Council's Further Info Request - MCU15/0111

Officer	:Denis Wallace
Direct Telephone:	 07 53296239
Our Reference	:MCU15/0111
Your Reference	:N/A
21 December 2015

Palm Lake Works
PO Box 10479
SOUTHPORT  QLD  4215

Attn. Ben Prior

Dear Ben

Information Request
Sustainable Planning Act 2009

I refer to your application and advise that Council requires further information to satisfactorily assess the proposal.
application details
Application No:	MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
Proposal:	Development Permit for Material Change of Use of Premises - Multiple housing Type 3 - Retirement & Special Needs (56 Additional Retirement Dwellings) Reconfiguring a Lot – 4 Lots into 3 Lots and Easements
Street Address:	2 - 4 Lamonts Rd, & 19 -20 Trading Post Rd COOROY  QLD
Real Property Description:	Lot 1 RP 215922 Lot 4 RP 215922 Lot 2 RP 165418 Lot 1 RP 165418
Planning Scheme:	The Noosa Plan (16 September 2013)
information required
The information requested is set out below:

PLANNING
Issue – Grounds to Overcome Planning Scheme Conflict
The development involves the retirement housing use on a Rural zoned allotment, with the use identified as inconsistent within the zone.  Grounds to support the proposal despite the conflict must be identified in accordance with S326 of the Sustainable Planning Act.  Grounds are included in the submitted planning report but are not well articulated or supported.

Information Required
Provide summary grounds to support the development despite the conflict with the site’s partial Rural zoning.  The grounds should be provided in a format similar to what might be included in Council’s Decision Notice, should it support the development.

Issue - Noise
The application re-submits the existing noise assessment for the site and it has not been updated for the development.

Information Required
Provide planning comment confirming the development does not introduce any new noise impacts or considerations that should be addressed buy an updated noise report.

WASTE MANAGEMENT
Issue
A waste management plan for the development site is required.

Information Required
Submit a Waste Management Plan in accordance with Noosa Planning Scheme Policy 11 – Waste Management Plans.  The Plan must demonstrate how the proponent will comply with Noosa Planning Scheme Policy 9 – Waste Management. The plan must also address refuse truck accessibility and turning paths within the site in compliance with Council’s requirements.

ENGINEERING
Issue
Field survey details for entire development site have not been provided.

Information Required
Provide updated survey plan encompassing the entire development site and any relevant features and survey data external to the site.

Issue
The provided traffic assessment report dated December 2014 is based on the previously approved development of 120 beds (care facility) and 164 residences and does not address the proposed increase in dwellings.

Information Required
Provide updated traffic report for the current proposal including any additional traffic generation associated with the increased development on the site.  The updated report should also investigate any the required upgrade works on the external roads and road intersections in accordance with current applicable standards and traffic data.

Issue
There are insufficient details regarding the proposed earthworks and finished levels associated with the new layout.  The provided engineering report is based on the previous MCU approval and does not include the additional two lots and changes to the layout.

Information Required
Provide information and updated drawing/s of the development site to indicate the proposed earthworks and finish levels including but not limited to the following:
Relevant cross sections and details to depict the extent and the changes to the surface levels.
Any required earth retention works (eg retaining walls, batters) particularly for the eastern part of the site eg near the proposed club house, proposed basins and the retained house and shed on proposed Lot 101.

Issue
The submitted Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) dated November 2015 does not comply with Council’s requirements and The Noosa Plan’s Planning Scheme Policy 5 (PSP 5 -Engineering Design Standards – Roads, Drainage and Earthworks).

