Original source · versioned page text
2015-10-13 Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda
Very large file: it may take a few minutes
The original of this document is very large (10.8 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
AGENDA
Planning & Organisation
Committee Meeting
Tuesday, 13 October 2015
commencing at 1.30pm
Committee Room, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin
Committee: Crs Joe Jurisevic (Chair), Noel Playford, Tony Wellington, Frank Wilkie
“Engagement with our community to protect and enhance our lifestyle”
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of sections 2 to 75 (of 110)
Section 2
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM PAGE
ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES -
PRESENTATIONS -
PLANNING & INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT REPORTS 3
Planning & Environment 3
1 STATE PLANNING REFORM - DRAFT PLANNING BILLS 3
2 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A
DETACHED HOUSE AT 38 PARK CRESCENT, SUNSHINE BEACH - MCU15/0070 21
3 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A
SERVICE AND UTILITY TYPE 3 (TOWER) AT DAVIS ROAD, COOTHARABA
(MCU15/0061) 41
4 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR
MULTIPLE HOUSING - TYPE 4 CONVENTIONAL FOR 16 UNITS AT 30-32
DOONELLA STREET, TEWANTIN (MCU15/0053) 57
5 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL D128/15 FOR A DEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION FOR OPERATIONAL WORKS (CLEARING VEGETATION ) IN AN
ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT AREA AT 10 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS 84
6 WALLACE PARK FLYING FOX MANAGEMENT PLAN 91
7 OYSTER RECRUITMENT ASSESSMENT PROJECT 95
CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORTS 100
ICT 100
8 UPDATE ON NOOSA COUNCIL'S INFORMATION COMMUNICATION
TECHNOLOGY (ICT) 100
Property and Facilities 104
9 PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT OF SUNRISE NEIGHBOURHOOD SHOP 2 LEASE 2
GRASSTREE CRT, SUNRISE BEACH 104
CLOSED SESSION 106
10 KIN KIN QUARRY BREACH
ACTION 106
Page 2 of 110
Section 3
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
PLANNING & INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT REPORTS
(Planning & Development Sections only)
Planning & Environment
1 STATE PLANNING REFORM - DRAFT PLANNING BILLS
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Manager, Planning & Environment, Kerri Coyle
Principal Strategic Planner, Rebecca Britton
Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator, Oddbjorn Ludvigsen
Planning & Infrastructure Department
Index ECM/Subject/Planning Instruments/State Planning
Attachments 1. Comments on Infrastructure Charges Provisions
2. Table of Feedback Sought on Proposed Options
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager, Planning & Environment, Principal Strategic
Planner and Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator to the Planning & Organisation
Committee Meeting dated 13 October 2015 and make a submission to the Department of
Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning on the draft Planning Bills in accordance
with the following:
A. The Planning & Development Bill and Planning & Development Regulations are not
clear in the decision rules, particularly for those applications which conflict with the
planning scheme. It is considered that where an application conflicts with the
planning scheme, the onus of proof should be on the applicant to prove the merits of
the proposal and justify any inconsistencies. Further, clear grounds and/or reasons
should be required to be provided as part of the decision in order to ensure a
transparent, accountable development assessment system for the community;
B. The definition of material change of use should not be limited to only increases in
scale and density of the premises, as there are circumstances where reducing the
scale of the development does materially change the site’s use. This is particularly
relevant for developments which include an important community use or the like. For
example removing the nursing home component from a retirement village may have
a significant social impact on an area;
C. Case law on the SPA definition of ‘use’ makes it clear that secondary uses forming
part of a primary use must not only be incidental, but also necessarily associated
such that it would be impossible for the primary use to be carried out in the absence
of the incidental use. The definition proposed in the Bill related to ‘use’ fundamentally
expands the activities that may be carried out because secondary activities need not
be necessarily associated with the primary use to be considered part of that use and
as a result, lawful. The regulation and enforcement of activities that were not
contemplated as part of a development approval (although ancillary) may prove
problematic for councils and undermine local communities’ understanding of the
development process;
Page 3 of 110
Section 4
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
D. The removal of the requirement to consider whether a person may make a properly
made submission objecting to change from the minor change test is likely to
undermine the communities input into development assessment matters, particularly
where they may be impacted upon by a proposed change;
E. The Planning Bill maintains and extends the time frame for applicants to be able
revive a development application where it lapses. This ability is not consistent with
the principles for the DA Rules of being an applicant driven process, and is likely to
create administrative problems for councils and lead to significant confusion for the
community, particularly submitters;
F. In the absence of demonstrable net benefit, no change is sought to the existing levels
of assessment or the terms used (i.e. code and impact) in the new legislation;
G. The proposed extension of Infrastructure Designation to privately owned
infrastructure is a significant policy shift and would remove due consideration by the
community, third party appeal rights and the need to comply with the planning
scheme. Infrastructure charges revenue would be forfeited and would result in a
considerable cost shift onto councils and their local communities. Statutory
requirements around community infrastructure should at a minimum enable council to
have a statutory role similar to a referral agency and allow consideration of local
planning instruments in the designation process;
H. Key process matters (including the development assessment process) should not be
moved from the principal legislation and into subordinate legislation, given the
potential negative outcomes for Councils and the broader community. The framework
should be located in one statutory instrument to ensure genuine review processes
cannot be expedited without due consultation and engagement;
I. Attachment 1 of this report which includes comment on Draft Planning Bills
provisions relating to Infrastructure Charges; and
J. Attachment 2 of this report which includes feedback to the Department of
Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning on the specific issues the Department
requested comment on.
REPORT
On 10 September 2015 the Queensland Government released the draft planning bills for
public consultation. The draft bills are available and open for public comment until Friday 23
October 2015 and include:
The Planning Bill which establishes the planning and development assessment system
The Planning & Environment Court Bill which defines the establishment and operation
of the Planning and Environment Court
The Consequential and other Legislation Amendment Bill which includes numerous
technical flow-on amendments to other acts that work in with the planning legislation.
While the legislation sets the general framework for planning in Queensland, the day-to-day
operation of the planning system is proposed to be governed by regulation and a set of
mandatory and non-mandatory instruments. The Department of Infrastructure Local
Government and Planning (DILGP) advises that the Department will consult on these
instruments after the Bills have been introduced to Parliament, but in the interim have
provided illustrative drafts. These include:
Planning Regulation
Process of making and amending local planning instruments
Infrastructure Designation Guidelines
Development Assessment Rules
Page 4 of 110
Section 5
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Notably, officers from DILGP have advised that the Shadow Minister’s three private
member’s Bills are expected to be considered by the Infrastructure, Planning and Natural
Resources Committee at the same time as the Bills proposed by the current Queensland
Government.
1. Overview of Draft Bills
The Draft Bills do not propose to alter the fundamental way Queensland’s planning system
currently operates, but there are some noteworthy changes proposed. The Draft Bills are
similar to the previous consultation version seen in September 2014 and the version
introduced by the Shadow Minister in June 2015. A brief overview of the proposed changes
is detailed below.
Reducing the number of state planning instruments.
It is proposed that the number of state planning instruments be reduced from four to two.
The State Planning Regulatory Provisions and the Queensland Planning Provisions are to
be rolled into the Planning Regulation 2016, leaving the State Planning Policy and Regional
Plans as the only 'state planning instruments' under the Planning Bill 2015.
Development Assessment Rules
The most significant change proposed by the draft Planning Bill 2015 involves the way in
which a development is assessed.
The following concepts will be introduced under the proposed legislative framework:
Exemption certificates may state that a development approval is not required for such
assessable development. However, they may only be used under defined
circumstances.
The ability for applicants to choose to opt-out of an information request and therefore
Council’s/state referral agencies may not make an information request.
The ability for applicants to decide when to publicly notify a development application in
the process such as before the information request or after a response is given to an
information request.
Introduce the ability for Councils to keep a list of persons (private consultants) who are
appropriately qualified to be the assessment manager for development applications.
The private consultant would then process and decide the application as the
assessment manager.
Introduce a ‘variation request’ as a development application for a preliminary approval
that seeks to vary the effect of a planning scheme for a premise. This is likely to be
typically used for larger scale developments and the approval would specify the codes
that apply and the assessment type for the ‘downstream’ application.
The ability for applicants to ‘stop-the-clock’ at any time once a development application
is properly made as many times as required for a cumulative period of up to 6 months
or further if agreed by the assessment manager. For example the applicant may stop
the clock during the decision period to change the proposed development to respond
to submitter’s issues or provide a flood study that was requested in Council’s
information request.
The ability for applicants to revive their development application which would have
otherwise lapsed (grace period extended from 5 business days under the Sustainable
Planning Act 2009 to 20 business days under the draft Development Assessment
Rules)
Page 5 of 110
Section 6
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Assessment benchmarks being new terminology for matters that a development will be
assessed against such as planning scheme code.
Categorising instrument being new terminology for regulations and planning schemes
which identify the development category such as accepted, assessable or prohibited
and include a Regulation or a Planning Scheme.
Further, the draft Planning Bill proposes the introduction of three categories of assessment:
1. Accepted: includes all developments other than assessable or prohibited
developments. The accepted category is effectively a combination of the exempt and
self-assessable categories under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.
2. Assessable: applies to developments which can only be carried out with a
development approval. Additionally, subject to the feedback in the public submission
period, the code/impact assessment categories may be changed to standard/merit
assessment.
3. Prohibited: is a development where no application can be made.
The time frames throughout the proposed development assessment process have been
generally moved to the Development Assessment Rules and are reduced, with the exception
of public notification including:
The assessment manager will have 20 business days to assess a code assessable
application and give the decision notice and 30 business days for an impact
assessable application.
Change to the decision time frame for extension applications from 30 business days to
20 business days to decide the application, with an additional 5 days to provide the
decision notice to the relevant parties.
A public notification period of at least 30 business days for development applications
that seek to vary a planning scheme and at least 15 business days for all other
development applications that require public notification.
Notably the current draft Regulation proposes the standard requirements for giving public
notice to include giving notice to adjoining owners of land, placing notice on the land, giving
notice to the Council who must keep a register of all development applications requiring
public notification.
Longer Currency Periods but No More ‘Roll Forward’
The currency periods for development approvals are proposed to be extended:
Material Change of Use Development Approval: is extended from four to six years.
Reconfiguring a Lot Development Approval (without works): is extended from two to
four years.
Together with these changes it is also proposed to remove the rolling currency period
provisions for related approvals where the relevant period would have been taken to have
started on the last day the latest related approval took effect. The removal of the ‘roll
forward’ provisions is an improvement on the current SPA provisions which could in theory
enable a development approval to remain current for 20 years and are overly complex in
tracking and advising on the lapsing date of an approval.
Removal of the term 'permissible change' and amendment to minor change test
Under the Draft Bills the term 'minor change' now applies to both changes to development
applications and development approvals. However the term takes on a slightly different
meaning depending on the circumstances. The Draft Bills also provide scope for approvals
to be changed if the change is not minor.
Page 6 of 110
Section 7
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
The test for a minor change to a development approval has also been amended to remove
the requirement to consider whether a person may make a properly made submission
objecting to the change. Instead the test will be mainly limited to whether the proposed
change is for a substantially different development. This undesirably limits the ability for
communities to have input into development matters.
Establishment of the Development Tribunal
The Building and Development Dispute Resolution Committee is to be replaced by the
Development Tribunal. The Draft Bills establish the jurisdiction of the Development Tribunal
and Planning and Environment Court and sets out how appeals are commenced in each.
Under the draft Bill the number of matters a Development Tribunal may hear an appeal for
have expanded to now include:
conditions of a development approval for a building classified under the Building Code
as a class 2 building (multiple dwellings) and the premise is not more than 3 storey
and 60 sole occupancy units.
Restricting the discretionary factors relevant to the awarding of costs in the Planning
and Environment Court.
The current discretionary cost provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 are to be
restricted and it is proposed that the concept of each party bearing their own costs in
Planning and Environment Court litigation be reintroduced. Parties will be liable for costs
where the proceedings have been initiated for an improper purpose or are considered to be
vexatious or frivolous.
Compensation provisions for planning scheme changes for managing natural hazard
risks
The compensation provisions for managing risks associated with natural hazards have been
removed in place of changes that provide for compensation to be based upon certain criteria
being met before a council would be liable.
Provisions relating to Infrastructure Charges
A number of matters have been identified by the Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator
relating to the Draft Bills provisions relating to Infrastructure Charges. These are outlined in
Attachment 1.
2. Feedback Sought on Proposed Options
There are number of areas highlighted in the Planning Bill which the Government is seeking
feedback on, either comments or identification of a preferred option. These areas include:
the advancing of the Draft Bills' purpose;
local government compensation arrangements in relation to natural hazards;
the terms to be used when classifying development;
the decision rules related to standard/code assessment;
a possible additional infrastructure provision; and
transitional provisions.
These have been summarised in Attachment 2. It is suggested that Council’s submission
also address these areas broadly in line with the comments included in Attachment 2.
Page 7 of 110
Section 8
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
3. Council’s Previous Submission
The table below details whether the current Bills have addressed the issues previously
raised in Council’s submission.
Council’s Previous Submission Comment
A. The Planning & Development Bill and Planning The draft Bill has not carried forward the
& Development Regulations are not clear in the existing statutory rules of SPA that preclude
decision rules, particularly for those applications approval of a development application where it
which conflict with the planning scheme. It is would conflict with a relevant State or Local
considered that where an application conflicts with Planning Instrument, in the absence of
the planning scheme, the onus of proof should be sufficient grounds. There is no requirement to
on the applicant to prove the merits of the proposal articulate the reasons an application is
and justify any inconsistencies; approved contrary to planning scheme
provisions.
B. The Planning & Development Bill includes a The draft Bill has been amended to allow the
clause that allows a regulation to prescribe the use of alternate assessment managers to be
assessment manager for a development solely at a local government’s discretion. This
application as any person from a class of persons is important to ensure that the new planning
who have stated qualifications or characteristics. It legislative framework continues to empower
is unclear whether this will result in an additional local government as the responsible entity
class of private entities (chosen by the Minister) immediately responsible for integrated land use
being identified as assessment managers in place planning, management and development
of councils for particular applications. This is of assessment.
significant concern as experience has
demonstrated that private building certification has
not always been successful in implementing
planning scheme requirements. This is particularly
important for any operational works applications
that include works which are to become a public
asset and be maintained at ratepayers expense;
C. The Planning & Environment Court Bill The draft Bill has been amended to return to
maintains the specific criteria for making a costs the former costs provisions of SPA, with parties
order introduced with the Sustainable Planning and only liable for costs where the proceedings
other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. These have been initiated for an improper purpose or
rules do not serve the public interest of enabling are considered to be vexatious or frivolous.
the community, submitters, local governments and
developers to dispute planning decisions due to the
risk and uncertainty of the Court awarding costs
against them. The previous Court powers to award
costs in circumstances where cases were frivolous
or vexatious or instituted primarily to delay or
obstruct are considered sufficient protections from
abuse of the system;
D. The definition of material change of use should The draft Bill has not amended the definition of
not be limited to only increases in scale and density material change of use and is limited to only
of the premises, as there are circumstances where increases in scale and density of the premises.
reducing the scale of the development does
materially change the site’s use. This is particularly
relevant for developments which include an
important community use or the like. For example
removing the nursing home component from a
retirement village may have a significant social
impact on an area;
Page 8 of 110
Section 9
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Council’s Previous Submission Comment
E. The Planning & Development Bill maintains and The draft Bill maintains the revival provisions,
extends the time frame for applicants to be able with the draft Development Assessment Rules
revive a development application where it lapses. indicating that applicants will be able to revive
This ability is not consistent with the principles for their application for a period of up to 20
the DA Rules of being an applicant driven process, business days.
and is likely to create administrative problems for
Councils and lead to significant confusion for the
community, particularly submitters
F. As Noosa Council values community The draft Bill has been amended slightly to
engagement in its planning and development require applications that seek to vary a planning
decisions, we have concerns regarding changes scheme to be advertised for a minimum of 30
that may serve to inhibit, obstruct or minimise business days and 15 business days for all
resident input. Reductions in public notification other applications that require public
periods and removal of existing requirements for notification.
notices to be placed in local newspapers are thus
Currently under SPA applications are required
not supported and there should be a minimum
to be advertised for 15 business days and 30
notification period for applications of 20 business
business days for those applications that have
days. We also have concerns about the proposal
3 or more state referral agencies or if a
that an applicant may choose to publicly notify a
preliminary approval is sought overriding the
development application as early as 5 days after
planning scheme.
the development application is properly made. We
believe submitters are better served under the The draft Decision Rules requires applicants to
current arrangement where public notification is publicly notify their application by placement of
able to occur following the information request a sign on the property and letters to adjoining
period owners, but Council’s may also require public
notice in a newspaper.
