08/1787 - Response to Information Request [As Published] · 132008.1787

Page 2

-*s

2.1. An amended analysis of the Gross Floor Area to the Basement and Retail areas on the
lower ground level (Dwg No.Sk4004). The drawing provided appears to incorrectly
position the basement/storey demarcation line, as the line does not correlate to the
natural ground levels for the site. Please amend the GFA calculation accordingly.

Response: The basement level and calculation of GFA has been undertaken in accordance with the
Noosa Plan definitions for basement and GFA. In accordance with the definition of basement, the
basement ceiling height projects no more than one metre above both natural ground surface and
finished ground level. Drawing sk4004 highlights the basement line used for distinguishing between the
basement area and ground level retail/GFA area. This line has been determined based on the 5m
contour level (also highlighted). The area included as basement and excluded from GFA does not have a
ceiling height projecting more than 1m above the 5m contour level. As a comparison to other Hastings
Street developments and previous measure of basement/GFA, a sketch is included in Appendix A
showing the basement/ground level for nearby developments at 31, 33 and 35 Hastings Street also
highlighting the 5m contour level in relation to areas calculated as basement and GFA.

2.2. An amended public access path along the western boundary to provide a minimum
width of 3 metres, improved visibility from Hastings Street, improved visual corridor
toward main beach and reduce potential pedestrian conflicts with the restaurant
outdoor dining area. ‘

Response: The proposed public access path along the western boundary has been amended such that it

is generally 3 metres wide. This is shown on drawing no.’s sk2000 and sk6001.

2.3. The extent of any retaining structures required along the boundaries to the site.

Response: Cross sections have been prepared to demonstrate the relationship between the subject site

and adjoining properties. This is shown on drawing no.’s sk6000 — sk6003. These sections show that

the proposed design levels will coordinate and link with existing adjoining levels and will not compromise

the structural integrity of the neighbouring buildings.

2.4, Reduced Levels to roof areas and rooftop structures.

Response: Proposed finished levels of the roof areas and rooftop structures have been shown on

drawing no.’s sk2004, sk3100 and sk3101.

2.5. Proposed Finished Levels to the Ground Floor and Pool Deck areas, in particular the
terrace and pool areas to the Main Beach frontage.

Response: Proposed finished levels to the Ground Floor and Pool Deck areas have been shown on

drawing no. sk2001.

2.6. A detailed perspective of the proposed roof terrace sunshading structure.

Response: A detailed perspective of the proposed roof terrace structure is shown on drawing no.
sk6004.

gt

 

Page 3

2.7. Proposed end-of-trip facilities (male & female staff showers / change rooms &
lockers).

Response: Proposed end of trip facilities are shown on drawing no. sk2000.
2.8. Proposed refuse collection areas.

Response: The proposed refuse collection area is shown on drawing no. sk2000. This area is located to
the eastern end of the site adjoining the proposed new on-street loading bay and accessible to the
basement service area access and bin store.

2.9. Details of proposed valet drop-off and collection points demonstrating that the lower
ground entry area is adequately sized to cater for this function without any conflicts
between passing vehicles, pedestrians, vehicle door swings, etc.

Response:. Details of the adequacy of the lower ground entry functions is addressed in correspondence
prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix B.

2.10. The size of the basement security gate structure in the opened and closed position
and its swept path.

Response: The proposed basement security gate has been relocated to avoid any conflicts with carparks
and such that it is visible from Hastings Street. The security gate will be a horizontal roller gate at the
end of the ‘porte cochere’ as shown on drawing no. sk2000.

2.11. Amerided. plans demonstrating vehicle sight lines clear that do not conflict with, -

parking spaces as currently shown on Dwg SK2000.

Response: Drawing sk2000 has been amended to ensure that sight lines do not conflict with parking
spaces, Further comment on this issue is included in correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen
attached in Appendix B.

2.12. Demonstrate that a vehicle turning left when exiting the development (eastbound)
can do so without crossing into the oncoming traffic lane (westbound).

Response: An AutoTURN drawing demonstrating the acceptability of this manoeuvre is included in
correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix B.

2.13. A detailed layout plan of the works proposed within the Hastings Street road reserve
clearly indicating any relocated outdoor dining areas, street furniture, carparks, etc.

Response: Drawing no. sk2000 provides details of the proposed street works along the frontage of the
site. These works only propose the relocation of one seating area currently existing at the eastern end
of the site. The relocation is intended to reinstate the existing seating/phone box area to allow a more
appropriately positioned loading bay near the driveway entrance to adjoining 23 Hastings Street. It is
considered that these proposed street frontage works will greatly enhance the amenity and safety of the
proposed development as well as the adjoining property 23 Hastings Street.

an?