Information Required
Provide amended Stormwater Management Plan and stormwater drainage plans that address/include but not limited to the following:
Stormwater runoff rates from the developed site must be maintain to its predevelopment rates for all storm events up and including 100 years storm event and taking into consideration the retention capacities of dams exist on site prior to the development works.
The SWMP shall investigate the impact of the development on the existing drainage conditions on other properties, including road reserve and parks areas, and make recommendations for any necessary stormwater works and/or mitigation measures to ensure no adverse impact caused to other properties (reference is made to downstream Discharge Locations A and B on the submitted plans).
All underground piped stormwater drainage must be designed to accommodate 5 years storm event with all overland flows be located with the roads and open space area and catering for 100 years storm event as minimum.
General plan/s showing the proposed stormwater system including pipe sizes and the overland secondary flow paths. Where possible, overland flow paths should be streamlined and sharp bends be avoided to alleviate the potential of breach and damage. The plan/s should also indicate any proposed external stormwater drainage works (eg stormwater drainage collection in Trading Post Road).
All the necessary drainage easements on the site in Council’s favour where required.
Clarification regarding the depth of water in proposed basins during major storm events particularly for the central basin (reference is made to Table 3-10 of the SWMP) and any proposed safety measures.

HYDROLOGY (WATER QUALITY)
Issue – Model design- Node Setup
Whist the high quality design of the modelling is acknowledged, there is inconsistencies between surface type and runoff parameters. Specifically, areas modelled for commercial use have been modelled with urban residential runoff parameters.  There is significant differences between soil storage capacities of these two land use types.

Information Required
Remodel with consistent surface type and runoff parameters. Otherwise, provide justification with previous acceptance by Council Officers for the disparity between the surface type and runoff input parameters.

Issue – Consistency with MUSIC Modelling Guidelines
A statement is included in the Concept Stormwater Management Plan which states that “Stochastic generation estimation and serial autocorrelation set to zero has also been adopted.” The MUSIC modelling guidelines recommends for stochastic option to be used and for the serial correlation to be left as the default to ensure that pollutant estimates are more reflective of real events.

Information Required
Update the MUSIC model to be consistent with MUSIC Modelling Guidelines. In particular, confirm default values are used for the serial correlation.

Issue – Adequacy of Pond Treatment Node
It is acknowledged that the application is being submitted by Palm Lakes, whose trademark is the integration of water within their developments.  It is also acknowledged that visual connection with water is important for the well being of the patrons within the development.  For these reasons the pond system within the development is supported and encouraged. However, the use of the pond system as a treatment node within the MUSIC model is not supported. The MUSIC modelling guidelines identified that MUSIC is not suitable for modelling water quality treatment in pond systems whether naturally occurring or part of the development as these are receiving systems and not part of the treatment train. Refer to Draft State Planning Policy for Healthy Waters (DERM 2009). Additionally – pond systems are a risk in terms of potential for cyanobacteria or algae outbreaks and the level of nutrients input is important for minimising the likelihood of such events occurring.

Information Required
Revise the MUSIC model without the pond system included as at treatment node. Otherwise, demonstrate how constituent loads within the waters entering the pond will be at concentrations that are unlikely to cause an algal or cyanobacteria outbreak.

Issue – Cyanobacterial Outbreak Risk Management
The application identifies that an aeration system could be retrofitted to the pond system where needed.  Based on the information provided, it is assumed that situations that could trigger this is where residence times within the pond exceed 14 days. This is very likely to occur during winter or drought seasons. Where an approval is issued, there would need to be a mechanism to ensure aeration would occur as required and where residence times are not being achieved.

Information Required
Provide a Concept Maintenance Plan to be approved as part of the MCU. The Concept Plan must include objectives for detail design as well as operation/maintenance of the Stormwater Treatment Train including all end of line receiving waters on the site – such as the Pond.  The Concept Maintenance Plan is to detail trigger points to manage risks of algal or cyanobacteria blooms within the pond prior to an algal or cyanobacteria outbreak occurring.

Issue – Calculations to Achieve Pollutant Reduction Targets
The calculations for demonstrating that pollutant reduction targets are met where Developed Site Only Unmitigated vs Developed Site Plus External Catchment Mitigated are unclear. The comparison should be Developed Site Plus External Catchment Mitigated vs unmitigated.

The precedent of providing credit for management of offsite stormwater is acknowledged. However, the principle of sending the water to the pond untreated and then seeking credit is not supported because there is concern the offsite waters could contribute undesirable pollutants to the pond system and lead to problems with management responsibilities in the pond system.

