Response to Information Request - Noosa Council.pdf

Page 2

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




Council Information Request

Lawful Point of Discharge & Stormwater Quality

1) Amend the application to include Lot 3 SP178340 and provide plans showing the extent of
   stormwater drainage easements required over this parcel in favour of the subject site to
   convey stormwater through Lot 3 SP178340 to the downstream waterway.

With respect to part 1, the proposed stormwater drainage works have been considered by
Walsh Engineering and addressed in the Engineering Report and a separate response to the
issues raised, which are provided as Attachments 2A & 2B.

The report advises that any changes to stormwater drainage infrastructure to cater for the
proposed development is to occur within the subject site (Lot 4 on SP178340). Further, there
is no need to undertake any stormwater infrastructure upgrading works within the adjoining
golf course land (Lots 2 & 3 on SP178340). Consequently, there is no change being made to
the current situation for the existing Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort with respect to the
discharge of stormwater.

The stormwater from the existing development utilises the existing stormwater infrastructure
within Lot 3, including the lake system before being discharged to Lot 2 and ultimately to
Lake Weyba. There is no development, either in the form of a material change of use or
operational work proposed or required within Lot 3 and or Lot 2 to facilitate the discharge of
stormwater from the proposed development.

Lots 2, 3 and 4 are owned by the applicant (Noosa Springs Investment Pty Ltd ACN 162 987
957). Further, there is a covenant in place over both Lots 2, 3 and 4, which prevents these
allotments from being sold separately. A copy of the covenant is provided as Attachment 3.

Having regard to the advice provided by Walsh Engineering about the lawful point of
discharge as defined by the Queensland Urban Drainage Manual (QUDM), the proposed
development will not discharge stormwater in a manner that would substantially damage the
adjoining land and other downstream land, this being Lots 2 and 3. Further, does not affect
land owned by a third-party, with Lots 2, 3 and 4 being under the same ownership, which
must remain the case given the existing covenant (Attachment 3). Given the circumstances,
it is not necessary to include Lots 2 and 3 as part of the application.

2) As part of the above plans, identify stormwater drainage infrastructure and flow paths
   within the downstream land.

With respect to part 2, Walsh Engineering has addressed this issue (refer Attachment 2B).
The Engineering Report provides a plan in Appendix B which shows the location of the
proposed Bio-Retention Basins for the new development on the subject site (Lot 4). Further,
the engineering plans show the stormwater drainage infrastructure, existing waterbodies,

                                                                                   2|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Council Information Request
Lawful Point of Discharge & Stormwater Quality

1) Amend the application to include Lot 3 SP178340 and provide plans showing the extent of
stormwater drainage easements required over this parcel in favour of the subject site to
convey stormwater through Lot 3 SP178340 to the downstream waterway.

With respect to part 1, the proposed stormwater drainage works have been considered by
Walsh Engineering and addressed in the Engineering Report and a separate response to the
issues raised, which are provided as Attachments 2A & 2B.

The report advises that any changes to stormwater drainage infrastructure to cater for the
proposed development is to occur within the subject site (Lot 4 on SP178340). Further, there
is no need to undertake any stormwater infrastructure upgrading works within the adjoining
golf course land (Lots 2 & 3 on SP178340). Consequently, there is no change being made to
the current situation for the existing Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort with respect to the
discharge of stormwater.

The stormwater from the existing development utilises the existing stormwater infrastructure
within Lot 3, including the lake system before being discharged to Lot 2 and ultimately to
Lake Weyba. There is no development, either in the form of a material change of use or
operational work proposed or required within Lot 3 and or Lot 2 to facilitate the discharge of
stormwater from the proposed development.

Lots 2, 3 and 4 are owned by the applicant (Noosa Springs Investment Pty Ltd ACN 162 987
957). Further, there is a covenant in place over both Lots 2, 3 and 4, which prevents these
allotments from being sold separately. A copy of the covenant is provided as Attachment 3.

Having regard to the advice provided by Walsh Engineering about the lawful point of
discharge as defined by the Queensland Urban Drainage Manual (QUDM), the proposed
development will not discharge stormwater in a manner that would substantially damage the
adjoining land and other downstream land, this being Lots 2 and 3. Further, does not affect
land owned by a third-party, with Lots 2, 3 and 4 being under the same ownership, which
must remain the case given the existing covenant (Attachment 3). Given the circumstances,
it is not necessary to include Lots 2 and 3 as part of the application.

2) As part of the above plans, identify stormwater drainage infrastructure and flow paths
within the downstream land.

With respect to part 2, Walsh Engineering has addressed this issue (refer Attachment 2B).
The Engineering Report provides a plan in Appendix B which shows the location of the
proposed Bio-Retention Basins for the new development on the subject site (Lot 4). Further,
the engineering plans show the stormwater drainage infrastructure, existing waterbodies,

2|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 3

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




and overland flow paths downstream of the subject land within Lot 3 which extends further
downstream to Lot 2 before discharging to Lake Weyba (refer Attachment 2A).

Stormwater Quality

3) Provide revised preliminary engineering plans supported by MUSIC modelling which
   demonstrate that the pollutant load reduction targets will be achieved prior to discharge
   from the subject site.

With respect to part 3, the preliminary engineering plans are supported by MUSIC modelling
for the reduction of pollutant load reduction targets. The Engineering Report and the
response provided to these issues have been provided by Walsh Engineering (refer
Attachments 2A & 2B.

Carparking

A number of issues have been raised with respect to the provision of parking, including more
details about the comparison with other resorts of a similar type, the estimated full time staff
at the Resort Complex, the parking surveys that have been undertaken, alternative modes of
transport such as mopeds, electric bikes and shuttle buses and confirmation about the
adequacy of the refuse vehicle swept paths.

