MCU22/0118 – DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 94 & 142 NOOSA DR, NOOSA HEADS (Referred from Planning & Environment Committee dated 7 November 2023 - Item 5.1)

That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Lorentson and determine that Cr Lorentson participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that there is no personal relationship with the applicant and Cr Lorentson will not be positively or negatively impacted by the decision so a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest.

Carried unanimously.

That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 November 2023 regarding Application No. MCU22/0118 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Short-term accommodation, situated at 94 & 142 Noosa Dr, Noosa Heads and:

A.    Refuse the application for the following reasons:

1.    The proposed development has failed to demonstrate a significant planning need to develop outside of Noosa Plan 2020's urban boundary, particularly at the density and height proposed and is inconsistent with the local landscape character. No overriding community benefit been demonstrated, which would justify approval despite its conflict with the planning scheme. 

2.    Valid planning grounds have been raised by submitters that the proposal will result in an unacceptable impact on the biodiversity of the locality. Further, the development exceeds what a community member could reasonably expect to be developed outside of the Urban Boundary and within the Environmental Management and Conservation Zone. 

3.    The proposed development of the subject land is inappropriate, in circumstances where:

(a)    The proposed development seeks to expand the existing resort complex in circumstances where part of that land is located outside of the urban boundary in Noosa Plan 2020;

(b)    The proponent seeks to utilise the land for Short-term accommodation, which is an inconsistent use in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone; 

(c)    The proposed development is an overdevelopment of the land at the expense of the natural values of the land, as the proposal would result in unacceptable clearing of vegetation in an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive area, including proposed development located on mapped Areas of Biodiversity Significance, Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES) Environmental Values and Riparian Buffer Area under the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay and mapped Core Koala Habitat area;

(d)    The stormwater treatment proposed is not of a sufficient size to achieve the water quality objectives and protection of biodiversity areas required under the Water Quality and Drainage Code.

(e)    The built form of the proposed development is unacceptable, being slightly over height in metres in the Tourist Accommodation zone and substantially over height in metres and storeys in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone.

In respect of the above, the proposed development is inconsistent with the following provisions of Noosa Plan 2020: 

(i)    Strategic Framework – 3.2.2, 3.2.5, 3.3.1(b) and 3.3.4(b)(p);

(ii)    Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay Code – 8.2.2.2(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i) Table 8.2.23 PO1, PO3, PO6 and PO11;

(iii)    Water Quality and Drainage Code – 9.4.82(2)(a) and (b) and Table 9.4.8.3 PO6;

(iv)    Noosa Heads Local Plan Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(b)(d)(e) and (ad) and Table 7.2.5.3 PO4, PO5, PO6 and PO26;

(v)    Environmental Management and Conservation Zone Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(a) and (b), Table 6.7.1.3 PO1, PO5, PO7, PO8, PO9, PO11 and PO13;

(vi)   Tourist Accommodation Zone Code - Table 6.3.4.3 PO9 and PO10.

4.    When read as a whole, the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (SEQRP) does not lend support to the proposed use of the land, as: 

4.1.    the SEQRP sets a long term, 50-year vision, establishing aspirations for the region up to 2067. Given this, the timing and sequencing of urban development occurring within the Urban Footprint is a finer grained detail, the planning for which is implemented through local government planning schemes; 

4.2.    the designation of land as being within the Urban Footprint does not imply that all that land with that designation can be developed for urban purposes; and

4.3.    when assessed against Noosa Plan 2020, the proposed development is not suitable for urban development.

5.    The following relevant matters support refusal:

5.1.    The proposed development will involve an unacceptable loss of vegetation in a locality which is an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive and serves as an important ecological linkage,

5.2.    There is no planning, economic or community need for the proposed development on the subject land.

5.3.    Approval of the proposed development would not be in the public interest as reflected in the provisions of Noosa Plan 2020 referred to in these reasons for refusal.

B.    Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.

That Item B be added to read (and the current Item B be subsequently changed to Item C):

B.  That the CEO be requested to review the zone and urban boundaries as part of a future review of the Planning Scheme.

Carried unanimously.

That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 November 2023 regarding Application No. MCU22/0118 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Short-term accommodation, situated at 94 & 142 Noosa Dr, Noosa Heads and:

A.    Refuse the application for the following reasons:

1.    The proposed development has failed to demonstrate a significant planning need to develop outside of Noosa Plan 2020's urban boundary, particularly at the density and height proposed and is inconsistent with the local landscape character. No overriding community benefit been demonstrated, which would justify approval despite its conflict with the planning scheme. 

2.    Valid planning grounds have been raised by submitters that the proposal will result in an unacceptable impact on the biodiversity of the locality. Further, the development exceeds what a community member could reasonably expect to be developed outside of the Urban Boundary and within the Environmental Management and Conservation Zone. 

3.    The proposed development of the subject land is inappropriate, in circumstances where:

(a)    The proposed development seeks to expand the existing resort complex in circumstances where part of that land is located outside of the urban boundary in Noosa Plan 2020;

(b)    The proponent seeks to utilise the land for Short-term accommodation, which is an inconsistent use in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone; 

(c)    The proposed development is an overdevelopment of the land at the expense of the natural values of the land, as the proposal would result in unacceptable clearing of vegetation in an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive area, including proposed development located on mapped Areas of Biodiversity Significance, Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES) Environmental Values and Riparian Buffer Area under the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay and mapped Core Koala Habitat area;

(d)    The stormwater treatment proposed is not of a sufficient size to achieve the water quality objectives and protection of biodiversity areas required under the Water Quality and Drainage Code.

(e)    The built form of the proposed development is unacceptable, being slightly over height in metres in the Tourist Accommodation zone and substantially over height in metres and storeys in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone.

In respect of the above, the proposed development is inconsistent with the following provisions of Noosa Plan 2020: 

(i)    Strategic Framework – 3.2.2, 3.2.5, 3.3.1(b) and 3.3.4(b)(p);

(ii)    Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay Code – 8.2.2.2(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i) Table 8.2.23 PO1, PO3, PO6 and PO11;

(iii)    Water Quality and Drainage Code – 9.4.82(2)(a) and (b) and Table 9.4.8.3 PO6;

(iv)    Noosa Heads Local Plan Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(b)(d)(e) and (ad) and Table 7.2.5.3 PO4, PO5, PO6 and PO26;

(v)    Environmental Management and Conservation Zone Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(a) and (b), Table 6.7.1.3 PO1, PO5, PO7, PO8, PO9, PO11 and PO13;

(vi)   Tourist Accommodation Zone Code - Table 6.3.4.3 PO9 and PO10.

4.    When read as a whole, the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (SEQRP) does not lend support to the proposed use of the land, as: 

4.1.    the SEQRP sets a long term, 50-year vision, establishing aspirations for the region up to 2067. Given this, the timing and sequencing of urban development occurring within the Urban Footprint is a finer grained detail, the planning for which is implemented through local government planning schemes; 

4.2.    the designation of land as being within the Urban Footprint does not imply that all that land with that designation can be developed for urban purposes; and

4.3.    when assessed against Noosa Plan 2020, the proposed development is not suitable for urban development.

5.    The following relevant matters support refusal:

5.1.    The proposed development will involve an unacceptable loss of vegetation in a locality which is an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive and serves as an important ecological linkage,

5.2.    There is no planning, economic or community need for the proposed development on the subject land.

5.3.    Approval of the proposed development would not be in the public interest as reflected in the provisions of Noosa Plan 2020 referred to in these reasons for refusal.

B.    That the CEO be requested to review the zone and urban boundaries as part of a future review of the Planning Scheme; and

C.    Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.

Carried unanimously.