2021-12-13 General Committee Meeting Minutes

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES                                                      13 DECEMBER 2021


          5.     The proposal does not comply with Performance Outcome PO12 of the Visitor
                 Accommodation Code and Performance Outcome PO6 of the Driveway and
                 Parking Code as insufficient car parking is proposed on site to address the likely
                 parking demands on site.
          6.     There is no need for additional short term accommodation in the area.
    B.    Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
                                                                                      Carried unanimously.




4   RAL21/0007 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR RECONFIGURING A LOT (1 LOT INTO
    12 LOTS) ASSESSED UNDER THE SUPERSEDED PLANNING SCHEME AT 111 LAKE
    WEYBA DRIVE, NOOSAVILLE
    In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Stewart provided the following
    declaration to the meeting of a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter:
    I, Cr Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to this matter as
    Kirsty Millar, the ex-wife, of Mr Bob Linke, Director of Linke and Linke Surveys Pty Ltd (the Applicant),
    donated $5000 on 12/2/20, $5000 on 6/3/2020; $1900 on 27/2/2020 and $1900 on 27/2/2020, to my
    2020 election campaign. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while
    the matter is considered and voted on.
    Cr Stewart left the meeting.
    Committee Recommendation
    Moved:             Cr Stockwell
    Seconded:          Cr Jurisevic
    That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment
    Committee Meeting dated 7 December 2021 regarding application RAL21/0007 for a
    Development Permit for Reconfiguring a Lot – 1 lot in 12 lots, situated at 111 Lake Weyba
    Drive Noosaville and:
    A.    Refuse the application for the following reasons:
          1.     The proposed development does not comply with Assessment Benchmark 3 of the
                 State Planning Policy (Natural Hazards, Risk and Resilience) as it does not
                 satisfactorily mitigate the bushfire risks to people and property to an acceptable or
                 tolerable level.
          2.     The proposed development does not demonstrate compliance with Overall
                 Outcomes 13.30.2 a), b) and c) and Specific Outcomes O4, O10, O13, O17, O19,
                 O20 and O24 of the Natural Hazard Overlay Code as it compromises the safety of
                 people and property from the site’s residual flood and bushfire risks.
          3.     The proposed lots are located on land that is categorised as having a high potential
                 for Bushfire Intensity and the proposed bushfire measures are not satisfactory and
                 inappropriately burden QPWS and the future owner of lot 12 to maintain a
                 significant portion of the proposed fire buffers.
          4.     The proposed development will compromise the safety of people, as:
                 a.     there is no effective evacuation route that remains passible, with sufficient
                        flood warning time, to enable people to progressively evacuate to a safe area
                 b.     the proposed area for residents to shelter in place is not satisfactory given
                        the lots will be isolated for a significant period.
                 c.     there is no warning system proposed for residents to decide whether to
                        evacuate before the road becomes impassable or shelter in place.
          5.     The proposed extent of fill and retaining walls will result in a poor visual outcome.

                                                                                                  Page 9 of 19