Original source · versioned page text
2019-03-07 Special Meeting Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
AGENDA
Special Meeting
Thursday 7 March 2019
commencing at 10.00am
Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin
Committee: Crs Tony Wellington (Chair), Jess Glasgow, Ingrid Jackson,
Joe Jurisevic, Frank Pardon, Brian Stockwell, Frank Wilkie
“Noosa Shire – different by nature”
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 15 sections
Section 2
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM PAGE
ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES -
REPORTS
1. 1718T147 TEWANTIN ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ROOF REFURBISHMENT 3
2. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 456/2018 – PROPOSED
CLEARING OF VEGETATION IN DAVID LOW WAY, ACCESS AND OFFSET
PLANTING IN BEACH RESERVE 9
MEETING CLOSURE -
Page 2 of 16
Section 3
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
1. 1718T147 TEWANTIN ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ROOF REFURBISHMENT
Document i nformati on
Author Building & Facilities Coordinator, Chris Steel
Infrastructure Services Department
Index ECM / Project and Contract / 1718T147 – 06 Reports to Council
ECM / Subject / Assets / Buildings
ECM / Property (T1) / 9 Pelican Street Tewantin
Attachments 1. 1718T147 – Evaluation Workbook
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides a recommendation for the contract award of the preferred contractor for the
Tewantin Administration Building roof replacement and solar installation.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Building Facilities Coordinator to the Special Meeting dated 7
March 2019 and award contract 1718T147 to Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd for an initial lump
sum price of $701,786.00 (excl. GST), and a final contract price of $649,978.00 (excl. GST)
following the small-scale technology certificate rebate.
REPORT
The proposed contract is to rehabilitate the existing roof on the Tewantin Administration Building
and installation of a new 90kW PV solar system. The roof is part of the original build and has come
to the end of its useful life. The 90kW solar system is part of Zero Emissions Noosa (ZEN) plan
and will provide sustainable energy for the building.
The contract works are proposed to commence on site at the beginning of April 2019 with
construction anticipated to be completed by the end of June 2019.
1. Design
The Tewantin Administration Building roof design will remain identical to the original with a slight
change in pitch to ensure storm compliance. The roofing design has taken into consideration the
close proximity of the river to ensure protection from the salt air.
2. Tender Process
Due to the value of the works being greater than $200,000 and the complex nature of the project,
Council went out to tender in accordance with the Local Government Act 2009 to obtain
experienced and capable contractors.
The invitation to tender 1718T147 was released via LG Tender Box on 6 September 2018 and
advertised in local publications, the Sunshine Coast Daily on 8 September 2018 and the Noosa
News on 11 September 2018.
The tender closed at 2.00pm, Tuesday 2 October 2018 with two submissions received (listed in
alphabetical order).
Infraco Pty Ltd
Midson Construction (Qld) Pty Ltd
A key component of the tender was the request by Council to include the 90kW solar PV system
with Solar Edge monitoring. The design and tender scope of the solar system was provided by
ERM Power in collaboration with Council’s ZEN.
Page 3 of 16
Section 4
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
3. Tender Assessment
The tender evaluation panel (below) comprised both internal staff and two external experts who
undertook an assessment of the two conforming tender submissions.
Council Officers
- Building and Facilities Coordinator (Evaluation Chair)
- Facilities Officer
- Project Manager, Transport Innovation
- Work Health and Safety Advisor
External Experts
- Mode Design (Roof)
- ERM Power (Solar)
The tenders were evaluated against the following criteria:
Capability and Resourcing
Contract Experience and Capacity
Methodology
Quality
Health and Safety
Environment and Sustainability
Contribution to local Economy
Price
Clarifications of tender submission responses, including the tendered lump sum price breakdown,
were sought from both respondents, after which Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd was
shortlisted.
Evaluation was delayed as a result of clarifications raised during the evaluation process. Items
requiring clarification included the solar design, Solar STC’s fixed cost, potential contract variation
concerns, site management, and Council staff relocation during work and workplace health and
safety. The evaluation team met on several occasions to discuss the tenders and also with the
short listed contractor to finalise clarifications and project delivery via presentations.
