Information Request MCU18 0019 · MCU18/0019

Officer: 	Glen Conforti
Direct Telephone: 	07 53296241
Our Reference:	MCU18/0019
Your Reference:	17365
2 March 2018
Arcare Pty Ltd
C/- Project Urban
PO Box 6380
MAROOCHYDORE  QLD  4558
[email protected]
Dear Sir
Information Request
Planning Act 2016
I refer to your application and advise that Council requires further information to satisfactorily assess the proposal.
application details
Application No.	MCU18/0019
Street Address:	52, 54, 56, 58, 60 & 62 Goodchap Street Noosaville 3, 5, 7, 9 & 11 Val Crescent Noosaville
Real Property Description:	Lot 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 RP 138011 Lot 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 RP 151414
Planning Scheme:	The Noosa Plan (3 July 2017)
INFORMATION REQUIRED
The information requested is set out below:
TRAFFIC
Issue - Goodchap Street porte cochere
It appears there is no traffic related need for the porte cochere. The traffic report indicates that emergency vehicle/s (ambulance) could satisfactorily utilise the proposed loading area via the Val Crescent driveway, and visitor drop-off could satisfactorily occur via the basement carpark.
Rather than the porte cochere, consideration should be given to the dedication of an emergency vehicle loading bay on-street within the existing carriageway at the Goodchap Street frontage, clear of the existing bus bay. The proposed Goodchap Street porte cochere raises the following concerns:
Goodchap Street is a major road in the network and vehicle accesses should be minimised;
The planning scheme requires one access driveway for the development. The proposal seeks 2 driveways from Goodchap Street and 1 driveway from Val Crescent.
Information Required
Provide amended plans with the porte cochere removed.
Consideration given to the dedication of an on-street emergency vehicle parking bay clear of the bus bay. Provide plans with the relevant details.
Provide sufficient justification should it be essential that emergency vehicles have on-site access (porte cochere) from the Goodchap Street frontage.
Should the existing bus stop be required to be relocated the relevant approval from Translink should be obtained and provided as part of the information response.