G. Noosa Council has long enjoyed a locally Concerns still stand but will best be resolved
popular planning scheme that is in part premised through the review process for the SEQ
on studies and deliberations concerning the ideal regional plan.
carrying capacity for our shire. We have concerns
that the Queensland Planning Reform Process may
herald arbitrary enlargements of the Urban
Footprints within the Noosa Shire area
H. Noosa Council does not support proposed The Bill proposes to extend Infrastructure
changes relating to Community Infrastructure Designations to private-owned infrastructure
designation that will remove local government (eg aged care, education and sports facilities)
powers to designate infrastructure. Nor do we where currently restricted to public-owned
support the proposal for the State Planning Minister infrastructure. This is a significant policy shift
to be the sole designating Minister for Infrastructure and would remove due consideration by the
Designation in Queensland and to thus choose community, third party appeal rights and the
what developments can proceed, be they public or need to comply with the planning scheme.
private infrastructure, and have them exempt from Infrastructure charges revenue would be
planning scheme requirements and from forfeited and would result in a considerable cost
infrastructure charges; and shift onto councils and their local communities.
Statutory requirements around community
infrastructure should at a minimum enable
council to have a statutory role similar to a
referral agency and allow consideration of local
planning instruments in the designation
process.
Page 9 of 110
Section 10
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Council’s Previous Submission Comment
I. The maximum infrastructure charges prescribed Has not been addressed.
by legislation remain unchanged since being
introduced in 2011. Infrastructure charges have
dropped in real terms due to indexation not being
applied. This prohibits councils from making
charges that reflect the actual current costs of
building infrastructure. Thus the proportional costs
of public infrastructure related to new development
are being met by the community. Meanwhile the
State Government adds 3.5% annual indexation to
its own fees and charges. Noosa Council thus
requests that annual automatic indexation of the
current maximum capped charges be introduced to
reflect increasing costs of providing infrastructure.
Previous Council Consideration
Council first considered the proposed Planning & Development Bill and Planning &
Environment Court Bill 2014 in September 2014 (prior to them being introduced to
Parliament) and requested the Chief Executive Officer make a submission to the draft Bills.
Then, at its meeting of 15 January 2015 Council considered a report on Queensland
planning reform including the Planning and Development Bill.
Ordinary Meeting 15 January, 2015, Item 1, Page 3
That Council note the report by the Principal Strategic Planner and the Manager, Planning &
Environment to the General Committee dated 12 January 2015 and request the Chief
Executive Officer to make a submission to the Dept of State Development, Infrastructure and
Planning regarding the following points:
A. The Planning & Development Bill and Planning & Development Regulations are not
clear in the decision rules, particularly for those applications which conflict with the
planning scheme. It is considered that where an application conflicts with the planning
scheme, the onus of proof should be on the applicant to prove the merits of the
proposal and justify any inconsistencies;
B. The Planning & Development Bill includes a clause that allows a regulation to
prescribe the assessment manager for a development application as any person from
a class of persons who have stated qualifications or characteristics. It is unclear
whether this will result in an additional class of private entities (chosen by the Minister)
being identified as assessment managers in place of councils for particular
applications. This is of significant concern as experience has demonstrated that private
building certification has not always been successful in implementing planning scheme
requirements. This is particularly important for any operational works applications that
include works which are to become a public asset and be maintained at ratepayers
expense;
C. The Planning & Environment Court Bill maintains the specific criteria for making a
costs order introduced with the Sustainable Planning and other Legislation
Amendment Bill 2012. These rules do not serve the public interest of enabling the
community, submitters, local governments and developers to dispute planning
decisions due to the risk and uncertainty of the Court awarding costs against them.
The previous Court powers to award costs in circumstances where cases were
frivolous or vexatious or instituted primarily to delay or obstruct are considered
sufficient protections from abuse of the system;
Page 10 of 110
Section 11
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
D. The definition of material change of use should not be limited to only increases in scale
and density of the premises, as there are circumstances where reducing the scale of
the development does materially change the site’s use. This is particularly relevant for
developments which include an important community use or the like. For example
removing the nursing home component from a retirement village may have a
significant social impact on an area;
E. The Planning & Development Bill maintains and extends the time frame for applicants
to be able revive a development application where it lapses. This ability is not
consistent with the principles for the DA Rules of being an applicant driven process,
and is likely to create administrative problems for Councils and lead to significant
confusion for the community, particularly submitters.
F. As Noosa Council values community engagement in its planning and development
decisions, we have concerns regarding changes that may serve to inhibit, obstruct or
minimise resident input. Reductions in public notification periods and removal of
existing requirements for notices to be placed in local newspapers are thus not
supported and there should be a minimum notification period for applications of 20
business days. We also have concerns about the proposal that an applicant may
choose to publicly notify a development application as early as 5 days after the
development application is properly made. We believe submitters are better served
under the current arrangement where public notification is able to occur following the
information request period;
G. Noosa Council has long enjoyed a locally popular planning scheme that is in part
premised on studies and deliberations concerning the ideal carrying capacity for our
shire. We have concerns that the Queensland Planning Reform Process may herald
arbitrary enlargements of the Urban Footprints within the Noosa Shire area;
H. Noosa Council does not support proposed changes relating to Community
Infrastructure designation that will remove local government powers to designate
infrastructure. Nor do we support the proposal for the State Planning Minister to be the
sole designating Minister for Infrastructure Designation in Queensland and to thus
choose what developments can proceed, be they public or private infrastructure, and
have them exempt from planning scheme requirements and from infrastructure
charges; and
I. The maximum infrastructure charges prescribed by legislation remain unchanged
since being introduced in 2011. Infrastructure charges have dropped in real terms due
to indexation not being applied. This prohibits councils from making charges that
reflect the actual current costs of building infrastructure. Thus the proportional costs of
public infrastructure related to new development are being met by the community.
Meanwhile the State Government adds 3.5% annual indexation to its own fees and
charges. Noosa Council thus requests that annual automatic indexation of the current
maximum capped charges be introduced to reflect increasing costs of providing
infrastructure.
Ordinary Meeting 2 July 2015, Item 2, Page 10
That Council note the report by the Principal Strategic Planner to the General Committee
Meeting dated 29 June 2015 and authorise the Chief Executive Officer to:
A. Make a submission to the Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources
Parliamentary Committee on:
1. the Planning and Development (Planning for Prosperity) Bill 2015;
2. the Planning and Development (Planning for Prosperity - Consequential
Amendments) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2015; and
Page 11 of 110
Section 12
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
3. the Planning and Development (Planning Court) Bill 2015;
with that submission to be based on Council’s previous submission in January 2015 on
the earlier versions of those Bills; and
B. Make a submission to the Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and
Planning in response to the Better Planning for Queensland Directions Paper in
accordance with the issues outlined in Attachment 2 of this report.
Finance & Risk
Nil
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
The Manager, Planning & Environment, Principal Strategic Planners, Infrastructure
Assessment Coordinator and Development Officers have attended a Departmental
workshop on the draft Planning Bills. Officers will also participate in LGAQ workshops.
Internal Consultation
Nil
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Community Services x Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health x DA Planning
Community Facilities x Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office Corporate Services
Community Engagement Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 12 of 110
Section 13
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
ATTACHMENT 1
Review of Draft Planning Bill 2015_Chapter 4 Infrastructure
Part 2 Provisions for local governments
Clause 110 Regulation prescribing charges: Item (2)&(3): and
Clause 112 Contents—general: Item (4)(b)(ii) & (5)
Indexation is an ongoing issue since the Minister has not changed the maximum amount
since its introduction in June 2011 yet costs for providing infrastructure have continually
increased and offsets for trunk infrastructure are subjected to actual costs.
Also, the proposal should a change to the charge ever occur, is convoluted and over
complicated. The maximum charges per the SPRP or new Regulation should simply be
applied from a base date and then simply indexed by an appropriate ABS QLD index
such as CPI or Road & Bridge index from the base date to the date of issue and to the
date payment is made.
Normal indexation of contributions/charges has been standard practice in the past for
many years both in government & in private industry contracts.
This issue has been raised to the State on many previous occasions with no rectification
to date (i.e. the Community is further subsidising development in this regard).
Clause 111 Adopting charges by resolution
Item (3)(a) – Concern is raised on potential legal implications in changing from: “land” to
“premises”.
Item (3)(c) - Appears to be simply changing the legislation location where charges don’t
apply to designated land i.e. SPA 205 however, the wording could have additional
consequences where charges may now not apply as it could possibly be also designating
a department rather just relating to the land?
Clause 117 When charge may be levied and recovered
Item (3)(b) - Should change 10 days to 20 days so as to match (c) & (d) & (8)(b)for
consistency.
Item (12)(b) – A charge is often not paid by an applicant who may be just acting for a
client and having no further involvement in the development from when an approval may
be given. Also for recovery, a charge is a Rate whereby payment is ultimately obtained
from the owner of the land. This has the potential to cause additional difficulty should
recovery action have to be taken.
Suggest change to: is payable by a payer with the ultimate responsibility for payment
lying with the land owner. (refer to definition of payer in Schedule 1).
Item (12)(c) – Concern is raised on potential legal implications in changing from: attaches
to the “land” to “premises”;
i.e. per section 142 (1) A levied charge is, for the purpose of its recovery, taken to be
rates of the local government that levied the charge. Where a Rate is a charge against
the Land & not a premises refer Local Government Act 2009 clause 93.
Page 13 of 110
Section 14
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Clause 118 Limitation of levied charge
Item (3)(a) – A previous use that is no longer taking place may not have previously paid
or contributed to all the current networks that now apply today i.e. typically for all transport
or stormwater networks. This should be changed so that that a previous use that no
longer exists, will only be credited for those networks to which they have previously
contributed to.
Item (3)(b)(i)&(ii) - Concern is raised on potential legal implications in changing from:
“land” to “premises”.
Clause 119 Requirements for infrastructure charges notice
Item (1)(c) Concern is raised on potential legal implications in changing from: “land” to
“premises”.
Item (2) – Could be difficult to know when or when not to apply this. An applicant won’t
know whether trunk infrastructure will be conditioned in the original approval so will still
cause difficulties in the first instance. How offsets & refunds are to be applied should all
be stated in resolutions.
Suggest changing (1)(f) & delete (2) to:
(f) whether an offset or refund under this part applies and, if so, information about the
offset or refund, including when the refund will be given may follow once details have
been fully determined.
Item (3) – Changing the term from an “information” to “decision” notice is inappropriate as
this term relates specifically to the development approval itself. Should therefore remain
as an “information” notice as that is what it actually is in order to avoid any confusion.
Clause 123 Representations about infrastructure charges
Item (6) – Should change 5 days to 10 days for consistency with (3) & other sections for
consistency.
Clause 126 Necessary infrastructure conditions
Item (2)(b) - The issue remains in that any necessary infrastructure condition is
automatically considered as “trunk” and thereby is fully off-settable under clause 127
even though it may be primarily required for the development itself.
Clause 127 Offset or refund requirements
Refer also to comment to Clause 126 item (2)(b)
There are situations where necessary conditions are primarily required for the
development itself & therefore such offsets should just apply that amount that can be
apportioned to other users and not the full cost. It is not equitable or fair & reasonable
that Local Governments (i.e. the community) should have to bear full costs to facilitate
individual development’s needs.
Item (4) –the latest time proposed is simply not workable & also may not be equitable to
either Development or Local Government depending on the specific scenario that arises.
Also LGIP provision dates may be stated over a period (i.e. 2011–2016).rather than a
specific date so then which date should it be? (i.e. 2011 or 2016?)
Possible Scenario 1:
The LGIP infrastructure proposed date is say 2016 and the construction start date &
completion by the developer is later say 2025. Then under this proposal, the refund would
need to be given immediately before the infrastructure is even provided. This is totally
unacceptable & unequitable for Local Gov’t.
Page 14 of 110
Section 15
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Possible Scenario 2 (reverse of 1):
The LGIP infrastructure proposed date is say 2025 and the construction start &
completion date by the developer is earlier say 2016. Then under this proposal, the
refund would only need to be given by 2025 some 9 years after provision & would be
unequitable for the developer.
The timing of refunds should be left to individual LG resolutions to cater for their particular
circumstances and ability.
Clause 132 Refund if development in PIA
Item (2)(a) - Why should any refund apply if the development exceeds the scale of
development from that assumed in the LGIP per clause 130 (2)(b). This is inequitable to
Local Government where the development is not complying with Planning Schemes,
LGIP’s & the integrity of the infrastructure planning statutory guidelines.
Item (2)(b) – How can this be the subject of a charge when the charge is not directly
linked to the cost of infrastructure & cannot change the maximum allowable charge to
include this cost?
Clause 136 Application of this subdivision
Still disagree with concept of Conversion applications as PIP’s/LGIP’s approved by State
details all that is Trunk for the period in question & any development outside should
provide additional infrastructure that is specifically required for it to proceed should be
fully undertaken by the development at its cost & not subsidised by the community.
Clause 137 Application to convert infrastructure to trunk infrastructure
Item (2) – whilst the time for making such applications is proposed to be limited to 1 year,
it still creates bureaucratic duplication of additional work for Local Government at a later
time. All this should be undertaken through representations during the normal negotiation
stage process.
Clause 138 Deciding conversion application
As per clause 137 comment
Clause 139 Notice of decision
Item 139 (1) – As for comment to 119 Item (3) – Changing the term from a “notice ” to
“decision” notice is inappropriate as this term relates specifically to the development
approval itself. The wording should therefore remain simply as a “notice” to avoid any
confusion.
Clause 140 Effect of and action after conversion
As per clause137 comment
Item (5) – Incorrect cross-reference to 248 that has no relevance to this section (i.e.
refers to Enforcement notices in Part 4 Appeals to P&E Court)
Part 4 Infrastructure agreements
Clause 150 Content of infrastructure agreement; and
Clause 153 When infrastructure agreement binds successors in title
Concern is raised on potential legal implications in changing from: “land” to “premises”.
Page 15 of 110
Section 16
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Chapter 6 Dispute resolution
Part 3 Appeals to tribunal, Item 242 Conversion applications; and
Part 4 Appeals to P&E Court, Item 253 Conversion applications:
Item (1) – The conversion application has already undergone the assessment process
under Local Government resolutions as governed by State regulation. A decision under
this process should therefore be binding and not subject to further appeal. Furthermore,
the clause provides an open ended avenue of appeal as there are no grounds provided
on the basis for making such an appeal against the refusal that has already followed due
process.
Chapter 8 Transitional provisions and repeal
Clause 320 Infrastructure charges notices
Item (2) – The statement “before or after” is confusing & unclear.
• if a notice relates to an approval that is changed or extended before the old act is
repealed then surely it has already been finalised under the old Act & should
continue to apply under 320 Item (1) & Item 321.
• Only “after” should apply to Item (2)
Clause 321 Levied charges
Item (2) – Ok but should change “after 3 July 2014” to “from 4 July 2014” for simplicity &
consistency in referencing the stated legislative date.
Clause 323 Infrastructure charges resolutions
Item (1) appears a bit confusing as a PIP is also taken to be a LGIP under the old act.
Item (4)(b) - The date for having a LGIP has been automatically extended to 1 July 2018
without the need for an application to the Minister to extend.
Suggest proposed amendment to SPA in “Local Government and Other Legislation
Amendment Bill” is also changed to match this bill for consistency & simplicity.
Clause 326 Infrastructure conditions—change or extension approval
Item (5) – The statement “ before or after” is confusing & unclear.
• if a notice relates to an approval that is changed or extended before the old act is
repealed then surely it has already been finalised under the old Act & should
continue to apply under 320 Item (1) & Item 321.
• Only “after” should apply to Item (5)
Page 16 of 110
Section 17
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
ATTACHMENT 2
Government Seeks Feedback on the following Comment
options
Purpose of the Act Support the inclusion of concepts relating to
inter-generational equity, precautionary
The following is an extract from the Draft Bill of the principle and sustainable use of resources.
proposed purpose of the Act:- The alternative purpose here provides a more
(1) The purpose of this Act is to facilitate encompassing and balanced approach to
ecologically sustainable development that defining the acts purpose and is supported
balances— over the Draft Bill’s purpose.
(a) the protection of ecological processes
and natural systems at local, regional, State,
and wider levels; and
(b) economic growth; and
(c) the maintenance of the cultural,
economic, physical and social wellbeing of
people and communities.
(2) The purpose is to be achieved through an
efficient, effective, transparent, integrated
and accountable system for—
(a) land use planning (planning); and
(b) development assessment.
(3) The system for achieving the purpose of this
Act includes—
(a) State planning policies (including
temporary ones) setting out planning and
development assessment policies about
matters of State interest; and …
Both IPA and SPA include similar sections (s1.2.2 in
IPA and s 4 in SPA) describing how the Act’s
purposes are to be advanced. Feedback is sought
on the proposed purpose and whether the following
kind of provisions should be also included to build on
this purpose.
(a) following decision-making processes that—
(i) are accountable, transparent,
coordinated, effective and efficient;
and
(ii) take account of short and long-term
environmental effects of development at
local, regional, State and wider levels; and
(iii) apply the precautionary principle,
namely that the lack of full scientific
certainty is not a reason for delaying
taking a measure to prevent
degradation of the environment if
there are threats of serious or
irreversible environmental damage;
and
(iv) seek to provide for equity between
present and future generations; and
(b) providing opportunities for the community to
be involved in making decisions; and
(c) considering the sustainable use of
renewable and non-renewable natural
resources, including biological, energy,
extractive, land and water resources that
contribute to economic development through
employment creation and wealth generation;
Page 17 of 110
Section 18
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
and
(d) considering housing choice and diversity,
and economic diversity; and
(e) considering supplying infrastructure in a
coordinated, efficient and orderly way; and
(f) considering amenity, conservation, energy
use, health and safety in the built
environment in ways that are cost-effective
and of public benefit;
(g) considering ways of minimising the adverse
environmental effects of development (like
climate change, urban congestion and
declining human health).
