2020-09-08 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                    8 SEPTEMBER 2020


4.    NEW NOOSA PLAN
As the new planning scheme came into effect on 31 July 2020 it is reasonable that the proposed
development’s compliance with the new scheme forms part of the assessment of the request to
extend the currency period.
Under the new planning scheme the site will be zoned Local Centre and the proposed development
would remain Code assessable and the maximum permissible building height remains at 8.0
metres. However, under the new scheme the allowable plot ratio will increase to 1.4:1, but a new
setback of 2 metres for the first floor from the village green is required and a new framework for
assessment with regards to building design and streetscape are introduced.
With regards to plot ratio the new scheme has increased the plot ratio of sites which adjoin the
village green from 0:8:1 to 1.4:1. In this regard, Council’s expert architect to the appeal has made
the following observations:
      This plot ratio of 1.4:1 – is a 75% increase over the 0.8:1 plot ratio in the current (now
      superseded) Noosa Plan……A plot ratio increase to 1.4:1 is in line with what NR would
      consider to be reasonable for the site, it would respect an increase in activity intensity, would
      seem to respect the type of plot ratio relaxations already provided to recent developments in
      the centre, but would still fall short of permitting a building to essentially fill the site to 2
      storeys…….Holding the plot ratio to 1.4:1 will allow for development across two storeys whilst
      still requiring some level of gesture back to the public realm in the way of façade articulations,
      steps and recesses. This will work architecturally to help avoid……bulky overdevelopments
      of the site that are out of keeping with the informal beachside character of the locality.
Reducing the plot ratio of the development from 1.67:1 to 1.4:1 would result in a reduction of
approximately 73m2 of gross floor area or by 16% which is significant and would reduce the bulk
of the building and allow for improved articulation. It is important to note that if a plot ratio of 1.67:1
were approved it would effectively set the benchmark for future development in the Local Centre
Zone within Peregian Beach. This would be contrary to the intent of the new planning scheme,
which has specifically allocated an increased plot ratio of 1.4:1 to sites adjoining the village green,
and result in bulky developments as expressed by Council’s architectural expert.
Furthermore the Local Centre Zone Code within the new planning scheme requires that properties
provide a 2 metre setback for the first floor to the village green. The current approved plans do not
provide a setback to the village green with pivoting shade fins set to the boundary and which
marginally intrude beyond the boundary when opened.
Performance Outcome PO3 of the Coastal Communities Local Plan Code seeks that:
      Development contributes to the establishment of attractive streetscapes and gateways to
      enhance the sense of arrival and the coastal village character of the separate urban
      communities within the local plan area.
To achieve this outcome the Peregian Beach Framework and Character Plan establishes a
framework for development on key sites within the Peregian village. In this regard the plan identifies
that the site is marked as a double ‘key corner’ site is adjacent to a ‘gateway/special place,’ has a
‘primary active street frontage,’ fronts onto a ‘primary streetscape treatment area’ and is listed as
a ‘Peregian Beach key redevelopment site’. Accordingly, the planning scheme includes design
outcomes which seek that development incorporates building materials such as varied roof forms,
changes in materials and variations in projected and recessed elements and facades. The
excessive plot ratio, absence of varied roof forms and zero setback of the upper level from the
village green result in the development being inconsistent with this Performance Outcome.




                                                                                         Page 44 of 154