Att 2_Detailed Assessment_030620 · 51994.1249.01

Page 2

  c) do not visually dominate the street or
  surrounding spaces;
  d) preserve the amenity of surrounding land;
  e) respect the scale of surrounding vegetation;
  f) respond to the topography of the site by
  minimising cut and fill (eg. stepping down the
  site or using a suspended pole construction); and
  g) maintain a mature vegetated skyline.

Discussion: The proposal has been assessed against Probable Solution S7.1 and is found to comply in
all instances. The proposal’s compliance is discussed below.

   1.   Café outdoor dining area extension
   2.   New awning over Hastings Street side of Bellissima Tenancy
   3.   New awning over western side of Bellissima tenancy
        These three elements are all within the 6m setback to Hastings Street but are below 6m in height.
        No further assessment is required.

   4.   New roof over foyer entry and car set down area
        This area is setback in excess of 7m from the Hasting’s Street frontage and therefore falls within
        the balance of the site, which is permitted to stand 15m tall with a 12m presentation to the
        beach. These elements do not exceed 12m. The roof of the set down area therefore complies
        with the Probable Solution.

   5.   Extension of fire stairs
   6.   Extension of lift to roof
        It is proposed to extend the eastern existing lift tower and fire stairs. The additional height would
        take the top of the lift tower to 15m and the fire stairs to just over 14m. These parts of the
        building are not within 7m of Hastings Street and so Part A of the Probable Solution is not
        relevant. With regard to Part B, at 15m and 14m these elements comply with the height limit for
        the balance of the site. The lift and fire stairs extension therefore comply with both parts of the
        Probable Solution.

   7.   Covered walkway links to stairs on level 4
        The walkway is also setback greater than 7m from Hastings Street and is therefore exempt from
        Part A of the Probable Solution. With regard to Part B, the roof over the walkway would not
        stand above 15m in height and will not be visible from the beach. The walkway therefore
        complies with the Probable Solution.

   8.   Pergolas in rooftop terraces
        It is proposed to install pergolas within each unit’s roof top terrace. Each pergola would stand
        14.65m high relative to natural ground level, being approximately 1m above the existing height
        of the roof top terrace.

        Part A. of the Probable Solution, requires buildings within 7m of Hastings Street to be no greater
        than 6m tall. As there are no feature pergolas proposed within 7m of Hastings Street, there will
        be no change to the building’s compliance with this part of the outcome. The proposed changes
        are therefore considered to comply with the first part of the Probable Solution.

        Part B. permits buildings and structures to stand 15m tall, but requires a 12m presentation to
        the beach. At approximately 12m above natural ground level, the proposed pergolas would not
        exceed the maximum allowable height limit. With regard to whether the building including the
        pergolas will present as 12m “to the beach”, we believe it complies for the following reasons:

                 The pergolas are generally level with the existing highest elements on the roof top and
                  by comparison do not therefore contribute additional height to the building;
                 Construction materials will be lightweight with an ‘open’ design and therefore would
                  not contribute significantly to massing and bulk the way that solid elements would;



3 June 2020                                                                                           2

Page 3

                 The top of the pergolas will be approximately 11m above the ground floor level on the
                  beach side and in the absence of any greater definition of the requirement to have a
                  “12m presentation to the beach”, it is submitted that the proposal complies.

         Notwithstanding,
             the structures are intended to provide protection from excessive solar exposure, which
                is a major shortcoming for the development; and
             increase the usability of the roof top terraces, which will increase the activation Netanya
                provides for the beach and surrounding premises.

         The proposed pergolas are therefore considered to comply with the second part of the Probable
         Solution. As the pergolas comply with both parts of the Probable Solution, an assessment
         against the Specific Outcome is not required.

    9.   New Cantilevered Awning (above third level, beach side)
         With a length of 4m, and a pitch of 5 degrees, the feature awning extends 0.35m above the roof
         height of the fourth floor. This is not a discernible change in building height and is clearly
         compliant with both parts of the Probable Solution.