Compensation Arrangements It is agreed that compensation provisions
should be removed where planning schemes
Under the draft Bill, compensation to land owners are made or amended to manage risks
due to changes in planning schemes relating to associated with natural hazards, including
reducing risks to persons or property form natural flood, bushfire, landslide, storm tide
events would not be payable. However, such inundation and coastal erosion. The new
changes would require Council’s to first prepare a legislation should make it clear that
report assessing the matter including feasible compensation rights should only be preserved
alternatives for reducing the risk. where an applicant can prove they have
suffered an immediate and demonstrable loss
An alternative approach is one similar to the current relating to the continuing use of land for
arrangement under the Sustainable Planning Act existing lawful purposes and not the
2009 where Council’s are open to compensation for speculative possibility of future development
all changes to planning scheme which reduces the for some other purpose. The superseded
value of interest in land. Under the current planning scheme provisions are considered
arrangements Council’s either agree to pay adequate for proponents to act on a
compensation or seek to reduce the risk through development proposal in accordance with the
conditions imposed on future development planning scheme that was in affect prior to the
approvals. change. Thus it is considered onerous to
require councils to prepare risk assessment
reports that assess feasibility alternatives for
reducing risk as part of imposing conditions on
development approvals.
Ideally, the planning scheme should deal with
natural hazard risks upfront at the planning
stage and it should then be for the applicant to
demonstrate how the natural hazard risks can
be appropriately managed as part of the
development application in accordance with
the scheme provisions.
Terms Used for Classifying Development There is no perceived value in changing the
names of assessment categories from code
There are currently two categories proposed for and impact to standard and merit. There is no
assessable development (development for which a legal obligation to change the name of the
development approval is required) including:- categories just because the new legislation
treats and defines the categories somewhat
Standard/Code differently. The practical intent of the
Merit/Impact categories remains largely unchanged and
therefore the names should remain
Feedback is sought on the names of assessment unchanged. This would avoid unnecessary
categories that should be used (i.e. either Standard effort and expense that would arise to correct
or Code) planning scheme and supporting DA
information.
Page 18 of 110
Section 19
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Decision rules for Standard/Code Applications There is no clear preference for the decision
rules for standard/code applications and it is
Feedback is sought on the decision rules for considered that both options require reworking
Standard/Code Assessable Applications. to be satisfactory. Notably, option 2 as
proposed most closely aligns with the current
Option 1 SPA provisions.
‘(2) To the extent [standard/code?] assessment
is required for the development, after For standard/code assessment applications
carrying out the assessment, the assessment of development proposals should
assessment manager— be ‘bounded’ and only undertaken against
(a) must decide to approve the applicable planning requirements rather than
application to the extent the the whole of the planning scheme. It is also
development complies with the appropriate that there is a presumption for
assessment benchmarks for the code assessable development to be in favour
development; and of approval. This is consistent with the
(b) may impose development conditions drafting of The Noosa Plan, with only
on any approval; and particular codes identified as relevant for code
(c) may, to the extent the development assessable applications. Development which
does not comply with the is identified as consistent with the zoning
assessment benchmarks, decide to intent is also only code assessable. However,
refuse the application only if for any development that is not consistent with
compliance can not be achieved by the planning scheme, clear grounds should be
imposing development conditions. required to be articulated.
‘(3) Nothing stops the assessment manager
approving a development application that
does not comply with some or all of the
assessment benchmarks for the
development.
Option 2
‘(2) To the extent [standard/code?] assessment
is required for the development, after
carrying out the assessment, the
assessment manager must decide—
(a) to approve all or part of the
application; or
(b) to approve all or part of the
application, but impose development
conditions on the approval; or
(c) refuse the application.
Infrastructure The latest time proposed is simply not
workable & also may not be equitable to either
Feedback is sought on whether the following Development or Local Government depending
provision should be included. on the specific scenario that arises. Also
LGIP provision dates may be stated over a
(4) If the LGIP identifies the infrastructure, the period (i.e. 2011–2016).rather than a specific
local government must pay the refund under date so then which date should it be?? (i.e.
subsection (3)(b) no later than the 2011 or 2016??)
construction date for the infrastructure stated
in the LGIP. Possible Scenario 1:
The LGIP infrastructure proposed date is say
2016 and the construction start date &
completion by the developer is later say 2025.
Then under this proposal, the refund would
need to be given immediately before the
infrastructure is even provided. This is totally
unacceptable & unequitable for Local Gov’t.
Possible Scenario 2 (reverse of 1):
Page 19 of 110
Section 20
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
The LGIP infrastructure proposed date is say
2025 and the construction start & completion
date by the developer is later say 2016. Then
under this proposal, the refund would only
need to be given by 2025 some 9 years after
provision & would be unequitable for the
developer.
The timing of refunds should be left to
individual LG resolutions to cater for their
particular circumstances and ability.
Arrangements for Transitioning Generally The Noosa Plan is currently drafted
in a manner that should allow easy transition
Feedback is sought about the arrangements for under the proposed Bill’s assessment and
transitioning assessments by local governments decision rules.
using local planning instruments from the
Sustainable Planning Act 2009 to the Bill. These
assessments would include all assessments for
development made assessable under local planning
instruments, and assessments carried out by local
governments for development made assessable
under the regulation (such as for reconfiguring a lot).
Merit assessment rules and processes under the Bill
are very similar to impact assessment rules and
processes under the old Act. So, a transition from
impact assessment to merit/impact assessment
under this section should be relatively
straightforward.
Section 56 includes options for decision rules for
standard/code assessment. These options are
intended to provide for some flexibility to balance
competing or conflicting assessment benchmarks, or
conflicts between referral responses and
assessment benchmarks, but unlike merit
assessment do not provide for assessment against,
or having regard to, matters not prescribed under a
regulation.
Feedback is sought on whether all code
assessments under the old Act are suitable to
transition immediately to standard/code
assessments under this section, or whether
transitional arrangements such as interim
assessment and decision rules would be desirable.
Page 20 of 110
Section 21
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
2 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A
DETACHED HOUSE AT 38 PARK CRESCENT, SUNSHINE BEACH - MCU15/0070
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Development Planner, Glen Conforti
Planning & Infrastructure Department
Index ECM / Application / MCU15/0070
Attachments 1. Proposal Plans
APPLICATION DETAILS
Applicant JE Jamieson, NE Jamieson
Proposal Development Permit for Material Change of Use of Premises -
Detached House
Properly Made Date 30 July 2015
Information Request Date 14 August 2015
Information Response 9 September 2015
Date
Decision Due Date 22 October 2015
PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address 38 Park Crescent Sunshine Beach Qld 4567
RP Description Lot 598 RP 48112
Land Area 532m²
Existing Use of Land Vacant land (dwelling demolished)
STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation Urban Footprint
Locality Eastern Beaches
Zone Attached Housing zone
Overlays Natural Hazards Overlay – Low Potential Acid Sulfate Soils
Natural Hazards Overlay – Landslide Hazard
Natural Hazards Overlay – Medium Bushfire Hazard
Natural Resources Overlay – Coastal Protection
Assessment Type Code
Page 21 of 110
Section 22
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Organisation
Committee Meeting dated 13 October 2015 regarding Application No. MCU15/0070 for a
Development Permit for Material Change of Use (detached house) situated at 38 Park
Crescent, Sunshine Beach and issue a Preliminary Approval in accordance with the
following conditions:
PLANNING
Preliminary Approval
1. Prior to the issue of a Development Permit, the Site Cover of the detached house must
be reduced to a maximum of 35%.
When Conditions must be Complied With
2. Unless otherwise stated, all conditions of this Decision Notice must be complied with
prior to the use commencing, and then compliance maintained at all times while the
use continues.
Approved Plans
3. Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with
the approved plans of development. The plans must be amended to comply with
Condition 1 of this Decision Notice prior to the plans becoming approved plans. The
plans to be amended are listed in the following table unless otherwise amended by
these conditions.
Plan No. Rev. Plan/Document Name Date
DD 1.2 B Site plan, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 1.3 B Roof Plan, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 1.4 B Bedroom Mezzanine, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 1.5 B Ground Floor Plan, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 1.6 B Lower Ground Floor, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 1.7 B Pool Terrace Floor Plan, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 2.1 B North West Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 2.2 B North East Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 2.3 B South East Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 2.4 B South West Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 3.1 B Section A, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 3.2 B Section B, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 3.3 B Section C, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
DD 3.4 B Section D, prepared by Sparks Architects 01.09.15
Building Height
4. The maximum height of the development must not exceed 12 metres above the
finished ground level and the natural ground surface and 3 storeys.
Page 22 of 110
Section 23
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
5. Certification must be submitted to Council from a Licensed Surveyor which certifies
that the building does not exceed the maximum height requirement of this Decision
Notice.
Performance Bond
6. Security in the form of a cash bond or trading bank guarantee to the sum of $10,000
must be submitted to Council, to secure performance of all conditions of this approval,
prior to the issue of a Development Permit for Building Works. The cash bond or
trading bank guarantee will be returned on performance of the conditions of approval
less any costs incurred by Council in respect of enforcing performance of this permit.
Council reserves the right to call upon the bond or guaranteed sum to effect
compliance with conditions.
Privacy
7. A screening device must be erected for the full length of the southern side of the
Ground Floor Deck. The screening device must be of a height to maintain
neighbouring residents’ amenity.
Landscaping
8. The retaining wall and associated screening fence/wall (faced with hardwood timber)
located near the southern boundary must be:
a. setback 1.5m up to 4.5m in height
b. setback 2m between 4.5m – 7.5m in height.
9. A minimum of 20% of the site must be retained as soft landscaping.
10. Screening vegetation must be planted for the full length of both side boundaries in
accordance with Council’s Planning Scheme Policy PSP3 Landscaping Plants and
Guidelines. The planted vegetation must have a minimum pot size of 200mm and
consist of native, endemic species with a mature height of not less than 8 metres and
a maximum spacing of 2 metre centres.
11. A mix of native landscaping including ground covers, shrubs and trees must be
provided for minimum width of 5m from the rear boundary (adjoining the pathway). In
this regard landscaping must also be provided between the swimming pool and the
rear boundary. Landscaping must be in accordance with Council’s Planning Scheme
Policy PSP3 Landscaping Plants and Guidelines.
Coastal Protection
12. External colours and finishes of the building must comprise muted/environmental tones
that blend with the natural environment.
ENGINEERING
Property Access and Driveways
13. A sealed access driveway must be provided from Park Crescent to the proposed
carparking. The driveway must be designed and constructed in accordance with
Council’s standards drawing SEQ R-050 and to grades that prevent vehicles from
scraping and/or bottoming whilst also allowing pedestrians movements along the
footpath without any step or level difference. Should any driveways be constructed to
grades that do not comply with Council’s standard drawing SEQ R-050 and AS/NZS
2890.1-2004, Council will require that the driveway be removed and reconstructed to
levels that do comply.
Page 23 of 110
Section 24
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Stormwater Drainage
14. Stormwater runoff from the development must be either discharged to Council’s
existing kerb and channel in Park Crescent and/or disposed of on-site without causing
scour or damage to the subject site or any adjoining property.
Geotechnical Stability
15. All works must be carried out in accordance with the recommendations contained in
the submitted Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Soil Surveys, Project No.115-
17158 dated April 2015.
16. Certification must be submitted to Council which certifies that the development has
been constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained in the submitted
Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Soil Surveys Project No.115-17158 dated April
2015 and that the development has a minimum factor of safety against landslip of 1.5
in the long term. All certification must be prepared by a Geotechnical Engineer and
must be addressed to Noosa Council. Where a member of an engineering company,
certification must be by the engineering company or an appropriate officer or employee
of the engineering company on behalf of the company
Earthworks and Retaining Walls
17. Earthworks required on site must be carried out in accordance with Council’s Planning
Scheme Policy PSP5 – Engineering Design Standards so as not to cause the
additional ponding of water on any adjoining lands or the blockage of, or interference
with, any natural watercourses.
18. The use of vibratory equipment of any kind is not permitted to be used (including
vibrating rollers and the use of vibrating installation techniques for sheet piling and
other construction vibrations caused by excavating, earthmoving or demolition
machinery or other similar construction techniques) unless approved and supervised
by a Certified Geotechnical Engineer. Under such circumstances the operator of such
equipment must at all times comply with the directions of the Geotechnical Engineer.
19. The excavation of the site and the construction of the proposed works must not have
any adverse effects on the stability of adjoining buildings and/or structures and/or
services and/or lands. In this respect, a Registered Professional Engineer Queensland
must supervise the excavation of the site and the construction of the new works to
determine whether any additional measures are required to protect the stability of
adjoining buildings and/or structures and/or services and/or lands.
Damage to Services and Assets
20. Any damage caused to existing services and assets as a result of the development
works must be repaired at no cost to the asset owner at the following times:
a. where the damage would cause a hazard to pedestrian or vehicle safety,
immediately; or
b. where otherwise, upon completion of the works associated with the
development.
Any repair work which proposes to alter the alignment or level of existing services and
assets must first be referred to the relevant service authority for approval.
Advisory Notes
PLANNING
Development Compliance Inspection
21. Prior to the commencement of the use, please contact Council's DA Planning Section
to arrange a Development Compliance Inspection.
Page 24 of 110
Section 25
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Qualified Person
22. For the purpose of preparing a Geotechnical Report, and for certifying geotechnical
stability for the development, a qualified person is considered to be a person who:
a. is a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ); and
b. has a degree in civil engineering or engineering geology; and
c. has a minimum of 5 years’ experience in the field of geotechnical engineering or
engineering geology.
REPORT
1. PROPOSAL
The application seeks approval for a detached house that exceeds building height in metres
and storeys in the Attached Housing zone and seeks front and side setback relaxations.
The proposal is for a 3 storey, 12 metre high detached house. The proposal consists of a
master bedroom on the upper most floor (mezzanine level), kitchen and living areas and a
large balcony on the ground floor level (street level). Bedrooms and bathrooms are located
on the lower ground floor and a semi open undercroft area and pool deck on the lowest floor
overlooking a swimming pool. The vehicle accommodation is located near the front
boundary.
An architectural rendering of the proposed detached house is shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1 – Architectural rendering from the north and south
Page 25 of 110
Section 26
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
The proposal is before Council because it is a 3 storey detached house and does not comply
with the relevant setbacks for a detached house in the Attached Housing zone.
2. SITE DETAILS
2.1. Site Description
The site slopes from the west (street frontage) to the eastern or rear boundary which adjoins
a walkway to the beach. The site slopes steeply from the road frontage for approximately
half to three quarters of the length of the site then generally levels off to meet the rear
boundary. (Refer to Figure 2 below)
Figure 2 – Subject Site outlined in purple
Page 26 of 110
Section 27
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
2.2. Surrounding Land Uses
Immediately adjoining the site to the north and south are detached houses and to the rear a
walkway to the beach. Opposite the site are a variety of 3 storey unit complexes which are
characteristic of development along Park Crescent and the nearby Crank Street, except for 9
detached housing lots to the south of the site which directly adjoin the dunes. Figure 3 below
shows the subject site outlined in green, the Attached Housing zone (unit complex zone) in
red and Detached Housing zone in light pink.
Figure 3 – Zone map showing the zoning surrounding the site. Attached Housing zone is
depicted in red where the majority is developed as unit complexes and Detached Housing in
light pink where detached houses exist.
3. ASSESSMENT
3.1. State and Other Statutory Instruments
South East Queensland (SEQ) Regional Plan 2009 - 2031
The site is located within the Urban Footprint of the SEQ Regional Plan. The proposal is
consistent with the regional policies of the SEQ Regional Plan.
Page 27 of 110
Section 28
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
3.2. Statutory Instruments – Planning Scheme
The subject site is located in the Eastern Beaches Locality and is zoned Attached Housing.
The proposed detached house is identified as a consistent use within the zone and is self -
assessable when complying with the Acceptable Solutions of the Detached House Code.
The proposal is subject to the Detached House Code. The Probable Solutions of the
Detached House Code require houses to not exceed a building height of 2 storeys and 8m.
The Code also requires setbacks for a detached house to be in accordance with those
outlined in Schedule 1 setbacks for the appropriate zoning. The proposal is located in the
Attached Housing zone where various Planning Scheme provisions exist for the different
residential development. Table 1 below outlines building height, setback, site cover and
gross floor area provisions for residential uses in the Attached Housing zone.
Table 1 – Planning Scheme Requirements
Planning Scheme requirements for residential uses in the Attached Housing zone (Sunshine Beach)
Detached House Duplex Units (3 or Proposal
more)
Building height 8m 12m 12m 12m
in metres
(complies with
duplex and units)
Building height 2 storeys 3 storeys 3 storeys 3 storeys
in storeys (complies with
duplex and units)
Setbacks 6m front and rear 1.5m up to 4.5m in 6m front and 7m front boundary
boundaries height rear boundaries (carport is approx.
