Minor Change Report 132004.240120.3

APPLICATION FOR A MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Author	Contract Planner, Ben Thrower
Development Assessment

APPLICATION DETAILS
Application No.	132004.240120.3
Development Approval	Dwelling in Sand Dune Problem Area
Applicant	Mr John Krimmer
Request Received On	29 July 2019

PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address	26 Arakoon Cres Sunshine Beach Qld 4567
RP Description	Lot 795 RP 48111 Lot 795 RP 48111
Land Area	No Land Area details available
Existing Use of Land	Residential

STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation	Urban
Locality	Eastern Beaches
Zone	Detached Housing
Overlays	Natural Hazards (Coastal Protection Area)
Assessment Type	Minor Change to Development Approval

PROPOSAL
The applicant seeks approval to change an existing approval for a Detached House by way of alterations and additions for a new enclosed entry level deck in the form of:
An enclosed 4.49m high extension located flush (i.e. 0m) to the southern boundary line over a length of 7.23m resulting in an additional 10m² site cover to the middle level; and
A concrete roof with gravel and vegetation planted on the roof.
The building will replace an existing unenclosed entry and pond located on the southern boundary.
As a result of the proposed alterations and additions, changes to existing conditions 1 and 50 are required to:
Update the ‘approved plan’ references; and
Change an existing conditioned setback to the southern boundary from 1.2m to 0m.
The application is supported by a letter from the adjoining southern boundary landowner stating they have no concerns regarding the proposed extensions and feel there will be no impact to them.
Key considerations include:
The side boundary setback sought is within 1.5m of the boundary, at 0m setback; and
The existing and proposed site cover exceeds Noosa Plan’s ‘40% site cover for all storeys’ Performance Outcome.
The locality and relevant proposal plans are included below (Figures 1 to 4).

Figure 1: Locality Plan

Figure 2: Proposed Entry Alterations Marked in Red

Figure 3: Proposed Entry Alterations Marked in Red

Figure 4: Proposed Entry Alterations Prespectives

background
On 14 October 2004 Council granted a Development Permit for a Dwelling House in a Sand Dune Problem Area at 26 Arakoon Crescent, Sunshine Beach.  The applicant submitted representations to Conditions of the approval and Council issued a Negotiated Decision Notice on 23 March 2005.
On 25 August 2006 Council granted a changed development permit.  The revised permit allowed the following changes:
Reduced basement (lower ground) area and amended retaining wall layout to allow a stepped profile and to reduce the overall depth of excavation;
Addition of a small beach entry deck (on ground) to the southern elevation of the building; and
Addition of a small services court (terraced area) to the northwest of the site.
The Dwelling House has since been constructed.
The relevant approved plans are included below (Figures 5 and 6).

