3. Final-Letter-170418-BA4090-Permissible Change · MCU16/0084

Page 2

In discussions with Council’s Stormwater Engineer throughout the operational works process it was
confirmed that conditions 26 and 27 conflict with the approved Stormwater360 system. The conflict
arose because conditions 26 and 27 relate to State Planning Policy (SPP) objectives. It is our
understanding that Noosa Shire Council does not endorse Stormwater360 systems in the local
government area because, they cannot guarantee that the stormwater treatment system will achieve
the water quality objectives of the SPP. However, as the development site is less than 2,500m 2 (site
area: 2,428m2) the development does not require assessment against the SPP and therefore is not
required to be conditioned in this regard.
Noosa Shire Council have their own stormwater quality objectives, which prompt the need for the
Stormwater360 system in this circumstance. Therefore, Council recommended that conditions 26 and
27 be deleted to be removed the conflict. The conditions state:
        26 - A stormwater quality treatment system must be provided for the development to achieve
        pollutant reduction targets of 90% reduction in gross pollutants, 80% reduction in Total
        Suspended Solids, 60% reduction in Total Phosphorous and 45% reduction in Total Nitrogen.
        27 - The Operational Works application must be supported by a MUSIC model that includes
        water quality treatment nodes endorsed by Stormwater Australia or their delegate to meet the
        Stormwater Quality Improvement Devices Evaluation Protocol. Evidence of the endorsement
        of the product must be provided with the Application for Operational Works.
We note that the proposal has not altered the approved built form and scale. There are no physical
changes proposed, merely an administrative change to reflect the Stormwater Management Plan.



Section 367 of SPA, outlines what criteria are applicable in determining if a change to a development
application is a Permissible Change to a development approval. Each of the proposed changes as
outlined above have been assessed against these criteria, as follows:
        367     What is a permissible change for a development approval
        (1)     A permissible change, for a development approval, is a change to the approval that
                would not, because of the change –
                (a)     Result in a substantially different development;
Response:
In respect to section 367(1)(a) of SPA, which determines what constitutes a substantially different
development, it is appropriate to have regard to the guidelines made by the Chief Executive under
Section 760 of the SPA (Statutory Guideline 06/09), as follows:
        "Although it will depend on the individual circumstances of the development, the following list
        identifies changes that may result in a substantially different development and would,
        therefore, not be a minor change or permissible change under the SPA. This list is intended as
        a guide to assist assessment managers and applicants to determine whether a change will
        result in a substantially different development and is not intended to be exhaustive.”



                                                                                                        2

Page 3

An assessment of the proposed changes against the criteria in the Guideline is included in the table
below.

 Guideline Criteria                                  Response

 Involves a new use with different or additional     The proposed changes do not alter the uses
 impacts.                                            approved, being Retail Business (Type 5 Vehicle
                                                     Uses (Service Station) and Type 2 Shop & Salon
                                                     (Shop)) and Entertainment & Business (Type 1
                                                     Food & Beverages (Food Outlet)). No new uses
                                                     are introduced and the changes do not involve
                                                     any different or additional impacts which were not
                                                     addressed by the applicant and Council through
                                                     the assessment process for the original
                                                     application.

 Results in the application applying to a new        The proposed changes do not involve the
 parcel of land.                                     addition of any new land to the development
                                                     application.

 Dramatically changes the built form in terms of     The built form, scale, bulk and appearance is
 scale, bulk and appearance.                         maintained. The proposed change relates to an
                                                     administrative error to the conditions. The
                                                     change involves deleting inconsistent conditions
                                                     regarding to stormwater quality.

 Changes the ability of the proposal to operate as   The proposed change does not alter the ability for
 intended. For example, reducing the size of a       the proposal to operate as a service station and
 retail complex may reduce the capacity of the       food outlets. The proposed change relates to an
 complex to service the intended catchment.          administrative error to the conditions. The
                                                     change involves deleting inconsistent conditions
                                                     regarding to stormwater quality.

