2015-11-10 Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                             10 NOVEMBER 2015


 Corner lots have to nominate a “rear” boundary and effectively have a 6 metre setback to at
   least 3 sides. Corner lots already present complexities given two front boundary setbacks,
   lack of private useable open space, presentation and orientation to adjoining properties, and
   the irregular and often truncated shape of the lot. The nomination of a rear boundary directly
   forces the creation of the building closer to a road frontage increasing issues relating lack of
   privacy, safety and security and associated traffic noise.
 Allowing corner lots to be managed as having side (rather than “rear” boundaries would allow
   improved liability and the design outcomes for the property. It would create a greater open
   space opportunity to allow vegetation and buffering to the street rather than a large blank wall
   of an 8m wall forced forward because of the need for a nominated rear boundary with an
   increased setback.
 Increasing rear boundary setback will encourage moving the building footprint as close as
   possible to the side boundaries to make up for the loss of rear building footprint. Overall this
   would defeat the purpose of the proposed rear boundary setback amendment intended to
   protect the amenity of neighbours.
 Where all adjoining neighbours have already built as close as allowable to your common
   boundaries an internal courtyard may have been your only chance of private open space and
   you are unfairly disadvantaged by the new setbacks.
 Increased structural complexity of supporting wall and roof above, when building section is
   stepped could add $60,000 to a 2 storey home.
 There is reduced ability to design for climate, orientate the building appropriately for solar
   heating, incorporate shade for passive cooling, capture prevailing breezes etc. As a result
   the inclusion of these amendments is contradictory to statements in the Strategic Framework
   and Community Vision which say residential development is encouraged to be more
   sustainable and flexible relying less on non-renewable energy for heating, cooling, lighting, or
   hot water heating.
 The Building Code of Australia (BCA) defines Australia into 8 climate zones. Each climate
   zone has distinctly different design and construction requirements. The Noosa Shire is
   contained within Zone 2 – Warm humid summer, mild winter. The proposed amendments will
   limit the opportunities to design for these recognised climatic conditions as the design
   envelope has been reduced.
 Limited consideration has been given to the impacts these amendments may have on lots
   that are small; irregular in shape, width, and dimensions; have multiple street frontages;
   contain an easement; adjoin bushland representing a bushfire hazard; have minimum floor
   heights specified; contain steep slopes
 By setting the upper floor back further than the first there is increased cost associated with
   articulation, creates situations where the first floor looks over roof below and is adversely
   affected by heat and glare
 Proposed amendments pander to a small minority of residents and have a detrimental impact
   on the balance of residents. This is a “nanny state” reaction.
 There is no one size fits all so you must consider the majority when reviewing these
   amendments – we live in one of the best urban environments in the world and it was created
   by people with a sincere vision of the community’s interest. These proposed amendments do
   not stand the test for all.
 These proposed amendments are completely unnecessary as the BCA has considered and
   demonstrated that the current residential setbacks work for the majority of developments and
   there is no justification for a departure from QDC.
 As the majority of residential development is infill or reconstruction it will disadvantage these
   residents unfairly.
 Proposed changes will impact on the Council staff ability to assess in a timely manner
   resulting in additional costs and delays to the construction sector.



                                                                                  Page 122 of 201