2020-03-16 General Committee Agenda

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT                                                    16 MARCH 2020


     4.    The proposed development is contrary to the Biodiversity Overlay Code as the
           proposal does not satisfactorily manage, minimise or mitigate its impacts on the site’s
           ecologically important areas, ecological linkages for the koala population and the site’s
           watercourse with the development resulting in excessive clearing of protected
           vegetation.
     5.    The proposed subdivision is contrary to the Reconfiguring a Lot Code as:
           (i)     The proposed lots and lot boundaries fragment the site’s wildlife corridor and the
                   riparian buffer to the site’s watercourse.
           (ii)    The proposal is to subdivide land in the Open Space Conservation zone.
           (ii)    The applicant has not demonstrated appropriate access for Lot 3 for construction
                   purposes is available or achievable.
           (iii)   The proposed parkland lot, Lot 4, includes part of the bushfire protection zone for
                   the multiple dwelling units and steep slopes which will require ongoing monitoring
                   and future management, inappropriately burdening Council’s resources.
     6.    The proposed development has not been designed to avoid any potential instability
           and associated problems and seeks to clear excessive vegetation that assists in
           stabilising the site and the development in the long term contrary to the Natural
           Hazards Overlay Code and Reconfiguration of Lot Code.
     7.    The proposed development will adversely impact on the vegetated character of the
           adjoining pedestrian path in Edgar Bennett Avenue road reserve enjoyed by residents
           and visitors to the area due to the scale and extent of development proposed along
           this boundary and limited landscape opportunities to screen the development. The
           proposed works for the driveway and associated retaining walls are also likely to
           adversely impact on the vegetation within the road reserve and result in the removal of
           some existing mature vegetation.
     8.    The proposed stormwater management strategies for water quality for the multiple
           housing development on lot 1 conflict with the Water Sensitive Design Code, which
           requires natural treatment strategies and systems and are contrary to the
           Reconfiguration of Lot Code.
     9.    The proposed proprietary device has not been accepted by Stormwater Australia as a
           satisfactory water quality treatment system for this area. Therefore, the proposed
           development may adversely impact on the downstream ecosystem due to changes in
           water quality.
     10.   The proposed development is contrary to the draft Noosa Plan provisions which are
           more protective of the site’s environment values and consequently more restrictive of
           development.
     11.   The application attracted a considerable number of public submissions raising valid
           grounds of objection to the development.
     12.   The proposed development is contrary to Schedule 10 Division 3 of the Planning
           Regulation 2017 as the development is situated in a koala assessable development
           area and does not avoid, minimise or mitigate interfering with koala habitat or propose
           a satisfactory offset to address any significant residual impact.
     13.   The proposal is contrary to the State Planning Policy as the proposed development will
           adversely impact on koala habitat, with koala populations recognised as being matters
           of both national and state environmental significance.
B.   Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.




                                                                                        Page 7 of 29