It is now proposed to provide an additional 48 carparking spaces with the inclusion of an
elevated carpark structure over the existing at ground parking beside the southern boundary
of the site. Collectively there is provision for the 285 standard spaces plus 8 PWD spaces,
with 107 of the spaces provided undercover (refer amended proposal plans provided as
Attachment 1).

According to the advice provided by Traffic and Transport Plus (TTP) the increased parking
provides for 1 carparking space per 1.6 rooms as a minimum, which is considered adequate
for the integrated Resort Complex. The above issues have been addressed in the Traffic
Engineering Response prepared by TTP (refer Attachment 4). These issues are also discussed
briefly below.

4) Details of actual parking demand rates at two existing comparable hotel / resorts at the
   Sunshine Coast area, identifying the distribution of parking demands at those comparable
   facilities across the days of a full week (outside of any lockdown or COVID restriction
   periods), as well as the number of occupied rooms on each day. It is recommended that
   comparable existing facilities be agreed with Council officers prior to commencement of
   data collection for the requested assessment.

Given the number of carparking spaces now being provided is 285, plus 8 PWD spaces, the
comparison with other resorts in terms of the parking generation rates seems less important.
Nevertheless, TTP has addressed this issue and have advised there is no real comparison able

                                                                                     3|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

and overland flow paths downstream of the subject land within Lot 3 which extends further
downstream to Lot 2 before discharging to Lake Weyba (refer Attachment 2A).

Stormwater Quality

3) Provide revised preliminary engineering plans supported by MUSIC modelling which
demonstrate that the pollutant load reduction targets will be achieved prior to discharge
from the subject site.

With respect to part 3, the preliminary engineering plans are supported by MUSIC modelling
for the reduction of pollutant load reduction targets. The Engineering Report and the
response provided to these issues have been provided by Walsh Engineering (refer
Attachments 2A & 2B.

Carparking

A number of issues have been raised with respect to the provision of parking, including more
details about the comparison with other resorts of a similar type, the estimated full time staff
at the Resort Complex, the parking surveys that have been undertaken, alternative modes of
transport such as mopeds, electric bikes and shuttle buses and confirmation about the
adequacy of the refuse vehicle swept paths.

It is now proposed to provide an additional 48 carparking spaces with the inclusion of an
elevated carpark structure over the existing at ground parking beside the southern boundary
of the site. Collectively there is provision for the 285 standard spaces plus 8 PWD spaces,
with 107 of the spaces provided undercover (refer amended proposal plans provided as
Attachment 1).

According to the advice provided by Traffic and Transport Plus (TTP) the increased parking
provides for 1 carparking space per 1.6 rooms as a minimum, which is considered adequate
for the integrated Resort Complex. The above issues have been addressed in the Traffic
Engineering Response prepared by TTP (refer Attachment 4). These issues are also discussed
briefly below.

4) Details of actual parking demand rates at two existing comparable hotel / resorts at the
Sunshine Coast area, identifying the distribution of parking demands at those comparable
facilities across the days of a full week (outside of any lockdown or COVID restriction
periods), as well as the number of occupied rooms on each day. It is recommended that
comparable existing facilities be agreed with Council officers prior to commencement of
data collection for the requested assessment.

Given the number of carparking spaces now being provided is 285, plus 8 PWD spaces, the
comparison with other resorts in terms of the parking generation rates seems less important.
Nevertheless, TTP has addressed this issue and have advised there is no real comparison able

3|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 4

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




to be made but have considered the Twin Waters Resort on the Sunshine Coast, which is
located close to the Sunshine Coast Airport and also those built on islands such as Kingfisher
(Fraser Is) and Tangalooma (Moreton Is).

Both of these types of resorts have different needs and demands with respect parking and
their respective operations, with none being directly comparable. All of these resorts lack the
facilities provided by the current location within Noosa Heads and ease of access to facilities
and services. It is suggested given the increased number of parking spaces (48 additional)
the comparison with similar resorts is not necessary or reasonable to demonstrate sufficient
parking is provided for the proposed Resort Complex.

5) Advise of the number of EFT staff expected to be employed at the proposed hotel/resort.

With respect to part 5, as explained in the report by TTP in the advice provided, it is expected
the total number of additional full time staff for the “Boutique Hotel” will 44 (refer
Attachment 4). It is noted the parking surveys undertaken included patrons and staff for
the existing operation of the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort.

6) Details of the referenced parking surveys at the existing carpark in 2015.

With respect to part 6, the carparking surveys undertaken for the existing operation of the
Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort are provided as Appendix A in the response prepared by
TTP (refer Attachment 4).

7) Details of proposals referenced throughout the traffic report and in the recommendations in
   relation to the provision of and encouragement of use of facilities such as mopeds, electric
   bikes & scooters and shuttle buses, including associated conditions of approval that the
   Council could impose to facilitate the aspirational outcomes.

With respect to part 7, provision has been made for 8 motorbike parking spaces, electric
bike, and moped parking will also be provided on the site. The applicant is committed to
providing a minimum of five (5) electric bikes and five (5) mopeds initially for the operation
of the Resort Complex, with additional moped and electric bikes being increased subject to
demand.

A shuttle bus will also be provided to provide guest transfers to the site as required. It is not
expected the proposed shuttle bus will used for airport transfers with this service generally
arranged with other transfer contractors being more cost effective; however, this will be
arranged and organised by the resort management as required.

While additional parking has been provided to remove any doubt about the operation of the
“Boutique Hotel” in association with the other existing facilities, it remains the intent to
provide alternative modal transport options, which is cost effective and sustainable. These
alternative modes of transport will be increased subject to demand by patrons.

                                                                                      4|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

to be made but have considered the Twin Waters Resort on the Sunshine Coast, which is
located close to the Sunshine Coast Airport and also those built on islands such as Kingfisher
(Fraser Is) and Tangalooma (Moreton Is).