Under the Federal Government’s Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme, Small-scale
Technology Certificates (STCs) are a tradable commodity attached to eligible installations of
renewable energy systems (including solar panels). Clarification was sought and confirmed from
Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd regarding this element due to Council being bound by the
Statutory Bodies Financial Arrangement Act 1982 which does not allow Council to enter into
derivative transactions. The confirmed amount is noted in the Finance section below.
The evaluation panel considers Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd to be the most advantageous
to Council and presents the best value for money. Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd’s tender
submission is favourable on the following basis:
demonstrated previous experience with similar large value commercial projects of this
nature;
demonstrated good track record working for Noosa Council and on other similar projects;
Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd have the necessary resources and processes in place to
deliver the project;
Competitive pricing.
4. Program
As part of the tender clarification process, Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd clarified that
completion of the project could be accomplished before the end of financial year in June 2019 with
a three-month project completion time frame, weather permitting.
Page 4 of 16
Section 5
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
5. Access and Noise Considerations During Construction
The Tewantin Administration Building will remain operational during the construction phase of the
project, with access restricted to the Level 3 main entrance and other areas at certain times
throughout a working day, due to crane lifts and works being completed above Council staff work
areas.
During construction, excessive noise may be experienced by staff and this may require some areas
to be restricted for extended periods and staff relocated. Buildings and Facilities has established a
working group to plan the scheduled relocations to meet business needs, and the working group
has begun identifying areas and strategies for staff relocation.
The schedule and timing of staff relocations can only be finalised and agreed upon once the tender
has been awarded. The working group will communicate advance notice to staff to mitigate
disruption to business.
Previous Council Consideration
Nil
Finance
Council’s capital program includes funding for the Tewantin Administration Building roof
replacement and solar installation. Council has currently allocated $770,000.00 (excl. GST) in the
current budget, representing a revised budget increase based on the tender submissions and solar
component costs.
Item Cost (excl. GST)
Costs to date (December 2018) $9,969
Tendered Contract Value $771,965
Superintendent Costs $12,000
less Small-scale Technology Certificates (STCs) rebate ($51,808)
Project sub-total $742,126
Potential relocation costs - includes ICT, Accommodation/Lease and Internal $72,040*
Building and Facilities costs
Total Project Cost $814,166.00
*Whilst these costs are not anticipated, based on project team discussions to date with stakeholders/staff
along with the potential for utilising existing Council facilities, they have been included as a ‘worse case’
scenario.
Risks & Opportunities
Finance Risks Mitigation
Council requests for scope increases This is to be mitigated through the Project Control Group
(PCG) and Capital Works Executive (CWE) management
and limitation of client requested scope variations
Contractor claims for variations for Mitigation through PCG and CWE with allowances made
unforeseen issues. within the contingency.
Energex delay the solar connection Continued communication with the solar provider and
approval Energex to maintain the scheduled completion.
Additional costs due to staff relocation Existing Council facility options, staff working from home,
during the project as well as allowing for relocation costs within the project
costs.
Page 5 of 16
Section 6
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Program Risks Mitigation
There is a potential that the project is Construction through the typically dry season aims to
delayed due to bad weather. mitigate this.
Materials supply, including solar system. Continued communication and frequent meetings with the
contractor to ensure industry suppliers are providing
updates on project timing.
Resource risk Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd has nominated a
capable team undertaking construction. The appointment
of an external superintendent mitigates the resource risk
for Council.
Construction takes longer than allowed for. The contractor has demonstrated to be well resourced
with an ability to increase crews to reduce risk of delays.
Energex delay the solar connection Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd will ensure continued
approval. communication with the solar provider and Energex to
maintain the scheduled completion.
Safety Risks Mitigation
Work place health and safety issues Midson Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd have demonstrated
throughout project, including high risk work extensive experience at working at heights and would be
due to working at heights. appointed as the principal contractor responsible for all
work place health and safety of the site.
