2021-09-13 General Committee Meeting Agenda

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                13 SEPTEMBER 2021


master planned precinct, surrounded by pre-existing commercial and retail land uses with many
consistent land uses, despite being Impact assessable, in the 2020 planning scheme. Even if it were
hypothetically agreed to apply a Present Value/discounted value approach to lot 2, the period of 12
months and the discount rate of 7.0% applied by the applicant’s valuer are excessive. The external
valuer advises that in the current market, a prudent buyer would purchase this site without approval
for built form as the risks are measurable and not so great that a purchaser would discount the value
of this lot so harshly as represented by the applicant’s valuer.
The current owner is an affected owner and in the circumstances the owner may apply for
compensation if the request is refused. However, based on a comparison of the 2 planning schemes,
that an application for the proposed development would be inconsistent with the SPS and advice
from Council’s valuer, it is not considered that the introduction of the Noosa Plan 2020 has reduced
the value of the interest in the premises.
4.    CONSULTATION
4.1. Other Referrals
Not applicable
5.    CONCLUSION & REASONS FOR DECISION
It is concluded that whilst the Noosa Plan 2020 differs from the Noosa Plan 2006, an application
under The Noosa Plan 2006 is unlikely to be supported by Council given the proposal is inconsistent
with the outcomes sought by the Noosa Plan 2006.
It is also noted that the applicant’s indicative assessment of comparative land values associated with
the highest and best use of the site under both the superseded planning scheme and the Noosa
Plan 2020 identifies no change in land value. The applicant’s assessment though also states there
is a decrease in present value as prospective purchasers will likely seek a 12-month settlement due
to the Noosa Plan 2020 requiring impact assessment for the relevant highest and best use. The
applicant’s valuation has been reviewed by an external consultant on behalf of Council and has
formed the opinion that the land value associated with the highest and best use under the Noosa
Plan 2020 is greater than the SPS.
Therefore, given an application under the Superseded Planning Scheme is inconsistent with the
scheme outcomes and Council’s external valuer concludes a greater value for the land under the
Noosa Plan 2020, it is recommended that the request to accept an application under the Superseded
Planning Scheme be refused.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
     Chief Executive Officer          Community Services                      Corporate Services
     Executive Officer                Community Development                   Financial Services
     Executive Support                Community Facilities                    ICT
                                      Libraries & Galleries                   Procurement & Fleet
                                      Local Laws                              Property
                                      Waste & Environmental Health            Revenue Services

     Executive Services           x   Environment & Sustainable Development   Infrastructure Services
     Community Engagement             Building & Plumbing Services            Asset Management
     Customer Service             x   Development Assessment                  Buildings and Facilities
     Governance                       Economic Development                    Civil Operations
     People and Culture               Environmental Services                  Disaster Management
                                      Strategic Land Use Planning             Infrastructure Planning,
                                                                              Design and Delivery




                                                                                          Page 21 of 135