Skip to the record
Accept no imitations.

Original source · versioned page text

PM Submission - Ian & Merilyn Stevens - 51938.3225.14

of 1

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

Noosa Council

PO Box 141

Tewantin,

OLD 4565

OBJECTION to Application Reference: 51938.3225.14

Unit 9-10/30 Hastings Street, Noosa Heads, Lot 30 on SP307674



Objection by Ian & Merilyn Stevens owners of unit 28, The Hastings, 30 Hastings Street, Noosa Heads, 4567,
Queensland.



We note in the pre lodgement notes Glen Conforti the Development Planner makes note:' 3. The impact of the development on
the general amenity (i.e. Privacy/overlooking) of all surrounding dwelling units and the whole development should be considered.
It is our belief that this has not been addressed adequately or proven in the plans and documents provided. The 1:200
Overviewing Diagrams Drawing No. SD.951 by Gerard Smith Design do not show enough detail at that scale or dimensions to
prove any privacy or overlooking details. We would need to see 1:20 or 1:50 diagrams showing dimensions of existing window
sills and header heights, existing awnings and dimensions, heights of diagrammatic humans, heights of new floor levels and
setbacks and details of proposed privacy screens to establish what actual privacy impacts and overlooking is occurring.

P09 Building Height states the built form must ....(c) preserve the amenity of surrounding
premises including privacy, views and access to sunlight. We understand the 15m maximum
height has been met but balconies on 1st, 2nd and 3rd floors do not preserve privacy to
existing windows or surrounding private open spaces of especially unit 8. The 14.2m height
shows an increase in shade and thus access to sunlight to unit 21 in the Dec 21st shadow
study. The facade of some units is in shadow at 4pm on the existing plans but the proposed
plan puts half of that fagade in shadow from 3pm
-P013 Setbacks states buildings should be 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. The current setbacks of east
590mm and 2m to the north (again we note privacy screens noted but no detail that they are fixed and permanent with 25% max
transparency) do not comply as they allow for overlooking from level 2 at the proposed alfresco to the Private Open Space of unit
8. Whilst the setback of 590mm to the east also allows for views into windows of unit 21. (again, we note privacy screens noted
but no detail that they are fixed and permanent with 25% max transparency and on level 1, 2 and 3 on the east they are only
partial, not the full length of balconies with views into these windows)

-P021 Safety and Amenity states the development and design ensures...(b) do not unreasonably impact on the amenity
enjoyed by users of adjoining or nearby premises, including privacy and access to sunlight. Again and perhaps the most
extreme non-compliance performance is P021. We do not believe the design complies as an acceptable outcome. 3rd floor open
area including kitchen and sittings areas looks directly down onto POS of unit 8. Operable timber screens again do not comply
with A021.4. Similarly privacy screens to eastern elevation levels 1,2 and 3 allow views into windows of unit 21. (again we note
privacy screens noted but no detail that they are fixed and permanent with 25% max transparency and on level 1,2 and 3 on the
east they are only partial, not the full length of balconies with views into these windows)



Our main objection is for our amenity and ensuring that operable privacy screens are made permanently fixed with 25%
maximum transparency or frosted glazing. They also need to be extended to all areas of viewing, not just the ones
shown on elevations and plans. The screens shown are 1.5m high, the Noosa Plan 2020 states 1.7m high.

The visual bulk of the front fagade is increased dramatically as there are no setbacks, thus presenting a monolithic
structure right on the Community driveway. A new building should take into account surrounding buildings and not
have an increased impact.

Regards

Ian & Merilyn Stevens
i Wyona Drive
Noosa Heads 4567                                                                                    9
                                                                                            <6
                                                                                      'A.
                                                                                              RECEIVED
                                                                                    (O'
                                                                                            21JUN 202I           TO


                                                                                      A Noosa Council
                                                                                      \ "X Records    /^
                                                                                          >
                                                                                              2




                        Sox;   Sis?              R: Per h
Log in to download the original file

PM Submission - Ian & Merilyn Stevens - 51938.3225.14.pdf · 786 KB (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”.