Original source · versioned page text
2019-06-11 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda
The original of this document is very large (12.0 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 11 JUNE 2019
Matters Raised Comments
Native animals are not included in the
assessment despite local sightings
There is no evidence to suggest the existing
environmental values do not warrant
conservation.
The proposed development directly conflict the
outcomes sought in the UNSECO Biodiversity
reserve.
Wildlife Corridor
The proposed wildlife corridor should be at Council officers are generally satisfied that a 50m wide
least 100m wide. corridor is appropriate rather than 100m, which has
The development will fragment an existing been confirmed by Council’s consultant ecologist.
corridor that links Alma Way to Noosa National The proposed wildlife corridor design provides for a
Park varying wildlife corridor width as little as 28m. A
minimum vegetated width of 50m was requested by
Council officers. Further it is not considered reasonable
to propose other private and unsecured land to act as
part of the wildlife corridor sought. For confirmation,
Council officers are generally satisfied where the
proposed corridor width includes the vegetated Edgar
Bennett Avenue road reserve.
The location of proposed building envelope of Lot 2 is
considered to also constrain the ability for an effective
and ‘best outcome’ wildlife corridor linking to the full
site’s common boundary to Yunaman Bushland
Reserve.
Natural Hazards
The proposed development does not respond It is agreed associated access driveways require
to the steep slopes. significant retaining walls and associated cut and fill
Instability will be created by construction on earthworks on steep land and immediately adjacent to
loose sandy soils. and/or abutting the Edgar Bennett Avenue frontage.
The soil depends on tree cover for protection It is agreed the works on steep slopes has the potential
against erosion. to cause erosion during construction, however these
concerns can generally be managed via conditions of
The development will erode the sloping site
development or during assessment of the subsequent
during construction.
Operational and/or Building Works application/s.
Proposed cut into dunes does not integrate
Appropriate bushfire conditions could be included to
with the natural characteristics of the site and
address the potential threat if the proposed
presents a serious risk to people and safety.
development was recommended for approval.
The proposed development will increase the
risk of wildfire due to the steep slopes.
Full risk assessment has not been undertaken
in accordance with specialist
recommendations.
Impacts on adjoining properties
The proposed development will impact This concern would normally be addressed by the
adjoining properties by: inclusion of a reasonable and relevant condition of
approval should the application be recommended for
Creating overlooking into existing
approval and/or assessed at the time of subsequent
dwellings;
Operational and Building Works assessment.
Creating noise and light spill
Creating a driveway on the western
property boundary
Page 96 of 133
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalVery large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.