 

 

 

 

 

ats

 

Page 4

2.14. Detail sections indicating the treatment and works along the northern boundary to
Main Beach.

Response: Drawing no.’s sk6002 & sk6003 provide cross sections detailing the works/relationship
between the northern site boundary and Main Beach. These sections demonstrate that the proposal will
integrate with the existing adjoining ground level.

2.15. Detail sections through the side boundaries.

Response: Drawing no.’s sk6000 — sk6002 provide sections through the side boundaries.

2.16. Asection through the proposed planter beam.

Response: Drawing no. sk6000 provides a section through the proposed landscape pergola planters.

2.17. A drawing demonstrating the natural ventilation (through flow) capabilities of the
accommodation units.

Response: Drawing no. sk6005 shows the natural ventilation capabilities of the units.

Vegetation & Landscaping

3. A vegetation survey of the mature trees along the Hastings Street frontage of the site.

Response; A vegetation survey of the mature trees has been undertaken and was included in the ;

Landscape Design’ Rationale and. Vegetation Report prepared by Landgraphics dated October 2008
submitted at application lodgement.-

4. The mature trees along the Hastings Street frontage form a significant part of the
existing Hastings Street streetscape. In particular, the grouping of a Cupaniopsis
anacardioides, a Euroschinus falcatus and an Alectryon coriaceous at the frontage to Lot
12 RP908660 and the two further Callitris columellaris on the site are substantial shade
and/or character trees. As such, their removal conflicts with outcomes sought by the
Landscaping Code. Please provide grounds for why these trees cannot be retained in the
development, including an arborist's report where appropriate.

Response: An Arboricultural Report addressing the existing vegetation along Hastings Street has been
prepared by Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy and is attached in Appendix C. This report concludes
that given the impacts on the site from the proposed development and its construction, there is no way
to retain the trees identified by Council in a long term healthy and structurally sound condition. This
report together with the amended Landscape Concept plan (attached in Appendix 0) propose an
approach for new tree planting to provide optimum planting ability to ensure best conditions for tree
growth can be achieved. This will enable the establishment of replacement streetscape planting and
character consistent with the intent of the Landscaping Code.

5. The design of the Hastings Street frontage to the site, in particular the inclusion of the
planter box beams and vergolas, does not allow for substantial plantings to replace the
significant trees proposed to be removed. Please amend the design to provide garden

.

 

 

 

Page 5

bed areas along the frontage that will allow the retention of existing mature trees or
the establishment of replacement trees. Please note palms will not be acceptable
plantings.

Response: The design of the Hastings Street frontage has been amended to remove the continuous
podium planter box beam. While some landscaped pergola planters have been retained along the
frontage to provide pedestrian amenity benefits and design articulation, minimum 4 metre gaps between
the pergola planters have been provided to ensure increased ability for establishment of replacement
trees. The Arboricultural Report attached in Appendix C provides further comments on this improved
outcome.

6. Demonstrate how the landscape proposal will "make full restitution to the landscape
environment” as stated in the Architectural Statement submitted, in light of the mature
trees proposed to be removed from the Hastings Street streetscape.

Response: The amended Landscape Concept Plan (Appendix D) and Arboricultural Report (Appendix C)
demonstrate how an appropriate landscape character and restitution to the existing landscape
environment can be achieved.

7. An arborist's report detailing measures required to protect the existing mature Ficus
trees adjacent to the Main Beach frontage of the site (outside the site boundary). The
report must address the canopies and root systems that extend into the site in order to
ensure the ongoing health of these significant trees.

Response: An. Arboricultural Report addressing the existing vegetation adjacent to the Main Beach
frontage of the site has been prepared by Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy and is attached in
Appendix E. The report details measures to protect the mature Ficus trees adjacent to the Main Beach
frontage. An amendment to the basement wall in the vicinity of the Ficus near the eastern boundary has
also been undertaken to minimize impacts on the root system.

8. Written details of the design and maintenance measures required to the proposed
planter beam, including proposed species and required maintenance regime.

Response: The amended Architectural scheme presents a modified and more rational design for the
planters that will present at the first level of building to the street front of Hastings Street. First Level
Pergola Planters are set in discrete sections emphasizing the articulated street facade. Gaps between
the planters have been configured to support emergent canopy trees to further develop the green, tree
lined feeling of the street.

The planters themselves would no longer be considered to represent a planting beam though it is
intended that individual planters support a strongly themed and unifying planting design.

