Original source · versioned page text
planning report Tristania
Development Application
Planning Report
Material Change of Use for a New Dwelling House
(Coastal Protection Overlay)
situated at 4 Tristania Dr, Marcus Beach
(Lot 101 M11112)
Page 1 of 11
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.
Full text of the other 10 pages
Page 2
Contents
1.0 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Development application details ................................................................................................3
1.2 Planning instrument details .......................................................................................................3
2.0 Site details ......................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Site description ..........................................................................................................................4
2.2 Surrounding land uses ................................................................................................................5
3.0 Proposed development details .......................................................................................... 6
4.0 Planning assessment .......................................................................................................... 7
4.1 Plot ratio ....................................................................................................................................7
4.2 Setbacks .....................................................................................................................................8
4.3 Coastal Protection and Scenic Amenity Overlay..........................................................................9
5.0 State assessment and other matters ................................................................................ 10
5.1. Matters established in the Planning Regulation .............................................................................. 10
5.2 State Planning Policy ......................................................................................................................... 10
6.0 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 11
Client Name: S Meldrum
Prepared by: Jack Lewis B.Sc Hons UNSW, M.Plan OTAGO MPIA MQELA
Version: 1
Date: 7 March 2022
This report is based on the QLD Government’s planning report template (Department of
Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning), which adopts a ‘report-by-exception’ approach. The
planning report only discusses the key issues and matters where a proposed development does not
exactly meet the requirements of, or conflicts with, a planning scheme or other planning instrument.
Disclaimer: While every care has been taken in preparing this report, Pivotal Perspective Pty Ltd
accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement
or advice, expressed or implied, contained within. To the best of our knowledge, the content was
correct at the time of publishing.
Page 2 of 11
Page 3
1.0 Summary
1.1 Development application details
Proposed development: Material Change of Use for a Dwelling House
(Coastal Protection and Scenic Amenity Overlay)
Type of approval sought: Development Permit
Site address: 4 Tristania Dr, Marcus Beach
Real property description: Lot 101 on M11112
Site area: 781m2
Owner details: S Meldrum
Applicant details: S Meldrum c/- Pivotal Perspective Pty Ltd
1.2 Planning instrument details
State planning policy: Natural Hazards, risk and resilience – coastal hazards
Regional plan: SEQ Regional Plan 2009–2031 (version commenced 2 May
Designation: 2014) – Urban Footprint.
Planning scheme: The Noosa Plan 2020
Zone: Medium Density Residential
Level of assessment: Code Assessment
Applicable overlays: Coastal Protection and Scenic Amenity Overlay
Landslide Hazard Overlay (Moderate)
Applicable codes: Acceptable Outcomes AO3, AO8, AO10, AO11, AO12.1,
AO12.2, AO12.4, AO13, AO14.5, AO15, AO16, AO17, AO19,
AO21.2, AO21.3, AO22.1, AO22.2, AO23.1, AO23.2 and AO24
of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code
Acceptable Outcomes AO2, AO3, AO5, AO6, AO7, AO8, AO9,
AO10, AO11, AO12, AO13, AO14, AO15, AO16, AO18, AO19,
AO20 and AO21 of the Low Density Housing Code
Coastal Protection and Scenic Amenity Code
State Referrals: SARA – Contaminated Land (Unexploded Ordinance)
Page 3 of 11
Page 4
2.0 Site details
2.1 Site description
Table 1: Site description
Site Description
characteristic
Existing land use Vacant
Existing Planning N/A
Approvals
Easements N/A
Figure 1: Aerial view and site identification
Source: Noosa Council Mapping System
Page 4 of 11
Page 5
2.2 Surrounding land uses
Table 2: Surrounding land uses
Surrounding land uses
North Multiple dwellings – 5 units
West David Low Way
East Tristania Dr and the Coastal Reserve
South 8 Tristania Dr – Vacant (recent approval for a dwelling house MCU21/0034)
Figure 2 – Zone map
Page 5 of 11
Page 6
3.0 Proposed development details
The application seeks to develop a new house on the currently vacant site with the following features:
- 4 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms over two levels;
- Double garage basement with access from Tristania Dr;
- Lift for access between levels;
- Pool orientated to the north adjoining the living area;
- Large landscaping areas surrounding the proposed dwelling to match into existing contours.
A copy of the site plan is included below and a full set of plans are provided as Attachment 1.
