Original source · versioned page text
2019-10-28 Special Meeting Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 28 OCTOBER 2019
The Department is a referral agency for Development impacting on state transport infrastructure
and has responded advising that they have no requirements.
5.2. Other Referrals
The application was forwarded to the following internal Council officers:
Environment Officer (Ecology)
Coordinator Development Engineering
Strategic Planning
Asset Infrastructure
The application was also assessed by external consultants for bushfire, traffic and water
quality/quantity.
6. CONCLUSION & REASONS FOR DECISION
The application proposes to reconfigure the SBC from 1 lot into 24 lots and involves the
extension of Hofmann Drive to Walter Hay Drive and the development of 2 private roads. The
reconfiguration is generally contained to the undeveloped parts of the site with the exception of 2
lots proposed adjacent to the perimeter of the showrooms situated on the existing internal road.
The layout of the proposal generally aligns with the existing Shire Business Centre precinct map.
Reconfiguration of the site will allow for the development potential of the land to be realised,
providing for the creation of new employment opportunities within the Shire.
An Infrastructure Agreement was entered into in 2003 and restricts Council’s capacity to include
conditions for further contributions provided the development is not of an intensity greater than
MP2. Since the time that the agreement was entered into the State Government have introduced
new assessment benchmarks to avoid and offset significant impacts to koala habitat. As a
consequence of the Infrastructure Agreement the proposal is unable to comply with these
benchmarks.
Aspects of the proposals non-compliance with the planning scheme relate to the Overall and
Specific outcomes of the Noosaville Locality Code, koala habitat, bushfire management, vehicle
access, provision of a transit facility, pedestrian/bicycle linkages, extent of vegetation removal
and insufficient lot sizes. It is not suitable to condition compliance with these matters as it would
transform the form of the development and the applicant has expressed that they are not
agreeable with the position that council officers has taken on these issues. Furthermore, the
applicant has not adequately demonstrated stormwater management strategies that are
consistent with the Water Sensitive Design Code and Reconfiguring a Lot Code
Due to the non-compliance with the state assessment benchmarks and the concerns raised
above it is recommended that the application be refused.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services Corporate Services
Executive Officer Community Development Financial Services
Executive Support Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services x Environment & Sustainable Development x Infrastructure Services
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service x Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning x Infrastructure Planning,
X
Design and Delivery
Page 34 of 44
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
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.