L02 To GRC -response to IR

Page 2

balloons on the relevant enclosed plans by QUOD Architecture. Those enclosed plans by Bird Landscape
Design identify the proposed planting regime in all proposed landscaped areas. These amendments
include

    (a) The width of the landscape strip within the site along its frontage to Hilton Terrace has been
        increased to 1.5m. and additional plants have been added and of a species that will further soften
        the development while further enhancing the amenity of the area.

    (b) Additional plants and species have been added in the 1.7m. wide landscape strip proposed along
        both side boundaries. These species, include for example, Backhousia myrtifolia ( i.e. grey
        myrtle), which is a native tree considered ideal for privacy hedges.




Figure 1: Amended Streetscape Presentation by QUOD Architecture (refer to Enclosed plans by QUOD
     Architecture)




Item 3:          Landscaping

Applicant’s Response: The enclosed plans by Bird Landscape Design show the location and species of
the proposed street tree in the footpath. It should be noted that there is a pole mounted street light along
the site’s footpath which limits potential street tree planting. The proposed street is a Callistemon citrinus
(i.e. crimson bottlebrush) and a 25 litre specimen is proposed to be planted as part of the development
proposal.


Item 4:          Building Height & Fence Height

Applicant’s Response: The applicant has amended the plans to better confirm the maximum height in
metres of the proposed development. The enclosed plans by QUOD Architecture have been amended to
show reduced levels on the ridge of the proposed roof forms. It should be noted that the highest ridge is
proposed at 9.9m. on Australian Height Datum (AHD). These RLs are also contained to a red balloon on
these enclosed drawings so as to assist in their identification.

QUOD Architecture has also amended proposal plans to show the 4.5m high blanket above ground level and
the 8m. high blanket so that Council can better appreciate that the proposed dual occupancy building complies
with the preferences relating to building height and associated boundary setbacks in the 2020 Noosa Plan.
These amended plans are also enclosed with this response.


Item 5:          Building Height & Fence Height

Page 3

Applicant’s Response: Although Hilton Terrace is a Distributor Road in the 2020 Noosa Plan and under
AO17.3 in the Medium Density Residential Zone Code, it would appear possible for a solid front fences and
walls up to 1.8 metres in height along the site’s frontage to Hilton Road, the applicant has always preferred
a more open and lower front fence that does not dominate the development’s presentation to Hilton
Terrace.

The original plans submitted to Council have been further amended to make a more open fence as evident
in Figure 1 above.


Item 6:          Site Cover & Plot Ratio

Applicant’s Response: The applicant appreciates to discussion during the online meeting on 25th March,
2022 in relation to the proposed gazebos. This discussion assisted greatly in better understanding Council’s
reference to the term “gazebo” in the 2020 Noosa Plan.

The development as originally proposed complied to both the site cover and plot ratio preferences in the 2020
Noosa Plan providing the proposed gazebos were considered to be gazebos under that planning scheme. It
is understood that the gazebos as originally proposed were not considered to be gazebos by Council and as
such contributed to site cover and plot ratio, and as a result, the dual occupancy as originally proposed
exceeded the preferred maximums for both cover and plot ratio in the 2020 Noosa Plan.

Following discussions with Council on the 25th March, 2022 the design of the proposed gazebos was
amended considerably as illustrated in the floor plan in Figure 2 below as well as those plans, elevations and
three dimensional representations in the enclosed amended plans by QUOA Architecture. These changes
for example include:

    (a) covered areas in each pergola are separated from each other by a 2m. wide space;
    (b) solid walls separating the two areas have been removed and low walls added in their place;
    (c) the powder rooms with their solid walls have been relocated away from the side boundaries of the
        site to a position more centrally located within the site; and
    (d) slatted privacy screens have been added to the replace the solid walls of powder rooms and where
        otherwise possible, along the edge of the pergola closest to neighbouring properties; and
    (e) floor areas of gazebos varied so as to maintain a 6m. wide setback from the rear boundary of the
        site.




Figure 2: Amended Floor Plan for Gazebos by QUOD Architecture (refer to Enclosed plans by QUOD Architecture)

Page 4

Item 7:             Site Cover & Plot Ratio

Applicant’s Response: The enclosed plans by QUOA Architecture illustrates amendments made to the
proposed gazebos following the discussion with Council on 25th March, 2022. These revised drawings clearly
illustrate the amendments made to the layout, fittings and finishes to the gazebos to those as originally
proposed. These amendments, for example, include:-


Item 8:             Building Setbacks

Applicant’s Response: Those original plans submitted with the development application proposed
complying front and side boundary setbacks as stated in the assessment against applicable benchmarks in
the proposal report. Those proposal plans by QUOA Architecture that are enclosed with this response have
been amended to provide additional dimensions and red balloons highlighting the proposed boundary
setbacks.

The proposed front and side boundary setbacks continue to comply with the preferences in the 2020 Noosa
Plan for a proposed dual occupancy development on the site.


Item 9:             Works near underground infrastructure

Applicant’s Response: The original plans submitted with the development application took into
consideration the surveyed location of the sewer main that obliquely traverses the site. The intention was to
liaise with Unity Water at the development works stages to ensure that the location and design of the
development complied with Unit Water’s requirements.

Following the online meeting with Council on 25th March, 2020 Council has advised by email that ‘Council is
happy to condition a subsequent approval from Unity Water rather than providing it with the IR response.’


Item 10:            Stormwater

Applicant’s Response: The applicant’s consulting engineers, ACROS, have provided the attached letter
dated 4th April, 2022 and signed by Lachlan Swann, RPEQ 21223 on behalf of Arcos Unit Group Pty Ltd
(Arcos Group), to certify that the proposed works as shown on drawings 211099-OPW-C-00301 & 211099-
SMP-C-00301, are not considered to significantly alter the stormwater drainage characteristic external to the
site. This certification includes confirmation that this also refers to no significant worsening of the stormwater
conditions external to the site.


The applicant has now responded to Council’s IR for this code assessable development application and
therefore requests that Council completes its assessment of this development application based on the
common material provided with the original application unless amended by this response to Council’s IR.

Council remains welcome to contact me directly on 0409632830 or by email through
[email protected] if Council requires any further information and/or clarification in relation to
any of the above response.



Yours faithfully,




Greg Martoo
Principal

Page 5

martoo consulting pty ltd.



Encl (3)
 A set of 24 plans Issue J by QUOD Architecture and dated 1st April, 2022
 A set of 5 plans by Bird Landscape Design – Numbered LD1 to LD3 & LP1 to LP2 and dated 2nd April,
    2022
 Letter dated 4th April, 2022 from ACROS Group and signed by Lachlan Swann