Figure 3: Site Plan
Page 6 of 11
Page 7
4.0 Planning assessment
The proposed new dwelling house is affected by a relevant overlay (Coastal Protection and Scenic
Amenity Overlay) (Planning Regulation 2017, Sch 6 Part 2) and requires assessment against the
provisions for a dwelling house in the Medium Density Residential Zone Code and Low Density
Housing Code which are outlined in Table of Assessment 5.5.2.
An assessment against the relevant provisions of the codes is provided below with further
assessment of some Performance Outcomes provided thereafter.
Table 3: Code Compliance
Provision Proposal – Site Area 780m² Code Provision Compliance
Building height 7.85m 8m Yes
2 storeys (compliant basement) 2 storeys. Yes
Site Cover 39.93% (311.79) 40% (312.4m²) Yes
Plot ratio 0.42:1 (328m²) 0.4:1 (312.4m²) PO
Setbacks Front
• Ground level beam: 4.25m 6m PO
• Balance of building: 6m – 6.75m 6m Yes
North side: 1.5m 1.5m / 2m Yes
South Side: 1.77m / 2m 1.5m / 2m Yes
Rear (David Low Way): 3.5m – 4.5m 6m PO
Garages 5.2m wide No more than 6m Yes
Soft Landscaping >20% (50%/390m2) 20% (156m2) Yes
A site specific geotechnical report is to A site-specific geotechnical
Landslide Hazard be prepared by an RPEQ confirming the assessment is prepared by a Yes
stability of the site. All recommendations registered professional engineer.
will be incorporated into the
development.
Materials and Appropriate colours that blend in to the Appropriate colours that blend in to Yes
Finishes natural environment. the natural environment.
4.1 Plot ratio
The proposed Plot ratio of 0.42:1 exceeds the Acceptable Outcome AO11of 0.4:1 by 15m². The code
seeks that dwelling houses within the medium density residential zone have a plot ratio similar to
that of a multiple dwelling. The exceedance is considered minor and complies with PO9 of the
Medium Density Residential Zone Code for the following reasons—
• the design is of a scale compatible with the approved dwelling house to the south (8 Tristania Drive) and the multiple
dwelling to the north;
• is less than 8m building height;
• steps down the slope with a portion of the ground floor excavated and not seen for surrounding area;
• complies with side setbacks;
• will not appear bulky to surrounding properties as the south elevation is well articulated.
Page 7 of 11
Page 8
4.2 Setbacks
A small beam at ground floor level and part of the stairs protrude into the 6m front setback, and to
the rear, which is also a frontage seeks a building setback of between 3.5m and 4.5m. The proposal
is therefore assessed against Performance Outcome PO12 which is provided below for reference.
Building Setback
PO12
Buildings and structures are designed and sited to:
(a) provide a high level of amenity to users of the subject site and adjoining premises, including
provision of visual and acoustic privacy;
(b) not unreasonably obstruct views or cause overlooking of private open space or habitable
areas of adjoining premises;
(c) provide adequate distance from adjoining land uses;
(d) preserve existing vegetation that will help buffer development;
(e) allow for space and landscaping to be provided between buildings including adequate area
at ground level for landscaping with trees, shrubs, outdoor living and utilities;
(f) be consistent with the predominant character of the surrounding area; and
(g) protect the natural character and avoid adverse impacts on ecologically important areas such
as national parks, waterways and wetlands.
Front setback - Beam
The encroachment to the Tristania Drive is considered minor noting that it is only a beam that is less
than 1.5m above the NGL that encroaches into the setback area.
Rear setback
The proposal complies with PO12 when considering the following—
• the ground floor sits well below David Low Way which provides natural noise mitigation for the
residents;
• timber battening provides visual interest from David Low Way;
• occupant’s amenity is maximised as the building orientation is to the east not to the west (David
Low Way);
• will not dominate views as only the roof and 1 storey will be seen from David Low Way;
• given the vegetation in the road reserve and the speed at which vehicles travel, only a quick
glimpse of the development would be seen from David Low Way in any case;
• no views from David Low Way are impeded, as the development as proposed, is well below 8m
(being 4.7m above NGL and only 2.7m above fence height) and the vegetation in the road
reserve will be higher than the building as seen in Figure 5 below;
Page 8 of 11
Page 9
Figure 5 – View from David Low Way
• a development with a compliant 6m setback and 8m in building height at that point, would be
significantly higher than the proposed and impede views from developments on the western side
of David Low Way, whereas this proposal is well below road reserve vegetation level and will not
impede views;
• will not impose on views from David Low Way as the development is excavated into the site;
• There is the opportunity for vegetation within the setback to be retained;
• 3.5m – 4.5m is a sufficient width to provide good screening vegetation to David Low Way;
• the lot is an odd shape and the design provides an excellent response to the landform;
• the proposal provides a 6m setback to Tristania Drive, its main frontage which preserves an open
streetscape;
• maintains the predominant character setbacks in the street, noting reduced setbacks exist to
David Low Way opposite the site.
