Request To Change Existing Development Approval For A Detached House At 38 Park Crescent, Sunshine Beach - MCU15/0070.01

REQUEST TO CHANGE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A DETACHED HOUSE AT 38 PARK CRESCENT, SUNSHINE BEACH - MCU15/0070.01

Document information

Author	Development Planner, Glen Conforti
Planning & Infrastructure Department

Index	ECM / Application / MCU15/0070.01

Attachments	1. 	Proposal Plans
2. 	Letter from concerned resident

APPLICATION DETAILS
Applicant	John and Ngaio Jamieson
Proposal	Change to an Existing Development Permit for Material Change of Use of Premises - Detached House
Properly Made Date	13 April 2016
Decision Due Date	19 May 2016

PROPERTY DETAILS
Property Address	38 Park Crescent, Sunshine Beach Qld  4567
RP Description	Lot 598 RP 48112
Land Area	532m²
Existing Use of Land	Vacant (dwelling demolished)

STATUTORY DETAILS
SEQRP Designation	Urban Footprint
Locality	Eastern Beaches
Zone	Attached Housing zone
Overlays	Natural Hazards Overlay – Low Potential Acid Sulfate Soils Natural Hazards Overlay – Landslide Hazard Natural Hazards Overlay – Medium Bushfire Hazard Natural Resources Overlay – Coastal Protection
Assessment Type	Code

RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 May 2016 regarding Application No. MCU15/0070.01 for a Change to an Existing Development Permit for Material Change of Use of Premises - Detached House situated at 38 Park Crescent, Sunshine Beach and approve the request in accordance with the following:
Agree to amend Condition 3 to read:
3.	Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the approved plans of development. The approved plans listed in the following table and may be further amended by the conditions herein.
Plan No.	Rev.	Plan/Document Name	Date
TP01	B	Cover Sheet and Site Plan, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP02	B	Ground Floor Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP03	B	Lower Floor Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP04	B	Rumpus Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP05	B	Roof Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP06	B	North East Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP07	B	North West Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP08	B	South East Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP09	B	South West Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP10	B	Section A, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP12	B	3D View, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
Agree to delete Condition 8;
Change Condition 11 to read:
11.	A mix of native landscaping including ground covers, shrubs and trees must be provided for minimum width of 5m from the rear boundary (adjoining the pathway). Landscaping must be in accordance with Council’s Planning Scheme Policy PSP3 Landscaping Plants and Guidelines.

REPORT
PROPOSAL
The application seeks approval to change an existing approval for a detached dwelling. The application seeks changes to the approved plans which include:

the removal of the upper level/mezzanine bedroom and ensuite;
a reduced ground floor level including kitchen, dining and deck areas;
a reduction of the lower ground floor area;
a reduction in the overall length of building;
the relocation of the swimming pool from the rear to the front of the site;
a reduction in area of the under croft;
an increase in soft landscaping to the rear of site;
screening provided along full length of the southern side of ground floor deck as required by Condition 7 of the approval
The proposed changes generally reduce the scale and footprint of the development. Figure 1 shows a 3D view of the proposal.

Figure 1 – 3D view of the proposal
site details
Background
The original application went before Council as the proposed dwelling included 3 storey portions and a building height of 12m, with various setback relaxations sought.
Council issued a Preliminary Approval for a Material Change of Use of Premises for a Detached Dwelling on 22 October 2015. The Preliminary Approval required the proposal plans to be amended to reduce site cover to 35% prior the issue of a Development Permit.
Through the Negotiated Decision process amended plans were submitted complying with the Preliminary Approval and a subsequent Development Permit for a Material Change of Use of Premises for a Detached Dwelling was issued on the 17 November 2015.
The original application was code assessable and was not required to be publicly notified. The proposal remains code assessable.
Statutory process
The applicant has requested to make a change to a development approval under s369 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009. A request to change a development approval under s369 can only be made in circumstances where that change would constitute a ‘permissible change’.
The proposed change to the development approval requested by the applicant is determined to constitute a permissible change on grounds that:
The change would not result in a substantially different development because the proposal involves a reduction in scale to the built form of the detached house and does not change the land use approved on-site;
The change would not require the application to be referred to additional concurrence agencies;
The original application was code assessable and the change would not cause the application to become impact assessable; and
The change would not cause the approval to involve prohibited development.
On this basis, the applicant has followed lawful process in making a request under s369 of the Act.
Assessment – Planning Scheme
The applicant seeks changes to Conditions 3 and 8. An assessment of each of the requested changes is provided below.
Applicant’s request
Condition 3 – Changes to the Approved Plans
Approved Plans
3.	Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the approved plans of development. The approved plans listed in the following table and may be further amended by the conditions herein.
Plan No.	Rev.	Plan/Document Name	Date
DD 1.2	C	Site plan, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 1.3	C	Roof Plan, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 1.4	C	Bedroom Mezzanine, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 1.5	C	Ground Floor Plan, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 1.6	C	Lower Ground  Floor, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 1.7	C	Pool Terrace Floor Plan, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 2.1	C	North West Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 2.2	C	North East Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 2.3	C	South East Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects	03.11.15
DD 2.4	B	South West Elevation, prepared by Sparks Architects	01.09.15
The applicant requests changes to Condition 3 to allow amended plans reflecting the various built form changes to the approved development.
Assessment
The proposal is for a house of a lessor scale, provides a greater seaward setback and retains the approved side setbacks except for an encroachment of a privacy screen associated with the swimming pool which has been relocated to within the front setback. A deck and stairs to the northern boundary also encroaches into the setback. The encroachments are addressed below.
The building height in metres has been slightly reduced with much less of the building proposed to the maximum height of 12m, which results in a reduction of building height presenting to Park Crescent.
Figure 2 shows the reduction in the scale of the development with the approved development hatched in red over the proposed.

