2021-05-28 Special Meeting Agenda

SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA                                                                  28 MAY 2021


RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Special Meeting dated
28 May 2021 regarding Application No. RAL20/0027 for a Development Permit to Reconfigure a Lot
(1 lot into 2 lots), situated at 33 Ross Crescent, Sunshine Beach and:
A.   Refuse the application as directed by the referral agency dated 20 April 2021 (SARA
     Reference: 2011-19747 SRA) pursuant to section 62 of the Planning Act 2016 and given the
     application does not comply with the Noosa Plan 2020.
B.   Include the following Council reasons for refusal in the Decision Notice:
     1.    The proposal is contrary to the State Planning Policy 2017 policies and assessment
           benchmarks for Natural hazards, risk and resilience as:
           1.1   the site is fully located within an erosion prone area in a Coastal Management
                 District and is not coastal-dependant development.
           1.2   the proposal will impact the ability to maintain natural process and the protective
                 function of landforms and vegetation that can mitigate risks to people and property
                 in the area.
     2. The proposal does not comply with the purpose 9.5.1.2 (a), (d) - (f), overall 2(c), (e) and
        specific outcomes PO5 and PO7 of the Reconfiguring a Lot Code as:
           1.1   The land is steeply sloping, is not appropriate as a low density residential lot, and
                 will result in the removal of coastal vegetation.
           1.2   The proposal increases the number of properties and persons at risk from coastal
                 hazards and the risks to existing development in the area.
           1.3   The proposal impacts the ability to retain the site’s coastal vegetation which
                 provides a natural buffer to coastal processes, with coastal vegetation defined as
                 an ecologically important area given its important role it plays.
           1.4   The proposal does not seek to avoid, minimise or mitigate the risk to people and
                 property from coastal process, including the projected effects of climate change.
     3.    The proposal does not comply with the purpose 1(a) and (b) and overall 2(a) and (b) and
           specific outcomes PO1 and PO2, of the Coastal Protection and Scenic Amenity Overlay
           Code as:
           3.1   the proposal impacts the ability for natural fluctuations of the coast and foreshores
                 to occur, including allowance of climate change.
           3.2   the proposal impacts the ability to maintain the site’s coastal vegetation which
                 provides a natural buffer to coastal erosion processes to mitigate risks for people
                 and property.
     4.    The proposal is contrary to the purpose 1(a) and (b) and overall 2(a), (b), (c) and specific
           outcomes of the Landslide Hazard Overlay Code, as the proposal:
           4.1   is located on steep land, within a high hazard area and will not maintain natural
                 coastal process and vegetation.
           4.2   is not compatible with the nature of the hazard and does not seek to minimise
                 potential risks to people and property.
C.   Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.




                                                                                         Page 4 of 18