Both of these types of resorts have different needs and demands with respect parking and
their respective operations, with none being directly comparable. All of these resorts lack the
facilities provided by the current location within Noosa Heads and ease of access to facilities
and services. It is suggested given the increased number of parking spaces (48 additional)
the comparison with similar resorts is not necessary or reasonable to demonstrate sufficient
parking is provided for the proposed Resort Complex.

5) Advise of the number of EFT staff expected to be employed at the proposed hotel/resort.

With respect to part 5, as explained in the report by TTP in the advice provided, it is expected
the total number of additional full time staff for the “Boutique Hotel” will 44 (refer
Attachment 4). It is noted the parking surveys undertaken included patrons and staff for
the existing operation of the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort.

6) Details of the referenced parking surveys at the existing carpark in 2015.

With respect to part 6, the carparking surveys undertaken for the existing operation of the
Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort are provided as Appendix A in the response prepared by
TTP (refer Attachment 4).

7) Details of proposals referenced throughout the traffic report and in the recommendations in
relation to the provision of and encouragement of use of facilities such as mopeds, electric
bikes & scooters and shuttle buses, including associated conditions of approval that the
Council could impose to facilitate the aspirational outcomes.

With respect to part 7, provision has been made for 8 motorbike parking spaces, electric
bike, and moped parking will also be provided on the site. The applicant is committed to
providing a minimum of five (5) electric bikes and five (5) mopeds initially for the operation
of the Resort Complex, with additional moped and electric bikes being increased subject to
demand.

A shuttle bus will also be provided to provide guest transfers to the site as required. It is not
expected the proposed shuttle bus will used for airport transfers with this service generally
arranged with other transfer contractors being more cost effective; however, this will be
arranged and organised by the resort management as required.

While additional parking has been provided to remove any doubt about the operation of the
“Boutique Hotel” in association with the other existing facilities, it remains the intent to
provide alternative modal transport options, which is cost effective and sustainable. These
alternative modes of transport will be increased subject to demand by patrons.

4|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 5

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




8) Undertake detailed assessment of the proposed changes to the parking layout including:
          a. Compliance with the AS2890 Australian Standard series.
          b. Whether the proposed hotel parking will be separated / delineated from the
             balance of the carpark, by either gates, or signage, or both, and how those
             arrangements would operate in a satisfactory manner. This should include how
             other vehicles will turn around if they reach the hotel / resort designated
             parking area without finding a parking space, and how vehicles will turn around
             and exit if they search for a prime undercover carpark near the lifts to the
             hotel/resort, and find all spaces occupied.
          c. The refuse vehicle swept path assessment indicates that it is extremely tight. It
             should be redone using an appropriate clearance envelope and with the vehicle
             travelling on both directions along the critical parts of the route.

With respect to part 8(a), these issues have been addressed in the response prepared by TTP
(Attachment 4). TTP have advised the proposed parking and swept path analysis for service
vehicles, buses and waste management vehicles comply with the Australian Standard – AS
2890 Parking Facilities Parts 1-6.

It is now proposed to remove one of the parking spaces close to the proposed hotel
entrance and provide a marked turnaround bay at the southern end of the eastern carpark
area. This allows for a car that enters the eastern carpark to turnaround to exit the carpark
without having to reverse down the aisle.

With respect to 8(b), signage is to be erected to direct hotel patrons towards the upper
parking area towards the eastern part of the site. Other signage will be erected to direct
other patrons to the middle and lower parking areas including the additional 48 spaces in
the elevated parking structure near the southern boundary. It is not intended to erect gates
to prevent access to the various parking areas on the site with onsite management being the
preferred option.

With respect to 8(c), where necessary the proposal plans have been amended to provide
minor changes to the swept path for the refuse vehicle access and for buses entering the
Porte-Cochere, including a minor increase in the height of the Porte-Cochere (refer
templates provided in Attachment 4). The operator for the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa
Resort has advised that buses with air-conditioning units are currently able to utilise the
existing Porte-Cochere, when accessing the front of the Resort.

TTP has advised that presently there is a bus layover on Links Drive, adjacent to the
northbound carriageway immediately north of the entrance gates. There is also an unused
bus stop on Resort Drive that can be used as a layover area as required. Further, TTP has
advised that if large numbers of buses are to be present at the same time, there is an
overflow parking area (multi-purpose area) off Resort Drive, which can be utilised for bus
parking, if necessary.

                                                                                   5|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

8) Undertake detailed assessment of the proposed changes to the parking layout including:

a. Compliance with the AS2890 Australian Standard series.

b. Whether the proposed hotel parking will be separated / delineated from the
balance of the carpark, by either gates, or signage, or both, and how those
arrangements would operate in a satisfactory manner. This should include how
other vehicles will turn around if they reach the hotel / resort designated
parking area without finding a parking space, and how vehicles will turn around
and exit if they search for a prime undercover carpark near the lifts to the
hotel/resort, and find all spaces occupied.

c. The refuse vehicle swept path assessment indicates that it is extremely tight. It
should be redone using an appropriate clearance envelope and with the vehicle
travelling on both directions along the critical parts of the route.

With respect to part 8(a), these issues have been addressed in the response prepared by TTP
(Attachment 4). TTP have advised the proposed parking and swept path analysis for service
vehicles, buses and waste management vehicles comply with the Australian Standard — AS
2890 Parking Facilities Parts 1-6.

It is now proposed to remove one of the parking spaces close to the proposed hotel
entrance and provide a marked turnaround bay at the southern end of the eastern carpark
area. This allows for a car that enters the eastern carpark to turnaround to exit the carpark
without having to reverse down the aisle.

With respect to 8(b), signage is to be erected to direct hotel patrons towards the upper
parking area towards the eastern part of the site. Other signage will be erected to direct
other patrons to the middle and lower parking areas including the additional 48 spaces in
the elevated parking structure near the southern boundary. It is not intended to erect gates
to prevent access to the various parking areas on the site with onsite management being the
preferred option.

