Cover letter

Page 2

3.0    Background
The approval was originally issued by the Planning and Environment Court on 8 August 2001. The
approval has been subsequently changed with the most recent change issued on 2 November 2006.
The approved changes included new toilets, additional landscaping and shade structures.

4.0     Summary of the proposed changes to the approval
The proposed changes can generally be described as a refurbishment of the shopping centre and
modification of parking areas. The enclosed Site Plan prepared by Thomson Adsett includes a Scope
of Works summary that identifies the following works as being proposed:

       Demolish existing specialty tenancies 7-9 to enable existing supermarket to expand;
       Reconfigure existing tenancies 10 & 11 and add new tenancy in place of 11A;
       Paint all exterior walls;
       New soffits to existing entry canopies;
       Remove all external wall and parapet specialty tenancy signage;
       Reconfigure parking bays, line markings, islands, speed humps, wheel stops, kerb ramps,
        footpaths as per TTM drawings;
       Add new outdoor dining area in place of existing parking spaces;
       Add new entry sign in front of new footpath;
       Replace entry feature, wall and pylon signage with new illuminated signage;
       Provide a new signage feature for specialty tenants to BWS wall near main entry;
       Remove shade awning over BWS entry and relocate existing tenancy entry door;
       Remove redundant awning and chain wire enclosure to rear wall;
       Replace external seats and provide new mall furniture.

The Development Schedule on the Site Plan prepared by Thomson Adsett identifies the Total Use Area
                       2           2       2
increasing from 4,512m to 4,539m (a 27m increase). To assist Council, the building areas have also
been described as Gross Floor Area (GFA), as defined in the Queensland Planning Provisions. The GFA
                     2           2     2
increases from 4,816m to 4,870m (54m ).

TTM Consulting (TTM) has been commissioned to review the existing car parking arrangements on the
site, identify any operational issues and recommend modifications. To improve traffic control and
pedestrian provisions and reduce conflict points, TTM have proposed modifications to the existing car
parking areas. These modifications, along with the changes proposed to the shopping centre, will
remove 15 existing parking spaces, leaving 280 parking spaces. TTM have prepared a suite of plans
illustrating the existing operational issues and the proposed modification works.

Amended Plans
As a result of the changes described above, the plans listed in Table 1 supersede the approved plans.

Table 1
Plan No.          Rev.      Plan Name                                                     Date
DA.01             4         Site Plan, prepared by Thomson Adsett                         23/08/2017
DA.02             2         Demolition Plan, prepared by Thomson Adsett                   15/08/2017
DA.03             3         Proposed Floor Plan, prepared by Thomson Adsett               23/08/2017
DA.04             2         Elevations, prepared by Thomson Adsett                        15/08/2017
DA.05             2         Detail Elevations, prepared by Thomson Adsett                 15/08/2017

Page 3

DA.06              2         Perspectives, prepared by Thomson Adsett                         15/08/2017
DA.07              3         Signage, prepared by Thomson Adsett                              05/09/2017
17BRT0143-02       C         Recommended Traffic Modifications – Site Plan, prepared          30/08/2017
Sheet 1 of 3                 by TTM Consulting
17BRT0143-02       C         Recommended Traffic Modifications – Northern Area,               30/08/2017
Sheet 2 of 3                 prepared by TTM Consulting
17BRT0143-02       C         Recommended Traffic Modifications – Southern Area,               30/08/2017
Sheet 3 of 3                 prepared by TTM Consulting

Changes to Conditions of the Decision Notice
The abovementioned changes cause amendments to several conditions in the approval. The
conditions below require changes. It is noted that the referenced conditions have been taken from the
original court order. These conditions did not appear to carry through to subsequent changes made
to the approval. Any new words proposed to be included are identified in bold, while any words to be
deleted are shown as struck out.

Condition 14
The current wording of the condition reads:

At least 295 off-street car parking spaces shall be provided with at least 5 of the spaces suitable for use
by persons with disabilities within close proximity to the main access to the retail areas and signed
appropriately. Access thereto shall be via a bitumen sealed or concrete pavement.

The car parking spaces and associated manoeuvring areas shall be in accordance with Australian
Standard AS2890.1-1993 with respect to dimension and gradient for User Class 3 and User Class 4 for
the disabled spaces.

It is requested that the condition is amended to reference the parking spaces shown on the plans
prepared by TTM and referencing the parking arrangement on the adjoining site as follows:

At least 295 280 off-street car parking spaces (including 31 spaces on the adjoining hotel site) shall
be provided with at least 5 6 of the spaces suitable for use by persons with disabilities within close
proximity to the main access to the retail areas and signed appropriately. Access thereto shall be via a
bitumen sealed or concrete pavement.