    10. New awning structure above seated area at NW corner for increased weather protection
    11. New rear entry structure between the building and the beach for increased weather protection
    12. New day bed pergola structure between building and beach
        These three elements are also setback in excess of 7m from the Hasting’s Street frontage and
        are therefore exempt from Part A of the Probable Solution. With regard to Part B, none of these
        elements exceed 12m in height and therefore comply with the Probable Solution.

    13. New amenities and entry structures to “Sails”
        The side of the building will fall into the “balance of the site” and there has a 15m height limits
        with which the proposal complies.

    14. New shopfront and roof over “Rumba Bar” as well as extension of Fire Stair 01
        This area is setback in excess of 7m from the Hasting’s Street frontage and therefore falls within
        the balance of the site, which is permitted to stand 15m tall with a 12m presentation to the
        beach. These elements do not exceed 12m and therefore complies with the Probable Solution.

Summary: All of the proposed changes relate to building height. In all instances the proposed changes
comply with the Probable Solution, however the effect of the proposed pergolas on the building’s 12m
presentation to the beach required a detailed compliance justification but was found to comply. As the
proposal achieves all Probable Solutions, an assessment of the Specific Outcomes is not required.


SETBACKS

Noosa Heads Locality Code
The relevant provisions with respect to setbacks are as follows:

  Specific Outcomes                                    Probable Solutions
  Setbacks
  O8 Buildings      and other structures are           S8.1 Buildings and structures comply with the
  appropriately designed and sited to—                 minimum setbacks identified in Schedule 1 -
  a) provide amenity for users of the premises as      Minimum Boundary Setbacks.
  well as preserve the visual and acoustic amenity
  of adjoining and nearby properties;
  b) provide adequate distance from adjoining
  land uses
  c) preserve any existing vegetation that will
  buffer the proposed building;

3 June 2020                                                                                         3

Page 4

  d) allow for landscaping to be provided between
  buildings;
  e) maintain the visual continuity and pattern of
  buildings and landscape elements within the
  street;
  f) protect public safety and property within
  erosion prone areas by ensuring such areas are
  maintained largely free of development; and
  g) help protect the natural character and visual
  amenity of coastal areas and watercourses.

Discussion: The proposal has been assessed against Schedule 1. The setbacks relevant to each element
are set out and discussed below.

   1.   Café outdoor dining area extension
   2.   New awning over Hastings Street side of Bellissima Tenancy
        The front (Hastings Street) setbacks for a Café and a Shop are set out in Table 1-1:

                Table 1-1 In the Noosa Heads Locality for the northern side of Hastings Street—
                a) 2m, average of 4m from the front boundary to Hastings Street for the ground floor
                and 2nd storey;
                b) 7m from the front boundary to Hastings Street above the 2nd storey; and
                c) 10m from the front boundary to The Parade (beach).

        Each of the proposed elements are single storey and are therefore permitted to be 2m from the
        boundary, with an average setback of 4m. The proposed awning at 3.45m complies with the
        minimum setback. The proposed outdoor dining area extension is setback approx. 1.5m from
        the front alignment to the dining area whilst the roof over extends to within approx. 0.5m. The
        setback definition allows for roof overhangs to extend up to 600mm into the setback area,
        making the roof over technically non-compliant by 900mm.

        It is noted that overall, the development generally meets the 4m average setback under the
        code.

        These variations are assessed against the Specific Outcome at the end of this section.

   3.   New awning over western side of Bellissima tenancy
        The side setbacks for Retail Business Type 2 are not defined by Table 1-1, 1-2 or 1-3 and
        therefore the Scheme refers to siting provisions under Parts 11 and 12 of the QDC.

        These parts of the QDC do not exist therefore it is not clear what setbacks apply in this instance.
        Having said that it is clear that large parts of the existing building are built to the western
        boundary and as such the proposed setback of approx. 0.5m is considered appropriate and
        consistent with the existing form.

   4.   New roof over foyer entry and car set down area
        These elements relate to the resort, and are therefore subject to the setbacks of Table 1-3, being:

                Multiple housing Type 4 Conventional
                Frontage—6m for 2 storey buildings

        These areas are in excess of 17m from Hastings Street and therefore comply with Table 1-3 and
        the Probable Solution.

