Pre-Request Response - 226 David Low Way 30 Oct 2017

Page 2

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



   •   large windows with aluminium frames along the eastern edge, which open outwards,
       located above the existing glass balustrade; and
   •   glass louvers provided from floor to ceiling along the northern edge.

The existing dividing wall to the south remains unchanged, along with the roof over the
balcony area. The retention of the glass balustrade to the eastern edge, includes the gap to
the floor area, which technically means that the balcony is not fully enclosed (refer Attachment
4).

Current Approval

The changes being sought to the development approval are with respect to condition 8, which
states, … all deck and balcony areas above ground floor must not be enclosed by permanent
fixtures such as shutters, louvers glass panelling or the like.

Condition 2 of the approval refers to the approved plans. In my opinion, the part enclosure of
the balcony area remains generally in accordance with the approved plans. This is because the
balcony area is roofed and provides for a solid dividing wall to the south, predominately
maintains the existing glass balustrade, but is otherwise partly enclosed by glass windows and
louvres.




Figure 1 – Area of partly enclosed balcony

The changes made to the balcony area are not consistent with condition 8. Consequently, it is
being requested that condition 8 be amended as follows:




 17006 – Colin & Michele Middleton

                                                                                        2|Page

Page 3

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



All deck and balcony areas above ground floor must not be enclosed by permanent fixtures such
as shutters, louvers glass panelling or the like, with exception of Unit 6, which provides for two
large glass windows along the eastern edge located above the balustrade that open outwards
and glass louvres along the north edge.

The suggested changes made to the condition allow for the proposed changes. The reason
the change is being sought in this manner is because the proposed change only affects Unit 6
and does not affect any other unit within the complex or the common property.

Minor Change

Pursuant to section 78 of the Planning Act 2016, the applicant seeks to make a minor change
to the development approval (changes application). In this case the responsible entity is the
Planning and Environment Court; however, a pre-request response is sought from Noosa
Council to make the necessary application to the Court straight forward.

The definition of minor change states:
   a) …
   b) for a development approval:
          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
            (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.

Having regard to whether the changes made to the balcony area would result in a substantially
different development, the Development Assessment Rules under Schedule 1 provide some
guidance with respect to this issue. To that end, the following comments are made:
    a) the proposed development does not involve a new use;
    b) does not involve a new parcel of land;
    c) does not dramatically change the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance
        (refer comments below);
    d) will not change the ability of the development to operate as intended;
    e) will not remove a component that is integral to the operation of the development;
    f) will not cause any impact upon traffic flow or the transport network;
    g) will not introduce any new impact or increase the severity of known impacts (refer
        comments below);
    h) does not remove an incentive or offset component; and
    i) will not have any impact upon the provision of infrastructure.


 17006 – Colin & Michele Middleton

                                                                                        3|Page

Page 4

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




With respect to part (c) above, the balcony area remains the same size, already provides for a
solid dividing wall between Units 6 & 7 and is roofed. Further, the enclosure consists of large
windows fitted above the existing balustrade along the eastern edge, which open outwards
and glass louvers along the northern edge. The proposed changes do not significantly change
the appearance of the balcony area and are not visible from the street. Consequently, having
regard to the above, the proposed development is not a substantially different development.

With respect to the other aspects in the definition of a minor change, the following comments
are made:
    • the change sought does not include prohibited development;
    • does not involve referral to any additional referral agencies and does not affect the
       assessment of the application as undertaken previously by a referral agency; and
    • the original application was publicly notified with two properly made submissions
       being received.

In my opinion, having regard to the comments made above, the proposed change can be
considered a minor change under the Planning Act 2016.

Pursuant to section 80 of the Planning Act 2016, there are two referral agencies that are to be
notified at the time the change is sought to be made by the Planning and Environment Court.
It is not expected that either the State Assessment Referral Agency (SARA) or Energex Limited
will have any objection to the proposed change.

Section 81 of Planning Act 2016 requires the responsible entity to:
   a) assess against, or have regard to, the matters that applied when the development
       application was made; and
   b) may assess against, or have regard to, the matters that applied when the change
       application was made.

Because the original approval was granted under the Noosa Plan 2006, and this remains the
current planning scheme, the obligation is to consider the change application against the
requirements of the Noosa Plan 2006.

