Council archive · source document
40 arakoon cres change · 131999.982857.1
Development Application
Planning Report
Minor Change to Existing Approval
(alterations to existing dwelling house)
17603 DA – MCU in Sand Dune Problem Area
situated at 40 Arakoon Cres, Sunshine Beach
(Lot 802/RP48111)
Page 1 of 14
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 13 pages
Page 2
Contents
1.0 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Development application details ............................................................................................. 3
1.2 Planning instrument details ..................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Referral agencies ..................................................................................................................... 3
2.0 Site details ....................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Site description ....................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Surrounding land uses ............................................................................................................. 5
3.0 Proposed development details ......................................................................................... 5
4.0 Planning assessment ........................................................................................................ 7
4.1 Minor Change Test .................................................................................................................. 7
4.1.1 Deciding the Request ....................................................................................................... 9
4.2 The New Noosa Plan 2020 ....................................................................................................... 9
4.3 Key issues ............................................................................................................................. 12
4.3.1 Building Height in Storeys .................................................................................................. 12
4.3.2 Setbacks ............................................................................................................................ 13
4.3.3 Garages ............................................................................................................................. 13
5.0 State assessment and other matters .............................................................................. 14
5.1 State interests ....................................................................................................................... 14
5.1.1 Matters established in the Planning Regulation ....................................................................... 14
5.1.2 State Planning Policy ............................................................................................................... 14
6.0 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 14
Client Name: Sofia Velosa and Ben Edwards
Prepared by: Jack Lewis B.Sc Hons UNSW, M.Plan OTAGO MPIA MQELA
Version: 1
Date: 8 March 2021
This report is based on the QLD Government’s planning report template (Department of Infrastructure, Local Government
and Planning), which adopts a ‘report-by-exception’ approach. The planning report only discusses the key issues and
matters where a proposed development does not exactly meet the requirements of, or conflicts with, a planning scheme
or other planning instrument.
Disclaimer: While every care has been taken in preparing this report, Pivotal Perspective Pty Ltd accepts no responsibility
for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained
within. To the best of our knowledge, the content was correct at the time of publishing.
Page 2 of 14
Page 3
1.0 Summary
1.1 Development application details
Proposed development: Minor Change to Existing Approval - 17603 DA – MCU in Sand
Dune Problem Area
Site address: 40 Arakoon Cres, Sunshine Beach
Real property description: 802/RP48111
Site area: 607m2
Owner details: Sofia Velosa and Ben Edwards
Applicant details: Sofia Velosa and Ben Edwards c/- Pivotal Perspective Pty Ltd
1.2 Planning instrument details
State planning policy: Nil
Regional plan: SEQ Regional Plan 2009–2031 (version commenced 2 May
Designation: 2014) – Urban Footprint.
Planning scheme: The Noosa Plan 2020
Zone: Low Density Residential zone
Level of assessment: Code – Table 5.9.4 – Building Work not associated with a MCU
Applicable overlays: Landslide Hazards Area
Applicable codes: Low Density Residential Zone Code (Applicable provisions)
Low Density Housing Code (Applicable provisions)
1.3 Referral agencies
Nil
2.0 Site details
2.1 Site description
Table 1: Site description
Site characteristic Description
Existing land use Detached House
Frontage and access 12.5m to Arakoon Cres
Topography and views The site falls away from the street to the north
Previous Approvals 17603DA – MCU in Sand Dune Problem Area
Easements Sewer at bottom of site
Page 3 of 14
Page 4
Figure 1: Aerial view and site identification with Coastal Protection Overlay
Source: Noosa Council Mapping System
Figure 2: Sight Photos looking south from property boundary and Seaview Tce.
Page 4 of 14
Page 5
2.2 Surrounding land uses
Table 2: Surrounding land uses
Surrounding land uses
North Seaview Tce Reserve (Dog Beach Carpark)
South 19 and 21 Arakoon Cres Houses (Higher side of one way road)
West 42 Arakoon Cres (House)
East 38 Arakoon Cres (House)
3.0 Proposed development details
The proposal involves substantial renovations to the existing dwelling house. The material palette
includes timber veneers and a new roof shape to renew the existing building. A comparison of the
existing and proposed buildings are included below:
- Lower Ground Level
o Extend this living space to include a surfboard storeroom, bedroom and living area extending
on to a pool.
