Original source · versioned page text
Meeting papers
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 Page 46 of 68
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.