21172_Information response_270922

Page 2

Response:
Refer attached amended proposal plans which includes an updated site cover calculation plan. This
plans demonstrates that excluding the rear deck associated with the approved dwelling, that site cover
complies at 45%. If the deck is included, site cover increases to 47.5%.

Given the deck location, design outcome and Noosa Plan site cover definition, it is our opinion that the
deck should not be included as site cover. The deck is at grade with the ground level outdoor terrace
and pool area of the approved dwelling. The deck is screened behind a blockwork wall and is not
visible from the east/Clipper Street. The deck forms part of the ground level open space area of the
approved dwelling.

The Noosa Plan definition of Site Cover specifically excludes
… a building or structure, or part of a building or structure, that is—
(a) in a landscaped or open space area, including, for example a gazebo or shade structure or; …

In accordance with this definition, as the deck is a structure in a landscaped and open space area, it is
specifically excluded from site cover calculation.

The proposal complies with PO10 of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code.


Issue – Setbacks
AO12.1 of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code details that buildings and structures are
required to be setback 1.5m for side boundaries. The proposed build to boundary blockwork column
and beam does not meet this setback requirement and is not considered to be consistent with the
character of the area.

Information Required
3. Remove the blockwork column and beam from the side boundary setback.

Response:
The column and beam is necessary for structural purposes to enable the location of a visitor carpark. If
Council was to support the removal of this visitor carpark on the basis that an exclusive visitor carpark
is provided with the Ventura Street unit (approved dwelling), then the column and beam could be
removed.

If the visitor carpark remains then so to must the column and beam. In this regard the design has
been reviewed to minimise the appearance and bulk of this structural element. Refer attached
amended proposal plans which propose a more minimalistic column and beam outcome to comply
with performance outcome PO12.


Issue – Setbacks landscaping
The Coastal Communities Local Plan Code details that development is to provide boundary setbacks
that provide space for trees between buildings. The proposed carpark and driveway along the north
eastern side boundary is not supported as it does not enable sufficient landscaping to be provided to
frame and separate the development.

Information Required
4. Provide a landscaped setback for the full length of the north-eastern boundary.

Response:
While no additional setback is possible to accommodate the visitor carpark, the design has been
reviewed to provide an improved landscape outcome to the side boundary in the form of a green wall
and an increase in the landscape area adjacent the driveway. Refer attached amended proposal plans,
which show the proposed green wall, and demonstrates that a form of landscaping to the side
boundary can be achieved, complying with performance outcome PO12.

Page 3

It is also noted that if Council was to support the removal of this visitor carpark on the basis that an
exclusive visitor carpark is provided with the Ventura Street unit (approved dwelling), then further
landscape area could be provided along the side boundary.


Issue - Streetscape
AO14.1 of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code details that development is to provide visual
interest to the street. Despite the justification provided the proposed design for the three units to
Clipper Street is not considered to provide an appropriate form for the streetscape and presents as a
large building.

Information Required
5. Provide revised plans for the units facing Clipper Street that:
    5.1. further highlight the individual units
    5.2. provide additional identification of entrance areas
    5.3. provide greater offset or staggering to the frontage
    5.4. vary the roof form.

Response:
Refer attached amended proposal plans which provide for increased visual interest to the street
through further highlighting the individual units, varying the roof form and additional identification of
entrance areas.


Issue - Garages
The proposed garage presentation is not considered to meet AO15 of the Medium Density Residential
Zone Code and impacts on the streetscape. The timber cladding whilst screening the garages provides
little variation in treatment of the garages which is sought by the scheme

Information Required
6. Provide revised plans detailing increased staggering and variation to the presentation of the
    garages.

Response:
Refer attached amended proposal plans, which removes the timber cladding to the unit 2 entry. This
further articulates the step between the unit 1 and unit 2/3 garages and breaks the previous perceived
singe plane appearance of the street presentation. The use of timber cladding to screen the garages
provides a more aesthetic design outcome and streetscape presentation, than would the more
dominate appearance of standard garage doors. The proposal complies with performance outcome
PO15.


Issue – Safety and Amenity
AO20 of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code details that buildings area to minimise the
potential of overlooking. Further information is required to demonstrate that the western dwelling
does not look into the three residential units proposed on site.

Information Required
7. Provide revised plans or details that demonstrate the private open space and windows of units on
    site will not be overlooked by the western unit.

Response:
The living and private open space area of the western unit has a 1.8m high screen fence to prevent any
overlooking. In addition, the upper level bedroom windows on the western elevation of units 1 – 3 are
provided with privacy screens ensuring they will not be overlooked by the western unit.

Refer attached amended proposal plans, which show the fencing and privacy screens.

Page 4

Issue - Landscaping
AO10.0 of the Dual Occupancy and Multiple Dwelling Code details the provision of landscaping for the
site. The proposal calculations do not clearly demonstrate compliance with the provision of
landscaping on site with regard to soft landscaping and includes driveways in landscape calculations.
Concerns are also raised as to how the areas at the rear of the three units will be able to sustain any
viable soft landscaping such as trees due to the high retaining wall and fence and limited sun access.

Information Required
8. Provide a plan demonstrating the areas used to calculate open space in accordance with planning
    scheme requirements.

Response:
Refer attached amended proposal plans, which includes an updated landscape calculation plan. This
plan now correctly details the areas included as hard and soft landscape area and demonstrates
compliance with the code requirements.

9. Provide a landscape plan prepared by a qualified person that demonstrates viable plantings can
    occur on the site especially to the rear of the three units.

Response:
A Landscape Plan will be provided with the operational works application. Appropriate shade tolerant
species will be selected for planting from Councils Planning Scheme Policy 2 Landscaping.


Issue – Gross Floor Area
Demonstrate compliance with scheme requirements.

Information Required
10. Provide a plan demonstrating the areas used to calculate Gross Floor Area requirements in
    accordance with scheme provisions.

Response:
Refer attached amended proposal plans, which includes a plan showing areas included in gross floor
area calculation. This plan demonstrates compliance with code requirements.


Issue – Retaining Walls
The submitted documentation proposes earthworks and the construction of retaining structures,
though no details for these works are provided.

Information Required
11. Provide details, prepared by a RPEQ (Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland), of the
    proposed earthworks, including, but not limited to: extents; volumes; existing and finished levels;
    cross-sections; batters and/or retaining structures; stabilisation methods proposed, etc.

Response:
A plan of earthworks prepared by an RPEQ will be provided as part of the operational works
application. The proposal plans submitted provide sufficient preliminary information to understand
the extent of earthworks, retaining and finished levels proposed.

12. Provide additional detail on the proposed retaining walls. The detail must be prepared by a RPEQ
    and include but not be limited to:
    12.1. The type of wall construction (material, foundations etc.);
    12.2. Section plans indicating the location of the walls and foundations in relation to the
        property boundary, the building pad, finished floor levels, driveway, etc.;
    12.3. The structures required to collect and convey existing overland flows that are impacted on
        by the construction of the walls;

Page 5

    12.4.   Any fencing to be installed on top of or beside the walls;
    12.5.   The location of any services, above or below ground, adjacent to the proposed walls.

Response:
A plan of retaining walls prepared by an RPEQ will be provided as part of the operational works
application. Attached for information purposes is the retaining wall plan currently under construction
with the approved western dwelling.


                                    END INFORMATION RESPONSE

Part 3: Information Request has now concluded and the application is now in Part 5: Decision.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me direct.

Yours faithfully
PROJECT URBAN




Scott Sobey
DIRECTOR
Email: [email protected]