Original source · versioned page text
Meeting minutes
ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 SEPTEMBER 2024
That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the Planning
& Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2024 regarding
Application Numbers 51981.3345.01 & 51984.3154.01 to make a minor change
to two (2) development approvals for a takeaway seafood kiosk situated at 185
Weyba Rd, Noosaville and:
A. Defer the decision on the application to allow Council and the applicant to co-
fund and brief an agreed Counsel to consider the separate legal opinions of each
party's advisors; and
B. That the opinion of Counsel be provided to Council at a future meeting for
consideration.
For: Crs Lorentson and Phillips
Against: Crs Finzel, Stockwell, Wilson and Wilkie
Lost.
Council Resolution
Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell
Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel
That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the Planning
& Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 September 2024 regarding
Application Numbers 51981.3345.01 & 51984.3154.01 to make a minor change
to two (2) development approvals for a takeaway seafood kiosk situated at 185
Weyba Rd, Noosaville and:
A. Refuse the change for the following reasons:
The proposed changes do not constitute a minor change to the
development approvals as defined by the Planning Act 2016, as the
changes will result in a substantially different development.
The proposed bakery (service shop) is not consistent with the Residential
A zoning intent under the 1973 Planning Scheme for Noosa Shire or the
Medium Density Residential zone under Noosa Plan 2020 and is more
appropriately located in a centre zone.
The proposed bakery is not consistent with Overall Outcomes 2(a), (d), (e)
& (j) and Performance Outcomes & Acceptable Outcomes PO1, PO5,
AO5.1, AO5.2 of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code under Noosa
Plan 2020 as:
a. The proposed bakery is not a residential use and is not compatible
with surrounding residential uses.
b. The proposed bakery is more appropriately accommodated in a
centre zone and the land maintained for dual occupancies,
multiple dwellings and the like.
c. The proposal is likely to adversely impact on surrounding
resident’s amenity.
B. The proposal is not consistent with Overall Outcomes 2(a) & (b) and
Performance Outcome and Acceptable Outcome PO6 and AO6.1 of the
Driveways and Parking Code as the proposal provides insufficient on-site car
parking and is likely to generate additional demand for car parking compared to
the takeaway seafood kiosk.
For: Crs Finzel, Stockwell, Wilson and Wilkie
Against: Crs Lorentson and Phillips
Carried.
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the original