with the existing
        built form;
    •   The extension is not visible to the surrounding area;
    •   The extension represents a 0.5% increase to the built form;
    •   No vegetation is removed as a result of the extension;
    •   The extension enables landscaped setbacks to be provided between the existing buildings in
        the area;
    •   Materials and colours approved under the Court Order will be utilized;
    •   The extension will not impact on the amenity of the adjoining lot.
    •   The Noosa Plan 2006 does not detail a specific gross floor area for the site;
    •   Based on the size of the lot (805ms) and location, the existing dwelling three bedroom home is
        relatively modest compared to other homes in the surrounding area;


The applicant will be seeking amendment of the following conditions of the court order:

    1. 2 - Development Approval – table of drawings to include revised plans prepared by Hollingdale
       Mainwaring 1209:SK0.00 (A) to 1209:SK0.05 (A)

    2. 6 Development - 6.1 Drawings - drawings to include revised plans prepared by Hollingdale
       Mainwaring 1209:SK0.00 (A) to 1209:SK0.05 (A)

    3. 6.Development - 6.3 Development parameters - to include/reference revised plans prepared
       by Hollingdale Mainwaring 1209:SK0.00 (A) to 1209:SK0.05 (A)

Page 5

   Page 5

The applicant seeks Council support for this pre-request response and welcomes the opportunity to
discuss the proposal on site.

The enclosed development application is lodged electronically and includes:

    •   Completed Noosa Council Pre Request Response Application form
    •   Approved Court Order Plans
    •   Proposal Plans


Application fees will be paid separately by the applicant following lodgment of the application. Could you
please confirm your reference number and provide a link for payment of fees.

Please contact our Sunshine Coast office if you require any further information and/or clarification.




Yours faithfully,




Nadine Gorton
Senior Planner
martoo consulting pty ltd