1m).
Half the building 2m up to 7.5m in height Half the
height for side building height 7.2m rear
2m plus 0.5m for every
boundaries – for side
3m above 7.5m 3.15m side
5/6m boundaries –
5/6m (complies with
duplex provisions)
Site Cover 40% 35% 35% 40%
Gross Floor Not Applicable 0.6:1 0.6:1 0.62:1
Area (GFA)
The proposal does not comply with building height and setbacks for a detached house in the
Attached Housing zone. On the other hand the proposal does comply with building height
and setbacks if it were a duplex.
The proposal is subject to the Detached House Code and is assessed against the relevant
provisions for setbacks and building height and is set out below.
Setbacks
Specific Outcome O1
O1 Buildings and other structures are appropriately designed and sited to—
a) provide amenity for users of the premises as well as preserve the visual and acoustic
privacy of adjoining and nearby land uses;
b) preserve any existing vegetation that will buffer the proposed building from adjoining
uses;
Page 28 of 110
Section 29
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
c) allow for landscaping to be provided between buildings;
d) maintain the visual continuity and pattern of buildings and landscape elements within
the street;
e) for class 10a structures, do not visually dominate the street;
f) avoid any significant adverse impacts on the natural values of waterways and their
foreshores, including those of the Noosa River and its lakes; and
g) do not interrupt the natural cycles of erosion and accretion of waterways and foreshore
areas.
Main building
The main building (excluding the carport) meets the required 6m front and rear setback
provision but the house requires half its building height for the side setbacks. This equates to
a 5-6m setback to the side boundaries.
The proposed main building has a 7m front setback, a 7.2m rear setbacks and 3.15m to
each side boundary.
Although a 5m to 6m setback is required to the side boundaries by the Code, the proposed
3.15m side setback provides sufficient area for separation to neighbouring properties and
adequate space for landscaping to provide a buffer between the neighbouring uses. Directly
opposite the site and the surrounding area are large bulky 3 storey/12m high unit complexes
which have setbacks similar to or less than that proposed. It is considered the proposal
maintains the visual continuity and pattern of established building setbacks on the beach
side of Park Crescent and the existing unit complexes in the Attached Housing zone that
surround the site.
The rear deck on the ground floor level has the potential to overlook neighbouring properties.
A condition could be imposed to ensure a screening device is erected and plantings are
provided along southern side boundary to provide privacy to the residents and neighbours.
Carport
Most lots on the seaward side of Park Crescent are steeply sloping with the majority of
garages having front and side setbacks similar to the proposed carport. The proposal allows
for landscaping along the majority of the carports length to screen and soften any impacts.
The carport maintains the visual continuity and established character for vehicle
accommodation along the seaward side of Park Crescent.
Retaining wall - front yard
A retaining wall and feature hardwood wall for the entry courtyard is proposed to be setback
1m from the southern boundary. The retaining wall varies in height from ground level to
approximately 2.6m high but the associated screening hardwood wall will increase the height
to approximately 4m or greater above the natural ground level. Although landscaping is
proposed to screen the wall, it is considered it should be setback to comply with the relevant
setback requirements. A condition could be imposed to ensure the structure complies with
the setback provisions.
Building height in storeys and metres
Detached houses in the Attached Housing zone are required to have a maximum building
height of 2 storeys and 8m. The proposal is 3 storeys and 12m and therefore is subject to
Specific Outcome O8 of the Detached House Code which is shown below:
Height
O8 Buildings and other structures—
a) are low rise and present a building height consistent with structures on adjoining and
surrounding land;
Page 29 of 110
Section 30
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
b) have a maximum building height of—
i) for Visitor Mixed Use Zone— 3 storeys; or
ii) if in the Noosa Heads Locality Attached Housing Zone—
• Lot 4 on SP100064 in Serenity Close Noosa Heads— 4 storeys
• Otherwise— 3 storeys
iii) if in the Noosaville Locality and the Attached Housing Zone with frontage to the
following streets: - Russell St, William St and Howard St, or Weyba Rd, James St
and Albert St north of their intersections with Elizabeth St (as well as properties
fronting Gympie Terrace or Noosa Parade between Weyba Road and Russell
Street)— 3 storeys;
iv) otherwise– 2 storeys;
c) do not visually dominate the street, surrounding spaces or the existing skyline;
d) preserve the amenity of surrounding land including privacy, views and access to
sunlight;
e) respect the scale of surrounding vegetation; and
f) respond to the topography of the site by stepping down the slope or sitting above the
ground level on stumps, for sloping sites.
A small portion of the proposed roof is approximately the same height (varies from equal
height to 1.3m lower) as the northern neighbour’s roof, but is higher than the southern
neighbour’s roof (approx. 4m higher). Notably, these two 2 storey detached houses on
adjoining sites have development potential of 3 storeys and 12m for a duplex or unit
complex. Given the extent of 3 storey and 12m development in the surrounding area and 1
of the neighbouring properties is a similar height; the proposal presents a building height
consistent with structures in the surrounding area.
However, the proposed site cover (building footprint) of 40% exceeds that of other 3 storey,
12m high development in the surrounding area where site cover is only 35%. In Sunshine
Beach, The Noosa Plan and previous planning schemes required a reduced building
footprint in lieu of additional building height. For example, a 2 storey, 8m high development
is permitted 40% site cover, whereas a 3 storey, 12m high development is permitted only
35% site cover.
Although the proposal is well designed, it is considered the proposed building height
combined with 40% site cover results in a scale of development that has the potential to
dominate the seaward side of Park Crescent. Notably the adjoining properties have
development potential for a duplex or units which are subject to 35% site cover. In terms of
development potential for the subject site the proposal would generally comply with the
provisions for a duplex on site if the site cover was reduced to 35%.
Substantial excavation is required near Park Crescent for the subsurface portion of the
house. There are some built form elements which respond to the site’s topography, such as
the stepped roof form, the upper level mezzanine and the ground floor is split level. The
proposal’s habitable spaces sit above an open undercroft area supported by masonry walls.
Generally, the proposal has been designed to maximise views and generally responds to the
sites topography. Figure 4 below depicts the proposed development, the sites topography
and the 12m height limit.
Page 30 of 110
Section 31
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Figure 4 – Proposal showing the undercroft design and a 12m height blanket which reflects
the sites topogarphy.
Overlay Provisions
The following overlay codes are applicable to this application:
Natural Resources Overlay Code
The site is affected by the Natural Resources Overlay being an identified Coastal Protection
Area. The Coastal Protection Overlay provisions include a 5m wide landscaped area
consisting of a mix of native plant species that protect the dune system and the character of
the beachfront. A 6m setback from the seaward boundary is required for buildings and
structures on properties that adjoin the beachfront or a reserve fronting the beachfront.
The site is approximately 40m along a pathway from the existing coastal dune and the pool
is proposed to be setback 4.59m from the rear boundary. Technically, the property does not
adjoin the beachfront or a reserve adjoining the beachfront. Notwithstanding the above, the
building is setback 7.2m which meets the required 6m setback and the proposed 4.59m
setback for the pool is sufficient to provide landscaping to protect the character of the area
and the dune, meeting the intent of the Code.
Page 31 of 110
Section 32
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
4. CONSULTATION
4.1. Other Referrals
The application was forwarded to Unitywater and the following internal Council specialists:
Development Engineer
5. CONCLUSION
Building height and setbacks of the proposed 3 storey, 12m high detached house do not
comply with the Probable Solutions of the Detached House Code. The proposed setbacks
and the physical building height are consistent with buildings and structures in the
surrounding area. However, the proposed building height combined with 40% site cover
results in a development of a scale not consistent with other 3 storey 12m high development
in the surrounding area where a site cover of only 35% exists. The proposal in its current
form has the potential to dominate the seaward side of Park Crescent and is not
recommended to be supported. When site cover is reduced to 35%, the proposal would be
commensurate with other 3 storey, 12m high development in the area and is considered to
meet the relevant Specific Outcomes of The Noosa Plan. Therefore a Preliminary Approval
is recommended only with a condition to reduce the site cover to 35%.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Community Services X Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office Corporate Services
Community Engagement Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 32 of 110
Section 33
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 33 of 110
ATTACHMENT 1
Jate i 4 detail
\ |B [01.09.15 | PO | Development Approval
A B) c D (E) (F
T T T T ~
| ° | | ¢
| | |
| | |
| | | Zz :
| | | Toor custom folded eaves gutter- / -
3 Stet FE aE aa Tr Ze : Cte fe
ek F \ [ ri NIL E> | | ] 3 Se a5 a 7 Dips btcte <S pice
\ a aC se | BS IN Nese f ey & 4) |
{wt \ \ sts hig
\ | fe sd iH) | Sh | ' 8 / : t ‘
i | | . AN) ao ch 4 cot fy
(1) } } a t 1 on | 3f& | et : .
Y | ee i fii ei sn Ee Si fe eas - ; PAF
&) we | I kt &
\ ag I
: decom bet ; Fey
a Ee i —
| 1 -4 7, | | | é
Y | |
| Peau) Eu | | i
! | | mol ! | ! |
| } | { | : :
a Sia =! :
(2) Ses A pe E = “Ee | |_FFL 29420 | I | } a > | deck below 1. J i 1 |
i Ai Vea Bol | ! | | — |
el a — 3 | i
‘2a eal LeUEP ;
{ she } A st robe | |
oP entry cou ar 1! | |
Wife {| } | | 2 |
! 1) root ens? |) I ; R
| | }letow Pl ae | a
| i | } 1 lee) FFL 2 420 \ | |
~ | I Ls } ve | —{ve +} t t
\ 1 pape 8 et tl A = = - =] ; aia a
ie - | Ai Ko b
| t A on +s
1 iss cs ‘| | A Lo Sans 4 Z on
Y\ | as te c UU tn > LN SF : = SS legend
Dk SRT oe ee ee BY | WWD 7 i ia S A] ss PA bs c yt |
SAS = b ie te eI aR me ede Ak f V VS Wig" S 5 CONC.EA Concrete exposed aggrega
(— = at iL NT SSS A S . = Bt balustrade type 1
Rae NZ 32 e BS oe ee Sea (7 IX ¢ Dig ORS - ar
LM ZI Sehr an | BS TRE ea Sales AF bog RT) SALMON 2 I SWAY POST eae, LOO bp _ someee_
28.0 | | 25.0 240 23.0 22.0 210 D aoe 0 | 180 17.0 16.0 SS B 15.05 ° 5 aia
re i S < wink shot edge decking
\ shower
| | | . Serato
| | | His tongue and groove
vanity basin
| | | refer to schedules for details |
| | | NOTE: all structural elements; inctuding all |
slabs, columns, beams, footings and
framing: o be in accordance with engineer's
design and detail
| | | NOTE: all landscaping elements and
4 planting types and description to be in
| & aoa Architects
- aeenee , Jamieson Residence Scale 1:100 nun. rc ~~
, spar ks architects . 38 Park Crescent Sunshine Beach John and Ngaio Jamieson 083 PO Bedroom Mezzanine Plan 0D 1.4 | @ /’
: Rs orchhes fees project client job no drawn drawing dwg no - ‘
Page 33 of 110Section 34
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 34 of 110
[rev] date [issued | detail J
\ B | 01.09.15) PO | Development Approval Development Approval
(A ) B ) (c D ( E ) ( F )
Co AK 900K 800K 8000 EK ADDY
| | ° | | | °
NY
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | z l -
| | | | | von \ i) —\\j S VES 1
48°22" ‘ihe boundary wht & SW : Mies | 20}
ea F PTT instore | |! | SE i Tass T [ | > a WA Ke 4 L, y NS Aleka 0 N yo} ~S
Lk M4 ee — ee SS ee SS Sop Se SE
7 jeen \gete |) FFL 26120] | sod e%,, Apel | y { | ce | ee - ‘ YOU", ARS EASE
ra SS Se C/N “oF + 3 SN .
Sig = 2 | 1» hr Ry | [kK \ as 8 Sf SN
grated drain to “8 | 2 a p ~>-----}-- aby -p -1--- | tng Lf a
front of carport 7 les AW, =a eS bang ye AN ‘ i
a SaaS LA st | pantry I kitchen : :
we | carport mw Tas = 1
V CONC.ST = 7
losses ES | at
a i (en ee + tte . Re
= 44 WI} pee | A op Bs
| a Se 48
| ja i . Z
! | {_ FFL 27 000 Ys | S| | | | i
Ty. a. sag ta * |
2} ane ee planter & trellis 5rd tite ! T&G | f SED ; —
f | SNZal Boas ee Tay lobby living/dining t deck 1 ae %
“ Py By A71h “onl : | (_FFL26 000 | | . | (FFL 25640 | ;
Be TZ at nT 8 Oo 1 s
- > 1 | TT pope Wf st | | | l3
4, 13 a aut Z ! | i |
2 i q an “ ae {ve} | } | {I
8 rina iscaped| {py |
~ 1 it _FFL25 980 | | — | | HI
i ! } entry | OS
| i I 7 T&G t |
UL p= r >!
(3) 4. | . 4 prada 4 Lo Mh ———— ———————————— et ie a ET el }
he i) wt ;
a! . fre(feature * | Uy | AT Ost { L |
ee | 7 SP &
Se ay is dil LU a <- ah eH LAN Pgh \| . Vas wed
SUA BA ee a a ee Ss h/t he ys Fi iN Bay > 2 SS Ms \ gen
“ans SLY Rast Ri Rat, Wel Se RS wh J WD N\A Ni Zz S . Piss, |" Sah . Y |
CRC OE PEE SLY tenet | Ye AYN Pin | GINS Wit NZ Becca SaktatO NO cegae
Hea Se SL Se PSY oo Aer Se , EC y NWS BIN 5 _ . °
RS ZS NS ee LUVIN | SY aS eat Le | oR Ee
lade fence - Hwo1 28:0, jf 8.08 | 28d : 23. 22.0 210 Na gory 0 | 189 Pounsery 170 160 a ee 15.0% 5 a sce eeking
| | | | | “ sn behaved cladding type t
sR ‘smooth render
ST store
| | | | | ¢ Son
| | | | | refer to schedules for details |
NOTE: all structural elements; including all |
| | | | | slabs, columns, beams, footings and
framing; to be in accordance with engineer's
design and detail
| | | | | NOTE: all landscaping elements and
J planting types and description to be in
nd des
| | | | & ounedeo Architects
- a6 Se fence Jamieson Residence Scale 1:100 wuut__J~_L__J —
{ spar ks architects me 38 Park Crescent Sunshine Beach John and Ngaio Jamieson 083 PO Ground Floor Plan DD15 { of }
ms orchtwcts pry. Rd, abn 80 124 6187 project client job no. drawn drawing dwg no. a
Page 34 of T10Section 35
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 35 of 110
( Estates ae details
HB -[01.09.15] PO [Development Approval Development Approval )
A B) (C) (0) E (F)
Co 80K 900K 8 KK 8000 EK OD
| ° | | | ° |
QY
| | | | | |
| | | | | | .
| | | | | I) /zE \ _
A .
\ IA = i 4
\\ f/f) _ / = —— ! LDP
ihe. 2, — S poncery — |: fecal 2 “Gta: Wp gpd === an Ma Lag
| | | NVA | aw ) ~—\\f 4 SL AES I
eco et KU en ANT TF on "998 OIIN | ANS Abe DIS PRS IT Pht
EZ 1 AI é ‘J Sane fo A _F De Dine VS ~
pS PUTT TT eT TT [ Lay ip K LY | _ je 7 (K eR, ane YN L / 2 & x) Mee ae ml. |
p LL mo re Beef. | / Sk oh Fea.