Issue – Val Crescent sight lines
The proposal demonstrates sight lines from the proposed Val Crescent driveway toward the roundabout, and shows that a sight line triangle across part of the site is required to satisfy absolute minimum driveway sight line requirements.  This satisfies the lesser Australian Standard requirement for driveway sight lines, but does not satisfy the more desirable Austroads Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) requirements.
Sight lines are restricted in both directions when departing from the driveway, and exacerbated even further by the fact that the driver of the vehicle departing from the driveway also needs to look across an angle greater than 90 degrees from the straight ahead in each direction.
Considering the above discussion, it is recommended that a more appropriate driveway location from a traffic safety perspective be investigated at a location further south along Val Crescent, about at the slight bend in Val Crescent half way along the long frontage.
Staff vehicle movements
No staff shift times or staff numbers have been provided. This number would help determine the times of day/night when most vehicle movements would occur.
Information required
Investigate and provide amended plans locating the access further south along Val Crescent.
Should the proposed Val Crescent access location be utilised, demonstrate the achieved sight lines are in accordance with Austroads Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) requirements on a scale plan in both directions along Val Crescent from the driveway, and justify those sight lines. The plan should include any proposed fencing, landscaping, and retaining walls in that vicinity.
Provide the mechanism (such as dedication of sight line easements with associated easement wording) to ensure that sight lines required across those parts of the site will be maintained into the future.
Please provide proposed staff numbers and shifts times and incorporate them into the traffic assessment.
Issue –Val Crescent Driveway Levels
The proposed RL of 4.372 on the property line at the Val Crescent driveway does not appear to match with the existing 5.0m and 4.5m contours either side of the driveway.
Information requested
Please provide section plans of the proposed Val Crescent driveway demonstrating how the driveway satisfactorily interacts with the existing kerb level, complies with the relevant Australian Standards and the pedestrian sight splay recommended in the QTraffic report.
Issue –Driveway layout and basement gate
The parking layout plan does not include dimensions.
There is potential for conflict between vehicles entering the basement and service vehicles using the delivery/loading area.
The basement access shows a gate which may restrict visitor access.
Information requested
Please provide:
a dimensioned parking layout plan demonstrating the details outlined in Section 3.3 of the QTraffic report;
a modified driveway layout that ensures that the swept path of the design vehicle (including clearances) remains within the proposed driveway area (refer to QTraffic plan 755_KNG03 SK.02 A);
a plan with the clear delineation of the access to the basement carpark clear of the loading area, so that all users are able to distinguish how that area will operate in an obvious manner; and
details of the hours of operation of the basement gate (open all hours, only open during day light hours, or closed at all times and only opened when required?).  If the gate is to remain closed for any part of the day or night identify how users, including visitors, will satisfactorily gain access at those times. Investigate moving the gate to allow unrestricted access to some car parks and a disabled space on entry to the basement.
PLANNING
Issue –Built form and streetscape
The proposal sits within a low density residential area characterised by single and 2 storey dwelling houses up to 8m in height. Opposite the site is a single storey hospital in a bushland setting.
Although the Goodchap Street elevation is articulated, it is still a large building within a low density residential setting.
The proposal presents a box type profile to Goodchap Street. The planning scheme seeks to avoid box type designs by requiring the use of eaves, roof pitch and a variety of materials to provide interest to the street and achieve a sub-tropical design.
Information Required
Remove the box style design presentation to Goodchap street and provide amended plans incorporating the following built form elements into the development—
an interesting, traditional style, light weight roof form and eaves which presents a pitch to Goodchap street;
provide further interest to the Goodchap Street elevation to break up the appearance of a large building including the western end of this elevation;
sub-tropical design elements;
comply with 8m building height in metres (lift overruns may be acceptable);
provide articulation or more interest to the elevation on the south side of the western building above the driveway near the basement entry to break up the height of this elevation; and
should the porte cochere remain, reduce the height  (and size) to be of a more human scale (approx. 3m to 4m in height), particularly given the structure is within the front setback.
Provide a 3D perspective showing how the proposal would sit within Goodchap Street and Val Crescent streetscape. The perspective should include neighbouring dwellings.
STORMWATER
Issue
The report notes that “A rational method check of the pre-development scenario was conducted to calibrate the XPSTORM model.” There is no further detail provided and we are unable to tell whether the rational method was used as a check or as a calibration tool. If it has been used as a calibration tool, QUDM v4 states:
“Utilisation of the Rational Method, as described within the Manual, may be considered appropriate…as a ‘checking tool’ (not calibration) of numerical models developed for small ungauged catchments (i.e. checking for potential gross errors)”.
It appears the ARR1987 methods and IFD data have been applied, however, this is not explicitly stated in the report.
There are several cross references that point to information that does not appear relevant to the text. One example is that Section 4.3.2 indicates that Appendix A contains illustration of modelled catchments but Appendix A does not contain catchment plans.
Regional flooding, minimum floor levels and access during flood events has not been mentioned.
The SWMP indicates water captures for detention purposes. The planning scheme also seeks that development captures water for re-use for non-potable purposes.
Information Required
Update the Stormwater Quantity Management section of the report to clarify methods, reference current guidelines and statutory documents, correct cross references and address regional flooding, minimum floor levels and access to the proposed aged care facility during flood events.
Amend the SWMP to include the capture and re-use of water for non-potable purposes.
due date for response to information request
The due date for providing the requested information is 4 June 2018. Please advise Council of your response to this information request in accordance with section 13 of the Development Assessment Rules.
If you do not provide a response before the due date, it will be taken as if you have decided not to respond to the information request and Council will continue with the assessment of your application.
other details
You can follow the progress of this application online at www.noosa.qld.gov.au. The “Online Services” page can be accessed via "Quick Links" on the left hand side of the screen.
Should you have any further queries in relation to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me on the number above.

Yours Faithfully

Glen Conforti
Development Planner

[word/footer1.xml]
Page 5 of 5

[word/footer2.xml]
PO Box 141		P. (07) 5329 6500	[email protected]	
	TEWANTIN  QLD  4565	F. (07) 5329 6501	www.noosa.qld.gov.au
				Page 1 of 5

[word/header1.xml]
3