16014 - Change to Development Approval

Page 2

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




2). This occurred without any representations being made about this issue and without any
explanation being provided under Part 2.

The application was first made over 101 (Lot 1 on RP230931) referenced correctly on the
Acknowledgement Notice dated 10 November 2016. The application was subsequently
changed on 13 June 2017, to include both 101 (Lot 1 on RP230931) and 105 (Lot 1 on
RP849431). This was correctly referenced on the Acknowledgment Notice that issued on 3 July
2017.

Because Council advised the application was being recommended for refusal, the applicant
changed the application on 5 October 2017. While this change reflected the original proposal
being sought primarily over 101, the subject land remained as 101 and 105. The change
application made at the time was submitted as a ‘minor change’ because the development
was not substantially different and had been previously publicly notified.

On 10 October 2017, Council advised that the change to the application was substantially
different and not a ‘minor change’; however, the changed application was not required to be
publicly notified. Regardless of this, an amended Acknowledgment Notice issued on 17
October 2017, confirming that the application remained current over both 101 (Lot 1 on
RP230931) and 105 (Lot 1 on RP849431) as intended.

It is also noted that the latest proposal that was publicly notified referred to the subject land
as both 101 and 105 Eumundi Noosa Road. Consequently, while the current proposal is
generally confined to 101, it has always been intended to provide a storm water detention
basin that would service the developments on both 101 and 105, which was discussed with
the Council during the assessment process. Consequently, it is requested with the decision
notice that issues granting approval for the proposed ‘minor change’, that this refers to both
101 and 105. In my opinion, this does not have any bearing on the approval that has issued.

Proposed Changes
The proposed changes are considered minor (discussed below) and are as follows:
   • a proposed new building as shown in Figure 1 (Attachment 1) which has already been
       determined to be ‘generally in accordance with’ the current approval;
   • relocation of the proposed carparking towards the northern end of the site behind the
       building while maintaining the same number of carparking spaces;
   • relocation of the existing shed (74m²) towards the southern boundary of 101 and clear
       of the carparking area; and
   • a proposed storm water detention basin located at the rear of the subject land and
       across the boundary of 101 and 105 Eumundi Noosa Road as shown in Figure 2
       (Attachment 3).

The proposed changes provide for a more efficient use of the land. Further, the proposed
onsite detention is the most appropriate way of collecting, treating and discharging storm
water for the developments on both 101 and 105. It is intended to provide a reciprocal
easement over the storm water detention basin to allow for maintenance by future owners.



                                                                                        2|Page
16004 – Changed Approval August 2018

Page 3

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




This also resolves an existing storm water drainage problem on site, with storm water currently
sheet flowing on to the residential properties to the south east.




Figure 1 – New Site Plan

The proposed storm water detention basin is on the lowest part of the site directly adjoining
the existing storm water drainage easement in the adjoining properties to the south east. The
detention basin is located adjacent to the boundary but will contain some planting to maintain
water quality, generally in accordance with the Storm Water Management Plan prepared by
aquaintel, and submitted with the application material.

It is suggested that the proposed detention basin provides sufficient separation from the
adjoining residential properties and will also act as a buffer to any development proposed on
105 in the future. Further, it is intended to retain 2m of landscaping adjoining the carpark area
and extending further to the south beside the open swale drain to the edge of the proposed
detention basin as shown in Figure 2 (Attachment 3).

Minor Change
Pursuant to the definition of a ‘minor change’ under Schedule 2 of the Planning Act 2016, a
‘minor change’ to a development approval means:
    (i)    would not result in substantially different development; and
    (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




                                                                                        3|Page
16004 – Changed Approval August 2018

Page 4

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




             B. referral to a referral agency, other than to the chief executive, if there were no
                referral agencies for the development application; or
             C. referral to extra referral agencies, other than to the chief executive; or
             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
             E. public notification if public notification was not required for the development
                application.




Figure 2 – General Layout Plan (extract)

Pursuant to Development Assessment Rules, (Schedule 1: Substantially different development),
a change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the proposed
change:
    (a) involves a new use; or
    (b) results in the application applying to a new parcel of land; or
    (c) dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance; or
    (d) changes the ability of the proposed development to operate as intended; or
    (e) removes a component that is integral to the operation of the development; or
    (f) significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport network, such as increasing traffic
        to the site; or
    (g) introduces new impacts or increase the severity of known impacts; or
    (h) removes an incentive or offset component that would have balanced a negative impact
        of the development; or
    (i) impacts on infrastructure provisions.



                                                                                        4|Page
16004 – Changed Approval August 2018

Page 5

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




Having regard to the provisions above, the following comments are made about the proposed
changes:
   • do not involve a new use (a);
   • do not apply to a new parcel of land, given the comments made above about the
       application being lodged over both 101 and 105 with this not being changed as stated
       in the Acknowledgement Notice dated 17 October 2017 (b);
   • do not dramatically change the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance (c);
   • will not change how the development will operate as intended (d);
   • do not remove an integral component of the development (e);
   • will not have an impact on traffic flow (f);
   • will not introduce new or increase any on site impacts (g);
   • does not remove an incentive or offset component (h); and
   • will have no impact on infrastructure (i).

Consequently, the proposed development is not substantially different to that currently
approved. Further, having regard to part (ii) of the definition of a ‘minor change’ (refer above),
the following comments are made:
    • the change does not involve the inclusion of prohibited development (A);
    • does not require referral to a referral agency (B);
    • does not require referral to extra referral agencies (C);
    • no referral is required (D); and
    • the application was required to be publicly notified (E).

Given the above, in my opinion, the changes being made to the proposal are a ‘minor change’.

Summary
It is suggested that the proposed changes to the development approval are not substantially
different. This is particularly the case given the changes to the built form have already been
determined to be ‘generally in accordance with’ the current approval. Further, there is no
increase in the scale and intensity of the development on the land with the changes seeking
to rearrange the location of the parking and the existing shed, which makes for better use of
the land.

The proposed storm water detention basin has always been intended as proposed and
provides for the collection and treatment of storm water for the developments over 101 and
105. The proposed detention basin is located on the lowest part of the site and can be readily
connected to the existing storm water drainage system in the adjoining easement. The 2m
wide landscaped buffer between the proposed use and the adjoining residential properties is
being maintained behind the carpark and extending to the edge of the detention basin, which
is sufficient.

It is also requested with the new approval granted, that the new Decision Notice correctly
refers to 101 (Lot 1 on RP230931) and 105 (Lot 1 on RP849431). This was the case with the
original Decision Notice which was subsequently changed when the Negotiated Decision
Notice issued with no reason being provided.



                                                                                        5|Page
16004 – Changed Approval August 2018

Page 6

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




It should be noted that the applicant is currently in discussions with the adjoining property
owner to the north (Klinge Scaffolding) about using the access handle for 99 Eumundi Noosa
Road (Lot 61 on RP69404) in association with the proposed development. Should an
agreement be reached about sharing this access then another changes application will be
made to allow for this improved access arrangement. It is acknowledged that a separate
application for an access easement will also be required to be made over this adjoining land.

Should you require further information please contact me.

Yours faithfully




Shane Adamson (BEngTech, GDURP, MPIA, MQELA)
Town Planning Specialist
Director - Adamson Town Planning Pty Ltd




                                                                                        6|Page
16004 – Changed Approval August 2018