Further – calculations have been provided for Developed site only with No Mitigation and a true understanding of the pollutant reduction targets for the developed site only with mitigation is unknown. It would be beneficial for the assessment if the calculations for “Developed site only with Mitigation” are provided.

Information Required
Provide calculations for “Developed site only with Mitigation”.

To reduce pressure on the pond, demonstrate whether there is any opportunity to retrofit a water quality treatment facility within the road reserve or other location within the development so that any activities on the road system will not be attributed directly to any issues within the pond system.

Issue – Consistency of data inputs to MUSIC model with proposed development layout.
The Concept Stormwater Management Plan proposes some parts of the site to be modelled as Commercial Use. I t is not clear in the Music Modelling Detail provided which parts of the catchment have been modelled as Commercial Use.

The MUSIC model set up indicates the park area will have 0% impervious area. It is expected park areas will include pathways, gondolas etc.

Information Required
Provide the Music Model and Auto Cad files or other mechanism to demonstrate that proposed nodes and impervious areas are consistent with development plans.

Issue- Adequacy of Nodes
The bowling Green and Park will potentially include high nutrient applications consistent with an agriculture or yard.

Information Required
Provide commentary to confirm that the Nodes proposed for the Bowling Green and Park will most adequately represent the nutrient fluxes from those uses.

Issue – Invert Levels of Outlet Structures
Invert Levels for all outlet points have not been included on provided plans. It is therefore not possible to confirm that adequate fall exists for low flow outlets of the water quality treatment devices.

Information Required
Detail Invert Levels for outlet structures of all water quality treatment devices, along with surrounding land  surface levels to demonstrate that adequate fall is available for stormwater discharges.

Issue – Depths of bioretention Basins
The design of bioretention basins include for retaining walls exceeding 2m in parts. This exceeds heights recommended in Water By Design Bioretention Technical Design Guidelines

Information Required
Demonstrate how the design of the bioretention basins, including location and heights of retaining walls is consistent with the recommendations of the Water by Design Bioretention Technical Design Guidelines for  depth of filter media to surrounding areas and retaining wall heights.

Issue- Proposed Detail Design Drawing Consistency with MUSIC model inputs
The proposed detail design drawings include proposed weir widths that are inconsistent with weir width inputs to the MUSIC model.

Information Required
Provide commentary regarding the functional consistency between proposed weir width details shown on proposed detail design drawings and  the MUSIC model weir width input data.

Issue
Overflows from the entire modelled catchment are proposed to combine at a singular outlet point. It is unknown whether and required scour protection will be able to be contained wholly on the subject property.

Information Required
Provide calculations in accordance with the Queensland Urban Drainage Manual to demonstrate that the confluence of stormwater at the drainage easement will not cause scour and that any required dissipater/erosion control can be contained wholly within the applicants property.

SERVICES

Issue
The submitted application refers to the use of sewer pump and rising main.  This is contrary to Condition 73 of the MCU approval 132007.2398 which requires gravity connection to existing system.

Information Required
Provide written confirmation from Unitywater that the proposed sewer pump and rising main option is acceptable.

End of Information Request

Under the provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, you have three options available in response to this Information Request. You may give the assessment manager (in this instance Council) and each referral agency (if any):

all of the information requested; or
part of the information requested together with a letter asking the assessment manager and each referral agency to proceed with the assessment of the application; or
a letter;
stating that you do not intend to supply any of the information requested; and
asking the assessment manager and each referral agency to proceed with the assessment of the application.
Please be aware that under Section 279 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009
the applicant must respond to the Information Request within 6 months of the request or otherwise the application lapses.

Should any Concurrence Agency make an Information Request, you are reminded of your obligation to provide Council with a copy of the information provided to that Concurrence Agency.

You may wish to follow the progress of this application online at www.noosa.qld.gov.au .  The “Planning Online” page can be accessed via "Quick Links" on the left hand side of the screen.  A disclaimer will appear; upon clicking “agree”, a search for a development application or property address can be carried out.

Should you have any further queries in relation to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me on ph.53296230.

Yours faithfully

Denis Wallace
COORDINATOR PLANNING

[word/footer1.xml]
Page 2 of 7

[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 7

[word/header1.xml]
MCU15/0111