Noosa Plan

Under the Noosa Plan, the subject land is located within the Eastern Beaches Locality and is
included in the Semi-Attached Housing Zone. The most relevant provisions are those
contained in the Eastern Beaches Locality Code, in particular the following specific outcomes:

 Amenity
 O1 Uses are located, designed and operated No solution provided
 to avoid significant adverse changes to the
 light, air quality, noise, accessibility or other
 conditions enjoyed by users of associated,
 adjoining or nearby uses.



 17006 – Colin & Michele Middleton

                                                                                        4|Page

Page 5

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




The proposed enclosure of the balcony area will not cause any significant adverse changes to
the adjoining and nearby land uses, in terms of light, air quality, noise, accessibility or any
other impact including privacy. This is because the proposed changes do not materially affect
the development in any way, in particular with respect to maintaining current building setbacks
to the residential properties to the east. Further, the use of the balcony area will not materially
increase the ability of a person to overlook any adjoining unit or residential property. In my
opinion, no amenity impacts are raised by the proposal.

 Setbacks
 O5 Buildings and other structures are S5.1 Buildings and structures comply with the
 appropriately designed and sited to—           minimum building setbacks identified in
 a) provide amenity for users of the premises Schedule 1 - Minimum Boundary Setbacks.
    as well as preserve the visual and acoustic
    privacy of adjoining and nearby
    properties;
 b) provide adequate distance from adjoining
    uses;
 c) preserve any existing vegetation that will
    buffer the proposed building;
 d) allow for landscaping to be provided
    between buildings and street frontages
    and between neighbouring buildings;
 e) maintain the visual continuity and pattern
    of buildings and landscape elements
    within the street; and
 f) protect the natural character and visual
    amenity of the beachfront.

Under Schedule 1, the required building setback from the rear property boundary is 6m. The
approved plan shows that the building setback is 5.875m to the eastern edge of the balcony
area, which remains unchanged. Consequently, the proposed development generally
maintains a 6m setback to the rear boundary, with the proposed part enclosure of the balcony
having no bearing on the existing setback. It is noted that under the provisions, a fully enclosed
building with large windows could be located 6m from the rear boundary.

 Site cover, gross floor area and plot ratio No solution provided
 O6 The site cover, gross floor area and plot
 ratio of buildings and other roofed
 structures—
 a) results in a building scale that is
     compatible        with        surrounding
     development;
 b) does not present an appearance of
     excessive bulk to adjacent properties,
     roads or other areas in the vicinity of the
     site;


 17006 – Colin & Michele Middleton

                                                                                        5|Page

Page 6

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



 c) maximises the retention of existing
    vegetation and allows soft landscaping
    between buildings;
 d) allows for adequate area at ground level
    for outdoor recreation, entertainment,
    clothes drying and other site facilities; and
 e) facilitates      onsite         stormwater
    management and vehicular access.

The proposed part enclosure of the balcony area does not increase site cover. The balcony
area maintains an open space feel given the two large windows to the east and the glass
louvers to the north, being from floor to ceiling. Further, the balustrading is retained along the
eastern edge, including the gap to the floor. It is highly likely that the large windows will remain
open most of the time and won’t substantially change the use of this area. The development
does not present as having excessive bulk to adjacent properties, road or other areas. The
building scale is retained and is compatible with surrounding development.

Conclusion

The applicant seeks a pre-request response to amend condition 8 of the development
approval. This is to allow for a part enclosure of the balcony area of Unit 6, by large glass
windows and glass louvers.

The proposed changes to the balcony area do not make for a substantial different
development and otherwise can be considered a minor change to the approval. The proposed
part enclosure of the balcony remains generally in accordance with the approved plans of
development; however, it is necessary to amend condition 8 of the approval. It is suggested
that a simple addition to condition 8 would allow for the proposed changes so as not to
complicate this matter.

The proposed changes made to the balcony area do not add to building bulk, site cover or
change building setbacks. Further, the proposed changes will not adversely impact upon the
amenity of any adjoining land users, in particular the adjoining units and the other residential
properties to the east.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please contact me.

Yours faithfully




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




 17006 – Colin & Michele Middleton

                                                                                        6|Page