   5.   Extension of fire stairs
   6.   Extension of lift to roof
   7.   Covered walkway links to stairs on level 4
   8.   Feature pergolas in rooftop terraces
        These elements do not affect setbacks. No further assessment is required.

3 June 2020                                                                                         4

Page 5

    9.   New Awnings (above third level, beach side)
         This element also relates to the resort and so Table 1-3 applies. The awnings are setback
         approximately 11.2m where Table 1-3 permits a setback to the beach of 6m for the first 2 storeys
         and 8m for each storey thereafter. As the awnings are part of the third storey, an 8m setback
         applies. The awning therefore exceeds the Probable Solution.

    10. New awning structure above seated area at NW corner for increased weather protection
    11. New rear entry structure between the building and the beach for increased weather protection
    12. New day bed pergola structure between the building and the beach
        These features are all landscaped elements and will be constructed from a variety of primarily
        transparent materials including Perspex sheeting and spaced timber to maintain sightlines.
        These elements will have a positive impact on the visual amenity and usability of the common
        areas and are therefore considered appropriate. No further assessment is considered necessary.

    13. New amenities and entry structures to “Sails”
        The side setbacks for Retail Business Type 2 are not defined by Table 1-1, 1-2 or 1-3 and
        therefore the Scheme refers to siting provisions under Parts 11 and 12 of the QDC.

         These parts of the QDC do not exist therefore it is not clear what setbacks apply in this instance.
         Having said that it is clear that parts of the existing building are built close to or on the eastern
         boundary and as such the proposed setbacks of approx. 0.5m (at the closest) is considered
         appropriate and consistent with the existing form.

    14. New shopfront and roof over “Rumba Bar” as well as extension of Fire Stair 01
        This element is well setback from the frontages and side boundaries and therefore comply with
        the Probable Solution.

On account of the minor variations proposed for the Providore Café outdoor dining area and the
Bellissima tenancy’s awning facing Hastings Street, the proposal does not completely meet S8.1.
Therefore, an assessment against the corresponding specific outcome, O8, is necessary. O8 has been
assessed below.

O8 (a) states:   provide adequate distance from adjoining land uses

Discussion:      A review of the adjoining uses in all directions, finds that there is unlikely to be any
                 significant negative impacts as a result of encroachments from the proposed structures.

                 The structures proposed on Hasting’s Street are setback in excess of 20m from the
                 structures on adjoining sites in all directions. This is considered more than adequate.
                 No further assessment is required.

                 The side awning will not encroach on any adjoining land use and in fact will provide a
                 positive contribution in terms of weather protection to the pedestrian access and public
                 toilet area between Netanya and the surf club.

O8 (b) states:   preserve any existing vegetation that will buffer the proposed building;
O8 (c) states:   allow for landscaping to be provided between buildings;

Discussion:      The plan indicate that any of the significant trees along the site’s frontage will be
                 retained and incorporated into new landscaped areas. These will continue to provide
                 landscape between and buffering to the buildings.


O8 (d) states:   maintain the visual continuity and pattern of buildings and landscape elements within
                 the street;


3 June 2020                                                                                            5

Page 6

Discussion:      The northern side of Hasting’s Street, east of Noosa Drive exhibits a variety of built and
                 landscaped elements. Starting from the intersection with Noosa Drive, the surf club
                 provides a generous landscaped setback which conceals the ramps and stairs between
                 the building and the street. The landscaped setback continues to conceal the
                 information centre and its large awnings, which extend to a two storey height, and the
                 adjoining amenities building. As a result, this section of the street is generally covered
                 in shade and the street appears closed in.

                 When the landscaped setback finishes at the subject site’s western boundary, in line
                 with the pedestrian crossing in front of the Bellissima tenancy, the character of the street
                 changes and becomes more open. From here, landscaped elements become more
                 refined, presenting as individual trees, among low retained garden beds. Built form is
                 also considerably different as Netanya, at four storeys, comes into view. The setback of
                 buildings also changes, with Netanya being setback 2-3m greater than the adjoining
                 information centre.

                 In this context, the proposed awning and outdoor dining area is consistent with the
                 general built form and landscape character of this part of Hastings Street and is
                 considered to maintain the visual continuity and pattern of buildings and landscapes in
                 this location.