 Removes a component that is integral to the         The proposed changes do not result in a removal
 operation of the development.                       of any component of the development. The
                                                     proposed change relates to an administrative
                                                     error to the conditions. The change involves
                                                     deleting inconsistent conditions regarding to
                                                     stormwater quality.

 Significantly impacts on traffic flow and the       The changes do not impact the traffic flow and
 transport network, such as increasing traffic to    transport network.



                                                                                                        3

Page 4

 the site.

 Introduces new impacts or increases the severity    The changes are not considered to increase the
 of known impacts.                                   severity of any impacts created by the
                                                     development as originally approved. Specifically,
                                                     the changes will not have an adverse effect on
                                                     stormwater management.

 Removes an incentive or offset component that       The development as originally approved did not
 would have balanced a negative impact of the        include any incentive or offset component.
 development.

 Impacts on infrastructure provision, location or    The proposal does not increase built form or
 demand.                                             scale of the development. The changes do not
                                                     impact on infrastructure provision, location or
                                                     demand.

                                                     The proposed change relates to an administrative
                                                     error to the conditions. The change involves
                                                     deleting inconsistent conditions regarding to
                                                     stormwater quality.



        (b) If the application for the approval were remade including the change—
                (i) Require referral to additional concurrence agencies; or
                (ii) For an approval for assessable development that previously did not require impact
                assessment—require impact assessment; or
Response:
The development originally did not required referral to the State Assessment and Referral Agency
(SARA). The changes to the conditions will not result in triggers requiring referral of the development
to SARA.
The original development application triggered Impact Assessment for the development.
        (c) For an approval for assessable development that previously required impact assessment—
        be likely, in the responsible entity’s opinion, to cause a person to make a properly made
        submission objecting to the proposed change, if the circumstances allowed; or
Response:
The original application required Impact Assessment. The alteration to the conditions regarding
stormwater quality is unlikely to cause a person to make a properly made submission objecting to the




                                                                                                          4

Page 5

proposed change. We also note that no properly made submissions were received about the original
development application.
        (d) Cause development to which the approval relates to include any prohibited development.
Response:
The proposal does not include any prohibited development.
        (2) For deciding whether a change is a permissible change under subsection (1)(b) or (d), the
        planning instruments or law in force at the time the request for the change was made apply.
Response:
No new planning instruments/laws applicable to the site or approved development have come into
effect since the original approval was granted on 12 January 2017 pursuant to Noosa Plan 2006.



It is requested that the approval package is amended. We request that conditions 26 and 27 be
deleted. We note that there are no amendments to the approved plans.
Suggested amendments are outlined as follows, with deletions in blue and struck out and additions in
blue and underlined.

 Assessment Manager Conditions

 26. A stormwater quality treatment system must be provided for the development to achieve
 pollutant reduction targets of 90% reduction in gross pollutants, 80% reduction in Total
 Suspended Solids, 60% reduction in Total Phosphorous and 45% reduction in Total Nitrogen.

 27. The Operational Works application must be supported by a MUSIC model that includes
 water quality treatment nodes endorsed by Stormwater Australia or their delegate to meet the
 Stormwater Quality Improvement Devices Evaluation Protocol. Evidence of the endorsement of
 the product must be provided with the Application for Operational Works.




                                                                                                        5

Page 6

Given the proposed change relates to an administrative error which resulted in conditions that were
inconsistent with the approved plans and which could have been rectified in the development
application process, we respectfully request that the application fee be waived.




In summary, we consider that the above assessment demonstrates that the proposed changes can be
considered a Permissible Change to the approval under SPA. The changes do not result in a
substantially different development, do not significantly alter the external built form, do not result in
external extensions to the building, and do not increase potential adverse impacts from the
development.
We trust the supplied documentation is sufficient in order for Council to undertake an assessment of
this request. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Penny Milton or the
undersigned on (07) 3007 3800.


Yours sincerely,




Cameron Stanley
Director




                                                                                                        6