Town Planning Report - Development Application 90 Beach Road, Noosa North Shore 28 June 2016

                                                                  15006 – North Shore Beach Houses June 2016




A recent Judgement made by the Supreme Court of Queensland (Savage % Anor v Cairns Regional
Council (2016) QCA 103), confirmed that the consent of the body corporate for the development
application is not required.

The above case involved the change of use from “Holiday Accommodation” to “Holiday
Accommodation/Multiple Dwelling”, which the relevant body corporate opposed. The advice
received in relation to that case is that:

   •   provided the proposed use involves the use of common property for access purposes only,
       common property does not form part of the land the subject of the application and need not
       be included in the IDAS Form 1; and
   •   if there was to be no development of the common property (e.g. no material increase in the
       scale of the use of common property) the common property does not form part of the
       application and it follows that the consent of the body corporate is not required.

The Court upheld this position, which is the same scenario for the proposed development, being
over the 19 existing allotments not involving common property and no building work being
proposed.


3. Background

On 14 October 2014, the subject site was granted a preliminary approval for material change of use
for development in accordance with the Noosa North Shore Eco-Tourism Portal Development Code
(Development Code). The preliminary approval was granted under section 3.1.6 of the Integrated
Planning Act 1997 (now repealed), which had the affect of overriding the planning scheme.

The preliminary approval allowed for the development of land at 30 Beach Road, 168 Maximillian
Road, 1-24/90 Beach Road and 25-49/90 Beach Road, Noosa North Shore; however further
development permits were required in accordance with the Development Code. A copy of the
Structure Plan for the development contained in the Development Code is provided as Figure 2.

The preliminary approval allowed for the development of the subject land, which is located in the
East Development Zone (refer Figure 2), in accordance with a Development Code. The preliminary
approval provided primarily for visitor accommodation in varying forms. The subsequent
applications were assessed against the preliminary approval and not the planning scheme.

The preliminary approval provided its own table of assessment contained in the Development Code.
According to the table of assessment, the further development applications to obtain a
development permit were code assessable, not requiring a public notification, which is important
when considering this development proposal for detached housing.

A number of subsequent applications were lodged requesting to change the preliminary approval,
including extensions to the relevant period or currency of the approval. However, the most recent
request granted an extension to 14 October 2014. Consequently, the preliminary approval has now
lapsed and is at an end and has no relevance in the assessment of the application, other than to
provide background information.




                                                                                Page 5