Town Planning Report - Noosa Professional and Medical Centre

According to Statutory Guideline 06/09 - Substantially different development when
changing applications and approvals …the change may result in a substantially different
development if the proposed change:

    •    involves a new use with different or additional impacts
    •    results in the application applying to a new parcel of land
    •    dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance
    •    changes the ability of the proposal to operate as intended. For example,
         reducing the size of a retail complex may reduce the capacity of the complex to
         service the intended catchment
    •    removes a component that is integral to the operation of the development
    •    significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport network, such as increasing
         traffic to the site
    •    introduces new impacts or increases the severity of known impacts
    •    removes an incentive or offset component that would have balanced a negative
         impact of the development
    •    impacts on infrastructure provision, location or demand.

The proposed changes will not result in any additional impacts, including traffic
generated or cause parking difficulties off site. While the removal of the multi-story car
park will alter the bulk and appearance of the development in part, this will not result a
dramatically different built form.

This is because the car park is to be located in an area removed from Goodchap Street
and located behind the existing Telstra Depot. From a character perspective given the
appearance of the proposed structure, it would be more desirable not to construct the
multi-storey car park on the land.

The deletion of the multistorey car park will not change the ability of the development
to operate as intended. This is provided adequate parking for the development is
provided, which is discussed in detail below.

Given the above, the proposed changes to the approval, in my opinion, will not result in
a substantially different development. Further, the proposed development:

     • would not require referral to any additional concurrence agencies;
     • previously required public notification;
     • would not likely cause a person to lodge a submission objecting to the change, if
        circumstances allowed; and
     • does not include any prohibited development.

Consequently, in my opinion, the proposed changes to the development approval are a
‘permissible change’.




                                                                                   4|Page
“Noosa Professional and Medical Centre” – November 2014