2019-04-09 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                  9 APRIL 2019


2.       SITE DETAILS
2.1. Background
On 13 May 2008 a Development Permit was granted for a Material Change of Use for Industrial
Business Type 1 & 2 and Education Type 3 uses to operate on the site.
On 20 July 2009, the Planning and Environment Court issued a consent order permitting a 9.5m
high Pylon Sign (Council reference 142008.1689). The sign was constructed soon afterwards
and now provides a place for businesses within the estate to advertise, as seen within Figure 2.
On the 14 October 2010, an estate containing eleven individual lots and common property was
created. The common property includes the driveway/access point to each lot and the location of
existing Pylon Sign.
On 16 February 2018 a minor change to the existing approval was granted which included plans
of development for the subject building (Council reference 132007.1841.7). The approved plan
identifies two proposed Wall Signs, with each sign complying with the Noosa Plan, being 4m
width, 1m height and a signface area of 4m² (refer to Figure 4).




     Figure 4 - Extract of plans approved 16 February 2018 illustrating two wall signs, each complying with the
                         Noosa Plan, being 4m width, 1m height and a signface area of 4m².

On or about 20 November 2018 Council’s compliance officer noted the existing sign does not
conform with:
       The signage plan assessed and approved as part of the preceding change to the existing
         approval; and
       The Noosa Plan provisions as they relate to Advertising Devices.
As a result the applicant was advised that the sign needed to be reduced to 4m² signface area or
an application (i.e. this application) would need to be submitted to Council.
Prior to lodgement of this application, the applicant’s representative contacted Council’s planning
department, whereby they were advised that Council’s planners would likely recommend the
application be refused based on conflicts with the Noosa Plan provisions. Regardless of this
advice, the applicant proceeded to lodge this application as is.




                                                                                                 Page 49 of 90