Council staff experience excessive noise B&F working group to organise relocations through pre
designated areas and locations.
Scope and Quality Risks Mitigation
Risk of not meeting project objectives. To be managed through Council officer reviews/
milestone meetings, and supported by specialist
consultants who developed the original design and
specifications.
Public Disruption and Council
Mitigation
Reputation Risks
Noise from plant and equipment may be a This will be minimised as much as possible with noisy
cause of disruption to local residents. works completed during business hours.
Solar system does not export to the grid as Energy usage would be at approx. 85% of total capacity
per design. based on a seven day week of power creation.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Liaison with neighbouring properties will be undertaken.
Internal Consultation
Corporate Services was consulted on both the procurement processes and budget.
Infrastructure Services was consulted on the tender scope, submissions and value.
Workplace Health and Safety (Executive Support) was consulted on the evaluation of tender
submissions.
Environment and Sustainable Development was consulted on the tender scope and
evaluation of submissions.
Page 6 of 16
Section 7
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Departments/Sections Consulted:
X Chief Executive Officer Community Services x Corporate Services
Executive Officer Director X Director
X Executive Support Community Development X Financial Services
Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries X Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services X Environment & Sustainable Development X Infrastructure Services
Director Director X Director
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service Development Assessment X Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture X Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning X Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 7 of 16
Section 8
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Page 8 of 16
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Att. 1- Evaluation Spreadsheet
Final Evaluation
NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL Weighted Attribute Evaluation Spreadsheet - Final Evaluation
Sa
PRICE
(Conforming Tenders Only} * Price includes
Respondent's STC repate
7
2
NON-CONFORMING TENDERS
1 2
Resutant
Evaluation Criteria score x
femratmenne fm | om | ae | wo |
fometnmceones | oe |» | | = | ae |
a
Se ee
feammaseisy | | | sm | om | 20 |
emomnesme | = | | | = | om |
foment | = | = f= | | em |
nee, = | se
Total Fees (Pc} 35% $684,251 $649,978
Average Fees (Pav) $_..______._-_-_. $667,115
Price Score 37 103
Normalised Price Score (Pn) 35 100
Weighted Price Score (Pw)
Building & Facilities Coordinator, Infrastructure Services
Facilities Officer, Infrastructure Services
Project Manager, Infrastructure Services
External Technical Expert
WHAS Advisor, Executive Services
The Contract Administrator confirms the above scores and ———
weightings of this evaluation =<———~,
[Contract Administrator's signature:| | Bulking & Facilities Coordinator, Infrastructure Services |
Copy of 1718T147 - Evaluation Workbook V4 Page 1 1/03/2018
Page 8 of 16Section 9
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
2. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 456/2018 – PROPOSED CLEARING
OF VEGETATION IN DAVID LOW WAY, ACCESS AND OFFSET PLANTING IN BEACH
RESERVE
Document i nformati on
Author Manager Development Assessment, Kerri Coyle
Environment & Sustainable Development Department
Index ECM/ Application / RAL17/0501 / Case/ 456/2018 (Kenlynn Pty Ltd)
Attachments 1. Original Proposal Plans
2. Amended Proposal Plans
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Special Meeting
dated 7 March 2019 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal No. 456/2018 and instruct
its solicitor to advise the Court and the Appellant as follows:
1. As road authority for the area, that it does not accept nor will it permit the removal of
vegetation and the maintenance thereof into the future for the purposes of achieving sight
lines in David Low Way as proposed by the traffic engineers in their joint report of 21
December 2018;
2. That it will not allow site access in the location presently proposed by the Appellant’s
development proposal; and
3. As trustee of the adjoining beach reserve, that it does not accept the Appellant’s proposal to
provide offset planting in the beach reserve, nor will it undertake any responsibility for
maintenance thereof into the future.
REPORT
A report on a development application to subdivide 1 lot into 6 residential lots and create an access
easement at 2 David Low Way, Castaways Beach was considered by Council at its Ordinary
Meeting on 18 January 2018.
Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 18 January 2018 resolved to refuse the application for the
following reasons:
1. The proposed development is contrary to the Overall and Specific Outcomes of the Eastern
Beaches Locality Code of the Noosa Plan. The development proposes significant clearing
that is contrary to the Locality Code which requires protection of the vegetated character and
views from the David Low Way and protection of native vegetation.
2. The proposed development is contrary to the Biodiversity code as it involves clearing of
vegetation that is mapped as Environmental Protection and Riparian vegetation under the
Noosa Plan.
3. The proposed development will result in unacceptable impacts on the visual amenity and
character of the area.
4. The applicant has not demonstrated that a compliant, safe access is able to be provided to
the site in accordance with required standards. To achieve a safe access significant clearing
of vegetation and earthworks in the road reserve is also likely to be required.
Page 9 of 16
Section 10
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
5. The proposal is an overdevelopment of the site with the resultant development form
detrimentally affecting the environmental and amenity values of the site.
6. The proposed development represents a poor planning outcome for the site, with the
subdivision layout failing to provide street frontage for the lots and an excessive number of
lots with access via an easement. The proposed access arrangements are likely to result in
ongoing management and maintenance issues for future residents of these lots.
The applicant subsequently appealed the decision seeking that the application be approved subject
to reasonable and relevant conditions. During the course of the appeal the applicant changed their
proposal reducing the number of lots proposed from 6 to 5 lots. The original proposal plans are
included as Attachment 1 and the amended lot layout is included as Attachment 2.
The amended plans primarily increase the area to be protected by an environmental covenant from
3590m2 to 3750m2, change the location of the covenant areas and increase the setback from the
riparian zone to the proposed building envelope from 56m to a minimum of 60m. The proposed
driveway access remains in a similar location to the original proposal plans but with some minor
changes to improve the driveway grade. Overall the layout and access generally remain the same
and do not resolve the reasons for refusal and address the conflicts with The Noosa Plan.
Council’s experts and the Appellant’s experts including planning, ecology, bushfire and traffic have
since completed joint expert reports on the amended plans and the matter is now set down for
hearing for 5 days commencing 18 March 2019 in Brisbane.
Review of the joint expert reports prepared for the appeal show that while both traffic experts agree
that a safe access can be achieved to the site, the appellant’s proposal will necessitate the removal
of substantial vegetation in the road reserve on David Low Way (and maintenance of that area of
the road reserve) to ensure sight line safety requirements are met with respect to access to and
from the site. The extent of clearing required to achieve satisfactory sight lines varies between the
experts but in both cases if the appeal is allowed by the Court, it would be expected that the clearing
in the road reserve would be undertaken for the proposed access. The extent of clearing required
is detailed in the diagrams below for both traffic experts. Notably no vegetation was required to be
cleared in the road reserve for the approved 2 lot subdivision for the site.
Figure 1: Appellant’s Traffic Engineer’s Assessment of Sight Lines & Required Clearing
Page 10 of 16
Section 11
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Figure 2: Council’s Traffic Engineer’s Assessment of Sight Lines & Required Clearing
The difference in opinion between the expert traffic engineers on the required clearing for sight
lines varies due to a difference between the traffic experts about which sight distance standards
apply. The Appellant’s traffic engineer adopts the Australian Standards applicable for an access
driveway while still acknowledging that the sight distance for an intersection would be desirable.
Council’s traffic engineer identifies that Austroads applies, as he considers this to be the definitive
design standard for higher order roads such as David Low Way. Council’s traffic engineer also
considers that the existing driveway location is likely to achieve safer sight lines than that achieved
at the Appellant’s proposed location. Council’s traffic engineer also casts doubt upon the access
grading with respect to the pedestrian/cycle path located within the road reserve from a safety
perspective.
