Council archive · source document
Minor Change Request report 22 delorme · MCU22/0116.01
2 September 2026 Noosa Council [email protected] RE: Minor Change to Existing Approval – Dual Occupancy – MCU22/0116, OPW22/0173 & RAL22/0014 – 22 Delorme St, Noosa Heads. This Minor Change Application seeks to amend the Development Permit for a Dual Occupancy, as a result of a compliance inspection for the plan sealing. 1. Background On the 9 January 2023, Council approved a dual occupancy. Relevant conditions pertaining to this minor change are conditions 2 & 3 (Approved Plans). Figure 1. Decision Notice Conditions
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 6 pages
Page 2
2. Proposal
The applicant seeks amendments to the approved plans including:
1. Additional laundry facilities, including sinks, have been installed within the garages and are
not shown on the approved plans.
2. A hot water service unit has been installed beneath the stairs and is not shown on the
approved plans.
3. The pool shape and construction differ from the approved plans.
4. A linen cupboard has been added at the top of the staircase in level 1 and is not shown on
the approved plans.
5. The balcony planter boxes at Level 1 have been replaced with fixed vertical screens installed
at approximately 45 degrees.
6. The roof pitch and roof construction differ from the approved plans.
Figure 2. Planning Approval and Building Approval comparisons with numbered changes.
Page 3
3. Minor Change Test
An assessment against the meaning of minor change and a response about the proposed application
is provide below. The Planning Act 2016 defines a minor change as a change to the approval that:
i. would not result in a substantially different development*;
(*In determining whether the proposed change would result in substantially different
development, the assessment manager or referral agency must consider the individual
circumstances of the development, in the context of the change proposed.)
Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules set outs provisions for a substantially different
development. A change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the
proposed change results in any of the following outlined in Table 1 below.
Table 1 - Substantially different development
Provisions of Schedule 1 of the DA Rules Response
a. Involves a new use There is no new use proposed onsite
b. results in the application applying to a new parcel of No new parcel of land is introduced
land; or
c. dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale, The built form is much the same as approved.
bulk and appearance; or
d. changes the ability of the proposed development to No change to the use approved.
operate as intended; or
e. removes a component that is integral to the operation No essential component of the development is proposed
of the development; or to be removed.
f. significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport The proposal does not trigger any additional traffic or
network, such as increasing traffic to the site; or intensity of movements to that originally approved.
g. introduces new impacts or increase the severity of No new impacts or the severity of impacts is likely to result
known impacts; or from the plan modifications.
h. removes an incentive or offset component that would Does not remove an offset or incentive components of the
have balanced a negative impact of the development; development.
or
i. impacts on infrastructure provisions. There are no additional impacts on infrastructure.
ii. if a development application for the development, including the change, were made
when the change application is made would not cause—
A. the inclusion of prohibited development in the application; or
Response: The change does not include any prohibited development.
B. referral to a referral agency, other than to the chief executive, if there were no
referral agencies for the development application; or
Response: The application was assessed by Noosa Council with no referral agencies
applicable.
C. referral to extra referral agencies, other than to the chief executive; or
Page 4
Response: The original and current application did not include any concurrence agency
assessment.
D. a referral agency to assess the application against, or have regard to, matters
prescribed by regulation under section 55(2), other than matters the referral
agency must have assessed the application against, or have had regard to, when
the application was made; or
Response: The proposed change would not result in the chief executive having to consider
matters additional to those considered when the application was made.
E. public notification if public notification was not required for the development
application.
Response: The change does not require the application to be publicly notified.
Given the above, the proposed change to the existing approval is a minor change in accordance with
Schedule 2 of the Planning Act 2016 and Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules.
4. Deciding the Request
In accordance with S81 of The Planning Act 2016, Council must only consider the information
provided and any other matter considered relevant, including — all matters Council would or may
assess against or have regard to, if the change application were a development application.
