2022-04-12 Planning & Environment Meeting Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                        12 APRIL 2022


During the course of the application Council officers asked that the applicant provide a letter, from
the owner of 8 Ravenwood Dr, approving the subject properties’ jetty configuration. This letter was
not provided.
The application has been lodged in response to a customer request enquiring about a retaining
wall and boat/jet ski lifting device which had been erected on State land to the rear of the subject
properties without the appropriate approvals.
The ensuing investigation (COM20/0734) resulted in the finding that, the joint jetty on 10 and 12
Ravenwood Drive, Noosa Heads, had not been constructed in accordance with the approval issued
14 November 1994, as it was constructed 9m long and not 6m as per the approved plans; and an
unapproved jet ski dry storage pontoon had also been installed.
A site inspection could not find any evidence of a retaining wall (other than the existing revetment
wall) as related by the customer.
3.     ASSESSMENT
3.1. Instruments for Statutory Assessment
Under the Planning Act 2016 the application must be assessed against each of the following
statutory planning instruments to the extent they are relevant to the development:
•      State Planning Policy;
•      South East Queensland Regional Plan;
•      Planning Regulation 2017; and
•      Noosa Plan 2020.
3.2. Noosa Plan 2020
The following code from the Noosa Plan 2020 is applicable to this development:
•      Waterways Works Code
The proposal does not comply with the requirements of the Noosa Plan’s Waterways Works Code,
Performance Outcome 9, which requires that “prescribed tidal works are designed and sited to
ensure:
     (a) they are contained within the prolongation of boundaries of the lot;
     (b) that when a vessel is berthed it does not encroach over the prolongation of boundaries of
     the lot;
     (d) they avoid conflicts with uses in the water and on the foreshore and adjoining lands.”
The proposal does not comply with the requirements of the Noosa Plan’s Waterways Works Code,
Performance Outcome PO13, which requires that ”prescribed tidal works are designed and
constructed for the sole purpose of providing access to vessels and are sited and designed to
avoid:
     (a) cluttering of waterways;
     (c) conflicts with uses on the foreshore and adjoining lands; and
     (d) unacceptable risks to personal and public safety.”
The proposal is contrary to the Waterways Works Code PO1, PO9 and AO9.3 as:
           i.    The extended length of the jetty results in the structure being located on and over
                 the prolongation of the boundaries of the lot;
           ii.   When a vessel is berthed it encroaches over the prolongation of the boundaries of
                 the lot;
          iii.   The extended length further clutters the end of the waterway and impacts on
                 adjoining lots.
Figure 3 above shows the latest available satellite imagery of the site and it is clear that the vessels
moored in such proximity not only adversely affect the amenity of the owner of 8 Ravenwood Dr,
but also increase the risk of an accident. For example, were the owner of 8 Ravenwood Dr to

                                                                                       Page 76 of 108