5 | K ar iGaeyaays NS \poe se TSS OS NN
8S deck 2 ( SZ RA ; MR - A wy IH Daw
SED | yp | {| aes | Se ¢ A Ket f%
=p | - — 4 RS - 5 SANS - PEA Ne eae A) SOQ A iy wv
SZ oT ON AM ithe. NS See ZN Se ¢
@) ee See ee — | —. — ja Sl x S i i BO 3. eo po se I Lf fe “e- eye <a oe 3 3 =
7 —— — a —— a a a Rake ei \ Bl
= Pa Bem fF -—— A de
REZ RI || S—_Pelbatnroom Me | valve) l7_ \J ‘eiah S
PE Ti] ens s Hy Y a
Ag |) es " | PBs
Pye 736 | , "se robe ped 3 /\\ /\ £4, | | als
| | |
| bs Ree Sf) ave
aa hil [| ig
= stair val. CH | | | | 2 “Sy me
rt Te af 1 | / | f° Be |
bp | ~ {FFL 22 040 | - | / | ‘ee aN |
@ way | Plt 7 iad | if
2 — et a Pp ee gg |_| —
~ } J "Sg
— — = \E) | aan |
i vw a | th) VV Lae oN
aN = \va \ | X y |
SSS Sy B + + \ + >
5 : = bunk/ rumpus office ens2 bed 2 l\ | | *
= Tae \day bed ve] 1? T&G iV { |
a “ms sia robe | Ih : J,
6 eft lla | pg! F at\ | \ \ -
lr an uP
€ ~ | TA . a
a 4 Sa — = _—————— | fy
aye A | ES RSL IE Se eter ae ef
Le sep— COS Ne GR Tey | |
8 ae deck 3| TAS KTR Ki (Ee | : Leer TRS :
8 7 (FL 22000 rae BRANT j | /€& = es Sj
2 wth SY f= | | ESAT bs eR \ eee Nef ——
ee Bas VRS EVE el =
, ooraes | WR RS SN Fe ZINA NG, Ae ine eat NBS SON ft balustrade type 1
Be gaa. Sy peo Ee Ne / Hl | \ ) GIN) Sz Netin ASAT SS | Conc.ea concrete exposed aggregate
a ns ese LA ol |e DPS USS, SS ee ae
26,0 |) % 25.05 |) 280 23.9 22.0 210 ons a) 189 Pouncory 170 | 16.6 SS 8 \ Mg / 15.05 \ KQ\ Go grated drain
hhX | \ | | K 7 i) | ~ / a {A —& | \\ 8 sink
| \ \ al \X ~ \ | SED shot edge decking
. V \ | Ys \ SHR shower
| - | | v | | | J aut stician cadang pe 1
| | | | | | 1 ‘org
Tas tongue and groove
vB vanity basin
| | | | | | refer to schedules for details:
| | | | | | NOTE: all structural elements; including all
‘slabs, columns, beams, footings and
| | | | | | NOTE: all landscaping elements and
(o> planting types and description to be in
| | | | | QD | | deepen data re ies
( sparks orchitects — Lowe ron or en wis ( 9”)
Se cova wore \C
Page 35 of 110Section 36
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 36 of 110
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
err
? ? ? ? ?
| ° | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | hwd timer posts & ss. cable trellis
| | | | | ~ IA ci a)
| | | \\y 4 sy ase | LEZ.
\\ /, go, hy // 45s A "1 2 an / ~
ONT IN. ORIN | SAWN FAV POS PRAT
a AANA LY OS fll Seok pce N\ 7 BEM Se
: emia ell a WSS
a) a | <I pa ath peat od ot ( wv
NI ie <i SU fi , : ¥ PE ey L i Pap
@)- —T Lod Ze ae f= ASK it. es a Shfhee. 2 Engl ret “ane cle et 2 Buel me dg — _
~ eed = [a ee sa.4 rm \"£:
“ ws ! f | [= =& lear
a Ley ote $f a
_—_ Se | #
= | | i =) ie 8
az ! pi ny
oy undercroft | pootdeck = ——i<‘TSSS pl pet i
landing te Peon = if e ii
pt conch ye Cor 660 a paL-
- — | | | I} | / i LZ a
! | | | V Ls : H
i — | | | \ 'y
! ! | on
; ~ ! eee || lI Ve
Se ; -
O-+ PRION ee | Sa OSE UE S e N +— —
. Os A i ZR ‘s HR
plo D6 ESN se (8 ae eA) gh) Pe
ecm See Ne W( Be \s OMA SG Fie RAY) x
= BWDP \A \| | 7 Aa |" F no / aol uy 782, h>
a eS LI cl oA MSN 2 Lage
cooktop = — 2 0 \ {iN “| \ Y Ay WAIN Nata is s—- . :
26 " \ sep She ege desing 23.0 22.0 210 | 00 \ Ne | 18% f70\) hh iy (e “eZ | we
|g Bkeme | p Vo | | i \
st ‘store
| | Wer emai” | | | |
| | mereeanaaeatoraoum | | | | | |
| | sabe column, bere, otngs nd. | | |
framing; to be in accordance with engineer's
design and detail,
NOTE: all landscaping elements and | b | | | ’ |
planting types and description to be in
design and detail. | | | | Dy |
Pen NT Seale 100 Ls 14
{ Sparks architects — | 38.Park Crescent Sunshine Beach == Johmand Ngaio Jamieson | 083 | PO___~Poo Terrace Flor lan p17 (7)
Seater [ere eter Tbr. Teron] crowing dag no
Page 36 of 110Section 37
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 37 of 110
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
( | Development Approval Development Approval )
fo 12.0m height limit al
1 _ _ ~ ae ~ 1
' (F) (E) (D) © (8) (A) 1
| T T T a Ty
i cece
200K OK 8000 >—K 800K 80K ABO KID
-o '
| | | | wet _— ||
| | | |.-- = Lo
soot} resem we ffm em RO
on / f 1
1 -7 —_
| | | lee i | / | iE
: | | aa / | | / poe _ eT eave
bedroom mezzanine FFL 204200 ef
' | 22 OT | | : '
3 ap nl pile
1 _--oO 71S 1
| _ aa _ La ae 1
I —— sen ee DY
+ Loe LL fe 2 Te po 7 + 2 oy 1
1 \ \ OM ~. Rs § '
o ' wee \ lf srt - = if ny Ee PONE
Rl aethie = ~ 4 Span a OS aN I
ground Weor FFL 2600 CS ee gar SS RE og ewe -
structuraljslab FFL 25,480 ue a4 ae fat 7}
ge RAR SS - oe as |
Feu! Fl | “ sal) 2. AW
- - <3 ge YY | 1
|* FC2 tolwindow hood typically Ee PS8 eo s
fie Pos | Til mi SO
dogma Y> | ae i. (6 E im 3 i |
ee Tl 3 $ _ 7 — ul
lower groiind floor FFL 22.040 | Ween | | r)
ee es !
ween dene : NTRS TT TUT AF sae a d iD r
onan een nnn n ALE Ry Wee 7) aS. i
2 : t CPT) Vase r a
1 sh ar] aay | i é ! / <A\__ \
& \ Hh Mh i ” a & 4 / eee? Zien ={)) 7 legend
' | AUT TRI I iF = Md S CZ i Bf Tramoless glass balustrade
at ts a } Ay ay Seuss
t]he AMT ELT oe 1 ve
° | - (Wreouat | a Pl Ds ——S i| er ignteoor
1 f Lwin cal, i undercroft ‘| Fez fibre cement with render finish -
undercroft =_->-FFL 17,280 al - | sa (= = =F ~~ "! mt tmetal shwelibre cement sheel
~~ ee wes UB = eo a ee a - ---- 2b <r rrrrrrirriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiic7- 4, we a et
e a OR OS NF epee tii ti! te---n- rs part
4 Gin ——— —— eqcort te «
== SSSSSSTSSaT ee tat H:11.99M :RL31.99H: 11 | Str Shp easing
bo-------------4F i Above NGL: RL 20.00Abov | $Nt S<TEON PE nt colour
' i Poot " — SR2 tooth render dark colour
| i i refer to schedules for details
' ' i i NOTE: all structural elements; including all
I IL H: 11.98M HRUUHTMB : RL: | fering tobe im accordance wth engineers
a | 2RL |__ design and detat. /
Key Plan @ 1:500 :
( sparks architects weraspatcecs cn 38 Park Crescent Sunshine Beach John and Ngaio Jamieson 083 Po North West Elevation pp21 ) \
\ sate acine ony Nd oe eae en72 project client |jobno. | drawn | drawing Tawgn \ 74 /
Page 37 of 110Section 38
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 38 of 110
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
? ° 0
! ONAN
600 eave = = 600 eave:
woof FFLSN8200 sj aimee tte Besser Nr et
Th | - \- = iC | gn re | < Sug
J 4 QA | Fa So :
3,135 ¢— 3.138... ,
bedroom mezzanine FFL20420 0.00 SET ETAT ATE HT ETH HHTH ie a ae
| | eon NL a
hw. timber blade fence -HWD1 = “EN ¢ | -
| te
1,000 SR1 i
some oor FFL28 mM | ME
structurale FFL25400 0 SS See
=\\V/, ee ~~. ==
FZ NIN} ff i 2 el
’ Pap $ =
Dyan . 2 e “> Cia
pe 0 : Me
lower ground floor FFL 22,040 7 st! Ian! {500 |
See eis sees eee Se ar FS see nS a ee —— 7 oy ee ee
Cy ie i =
als Pg be =
pred M 4 =H
, SS
fn, i A ag
( h, _ | EN
g sf i ie elt
names rem rire tegen _
—~ r& i a =a
| RSET NY 5 eee
W/L TE 7 = < For" Feehan
mR 1% =~ ye Wh 2 sxcossee? = coramctle-Ighicoour
a ae NN m2 metal sheetifibre cement sheet
! — i eee
eenwmel |e See |
| Above NGL'RLZO00AGOVENGL-RL | Sel Sete”
Sees vender = a cur
| NOTE: all structural elements; including all
| | refer to schedules for details
i 1190 tions: Ri 28.85 inns tte macro res
Key Plan @ 1:500
sparks architects G@ ein 088 [PO Nor Eos eaten oa (_)
ae pra | own | rowing avg
Page 38 of T10Section 39
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 39 of 110
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
[et trterrel ees] Development Approval Development Approval )
1 S '
9 “ 9 9° ¢ ¢ ;
' tS T |
| Co AK BQO Kf 000K 8,000 FHKE 9609 OK 6000 D
1 MB wos !
1 | Ro ae | | | | |
L a5 me :
— 4 bo ------445— Bt pe rot ft. 820
S00 eave em a | | 12.0m height limit 3
oe | ET os RES es! >. | | prtroom mezzaning FFL 204
MY so At
mon TAU 4 te | =~ |
1. timber blade tl LP if a |
fence -HwD1 |] |] era i " | sw ret | / 8
2a {al ||| Mig tl | mero | ps §
: kaa y ay Srey oe | _ ne
al! aN PNY Par VRE) Roe | ‘haar | ground floor L 26,000
ee bs $., a Se OL
WU ud o - ANG. | i structural slab L 25,480
Ta OREO i coe eZ Ya —— ee
| Se gay e2 “wie Gy i FC2to.window wpicaly
: “J ; ; : ? | / ag
| # Lease |= + = 4H) FC bind Nop
legend LZ deck 3 pd SSS D3 = SS : - fr *
Bt frameless glass balustrade ee ~ aH
io pevioodtype 1 Be | \_ | tower ground floor FFL 18,980
tes 1 eet | | Be
wt connate i = I I : | eo VY yp 2a
== Sw A sol oped
ee i NZ PIA Wa | eon Ue
: i aor | ; Slo g
Sit sap cling 1 CN Hu Papa tH +
Si Seam eee i SC i i He | cable io cig
msi i nde it yal l : ™
sre ene \W AS: ENT BATT TTT
fee eyscoens tr ! i eee fe anarron ep 0
estan and deta TTT a A.) ve | Y . “, [ poo
|| tp -- | Sg Nig ——— a \ AKA,
H: 11.99M : RL31.99H: 11 | 4 ts TE Vy ~~
Above NGL: RL 20.00 Abov ‘| | | | ‘Sit. | >
__. Z i, e
y OTe Wo NGL againstbuiing = |
i P= get aan ~~~ = =F
Hi 1.98M WRtIMS : RL L--------- '
= Se
Plan @ 1:500
( sparks orchitects enn Sot ean wes (|
=e svg wore \
Page 39 Of T10Section 40
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 40 of 110
C Ex ame ee a Development Approval )
tos > a = —~ —~ ~ Po !
1 (A) ~~ B) (Cc) (0) (E) (F) \
1 4
| KO 6a30 DD C3000 KO OY
| tse | |
so 5
| at OK 9 fall ~~ | | | | H
' —_- yA 1
| win ~t | | |
ee | ee rot ft. t20
- — | | |
3 | \ ~e . 3
| . c j rer sh | | 12.0 eight nt &
> — ys . long se
_ tn | | | bedroom mezzaning FFL 29,4
fey - ~s > |
fm, ~~ ee
| a & ae ee |
een wall Figen toes SIS For) g
WA , —_ cer | ~~ ._] / | =
Wy ¢ Pe y\ & weep
\ V4, st : a, sntey cout | 3 | deck / ote . 4- ae al. - oe
WAs ms ee won Lk | \ 0 ] Tat apes ele -------7
Pn, a) Jy a ee i ground fioor —_FFL.26,000
NR = structural stab FFL 25,480
—— |
my
— | EO ae Bh
a ; 2 2
. | BF
% | : ih Hy | La | i | :
gend ~ =
Bt frameless glass balustrade = : .
pwot sree " ee ~ || L L — lower ground floor FFL 18,980
Fct fibre cement with render finish - | “
light colour
= ne | ¢ wl a0
Fc2 fibre cement with render Snish - ALIA) §
mt metal sheetfibre cement sheet! H SH || Els I |
ceramic tile - light colour i ‘| a i} Hh 4 .
m2 metal sheetfibre coment shoot zi) RH ka | il | ; , y ~
| aioe a RSA IE a 1s
Rt roof type 1 veh, i itl i 4 H | n 3
R2 roof type 2 i i |
SUL sep lacing os NT AIPA A +
eet root vender - ight colour l|\|h i I al 6 pool deck |
SR2 ‘smooth render - dark colour / ih i i i i poo! fence
ee aoe | ria dl | a .
farm ipbeeccodane wih engmeere | Mataln a 3 he oh SS > entero |___epsr.s
ign and deta 7
i __ EM -
ee —“‘(‘C‘isCSCisz T D an Ah rT}
H: 11.99M : RL 31,99 H: 11 "1 — pool Jawn. sb
Above NGL: RL 20.00 Abov: i ee IN
~ S-- I IN ~ oo me =e.
Key Plan @ 1:500
fo - PENS en enna a8 Jamieson Residence Scale 7:100 uuuut__s—_1___J iN
| sparks architects ————— 38 Park Crescent Sunshine Beach John and Ngaio Jamieson 083 PO Section A posi ( ) j
\ - epate cxcce iy he ohn 9 446728 project client jobno. | drawn | drawing |dwgno. \ 4 /
Page 40 of 110Section 41
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
3 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A
SERVICE AND UTILITY TYPE 3 (TOWER) AT DAVIS ROAD, COOTHARABA
(MCU15/0061)
CUMENT INF ORM ATION
Author Development Planner, Jack Lewis
Planning & Infrastructure Department
Index ECM / Application / MCU15/0061
Attachments 1. Proposal Plans
2. Photomontages
APPLICATION DETAILS
Applicant NBN Co
Proposal Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Service &
Utility Type 3 (Tower)
Properly Made Date 30 June 2015
Information Request Date 14 July 2015
Information Response Date 3 August 2015
Decision Due Date 5 November 2015
Number of Submissions 1 Properly Made Submission
PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address Davis Rd COOTHARABA QLD 4565
RP Description Lot 1 SP277246
Land Area 300m2
Existing Use of Land Vacant
STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation Regional Landscape & Rural Production
Locality Boreen Point, Kin Kin & Cootharaba
Zone Rural
Overlays Biodiversity Overlay – Environmental Protection Area
Natural Hazards – Medium Bushfire Hazard
Assessment Type Impact
Page 41 of 110
Section 42
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Organisation
Committee Meeting dated 13 October 2015 regarding Application No. MCU15/0061 for a
Development Permit for Material Change of Use for Service & Utility Type 3 (Tower) situated
at Davis Road, Cootharaba and:
A. Approve the application in accordance with the following conditions:
PLANNING
When Conditions must be Complied With
1. Unless otherwise stated, all conditions of this Decision Notice must be complied
with prior to the use commencing, and then compliance maintained at all times
while the use continues.
Approved Plans
2. Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally
comply with the approved plans of development. The approved plans are listed
in the following table unless otherwise amended by these conditions.
Plan No. Rev. Plan/Document Name Date
4GYM-51-25- 06 Site Specific Notes and Antenna Table drawn by 12/05/2015
DAVD-C1 Aurecon
4GYM-51-25- 06 Overall Site Plan drawn by Aurecon 12/05/2015
DAVD-C2
4GYM-51-25- 06 Site Setout Plan drawn by Aurecon 12/05/2015
DAVD-C3
4GYM-51-25- 06 Site Elevation and Details drawn by Aurecon 12/05/2015
DAVD-C4
3. Development authorised by this approval must be undertaken generally in
accordance with the Approved Plans listed within this Decision Notice.
Building Height
4. The maximum height of the structure must not exceed 41 metres above the
finished ground level and the natural ground surface.
5. Certification must be submitted to Council from a Licensed Surveyor which
certifies that the monopole structure does not exceed the maximum height
requirement of this Decision Notice.
6. No lights are permitted to be attached to the telecommunications facility, except
where required for aircraft hazard lighting purposes or similar.
Existing Vegetation
7. Existing vegetation within the lease area located outside of the 100m2 compound
and driveway access area shall be maintained and allowed to grow to full form.
Page 42 of 110
Section 43
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Health and Safety
8. The development must not, at any time during the life of the development, result
in human exposure to environmental electromagnetic emissions exceeding the
current regulations, standards and/or recommendations of the Australian
Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). The carrier of the
infrastructure must provide, at any time upon request by Council, written
certification to demonstrate compliance with this condition. The written
certification must assume:
a. a maximum number of users over the lifetime of any pole or other
supporting structure
b. full power usage
c. a maximum down tilt of antennae.
9. Warning information signs and security fencing must be provided on the site to
prevent unauthorised entry. Fencing must be camouflaged through the use of
colours, materials and screening vegetation to blend the fence into the visual
landscape.
