16187pf.mv

Whilst the main part of the building has not been moved further away from the
frontage to Walter Hay Drive, the applicant has made amendments to address
this RFI item, particularly the requirement to reduce the prominence of the
development to this frontage (addressing specific outcome (O193). These are
described as follows:

        The north-eastern corner of the building has been truncated (“cut out”)
         to set this part of the building further away from the boundary (a further 2
         to 3 metres) to now achieve a 6 to 7 metre setback at this nearest point;
        The truncation adds both an additional landscaped area and visual
         interest to the building at this location;
        The bio-basin has been significantly reduced in size which has in-turn
         increased the area for landscaped screening considerably (refer
         amended landscape concept plans for details of the proposed planting
         and screening); and
        A simple painted pattern has been added to the Walter Hay Drive
         (WHD) elevation. This is an abstract representation of tree trunks in
         natural colours to act as a background to the (real) planting in this
         location.

Notwithstanding that the proposed development does not fully achieve the
10m setback set out in Probable Solution S193.1, the proposed landscaping
treatment is considered a superior outcome in any case and compliant with
O193 (Specific Outcome). This is achieved through the following measures and
can be seen in the Landscape Detail Plan & Elevation (refer Appendix B):

        Providing for the protection and retention of existing vegetation;
        Comprising tiered, dense plantings at the north eastern most corner of
         the site to buffer the area of the building closest to Walter Hay Drive;
        Providing a mixture of advanced and tube stock planting to allow for an
         initial screening treatment. At maturity, this is considered to relate to a
         70/30 split in terms of visual prominence;
        Incorporating close centre plantings (consistent with the existing
         vegetation along Walter Hay Drive) to provide for smaller trunk diameters
         and thus reducing the opportunity for vehicle crash damage, whilst
         maintaining an appropriate level of screening;
        Providing for a double tiered planting scenario (north and south of the
         bio-retention basin);
        Incorporating a planting schedule which will maintain a consistent
         physical structure and species composition with the existing vegetation
         along Walter Hay Drive; and
        A detailed landscape plan will be provided at the Operational Works
         stage.

To lend further weight to the proposed setback, we undertook an analysis of
existing developments with frontage to Walter Hay Drive. The results of this
analysis are as follows (and illustrated in Appendix C - Walter Hay Drive Setback
Details):

        The building located at 22 Lionel Donovan Drive (with a secondary
         frontage to Walter Hay Drive) comprises a setback of 7.6m; and
        The industrial tenancies at 8 Selkirk Drive comprise a setback to Walter
         Hay Drive of 6.5m.




April 2015                         Empirica Developments Pty Ltd - Noosaville           Page 2
                                                 RFI Response