2016-07-12 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                    12 JULY 2016


4.   CONSULTATION
The applicant and landowner of the lot attended two meetings with Council on the 24 June 2016
and 27 June 2016. Council officers advised that the relaxations sought will not be supported. The
applicant provided written correspondence to Council in association to the proposal which is set
out below:

1)    “I am asking for 1.5m relaxation on the 6.0m Setback. I believe that this is very reasonable.
     I have altered my plans on three occasions, each time reducing the width of the pool and
     path area. Given that our boundary is approximately 100 metres from the High Tide datum,
     I struggle to see what difference 1.5m would make. I was told by the council representative,
     that a 1.5m relaxation was being granted to a property that is four houses from us.”

The Natural Resources Overlay code nominates a 6.0m setback as a Specific Outcome of the
scheme. The planning scheme applies a precautionary principal in provisioning the setback. In
conjunction with the building setback, the Code seeks for the rear of the lot to be revegetated to
increase dunal stability and mitigate the risk of natural coastal processes, such as erosion. The
site has an approximate 78m buffer to the foreshore directly to the east. An existing 10m strip of
vegetation within the Reserve beyond the rear property boundary has been cleared, converted to
lawn and regularly mowed.
Recent weather events in New South Wales resulted in scour and erosion along the coastline to
a length of 40m. The intent of the Natural Resources Overlay code is to reinforce dunal stability
to the extent that is reasonable along properties within a Coastal Protection Area. The provisions
apply a precautionary principal to accommodate climate change including sea level rises and
more severe and frequent storm events.
2)   “There are many properties within the eastern beaches that have new construction
     undertaken within the Set back area determined in the ‘Environmental Overlay’. I am not in
     a position to know if these have gained approval from Council.”

It is evident that existing development along Lorikeet Drive and south Peregian has extended and
been sited, through time within the current 6.0m setback requirement of The Noosa Plan. Council
records generally indicate that since The Noosa Plan gazetted in 2006, new development and
redevelopment has only been permitted within the 6.0m setback where reasonable grounds
applied, for instance where an existing development has been sited well within the minimum
setback making it unreasonable to significantly alter an existing footprint in applying a 6.0m
setback.
It is also noted that a large number of existing dwellings within south Peregian were approved
prior 2004 when the local government area of the former Maroochy Shire Council included south
Peregian. The former Maroochy Plan 2000 permitted more relaxed development within the area
including in particular setback and building height relaxations usually not supported under the
current Noosa Plan.
3)   “What I do know is that in speaking to two builders, two certifiers, two pool builders, one
     building designer and six property owners, that also front the eastern beaches, not one
     individual was aware of the existence of this setback.”
Building certifiers are required to implement the outcomes of the scheme. If a variation or
relaxation is required, Council approval is to be obtained. Council officers have prepared an
information sheet provided to local certifiers. The information sheet provides guidance relating to
where an application is triggered. Building certifiers must familiarise themselves with The Noosa
Plan when making assessments against it.




                                                                                    Page 7 of 185