Further Council Report MCU21-0110.pdf

                    3. The proposed development conflicts with the State Planning Policy, State interest -
                       emissions and hazardous activities as it is in proximity of an existing Sewage Treatment
                       Plant and risks inhibiting the sewage treatment plant from functioning safely and effectively
                       due to potential reverse amenity impacts.
                    4. When read as a whole, the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (SEQRP) does not
                       lend support to the proposed use of the land, as:
                              a. the SEQRP sets a long term, 50-year vision, establishing aspirations for this region
                                 up to 2067. Given this, the timing and sequencing of residential developments
                                 occurring within the Urban Footprint is a finer grained detail, the planning for which
                                 is implemented through local government planning schemes;
                              b. the designation of land as being within the Urban Footprint does not imply that all
                                 that land with that designation can be developed for urban purposes; and
                              c. when assessed against Noosa Plan 2020, the proposed development is not
                                 suitable for urban development.
                    5. Noosa Plan 2020 appropriately integrates and advances the South East Queensland
                       Regional Plan 2017, as set out in section 2.2 of the planning scheme.
                    6. The proposed development has failed to demonstrate a significant planning need to
                       develop outside of the urban boundary, particularly at the density and intensity proposed
                       and where inconsistent with the local landscape character. Nor has any overriding
                       community benefit been demonstrated, which would justify approval despite its conflict with




                                                                                   4
                       the planning scheme.
                    7. Many valid planning grounds have been raised by submitters that the proposal represents




                                                                            T
                       an unacceptable level of impact on the amenity of the locality. Further, the development
                       exceeds what a community member could reasonably expect because of the change to the
                                                                  EN
                       Tourism Accommodation Zone when the Noosa Plan 2020 was advertised.
               On 19 July the applicant stopped the decision-making period until 29 September 2023, as this was
               done prior to prior to the Ordinary Meeting of 20 July 2023 Council was not able to decide the
                                                        M

               application. The decision-making period recommenced on 29 September 2023.
               Ordinary Meeting Minutes, 20 July 2023, Item 8.3 Page 10
                                                       H


               That Council note the report by the Development Assessment Manager to the Planning &
                                                  C



               Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 July 2023 regarding Application No. MCU21/0110 for a
               Development Permit for Material Change of Use – Bar, Food and Drink Outlet, Outdoor Sport and
                                        TA




               Recreation, Resort Complex at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Heads and note that the Applicant
               has stopped the current period.
               The applicant has not amended the layout of the proposed development however has provided
                                AT




               several written submissions (ATTACHMENT 4) which have included an analysis of the
               submissions made during the notification period, a letter from a solicitor reviewing the grounds of
               refusal, and a further letter from the applicant’s planning consultant seeking to justify grounds to
               support the development.
               The applicant’s submissions include an assessment of planning need, referring to an Economic
               Impact Assessment provided as part of the application material which identified a significant need
               for short-term accommodation in Noosa with an estimate that, even now, there is a shortage of
               683 rooms. The report also forecasts a gross regional product of $25.71M and employment for
               202 people during construction. When operating, the annual gross regional product is $14.29M
               and generates 159 jobs. It is noted the economic benefits of the proposal we not discussed
               during the July round of meetings.

               Unitywater have recently provided additional written correspondence to Council in which they
               maintain the position that they do not support the development in its current location.
               The officer recommendation remains in support of the application. During the July General
               Committee Meeting it was identified that the proposed condition requiring guests to be advised of
               the potential for odour from the sewage treatment plant may influence guests’ perception of the
               presence of odour, and result in unsubstantiated odour complaints. In this regard, it is
               recommended that condition 13 of the original recommendation be deleted.

                                                                                                          Page 2 of 5

Document Set ID: 22632986
Version: 7, Version Date: 07/11/2023