With respect to 8(c), where necessary the proposal plans have been amended to provide
minor changes to the swept path for the refuse vehicle access and for buses entering the
Porte-Cochere, including a minor increase in the height of the Porte-Cochere (refer
templates provided in Attachment 4). The operator for the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa
Resort has advised that buses with air-conditioning units are currently able to utilise the
existing Porte-Cochere, when accessing the front of the Resort.

TTP has advised that presently there is a bus layover on Links Drive, adjacent to the
northbound carriageway immediately north of the entrance gates. There is also an unused
bus stop on Resort Drive that can be used as a layover area as required. Further, TTP has
advised that if large numbers of buses are to be present at the same time, there is an
overflow parking area (multi-purpose area) off Resort Drive, which can be utilised for bus
parking, if necessary.

5|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 6

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




Odour

With respect to the issue of odour generated by the Noosa Wastewater Treatment Plant, the
data required under parts 9 & 10 of the information request has been provided previously by
email to Noosa Council on 14 September 2021. The odour consultant Katestone has also
addressed the other issues raised in the response provided as Attachment 5.

17. Provide a site-specific geotechnical investigation for the development site which identifies
    the building foundation requirements and stability considerations necessary for each future
    building/structure to maintain the stability of those building/structures for the long term.
    The report must include that the development site is stable, can be safely built upon, and
    has a factor of safety in excess of 1.5, both prior to the development and in the long term.

With respect to part 17, a Geotechnical Investigation Report has been prepared by Core
Consultants Pty Ltd (refer Attachment 6). Core Consultants have considered the location of
the proposed “Boutique Hotel”, the slope of the land, and the proposed bulk earthworks.
Onsite investigation work comprised eight (8) boreholes drilled to a depth of 0.8 m to 5 m.

A qualitative slope stability assessment was undertaken following the Australian
Geomechanics Society (AGS) Guidelines for Landslide Risk Management (March 2007). Core
Consultants has advised that based on the available information and the results of the
investigation, there is a Low Risk of slope instability for the proposed development, subject
to implementation of the recommendations made in the report. Further, from a geotechnical
viewpoint the site is suitable for the proposed development1.

18. A Bushfire Management Plan is required in support of this application, to be prepared in
    accordance with the overlay code – (8.2.(b)) and Noosa Plan 2020 Policy SC6.9.4 -Bushfire
    management plans.

With respect to part 18, a response to the issues raised with respect to the risk from bushfire
have been addressed by Rob Friend and Associates which is provided as Attachment 7A.
This response includes a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP).

Response to the issues raised by the SARA have also been addressed by the bushfire expert
with respect to the impacts upon koala habitat (refer Attachment 7B). It is advised that …
the development will occur primarily over land that is already cleared and be utilised for
structures like tennis courts and landscaping. The hazardous vegetation retained in proximity
to the development site is separated by Resort Drive, tennis courts and auxiliary parking which
will provide a buffer between hazardous vegetation and proposed structures.




1
    Geotechnical Investigation Report, dated September 2021, Executive Summary, page 8

                                                                                         6|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Odour

With respect to the issue of odour generated by the Noosa Wastewater Treatment Plant, the
data required under parts 9 & 10 of the information request has been provided previously by
email to Noosa Council on 14 September 2021. The odour consultant Katestone has also
addressed the other issues raised in the response provided as Attachment 5.

17. Provide a site-specific geotechnical investigation for the development site which identifies
the building foundation requirements and stability considerations necessary for each future
building/structure to maintain the stability of those building/structures for the long term.
The report must include that the development site is stable, can be safely built upon, and
has a factor of safety in excess of 1.5, both prior to the development and in the long term.

With respect to part 17, a Geotechnical Investigation Report has been prepared by Core
Consultants Pty Ltd (refer Attachment 6). Core Consultants have considered the location of
the proposed “Boutique Hotel”, the slope of the land, and the proposed bulk earthworks.
Onsite investigation work comprised eight (8) boreholes drilled to a depth of 0.8 m to 5m.

A qualitative slope stability assessment was undertaken following the Australian
Geomechanics Society (AGS) Guidelines for Landslide Risk Management (March 2007). Core
Consultants has advised that based on the available information and the results of the
investigation, there is a Low Risk of slope instability for the proposed development, subject
to implementation of the recommendations made in the report. Further, from a geotechnical
viewpoint the site is suitable for the proposed development.

18. A Bushfire Management Plan is required in support of this application, to be prepared in
accordance with the overlay code — (8.2.(b)) and Noosa Plan 2020 Policy SC6.9.4 -Bushfire
management plans.

With respect to part 18, a response to the issues raised with respect to the risk from bushfire
have been addressed by Rob Friend and Associates which is provided as Attachment 7A.
This response includes a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP).

Response to the issues raised by the SARA have also been addressed by the bushfire expert
with respect to the impacts upon koala habitat (refer Attachment 7B). It is advised that ...
the development will occur primarily over land that is already cleared and be utilised for
structures like tennis courts and landscaping. The hazardous vegetation retained in proximity
to the development site is separated by Resort Drive, tennis courts and auxiliary parking which
will provide a buffer between hazardous vegetation and proposed structures.

1 Geotechnical Investigation Report, dated September 2021, Executive Summary, page 8

6|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 7

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




Under the BMP, two bands of understory management within the landscaping is proposed
with a focus on selection of low flammability species for the understory plantings. The basis
for the managed vegetation zone is to provide separation from potential bushfire hazard
area which is located outside of the property boundary.

Rob Friend and Associates has advised that the management of understory vegetation is for
vegetation less than 2m in height and is to reduce potential surface and near surface fuel
loads. Canopy fuels are unlikely to be involved in a bushfire at this site. Further for the
purpose of bushfire mitigation, no mature trees will require removal within the development
footprint or immediate surrounds, including NJKHT’s. While the tennis courts could be
considered infrastructure, the retained NJKHT’s do not present a bushfire hazard to the
tennis courts and are not required to be removed.