It is proposed that Coastal Rosemary “Westringia fruiticosa” will be planted in single species
configuration in the planters. Westringia is a native plant species adapted to the coastal environment.
It is salt and drought tolerant and as such is ideal in monoculture applications where fow maintenance is
a necessity. Westringa presents a fine blue grey foliage with a predictable compact growth habit. The
hardiness of the plant assists the management in controlling maintenance required by adjustment of
watering regime, which will in turn be used to suppress weed growth.

Occasional maintenance including trimming, weed removal and mulch top up can be instigated either
through wheeled trellising from ground level (at off peak times such as early morning), or by first level

 

Page 6

access supported by appropriate anchor points and harnessing. It is expected that such access would
be limited to 2 monthly maintenance events.

Built Form / Design

9. An amended assessment of the development's Gross Floor Area based on revised lower-
ground level GFA allocations, correctly identifying the basement area (as per item 2.1).
Provide planning grounds to justify the development's GFA, should the revised
calculation exceed the provisions of the Noosaville Locality Code.

Response: As detailed in item 2.1 response, the basement and ground level GFA allocations have been
correctly calculated in accordance with the Noosa Plan. Drawing no’s sk4004 — sk4007 provide current
GFA calculations for each level of development.

10. Further written grounds to justify the proposal's non-compliance with Probable Solution
S48.1 of the Noosa Heads Locality Code in regard to the number of nonresidential
tenancies, given that tenancies over 100m’ are calculated as two tenancies and the
.commercial frontage of the development does not provide for the retention of the
existing mature vegetation at the frontage of the site.

Response: The proposed outcome with extent of nonresidential tenancies is consistent with the
assessment approach and approvals granted by Council for Hastings Street redevelopments over the last
10 years. Redevelopments undertaken within Hasting Street over the last 10 years include 25 Hastings St
(Tingirana), 32-38 Hastings St (The Sebel), 23 Hastings St and 31 Hastings St (The Breakers). While
these developments were approved under the superseded planning scheme, the same provision applied
in regards to ratio of units to shops. All of these developments were approved with a relaxation of ratio
of units to shops, based on consideration of existing pre-redevelopment nonresidential uses. Since
commencement of the Noosa Plan the only redevelopment approved (yet to. be constructed) is 33
Hastings St (Sandpiper). This development was also approved with a relaxation of ratio of units to
shops. Again the main consideration with the application was extent of existing nonresidential use. All
of these developments were approved with a relaxation of ratio of units to shops, with the proposed
nonresidential area being equal to or less than the pre-redevelopment nonresidential area.

The existing Seahaven development comprises approximately 1,272m? of nonresidential use, with
approximately 942m? at ground level and 330m? at first floor level. The proposed development includes
759m? at ground level which is substantially less than the existing provision. Having regard to
redevelopment approvals granted in Hastings Street over the last 10 years, the proposed nonresidential
use at ground level is justified, being consistent with the established Hastings Street character and
Councils demonstrated assessment approach.

11. Written details of the energy efficiency measures to be incorporated into the
development.

Response: Energy efficiency calculations are quite onerous procedures and would involve the virtual
commitment to finished working drawings, detailed finishes schedules and construction documentation,
before a realistic analysis could be considered. The BCA provides the current legislation for energy
efficiency requirements. Energy efficiency will therefore be a mandatory part of Building Certification.
We understand that the state is currently considering amendments to the BCA to provide for more
stringent requirements. The development will therefore need to comply with BCA provisions current at
the time of assessment. Given that energy efficiency measures are not called for under the Noosa Plan,
no assessment of energy efficiency measures is required or appropriate at this stage.

Page 7

12. Written details of the energy efficiency star rating anticipated for the building.

Response: The energy efficiency rating for the building will be compliant with the BCA provisions current
on the date presented for building assessment.

13. Written details of the proposed water conservation and re-use measures to be
incorporated into the development.

Response: Water measures to be incorporated into the development comprise targeting demand
reduction through:
e All fixtures complying with the minimum WELS water rating 3 star and the flow of each fixture
being not more than 9L/Min.
All WC's and washing machines being charged from the harvesting tank
Irrigation, bin wash and car wash facilities being charged from the harvesting tank
All hot. water systems being designed and constructed in a way so as to ensure the waste of
cold water being uselessly discharged to the sewer is minimised. This can be achieved with use
of continuous flow systems.
The overall target is to reduce the demand per person per day to <140 litres.

Parking

14, Demonstrate how each accommodation unit will have an accessible car space at all
times, given that 16 of the 23 residential parking spaces are proposed in tandem.

Response: The proposed development will have a 24 hour valet parking arrangement for the
accommodation units to ensure that cars and car spaces are accessible at all times. Further comments
in this regard are included in the correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix
B.