Colours and Finishes
10. The monopole and associated panels must be finished in colours that blend in
visually into the landscape.
Cessation of Use
11. The telecommunications facility must be removed from the site upon cessation of
the use.
B. Find the following are sufficient grounds to justify the decision despite the conflict with
the Planning Scheme:
1. The telecommunications facility will provide coverage for the NBN fixed wireless
network, allowing for the delivery of higher speed data to rural residential
households in the Cootharaba area; and
2. The proposal will not significantly impact on the visual or residential amenity of
the locality as it is to be located near existing infrastructure, and is screened by
existing vegetation.
REPORT
1. PROPOSAL
The application seeks a Development Permit for Material Change of Use for a
telecommunications tower associated with the establishment of the fixed wireless network
infrastructure of the National Broadband Network (NBN). Fixed wireless is a network of base
station facilities proposed to provide fast internet service to the majority of rural and rural
residential properties. Since 2013, there have been 8 other NBN towers approved in the
Noosa Shire, with several already constructed and operational.
The base stations communicate directly with antennas fixed to individual premises (dwellings
or businesses) to deliver wireless broadband access. The proposed tower is designed to
serve approximately 275 rural residential properties in the Cootharaba area.
Page 43 of 110
Section 44
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
The proposal is for a 41 metre high monopole located within a 300m2 lands lease on Davis
Road, Cootharaba. The lands lease has recently been created within the 210m wide Davis
Road reserve, near the existing Cootharaba Rural Fire Service (RFS) Station. The
infrastructure includes transmission equipment and outdoor cabinets within a 100m2
compound. The locality plan is shown in Figure 1 below, and the detailed proposal plans
included as Attachment 1.
Figure.1 Locality plan of Davis Road, Cootharaba.
Page 44 of 110
Section 45
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
2. SITE DETAILS
2.1. Background
On 5 July 2015, the Department of Natural Resources & Mines (DNRM) created the 300m 2
lands lease over the subject development site.
2.2. Site Description
The proposed tower is located 65m east of the formed/bitumen section of Davis Road and
120m south of Cootharaba Road. The site is adjacent to existing electricity infrastructure and
accessible via an existing access track. The proposed facility will utilise existing access and
power infrastructure, in conjunction with mature vegetation screening that will surround the
facility to the east, south and west (see Figure 2).
Figure 2 – Location of proposed facility (red arrow) looking south east from the Davis Road
reserve.
2.3. Surrounding Land Uses
Surrounding the site are large rural residential and agricultural grazing properties. The
closest houses to the tower are located 150m to the north east (640 Cootharaba Rd), 270m
to the south east (23 Davis Rd), and 170m to the west (612 Cootharaba Rd). The
Cootharaba Rural Fire Service Station is also located approximately 100m to the west of the
site.
2.4. Instruments for Statutory Assessment
Under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 the application must be assessed against each of
the following statutory planning instruments to the extent they are relevant to the
development:
State Planning Policies;
the South East Queensland Regional Plan;
State Planning Regulatory Provisions; and
the Planning Scheme for the local government area.
Page 45 of 110
Section 46
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Of these, the statutory planning instruments relevant to this application are discussed in the
sections that follow.
2.5. State and Other Statutory Instruments
The site is located within the Regional Landscape and Rural Production Area of the SEQ
Regional Plan. The proposal is consistent with the regional policies and regulatory provisions
of the SEQ Regional Plan.
2.6. Statutory Instruments – Planning Scheme
The subject site is located in the Boreen Point, Kin Kin & Cootharaba Locality. The site is
within the Davis Road reserve and in accordance with Part 2.10.1 of The Noosa Plan, if a
road is not shown as being covered by a zone, the land has the same zoning as the
adjoining land. The surrounding lots are all zoned Rural and the subject site therefore also
takes on the Rural zoning.
The proposed use is identified as an inconsistent use within the Rural zone and is required
to follow an impact assessable application process. While the whole of the planning scheme
is applicable, the following codes and policies are most relevant to the application:
Mary River Catchment Locality Code
Planning Scheme Policy 23 – Telecommunication Towers
Infrastructure Uses Code
The pertinent issues arising out of the assessment are discussed below.
Mary River Catchment Locality Code
The Locality Code seeks for new development to not significantly impact on the existing
visual amenity of the area. The proposed 41m high tower is surrounded by existing mature
vegetation (up to 30m in height) and is more than 150m away from the closest house.
The applicant has produced photomontages using a cherry picker to represent the visual
impacts of the tower from the closest residential houses to the east of the site and the Davis
Rd bitumen formation as indicated in Attachment 2. The photomontages show that only the
top portion of the tower will be visible from the closest residential dwellings, with the majority
of the tower screened by the existing vegetation. It is considered that the proposed location
does not detract from the existing scenic amenity of the area and is consistent with the visual
amenity Outcomes of the code.
Planning Scheme Policy 23 - Telecommunication Towers
Section 3.2 & 3.4 of the Policy outlines matters for consideration when assessing proposals
for towers. The most applicable points associated with the assessment of this proposal are:
3.2 a) Loss of vegetation on steep slopes or ridgelines; or
3.2 b) Visual scarring or the degradation of views or vistas from the major road
network; or
3.2 c) Alteration to key landform and landscape characters such that they become
dominated by the facility; or
3.4 d) Be positioned to minimise clutter of multiple facilities.
The proposed tower is located on relatively flat land and requires the removal of
approximately 15 trees associated with the lease area and driveway. The tower will not be
readily seen from the major road network and the existing vegetation assists in screening the
base of the tower. The height of the tower also allows future co-location opportunities with
other telecommunication providers, consistent with the outcomes of the Policy.
Page 46 of 110
Section 47
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Infrastructure Uses Code
The Code includes requirements around two central themes - Health & Safety and Visual
Amenity.
Health & Safety
The Specific Outcomes of the Code require the development to avoid unacceptable risks to
the environment or to personal and public safety. The applicant has provided a summary of
the maximum cumulative radiofrequency (RF) and electromagnetic energy (EME) levels at
ground level emitted from the proposed tower, assuming full power usage. The summary
indicates the proposed tower will emit a maximum EME level from the tower, which is
0.098% of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency’s (ARPANSA)
regulated acceptable maximum radiation public exposure limits.
Taking a precautionary approach to the sensitive issue concerning health and safety over
time, certification is to be provided by the telecommunications carrier upon request. The
certification must demonstrate annual compliance with the Health & Safety requirements
compared to ARPANSA regulations.
Visual Amenity
The Code seeks for the tower to be below 25m height in the Rural zone. The proposed tower
is 41m high, with the applicant indicating the height is required to provide appropriate
coverage to the surrounding properties.
The tower will be sited amongst mature vegetation, near existing electricity infrastructure and
setback more than 150m from the closest residential dwelling. As demonstrated by the
photomontages of the tower from the neighbouring residential dwellings and the Davis Road
carriageway (See Attachment 2), the proposal is considered to be visually integrated with
its setting and existing infrastructure so as not to dominate views from surrounding areas.
Conditions are recommended for the development to be finished with suitable muted tones,
no lights to be attached and existing vegetation to be kept around the perimeter of the lease
area, which would assist in screening the tower.
Overlay Provisions
The Biodiversity and Natural Hazards Overlay codes are applicable to this application:
Natural Hazards Overlay (Medium Bushfire Hazard Area)
The proposed development is a non-habitable structure, which will not result in an increase
in the number of people living, working or congregating in the mapped bushfire or landslide
hazard areas, thus meeting the outcomes of the Natural Hazards Overlay.
Biodiversity Overlay (Environmental Enhancement)
The proposed facility has been located within a section of the Davis Road reserve mapped
as being Environmental Enhancement Area. Although the subject site is mapped by the
overlay, the location of the facility has been sited within a previously disturbed area of the
Davis Road reserve, adjacent to an existing clearing for aerial power lines and access.
The development will occupy a relatively small footprint within the site and will involve only
minor vegetation clearing of ‘least concern’ vegetation (approximately 15 trees) and requires
only minor excavation works during the construction of the facility. The applicant includes a
flora and fauna survey within a 100m buffer of the proposed clearing, which concludes that
the site does not include any rare and/or endangered species and has been impacted by
previous clearing.
Page 47 of 110
Section 48
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Council’s Environment Officer agrees with the consultant report and indicates that the
proposal minimises the total footprint within which all structures and driveways are
contained. For these reasons, the proposal is considered to comply with the Overall
Outcomes of the Biodiversity Overlay Code.
3. CONSULTATION
3.1. IDAS Referral Agencies
Not applicable
3.2. Other Referrals
The application was forwarded to the following internal Council specialists:
Environment Officer
Development Engineering Officer
The specialist comments are included as part of this report.
3.3. Public Notification
The application was publicly notified for 15 business days in accordance with the
Sustainable Planning Act 2009. One (1) properly made submission was received. The
following table provides a summary and assessment of the issues raised by submitters.
Issues Comments
Electromagnetic radiation from the tower The summary indicates the proposed tower will
will cause cancer. emit a maximum EME level from the tower,
which is 0.098% of the Australian Radiation
Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency’s
(ARPANSA) regulated acceptable maximum
radiation public exposure limits.
4. CONCLUSION
The proposed development is for a 41m high tower to be erected within the Davis Road
reserve, Cootharaba for the establishment of the fixed wireless network infrastructure of the
National Broadband Network (NBN). The site is located within the Rural zone and the
proposed Infrastructure use as a Service & Utility Type 3 Tower is identified as an
inconsistent use within the zone.
Despite the inconsistency with the zone, the application has been assessed against the
provisions of The Noosa Plan and does not raise any significant planning concerns. The
tower does not pose an unacceptable risk to public safety. The proposed location is set
amongst existing vegetation and is an acceptable distance away from neighbouring
properties and the major road network, so as not to be visually dominant or obtrusive.
Whilst the proposed use raises a conflict with the Boreen Point, Kin Kin & Cootharaba
Locality Code, it is considered that the following grounds are sufficient to support the
proposal:
1. The telecommunications facility will provide coverage for the NBN fixed wireless
network, allowing for the delivery of higher speed data to rural residential households
in the Cootharaba area; and
Page 48 of 110
Section 49
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
2. The proposal will not significantly impact on the visual or residential amenity of the
locality as it is to be located near existing infrastructure, and is screened by existing
vegetation.
The application is, therefore, recommended for approval, subject to conditions.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Community Services x Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office Corporate Services
Community Engagement Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 49 of 110
Section 50
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
ATTACHMENT 1 – Proposal Plans
Page 50 of 110
Section 51
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 51 of 110
Get
Vv
Limited
Get
AE — AE — AE — at — ab — Ae —at —at ae —at at —at —at —ae ae en 7 EXISTING AERIAL ELECTRICAL LINES ee
re € EAE —“AE — AE —AE — AE — ae — ae ae —ae. =
EXISTING ACCESS ERICSSON
TRACK
So PROPOSED NBN CONSUMERS MAINS
\ a $a en
\
\ PROPDSED NBN 2.4m HIGH CHAINWIRE SECURITY
—pROPOSED NBN GPS UNIT I1-OFF) ee som = FENCE WITH 3.0m WIDE ACCESS GATE
s ~ . ere —— _ __
PROPOSED NBN POWER DISTRIBUTION PRE ED NBN PROPERTY
BOARD/METER PANEL ON H-FRAME $—w»— 7 — Ly, ‘ - ol ’
\ —— —_ nek
j FINAL ELECTRICAL CIRCUITS IN cons NUE — NUE — NUE SE Fe weber — we ik — we —dag NUE —= NUE — nue * =
INSTALL AS PER AS/NZS 3000 = - f . NATIONAL BROADBAND
PROPOSED NBN OUTDOOR CABINET —===—q————"4_¥ | ; _ Pd PROPOSED NBN MONOPOLE FOOTING (TBC) | NETWORK
\ $SC-02 ON CONCRETE SLAB J 8 r ~~ SITE No: 4GYN-51 25-DAVD
| PROPOSED NBN OUTDOOR CABINET ~ \ fas < ,
$SC-02 (FUTURE LOCATION) ae S\N eg \ | AE # DAVID COOTHARABA\
= ~ ~ 2
; =a ~~ HEIND OY, NEF, a “Sa PROPOSED NBN 1x #600 PARABOLIC ROAD RESERVE
"0.0m PROPOSED NBN ACCESS ROUTE“ we pa Roy | ANT. Monopae is ANTENNA (TO BOREEN POINT NORTH) DAVIS ROAD
(APPROX. 10m LONG! ~ ee 7 (emits fi s/f - | COOTHARABA QLD 4565
WEN 300 WDE CABLE LADOO) wir (1-081, bls PE a | PROPOSED NBN 40m MONOPOLE WITH CIRCULAR
CABLE LADDER SUPPORT POST ~ _ line I: v at | lg PRELIMINARY
1 - EA Le ep HEADFRAME AND LADDER WITH LAD-SAF | PRELIMINARY |
~— ' aL _—
i : 5 . ~ S| 7 PROPOSED NBN 3x LLPX310R PANEL ANTENNAS _——
foo s| a | So . = | WITH NBN REMOTE RADIO UNITS TO BE FIXED
sie NS, | 5 - | | BEHIND THE PANEL ANTENNAS
BR pee. | as . 1
2 + Ss a, Ss
VEGETATION TO BE REMOVED, APPROX, 270m* - 7 7 / s— ;—~,—l
NS | SETI _ e
2250
= te ee _2250_| 350
. L__ 10000 — _
NBNCOMPOUND AREA aurecon
PROPOSED NBN CONSTRUCTION AREA evIGTINGTREES APPROY. mH actaipestateettregteresanatertan
sae fescee OvR
sceno SCALE 1100 wore pene JR
LEGEND NOTE:
— Nut — NuE — NBN UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINES Seana Tee
— ec — ec— _ FINAL ELECTRICAL CIRCUITS IN 2x 50¢ HDPVC 1, THE NBN CONSUMERS MAINS ROUTE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS IS INDICATIVE SITE SETOUT
UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL CONDUIT ONLY. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO DETERMINE EXACT ROUTE, ELECTRICAL
_ _ CONTRACTOR TO LOCATE AND IDENTIFY EXISTING U/G SERVICES PRIORTO | PLAN
/ / NBN COMPOUND FENCE COMMENCEMENT OF WORK,
— + —4«E —_ EXISTING AERIAL ELECTRICAL LINES sane =a
——— - —— PROPOSED NBN LEASE AREA 4GYM-51-25-DAVD-C3
(COPYRIGHT © NEN CoUIMITED ABN &6 136 533 741 . ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. VERSION 10- SEPT 2011 2 10 9 10 20 30 40 S0mn Az
Lasuedesrtisietirosf fp |P|G
Page 51 of 110Section 52
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 52 of 110
Get
SS
El 4.0m Nv
APPROX, OVERALL FACILITY HEIGHT \ NBNCo
EL 40,0m EL 40,0m
Zz Zz _ | ;
TOP OF MONOPOLE C/L 3x 1077H PROPOSED NBN PANEL ANTENNAS Limited
—_ 3x 500H REMOTE RADIO UNITS MOUNTED BEHIND =<
\ w EL 39.0m
C/L 1x PROPOSED NBN CANISTER es
\ gL 37.00 4
| ix #600 PROPOSED NBN PARABOLIC ANTENNA =
(TO BOREEN POINT NORTH)
ERICSSON
|
|
EXISTING TREES TO 27m
\
\ | w EL 275m
\ C/L PROPOSED NBN GPS UNIT
|
|
|
| ROPOSED NBN 40m MONOPOLE WITH
| CIRCULAR HEADFRAME ae
| NATIONAL BROADBAND)
ROPOSED NBN FEEDER CABLES TO BE NETWORK
| RUN VERTICALLY INSIDE MONOPOLE SITE No: 4GYM-51-25-DAVD
| DAVID COOTHARABA
| ROAD RESERVE
| DAVIS ROAD
| COOTHARABA QLD 4565
I
| PRELIMINARY
| _—
| /— PROPOSED NBN 300 WIDE CABLE LADDER WITH
PROPOSED NBN 2.4m HIGH CHAINWIRE SECURITY —, {OFF} CABLE LADDER SUPPORT POST
FENCE WITH 3.0m WIDE ACCESS GATE \ | PROPOSED NBN OUTDOOR CABINET
\ | / __ SSC-02 ON CONCRETE SLAB
\ | Revel Deis
-nE PROPOSED NBN PROPERTY \ | /-— PROPOSED NBN POWER DISTRIBUTION
POLE \ | BOARD/METER PANEL ON H-FRAME s
\ 1 M7 eco
\ aur n
EL 0 om ‘Aurecon Australia Pty Lic ABN S¢ 005 133.873
{TOP OF FOUNDATION
fe Fl 0.158
FINISHED GROUND LEVEL
===
Orawing The:
SITE ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION AND DETAILS
SCALE 1:200 ~o
4GYN-51-25-DAVD-C4
(COPYRIGHT © NEN CoUIMITED ABN S6 136 533 741 . ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. VERSION 10- SEPT 2011 2 10 9 10 20 30 40 SOma Az
Page 52 of 110Section 53
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
ATTACHMENT 2 - Photomontages
Page 53 of 110
Section 54
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 54 of 110
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
PROPOSED NBN
FACILITY
f
E ro ae et)
aS a : og ; 4
ee . J Pe a we aes
oa 5 te 4 ils ot ' ; ae
¥ [ . a. ; k,, % “> . A .
