2017-03-16 Ordinary Meeting Minutes

ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES                                                        16 MARCH 2017


    9.    All conduits, wiring, switches or other electrical apparatus installed on an advertising
          device must be concealed from general view.
          Movement
    10.   The approved signs must not revolve, move, contain moving parts, change its
          message, flash, have a moving or flashing border, or give the impression of movement
          in any way.
          Maintenance
    11.   The approved signs must be properly maintained by the owner of the property to
          ensure the signs continue to comply with the Approved Plans and conditions of this
          Decision Notice.


3   132007.1259.05 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE DEVELOPMENT
    APPROVAL AND EXTEND THE RELEVANT PERIOD FOR VISITOR ACCOMMODATION,
    OFFICE, SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS AT 215A DAVID LOW WAY, PEREGIAN BEACH
    That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment
    Committee Meeting dated 7 March 2017 in regard to the request to extend the relevant period
    and to change Condition 31 of approval No. 132007.1259.05 for a Development Permit for
    Material Change of Use – Visitor Accommodation Type 4 Conventional, Entertainment &
    Dining Type 1 Food & Beverages, Retail Business Type 2 Shop & Salon, Commercial Type
    1 Office situated at 215A David Low Way, Peregian Beach and
    A.    Refuse the request to extend the relevant period before which the development
          approval will lapse under section 341 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 for the
          following reasons:
          1.    The notice requesting the extension to the period was not made on the Council’s
                prescribed form.
          2.    The notice did not provide a copy of its notification to the relevant concurrence
                agency for the original development application under section 383(3)(b) of the
                Sustainable Planning Act 2009.
          3.    The proposed development is inconsistent with The Noosa Plan and given the
                time lapsed it is relevant to examine whether there are still grounds in the
                community’s interest to justify the conflict with the planning scheme.
          4.    The community is unlikely to be aware of the development approval given the
                time lapsed since the application was lodged in 2007; changes in the area; and
                the shopping complex that has been constructed on a significant portion of the
                site.
          5.    The application would be likely to attract further properly made submissions were
                a further development application lodged and publicly notified today, given
                a.      the time lapsed since the application was lodged in 2007;
                b.     the changes that have occurred in Peregian Beach, including significant
                       urban growth west of Peregian Beach
                c.     the development cannot proceed in its current approved form and the
                       change is likely to result in a substantially different development
          6.     The approved development in its current form cannot proceed as a shopping
                 complex has been constructed on a significant portion of the site and has
                 superseded the development approval.
    B.     Advise the applicant that the request to change the date in Condition 31 when the
           development approval will lapse for failure to complete all works associated with the
           development is a request to change the development application under section 369
           of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and must be made to the Planning and
           Environment Court.

                                                                                    Page 6 of 13