15, Demonstrate how an appropriate number of parking spaces will be accessible at all
times for customers of the commercial tenancies.

Response: The correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix B details how
an appropriate number of parking spaces will be accessible at all times for customers of the commercial
tenancies.

General
16. Details of all existing commercial tenancy areas on the site.

Response: There are currently 12 commercial tenancies on the site. These tenancies comprise an area
of approximately 1,272m?, with approximately 942m? at ground level and 330m? at first floor level. In

addition there exists an outdoor dining area of approximately 69m?, Attached in Appendix F are plans of
the existing development highlighted by Foster Designs showing these area.

Page 8

17. Details of the existing approved outdoor dining areas along the frontage to the site.

Response: We understand that the existing outdoor dining area of 69m? is lawfully approved; however
we do not have access to Council records/approvals to confirm. In addition to this outdoor dining area
within the site, a footpath dining area/permit from Council also exists.

18. Preliminary written details of the anticipated construction period, anticipated traffic
impacts due to construction and measures to be undertaken to minimise interruption to
Hastings Street traffic flow, residents and businesses.

Response: Preliminary details of the anticipated construction period, anticipated traffic impacts due to
construction and mitigation measures are included in Appendix G.

Land Development
Carparking

19. Demonstrate how vehicles can pass at the two internal 90° corners of the access
driveway. The vehicle paths and vehicles sizes shall be in accordance with AS/NZS
2890.1:2004.

Response: The correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix B demonstrates
how vehicles can pass at the two internal 90° corners of the access driveway and comply with AS/NZS
2890. 1:2004.

20. Demonstrate how vehicles parked in proposed spaces 8 & 15 can reverse from the space
and exit the aisle in a forward gear in a total of 2 movements.

Response: The correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix B demonstrates
how vehicles parked in proposed spaces 8 & 15 can reverse from the space and exit the aisle in a
forward gear in a total of 2 movements.

21. Demonstrate how vehicles can manoeuvre and exit the site in a forward gear if the
security gate is closed and all of spaces 1-2 and 9-15 are occupied. The manoeuvring must
be in a total of 3 movements (forward gear entry, reverse and forward gear exit).

Response: The security gate has been repositioned thereby negating this issue.

22. Demonstrate how a motorbike parked in the rear isolated parking space of the four can
exit the space when all spaces are occupied.

Response: The motorbike parking bays have been amended so that no inaccessibility of bays would
occur. Refer correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix B for further
comment.

xt:

Page 9

Site/building stability

23. Please provide comment from a suitably qualified geotechnical/structural engineer with
regard to the site location and the possible affects of wave action and water inundation
in a major storm event.

Response: Correspondence prepared by Coffey Geotechnics is attached in Appendix H regarding the site
location and possible affects of wave action and water inundation.

Sewer

24. It is noted that a Council sewer main traverses the development site. The development
plans show buildings located over the sewer. Provide plans showing buildings designed
clear of the Council sewer within the development site, or a diversion of the sewer. A
sewer diversion will require plans and longitudinal sections of the diverted sewer, the
relationship to the proposed building and an easement over the sewer in accordance
with the Noosa Plan - Planning Scheme Policy No. 6. Please note that No buildings or
structures are permitted to be located within a sewer easement.

Response: Plans prepared by Construction Hydraulic Building Service Engineers are attached in
Appendix I showing a solution for diversion of the sewer, should the approved redevelopment of 33
Hastings Street not occur first, which would then result in the sewer in question becoming redundant.

Stormwater

25. There is a discrepancy between the architectural plans and the stormwater management
plans with regard to the location and extent of the retention and detention tanks. Please
provide consistent plans.

esponse: The attached architectural plans and stormwater management plans in Appendix I provide
for a consistent location of the retention and detention tanks.

Works

26. Confirm that separate male & female shower / change facilities and lockers will be
provided for staff.

Response: Separate male and female shower/change facilities will be provide for staff generally as
detailed on drawing no. sk2000.

27. Demonstrate that the ramped public access path along the western boundary is
compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act.

Response: The ramped public access path along the western boundary will be compliant with the
Disability Discrimination Act. Drawing no. sk2000 shows grades not exceeding 1:14 in accordance with
the disability code. This matter is also subject to further detailed design and subsequent Operational
Works application and will require Council assistance to make good the grades.

wow

Page 10

-10-

28. Demonstrate that the Bicycle parking spaces comply with AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic
Engineering Practice, Part 14 — Bicycles, Section 10 and provide details of the proposed
security category level to be provided.