Notwithstanding the expert traffic engineer’s opinions on satisfactory sight lines, the vegetation in
the road reserve is reasonably intact native coastal vegetation and contributes significantly to the
vegetated character of David Low Way. The Noosa Plan seeks to protect this vegetation and
concern is raised about the extent of vegetation that may be lost if the Appellant’s appeal is
successful.
The Appellant has also recently (on 15 February 2019) advised that they would be willing to accept
a condition requiring vegetation offsets in the adjoining beach reserve, which they would maintain
for 3 years or if Council preferred a financial contribution calculated under the Queensland
Environmental Offsets Policy made.
Such a proposed offsetting arrangement is not consistent with The Noosa Plan or the draft planning
scheme for significant vegetation with the planning schemes instead both seeking to retain and
enhance vegetation. It is also clear that while the Appellant’s vegetation management and
offsetting plan is still being reviewed by Council’s expert ecologist, the plan is not desirable as the
area being cleared and the proposed offset area are 2 different ecosystems (and so the plan does
not achieve a like for like) and given the beach reserve is highly exposed, the proposed planting is
unlikely to be successful. The proposed offsetting arrangement would also require significant
ongoing maintenance by Council into the future.
The proposal therefore raises a number of matters which the Council is entitled to consider from
the viewpoint of its separate role as road authority (in respect to works in the David Low Way road
reserve) and trustee (in the case of the offset vegetation maintenance proposal in the adjacent
beach reserve).
These matters have been brought to Council’s attention as they do raise significant issues for
Council that will impact on the character of this part of David Low Way; the safety of David Low
Page 11 of 16
Section 12
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Way being an important part of the major road network; and raise ongoing maintenance issues for
Council. The Appellant’s proposals in respect to vegetation removal in David Low Way, the
proposed access location and the proposed offset planting arrangement are not desirable and
have adverse impacts. It is therefore recommended that Council advise the Court and the
Appellant that Council will not accept them, in its capacity as road authority (in respect to works in
the David Low Way road reserve) and trustee (in the case of the offset vegetation maintenance
proposal in the adjacent beach reserve).
The recommendation is worded accordingly.
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting, 18 January 2018, Item 3, Page 4
That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the General Committee Meeting dated
15 January 2018 regarding Application RAL17/0501 for a Development Permit for Reconfiguring a
Lot – (1 into 6 residential lots), situated at 2 David Low Way, Castaways Beach and:
A. Refuse the application for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is contrary to the Overall and Specific Outcomes of the
Eastern Beaches Locality Code of the Noosa Plan. The development proposes
significant clearing that is contrary to the Locality Code which requires protection of the
vegetated character and views from the David Low Way and protection of native
vegetation.
2. The proposed development is contrary to the Biodiversity code as it involves clearing
of vegetation that is mapped as Environmental Protection and Riparian vegetation
under the Noosa Plan.
3. The proposed development will result in unacceptable impacts on the visual amenity
and character of the area.
4. The applicant has not demonstrated that a compliant, safe access is able to be
provided to the site in accordance with required standards. To achieve a safe access
significant clearing of vegetation and earthworks in the road reserve is also likely to be
required.
5. The proposal is an overdevelopment of the site with the resultant development form
detrimentally affecting the environmental and amenity values of the site.
6. The proposed development represents a poor planning outcome for the site, with the
subdivision layout failing to provide street frontage for the lots and an excessive
number of lots with access via an easement. The proposed access arrangements are
likely to result in ongoing management and maintenance issues for future residents of
these lots.
B. Advise the utility service providers that there is significant vegetation within the road reserve
adjacent 2 David Low Way, Castaways Beach that requires detailed assessment prior to
installation of any services to minimise potential impacts on this vegetation.
C. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016.
Ordinary Meeting, 19 April 2018, Item 1, Page 4
That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 April 2018 regarding Planning & Environment Court
Appeal No. 456/2018 and agree to defend the appeal.
Page 12 of 16
Section 13
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Finance & Risk
If the Appellant’s appeal is successful and Council does not take a position on the matters raised
in this report then it would not be appropriate for Council to later refuse to permit the clearing in the
road reserve, the proposed access and offsetting arrangement.
