Minor Change Report MCU17 0559 05 (As Published) · MCU17/0559.05

                   Response
                   The applicant relies on a survey plan to assert that the lower level constitutes a basement as it
                   is located approximately 1 metre below the surveyed ground level. The survey plan, however,
                   relates to the undercroft area behind the unit, rather than the ground floor area that has
                   historically been assessed by Council for gross floor area (GFA) purposes. The undercroft area
                   was never included in Council’s GFA or plot ratio calculations, whereas the subject ground floor
                   level has previously been assessed as above-ground and not a basement under the Noosa
                   Plan 2006.
                   Under the applicable Noosa Plan 2020, a basement is defined as a space no part of which is
                   more than 1 metre above ground level, with ground level being the natural ground or the level
                   as lawfully changed, being the level shown on the first registered plan of survey. In this instance,
                   the ground levels shown on the approved building plans were created as part of development
                   works and do not constitute the natural ground level or a lawfully changed ground level for the
                   purposes of the Planning Scheme.
                   While the applicant asserts that the subject level is located approximately 1 metre below the
                   surveyed ground level, this fact alone is not determinative. Having regard to the lawful ground
                   level and the planning context, the space does not properly characterise as a basement and
                   continues to perform as an above-ground storey. Accordingly, the area must be included in GFA
                   calculations, with the result that the proposal significantly exceeds the GFA anticipated for
                   development within the zone and does not achieve the zone’s overall intent or planned built
                   form outcomes.
               c) The installed planter boxes are deteriorating resulting in maintenance issues for the boxes and
                  the overall the unit.

                    Response
                    This is not a planning matter. The planter boxes were installed to comply with the previous
                    minor change approval. The deterioration is clearly due to poor materials and workmanship in
                    their construction. It is Council’s expectation that the planter boxes be repaired or replaced to
                    address the maintenance concerns. This is not considered valid grounds for their removal.

               d) The applicant raised amenity issues due to loss of light and air flow in the lower ground floor,
                  as well as access around the planters.
               Response
                    It is acknowledged that the planters result in some reduction to light and airflow. However, the
                    lower ground floor levels were approved as a basement level with limited openings and the
                    inherent amenity constraints anticipated for that built form. This is a building certification
                    matter.
                    In this respect, the development continues to achieve the purpose and overall outcomes of
                    the relevant zone and use codes, which recognise that building design must respond to site
                    constraints and approved building typologies, while still providing an acceptable level of
                    amenity commensurate with the nature of the accommodation provided. The marginal
                    reduction in light and airflow does not result in any unacceptable amenity outcome, nor does
                    it conflict with the relevant performance outcomes relating to residential amenity or building
                    functionality.
                    Council Officers have inspected the site following installation of the planters and confirmed
                    that pedestrian access around the building remains functional and unobstructed. Accordingly,
                    the planters do not materially compromise access outcomes or compliance with the relevant
                    performance and overall outcomes.
               Recommendation
               It is recommended existing condition 2 remain unchanged.



                                                                                                          Page 7 of 9

Document Set ID: 24630994
Version: 5, Version Date: 02/06/2026