2020-08-31 Special Meeting Agenda

SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA                                                           31 AUGUST 2020


6.    The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the Reconfiguring a Lot Code as:
      i.    Insufficient provision has been made for walking and cycling linkages with the existing
            development in the Shire Business Centre as the proposed network and linkages are
            unable to be implemented contrary to Overall Outcomes 14.181.2f), Specific Outcomes
            O8 and O9.
      ii.   The proposed lots will have a significant adverse impact on the natural environment
            and will not retain the sites natural environmental values contrary to Overall Outcomes
            14.181.2g), Specific Outcomes O21b and O22.
7.    Bushfire mitigation measures do not satisfactorily address the risk of bushfire contrary to
      Overall Outcomes 13.30.2a), 13.30.2c), Specific Outcomes O4, O7, O8, O9, O11 and O12
      of the Natural Hazards Overlay Code.
8.    Bushfire mitigation measures result in the removal of vegetation contained within OS3 as
      detailed in Schedule 4 (Shire Business Centre Map) of the Noosa Plan.
9.    The proposed development is contrary to the draft Noosa Plan provisions, which support the
      refusal of the development application for the same reasons as those applicable under the
      current Noosa Plan because of non-compliance with requirements for pedestrian/cycle links,
      an appropriate response to the site’s natural hazards and protection of the site’s
      environmental values including vegetation retention.
10.   The proposed development cannot be conditioned to comply with the above assessment
      benchmarks.
11.   There are no matters that would warrant approval of the development application
      notwithstanding the noncompliance with the assessment benchmarks.
As a result of Council’s decision to refuse the subdivision, the applicant lodged an appeal to the
Planning & Environment Court. The applicant seeks that the development should be approved with
reasonable and relevant conditions.
The primary issues of contention in the appeal included:
     Bushfire mitigation measures
     Acoustic measures for residential lots
     Fulfilment of the planning scheme’s requirement for parklike setting
     Impacts of clearing koala habitat with no offset proposed
     Submission of a suitable Infrastructure Agreement
During the course of the appeal court mediation was attended and a series of without prejudice
meetings were held, which resulted in the following proposal put forward by the appellant:
     Dedicate to Council (without cost to Council) proposed lot 24 being the Transit lot, with the
      dedication to occur after the Noosa Plan is amended which shows the provision for the transit
      lot only in a location consistent with proposed lot 24 on the survey plan.
     Agreement that the proposed dedication of lot 24 is in full and final satisfaction of any
      obligation to provide environmental offsets (including in relation to koala and koala habitat)
      in respect of the ultimate clearing and development of the land.
The appellant also provided a copy of the following:
     A revised Infrastructure Agreement to deliver the proposed dedication of lot 24 and enable
      Council to condition the necessary land dedication and works required for the subdivision
      that Council was currently prevented from conditioning by an Infrastructure Agreement
      entered into at the time of construction of stage 1 of Noosa Civic.
     A deed of Agreed Delivery Arrangement to provide a mechanism for the proposed offset
      arrangements for clearing of koala habitat pursuant to the Environmental Offsets Act 2014.

                                                                                     Page 27 of 35