O8 (e) states:   protect public safety and property within erosion prone areas by ensuring such areas
                 are maintained largely free of development; and

Discussion:      The urban design elements (day beds, shade structures etc) proposed on the beach side
                 of the development are no longer considered to be in an erosion prone area by virtue
                 of the stabilising effect the existing development has had on the site.

O8 (f) states:   help protect the natural character and visual amenity of coastal areas and watercourses.

Discussion:      The proposed elements are considered to improve the visual amenity of the
                 development when viewed from the beach, street and adjoining properties.

This assessment has found, despite the minor variations to the code setbacks, that the proposed changes
comply with the setback provisions of the Noosa Heads Locality Code.

SITE COVER

Noosa Heads Locality Code
The relevant provisions with respect to site cover are as follows:

  Specific Outcomes                                     Probable Solutions
  Site cover, gross floor area and plot ratio           No solution provided
  O9 The site cover, gross floor area and plot ratio
  of buildings and other roofed structures—
    a) results in a building scale that is compatible
       with surrounding development;
    b) does not present an appearance of
       excessive bulk to adjacent properties, roads
       or other areas in the vicinity of the site;
    c) maximises the retention of existing
       vegetation and allows for soft landscaping
       between buildings;
    d) allows for adequate area at ground level for
       outdoor recreation, entertainment, clothes
       drying and other site facilities; and
    e) facilitates onsite stormwater management
       and vehicular access.


3 June 2020                                                                                           6

Page 7

  O10 Site cover—
  e) for the Visitor Mixed Use Zone does not
  exceed 45%.


Discussion: As no probable solution is provided, the proposal is assessable against both of the Specific
Outcomes above. The proposal has been assessed against each in turn below, starting with O9 (a).

O9 (a) states:   results in a building scale that is compatible with surrounding development;

Discussion       The proposed changes do not result in a discernible increase in scale given the
                 comparative size and bulk of the existing building.

O9 (b) states:   does not present an appearance of excessive bulk to adjacent properties, roads or other
                 areas in the vicinity of the site;

Discussion       The elements proposed do not represent excessive bulk on the basis that they:
                         • present a predominately open form;
                        • generally do not include solid walls;
                        • utilise floating or cantilever construction styles;
                        • comprise visually permeable materials including Perspex/glass and spaced
                            timber; and
                        • present a colour scheme which is also visually unobtrusive.

                 The contribution the proposed elements make to the amenity of the street and usability
                 of the public realm (weather protection) is considered to offset any perceived bulk.

O9 (c) states:   maximises the retention of existing vegetation and allows for soft landscaping between
                 buildings;

Discussion       The majority of site landscaping will be maintained and enhanced in places where the
                 old landscape planters are removed.

O9 (d) states:   allows for adequate area at ground level for outdoor recreation, entertainment, clothes
                 drying and other site facilities; and

Discussion       The building is existing. The proposed changes seek to enhance the spaces that are
                 already provided and do not reduce the site’s ability to provide for outdoor recreation,
                 entertainment, clothes drying or other site facilities.

O9 (e) states:   facilitates onsite stormwater management and vehicular access.

Discussion       As above, the building is existing. Stormwater and vehicular access are not prejudiced
                 by the changes proposed.

With regard to O10 above, at 63.1% site cover, the proposal does not comply with the Code. It is
important to note that the existing Netanya development (without any of the proposed changes) has a
calculated site cover of 60.8%, which clearly already exceeds SO10. It is therefore impossible for the
proposed minor change to comply with SO10.

Where development does not comply with the Specific Outcome, an assessment against the relevant
Overall Outcomes is required. This assessment is undertaken below:


3 June 2020                                                                                       7

Page 8

        Overall Outcomes i) k) & l)
        i) The locality provides substantial commercial, retail and administrative services with two main
        business centres at Hastings Street and Noosa Junction;
        k) The two business centres are designed to cater for the different needs of visitors as well as
        local residents;
        l) Noosa Heads is the principal focus for visitor accommodation and services in Noosa;

Discussion: The proposed changes will allow the development to remain relevant, competitive, and
successful into the future and therefore improve the development’s ability to advance tourism,
economic, and amenity outcomes.

