PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D130 OF 2023 – APPLICATION TO RECONFIGURE A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) AT 39-41 PICTURE POINT CRESCENT, NOOSA HEADS · ATTACHMENT 1 – RAL22 0021 – Acting Co-ordinator Planning Report

          ATTACHMENT 1 – RAL22/0021 – Acting Co-ordinator Planning Report
REPORT
On 20 July 2023 Council at its Ordinary meeting resolved to refuse an application to subdivide a
1447.3m2 High Density Residential zoned site at 39-41 Picture Point Crescent, Noosa Heads into
2 residential lots for the following reasons:
1.   The proposal is contrary to Overall Outcomes 2(a), (b), (c) & (d), Performance Outcomes
     PO5, PO6, PO7, and Acceptable Outcome AO5.1, AO5.2, AO7.3, AO7.4, AO7.5, AO7.7 of
     the Reconfiguring a Lot Code as:
     a.     The proposed lots are not consistent with the size and character of surrounding lots
            and are less than the required minimum lot size and width.
     b.     The proposed lots are irregular in shape, with the proposed lot shape not necessitated
            by a curve in the road, topographical constraints, or the site’s vegetation, with the lot
            shape constraining their future development for multiple dwellings.
     c.     The future development of the lots is likely to result in duplication of accessways and
            services, excessive earthworks and modification to the landform which will impact on
            the amenity and character of the area.
     d.     The proposed development is not consistent with the Overall Outcome 2(o) of the
            Noosa Heads Locality Plan Code to accommodate a greater diversity in housing types
            as the proposed reconfiguring a lot will limit the opportunities for further multiple
            dwellings in Noosa Heads.
2.   The proposed lots are not consistent with the Overall Outcome 2(f) and Performance
     Outcome PO1 of the High Density Residential Zone Code to accommodate multiple
     dwellings to the exclusion of dual occupancy and dwelling houses, as the proposed lots are
     unlikely to be able to accommodate multiple dwellings consistent with the code’s built form
     requirements.
3.   The proposed development is contrary to Overall Outcome 2(c), (d) & (h), Performance
     Outcome PO2 and Acceptable Outcome AO2 of the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands
     Overlay Code as the proposed lot boundaries transect a wildlife corridor and no rehabilitation
     is proposed to improve this ecological linkage.
4.   The proposed lots are in part located in a medium bushfire hazard area and the Bushfire
     Management Plan does not make any assessment of the proposed development or identify
     any bushfire mitigation measures, based on ecological principles, to minimise the risk to
     people and property from bushfire hazard.
As a result of Council’s decision to refuse the application, the applicant has now lodged an appeal
to the Planning & Environment Court. The applicant seeks that the development be approved
subject to reasonable and relevant conditions.

The matter is in order for Council to defend the appeal and the recommendation is worded
accordingly.

Previous Council Consideration
Not Applicable

Finance & Risk
It is premature at this stage to provide advice on the likely prospects of the appeal. There will be
costs associated with defending the appeal, particularly if the matter proceeds to trial.

Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Thynee Macartney – Tim Quirk