Page 5 of 14
Page 6
- Ground Level
o Extend lounge, dining and kitchen areas with large deck
o The original garage setback was located less than 1m from the Arakoon Cres boundary and
the new design keeps this setback.
Page 6 of 14
Page 7
- Upper Level
o Extend bedrooms on top of the garage and reduce the height encroachment.
4.0 Planning assessment
4.1 Minor Change Test
An assessment against the meaning of minor change and a response about the proposed application
is provide below. The Planning Act 2016 defines a minor change as a change to the approval that:
i. would not result in a substantially different development*;
(*In determining whether the proposed change would result in substantially different
development, the assessment manager or referral agency must consider the
individual circumstances of the development, in the context of the change proposed.)
A change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the
proposed change:
- Involves a new use; or
Response: The proposed development does not change the existing use or proposed use as
a dwelling house.
- Results in the application applying to a new parcel of land; or
Response: No new parcels of land are applicable.
- Dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance; or
Response: The changes are generally consistent with the bulk, scale and appearance of the
existing approval.
- Changes the ability of the proposed development to operate as intended; or
Response: The site will still be used as a dwelling house.
- Removes a component that is integral to the operation of the development; or
Response: There are no components being removed from the development integral to the
operation of the development.
Page 7 of 14
Page 8
- Significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport network, such as
increasing traffic to the site; or
Response: No change.
- Introduces new impacts or increases the severity of known impacts; or
Response: No new impacts are introduced.
- Removes an incentive or offset component that would have balanced the
negative impact of the development; or
Response: The proposal does not remove an incentive or offset.
- Impacts on infrastructure provisions.
Response: No change – The site is anticipated to be used for low density residential
purposes.
ii. if a development application for the development, including the change, were made
when the change application is made would not cause—
A. the inclusion of prohibited development in the application; or
Response: The change does not include any prohibited development.
B. referral to a referral agency, other than to the chief executive, if there were no
referral agencies for the development application; or
Response: No referral agencies were applicable to the original application.
C. referral to extra referral agencies, other than to the chief executive; or
Response: No referral agencies are applicable to the existing or current development
approval for an MCU. A referral has been made for the subsequent building approval.
D. a referral agency to assess the application against, or have regard to, matters
prescribed by regulation under section 55(2), other than matters the referral
agency must have assessed the application against, or have had regard to, when
the application was made; or
Response: The proposed change would not result in the chief executive having to consider
matters additional to those considered when the application was made.
E. public notification if public notification was not required for the development
application.
Response: The change does not require the application to be publicly notified.
Given the above, the proposed change to the existing approval is a minor change in accordance with
Schedule 2 of the Planning Act 2016 and Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules.
Page 8 of 14
Page 9
4.1.1 Deciding the Request
In accordance with S81 of The Planning Act 2016, Council must only consider the information
provided and any other matter considered relevant, including — all matters Council would or may
assess against or have regard to if the change application were a development application.
Council must only consider the statutory instrument, or other document, as in effect when the
development application for the development approval was properly made. However, may give
weight they consider appropriate, in the circumstances, to—
(a) the statutory instrument or other document as in effect when the change application was
made (Superseded Planning Scheme); or
(b) if the statutory instrument or other document is amended or replaced after the change
application is made but before it is decided—the amended or replacement instrument or
document; or
(c) another statutory instrument—
(i) that comes into effect after the change application is made but before it is decided;
and
(ii) that the responsible entity would have been required to consider if the instrument
had been in effect when the development application for the development approval
was properly made.
4.2 The New Noosa Plan 2020
The changes require assessment against the specific provisions of the Low Density Residential and
Low Density Housing Zone Codes. An assessment against the relevant provisions is provided below
with further assessment regarding the noncompliance provided thereafter.
Table 3: Summary of development aspects and
Provision Code Provision Proposal Compliance
PO5 – AO5.1
Secondary
Dwellings No more than one secondary dwelling is provid No secondary dwelling proposed Y
ed on any site regardless of site area.
AO5.2
A secondary dwelling:
a. has a maximum gross floor area of 65m²;
b. has no more than two bedrooms; and
c. does not occur on any property
covered by a Building Unit Plan.
PO7 - Building AO7.1 Building Height in Metres
Height Buildings and structures are no more than 8 m
etres in building height and do not exceed 2 The existing building is >8m in PO
storeys. height relative to Natural Ground
Level.