Council must only consider the statutory instrument, or other document, as in effect when the
development application for the development approval was properly made. However, may give
weight they consider appropriate, in the circumstances, to—
(a) the statutory instrument or other document as in effect when the change application was made
(Superseded Planning Scheme); or
(b) if the statutory instrument or other document is amended or replaced after the change application is
made but before it is decided—the amended or replacement instrument or document; or
(c) another statutory instrument—
(i) that comes into effect after the change application is made but before it is decided; and
(ii) that the responsible entity would have been required to consider if the instrument had been in effect
when the development application for the development approval was properly made.
Page 5
5. Assessment
An assessment against the current key technical provision of The Noosa Plan is provided below.
Criteria The Noosa Plan 2020 Proposal Compliance
Site Details 22 Delorme St, Noosa Heads – 528m2 – Medium Density Residential zone
Units Duplex - 2 x 3 bed units (No Change)
Height 8m 8m No Change
2 storeys 2 storeys No Change
Site Cover 40% overall (211m²) 209m2 No Change
Plot ratio/GFA 0.4:1 (211m²) Existing 1.5m2 decrease
including tub.
Ground Floor - 91m2
Proposed
Ground Floor – 89 .48m2
*Existing GFA Calculation **Proposed GFA Clac
Private Open Space Ground Level (25m2) >25m2 No Change
Setbacks No Change
Landscaping No Change
Carparking No Change
Page 6
Plot Ratio The original approval complied with the Gross Floor Area requirement of 0.4:1. The inclusion of the tub within the garage complies with the inclusion of a dedicated laundry tub (2 x 0.24m2) within each of the garages. There is provision for a washing machine and dryer, however these may be located above the tub and/or located within the unit (as they are not built in elements). A recalculation of the GFA across the ground floor area indicates the GFA is less than what was approved by 2m2, resulting in the overall GFA being compliant. The location of the hotwater system under the stairs does not contribute to GFA as it is a building service. The linen cupboard location was also included in the original GFA calculation and does not contribute to additional GFA. Roof form and facade changes The southern elevation includes barge capping (minimum 300mm) and is compliant with the additional design requirements. The roof form changes to the pitch ae consistent with the relevant key technical provisions for roof form and are inconsequential. The applicant also amended the use of planters in favour of fixed vertical screens facing Safari Street. These elements provide privacy for the bedrooms of the units and do not have any impact on the key technical provisions. These changes are generally in accordance with the original approval and provide for a sympathetic street façade. Figure 3. Planning Approval and Building Approval Elevation changes.
Page 7
6. Changes to Conditions
The proposal meets the minor change test and requires amendments to the following conditions:
2. Prior to lodgement of a Building permit (Private Certification) for the proposed development,
amended plans must be lodged with Council demonstrating compliance with the:
a. Medium Density Residential Zone Code AO14.1, AO14.2 and AO14.4 or PO14 by:
i. Incorporating further articulation and additional design elements in the
Safari Street (southern) elevation which will include defining the roofline to
include barge capping a minimum of 300mm to the satisfaction of the
Planning Manager.
b. Inclusion on facilities for washing clothes without exceeding the maximum plot
ratio of 0.4:1.
Approved Plans
3. 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.
Plan No. Rev. Plan/Document Date
Sheet 4 F Ground Floor Site Plan 21/06/2024
Sheet 8 F Ground Floor Plan 21/06/2024
Sheet 9 F First Floor Plan 21/06/2024
Sheet 10 F Roof Plan 21/06/2024
Sheet 12 F East & North Elevations 21/06/2024
Sheet 13 F West & South Elevations 21/06/2024
If you have any further queries in relation to the above, please do not hesitate to contact myself.
Regards,
Jack Lewis B.Sc Hons UNSW M.Plan Otago RPIA
Planner/Director
Pivotal Perspective Pty Ltd
0406 334 227
Used in these records
Minor Change Request report 22 delorme.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 1.2 MB (small file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.