Minor Change Request Report (rec. 10.6.25) - 132001.210307.1

Page 2

 2. Background
The existing MCU was originally approved by Council on the 28 February 2002 (22433DA)
for a Medical Centre, Professional Offices & Commercial Premises. There were 52 conditions
associated with the original approval including the creation of an easement for access
through the site. A copy of the approved plans is included below.




 Figure 3 – Existing and Proposed site plan

Page 3

 3. Minor Change Test
An assessment against the meaning of minor change and a response about the proposed
application is provided below. The Planning Act 2016 defines a minor change as a change
to the approval that:
 It would not result in a substantially different development*;

                (*In determining whether the proposed change would result in substantially different development, the assessment
                manager or referral agency must consider the individual circumstances of the development, in the context of the
                change proposed.)

 Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules set outs provisions for a substantially
 different development. A change may be considered to result in a substantially different
 development if the proposed change results in any of the following outlined in Table 1
 below.
 Table 1 - Substantially different development

            Provisions of Schedule 1 of the DA Rules                         Response


      (a)       Involves a new use                                        There are no new uses proposed onsite.


      (b)       results in the application applying to a new parcel of    No new parcel of land is introduced.
                land; or

      (c)       dramatically changes the built form in terms of scale,    The built form and appearance is not significantly changing, and complies with the Noosa Plan
                bulk and appearance; or                                   parameters.


      (d)       changes the ability of the proposed development to        There is no change to the operation of the development as a commercial premises.
                operate as intended; or

      (e)       removes a component that is integral to the operation     The proposal will continue to be used as a premises.
                of the development; or

      (f)       significantly impacts on traffic flow and the transport   There are no changes to the parking on the site, or traffic flow entering and/or leaving the site.
                network, such as increasing traffic to the site; or

      (g)       introduces new impacts or increase the severity of        No new impacts or the severity of impacts will result from the changes.
                known impacts; or

      (h)       removes an incentive or offset component that would       Does not remove an offset or incentive components of the development.
                have balanced a negative impact of the development;
                or

      (i)       impacts on infrastructure provisions.                     There are no additional impacts on infrastructure.


 ii. if a development application for the development, including the change, were made when the change application is made
 would not cause—

  A.         the inclusion of prohibited development in the application; or
 Response: The change does not include any prohibited development.

  B.         referral to a referral agency, other than to the chief executive, if there were no referral agencies for the development
             application; or
 Response: No referral required for the development.

  C.         referral to extra referral agencies, other than to the chief executive; or
 Response: No referral agencies are applicable to the current development.

  D.         a referral agency to assess the application against, or have regard to, matters prescribed by regulation under section
             55(2), other than matters the referral agency must have assessed the application against, or have had regard to, when
             the application was made; or
 Response: The proposed change would not result in the chief executive having to consider matters additional to
 those considered when the application was made.

 E.             public notification if public notification was not required for the development application.
 Response: The original application did not include public notification.

 Given the above, the proposed change to the existing approval is a minor change in
 accordance with Schedule 2 of the Planning Act 2016 and Schedule 1 of the Development
 Assessment Rules.

Page 4

4. Deciding the Request
In accordance with S81 of The Planning Act 2016, Council must only consider the
information provided and any other matter considered relevant, including — all matters
Council would or may assess against or have regard to, if the change application were a
development application.
Council must only consider the statutory instrument, or other document, as in effect when
the development application for the development approval was properly made. However,
may give weight they consider appropriate, in the circumstances, to—


     (a) the statutory instrument or other document as in effect when the change application was
     made (Superseded Planning Scheme); or
     (b) if the statutory instrument or other document is amended or replaced after the change
     application is made but before it is decided—the amended or replacement instrument or
     document; or
     (c) another statutory instrument—
          (i) that comes into effect after the change application is made but before it is decided;
          and
          (ii) that the responsible entity would have been required to consider if the instrument
          had been in effect when the development application for the development approval was
          properly made.



5. Assessment
The original approval was given under the 1985 Planning Scheme with the site zoned
Residential Low Density with a Community Services PDLU under the Strategic Plan. The
development was originally publicly notified, and there were no submissions received.
The site is currently located within the Tewantin Local Plan Code and is zoned District
Centre under The Noosa Plan 2020. The site is also identified as a key corner on the
Tewantin Framework and Character Plan.




                         Figure 4 – Tewantin Framework & Character Plan

Page 5

 The following table outlines compliance to the key parameters of the development and the
 Noosa Plan 2020.
 Table 2 – Planning Scheme Criteria


       Criteria        Planning           Existing approved               Proposal          Complies
                       Scheme               development               Includes additional
                                            Site Area (1,050m²)         parameters (net
                                                                           increase)


   Building height

   •     storeys         2 storeys               1 storeys                     1 storey        
   •     metres
                        10 metres                5 metres                  5 metres            

       Site cover    Scale compatible             25.7%                        25.7%           

                                                  (270m )
                                                       2




       Plot ratio      630m² (0.6:1)           270m² (25.7%)             270m² (25.7%)         

       Carparking       14 spaces                16 spaces                 16 spaces           


As demonstrated in the table above, the proposal generally complies with all the key
parameters outline in the planning scheme, with further discussion about design and
carparking below.


 6. Design
The proposed changes are in keeping with the existing building’s ‘timber and tin’ façade, with
the removal of the external stairs in keeping with the Framework code requirements for this
key corner. Landscaping is maintained around the front façade to add visual interest to this
highly trafficked streetscape predominantly used by vehicles.




                              Figure 5 – Tewantin Framework & Character Plan

Page 6

 7. Carparking
The original assessment related to carparking is included below and demonstrates the site
has a surplus of 2 spaces. It appears the building was not constructed exactly in accordance
with the 2002 approval, and this change will reflect the current buildings and layout on the
site.




                   Figure 6 – Original 2002 assessment regarding parking and design

Page 7

8. Changes to Conditions
As a result of the proposed amendments to the development, Condition 43 requires
changing to include the proposal plans, as per below (deleted red strikethrough and
additions bold underlined).


     43. Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply
     with the approved plans of development. The approved plans are numbered 3001aa
     sheet of 2 and sheet 2 of 2 prepared by Graham Matheson Licenced Building
     Designer and dated 12/12/01 Drawing Numbers 1, 4 and 5 drawn by e.designers
     and dated 21.05.2025 and as may be amended by these conditions. The approved
     uses are Medical Centre, Commercial Premises and Professional Offices.
     Upon the approval of this application, the applicant is to submit to Council 6 (six)
     copies of the Plan of Development, specifying on the face of the plan the approved
     uses, to allow the Planning Scheme to be amended to include it in the Special
     Facilities (Medical Centre, Commercial Premises and Professional Offices in
     accordance with the Plan of Development) Zone.




If you have any further queries in relation to the above, please do not hesitate to contact
myself.
Regards,




Jack Lewis B.Sc Hons UNSW M.Plan Otago MPIA MQELA
Planner/Director
Pivotal Perspective Pty Ltd
0406 334 227