AO7.2
Where excavation is required, the maximum p The new roof reduces the scale
ortion of the exposed external façade of the of the encroachment from 1.3m
building cannot exceed 8m in building height. to 0.7m along the eastern
façade, and from 2.6m to 2.4m
Editor's note—refer to Figure AP313A along the western façade.
Building Height in Storeys
The existing building is three
storeys in section. The proposal
reduces the prominence of any PO
three storey encroachments.
Page 9 of 14
Page 10
PO8 – Site AO8.1 (180m2) 30% for all storeys Y
Cover Site cover of all buildings and structures on
site does not exceed:
a) for a single storey building – 50%
b) for a building of 2 storeys –
i) 50% for one of the storeys; and
ii) 30% for the other storey; or
iii) 40% for both storeys.
PO9 – Setbacks AO9.1
Front – 6m 0.5m PO
Side (west) – 1.5m to 2.5m 1.9m PO
Side (east) – 1.5m to 2.5m 0.5m PO
Rear (<550m2) - 1.5m to 2.5m (reserve) 19.8m Y
PO12 – 2 or more of the following features fronting the Window and porch fronting the Y
Streetscape street: street.
- Verandah
- Porch
- External stairs
- Awning
- Windows
PO13 – AO13.1
Garages
No more than 3 garages and total width of 6.7m 6.0m presentation (48%) PO
to the street or 40%
PO14 – Limited to no more than 6m wide and not Lower level not considered a N/A
Basements encroach into side setback. basement.
Page 10 of 14
Page 11
PO15 – Driveways have a maximum width of 6 metres 6.0m Y
Driveways within the property and only one footpath
crossing is provided per property as part of the
driveway.
PO16 – Roof AO16.1
Design
5 degree roof pitch and eaves to 75% of Not Applicable N/A
dwelling (Not applicable to Coastal
Communities or Noosa Heads).
AO16.2
Parapets do not exceed 50% of the width of the No parapets Y
front façade.
AO16.3
Development does not include rooftop terraces. No rooftop terrace Y
(see commentary about storey
and height)
PO19 – AO19.1
Earthworks
Cut or fill is less than 1.5m in depth relative to No additional cuts or fill proposed Y
Natural Ground Level.
PO20 – Colours AO20.4
Are finished with exterior colours of moderate to Finished in timber recessive Y
darker shades of olive green, brown, green, colours – improvement on the
blue, charcoal or wood stains that blend with the existing colour scheme.
colour and hues of the
surrounding vegetation and landscape.
AO21 – AO21
Drainage
Filling and excavation for operation works are Existing and proposed roofwater Y
designed and constructed to ensure overland is to be directed to the street and
flow and/or flooding is not worsened, impeded, existing detention pit to ensure
or otherwise diverted to adversely affect other non-worsening of water to
properties or downstream environments. adjoining properties.
AO22LDHC – AO22.1
Landslide
Hazard Development, including access, is not located The site is partially located in a Y
on land identified as a landslide hazard area on Landslide Hazard Overlay Area
a Landslide Hazard Map. (Medium Hazard area). The
development proposes additions
AO22.2 to the existing building and no
Development, including associated access, is new footings or earthworks.
located outside moderate, high and very high
landslide hazard areas and areas with
15% slope or greater, as determined by a site-
specific slope-analysis;
Editor's Note—A site- specific geotechnical
assessment may be used to demonstrate that
Page 11 of 14
Page 12
although the proposed development is shown
on the Landslide Hazard Overlay as being in
the moderate, high or very high landslide
hazard area, the landslide risk is low or very
low.
OR
AO22.3
A site-specific geotechnical assessment is
prepared by a registered professional engineer
to certify that:
- the stability of the site, including
associated buildings and
infrastructure, will be maintained and
operational for the life of the
development;
- the site is not subject to the risk of
landslide activity originating from other
land, including land above the site;
and
- development of the site will not
increase the risk of landslide activity
on other land;
AO22.3
A site-specific geotechnical assessment is
prepared by a registered professional engineer
to certify that:
- the stability of the site, including
associated buildings and
infrastructure, will be maintained and
operational for the life of the
development;
- the site is not subject to the risk of
landslide activity originating from other
land, including land above the site;
and
- development of the site will not
increase the risk of landslide activity
on other land;
Editor's Note— PSP8 Natural Hazards provides
further guidance on assessing landslide hazard.
AO22.4
Any specific measures identified in
a site specific geotechnical assessment for
stabilising the site or development are to be
fully implemented.
