Boreen Point IRR_MCU13-0053

In respect to Section 350 of the SPA, and specifically Section 350(1)(d)(i) of what constitutes a
substantially different development, it is appropriate to have regard to the guidelines made by the
Chief Executive under Section 760 of the SPA (Statutory Guideline 06/09).

An assessment of the proposed changes against the criteria in Statutory Guideline 06/09 is included in
Table 1 below.
TABLE 1 – ASSESSMENT OF CHANGES AGAINST THE SUSTAINABLE PLANNING ACT 2009

 Substantially Different           Comment
 Development Criteria
 Involves a new use with           No new uses are proposed. The proposed change involves a
 different   or     additional     relocation of the proposed facility within the same property. It is
 impacts.                          considered the additional 110 m setback from the closest residential
                                   dwelling will provide significant screening to the facility when viewed
                                   from 81 Lake Flat Road, Boreen Point. It is considered that this
                                   change reduces the overall visual impact of the proposal and
                                   therefore constitutes a more favourable development (refer to
                                   Photomontage 1 (original location) compared to Photomontage 3
                                   (alternative location) attached as Attachment C). No substantially
                                   different or additional impacts are anticipated as a result
 Results in the application        No new parcels of land have been introduced.
 applying to a new parcel of
 land.
 Dramatically changes the          The monopole design of the telecommunications facility is proposed
 built form in terms of scale,     to be retained. No change is proposed to the height of the facility.
 bulk and appearance.
 Changes the ability of the        No changes are proposed to the way in which the proposal will
 proposal to operate as            operate. The development will continue to operate as a
 intended.       For    example,   telecommunications facility.
 reducing the size of a retail
 complex may reduce the
 capacity of the complex to
 service        the     intended
 catchment.
 Removes a component that          As outlined above, the development will retain all the key attributes
 is integral to the operation of   of the telecommunications facility. No components considered
 the development.                  integral to its operation will be removed.
 Significantly      impacts   on   No changes to access, car parking and road works are proposed as
 traffic flow and the transport    part of this application. Access will still be obtained via Lake Flat
 network, such as increasing       Road.
 traffic to the site.

 Introduces new impacts or         No new impacts are introduced as outlined by the comments above.
 increases the severity of         The revised design reduces the visual impact of the proposal.
 known impacts.
 Removes the incentive or          No incentives or offsets are being removed.
 offset component that would
 have balanced the negative
 impact of the development.
 Impacts on infrastructure         The proposal does not affect the provision of infrastructure required
 provision from a location or      by the original application.
 demand.

We regard the proposed amendments as a minor change to the existing development application
under Section 250 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 on the following grounds:
   • The amendments do not adversely affect the ability of a person to assess the changed
       application;
   • The amendments do not result in a substantially different development;