Original source · versioned page text
MCU25/0006 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - SHORT TERM ACCOMMODATION (BACKPACKERS ACCOMMODATION) AT 17 RUSSELL ST, NOOSAVILLE · Committee to Council
ORDINARY MEETING 16 OCTOBER 2025 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIO 11.2.3 MCU25/0006 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - SHORT TERM ACCOMMODATION (BACKPACKERS ACCOMMODATION) AT 17 RUSSELL ST, NOOSAVILLE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 October 2025 regarding Application MCU25/0006 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Short-term accommodation (backpackers accommodation), situated at and 1-3/17 Russell Street Noosaville and: A. Refuse the application for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development is an overdevelopment of the site and is not consistent with Overall Outcomes 6.3.3.2 (2) (a) (c) (d) (e) (f) (h) (j) (n) and (p) and performance outcomes and acceptable outcomes PO6, PO7, PO8, PO9, PO15, AO9.1(c) and AO15.2 and AO15.3 of the High Density Residential Zone Code as; a. The scale of the development is not consistent with structures on adjoining or nearby land and is likely to dominate and adversely impact the surrounding residential amenity. b. The proposed development will result in a site cover which significantly exceeds the site cover requirements of the planning scheme providing a building that is not consistent with the street and surrounding area. c. The proposed development does not satisfactorily incorporate design elements and materials reflective of the local streetscape character of the area, with the building not designed in the Noosa sub-tropical style. d. The proposal will result in a plot ratio which significantly exceeds the plot ratio requirements of the planning scheme and is of a size that is not compatible with surrounding development. e. The proposal rear setback of the third floor and rooftop terrace significantly encroaches into the rear setback as required by the planning scheme and contributes to building bulk and provides opportunities for overlooking to adjacent properties. f. The proposed roof top terrace creates opportunities for potential privacy impacts on neighbouring properties due to overlooking. 2. The proposal does not comply with Overall Outcomes 9.4.1.2 (2) (a) (b) (c) and Performance Outcome 6 and Acceptable Outcomes 6.1and 6.2 of the Driveways and Parking Code as: a. Sufficient carparking is not available on site to accommodate the likely demand for carparking on site and the site is located where on street parking is insufficient and undesirable. b. The proposed car stacker is not suitable for parking as it lacks sufficient clearance for operation and is impractical for use by guests and staff unfamiliar with such systems.
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 1 page
Page 2
ORDINARY MEETING 16 OCTOBER 2025
c. The development does not provide the required number of functional car spaces
including service vehicles as the proposed bus park is not sized to accommodate
a small rigid vehicle.
d. No provision has been made for motorcycles and bicycles.
3. The proposed does not comply with Performance Outcome 7 and Acceptable Outcome
AO7.1 of the Driveways and Parking Code as:
a. The development fails to provide adequate loading and manoeuvring areas on site
to accommodate the anticipated service vehicles.
4. The proposal is not consistent with Overall Outcome 9.4.10.2 (2) (d) and Performance
and Acceptable Outcomes PO3, AO3.2(b), AO3.2(d), AO3.2(e) and AO3.2(f) of the
Waste Management Code as:
a. The development has not adequately demonstrated that waste can be serviced on
site.
b. The proposed waste storage area has not been designed to allow for unobstructed
access for collection by service vehicles (i.e., on-site servicing).
c. Kerbside servicing is unable to occur while remaining clear from all existing on-
street carparks, pedestrian footpaths and without impeding traffic flow on Russell
Street.
5. The proposal is not consistent with Performance Outcome PO9 and the
corresponding Acceptable outcomes AO9.1 & AO9.2 of the Visitor accommodation
Code as:
a. The proposed area of landscaping is significantly less than the area required by
the planning scheme;
b. The proposed landscaping widths to side and rear boundaries are significantly less
than that required by the planning scheme;
c. The undersupply of onsite landscaping area and widths to boundaries results in a
development which restricts the ability to incorporate landscaping between the site
and neighbouring premises / buildings and to assist with softening the built form.
There are no relevant reasons to approve the proposed development to vary from development
intensity specified by the Noosa Plan 2020 for this area.
B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
C. Note the report incorrectly identifies the required number of bicycle spaces and
motorcycle spaces which should each be identified as 7.