The car parking spaces and associated manoeuvring areas shall be in accordance with Australian
Standard AS2890.1-1993 with respect to dimension and gradient for User Class 3 and User Class 4 for
the disabled spaces.

Condition 15
The current wording of the condition reads:

The proposed carpark layout shall generally be in accordance with plan B1213/SK01-P13, dated 3
August 2001, prepared by Loucas Zahos Architects, except as modified herein.

Page 4

15.1    the car parking area to the south-west of the site shall be amended so that the aisle width
        between the centre carparking area and the southern boundary is at least 5.5 metres wide.
        This may result in the loss of the 2 adjacent car parking spaces.

15.2    Directional line-marking and sign-posting shall be provided on the circulation aisles around
        the retail extension. These shall include One Way Only, No Entry and Give Way signage and
        also directional pavement-markings at appropriate locations.

15.3    The kerb alignment shall be amended to provide a smoother trnaistion for vehicles making a
        left turn into the one-way aisle and also along the exit lanes from the eastern car park to
        Gibson Road.

The amended layout shall be submitted to Council in conjunction with an application for a
Development Permit for Operational Works – Carparking/Access.

It is requested that the condition is amended to reference the parking layout shown on the plans
prepared by TTM as follows:

The proposed carpark layout shall generally be in accordance with plans 17BRT0143-02 Sheets 1-3
Revision C dated 30 August 2017 prepared by TTM Consulting B1213/SK01-P13, dated 3 August
2001, prepared by Loucas Zahos Architects, except as modified herein.

15.1    the car parking area to the south-west of the site shall be amended so that the aisle width
        between the centre carparking area and the southern boundary is at least 5.5 metres wide.
        This may result in the loss of the 2 adjacent car parking spaces.

15.2    Directional line-marking and sign-posting shall be provided on the circulation aisles around
        the retail extension. These shall include One Way Only, No Entry and Give Way signage and
        also directional pavement-markings at appropriate locations.

15.3    The kerb alignment shall be amended to provide a smoother trnaistion for vehicles making a
        left turn into the one-way aisle and also along the exit lanes from the eastern car park to
        Gibson Road.

The amended layout shall be submitted to Council in conjunction with an application for a
Development Permit for Operational Works – Carparking/Access.

Condition 23
The current wording of the condition reads:

Minimum Floor Heights for the development shall be in accordance with the Planning Scheme at the
time of Issue of the Building Permit.

Given the minor nature of the extensions proposed, it is requested that the condition is amended to
allow the proposed extensions to match existing floor heights.

Page 5

Condition 26
The current wording of the condition reads:

Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the approved
plan of development. The approved plans are numbered B1213/SK01 issue P13 dated 3 August 2001
and relevant elevations including SK12 issue P1 dated 26 June 2001 prepared by Loucas Zahous
Architects and as may be amended by these conditions.

It is requested that the condition is amended to reference the updated plans as follows:

Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the approved
plans of development. The approved plans are numbered B1213/SK01 issue P13 dated 3 August 2001
DA.01-DA.07 and relevant elevations including SK12 issue P1 dated 26 June 2001 prepared by Loucas
Zahous Architects and as may be amended by these conditions prepared by Thomson Adsett and
17BRT0143-02 Sheets 1-3 prepared by TTM Consulting.

Condition 27
The current wording of the condition reads:

Six (6) coloured copies of the approved Plan of Development, including elevations with the carparking
table (see below) on the face of the plan, are to be provided to Council upon the approval of the
application, to enable amendment of the Planning Scheme, to include the Future Urban zoned portion
of the site, Lot 1 on SP 115778, Parish of Weyba in the Special Facilities (Shopping Centre and Car
park) Zone, consistent with the remainder of the site.

                  Total Use Area                                       4512m2
                  Parking Requirements
                  Spaces Existing                                      275
                  Spaces for new 300m2 (@ 1/15m2)                      20
                  TOTAL REQUIREMENT                                    295

                  Parking Provision
                  Car parking existing on site                         236
                  Spaces shared with Hotel (legal agreement)           31
                  Additional cars to be provided on Lot 1 on SP        27
                  115778 (shown hatched)
                  Additional car space provided with building          1
                  extension
                  TOTAL PROVISION                                      295

NOTE: 264 carparking spaces are provided on the subject site described as Lot 1 on SP 115778 for the
Noosa Village Shopping Centre development. The remaining 31 spaces required for this development
is provided by agreement with the property owner of Lot 2 on RP842280.

Page 6

The condition requires further plan amendments to be submitted to Council for incorporation into a
previous planning scheme amendment. This part of the condition is considered to be redundant.
Council may wish to include a condition regarding the total use area as follows:

The total use area of the development is 4,539m2.