Figure 5: Elevation Plan approved 25 August 2006

Figure 6: Elevation Plan approved 25 August 2006

assessment
Instruments for Statutory Assessment
Under the Planning Act 2016 the application must be assessed against each of the following statutory planning instruments to the extent they are relevant to the development:
State Planning Policy;
South East Queensland Regional Plan;
Planning Regulation 2017;
The Noosa Plan.
The following codes from the Noosa Plan are applicable to this development:
Eastern Beaches Locality Code;
Detached House Code;
Natural Hazards Overlay Code.
Statutory Process
The applicant has requested to make a minor change to a development approval under s78 of the Planning Act 2016. An application for a minor change to a development approval can only be made in circumstances where a change would constitute a ‘minor change’.
The proposed change to the development approval is determined to constitute a minor change on the grounds that:
the development would not result in substantially different development as it seeks a minor change to the existing approved building footprint and layout;
the change does not include prohibited development;
the change would not require the application to be referred to an additional referral agency or cause a referral agency to have regard to new mattes prescribed by regulation;
where the original application was code assessable, the change would not cause the application to become impact assessable.
Statutory Instruments – Planning Scheme
The subject site is located in the Eastern Beaches Locality and is zoned Detached Housing. The proposed use is defined as consistent use in accordance with the zone provisions and is required to follow a minor change application process.
The application has been found to generally comply with all applicable statutory instruments. Pertinent issues arising out of the assessment are listed in Table 2.
Table 2: Pertinent issues arising out of the assessment
Criteria	Planning Scheme	Existing/Approved	Proposed	Complies
Side Boundary Setback	1.5m	A minimum of 1.2 metres from the southern side boundary as shown on the approved plan of development. Otherwise 1.5m	0m setback where alterations and additions marked in red on approved plans of development prepared by sparkesarchitects. Otherwise: A minimum of 1.2 metres from the southern side boundary as shown on the existing approved development. Otherwise 1.5m	X
Site Cover	40% for all storeys for a building 2 storeys or more.	38.5% based on applicants calculations.		X
Side Boundary Setback
The proposed side boundary setback located flush (i.e. 0m) to the southern boundary is considered to comply with the corresponding Noosa Plan Performance Outcome as the proposed alterations and additions:
Provide for amenity of users of the premises;
Does not require any existing vegetation to be removed;
Includes roof top soft landscaping;
Is consistent with the visual continuity and pattern of other development in the street;
Is located central to the southern side boundary and downhill from key view lines from the road; and
Will have very limited impact on view lines from the beach and therefore does not impact on the natural character and visual amenity of the beachfront.
The proposal does not alter sightlines from the road to the beach, as there is already a structure (door to stairway) which restricts sightlines.
While the proposed setback and built form could impact on the visual and acoustic privacy of adjoining properties and be deemed to not provide adequate distance from adjoining dwelling, the subject landowner has provided a letter stating they have no concerns regarding the proposed extensions and feel there will be no impact to them.
Site Cover
While the existing plans do not provide an exact site cover measurement, the consultant’s report concludes site cover is 38.5%.  The proposed 10m² additional site cover adds approximately 1.5% site cover.
The additional site cover is considered reasonable as it will:
Be inconsequential to the overall scale of the development and surrounding development, which consist of other similar sized dwellings;
Will not present as bulk to roadways and other areas as the alterations and additions are located central to the southern side boundary and downhill from key view lines; and
Will not require removal of any vegetation and includes some soft landscaping on the roof top.
While it is noted that there is potential additional bulk when viewed from the immediately adjoining property, that landowner has provided a letter stating they have no concerns regarding the proposed extensions and feel there will be no impact to them.
Condition 1
“Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the approved plans of development prepared by Gabriel & Elizabeth Poole – Design Company.  The approved plans are WD 1.1 Rev B, WD1.2 Rev B and WD2.2 Rev B dated 12 July 2006 and WD1.3 Rev A, WD1.4 Rev A, WD1.5 Rev A, WD 2.1 Rev A, WD2.3 Rev A, WD3.1 Rev A, WD3.2 Rev A, WD3.3 Rev A, WD3.4 Rev A WD, 3.5 Rev A, and WD 3.6 Rev A dated 24 April 2006 and as may be amended by these conditions.”
Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested that Condition 1 is amended as required in response to the proposed alterations and amendments.
Assessment of Request
It is noted a new set of complete plans, drawn by a different entity, has been provided, while the application itself relates to only proposed alterations and additions for a new enclosed entry level deck.
On this basis it is recommended that the original approved plans remain as the approved plans and that the proposed new set of plans are approved only to the extent where directly relating to alterations and additions marked in red.  On this basis, the condition is changed as follows:

Condition 1 – Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with:
The approved plans of development prepared by Gabriel & Elizabeth Poole – Design Company.  The approved plans are WD 1.1 Rev B, WD1.2 Rev B and WD2.2 Rev B dated 12 July 2006 and WD1.3 Rev A, WD1.4 Rev A, WD1.5 Rev A, WD 2.1 Rev A, WD2.3 Rev A, WD3.1 Rev A, WD3.2 Rev A, WD3.3 Rev A, WD3.4 Rev A WD, 3.5 Rev A, and WD 3.6 Rev A dated 24 April 2006 and as may be amended by these conditions; and
The alterations and additions marked in red on plans of development prepared by sparkesarchitects.  The approved alterations and additions are SD1.1 Rev01, SD1.6 Rev01, SD1.7 Rev01, SD2.1 Rev01, SD2.2 Rev01, SD3.1 Rev01 and SD3.2 Rev01 dated 14 August 2019 and as may be amended by these conditions.