The BMP advises that the proposed development will have an acceptable risk from bushfire
subject to meeting a number of recommendations under part 6, including:
   • at part 6.1 the building location having a radiant heat flux of 29kW/m² and a
       separation of 15.7m to any habitable structures;
   • at part 6.2 the landscaping understory treatments with landscaping within 20m of
       Noosa Drive comprising 100% less flammable plant species and the remaining area
       greater than 20m having 50% less flammable plant species, amongst other things;
   • at part 6.3 some improvements are required to the Resort Drive verge with the
       removal of vegetation along the edge of the road to extend the accessible width and
       improve sightlines;
   • at part 6.4 the existing water supply being adequate subject to the design of a
       hydraulic consultant; and
   • at part 6.5 the preparation of a bushfire management plan (already provided), along
       with an emergency response plan including an evacuation plan.

19. Clarification that the site contours, including natural ground level, have been determined
    by a cadastral surveyor and/or a cadastral survey of the site.

With respect to part 19, advice has been obtained from the Downes Group who completed
the initial survey of the site to obtain the existing ground levels (refer Attachment 8A). A
copy of the survey undertaken is provided as Attachment 8B. The extrapolation of the
existing ground levels to obtain what were the natural ground levels was undertaken from
the cadastral survey of the site by the project architects.

The Downs Group have certified that the extrapolation of the natural ground levels by the
project architect is correct. Consequently, the height of the proposed buildings on the land is
relative to the determined natural ground level.

20. All Elevation Plans, Section Plans and height blanket plans to detail the maximum RL of
    each building with the RL of the natural ground level confirmed below.


                                                                                    7|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Under the BMP, two bands of understory management within the landscaping is proposed
with a focus on selection of low flammability species for the understory plantings. The basis
for the managed vegetation zone is to provide separation from potential bushfire hazard
area which is located outside of the property boundary.

Rob Friend and Associates has advised that the management of understory vegetation is for
vegetation less than 2m in height and is to reduce potential surface and near surface fuel
loads. Canopy fuels are unlikely to be involved in a bushfire at this site. Further for the
purpose of bushfire mitigation, no mature trees will require removal within the development
footprint or immediate surrounds, including NJKHT’s. While the tennis courts could be
considered infrastructure, the retained NJKHT’s do not present a bushfire hazard to the
tennis courts and are not required to be removed.

The BMP advises that the proposed development will have an acceptable risk from bushfire
subject to meeting a number of recommendations under part 6, including:

e at part 6.1 the building location having a radiant heat flux of 29kW/m? and a
separation of 15.7m to any habitable structures;

e at part 6.2 the landscaping understory treatments with landscaping within 20m of
Noosa Drive comprising 100% less flammable plant species and the remaining area
greater than 20m having 50% less flammable plant species, amongst other things;

e at part 6.3 some improvements are required to the Resort Drive verge with the
removal of vegetation along the edge of the road to extend the accessible width and
improve sightlines;

e at part 6.4 the existing water supply being adequate subject to the design of a
hydraulic consultant; and

e at part 6.5 the preparation of a bushfire management plan (already provided), along
with an emergency response plan including an evacuation plan.

19. Clarification that the site contours, including natural ground level, have been determined
by a cadastral surveyor and/or a cadastral survey of the site.

With respect to part 19, advice has been obtained from the Downes Group who completed
the initial survey of the site to obtain the existing ground levels (refer Attachment 8A). A
copy of the survey undertaken is provided as Attachment 8B. The extrapolation of the
existing ground levels to obtain what were the natural ground levels was undertaken from
the cadastral survey of the site by the project architects.

The Downs Group have certified that the extrapolation of the natural ground levels by the
project architect is correct. Consequently, the height of the proposed buildings on the land is
relative to the determined natural ground level.

20. All Elevation Plans, Section Plans and height blanket plans to detail the maximum RL of

each building with the RL of the natural ground level confirmed below.

7|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 8

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




With respect to part 20, the project architect has now provided additional information on the
elevation plans, section plans, and the height blanket plans as requested which is provided
with the amended proposal plans (refer Attachment 1).

The amended proposal plans confirm the height of the proposed building relevant to what is
considered to be the natural ground level as confirmed by the Downes Group (refer
Attachment 8).

It is accepted the proposed development will exceed 12m in height in part on the lower
portion of the site; however, as explained in the town planning report under the Visual
Amenity Impacts and the photomontages prepared (refer Figure 1), it is not expected the
proposed development would cause any adverse offsite visual amenity impacts. Further, the
site is constrained by slope and the odour contour shown on the proposal plans, which
means the development is necessarily limited to this part of the site.

The development has been designed as three levels to provide the necessary density over
this part of the site and to allow for efficiency of servicing the proposed “Boutique Hotel”,
which is costly. Despite the height, when viewed off the site, in particular from Resort Drive,
the proposed development presents as two storeys. The higher portion of the building that
exceeds 12m from the natural ground level will not protrude above the existing tree line and
will not have a significant visual amenity impact (refer photomontage - Figure 1). It is noted
the “Parkridge Noosa” development has a higher elevation and is also partly visible to the
right.




Figure 1 – Extract of photomontage prepared by Design & Visual Communications

With respect the building height issue, the project architect Mr Shane Thompson has
provided the following advice:



                                                                                    8|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
&

Adamson
Town Planning

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
advice”

With respect to part 20, the project architect has now provided additional information on the
elevation plans, section plans, and the height blanket plans as requested which is provided
with the amended proposal plans (refer Attachment 1).

The amended proposal plans confirm the height of the proposed building relevant to what is
considered to be the natural ground level as confirmed by the Downes Group (refer
Attachment 8).

