Skip to the record
Trusted by locals. Built for Noosa.

Original source · versioned page text

2015-06-23 Planning & Organisation Committee Meeting Agenda

of 123

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

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

Very large file: it may take a few minutes

The original of this document is very large (12.7 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.

Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.

PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                  23 JUNE 2015


There are some aspects of the layout that are considered to support the proposal, being:
Orientated to comply
The gabled end (the shorter building elevation) is orientated towards Main Street being less
intrusive than if the building were orientated 90 degrees to comply with a 6m setback. The
90 degree orientation would present the rear or the full length of the building to face Main
Street (assuming the verandah would be orientated north). Figure 5 below shows the rear
elevation.
If the dwelling was rotated 90 degrees to comply, the living area and the whole verandah
would directly overlook the neighbouring property, whereas currently the orientation is
slightly less intrusive to the neighbour being a smaller portion of the verandah and 2
bedroom windows overlooking the neighbour.




Figure 5 - The rear elevation

Building encroachment
If the dwelling were setback 6m to comply (demolish the encroachment or a designed 2.7m
shorter building) the same gabled end elevation would present to Main Street. It is
considered this would only be a slightly better outcome because the same elevation would
present to Main Street but only setback a further 2.7m. Distinguishing this difference from
Main Street would be relatively difficult. Figure 6 below highlights the difficulty in
distinguishing the depth of the setback in relation to the streetscape.




                                                                                 Page 58 of 123
Log in to download the original file

2015-06-23 Planning & Organisation Committee Meeting Agenda(PDF, 12MB).pdf · 12.7 MB (very large file)

Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.

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”.