/~ > , mt ,
+ i"
“ ‘ ‘4 Y ,
par” belie =. |
i. as Ea
. Ace
Page 54 of 110Section 55
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 55 of 110
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
PROPOSED NBN
FACILITY
ag a
~
~~ ~~ © oe
ue - ye”
. rs il ——ae
Coa | Pia rt satan
> | ite — a? Salt. Cea
7 Pir a iri Ta ery as
Page 55 of 110Section 56
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Page 56 of 110
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
PROPOSED NBN
FACILITY
a
©
) A
ae ‘ % ¥
a4 i tA) r x ;
Me ual TL) ; i | “ ‘ A =
pe sale ) : "
A oe > ~ - :
—
Page 56 of 110Section 57
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
4 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR
MULTIPLE HOUSING - TYPE 4 CONVENTIONAL FOR 16 UNITS AT 30-32
DOONELLA STREET, TEWANTIN (MCU15/0053)
CUMENT INF ORM ATION
Author Denis Wallace, Coordinator Planning
Planning & Infrastructure Department
Index ECM/Application/MCU15/0053
Attachments 1. Proposal Plans
2. Landscape Concept Plan
APPLICATION DETAILS
Applicant Serina Pty Ltd C/- DFS Group
Proposal Development Permit for Material Change of Use for Multiple
Housing - Type 4 Conventional (16 units)
Properly Made Date 19 June 2015
Information Request Date 2 July 2015
Information Response 21 August 2015
Date
Decision Due Date 19 November 2015
Number of Submissions Nil
PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address 30 – 32 Doonella Street Tewantin
RP Description Lot 32 RP893427
Lot 903 T1631
Land Area 2,539m2
Existing Use of Land Multiple Dwellings / Detached House
STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation Urban Footprint
Locality Tewantin & Doonan
Zone Community Services
Overlays Potential Acid Sulphate Soils
Assessment Type Impact
Page 57 of 110
Section 58
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Organisation
Committee Meeting dated 13 October 2015 regarding Application No. MCU15/0053 for a
Development Permit for Material Change of Use for Multiple Housing - Type 4 Conventional
(16 units) situated at 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin and:
A. Approve the application in accordance with the following conditions:
PLANNING
When Conditions must be Complied With
1. Unless otherwise stated, all conditions of this Decision Notice must be complied
with prior to the use commencing, and then compliance maintained at all times
while the use continues.
Approved Plans
2. Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally
comply with the approved plans of development. The approved plans are listed
in the following table unless otherwise amended by these conditions.
Plan No. Rev. Plan/Document Name Date
0000-A-00-01 G Cover Sheet and Site Plan by Inter Pty Ltd 12 August 2015
0000-A-02-01 D Basement and Ground Floor by Inter Pty Ltd 12 August 2015
0000-A-02-02 C First Floor Plan by Inter Pty Ltd 24 May 2015
0000-A-02-03 C Unit Plans by Inter Pty Ltd 24 May 2015
0000-A-04-01 D Overall Elevations by Inter Pty Ltd 12 August 2015
0000-A-05-00 C Overall Sections by Inter Pty Ltd 24 May 2015
0000-A-06-01 B Waste Management Details by Inter Pty Ltd 12 August 2015
SD-01 A Landscape Concept Plan by DFS Group 27 May 2015
SD-02 A Landscape Concept Plan by DFS Group 27 May 2015
Nature and Extent of Approved Use
3. The approved development comprises 15 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 1 bedroom
residential units.
Building Height
4. The maximum height of the development must not exceed 8 metres above the
natural ground level and finished ground level (with the exception of the driveway
entrance to the basement carpark and refuse store area).
5. Certification must be submitted to Council from a Licensed Surveyor which
certifies that the building does not exceed the maximum height requirement of
this Decision Notice.
Page 58 of 110
Section 59
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Performance Bond
6. Security in the form of a cash bond or trading bank guarantee to the sum of
$20,000 must be submitted to Council, to secure performance of all conditions of
this approval, prior to the site pre-start meeting. The cash bond or trading bank
guarantee will be returned on performance of the conditions of approval less any
costs incurred by Council in respect of enforcing performance of this permit.
Council reserves the right to call upon the bond or guaranteed sum to effect
compliance with conditions.
Street Identification
7. The street address of the development must be clearly visible and discernible
from the primary frontage of the site by the provision of a street number and,
where appropriate, the building name.
Water & Sewer Connections
8. An underground connection to reticulated water and sewerage must be provided
to the development site in accordance with the standards and requirements of
Northern SEQ Distributor–Retailer Authority (Unitywater).
9. A Certificate of Completion from the Northern SEQ Distributor–Retailer Authority
(Unitywater) must be submitted to Council that certifies an underground
connection to reticulated water and sewerage has been provided to the
development site.
Building Appearance
10. All air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment must be fully enclosed or
screened such that they are not visible from the street frontages nor adjoining
properties.
11. All deck and balcony areas above ground floor must not be enclosed by
permanent fixtures such as shutters, louvres, glass panelling or the like.
12. Undercroft areas toward the building’s Doonella Street frontage shall be
screened/battened generally as indicated on the approved plans.
13. Balustrading to balcony areas must be glazed, as indicated on the approved
plans.
Fencing and Walls
14. Any street fencing must be set back an average of 1 metre from the front
property boundary. Any fencing on the front boundary must either:
a. not exceed a maximum height of 1.2m
b. be of open construction.
15. The area of land between the fence and the front property boundary must be
densely landscaped to screen any fencing from the street.
Clothes Drying Areas
16. A common access outdoor clothes line shall be provided for resident’s use,
which is screened from public view.
Storage
17. Each dwelling unit must be provided with an allocated secure storage area(s)
within the basement carpark.
Page 59 of 110
Section 60
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Community Management Statement
18. Any proposed Community Management Statement required for the development
pursuant to the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 must be
submitted to Council for endorsement at the same time as submission of the
Building Format Plan (or similar) to Council for compliance assessment.
19. All clauses and by-laws of the proposed Community Management Statement
must accord with the requirements of this Decision Notice.
Landscaping Works
20. The development site must be landscaped. The works must be undertaken in
accordance with an Operational Works approval and the Noosa Plan and must
include:
a. The works shown on the approved plan number SD-02[A] titled
“Landscape Concept Plan” by the DFS Group dated 27/05/15.
b. New planting species generally consistent with requirements of Planning
Scheme Policy 3 – Landscaping Plants & Guidelines.
c. Retention of exiting trees toward the eastern boundary and south-eastern
corner of the site as shown on the approved Landscape Concept Plan
(with consideration to be given to the viability of retaining the tree(s) close
to the building in the context of the likely construction disturbance).
d. Retention of existing street trees (with consideration to be given to the
viability of retaining the tree(s) close to the new vehicle crossover in the
context of the likely construction disturbance).
e. Screening vegetation along the western boundary and front setback.
f. Clearly detail any proposed front fencing.
21. All landscape works must be maintained generally in accordance with the
approved design for the life of the development.
ENGINEERING
External Works
22. Roadworks must be provided within the proposed 3.0m wide “Public
Thoroughfare” easement adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. The
works must be undertaken in accordance with an Operational Works approval
and must include in particular:
a. 2.0m wide seal or concrete pavement along full length of the easement.
The formation must be designed to cater for the potential future use by
vehicles and be in accordance with Council’s Planning Scheme Policy 5 –
Engineering Design Standards – Roads, Drainage and Earthworks.
b. Landscaping works to provide a suitable visual screening buffer between
the building and the easement with a minimum garden bed width of
800mm.
c. Pram ramps where required.
d. Any necessary alteration and reinstatement works beyond the boundary of
the site to connect and match existing public carparks or pathways
pavements.
Page 60 of 110
Section 61
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Site Access and Driveways
23. A sealed access driveway must be provided from Doonella Street to all parking
and maneuvering areas of the development. The works must be undertaken in
accordance with an Operational Works approval and must include in particular:
a. A driveway crossover generally in accordance with standard drawing SEQ
R-051 Type D with a width not exceeding 6.5m at the boundary line with
line marking or mountable traffic device at the entry to encourage left-in
and left-out from the site.
b. Signage in accordance with Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) installed within the site to indicate left-out only traffic.
c. Grades to allow for a compliant concrete pathway along the frontage.
d. Any landscaping, fences and fixtures near the access entry point must
comply with AS 2890.1 requirements for sight visibility for pedestrians and
cyclists at driveways.
Frontage Reinstatement Works
24. All redundant driveways to the site must be removed and the kerb, footpath and
verge area reinstated to match the balance of the site frontage, including the
provision of topsoil and turf where the existing verge is grassed. The works must
be undertaken in accordance with an Operational Works approval and must
include in particular:
a. The existing driveway layback be removed and the kerb reinstated to
match the type and alignment of the adjoining existing sections of kerb line.
The driveway layback must be saw-cut and removed to allow for a smooth
and neat join finish between the new and the existing kerb.
b. Reinstatement of concrete footpath to provide even and consistent
gradients in longitudinal and across profiles generally in compliance with
IPWEAQ standard drawing SEQ R-065 Concrete Pathway Construction
Details, this may necessitate replacement of sections of the existing
footpaths beyond the edges of the redundant driveways.
c. Any affected trees within the grassed verge must be replaced with similar
species in accordance with the landscaping conditions of this permit.
Car Parking
25. A minimum of 25 car parking spaces must be provided and marked on the site
generally in accordance with the approved plans. The works must be
undertaken in accordance with an Operational Works approval and must include
in particular:
a. 4 visitor parking spaces within the total, which are clearly marked for that
purpose and accessible at all times for visitor use.
b. Crossfalls, gradients and vehicle headroom in accordance with Australian
Standard AS2890: Parking Facilities.
26. All car parking areas and access driveways must be maintained exclusively for
vehicle parking and maneuvering and kept in a tidy and safe condition at all
times.
27. All car and bicycle parking areas must be line marked in accordance with
approved plans, no dividing walls be constructed unless a further application for
amendment is approved by Council.
Page 61 of 110
Section 62
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Service Vehicles
28. Service vehicle parking, maneuvering and standing space must be provided on
the site in accordance with the approved plans.
Stormwater Drainage
29. The site must be provided with a stormwater drainage system connecting to a
lawful point of discharge. The works must be undertaken in accordance with an
Operational Works approval, and must include in particular:
a. Stormwater system that caters for all storms up and including 1 in 100
years storm event.
b. No adverse impact on other properties and the road’s footpath and
grassed verge (eg by diverting flows and/or blocking flows and causing
additional ponding).
c. Where applicable, extension of the site stormwater system to
accommodate stormwater from external site, including registration of
drainage easements.
d. The use of gravity stormwater drainage only and not surcharge pits or
pumps.
30. Stormwater runoff from the development must be disposed of without causing
scour or damage to the subject site or any adjoining property.
Electricity and Telecommunication Services
31. Unless otherwise stipulated by telecommunications legislation at the time of
construction, the development must be provided with all necessary conduits, pits
and pipes to accommodate the future connection of optic fibre technology
telecommunications.
32. Certification must be submitted to Council from all relevant service providers
which certifies that the development has met the requirements of this Decision
Notice and all applicable legislation at the time of construction.
Easements
33. A 3 metre wide easement for “Public Thoroughfare” purposes must be registered
against the title of the property in favour of Council. The easement must be
located adjacent to the northern boundary of the subject property. The easement
must:
a. be clearly shown on all plans submitted for Operational Works
b. be registered prior to the commencement of the use
c. the terms of the easement must allow for the use of the easement by the
public whether in vehicles, cycles or on foot.
34. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the relevant service provider, any public or
third party infrastructure located on the subject site must be placed within an
easement registered against the title of the property.
35. All easements must be designed in accordance with the planning scheme and
granted at no cost to the Grantee. Where the Grantee is Council or a service
authority, the easement documentation must be in accordance with the
Grantee’s standard easement terms. Draft easement documentation must be
submitted to Council for endorsement.
Page 62 of 110
Section 63
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
36. All works must be kept clear of any existing or proposed easements on the
subject land, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Grantee.
Earthworks and Retaining Walls
37. All earthworks, associated batters and retaining walls must be undertaken in
accordance with an Operational Works approval, and must in particular:
a. Be undertaken in compliance with the provisions of Australian Standard
AS3798: Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and Residential
Developments.
b. Be carried out in accordance with a site-specific Geotechnical Investigation
Report prepared by a suitably qualified person* that addresses, in
particular:
i. the impact of excavation and the construction works on the stability
of nearby building and infrastructures
ii. Acid Sulfate Soil assessment report in accordance with State
Planning Policy 2/02 Planning and Managing Development Involving
Acid Sulfate Soils and supported by appropriate testing and
documentation.
c. Have all access chamber surface levels for drainage, water supply or
sewerage infrastructure within the work site be adjusted to provide a
freeboard of 100mm above the finished ground surface level or be in
accordance with the requirements and directions of the service provider.
d. All fill and associated batters must be contained entirely within the subject
site unless written permission from the respective landowner(s) is provided
to Council.
(*) refer to Advisory Notes
Acid Sulfate Soils
38. Where excavations of non-imported soils below the elevation of 5m AHD are
necessary for construction, the application for Operational Works for Bulk
Earthworks, Stormwater and /or Landscaping must demonstrate and include
certification from a suitably experienced and qualified geotechnical engineer of
methods necessary to ensure construction and operation of the development:
a. Shall be consistent with Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual:
Soil Management Guidelines; and
b. will not result in the release of acid or associated metals; and
c. will not cause localised lowering of groundwater.
Erosion and Sediment Control
39. Prior to the completion of the development, all site surfaces must be effectively
stabilised. For the purpose of this condition, an effectively stabilised surface is
defined as one that does not, or is not likely to result in visible evidence of soil
loss caused by sheet, rill or gully erosion or lead to sedimentation, or lead to
water contamination.
Page 63 of 110
Section 64
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Water Quality and Quantity
40. Except as otherwise modified herein, the development must be designed,
constructed and maintained to achieve the stormwater quality and quantity
outcomes detailed in the Stormwater Management Plan for 30-32 Doonella
Street, Tewantin Rev A by AquaIntel Pty Ltd dated 12 August 2015 (Doc No
2014027 RPT 001).
41. The development must include measures to prevent oils, hydrocarbons or other
pollutants likely to be released in basement areas from being released into
Council’s Stormwater system or other receiving waters.
42. Water quality treatment devices must be shaped and designed to be low
maintenance, and integrate into the landscape. Where bioretention devices are
proposed, the Operational Works Application for Stormwater Drainage,
Landscaping and Earthworks must demonstrate how the design is consistent
with the most current version of the Water by Design Bioretention Technical
Design Guidelines.
43. Water Quality Treatment devices must be operated and maintained in
accordance with manufacturer’s specifications and relevant maintenance
manuals.
44. Prior to commencement of use the Community Management Statement must
include provision for the engagement of personnel to operate and maintain
Water Quality Treatment devices in accordance with manufacturer’s
specifications, relevant maintenance manuals and the Stormwater Management
Plan for 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin Rev A by AquaIntel Pty Ltd dated 12
August 2015 (Doc No 2014027 RPT 001).
Water Reuse
45. Detail design plans submitted with the Operational Works Application must
demonstrate how waters will be reticulated from the rainwater storage tank to
reuse areas with a minimum water use of 342KL per annum.
46. A suitable backflow prevention device must be installed on water reuse facilities
to protect the potable water within the reticulated water supply in accordance
with AS/NZS 3500:2003 Plumbing and Drainage.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
Waste Storage
47. The development must provide waste storage and disposal facilities in
accordance with Planning Scheme Policy 9, Waste Management, including an
external imperviously paved area correctly sized for all refuse and recycling
containers and suitably screened from public places and neighbouring
properties.
The waste management facilities should ensure recyclables bins are
appropriately sited and accessible, and/or provided with their own waste shute,
to ensure recyclable waste is not placed in the general waste shute.
48. The site must be provided with a bin wash area with a cold-water tap, hose and
drain outlet connected to sewer, via a bucket trap. The drain outlet is to be
designed to prevent storm water entry to the sewerage system which can be
achieved by a bunded area, with a nib wall height of 100mm maximum,
enclosing a wash area of 700mm x 700mm minimum (max 0.7m²). Alternatively
the waste area can be roofed, or any other appropriate design approved by
Council.
Page 64 of 110
Section 65
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Building Demolition/Removal/Relocation
49. A Waste Management Plan (construction and demolition) must be submitted and
approved by Council’s Environmental Health Officer prior to issue of a
development permit for operational works for demolition, removal or relocation of
any building other than a shed.
The purpose of the Waste Management Plan is to facilitate the segregation of
waste for the effective reuse and recycling of such materials. Segregated
wastes attract significantly reduced disposal fees at the landfill with some items
free. Higher gate fees are charged for mixed waste.
Waste Management Plans (construction and demolition) are required to be
submitted in accordance with Planning Scheme Policy 11, Waste Management
Plans.
