2019-04-09 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                          9 APRIL 2019


5                        PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 245 OF 2019 (M DESIGN &
                         FOURTEEN ENTERPRISES) - REFUSAL OF A MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT
                         APPROVAL FOR ADDITION OF A SWIMMING POOL AND DECK AT 42 SEAVIEW
                         TERRACE, SUNSHINE BEACH
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION




Author                               Manager Development Assessment, Kerri Coyle
                                     Environment & Sustainable Development Department

Index                                ECM/ Application/ 51987.2951.01 / Case / 245/2019 M Design and Fourteen
                                     Enterprises Pty Ltd

Attachments                          Nil



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.

RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 9 April 2019 regarding Planning & Environment Court
Appeal No. 245 of 2019 and agree to defend the appeal.


REPORT
A report on this application to change an existing development approval for a house to facilitate
the construction of a swimming pool and extend a deck within the Coastal Building Line at 42
Seaview Terrace, Sunshine Beach was considered by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 20
December 2018.
At the Ordinary Meeting Council found the proposal was contrary to the Noosa Plan and state
policy for coastal management and accordingly resolved to refuse the application for the
following reasons:
1.                       The proposal is in conflict with the assessment benchmarks of the State Planning Policy as
                         it proposes development in an Erosion Prone Area and Natural Hazard Area.
2                        Development seaward of the Coastal Building Line is contrary to the building setbacks
                         contained in the Planning Scheme and the setback provided under State Code 8; Coastal
                         Development and Tidal Works of the State development assessment provisions.
3.                       Recent modelling carried out by the Council indicates significant erosion is likely to occur in
                         the future which may threaten life and property should the proposed development proceed.
4.                       The proposal does not comply with the Planning Scheme in force at the time of the original
                         approval, given the extent of excavation and vegetation removal in a sand dune area.
5.                       The proposal does not comply with the Natural Resources Overlay Code for Coastal
                         Protection as it has the potential to adversely impact on natural coastal processes.
6.                       Given the site is affected by the Coastal Building Line and is located in a highly vulnerable
                         erosion prone area, the proposed 6m setback is not sufficient to minimise the risk of
                         erosion.
7.                       The proposal does not comply with the Biodiversity Overlay Code as vegetation is
                         proposed to be removed within the Environmental Protection Overlay placing the integrity
                         and resilience of the foreshore at risk.
                                                                                                         Page 55 of 90