It is accepted the proposed development will exceed 12m in height in part on the lower
portion of the site; however, as explained in the town planning report under the Visual
Amenity Impacts and the photomontages prepared (refer Figure 1), it is not expected the
proposed development would cause any adverse offsite visual amenity impacts. Further, the
site is constrained by slope and the odour contour shown on the proposal plans, which
means the development is necessarily limited to this part of the site.

The development has been designed as three levels to provide the necessary density over
this part of the site and to allow for efficiency of servicing the proposed “Boutique Hotel”,
which is costly. Despite the height, when viewed off the site, in particular from Resort Drive,
the proposed development presents as two storeys. The higher portion of the building that
exceeds 12m from the natural ground level will not protrude above the existing tree line and
will not have a significant visual amenity impact (refer photomontage - Figure 1). It is noted
the “Parkridge Noosa” development has a higher elevation and is also partly visible to the
right.

   

Figure 1 — Extract of photomontage prepared by Design & Visual Communications

With respect the building height issue, the project architect Mr Shane Thompson has
provided the following advice:

8|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 9

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




We note that the height of the proposed hotel at the Southern end of Pavilion 2 exceeds slightly
the preferred height limit of 12 m above the Natural Ground Level. It is worth noting that the
concept of a linked series of smaller buildings “cascading” down the hill side, much like what
might be found in a traditional Mediterranean hillside village, inevitably leads to parts of some
buildings slightly exceeding the height of the same or other buildings as the natural ground
level below continues to fall. In many instances of the design for this project based on this
concept the height of the buildings also falls well below 12m above the natural ground level, in
this sense the design remains very responsive to the natural topography and allows the
building to be perceived as being very organic and of a smaller scale then the concept of a
single larger building may have appeared. Amongst the drawings submitted as part of the
Development Application, there is a rendered view at the point of arrival at the Porte Cochere.
Whilst it gives a realistic perception of the experience, there are some aspects of that view in
particular which offer the view of an apparent height much higher than the building is in
reality above the natural ground level.

The mitigating circumstances in this instance are:

    •   The view taken from the Porte Cochere level is at an artificially low level because of
        some excavation required at this level.
    •   The building itself is located some 30m approx. from the point of view, where the
        natural ground level is much higher than is perceived by this view.
    •   The 2 dimensional nature of the view has the affect of fore shortening the perspective
        and giving the impression that the distance in height is seen as a vertical straight line.
        (similar to telescoping a view)
    •   The landscaping on this view has been especially thinned out compared to what is in
        fact intended so as not to hide the building in this view.
    •   The high pitched tiled roof has been retained, whereas a flat roof may have been used
        here, whilst still complying with the design covenants as it was considered that the
        steeper and higher tiled roof would provide a better overall experience.

Similarly the more distant photomontage views have not sought to hide the building in this
location by a denser landscape as will be the case in real life, so as to ensure that the authentic
height of the building from distant views which may be glimpsed from time to time can be
understood. It is certainly envisaged that the landscape design as proposed will mitigate this
view far more than the photomontage suggests.

21. Site plans to include details of the shared lawn area proposed to be used for weddings.

With respect to part 21, the reference to weddings in the multi-purpose area has been
deleted. If this is to form part of the integrated development this will be considered under
the further application requesting to change to the current development approval for the
existing Country Club including Golf Clubhouse, Health Club and Tennis Centre (17380 DA),
which is discussed below. It should be noted that weddings and other receptions have been
held within the clubhouse function rooms since the commencement of this use.

                                                                                       9|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
y

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

We note that the height of the proposed hotel at the Southern end of Pavilion 2 exceeds slightly
the preferred height limit of 12 m above the Natural Ground Level. It is worth noting that the
concept of a linked series of smaller buildings “cascading” down the hill side, much like what
might be found in a traditional Mediterranean hillside village, inevitably leads to parts of some
buildings slightly exceeding the height of the same or other buildings as the natural ground
level below continues to fall. In many instances of the design for this project based on this
concept the height of the buildings also falls well below 12m above the natural ground level, in
this sense the design remains very responsive to the natural topography and allows the
building to be perceived as being very organic and of a smaller scale then the concept of a
single larger building may have appeared. Amongst the drawings submitted as part of the
Development Application, there is a rendered view at the point of arrival at the Porte Cochere.
Whilst it gives a realistic perception of the experience, there are some aspects of that view in
particular which offer the view of an apparent height much higher than the building is in
reality above the natural ground level.

The mitigating circumstances in this instance are:

e The view taken from the Porte Cochere level is at an artificially low level because of
some excavation required at this level.

e The building itself is located some 30m approx. from the point of view, where the
natural ground level is much higher than is perceived by this view.

e The 2 dimensional nature of the view has the affect of fore shortening the perspective
and giving the impression that the distance in height is seen as a vertical straight line.
(similar to telescoping a view)

e The landscaping on this view has been especially thinned out compared to what is in
fact intended so as not to hide the building in this view.

e The high pitched tiled roof has been retained, whereas a flat roof may have been used
here, whilst still complying with the design covenants as it was considered that the
steeper and higher tiled roof would provide a better overall experience.

Similarly the more distant photomontage views have not sought to hide the building in this
location by a denser landscape as will be the case in real life, so as to ensure that the authentic
height of the building from distant views which may be glimpsed from time to time can be
understood. It is certainly envisaged that the landscape design as proposed will mitigate this
view far more than the photomontage suggests.

21. Site plans to include details of the shared lawn area proposed to be used for weddings.

With respect to part 21, the reference to weddings in the multi-purpose area has been
deleted. If this is to form part of the integrated development this will be considered under
the further application requesting to change to the current development approval for the
existing Country Club including Golf Clubhouse, Health Club and Tennis Centre (17380 DA),
which is discussed below. It should be noted that weddings and other receptions have been
held within the clubhouse function rooms since the commencement of this use.