The cost of preparation for this appeal is $192,243 as at 31 December 2018, with the trial likely to
cost Council a further $120,000.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Wakefield Sykes - Solicitor
Internal Consultation
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Chief Executive Officer Community Services Corporate Services
Executive Officer Director Director
Executive Support Community Development Financial Services
Community Facilities ICT
Libraries & Galleries Procurement & Fleet
Local Laws Property
Waste & Environmental Health Revenue Services
Executive Services x Environment & Sustainable Development x Infrastructure Services
Director Director Director
Community Engagement Building & Plumbing Services Asset Management
Customer Service x Development Assessment Buildings and Facilities
Governance Economic Development Civil Operations
People and Culture x Environmental Services Disaster Management
Strategic Land Use Planning x Infrastructure Planning,
Design and Delivery
Page 13 of 16
Section 14
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Page 14 of 16
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
ATTACHMENT 1
‘This plan has been prepared a5 3 proposed subdivision _
| and should not be used for any offer purpose.
The dimensions, areas and total number of lots shown >
hereon are subject to Seid survey and are also to the a
Sep ee XS G, iD
Therefore, no reilance should be placed on the = co Cc
Information on this pan for any financial deatings ~=N\ » i
otving the land. za
Ae Cre .
&, : = is
I 9 } ix
~w " Ww
HF ae
Q jtal Arca ow i
N Ss ip FFIEC ne Hi
= f Xs 2 i; =
. a is hwy Se \ i
een! YR fe ; ~ a
Propsaed zs:
Newt pad. oe ie, 159
/ OP BIG NRT
nm ue |
3 ae Cov K
c AOR |
hoe wo
ny RN Sam 0
6
oo t n 5
[| Covenant (Coastal) % 716 a zs
Oo Total Area
[| Covenant (Road Buffer} 05) LEX mt x
New Road \ N
[| Building Envelope Init a Sabet 9
% Th 20s °
a--- New Road g \s\.< nw
>
Easement Schedule rc
2 Road : Uv
A 712 ‘Access/Services/Council " 2 =
B 711,713 Access/Services/Council >
c 711,712,714 Access/Services/Council
D 711-713,715 Access/Services/Council = oo) =
E 711-714.716 | Access/Services/Council > -
F 711-715 Access/Services/Council 4
: % Note:
Statistics Table Building Envelopes reflect
minimum building setbacks
‘ares average [od oe es te
Road |S Cd Noosa Planning Scheme.
[Park CT CN GS
[Covenant—| aia Contour Note:
Contour Intervals are at 1.0m (minor) and 5.0m (major)
vio id Scale 1:750 = Lengths are m Metres.
a
at Eu ee See, KenlynnPty Ltd [rowne. sooees |
SRVETOR Lee cos anew SITE: Proposed Lote 711-716 & & AF & CovHJIN SP CUENT: SCALE +:750 (a3)
Page 14 of 16Section 15
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Page 15 of 16
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Tis plan has been prepared as 3 proposed subdivision —
1 and should not be used for any other purpose.
The dimensions, areas and total number of lots shown
@ hereon are subject to Seid survey and are also to the : 7 5 Soe atte 7 ay >
ee ee ee Ag Le a rt ns A ms RO
Cartticate of Title for this stie has not bean obtained. Ce) aw. oe thy Pa , w
Sect eense, | AN Pat Ree Ma |S
Therefore, no rellance should be placed on the | ae ok Saas eo ‘we © a
ae | or ate a ie ew : <
orving 4 - wee = 25 irs Sirs =
The aerial photo undertay is destved from information ry A oy A tna ?o 4 ee ey SOR 7
, supplied by Nearmap.com. It is approximate only. 2 > beg hp Bf a SR =, Xe i - iz
‘ne 7, eet ey a i he “
——= New Road CL gs caeme tas od Mag 35
= | Eicon: areal ga 2 bea is Se
we. /€ TE Total Area (iy §
Pe a Tt hk Ne ee ne \ eee eS zt
mee 7A 5 oS he. Fee a ON a
+x } Ma J P| "| ah “as, A ¥ aX ; = : Ry Finn He
ar 3 = i 5 Be PE 4 i Ts ie ho pity i
hie : i + e . oe AT ya
SY a en een F pA op oA ae a ae i
SS gm tS A ee ar ae
i) ng _ |. 23 Ba : = 2 — Sony : ‘ kf | MS Y, , <
ce | f° $8 RS P12 hf
ce ’ . Bt ol a " ates Gime | f * .. ie Pe Ww)
i A i A PE: > — mee 0 eal bes er «
" ey E> ~~ en an my ah 8 . .