Condition 29
The current wording of the condition reads:

A colour scheme for the development is to be provided to and approved by the Manager Land Use
prior to the commencement of building works. The use of unobtrusive and natural colours is to be
adopted.

The plans prepared by Thomson Adsett include the proposed colour scheme. The condition should be
amended to refer to the approved plans.

The A colour scheme for the development is to be generally in accordance with the approved plans
provided to and approved by the Manager Land Use prior to the commencement of building works.
The use of unobtrusive and natural colours is to be adopted.

5.0     Minor Change

MINOR CHANGE

The Planning Act 2016 defines a minor change as:

A minor change, for a development approval, is a change to the approval that —

        (a) would not result in a substantially different development; and

        The DA Rules state:

        In determining whether the proposed change would result in substantially different
        development, the assessment manager or referral agency must consider the individual
        circumstances of the development, in the context of the change proposed.

        A change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the proposed
        change:

           Involves a new use; or

            Comment: No new uses are proposed.

           Results in the application applying to a new parcel of land; or

            Comment: No new parcels of land have been included.

Page 7

   Dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale, bulk and appearance; or

    Comment: Dramatic changes to the approval are not proposed.

   Changes the ability of the proposed development to operate as intended (for example,
    reducing the size of a retail complex may reduce the capacity of the complex to service the
    intended catchment); or

    Comment: The proposed changes do not change the ability of the proposed development
    to operate as intended.

   Removes a component that is integral to the operation of the development; or

    Comment: The changes do not remove a component that is integral to the operation of
    the development.

   Significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport network, such as increasing traffic to
    the site; or

    Comment: The changes proposed do not significantly impact on traffic flows.

   Introduces new impacts or increases the severity of known impacts; or

    Comment: The proposed changes do not introduce new impacts or increase the severity of
    known impacts.

   Removes an incentive or offset component that would have balanced the negative impact
    of the development; or

    Comment: Not applicable.

   Impacts on infrastructure provisions.

    Comment: Not applicable.

(b) if a development application for the development, including the change, were made
    when the change application is made would not cause—

        A. the inclusion of prohibited development in the application; or

        Comment: The proposed changes will not result in the inclusion of any prohibited
        development in the approval.

        B. referral to a referral agency, other than to the chief executive, if there were
           no referral agencies for the development application; or

        Comment: Not applicable.

Page 8

                C. referral to extra referral agencies, other than to the chief executive; or

                Comment: No additional referral agencies would be triggered.

                D. a referral agency to assess the application against, or have regard to, matters
                   prescribed by regulation under section 55(2), other than matters the referral
                   agency must have assessed the application against, or have had regard to,
                   when the application was made; or

                Comment: Not applicable.

                E. public notification if public notification was not required for the
                   development application.

                Comment: The original application required impact assessment.

Accordingly, the subject change is a minor change.

ASSESSMENT
Pursuant to Clause 81(3) the responsible entity -
   (a) must assess against, or have regard to, the matters that applied when the development
       application was made; and

    (b) may assess against, or have regard to, the matters that applied when the change
        application was made.

        Comment: The Noosa Plan includes the site within the Noosaville Locality and the Business
        Centre Zone. The proposal is consistent with the overall outcomes of the Noosaville Locality
        Code.

        The proposal does not comply with Specific Outcome O80c) in that the proposal increases the
                                                                       2
        retail floor space of the centre. The proposal represents a 27m increase in Total Use Area and
                 2
        a 54m increase in Gross Floor Area. These are very modest increases equating to
        approximately 1% of existing areas. The proposal does not elevate the status of the centre.
        The proposal is also entirely consistent with Overall Outcome ss) vi) which states that Noosa
        Village Plaza retail centre provides for the local community needs of residents and visitors of
        Noosaville, with development resulting in no significant change in retail floor space.

        TTM has confirmed that the changes to the existing parking supply will improve vehicle and
        pedestrian safety and operational efficiency. TTM have also confirmed that the proposed
        parking supply is consistent with current best practice and exceeds minimum and peak
        parking demands.

Page 9

6.0     Conclusion

The proposed changes to approval reference 131999.982622 comply with the assessment
requirements of the Planning Act 2016 as demonstrated above. Accordingly we request that Council
issues a notice pursuant to the relevant sections of the Act approving the Change Application. We
look forward to Council’s decision on this matter.

I note that Council has issued Operational Works approvals for the shopping centre. Council may also
wish to reference the submitted plans prepared by Thomson Adsett and TTM against the Operational
Works approvals as being generally in accordance with the approved Operational Works plans.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me direct.

Yours faithfully
PROJECT URBAN




John McKennariey
Associate
Email: [email protected]

cc.       Fort Street Real Estate Capital