4.3 Key issues
4.3.1 Building Height in Storeys
The Performance Outcomes (PO7) seek for buildings to not exceed two storeys. The existing
building is three storeys in section and over 8m relative to Natural Ground Level. The relevant
purpose and overall outcome are included below:
a) The distinct look and feel of existing residential neighbourhoods is retained, and development makes a positive
contribution to the streetscape, maintaining the low density and low scale character.
m) Development responds to land constraints including topography, bushfire and flood.
The proposed changes reduce the extent of three storey encroachment by setting back the top floor
and including a large void area above the second floor living area.
Page 12 of 14
Page 13
The proposed modifications to the existing building do not propose any additional substantial
earthworks, rather provides for more useable areas on the lower levels for use by the long-term
owners.
The predominant character of the area are split level buildings designed to complement the landform
changes and the scale of surrounding vegetation. The cosmetic changes to the building make a
positive contribution to this part of the Low Density Residential zone within Arakoon Crescent, while
maintaining the low density character on the sloping site, consistent with the purpose and overall
outcomes.
Although not meeting the performance outcome, the application is considered to meet the overall
outcomes and in accordance with the delegations of Noosa Council (p.98), a Council planner may
exercise the delegation and approve the changes.
4.3.2 Setbacks
The proposed changes bring part of the two-storey building bulk over the garage allowing for a single
sloping roof design following the contours of the land. Although not meeting the 6m setback
requirement, the design provides for a garage in the location of the existing garage (<0.5m) and
includes a sloping roof form for the second storey, which is a sympathetic design response to the
street. This part of the street at the end of a dead end road, which is set down hill from other houses
on the high side of Arakoon Crescent, resulting in the development not impacting any views of
neighbours.
The design is also consistent with this part of the street which includes garages close to the
boundaries to account for the steep slopes of these downhill sites. The design proposes to remove
the existing unapproved bin store, include a new yellow line to discourage parking and relocate the
existing cabbage tree within the frontage to ensure a vegetated softening to the building bulk
consistent with the relevant outcomes pertaining to setbacks.
The overall side setbacks are improved compared to the existing built form with landscaped
pathways and screening provided to ensure the visual and acoustic privacy of neighbouring
dwellings. The architecturally designed building is appropriately integrated with the existing built form
and consistent with the character of the surrounding area in accordance with the Performance
Outcomes of the Code.
4.3.3 Garages
The relevant Performance Outcomes pertaining to garages seek for these structures to be visually
integrated with the dwelling and avoid dominating the street. The proposed garage replaces the
existing 6m wide double garage and provides for a ‘charred timber cladding’ finish consistent with
the building façade. Together with a new timber batton pivot gate recessed along the western
entrance, the design provides a good architectural response to the narrow frontage, while allowing
for vegetation to be provided along Arakoon Crescent to improve the streetscape appearance.
Page 13 of 14
Page 14
5.0 State assessment and other matters
5.1 State interests
5.1.1 Matters established in the Planning Regulation
Nil
5.1.2 State Planning Policy
The SPP includes assessment benchmarks that may be applicable where a local government
planning scheme does not adequately reflect the SPP. The Noosa Plan 2020 appropriately
integrates all SPP provisions, except for Natural Hazards, risk and resilience – coastal hazards – in
part.
Development in the erosion prone area, as shown on the SPP interactive mapping system, will be
subject to assessment against the assessment benchmarks – natural hazards, risk and resilience
within the State Planning Policy. An assessment is provided below.
State interest Assessment against assessment benchmark
Natural Hazards The site is located within the Erosion Prone Area of the SPP, however
(Coastal) not located within a coastal management district. The development is
located away from the coast so as to not cause a risk to people and
property.
6.0 Conclusion
This application seeks a change to the existing approval for a dwelling in the sand dune problem
area situated at 40 Arakoon Cres, Sunshine Beach. Although previously assessed under the
Superseded Strategic Plan 1996 - the proposed development would be code assessable against
The Noosa Plan 2020. The development has been assessed against The Noosa Plan 2020 as part
of the weighting exercise of S.81 of the Planning Act and found to generally meet the relevant
Performance and Overall Outcomes.
The proposed changes are in keeping with the existing approval and the further assessment finds
the development meets all Performance Outcomes of the applicable codes. The Assessment
Manager’s favourable consideration of the above development application is therefore
recommended.
Page 14 of 14
Used in these records
40 arakoon cres change.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 3.9 MB (large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.