Original source · versioned page text
L04 To NC -lodge changes repres
Attached to the e-mail RAL20/0024 - Change Representations to Council's Conditions.
Council’s Reference: RAL 20/0024 Our Reference: 02778 L04 GM Our Contact Person: Greg Martoo 22nd March, 2021 Chief Executive Officer Noosa Council PO BOX 141 TEWANTIN Q 4565 Attention: Tara Norley - Development Planner Dear Tara, RE: CHANGE REPRESENTATIONS TO COUNCIL’S CONDITIONS Development Application – Reconfiguring a Lot – Access easement Over Land Described as Lot 11 on SP216099 and Located at 1327 Cooroy Belli Creek Road, Ridgewood: Scott Frew Reference is made to Council’s decision notice dated 17 March 2021 in relation to the above development application (“Council’s Decision Notice”) which was assessed under the Noosa Plan 2020 (25 September 2020) (“the planning scheme”). In accordance Section 75 of the Planning Act 2016 and the applicant requests suspensionof the appeal period resulting from Council’s Decision Notice in order to make these change representations. These change representations identify that condition being negotiated by the applicant, the applicant’s concerns in relation to this condition, and an amendment to Council’s Decision Notice that is acceptable to the applicant. Condition 7: All easements must be designed in accordance with the planning scheme and granted at no cost to Council. Applicant’s Concerns response to Condition 7: Condition 7 above is considered too vague as it does not identify which provision in the planning scheme needs to be complied with as a result of this condition and also what aspect of the proposed design that this condition refers to. The planning scheme is a lengthy document that makes various references to easements in a number of situations. Condition 1 in Council’s Decision Notice states that – ‘Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the approved plans of development. The approved plans are listed in the following table unless otherwise amended by these conditions.’ The proposal plan referenced in Condition 1, being D-02778-01-B, was based on an accurate field survey as explained in the development application, because among other things, it was considered essentially to confidentially locate existing buildings with respect to existing and proposed cadastral boundaries.
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 1 page
Page 2
Condition 1 in Council’s Decision Notice refers to Condition 7 being able to vary the proposed easement
boundaries as shown D-02778-01-B, but unfortunately Condition 7 does not confirm what aspects of the
proposed easement design is being referred to by Council. As a result it is unknown whether the
easement boundaries as shown on D-02778-01-B have been approved or not by Council.
It is appreciated that Condition 7 may be a standard condition that Council often includes in development
approval that will result in the registration of an easement regardless of the proposed purpose/s of the
easement. In this particular development application the proposed easement design has in fact been
accurately determined as stated in the development application, although this may not be evident on the
proposal plan.
Amendment to Council’s Decision Notice as Requested by the Applicant:
That Condition 7 be deleted because Condition 1 is sufficient to detail the approved easement
boundaries.
The applicant requests that these representations be assessed by Council as soon as possible and that
Council issues a Negotiated Decision Notice which amends the original Decision Notice as requested
above.
Please do not hesitate in contacting our Sunshine Coast office if Council requires any further information
and/or clarification in relation to these representations.
Yours faithfully,
Greg Martoo
Principal
martoo consulting pty ltd
2