Council archive · source document
06/0823 - Applicant's Response to Information Request including Attachments [As Published] · 132006.823
Very large file (42.4 MB): the whole original can take several minutes to open, especially on a phone. Text is quick to read.
17. + the remaining non-penthouse unit will utilise a tandem space (ie. for parking of two cars). This allocation exceeds Council's car parking requirements. Therefore, the provision of car parking for Buildings G (K), H (M) and | (N) is consistent with Council's car parking requirement for accommodation units. Health Spa A total of 19 car parking spaces are provided for the development’s Health Spa component. This provision coupled with the surplus car parking spaces within the adjacent Building D (8 spaces) is considered by the Health Spa operator to be adequate for the proposed operations. Correspondence from the proposed operator (Golden Door) is included as Attachment 11 confirming their satisfaction with the provision of 19 spaces. Central Facilities A total of 29 internal and 4 external car parking spaces are provided for Building V. This provision is 49 spaces less than Council’s parking requirement. However it is considered that the proposed number of spaces is adequate when the following is taken into consideration: + the provision of on-grade parking proximate to this building; + the staff use of 10 tandem parking spaces within Blocks G (K), H (M) and I (N); and * the integrated nature of the site operations, particularly with regard to the uses located within Building V. Staff Resort staff will be allocated the remaining tandem spaces (ie. parking up to 20 cars) within Blocks G (K), H (M) and 1 (N). The operation of these spaces will be managed by the resort operator. When considering the compliance of the proposed development with the Driveways and Carparking Code, it is critical to understand that the application is for an integrated resort, and as such an assessment of the individual component parts is not a true reflection of the parking demand likely to be generated. Table 3.1 contained within the Traffic Impact Assessment is not considered to be correct. For example it is noted that Table 14.47 of the Driveways & Car Parking Code requires:- 17.1 1 space per accommodation unit; AND 17.2 1 space per 10 accommodation units. These additional ‘1 per 10’ spaces have not been addressed. Further, in accordance with Item 15 of this Information Request, please amend the report to reference all proposed uses on the site. Page 13
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalUsed in these records
06/0823 - Applicant's Response to Information Request including Attachments [As Published]Related documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 42.4 MB (very large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take a few minutes. On mobile data, it is best to wait for Wi-Fi.