Waste storage areas must provide adequate separation of all reusable,
recyclable and waste materials. These must be located so that they are
convenient and safe to use.
The Plan must contain the following information:
The site area for the storage and separation of waste is to be shown on the
plan drawings accompanying the application.
A waste management table as indicated below is to be completed showing
how waste material is to be segregated - recycled – reused or disposed.
Table – Waste Management Table
MATERIALS ON-SITE DESTINATION
Re-use and Recycling Disposal
Expected waste Estimated On-site Off-site *specify
materials volume(m³) *specify proposed *specify contractor and
re-use or on-site contractor and landfill site or
recycling methods recycling outlet other disposal site
Excavation
material
Green waste
Bricks
Concrete
Timber-please
specify
Plasterboard
Metals - please
specify
Asbestos
Other - please
specify
Note * If a demolition contractor is undertaking works, then the Waste
Management table is to be completed by the demolition contractor.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Noise
50. Written certification is required from a suitably qualified person confirming that
sound pressure levels from all mechanical plant and equipment comply with the
following :
Page 65 of 110
Section 66
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Air-conditioning and Refrigeration:
7am to 10pm: Maximum level allowable = background + 5dB(A)
10pm to 7am: Maximum level allowable = background + 3dB(A)
Pumps:
7am to 7pm: Maximum level allowable = background + 5dB(A)
7pm to 10pm: Maximum level allowable = background + 3dB(A)
10pm to 7am: No audible noise.
Assessment and certification is required immediately after installation of the
equipment and prior to any occupation of the building. All equipment should be
operating at the same time to test the overall noise level created, with the
measurement location at either the residential boundary or outside the most
exposed part of an affected building - whichever is the closest to the
plant/equipment.
The certification must be submitted to Council, which certifies that operational
noise from any fixed plant and equipment complies with the requirements of this
Decision Notice.
B. Find the following are sufficient grounds to justify the decision despite the conflict with
the Planning Scheme:
1. The multiple dwelling use is existing on the site.
2. The development will provide centrally located small dwelling units with access
to Tewantin’s facilities and services.
3. The development’s small dwelling units will increase residential housing options
in the locality and are likely to be relatively affordable.
4. There is no identified need for further community or infrastructure facilities within
Tewantin and the development will not unduly constrain land available for
commercial uses consistent with the site’s zoning provisions.
5. The development is consistent with the developed character of the area and will
not negatively impact on visual or residential amenity.
REPORT
1. PROPOSAL
The application seeks development approval for a Material Change of Use for Multiple
Housing – Type 4 Conventional for 16 residential units. The units are proposed within a 2-
storey building comprising 15 x 2 bedroom units and 1 x 1 bedroom unit arranged over two
habitable levels above a basement carpark. The gross floor area of the 2 bedroom units
range in size between 72 – 78m2 and the 1 bedroom unit is 64m2, with all units constituting
“small dwelling units” under The Noosa Plan (being less than 90m2).
The basement carpark houses 21 cars, bicycle parking, plant rooms, residents’ storage, a lift
and refuse area. 4 uncovered visitor carparks are provided at grade, external to the building.
Each of the 2 habitable building levels contain 8 units and each unit has a small east or west
facing balcony of a minimum 2.2 metre depth.
The building construction is primarily a mix of concrete, masonry block and FC sheeting.
Character elements are provided by the mix of external elements and use of timber
battening, glazed balustrading, window hoods, louvres and deep eaves to the simple skillion
roof form.
Page 66 of 110
Section 67
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
A number of the lower level units are allocated private courtyard areas but substantial
portions of the site will be left as communal open space. A roofed communal deck and BBQ
area is proposed in the northeast corner of the site and a number of existing large shade
trees are proposed to be retained. Dedication of a 3 metre wide pedestrian easement is
proposed along the northernmost boundary to provide a new formalised link between the
Council carpark to the east and the public laneway to the northwest.
A stormwater detention and treatment basin is proposed adjacent the Doonella Street
frontage in the southeast corner of the site. Vehicle access is via an upgraded crossover at
the western end of the site frontage with another existing crossover to the east to be
removed.
Figures 1 to 3 below show the proposed site layout and front building perspectives. Full
proposal plans are included as Attachment 1 and a Landscape Concept Plan is included as
Attachment 2.
Figure 1 – Proposed Site Plan
Page 67 of 110
Section 68
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Figure 2 – Front Perspective from South West
Figure 3 – Front Perspective from South East
The application acknowledges the residential proposal raises conflicts with the site’s
Community Services zoning and submits grounds in support of the development considered
sufficient to overcome the planning conflicts.
2. SITE DETAILS
2.1. Background
The site contains an existing detached house and an existing unit building with 4 units on Lot
903, which appears to have been constructed in the 1960s or 1970s and pre-dates planning
approvals for the area.
A pre-lodgement meeting was held with the applicant in September 2014 for a 21 unit
proposal on the site. A number of built form, population density and traffic concerns were
raised with that design, which have been addressed in the current proposal.
Page 68 of 110
Section 69
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
2.2. Site Description
The site comprises two rectangular allotments both fronting Doonella Street. Lot 32 is
516m2 in area and contains an existing 2 storey weatherboard house. Lot 903 is 2,023m2 in
area and contains an older fibro unit building of 5 units in a poor state of repair. The units
are within 2 buildings, one being single storey and the other 2 storey. Both lots have mature
gardens but predominantly comprise exotic species. A tall mature hoop pine is located on
the northern boundary of the larger lot.
Both lots gain access via Doonella Street, with the 2 driveways rising up a moderate slope.
Overall, the site slopes at approximately 8% from the rear boundary down to the south
eastern corner at the Doonella Street frontage. The frontage contains 3 mature Poinciana
trees within the footpath reserve and a pedestrian crossing at its centre. Figures 4 to 6
below show aerial images of the site, zonings and the site survey.
Figure 4 – Aerial Photograph of Site and Surrounds
Page 69 of 110
Section 70
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Figure 5 – Zoning Map
Figure 6 – Site Survey and Demolition Plan
Page 70 of 110
Section 71
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
2.3. Surrounding Land Uses
The site is surrounded by the following land uses:
Adjoining the site to the east is the large Council owned ‘Doonella Street carpark’,
which provides rear access to the Tewantin Plaza and the carpark for the ‘Berry Place’
cafés and takeaway shops fronting Memorial Avenue.
Adjoining the site to the north is the ‘Tewantin Newsagency’ building, located at 107
Poinciana Avenue. Currently, there is no through access from the Sidoni Lane carpark
to the Council owned carpark at Doonella Street due to the shape of this lot.
Adjoining the site to the west is the Salvation Army’s support accommodation building,
providing safe, affordable and supported accommodation to families who are homeless
or at imminent risk of being homeless. The site also adjoins the large Council owned
‘Sidoni Lane carpark’, which provides rear access to many of the shops on the
southern side of Poinciana Avenue.
Across the Doonella Street to the west are a mix of older style unit developments and
detached houses fronting Lake Doonella.
3. ASSESSMENT
3.1. Instruments for Statutory Assessment
Under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 the application must be assessed against each of
the following statutory planning instruments to the extent they are relevant to the
development:
State Planning Policies;
the South East Queensland Regional Plan;
State Planning Regulatory Provisions; and
the Planning Scheme for the local government area;
Of these, the statutory planning instruments relevant to this application are discussed in the
sections that follow.
3.2. State and Other Statutory Instruments
State Planning Policies
The following State Planning Policy provisions with regard to water quality and acid sulfate
soils apply to the development and can be met by the development. Council’s Environment
Officer has assessed these aspects against both the State Planning Policy and the planning
scheme provisions and applied conditions in the recommendation to achieve compliance.
South East Queensland (SEQ) Regional Plan 2009 - 2031
The site is located within the urban footprint area of the SEQ Regional Plan. The proposal is
consistent with the regional policies of the SEQ Regional Plan and associated State
Regulatory Provisions.
3.3. Statutory Instruments – Planning Scheme
The site is located in the Tewantin & Doonan Locality and is zoned Community Services.
The proposed multiple dwelling use is identified as an inconsistent use within the zone and is
required to follow an impact assessable application process.
Locality Provisions
The planning intent for land within the Community Services zone within the locality is
identified in Overall Outcome 12.8.2 (w), which states:
Page 71 of 110
Section 72
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
For the Community Services Zone—land committed or planned for community purposes—
i is protected and managed to enable the efficient and timely delivery of community
services; and
ii is consistent with the indoor recreation, education, social and safety needs of the local
community, including people with special needs, such as the elderly, children, low
income earners and disabled persons;
The proposed development does not involve a community use or infrastructure use
consistent with the zoning. Given the site is privately owned, the most likely community uses
on the site would be either childcare or aged care. Notably, Tewantin’s Community Services
zone provisions also allow office development, medical, veterinary and entertainment &
dining uses on the site. As such, the development provisions for the site are an amalgam of
the Community Services and Business Centre zones. Further outcome O77 of the locality
code states:
Uses found within the Community Services Zone, fronting Pelican Street, Poinciana Avenue,
Memorial Avenue, Doonella Street and Sidoni Street—
a) support the functions of the Business Centre and include a range of important
community services which serve the Tewantin and Doonan locality as well as the wider
region; and
b) are focused on emergency services, information centres; medical centres, social and
infrastructure uses, and in the case of the Tewantin-Noosa RSL Club, entertainment
and dining uses;
The applicant acknowledges the development involves an inconsistent use but submits a
number of grounds in support of the proposal. These are discussed in Section 3.4 of this
report.
The Overall outcomes for the locality seek new uses that are compatible with the character
and amenity of existing uses in the area. They also seek new multiple housing
developments that focus on areas close to the Tewantin Business Centre, community
facilities, parks and public transport services. The proposed unit development expands on
the existing multiple dwelling use on the site, but does not introduce any significant new
impacts on the amenity of the area and is generally well designed. The proposed small
dwelling units are likely to be relatively affordable and the location provides excellent access
to Tewantin’s facilities and services.
The locality code includes built form provisions for new development. The table below
provides assessment against the built form limits that would be applied to the site under both
the Community Services zone and Attached Housing zone (for comparison where unit
development is allowed).
Criteria Planning Scheme Proposal Complies
Site Area 2,539m²
Population density 40.62 persons max 37.7 persons
(100persons per ha for
Community Services Zone for
retirement housing)
25.39 persons max X
(100persons per ha for
Attached Housing Zone)
Page 72 of 110
Section 73
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
Criteria Planning Scheme Proposal Complies
Gross floor area 1,625m² max 1,437m²
(Community Services Zone)
1,019m² max X
(Attached Housing Zone)
Site cover 40% max 33%
2 2
Landscaped open space 381m 913m
(for Community Services Zone)
1,131m² min 913m² X
(for Multiple Housing)
Soft landscaping > min 60% of total > 60% of total
Landscaping Setbacks 6m to frontage 6m
2m to uncovered parking 2m
Building height
storeys 2 storeys max 2 storeys
metres 8 metres 8 metres
(with non-
compliance at
basement entrance,
which is acceptable)
Boundary setbacks
Frontage 6 metres min 6 metres
Side 4 metres min 13.175 metres
(east)
4 metres (west)
Rear 6 metres min 6 metres
Carparking 16 spaces 25 spaces
Roof Form 5 deg slope min 2 deg skillion roof X
600mm+ eaves to a min of 75% 900mm eaves to
of perimeter 100%
The development involves a number of built form and density relaxations, which are
discussed below.
Population Density & Gross Floor Area
The proposal complies with the population density and gross floor area provisions for the
zone that would apply to retirement housing but does exceed these provisions as they would
apply for a consistent unit development within the adjacent Attached Housing zone. While
not a clear planning scheme “conflict”, it is considered the grounds to support the application
detailed in Section 3.4 should demonstrate clear benefits to justify the development at the
proposed density.
Page 73 of 110
Section 74
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
The building bulk and appearance is otherwise largely compliant, having a site cover of only
33%, providing substantial landscaped areas and allowing the retention of a number of
mature trees on the site. As such, the density and gross floor area aspects are not
considered to result in development out of character with the Community Services zone.
Landscaping
The Landscaping Code applies a pro-rata requirement of 30m2 landscaping per person of
proposed population density and thereby requiring 45% landscaping for the site. The
development provides less at 36%, with the area of at-grade vehicle manoeuvring area
limiting the landscaping somewhat. However, the proposal significantly exceeds the 15%
minimum sought for the Community Services zone and submitted preliminary landscaping
plans indicate a good outcome including trees to partially screen the building elevations and
the predominance of soft-scaping.
Roof Pitch
The locality code identifies a minimum 5 degree roof pitch as a probable solution to achieve
simple roof forms avoiding box profiles, flat roof with parapets, and the like. The proposal
has a lesser pitch (2 degrees), but provides a single skillion form across a 25m roof width
resulting in a legible fall of 0.5m as well as including deep eave overhangs to the full roof
perimeter. In the context of the surrounding development (including the large petrol station
canopy on the corner of Doonella St and Memorial Avenue, the Tewantin Plaza and the
Cooloola Centre), the relatively large roof line avoids the appearance of a box profile and is
considered acceptable.
Public Thoroughfare
A key outcome of the Tewantin Locality code seeks connectivity between buildings and
public spaces is retained and enhanced. In this regard, Council’s Operational Works
Engineer recommends a 3m wide public thoroughfare easement be created at the rear of the
site for a new public right of way between the Sidoni Lane and Doonella Street carparks. The
dedication as an access easement is favoured rather than ‘road reserve’, as the access will
only be for pedestrian thoroughfare at this stage.
It is considered the area at the rear of the ‘Tewantin Newsagency’ site and the adjoining
units (107 & 109 Poinciana Avenue) is a more appropriate alignment for the extension of the
road as it is unencumbered by existing infrastructure (electricity transmission box) and
should be undertaken when the opportunity arises.
Land Use, Works & Overlay Provisions
The following codes which regulate land use, design and works are most applicable to this
application:
Residential Uses Code
Engineering Works Codes
Landscaping Code
Waste Management Code
The application has been assessed against each of the above applicable codes and
complies, or can be conditioned to comply, with each. Conditions are also recommended to
address the following matters:
Right turn restrictions for vehicles exiting the site to avoid traffic conflicts on Doonella
Street.
Retention of existing mature trees toward the eastern open space portion of the site.
Retention of mature Poinciana street trees within the road reserve.
Various waste, stormwater, clothes drying, communal facilities and building
appearance aspects.
Page 74 of 110
Section 75
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 13 OCTOBER 2015
3.4. Grounds to Support Application
The applicant identifies the following grounds it considers sufficient to overcome the
application’s conflicts with the planning provisions applying to the site’s Community Services
zoning, in accordance with the requirements of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009:
1. The application site is already used for residential purposes;
2. Residential use is compatible with other established uses within the area and can
continue to operate on the site without adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining
uses or the character of the surrounding area;
3. The proposed development will address a need for smaller, more affordable,
residential dwellings within Tewantin;
4. The proposed development will add to the supply, variety and mix of dwellings within
Tewantin;
5. The proposed development is consistent with the height, scale and density expected
within the local area;
6. The site is located next to the Tewantin Business Centre and has excellent
accessibility to the services and facilities within the Centre;
7. The proposed residential development will help to support the vitality and viability of
the Business Centre;
8. The Council has no additional community facilities identified or planned for Tewantin
Town Centre and the site is no longer required to provide these types of facilities;
9. There is no identified need, or demand for, the site to be used for service, utility or
transport uses; and
10. Commercial Business and Entertainment uses, which are also supported on the site by
the Noosa Plan, would more appropriately be located within the Business Centre Zone
to help reinforce its vitality and viability.
These grounds are generally agreed with. Advice from Council’s Strategic Planning unit
indicates no additional community facilities have been identified or planned for the
Tewantin’s business centre, with the intent to continue to upgrade and strengthen the
existing Tewantin Community Centre at Ernest/Earl Streets (which includes United
Synergies and Tait House).
Perhaps the most likely use for the site, given its private ownership, would be for childcare,
however, there are a number of existing nearby centres and loss of this land for that purpose
would not unduly constrain land for provision of future facilities should the need arise in the
future. The site’s planning provisions also allow for offices and medical (more commonly
associated with the adjacent business centre zone), but it is generally agreed with the
applicant that further commercial development fronting Doonella Street is not desirable.
Council’s Strategic Planning unit notes The Noosa Plan’s stated intent to provide for shop-
top housing and small dwelling units within the Business Centre zone, but these provisions
have yet to realise any significant new re-development or provision of affordable housing.
Tewantin has an older population relative to the broader Sunshine Coast and only 21.1% of
households comprise couples with children compared to 26.6% for the Sunshine Coast.
Also 26.5% of households are lone households compared to 22.1% for the Sunshine Coast.
Across the Sunshine Coast there is a lack of housing choice, especially for smaller and more
affordable dwellings. This is particularly the case for Noosa where there is a mismatch
between current housing forms and current and anticipated future demographic
profiles. Based on available land for housing in infill and greenfield areas, there is likely to
be increasing shortage of smaller and more affordable housing. The subject site is well
Page 75 of 110
The text continues on section 76.