9|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 10

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




22. Details of the proposed size of functions to occur within the proposed ‘boutique hotel’

With respect to part 22, there are no functions proposed within the proposed “Boutique
Hotel” other than associated with conferences for guests staying at the hotel only. The main
functions that do occur on the site and that will continue will be within the existing
clubhouse, which provides for a number of room configurations. The Plantation Room
provides for banquet setting places for 160 persons2.

23. Clarification as to how the proposed works to the golf clubhouse accord with the existing
    golf course approval and if it is intended to submit a separate application for their
    approval.

With respect to part 23, once the development approval for the proposed “Boutique Hotel”
issues, it is intended to lodge a request to change the current development approval (17380
DA) to ensure consistency with the new development approval for the “Boutique Hotel”.




Figure 2 – Extract of Proposed Clubhouse Plan

At this stage, the only changes required to be made to the clubhouse approval is with
respect to renovations to the existing kitchen facilities within the clubhouse to adequately
service the proposed “Boutique Hotel” (refer Figure 2).


2
    Town Planning Report, page 10

                                                                                     10 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
x |

Adamson
Town Planning

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
advice”

22. Details of the proposed size of functions to occur within the proposed ‘boutique hotel’

With respect to part 22, there are no functions proposed within the proposed “Boutique
Hotel” other than associated with conferences for guests staying at the hotel only. The main
functions that do occur on the site and that will continue will be within the existing
clubhouse, which provides for a number of room configurations. The Plantation Room
provides for banquet setting places for 160 persons’.

23. Clarification as to how the proposed works to the golf clubhouse accord with the existing
golf course approval and if it is intended to submit a separate application for their
approval.

With respect to part 23, once the development approval for the proposed “Boutique Hotel”
issues, it is intended to lodge a request to change the current development approval (17380
DA) to ensure consistency with the new development approval for the "Boutique Hotel”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2 — Extract of Proposed Clubhouse Plan

At this stage, the only changes required to be made to the clubhouse approval is with
respect to renovations to the existing kitchen facilities within the clubhouse to adequately
service the proposed “Boutique Hotel” (refer Figure 2).

2 Town Planning Report, page 10
10|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 11

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




The kitchen expansion comprises about 105m² of GFA, which is included in the total GFA
calculation as stated in the town planning report3. The changes being made to the clubhouse
are shown on the proposal plans and remain unchanged (refer Figure 2).

It is accepted there will be a need to request a change to the current development approval
(17380 DA) once the development approval issues for the “Boutique Hotel”. Should it be the
case that the proposed “Boutique Hotel” is not supported then the proposed renovations to
the existing clubhouse would not go ahead.

The proposed minor extensions to the clubhouse were provided with the application
material given the development as a whole is to be integrated. These minor extensions have
been shown on the proposal plans in order to be open and transparent about what is being
proposed, in particular for members of the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort.

24. Clarification as to whether the proposed use of the golf clubhouse accords with the relevant
    approval and if it is intended to submit a separate application.

With respect to part 24, it is not intended to operate the clubhouse and the associated
health club and day spa facilities other than in accordance with the current development
approvals already in place. The existing clubhouse, health club and day spa facilities are used
by members, the general public and will be used by patrons of the proposed “Boutique
Hotel”. The development as a whole will operate as an integrated Resort Complex, including
the championship golf course.

The existing Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort currently provides for conferences and
functions including weddings; however, the site and Noosa Springs more generally lacks
visitor accommodation. The current development approval for the existing club house
(17380 DA – Condition 33) clearly provides for functions to occur within the existing
clubhouse.

There is no changes being made to the existing use of the clubhouse, other than to provide
for increased catering and servicing of the proposed “Boutique Hotel”. The proposed
“Boutique Hotel” will provide for purely visitor accommodation that will complement the
existing onsite facilities to provide for a high quality tourist destination as a Resort Complex.

25. Clarification of the mechanism for how the offsets are to be delivered

With respect to part 25, Gondwana Ecology has already considered the matter of offsets
having regard to the Preliminary Earthworks Plan provided as Appendix B in the Engineering
Report (refer Attachment 1A). A copy of the advice provided by Gondwana Ecology is
provided as Attachment 9.



3
    Town Planning Report, page 16

                                                                                    11 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

The kitchen expansion comprises about 105m? of GFA, which is included in the total GFA
calculation as stated in the town planning report®. The changes being made to the clubhouse
are shown on the proposal plans and remain unchanged (refer Figure 2).

It is accepted there will be a need to request a change to the current development approval
(17380 DA) once the development approval issues for the “Boutique Hotel”. Should it be the
case that the proposed “Boutique Hotel” is not supported then the proposed renovations to
the existing clubhouse would not go ahead.

The proposed minor extensions to the clubhouse were provided with the application
material given the development as a whole is to be integrated. These minor extensions have
been shown on the proposal plans in order to be open and transparent about what is being
proposed, in particular for members of the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort.

24. Clarification as to whether the proposed use of the golf clubhouse accords with the relevant
approval and if it is intended to submit a separate application.

With respect to part 24, it is not intended to operate the clubhouse and the associated
health club and day spa facilities other than in accordance with the current development
approvals already in place. The existing clubhouse, health club and day spa facilities are used
by members, the general public and will be used by patrons of the proposed “Boutique
Hotel”. The development as a whole will operate as an integrated Resort Complex, including
the championship golf course.

The existing Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort currently provides for conferences and
functions including weddings; however, the site and Noosa Springs more generally lacks
visitor accommodation. The current development approval for the existing club house
(17380 DA - Condition 33) clearly provides for functions to occur within the existing
clubhouse.

There is no changes being made to the existing use of the clubhouse, other than to provide
for increased catering and servicing of the proposed “Boutique Hotel”. The proposed
“Boutique Hotel” will provide for purely visitor accommodation that will complement the
existing onsite facilities to provide for a high quality tourist destination as a Resort Complex.