3 Ie ati tS SL a 158: |
» poame = a ie ol Ee
i” i es —— "OF 613m? | Re . ne
Po We Rag oe fe
a told Total area
. 1 —2oh PCy Rr - ;
‘ , ‘eats wh ba Bo) ef " * !
ane ie Sp. 8 me Hide oe SE oeee wn
ape Bet “a 565 m* fT Teams ;
1: he Syrea e eC
Negi 775 SSS oa ah eh: Ow
we AAS Ya ee ee
a vi Eh 7 bf Me 0
rm > 3) oe i 7 % Soe e otRn aS K ia <
ie a Neer way Bee 7 bldg Eos
pe ERE Sa bald Ba 7 87 3aBimne ary
Ke a> ae as 7 mes eA in n
Pee ~~ ss Wes = ia ae oO
Soo we | AM A ie 5 t z
So a UR eT v
Note: ee oe ae NB Be a
Building Envelopes refiect FR oe! 7 Pe ae oO
minimum building setbacks Piss, a Se! ee
as per schedule 1 of the f ‘ ab — (EC ee is iota ey
Noosa Planning Scheme. Le a en Nt ie a ia
Shy te >
Easement Schedule me et ee ; rr
a. ee “ee The, ae aN uv
A 712 Access/Services/Council { } as. e mbH. aes
B 711,713 Access/Services/Council “y tee : oe et a >
o 711,712,714 | Access/Services/Council] [J Fi 7k ne 5 >
D 711-713,715 | Access/Services/Council ; SU Ph et a =
E 711-714,716 Access/Services/Council nd a a\ pe i eae
F 711-715 Access/Services/Council i. Saree ) > BS ae
Statistics Table We r ‘ Ree .~
; ‘3 fe» SR my
a a rae | eiaee bs mY
fArearange | Sadar 336m | oo fi Fiz ri te ead
[Areaaverage | 160im' ee" hE ee WE
© 5S Dal at Bae ae
[Park TN
[Covenant seam Contour Note:
Contour Intervais are at 1.0m (minor) and 5.0m (major)
no Seale 1:780 = lengths are m Metres.
REVInION Seen
i/o
poe sfc |i] gemma, [Kony Pty Lid
os se LEVEL DATUM: | SITE: Propoced Lots 711-716 6 & AF & Cov HIN & PV CUENT- SCALE 4-750 (A3)
Page 15 of 16Section 16
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
Page 16 of 16
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 7 MARCH 2019
,i TS - :
oa I ve ar ra / y canis aie ;
ns Wf j mg Sa OPT oe oi ee ae e
yy) Of ys | ie ras deo eanyme aur amen | 3 Gp
0) OM eS Pa TD as ee tn of Hikes emaeaitiataien ota ||7
9 ee ee ee lla
* f tT i ro / ae aes a x - =
one) A ee Soe [=~ Covenant Schedule =‘)
een) i b pe ms J are —_ ~ 2s a 4
—— ii u FS spf? / fa wes FES ve Pe - ey cnt ah. r Manageme: 3
3 oF oy Ex» eS a et hts (wr : ‘nak ~~ a a ue ps . > : me i |= st re A - ster al ; .