Condition 50
“The dwelling is to be set back a minimum of 1.2 metres from the southern side boundary as shown on the approved plan of development.”
Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested that Condition 50 is amended as required in response to the proposed alterations and amendments.
Assessment of Request
It is recommended the condition is changed only as required to reflect the proposed 0m setback resulting from the alterations and additions marked as red on the new set of plans as follows:

Condition 50 - The dwelling is to be set back a minimum of 1.2 metres from the southern side boundary as shown on the approved plan of development except alterations and additions marked in red on approved plans prepared by sparkesarchitects, 14 August 2019.

draft planning scheme
Under New draft Noosa Plan the site is zoned Low Density Residential Zone.
It is noted the corresponding Local Plan Code does not prescribe a site cover threshold.  Alternatively, the corresponding zone code includes a ‘40% site cover provision for both storeys’ as an acceptable outcome with any alternative site cover sought subject to assessment against the corresponding Performance Outcome, being:
“Development:
is of a scale compatible with surrounding development and the particular circumstances of the site;
has a low site impact to maximise the opportunity to retain site characteristics, such as native vegetation and natural landforms;
allows the opportunity to provide soft landscaping between buildings;
does not present an appearance of bulk to adjacent properties, roads or other areas in the vicinity of the site.”
The proposed alterations and additions are considered to satisfy with this Performance Outcome for the same reasons provided in the above assessment (refer to Chapter 3.3).
cONSULTATION
Referral Agencies
Nil
It is noted the Decision Notice refers to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a Concurrence Agency due to the lot being located within the Coastal Management District.  However there is no response from the EPA is enclosed as part of the Decision Notice.
A review of the file concludes that the reference to EPA as a Concurrence Agency appears to be an administrative error as a letter was received from the EPA on 24 May 2004 stating it is not a Concurrence Agency for the original application.
Council’s delegated planning officer liaised with representatives from the Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning (DSDMIP) on 14 August 2019 seeking confirmation if EPA or DSDMIP are a Referral Agency for the application.  The discussion concluded that neither entity are a Referral Agency.
On this basis, is recommended the changed Decision Notice deletes reference to EPA being a Referral Agency.
Other Referrals
Nil
conclusion & reasons for decision
The application seeks additions and alterations to an existing detached dwelling for a new enclosed entry level deck in the form of:
An enclosed 4.49m high building located flush (i.e. 0m side boundary setback) to the boundary line over a length of 7.23m resulting in an additional 10m² site cover to the middle level; and
A concrete roof with gravel and vegetation on the roof.
The proposed development is considered to generally comply with the original approved development and does not raise any significant issues that cannot be addressed by reasonable and relevant conditions. The application is therefore recommended for approval.
The report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
RECOMMENDATION
With regard to Application No. 132004.240120.3, to make a minor change to an existing approval for ‘Dwelling in Sand Dune Problem Area’ situated at 26 Arakoon Cres Sunshine Beach Qld described as Lot 795 RP 48111, Council on decided to:
A.	Approve the change.
B.	Delete reference to EPA being a Referral Agency.
C.	Amend conditions 1 and 50 to read as follows:
Condition 1 – Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with:
The approved plans of development prepared by Gabriel & Elizabeth Poole – Design Company.  The approved plans are WD 1.1 Rev B, WD1.2 Rev B and WD2.2 Rev B dated 12 July 2006 and WD1.3 Rev A, WD1.4 Rev A, WD1.5 Rev A, WD 2.1 Rev A, WD2.3 Rev A, WD3.1 Rev A, WD3.2 Rev A, WD3.3 Rev A, WD3.4 Rev A WD, 3.5 Rev A, and WD 3.6 Rev A dated 24 April 2006 and as may be amended by these conditions; and
The alterations and additions marked in red on plans of development prepared by sparkesarchitects.  The approved alterations and additions are SD1.1 Rev01, SD1.6 Rev01, SD1.7 Rev01, SD2.1 Rev01, SD2.2 Rev01, SD3.1 Rev01 and SD3.2 Rev01 dated 14 August 2019 and as may be amended by these conditions.

Condition 50 - The dwelling is to be set back a minimum of 1.2 metres from the southern side boundary as shown on the approved plan of development except alterations and additions marked in red on approved plans of development prepared by sparkesarchitects, 14 August 2019.

[word/footer1.xml]
Page 1 of 1

[word/header1.xml]
3

[Attachment: image2.png (image text)]
950
FFL
=|
upper FFL - 27 250
=
middle
==
lower floor- FFL -20 700,
S
S
YA

[Attachment: image5.png (image text)]
 

      
     

 

 

Area subject to proposed
alterations and additions

EAST ELEVATION

yaaa
rosea

 


[Attachment: image6.png (image text)]
 

 

 

Area subject to proposed
alterations and additions