Skip to the record
The first. The best. The only NoosaWatch™.

Original source · versioned page text

Town Planning Assessment Report

of 55

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

   ●   Fire services for common private title code;
   ●   Landscaping code;
   ●   Sustainable building design code;
   ●   Transport code;
   ●   Water quality and drainage code;
   ●   Waste management code;
   ●   Landslide hazard overlay code.

The proposal has been assessed against the Acceptable Outcomes and Performance Outcomes of the
above codes, and is considered compliant. Where the proposal does not comply with an Acceptable
Outcome, alternative solutions to satisfy the corresponding Performance Outcome have been
provided.

5.3 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE CODE

A review of the High density residential zone code has been undertaken. Refer to attached code
assessment. The proposed development meets the purpose, overall outcomes and the relevant
acceptable outcomes of the code. The proposal complies with, can comply with or can be conditioned
to comply with all of the relevant code requirements with the exception of the acceptable outcomes
below:


    Performance Outcome                Acceptable Outcome                      Response

PO5 Buildings and structures:    AO5.1 Buildings and structures:     The Isometric Height Plane
 (a) are low rise and present a (a) on lots with frontage to         plan shows the 12m height
     building height consistent      Serenity    Close,   Noosa      line, which confirms part of the
     with      structures     on     Heads, are no more than         roof terrace green roof and
     adjoining and surrounding       15 metres in building           hand rails exceed the preferred
     premises;                       height; or                      12m height limit.
 (b) are designed to provide an (b) on any other site, are no
     interesting streetscape and        more than 12 metres in From the street frontage, the
     complement          landform       building height.             proposal presents as 2-3
     changes and landscapes;                                         storeys and is well below 12m.
 (c) do not visually dominate                                        Refer renders. The proposed
                                   AO5.2 Where excavation is built form is sited well in
     the street or surrounding
                                   required, the maximum portion excess of the minimum front
     area;
                                   of the exposed external façade setback requirements down the
 (d) respect the scale of existing of the building cannot exceed :   slope, and this is considered to
     vegetation, maintaining a
                                    (a) 15 metres in building reduce the appearance of bulk
     vegetated skyline;
                                        height     for   lots   with and scale, and does not
 (e) preserve the amenity of            frontage to Serenity Close, dominate the street. The intent
     surrounding         premises       Noosa Heads; or              of the increased front setbacks
     including privacy, views and
                                    (b) 12 metres in building was to reduce the extent of
     access to sunlight;                                             earthworks required for the
                                        height on any other site.
 (f) do    not exceed three                                          basement. This has resulted in
     storeys , except for lots                                       a 6m wide landscape strip plus
     with frontage to Serenity Editor's note—refer to figure further             landscaping     and
     Close, Noosa Heads which AP3-13A                                landscape elements (such as
     do not exceed four storeys. Alternative provision to the courtyards) to further soften
                                   QDC                               the extent of the proposal. The
                                                                     proposal has followed the
                                                                     splayed nature of the site, with
                                                                     the front of the building
                                                                     narrower than the rear. These


                                                                                                   16

Log in to download the original (Town Planning Assessment Report.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”.