        Overall Outcomes m) & dd)

        m) Hastings Street accommodates a high proportion of entertainment and dining premises
        providing interest for visitors;
        dd) Hastings Street’s character of low rise buildings, vibrant pedestrian friendly streetscape, mix
        of indoor and outdoor activities, diverse dining opportunities, specialty Retail businesses and
        pedestrian links to Main Beach is maintained;

Discussion: the changes represent a significant improvement to the visual amenity of the existing
entertainment and retail businesses and allow both to integrate with Hastings Street and activate the
streetscape. The use of outdoor dining areas and cantilevered awnings promotes a mix of indoor and
outdoor environments and diverse dining opportunities that the Code seeks.

        Overall Outcomes qq)i)
        qq) For the Visitor Mixed Use Zone—development—
                i. comprises small business outlets with individual character

                ii. comprises residential development that includes a mixture of building sizes and are
                designed for Visitor accommodation, are setback from the street and beach frontages
                and have a landscaped character consistent with the street landscaping themes;

                ii (sic). contributes to a high level of residential amenity, design quality, landscape
                quality and safety;

                iii. respects the scale and character of the streetscape and surrounding development;

                iv. enhances the traditional focus for Visitor accommodation in the coastal part of
                Noosa;

                v. incorporates Entertainment and dining businesses, Retail businesses and Commercial
                businesses that are of particular interest to visitors;

                vi. contributes to the economy of Noosa through the tourism and hospitality sectors;
                and integrates with nearby public recreation and landscaped car parking areas;

Discussion:
In addressing the above items collectively, it is noted that:
• The proposed changes improve the development’s ability to advance tourism, economic, and
    amenity outcomes;
• The proposed changes will allow the development to remain relevant and competitive and
    successful into the future;


3 June 2020                                                                                         8

Page 9

•    The use of outdoor dining areas and cantilevered awnings promotes a mix of indoor and outdoor
     environments and diverse dining opportunities that the Code seeks;
•    The proposed changes are consistent with and respect the existing built form and landscape
     character. and
•    there is unlikely to be any significant negative impacts as a result of the additional site cover.

Compliance Summary: An assessment of the overall outcomes of the Code finds no conflicts. The
proposal complies with all relevant outcomes and therefore complies with the Code.

GROSS FLOOR AREA

Noosa Heads Locality Code
The relevant provisions with respect to gross floor area are as follows:

    Specific Outcomes                                  Probable Solutions
    O13 For the Visitor Mixed Use Zone the             No solution provided
    maximum a gross floor area is equivalent to the
    maximum allowable population in persons
    multiplied by 40m2, provided that gross floor
    area does not exceed a total of 13,600m2.

Discussion: Land in the Visitor Mixed Use zone is permitted to have a density of up to 280 persons per
hectare. On a site of 3,471.30m2, this equates to 97.2 people. Gross floor area is the maximum persons
multiplied by 40m2. The permitted max gross floor area is therefore 3,887.86m2.

The existing building (4,035.5m2) already exceeds this figure, the additional 53m2 of gross floor area is
considered acceptable on the basis it provides much needed amenities and a significantly improved
entry for the existing Sails restaurant, which in turn greatly improves the visual amenity along Park Road,
and provides weather protection for the western tenancies.

Notwithstanding, where development does not meet the Specific Outcome, compliance with the code
is determined through an assessment against the Overall Outcomes of the code. The overall outcomes
relevant to gross floor area are discussed below:

         Overall Outcomes i) k) & ee)
         i) The locality provides substantial commercial, retail and administrative services with two main
         business centres at Hastings Street and Noosa Junction;
         k) The two business centres are designed to cater for the different needs of visitors as well as
         local residents;
         ee) Hastings Street and Noosa Junction contain a range of entertainment and dining
         businesses and venues that operate into the evenings and include live music which creates a
         vibrant atmosphere;

Discussion:
The proposed gross floor area represents an insignificant increase to the site’s existing commercial and
retail offering.

