09/1058 - MCU - Detached House [As Published] · 132009.1058

 

 

f) avoid any significant adverse impacts on
the natural values of waterways and their
foreshores, including those of the Noosa
River and its lakes; and

g) do not interrupt the natural cycles of
erosion and accretion of waterways and
foreshore areas.

d) The proposed encroachment does not
impact upon the visual continuity and pattern
of the streetscape.

e) Not Applicable.
f) Not Applicable.

g) All encroachments within the rear setback
are cantilevered structures and accordingly
do not impact upon the natural dunal
processes.

 

 

  

Natural Resources Overlay

2 Res - Coasta
Protection % “%

    

  
 

Justification ,
es eee

e

  

 

019 Where a coastal building line does not
exist on properties fronting the beachfront or
a reserve adjoining the beachfront— buildings,
other structures and retaining walls are
setback a minimum of 6m from the seaward
boundary of the site.

Whilst the proposal does not comply with
Specific Outcome O19 of the Natural
Resources Overlay Code, the design of the
elements located within the setback area
clearly comply with the Overall Outcomes
sought for sites within the Coastal Protection
Overlay as demonstrated below.

 

Overall Outcomes for the Natural
Resources Overlay Code

e) for Coastal Protection Areas, development

i) does not adversely impact upon natural
coastal processes; and

ii) is designed and sited to protect the natural
beach experience and visual amenity
enjoyed by residents and others.

 

i) both the upper level building line and eaves
are located far above ground, and
accordingly do not impact upon natural
coastal processes. Further, the architect has
specifically designed the swimming pool to
cantilever over ground, thus enabling dune
stabilising vegetation to be established
underneath.

ii) The subject site is well setback from
Peregian Beach and is completely screened
by dense vegetation. Accordingly the
proposed encroachment will have no impact
on the natural beach experience and visual
amenity.

 

 

Site Cover

The proposed dwelling has a Site Cover of 42%. This minor non-compliance has resulted
from the indoor / outdoor form of the dwelling. In this regard the architect has employed a
design concept representative of modern Queensland architecture, incorporating !arge

internal open spaces. It is these expansive deck areas which have resulted in a site cover

greater than 40%.

 

Detached Housing Code

Justification .

 

 

O9 The site cover of buildings and other
roofed structures—
a) is of a scale that is compatible with

 

a) The proposal is considerably smaller than
a number of the recently constructed nearby
dwellings.