25. Clarification of the mechanism for how the offsets are to be delivered

With respect to part 25, Gondwana Ecology has already considered the matter of offsets
having regard to the Preliminary Earthworks Plan provided as Appendix B in the Engineering
Report (refer Attachment 1A). A copy of the advice provided by Gondwana Ecology is
provided as Attachment 9.

3 Town Planning Report, page 16

11|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 12

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




Gondwana Ecology has advised4 the site, including the patch of vegetation designated a
koala habitat area, is fenced from the surrounding bushland and is disturbed by a heavily
weed infested ground cover. Further, the surveys over several years have failed to record
koalas on the site, which is likely due to the site being fenced and the habitat not being of
particular importance for the koala. The proposed development is on land that is already
impacted by development or otherwise has been disturbed. The proposed location and the
extent of earthworks for the proposed tennis courts have been minimised to avoid additional
tree loss.

In accordance with the State offset legislation, the koala habitat trees to be removed will be
offset by way of financial contribution, as follows:

The impact area (koala habitat in SEQ) for the subject land in hectares is 19 X 0.004ha =
0.076ha. This equates, based on the financial calculator, to $8,702.76.

Gondwana Ecology has confirmed the proposed redevelopment will not fragment koala
habitat and the rehabilitation (and landscaping) exercise will enhance the remaining patch of
bushland. Further, given the context of the site, scale and design of the proposed re-
development and minimal impact to ecology values, it would be reasonably expected that
the development would be approved subject to the imposition of reasonable and relevant
conditions.

New Elevated Carpark

It is accepted that the new elevated carpark structure adjoins the southern boundary of the
site. While this structure abuts the boundary and has a reduced building setback, this
boundary is well screened and the proposed structure is unlikely to be visible from the
adjoining golf course, being less than a single storey structure in height. Further, needs to be
located above the existing at ground parking area within the subject site, given the existing
access and parking arrangements.

The proposed structure is about 2.6 m in height to the top of the deck area. The open
structure adjoins the southern boundary but sits on the lowest part of the site and will not be
visible off the site from the surrounding access roads.

While under acceptable solution (AO13.1) of the Tourist Accommodation Zone it is expected
that the structure be setback 1.5m, in this case the structure is well screened from the
adjoining Lot 3 (golf course), which is owned by the applicant, will not obstruct views, and
will maintain the amenity of area and therefore complies with performance outcome PO13.
Further, under performance outcome PO10, the building scale and bulk is compatible with
surrounding development and will not present an appearance of bulk to adjacent properties
when having regard to the context of the site.


4
    Response prepared by Gondwana Ecology, dated 16 November 2021, part 5, page 4
                                                                                    12 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning ,

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Gondwana Ecology has advised‘ the site, including the patch of vegetation designated a
koala habitat area, is fenced from the surrounding bushland and is disturbed by a heavily
weed infested ground cover. Further, the surveys over several years have failed to record
koalas on the site, which is likely due to the site being fenced and the habitat not being of
particular importance for the koala. The proposed development is on land that is already
impacted by development or otherwise has been disturbed. The proposed location and the
extent of earthworks for the proposed tennis courts have been minimised to avoid additional
tree loss.

In accordance with the State offset legislation, the koala habitat trees to be removed will be
offset by way of financial contribution, as follows:

The impact area (koala habitat in SEQ) for the subject land in hectares is 19 X 0.004ha =
0.076ha. This equates, based on the financial calculator, to $8,702.76.

Gondwana Ecology has confirmed the proposed redevelopment will not fragment koala
habitat and the rehabilitation (and landscaping) exercise will enhance the remaining patch of
bushland. Further, given the context of the site, scale and design of the proposed re-
development and minimal impact to ecology values, it would be reasonably expected that
the development would be approved subject to the imposition of reasonable and relevant
conditions.

New Elevated Carpark

It is accepted that the new elevated carpark structure adjoins the southern boundary of the
site. While this structure abuts the boundary and has a reduced building setback, this
boundary is well screened and the proposed structure is unlikely to be visible from the
adjoining golf course, being less than a single storey structure in height. Further, needs to be
located above the existing at ground parking area within the subject site, given the existing
access and parking arrangements.

The proposed structure is about 2.6 m in height to the top of the deck area. The open
structure adjoins the southern boundary but sits on the lowest part of the site and will not be
visible off the site from the surrounding access roads.

While under acceptable solution (AO13.1) of the Tourist Accommodation Zone it is expected
that the structure be setback 1.5m, in this case the structure is well screened from the
adjoining Lot 3 (golf course), which is owned by the applicant, will not obstruct views, and
will maintain the amenity of area and therefore complies with performance outcome PO13.
Further, under performance outcome PO10, the building scale and bulk is compatible with
surrounding development and will not present an appearance of bulk to adjacent properties
when having regard to the context of the site.

4 Response prepared by Gondwana Ecology, dated 16 November 2021, part 5, page 4

12|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 13

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




In accordance with section 14.1 of the Development Assessment Rules, the applicant has
completed its response to the information request made.

It would be appreciated if Council could provide the adjoining owner’s details to allow public
notification to commence as soon as possible.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please contact me.

Yours faithfully




Shane Adamson (BEngTech, GDURP, MPIA, MQELA)
Town Planning Specialist
Director - Adamson Town Planning Pty Ltd




                                                                                  13 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
‘

Adamson
Town Planning

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
advice”

In accordance with section 14.1 of the Development Assessment Rules, the applicant has
completed its response to the information request made.

It would be appreciated if Council could provide the adjoining owner's details to allow public
notification to commence as soon as possible.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please contact me.

Yours faithfully

—_

Shane Adamson (BeEngTech, GDURP, MPIA, MQELA)
Town Planning Specialist
Director - Adamson Town Planning Pty Ltd

13|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”