The additional gross floor area merely seeks to change the approved development to improve the variety
of dining spaces which are available and to supply guests with access to good restroom facilities
advances, changes which will contribute to the vibrancy of the venue and its ability to operate into the
evenings.

The proposal is considered to comply with the Overall Outcomes relevant to Gross Floor Area and
therefore comply with the Code.

ROOF FORM



3 June 2020                                                                                         9

Page 10

Noosa Heads Locality Code
The relevant provisions with respect to roof form are as follows:

  Specific Outcomes                                    Probable Solutions
  Roof form
  O15 Roof forms—                                      S15.1 The main roof of the building has a roof
   a) contribute positively to the local skyline;      pitch no less than 5 degrees and has minimum
   b) complement the character of the locality;
   c) use soft and articulated, pitched, skillion or   600mm eaves to at least 75% of the perimeter of
       curved roof forms;                              the building; AND
   d) avoid low pitched (eg. less than 5 degrees)      S15.2 Buildings and structures do not include
   e) or box profiles/parapets; and                    roof top terraces.
   f) do not create opportunities for residents to
       overlook the private open space areas of
       neighbouring properties


Discussion: the existing development approvals permitted roof top terraces and therefore it is believed
that S15.2 is not applicable to this assessment. Notwithstanding this, as there are new elements
proposed within the roof top terraces, an assessment of the corresponding Specific Outcome O15 has
been undertaken below:

O15 (a) states: contribute positively to the local skyline;

Discussion:      By providing increased shade protection, the proposed changes are considered to
                 increase the appeal and usability of the existing roof top terraces. As a consequence,
                 these spaces are likely to become more actively used by guests, which will contribute to
                 the creation of a vibrant atmosphere that is visible from the street, adjoining premises
                 and the beach alike.

                 As shown on Plan SD60.06 of the Architectural Plans, the structures present a
                 predominately open form, do not include solid walls and comprise visually permeable
                 materials, including Perspex/glass and spaced timber in order to be sympathetic to the
                 views of development to the south.

                 The proposed structures are not entirely different from the existing situation which
                 currently provides for a mixture of shade sails and umbrellas, and to this extent the
                 proposal will provide consistency and continuity for the roofline.

O15 (b) states: complement the character of the locality;

Discussion:      The planning scheme identifies Hastings Street and Noosa Main Beach as a primary
                 focus for recreation where tourists can enjoy the outdoors. Improving the usability of
                 the localities existing outdoor recreation areas directly advances this intent and is
                 considered to complement the locality.

                 In a more physical sense, there are a number of examples of roof top terraces in Noosa
                 Heads and to this extent the proposed changes are consistent with the character of the
                 locality.

O15 (c) states: use soft and articulated, pitched, skillion or curved roof forms;

Discussion:      The proposed pergolas provide a high amount of articulation with variation in
                 construction materials and colour. Pitched, skillion or curved roof forms are not

3 June 2020                                                                                      10

Page 11

                  considered to be consistent with the existing form of Netanya, which has a long, low set
                  rectangular form.


O15 (d) states: avoid low pitched (eg. less than 5 degrees)
O15 (e) states: or box profiles/parapets; and

Discussion:       The roof form, pitch and profile was established under previous requirements. The
                  proposed changes are consistent with the existing design and style.

O15 (f) states:   do not create opportunities for residents to overlook the private open space areas of
                  neighbouring properties

Discussion:       The proposed changes do not introduce any new overlooking opportunities.


CONCLUSION

The above assessment of the proposal against the Noosa Heads Locality code, in respect to Height
demonstrates that the proposal meets the Probable Solution and therefore complies with the Code.

With regard to density, setbacks and roof form, the assessment demonstrates that the proposed changes
meet the relevant Specific Outcomes and therefore complies with the Code.

In relation to the site cover and gross floor area, the proposed development was found to be inconsistent
with Specific Outcomes O10 and O13. Following an assessment against the Overall Outcomes of the
Code, the changes were found to achieve all relevant outcomes and therefore comply with the Code.

On this basis, it is believed that there are sufficient planning grounds and merit to support the proposed
changes.


Peter Folker
Director
PROJECT URBAN
Email: [email protected]




3 June 2020                                                                                       11