Skip to the record
Search everything, all in one place.

Original source · versioned page text

img-810092332-0001

Attached to the e-mail Notice of Appeal Noosaville Medical & Professional Centre Pty Ltd v Noosa Council - P&E Appeal No 3126 of 2015.

of 6

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

<9

12 The Respondent's decision with respect to the changes proposed to conditions 1, 10, 11,
12 and 36 is wrong in law and contrary to proper planning for the reasons identified in
paragraphs 13 to 20 below.

Conditions 1, 10 and 36

13. Conditions 1, 10 and 36 of the Amended development approval, properly construed,
require the construction of a multi-deck carpark and the provision of 395 carparks to
service the approved material change of use.

14 — Acondition requiring the provision of 395 carparks and a multi-deck Carpark are:
14.1 No longer lawful conditions for the purpose of section 345 of SPA; or

14.2 Further in the alternative, conditions which, are in the exercise of the discretion, no
longer an appropriate town planning and traffic engineering response to the
approved material change of use.

Particulars

14.3 The conditions in their current form require the construction of a multi-deck carpark
and the provision of 395 car parking spaces on the subject land for the material
change of use approved.

14.4 The use of the land in accordance with the Amended development approval does
not require the provision of 395 carparks to accommodate parking demand.

14.5 An appropriate provision of carparks having regard to proper traffic engineering
principles and the demand generated by the approved material change of use is
355 carparks. ‘

14.6 Appropriate provision can be made on the subject land for 355 carparks absent the
multi-deck carpark.

14.7 The cost of constructing the multi-deck carpark is estimated to exceed $3,000,000.

14,8 The cost of constructing the multi-deck car park is an unreasonable imposition on
the development given paragraphs 14.5 to 14.7 and thereby unlawful.

14.9 Further or in the alternative, the facts alleged in paragraphs 14.3 to 14.8 above
favour an exercise of the discretion to change conditions 1, 10 and 36 in the
manner sought by the Appellant.

Condition 11
15 Condition 11 of the Amended development approval is the following terms:

“A verification survey of the building is to be carried out by a Licensed Surve yor
and a certificate lodged with Council at completion of the work confirming
compliance with the maximum allowable building height as required either by the
conditions of the approval of the Planning Scheme".

16 The maximum building height of the Amended development approval:

16.1 is controlled by condition 10 of that approval by reference to approved plans and
empirical measures; and

Legal/44521643_1

Log in to download the original (img-810092332-0001.pdf)

Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.