Figure 2 – Proposal with approved development hatched in red
Figure 3 below shows a comparison of the approved and proposed street presentation.

Figure 3 – Approved elevation on the left and the proposed elevation on the right
The proposed plans do not raise any concerns as the development remains within the approved building envelope and does not introduce any new impacts.
It is recommended Condition 3 be amended to reflect the amended plans and to read as follows:
3.	Development undertaken in accordance with this approval must generally comply with the approved plans of development. The approved plans listed in the following table and may be further amended by the conditions herein.
Plan No.	Rev.	Plan/Document Name	Date
TP01	B	Cover Sheet and Site Plan, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP02	B	Ground Floor Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP03	B	Lower Floor Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP04	B	Rumpus Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP05	B	Roof Level, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP06	B	North East Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP07	B	North West Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP08	B	South East Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP09	B	South West Elevation, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP10	B	Section A, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
TP12	B	3D View, prepared by NOF Architects	27/04/16
Applicants Request
Condition 8 – Setback and landscaping
8.	The retaining wall and associated screening fence/wall (faced with hardwood timber) located near the southern boundary must be:
setback 1.5m up to 4.5m in height
setback 2m between 4.5m – 7.5m in height.
The applicant seeks to delete the Condition for the following reason.
The area of intrusion is minor with only 1.4 metres of the screen fencing extending into the 1.5 metre setback. It is noted that the screen could be reduced in height to comply with the setback requirement however this would reduce the amenity and privacy for both the applicant and the adjoining premises. The minor intrusion is considered acceptable and aids in maintaining privacy for both properties whilst still permitting landscaping to be provided between the two buildings. The condition is recommended to be deleted.
Assessment
The screening fence is associated with the swimming pool which has been relocated from near the seaward boundary to within the front setback. The swimming pool complies (1.5m setback) with the side setback provisions but the screening fence located above the pool slightly exceeds the maximum height of 4.5m for a 1.5m setback. The screening fence could be lowered to comply or alternatively stepped in 0.5m. However, there is no access to the southern edge of the pool and therefore no overlooking opportunities caused by the minor encroachment. Furthermore, there is sufficient space to provide landscaping between the pool and boundary and existing Condition 10 of the approval ensures screening vegetation is planted for the full length of both side boundaries. It is recommended the condition be deleted.
Additional and changes to Conditions required
Given the changes to the development plans, Condition 11 of the approval also requires amendment, as detailed below.
The swimming pool has been relocated to within the front setback. Condition 11 is recommended to be changed to read as follows:
11.	A mix of native landscaping including ground covers, shrubs and trees must be provided for minimum width of 5m from the rear boundary (adjoining the pathway). In this regard landscaping must also be provided between the swimming pool and the rear boundary. Landscaping must be in accordance with Council’s Planning Scheme Policy PSP3 Landscaping Plants and Guidelines.
Correspondence from concerned residents
The original application raised concerns among nearby residents being 3 storeys and up to 12m in height for a detached house. Correspondence received from concerned residents is included as Attachment 2 and seeks additional changes to the dwelling design.
The residents seek Council to compromise by allowing the swimming pool screen fence to be within the side setback in return for the building height presenting to the street to be reduced. The proposed building height at the eave that presents to the street varies between approximately 7.9m and 8.3m above the natural ground level. As seen in Figure 3 above the development has already reduced the eave height by approximately 2m. Given the development is located in an area where 12m and 3 storey development is the permitted building height, the request for a further reduction is unreasonable. The proposed changes already reduce the scale, footprint and bulk of the development.
conclusion
The application seeks to change the existing development approval for a detached dwelling. The changes reduce the scale of the development, comply with the approved setbacks, sit within the approved building envelope and are considered to maintain the intent of the approval. The application is recommended for approval, subject to amended conditions.

Departments/Sections Consulted:

	Chief Executive Officer		Community Services		Corporate Services
	Executive Officer to the Mayor & CEO		Community Facilities		Financial Services
	Executive Support		Community Development		ICT
			Libraries & Galleries		Procurement & Fleet
			Local Laws		Property & Facilities
			Waste & Environmental Health		Revenue Services
					
	Executive Office	X	Planning & Infrastructure		
	Community Engagement		Building & Plumbing Services		
	Customer Service		Civil Operations		
	Economic Development		Infrastructure Planning & Design		
	Governance		Planning & Environment		
	Human Resources		Strategic Land Use Planning		
	Sustainability				

[word/footer1.xml]
Page 7 of 8

[word/footer2.xml]
Page 8 of 8

[word/header1.xml]
3

[word/header2.xml]
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT	10 MAY 2016

[word/header3.xml]
3

[word/header4.xml]
PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT	DD MONTH YYYY

[Attachment: image2.png (image text)]
   

South East Elevation