Planning Statement · 132004.240098

Page 2

The owner of shop 3 seeks approval to utilise the shop for a restaurant. Attachment A provides plans
prepared by Andrew Mckellar Design which detail the location of a kitchen on site and the approved
outdoor dining areas.

The proposal does not involve and additional building works or floor area. All existing service areas
and infrastructure will be utilized.

In support of the proposal the following is noted:

    •   2004/240098 (23789DA) approves the premises as a shop and outdoor dining area;

    •   An existing restaurant exists on the site; and

    •   All works are internal to the premises.



Sustainable Planning Act
Section 367 of the Sustainable Planning Act defines a permissible change for a development approval
as:

         (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; or
        (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
        (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
        (d) cause development to which the approval relates to include any prohibited development.

The proposed change is considered to comply with the requirements of the Sustainable Planning Act
as detailed below:

        (a) result in a substantially different development;

           The proposed change does not result in a substantially different development as minimal
           works are proposed and the uses on site remain the same.


        (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

           No concurrence agencies would be triggered by the proposal and the level of assessment
           has not altered.

        (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;

Page 3

           One not properly made submission was lodged in response to public notification of the
           application. The submitter raised concerns with the need for restaurants in the area and
           the location of the restaurant.

           The original approval was assessed under the 1985 Planning Scheme which included the
           site in the Residential Medium Density zone. This Planning Scheme has now been
           superseded by The Noosa Plan 2006 which includes the site in the Visitor Mixed use zone
           in which Entertainment and dining business (restaurants) are consistent uses and
           supported by the scheme. It is noted that the current 2006 scheme also indicates that
           restaurants are not to have an adverse impact on the surrounding area. The subject
           premises are located adjacent to Gympie Terrace and are well separated from the
           adjoining unit development. Further restaurants are now a well accepted use along
           Gympie Terrace and it is unlikely that a person would make a valid submission objecting to
           an additional restaurant in the area.

        (d) cause development to which the approval relates to include any prohibited development.

            Not prohibited development.

The proposal is therefore considered to be able to be considered as permissible change.


Noosa Plan

The site is included in the Noosaville Locality which provides a Visitor Mixed Use zoning over the
property. The proposal has been reviewed against the provisions of the Noosa Plan and is
considered to generally fulfill the provisions of the planning scheme.

The proposal does not increase site cover, gross floor area or affect landscaped open space and
merely changes the use of the premises from a shop to a restaurant.

In terms of carparking the entire development was required to provide a total of 32 carparking spaces
on site with 6 spaces being attributable to the shop component. This translates to 3 spaces for each
shop tenancy.

The Noosa Plan 2006 details car parking for Entertainment & dining business at a rate of 1 space
per 10m2,or part thereof, of use area and outdoor dining area (excluding kitchen and food storage
areas) on the property…

Based on the new Entertainment & dining business (restaurant) layout the premises attract car
parking as follows:

    •   Kitchen: 28m2            - Nil car parking spaces
    •   Dining area: 28m2        - 3 car parking spaces
    •   Outdoor dining: 12m2     - Nil area already approved and assessed for outdoor dining

To facilitate the change to the approval to permit the use of the tenancy for a Entertainment & dining
business (restaurant), condition 25 of the 2004/240098 (23789 DA) will be required to be deleted.
Condition 25 states:

Page 4

The condition is considered unreasonable and irrelevant due to the change in the Planning Scheme since
the permit was originally issued and the overall change to the character of the area. The condition is
requested to be deleted as part of this application.


CONCLUSION
The request to change the approved plans to convert an existing shop to an Entertainment & dining
business (restaurant) complies with the requirements of the Noosa Plan 2006 and is considered consistent
with the desired intent of the area.

It is considered the proposed changes are consistent with the provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act
and the applicant seeks Council support for the proposal.

The attached development application includes:

               Proposal plans prepared by Andrew McKellar Design;

               A completed Sunshine Coast Council Request to Change Existing Approval and/or
               Extension of Relevant Period form; and

               Councils application fee of $935.00 will be paid separately.


The Assessment Manager’s favourable consideration of the above development application is therefore
recommended. Please contact our Sunshine Coast office if you require any further information and/or
clarification with respect to the above application.


Yours sincerely,




Nadine Gorton
Senior Town Planner
Martoo Consulting Pty Ltd

Page 5

                                                                          Attachments
  ___________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment A – Proposal Plans