Skip to the record
For the highest quality transcripts.

Original source · versioned page text

2014-12-09 Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda

of 134

Page text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

Very large file: it may take a few minutes

The original of this document is very large (13.1 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 & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                9 DECEMBER 2014


Earthworks
The lots are proposed to be re-profiled to provide level building platforms, which results in
retaining walls up to 1 metre above the natural surface level on some lots. This is preferable, as
the developer will undertake the cut and fill works rather than individual owners or builders, which
often results in inconsistent or sub-standard works and surface drainage issues. The fill is not for
flood immunity and will not adversely impact on the waterway course or riparian vegetation.
Open Space
The Code requires the development to provide open space in accordance with the following:
“Active Parkland or open space linkage to Active Parkland is provided in accordance with the
Priority Infrastructure Plan in Part 15;” or
“Park contributions are paid in accordance with the applicable infrastructure charging instrument.”
The applicant is providing passive parkland and is seeking to provide a playground within the
park on neighbouring land in lieu of Park Contributions for the development. This is proposed to
be delivered through an Infrastructure Agreement as part of the REC13/0146 and Councils
Priority Infrastructure Plan (PIP). Under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, local parks and
equipment may be considered as trunk infrastructure and accordingly applicants are entitled to
an offset in their infrastructure charges. It is anticipated this will be addressed through the
Negotiated Decision process once the Infrastructure Agreement is finalised.
The proposal complies with the Reconfiguring a Lot Code.
Overlay Provisions
The following overlay codes are applicable to this application:
The following overlay codes are applicable to this application:
    Biodiversity Overlay Code – Riparian Buffer Area
    Natural Hazards Overlay Code – Flood Hazard Area
    Natural Resources Overlay Code – Extractive Resource Buffer Area
    Natural Resources Overlay Code – Gas Pipeline Buffer Area
Biodiversity Overlay Code
Approximately 50% of the site is affected by Riparian Buffer areas. The mapped buffers are not
centrally located over the watercourses and do not follow the meander of either tributary, but
range in width from zero to 20m from the top of bank from the eastern side of the eastern
tributary and up to 70m elsewhere. The applicant proposes to rehabilitate most of the riparian
buffers and 10m from the top of bank for the full length and both sides of the waterways,
including the portion of the waterway not affected by the Riparian Buffer.
A portion of the riparian buffer on the south western side of the eastern tributary is not being
rehabilitated, as a playground is proposed as part of the adjoining subdivision REC13/0146. All
lots are outside the riparian buffer and combined with the rehabilitation of the waterway, the
proposal complies with the provisions of the Biodiversity Overlay Code.
Natural Hazards Overlay – Flood Hazard area
Approximately 70% of the land is flood affected being below the level of a Q100 event. The
applicant provided a Flood Assessment that considers land areas subject to 4 current
development applications (being the subject application, REC13/0146, REC13/0148 and
REC14/0008). The proposed flood strategy is not a fully conventional detention system, using a
variety of storage methods to achieve a non-worsening at the site boundaries. The proposed
methods include deliberately “roughing” the flood ways by utilising riparian vegetation, excavating
side storage adjacent to the western tributary, a restrictive footbridge across the eastern tributary
and 2 bio basins. The Flood Assessment strategy’s modelling suggests that there is no risk to
surrounding residences and a proposed non-worsening at any flood affected boundary in a Q100
event.

                                                                                    Page 51 of 134
Log in to download the original file

2014-12-09 Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda(PDF, 12MB).pdf · 13.1 MB (very large file)

Very 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.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.