Skip to the record
Trusted by locals. Built for Noosa.

Original source · versioned page text

planning report Tristania

of 11

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

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
Log in to download the original file

planning report Tristania.pdf · 1.2 MB (small file)

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”.