2017-08-08 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                 08 AUGUST 2017


   Our client, John Hofmann, has been suffering from serious health concerns for some time
     and has been incapacitated from progressing the development. Despite not being a planning
     ground per se, it is considered that the s87 Planning Act provides Council a largely unfettered
     discretion to consider any matter the assessment manager thinks relevant;
   Our client’s commitment to extending the life of this approval has been demonstrated via the
     recent lodgement of the Survey Plan for the first stage of the development;
   The approved development layout is generally in keeping with the current State Development
     Assessment Provisions (SDAPs) in relation to vegetation requirements, setbacks to
     environmental constraints including buffers for bushfire management. These constraints are
     directly comparable under Council’s current overlay mapping constraints;
   The approval conditions of the Court order include specific requirements in respect to these
     constraints which relate to concurrence agency matters of State Environmental Significance.
   The DILGP has indicated, in relation to our client’s extension request lodged under SPA, that
     it does not object to an extension to the currency period of the approval;
   The approved development:
     o     Is predominantly located in disturbed areas of the site;
     o     Incorporates setbacks for bushfire management;
     o     Layout and design of allotments has been generally designed around already cleared
           vegetation areas and environmental constraints;
     o     The conditions placed on the development appropriately address all relevant
           environmental concerns;
     o     Existing development rights are considered to exist under the original rezoning
           development permit;
     o     Results in dedication of significant open space which will result in considerable
           community benefits through the long-term conservation and low impact recreational
           use of areas with ecological values;
     o     The site adjoins the urban fringe of Noosaville, is the next in sequence and is
           surrounded by urban and rural residential development to the north and west of the
           site which is compatible and similar in nature.
   The current approval conditions are consistent with current laws and policies in the following
     respects: -
     o     The engineering conditions which have been placed on the existing development
           approval are considered to be consistent with current engineering design requirements
           and standards. Reference is made to Civil Engineering conditions 18 to 37 and
           conditions 68 to 78. It is noted that the subsequent operational works application will
           be assessed in accordance with local laws and policies applicable at the time of
           lodgement.
     o     The development is required to be undertaken in accordance with the Court’s approval
           conditions including those of the referral agencies Department of Natural Resources
           and Mines (DNRM), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The approved
           development setbacks and environmental conditions are considered generally
           consistent with current laws and policies in regard to site constraints including
           vegetation and bushfire hazard.
     o     We note that this approval was issued under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, with
           an Adopted Infrastructure Charges Notice issued by the then (pre-de-amalgamation)
           Sunshine Coast Council. Infrastructure contributions applicable to this development
           approval can be updated to reflect Noosa Council’s current adopted infrastructure
           charges resolution, as required.

                                                                                    Page 69 of 84