2021-09-13 General Committee Meeting Agenda

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                13 SEPTEMBER 2021


2006 is a medical centre. Whilst under the Noosa Plan 2020 it is an indoor sport and
recreation/veterinary service. The indicative assessment identifies a difference between the highest
and best use under the Noosa Plan 2006 and Noosa Plan 2020 with the Noosa Plan 2006 offering
the better outcome.
The proposal has been reviewed by an external valuer on behalf of Council who advises that the
highest and best use of the site is office/medical which are consistent code assessable uses under
the SPS compared to what could be achieved under the Noosa Plan 2020. On this basis, the external
valuer considers that the land value associated with the highest and best use under the SPS is
greater than the Noosa Plan 2020.
The current owner is an affected owner and in the circumstances the owner may reasonably apply
for compensation if the request is refused.
9.     CONSULTATION
9.1. Other Referrals
Not applicable
10.    CONCLUSION & REASONS FOR DECISION
The Noosa Plan 2020 affects the potential development potential of the site as commercial business
uses including Office and Medical are no longer consistent code assessable uses. Both uses are
inconsistent impact assessable under the Noosa Plan 2020. Whilst the Noosa Plan 2020 allows for
an additional 700m2 of additional Showroom gross floor area it does not fully offset the amount of
gross floor area for Office and Medical which could be achieved under the Noosa Plan 2006.
The application material has been supported by a preliminary comparison of the land values
associated with the highest and best uses that can be achieved under the superseded planning
scheme as compared to the Noosa Plan 2020. An independent valuation for Council generally
concurs with the assessment undertaken by the applicant’s valuer. In this regard, there is a
difference between the highest and best use under the Noosa Plan 2006 and Noosa Plan 2020 with
the Noosa Plan 2006 offering the better outcome in the 2 valuer’s assessments.
It is also noted that the applicant’s proposal would likely be supported under the SPS subject to a
detailed assessment being undertaken of the site layout and built form requirements. For these
reasons, it is recommended that the request to accept an application under the Superseded Planning
Scheme be agreed to.
It is noted that the owner may reasonably apply for compensation if the request is 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 57 of 135