MCU10/2083 Development Application part 2 - Attachment 1 - Town Planning Report & Code Assessment_FINAL_291010

KHA DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS                                                         TOWN PLANNING REPORT 100407




6.3.6 APPLICABLE CODES

The proposed development is Impact Assessable and is subject to the following primary codes:

     Noosaville Locality Code

     Business Uses Code

     Landscaping Code

     Engineering Works Codes
         Driveways and Carparking Code
         Transport, Roads and Drainage Code
         Erosion and Sediment Control Code
         Existing Services Code
         Earthworks Code
         Waste Management Code

An assessment of the applicable codes has been undertaken by KHA Development Managers and
included in Attachment 1. This code assessment has determined that the proposal generally complies
with all probable solutions and specific outcomes. Where probable solutions are not met, an
alternative solution demonstrating compliance with the specific outcome is provided, with the
exception of specific outcomes O43 and O44 of table 11.16 of the Noosaville Locality Code, which
identify the proposal as an inconsistent use.

Sufficient grounds to justify the proposal, despite this conflict are detailed in section 6.4 of the report
below.


6.4 TOWN PLANNING GROUNDS

In accordance with section 326 (1) (b) of the Sustainable Planning Act the assessment managers
decision must not conflict with a relevant instrument unless there are sufficient grounds to justify the
decision, despite the conflict.

Grounds are defined in schedule 3 of the Act as:

grounds, for sections 326(1)(b) and 329(1)(b)—
1 Grounds means matters of public interest.
2 Grounds does not include the personal circumstances of an applicant, owner or interested party.

As demonstrated by the assessment against the Noosa Plan above, the only conflict with a relevant
instrument is specific outcomes O43 and O44 of table 11.16 of the Noosaville Locality Code. These
specific outcomes identify the proposal as an inconsistent use. In this regard the following provides
sufficient planning grounds to warrant approval of the application despite the conflict.

It has been well established by the Planning and Environment Court that demonstration of ‗need‘ is a
sufficient planning ground and a matter of public interest. Need, in planning terms, was described by
Skoien DCJ in Harburg Investments Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council & Anor 1 as:

―Need does not mean pressing need, critical need, widespread desire or anything of that nature
rather, a thing is needed if it its provision taking all things into account would improve the physical



1
    [2001] QPELR 313 at 317


DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – CONVENIENCE CENTRE                              PAGE 18
37 GIBSON ROAD, NOOSAVILLE
LOT 1 RP 802167