Skip to the record
Noosa's #1 Council Tracker.

Council archive · source document

Information Response · MCU15/0014

Attached to the e-mail MCU15/0014 - Information Response.

of 3

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

Friday, 10 April 2015

Our Ref: 15010 / Office: Sunshine Coast
Council Ref: MCU15/0014



        NOOSA COUNCIL
        PO BOX 141
        TEWANTIN QLD 4565

        ATTENTION:      Glen Conforti


Dear Glen

INFORMATION RESPONSE

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE OF PREMISES - MULTIPLE
HOUSING - TYPE 4 CONVENTIONAL (6 UNITS)

279 GYMPIE TERRACE, NOOSAVILLE
LOT 2 RP51970

Further to Council’s Information Request for the abovementioned proposal we now respond in full to
each of the items raised.

Issue – Setbacks

1. Please provide amended plans with a greater setback to the second floor.

Response:
Refer attached amended proposal plans prepared by Kidd & Co Designers. The setback to the
western boundary has been increased with the majority of the second floor now setback 3.8m from
the boundary. This will ensure that the amenity of the neighbouring properties eastern aspect is not
impacted. It is noted that the proposed setbacks are consistent with the setbacks of nearby buildings
which typically have a 3 – 3.5m setback, none of which comply with a side setback of half the building
height. The setbacks proposed will minimise impact on neighbouring views within the reasonable
expectation of maintaining consistency with existing development form and setbacks.

Issue – Stormwater

2. Provide a preliminary stormwater drainage plan for the development. The plan must be prepared
    by an RPEQ and include but not be limited to:
    (a) The location of the discharge point and the expected discharge rate. Please note that the
        maximum discharge rate to kerb and channel at any one location is 25l/sec.
    (b) The location of any necessary detention system
    (c) Levels that demonstrate that the filling of the site will not cause additional ponding of
        stormwater on the adjoining properties or alternatively provide a preliminary design of the
        stormwater system to convey the runoff through the subject site
Full text of the other 2 pages

Page 2

    (d) Any modifications or additions to the existing stormwater drainage system
    (e) Any necessary easements.

Response:
Refer attached preliminary stormwater drainage plan and correspondence prepared by SCG Consulting
Engineers. This plan and correspondence demonstrates that an appropriate stormwater outcome for
the site can be achieved.

Issue – Access

3. Provide revised plans that indicate:
    (a) The access driveway located clear of any existing infrastructure or indicate on the plan any
        relocated infrastructure,
    (b) The reconfiguration of the existing on-street carparking that does not result in a loss of
        spaces.
    (c) The gate relocated within the site sufficient to allow a vehicle to wait within the site (minimum
        6m)
    (d) A passing opportunity between the front boundary and the carparking area. It is
        recommended that the passing opportunity (5.5m wide) be provided near the front boundary.

Response:
Refer amended proposal plans and attached traffic engineering advice prepared by RoadPro
Development. This advice confirms that the access arrangements are appropriate and comply with
Australian Standards.

Issue – Carparking

4. Provide additional detail on the proposed “car stackers”. The detail must include but not be limited
    to:
    (a) the design of the “car stackers”
    (b) an indication on the use of the “stacker” (how to enter and exit the stacker)
    (c) an indication from the manufacturer of the time taken to enter and exit the “stacker“
    (d) the “waiting” area for other vehicles
    (e) an indication from the manufacturer of the types of vehicles that can use the stackers
    (f) should the ‘stacker limited certain vehicles provide details on how the developer will limit the
        use of the site to the suitable vehicle types and exclude other vehicles. Reasonable
        consideration must be given to the mix of vehicle types commonly used in the locality and by
        tourist visitors (SUV, 4WD etc).

Response:
Refer attached brochure on the proposed car stacker. The proposed car stacker will be the 2500kg
load capacity, which will be adequate for a typical 4wd vehicle. The garages are proposed with a
ceiling height of over 4m to accommodate 4wd vehicles on the stackers. Being a hoist style car
stacker, access onto and off the stacker is relatively easy and similar to a service hoist, with sufficient
space provided in the driveway for vehicles to wait whilst another vehicle is moved onto or off the car
stacker.

5. Provide plans that demonstrate how vehicles can enter and exit garage 1 and the visitor spaces,
    reverse out and exit the site in a forward gear in a total of 3 movements. Please note that the
    manoeuvring areas must be in accordance with AS/NZS2890.1:2004 for the larger vehicle type
    (B99).

Response:
Refer attached swept path diagrams prepared by SCG Consulting Engineers. These swept path
diagrams demonstrate that appropriate access to the garages and visitor parks can be achieved.

Page 3

6. Provide additional detail on how the “intercom” system will overcome the potential issue where a
    visitor accesses the site to find that the visitor spaces are occupied. The detail must include on-
    site manoeuvring of the vehicle if all of the spaces are occupied.

Response:
Refer attached swept path diagrams prepared by SCG Consulting Engineers. The swept path diagram
demonstrates that onsite manoeuvring of a visitor vehicle can occur even if all of the spaces are
occupied.

Issue – Acid Sulfate Soils

7. Provide a preliminary acid sulphate management plan to address the potential issues associated
    with the filling of the site.

Response:
Refer attached correspondence prepared by SCG Consulting Engineers. This correspondence confirms
that the proposed filling of the site will not lead to an increased risk of acid sulfate soils creation.


The Information and Referral Stage of IDAS has now concluded. We ask that you now provide details
of adjoining owners in order that we may commence the public notification of the application.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me direct.

Yours faithfully
KHA DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS




Scott Sobey
DIRECTOR
Email: [email protected]

Used in these records

About this file

File size
318 KB (small file)
File type
PDF

No other editions are linked here.

Original file

Log in to download the original file

Information Response.pdf · 318 KB (small file)

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”.