2020-06-09 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                      9 JUNE 2020


The applicant’s submission is agreed with to a limited extent as the proposed development is
located in part in an area that contains more moderate slopes, and which is currently infested by
weeds. This layout has for the most part also removed the need to construct a bridge across the
site’s waterway as was proposed in the previous development approval. The proposed multiple
dwelling units have also been desirably designed as individual buildings stepping down the slope
set on posts, rather than combining the units into one larger building with a basement car park
and requiring significant earthworks as previously approved.
Notwithstanding this, the proposal extends approximately three quarters along the site’s western
boundary into steeper slopes and more intact vegetation. The proposed extent and layout of the
development in this area also impacts on the visual amenity and vegetation within Edgar Bennett
road reserve (public pathway) as the proposal includes limited setbacks and opportunities for
landscaping and significant earthworks are proposed for the driveway with up to 2m high
retaining walls required on the boundary. A number of the proposed multiple dwelling units,
including units 1, 2, 11 and 12 at either end will also be highly prominent being 3 storeys and
setback 2m from this road reserve boundary in places. Notably multiple dwelling units 3 – 10 will
predominantly present as 1-2 storeys with the lower levels unlikely to be visible from the
pathway.
The proposed site layout does not maintain a sufficient wildlife corridor through the site,
inappropriately reliant on the adjoining Peppers Resort land, which includes the main resort
driveway and retaining walls, narrowing the corridor to approximately 23m in part. Construction
access for proposed lot 3 may also adversely impact on this corridor as the current access
easement terms do not support access for construction via Peppers Resort. The proposed lots
and lot boundaries also fragment this wildlife corridor and intrude into the riparian buffer to the
site’s watercourse with insufficient building setbacks proposed.
The proposed conservation park lot, lot 4, also includes part of the bushfire protection zone for
the multiple dwelling units and given the potential for further land slips and the consequential
impacts on the uphill units that may arise, this lot would require ongoing regular monitoring and
future management. This would inappropriately burden Council resources and therefore
dedication of lot 4 to Council as conservation park is not recommended, notwithstanding its
desirable environmental values.
The proposal further substantially exceeds the Noosa Plan provisions pertaining to site density,
building height, gross floor area, site cover and boundary setbacks and while some increased
building height may be warranted on the site due to the site’s slope, the proposed building height
is excessive in places and is not all in keeping with the surrounding built form. The proposed
building height and reduced setbacks will also adversely impact on nearby resident’s visual
amenity and the treed public pathway enjoyed by residents and visitors to the area.
A review of the application against the draft new Noosa Plan provisions concludes that the
proposed development would conflict with the draft outcomes sought. The draft Noosa Plan does
identify some medium density development area directly off Attunga Heights. However, the
proposed development exceeds this potential development area identified by the draft Noosa
Plan, with the draft scheme reinforcing the current planning scheme requirements to protect the
site’s environmental values.
On this basis, the development as proposed is considered to not meet a substantial number of
outcomes sought by the Noosa Plan, and as such the development is considered an
inappropriate development impacting on the site’s environmental values and is recommended for
refusal.
As a result of Council’s decision to refuse the proposed development, the applicant has lodged
an appeal to the Planning & Environment Court. The applicant seeks that the development
should be approved with reasonable and relevant conditions. Notably a number of submitters
have elected to join the appeal as co-respondents.
It is in order for Council to defend the appeal and the recommendation is worded accordingly.


                                                                                    Page 39 of 55