NOOSA PLAN 2020 PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 2 - POST PUBLIC NOTIFICATION FOR FINAL STATE GOVERNMENT MINISTERIAL APPROVAL · Attachment 1 Table of submissions

 Your Say    ECM         Submitter comments                                                                                              Response   Recommendation
 Reference   reference
                         corresponding number of blocks that front the slip road from David Low Way to the west of these blocks
                         that also have the benefit of the zoning.
                         Consistent with the existing use rights in the zone, Council has recently allowed the construction of new
                         single detached dwellings on a number of these blocks. The genie is therefore already out of the bottle
                         and it would be wholly inconsistent of Council to now seek to restrict what others immediately adjoining
                         these properties may do on their properties by these changes.
                         Peregian Beach is not dominated by multi-unit dwellings by way of general statement and Plover Street
                         is not. In fact, compelling the construction of dual occupancies or mutli-unit dwellings in the zone could
                         affect the amenity of the street for permanent residents, which is one of the stated objectives of the
                         proposal. That is not to say that the right to do so which currently exists should be lost.
                         Single detached homes contribute to the diverse character and charm of Peregian Beach and our street.
                         They offer varying architectural styles and larger outdoor spaces, which are valued by many residents. A
                         compulsory shift away from these homes could alter the aesthetic and social fabric of our community,
                         potentially leading to a loss of neighbourhood identity.
                         There is no guidance in the proposal as to what protection of a pre-existing non-conforming use will mean
                         nor is there any guidance as to cessation of that use. In either case only some vague concepts of fact
                         and degree based on materiality of scale and intensity is made. For example, what is to happen with
                         certainty to an existing detached dwelling house:
                         1. in the event of damage or destruction;
                         2. renovation; or
                         3. build for a similar use but of increased scale,
                         Having to take planning advice as to whether something as simple as a renovation is lawful is an
                         unacceptable position for any property owner. To suggest that someone cannot renovate or rebuild their
                         dwelling house or without applying a fact and degree test or build a new dwelling is inconceivable.
                         The proposed limitation on site cover is unacceptable in these circumstances. The right to renovate or
                         rebuild an existing dwelling house or to build a new dwelling house should be respected in the proposal.
                         Further, to insist that on a lot size of less than 600m2 (with the effect of a 40% site cover and unchanged
                         set-backs) a requirement for construction of dual occupancy or multi-dwelling is:
                         1, with the current costs of construction, uneconomic;
                         2. does not recognise that with certain lot orientations either may not be possible to construct at all or
                         economically;
                         3. without an increase in height in the zone to provide the required car parking and density of dwelling will
                         require significant excavation of subterranean basements which is uneconomic or will present significant
                         engineering challenges which are not economic to resolve; and/or
                         4. will have a devaluing effect of property within the zone, which if the planning scheme is required to be
                         put in place for all in the community, is hardly likely to be benefiting all and in particular the property
                         owner.
                         Deterring development because it is uneconomic means that any economic benefits that could be
                         achieved through a renovation will also be a missed opportunity for Noosa.
                         Homeowners who have invested in these properties should be assured that their current use will not be
                         disrupted or devalued by the new zoning proposal. If a change must be made, implementing measures
                         to grandfather existing properties will help maintain stability and protect the investments of current
                         residents while transitioning towards higher-density development.
                         In fact, restricting single detached dwellings is likely to affect housing affordability negatively. Detached
                         homes often provide options for families seeking more space at a lower cost compared to multi-dwellings.
                         By limiting these options, there may be a risk of reducing the availability of affordable housing for larger
                         families or those seeking more private living arrangements.
                         The zone has and should continue to allow a lesser use and then authorise a more intense use rather
                         than prescribe only a more intense use.
                         If multi-dwelling is to be authorised, the zone should also allow a site cover plot ratio that is of a lesser
                         density to allow for the construction of a ""granny flat"" style second dwelling of smaller GFA with a lower
                         total GFA coverage.
                         One of the stated objectives of the proposal is to reinforce a range of medium density housing types for
                         permanent residents. It is important to recognise that higher-density multi-dwellings, for the reasons
                         stated above under the heading ""Economics"" do not automatically translate to affordable permanent
                         accommodation. To maximise the investment already made in our property and then taking into account
                         the cost per multi-dwelling could clearly mean that permanent housing costs do not decrease but in fact
                         will increase.
                         It is also not clear as to what permanent housing stock is capable of being created in locations immediately
                         adjacent the beach. The underlying costs of these assets means that the permanent rental that is required
                         to be charged is not payable by those that Council is seeking to provide for. Larger single detached


                                                                                                                                          56
Table of Submissions made regarding Noosa Plan 2020 Proposed Amendment No. 2, 2024