4.3 Coastal Protection and Scenic Amenity Overlay
The building is located more than 6m from the coastal boundary and is outside of the coastal erosion
areas for 2040, 2070 and 2100. Native vegetation can be provided along the frontage and in the
road reserve in accordance with PSP2 for landscaping with suitable coastal species. The proposed
development meets all Acceptable Outcomes of the Overlay Code.
Page 9 of 11
Page 10
5.0 State assessment and other matters
5.1. Matters established in the Planning Regulation
Nil
5.2 State Planning Policy
The SPP includes assessment benchmarks that may be applicable where a local government
planning scheme does not adequately reflect the SPP. The Noosa Plan 2020 appropriately
integrates all SPP provisions, except for Natural Hazards, risk and resilience – coastal hazards – in
part.
Development in the erosion prone area, as shown on the SPP interactive mapping system as shown
in Figure 6 below.
Figure 6 – SARA DA Mapping - erosion prone area
Therefore, the proposal is subject to assessment against the assessment benchmarks – natural
hazards, risk and resilience within the State Planning Policy.
While the site is within a erosion prone area, it is not within coastal management district, therefore
is subject to Assessment benchmark4, 5, 6, and 7 of the natural hazards, risks and resilience SPP
which an assessment is provided below.
SPP Assessment Benchmark Assessment Complies
(4) Development supports and does not The proposal sits across the road and Yes
hinder disaster management response or opposite the coastal dune system which
provides sufficient space for disaster
recovery capacity and capabilities.
management to operate if an erosion event
occurred. Noting the site is currently
approximately 170m from the toe of the
frontal dune and the coastal dune is heavily
vegetated.
(5) Development directly, indirectly and The proposal maximises the setback to the Yes
cumulatively avoids an increase in the eastern boundary to avoid potential damage
from the natural hazard.
severity of the natural hazard and the
potential for damage on the site or to other
properties.
(6) Risks to public safety and the No hazardous material will be stored on site Yes
environment from the location of hazardous other than the usual for maintenance of an
urban garden.
Page 10 of 11
Page 11
materials and the release of these materials This small quantity of hazardous material will
as a result of a natural hazard are avoided not result in any significant risk to public
safety or to the environment.
(7) The natural processes and the protective The proposal is within a site that has Yes
function of landforms and the vegetation that historically been deemed to development.
can mitigate risks associated with the natural
It is not proposed to remove any vegetation
hazard are maintained or enhanced. within the protected frontal dune system nor
imposing on the natural protective function on
which the dune system provides from
erosion.
6.0 Conclusion
This application seeks a Development Permit for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use
(Coastal Protection) situated at 4 Tristania Dr, Marcus Beach. The proposed development is code
assessable and meets the relevant Performance Outcomes.
The Planning Act 2016 prescribes that a code assessment must be carried out only—
(a) against the assessment benchmarks in a categorising instrument for the development
(The Noosa Plan 2020); and
(b) having regard to any matters prescribed by regulation.
Council, after carrying out the assessment—
(a) must decide to approve the application to the extent the development complies with all of
the assessment benchmarks for the development; and
(b) may decide to approve the application even if the development does not comply with
some of the assessment benchmarks; and
Examples—
1 An assessment manager may approve an application for development that does not comply with some of
the benchmarks if the decision resolves a conflict between the benchmarks.
2 An assessment manager may approve an application for development that does not comply with some of
the benchmarks if the decision resolves a conflict between the benchmarks and a referral agency’s
response.
(c) may impose development conditions on an approval; and
(d) may, to the extent the development does not comply with some or all the assessment
benchmarks, decide to refuse the application only if compliance cannot be achieved by
imposing development conditions.
Example of a development condition—
a development condition that affects the way the development is carried out, or the management of uses
or works that are the natural and ordinary consequence of the development, but does not have the effect
of changing the type of development applied for
The assessment finds the development generally complies with the Overall Outcomes of the
applicable codes. The Assessment Manager’s favourable consideration of the above development
application is therefore recommended.
Page 11 of 11