a eae a nes ot a F cespgaeh oo) ge oe ‘ ij
Pee FS Oe 1g at ee | al eee ||
Om face ae, Total Area fe Ee | ON al oP meee mH vj
Df 8087 ge OT SN orators e
¥ Hy a vig Mot C eae ‘ a a , :
Y Bee Pee " ef 7 1 ME ot aaa ee Seka aa \
Fe ee pe a Co NE OS ey ee es Sioa z
Q |) BRI bo WONG tS ee ee
Je Ae ; tie VA ~ ye he? pase 2 hess “3 . “F718 cf ==
3 [a ee = aes P ‘ - a a - . ee dee 2 ns —
an egy oot Bee =~ ye eT ee at a £ -| Se pets 2714715 Lae a
: on oe OS ck, ee i aes 6 eee ie ee cnn
® ) n 5 \ y cl, } me. - hex fe i. ¢ 4 SP * ‘ - Wis, "
= | “ y Faso a | AES $9 rote : ee i a ae Soy; me - 2
Y er Co Fr eb Tata 7 baa “el hy Pn * ES, ra er yt
-: r@ ia en ak tag 4
: ‘ . ee, be be Pi a ee ot ae te cies + eo ae ’
a ‘ iC Aby' ee fa Bae! > ie a Ts sae
4. Sah tt TRY se RS eee
RS BB cor ol apt cae m g e I pT ge oe a
i — : s a - <A Cs :
4 ; AE a —} 5 ae Chg be oe w
4 te | Blog Er i hs teal" Yee ME a ¢
af oS ee f es nies 2 > “ : ie #',. oO
\ aS , yl oe . 5 . 2% F 4s a ae
eB s&s ae 0
1 OD rrp. | *c . Pt eure? . N fi lr : =
' ' , —, \ ij nee eee wa pts oe ste <
bi Liao Sieg ’ : ; ,
een te? es oe Oe ae ey ae Pore
> > i a a O
1 a Ni "7 f ty _ om ‘ A. ee aa
- New Road 5 2, a He at iat tm", aan 4 ree ri e ing Envelopes =
~ BO mB: ; \ Ke pre ve " 3 ey a ees oe ae TS . uv
a 4 = is NS | ee ox ae > fe 203 DD
els ; \ aA +e M 8 al + Moy = af a re é oO
“y a = , Sage > — . Pree Oe <5) Be oe 4 PD
ae ww " “oi 4 _ a, a ya ae ee
Ne N fa. ee ‘ U
& . a Pe Gas, el - i & - y ae :
dm ; w : % nim % es : la y= oe yee ~ ote: oO
a ware a So pace ”
* ‘ \ L ‘ i. ry, Pi oN Bo | w aa Sols gar ee ie >
Nee ah Ge ce A Date Segal 9 i eter
rt i 7 - ce . _" yo a or Say 7
2s Se 27 Pe oh a) «Contour Not
na vA) aw. ke ee Op a ei A) Se pea oe ee eal -
, AS? , \l es bas: Oe 4 oe bE
a 7, ts ie Paw ' ro WD oss ee oI a =, 3
ri = ae ene raaN les Btatictice 7 ‘able
: 0 ie ptt, we a eee | ee eS __|
ee hy yin Or Vee ae ae 3 yn a ea a i | WUC: fps 3897 m* |
eS ar a es 26) [weravesee
Rigs || RBM CENOE a ge a ag
Fee | I ee a aS Pe eg Oe
ie ae |, i é ie er ts nf ae Fis ted i fal Site Ay rd aT * Fim |
Aerial map sourced from Nearldap
Seale 1:750 = Lengths are In Metres.
eae ene eee eee Ree ee LF
10 o 0 2 2 4 450 6 7 8 9 WO 10
LEVEL DATUM: 2iTe-Propoced Lots 711-716 8 E a CUENT: SCALE 1:750(A3)
fos ee ceremeeee, | Kenymn Pty Ltd [ane ‘set
Page 16 of 16