Response: The correspondence prepared by Cardno Eppell Olsen attached in Appendix B demonstrates
that the Bicycle parking spaces comply with AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice, Part 14 —

Bicycles, Section 10 and provides details of the proposed security category level to be provided.

Building

29.4 report addressing Probable Solutions $1.1 to $1.6 of the Building Removal, Relocation

& Demolition Code.

Response: A table demonstrating compliance with Probable Solutions $1.1 to $1.6 of the Building
Removal, Relocation & Demolition Code is below.

14,106 Re-use of buildings or materials‘:

 
 

     

ope ee Te oes emo He

 

er

 

 

O1 Opportunities for re-use of
buildings are maximised

$1.1 Buildings are relocated to another
site and adapted to meet the needs of
users.

OR

$1.2 At least 10% of building materials
are reused or recycled (measured in
cubic metres)

N/A

- Buildings will not be relocated.

Can comply

It is envisaged that approximately 80%
of all materials will be recycled. These
would include Concrete, Masonry,
Vegetation and Metals.

 

O02 The development ensures waste
during any construction and demolition
works is minimised and construction and
demolition materials are reused and
recycled where possible

$2.4 A Waste Management Plan
prepared in accordance with Schedule 9
Demolition & Construction Waste
Management specifies—

a) estimated volumes of waste to be
generated;

b) estimated volumes of recyclables;

C) initiatives to minimise waste by waste
reduction, reuse or recycling;

d) plans showing the location and
details of the waste storage areas; and
€) a description of the type of
containers proposed to store the waste.

Can Comply

A Waste Management Plan will be
Prepared in accordance with Schedule 9
Demolition & Construction Waste
Management and can be imposed as a
condition of approval.

Preliminary details include:
a) Estimated volumes of waste are

Concrete 12900t
Masonry 4000t
Vegetation 30t
Asbestos 30m3
cad 300m3

b) Approximately 80% of all concrete,
vegetation, masonry and all metals
generated from demolition works will be
recycled.

¢) 80% recycling

d) Some waste materials may be
stockpiled on site as part of the
demolition process, but in general no
waste storage is intended on site.

e) Trucks will be utilised to remove
waste from site.

 

 

14,107 Safety.and protection of infra:

wa

EE Be

Sa eT

 

03 Demolition, removal, relocation or
associated works does not result in—
a) ‘live’ or ‘active’ infrastructure that
may present a risk to people using the
site or surrounding areas; or

 

$3.1 Infrastructure including,
reticulated water, sewerage,
stormwater, and electricity are
protected from damage and made safe
to the standard required by the

 

b) damage to infrastructure or other

regulatory authority;

 

Can Comply
All infrastructure will be protected from
damage and made safe to the standard
required by Council.

 

 

 

Page 11

Column 1

   

LTT tai emelel en

 

works,

-11-

perme 1a 2
tiger tele roLalelgy
Pa 6s) < (= S53]

feu
Proposal

 

    

 

 

the site to avoid causing unhealthy
conditions incuding--

a) potential fire hazard;

b) ponding of water; and

Cc) breeding of vermin;

AND
$3.2 Infrastructure is disconnected, Can Comply
capped or sealed induding-- All affected infrastructure will be
a) electricity meters are removed and disconnected, capped or sealed as
electrical wires disconnected; and required
b) telephone lines are disconnected;
and
c) high speed data cables and television
provider boxes are disconnected and
removed;
AND
$3.3 A temporary crossing is provided Can Comply
to protect road reserve infrastructure A temporary crossing can be provided
induding kerb and channel;
AND
$3.4 Any damage to footpaths, street Can Comply
plantings, kerb and channel or roadways | Any damage to footpaths, street
at the removal site, the new site or plantings, kerb and channel or
“between the sites is repaired or roadways will be repaired or reinstated
reinstated, to at least pre-existing .
: conditions, :
(14.108 Amenity and envirorimental.protection™::..- Se ER EE are WL ee tat a,
O4 Waste materials are removed from $4.1 Waste materials are removed from | Can Comply

the site;

All waste materials will be removed
from the site

 

OS The potential for movement from
the site, of soils or similar materials is
minimised;

$5.1 Erosion and sediment control
measures are installed and maintained
until soils are stabilised by vegetation or
sealed.

Can Comply

Approved erosion and sediment control
measures will be installed and
maintained "

 

O06 Vacant sites do not have an
adverse impact upon the amenity of the
surrounding areas.

 

 

$6.1 If a development permit has not
been issued for the future use of the
site—

a) hard surfaced areas including
concrete slabs are removed or covered
with a minimum of 300mm of soil; and
b) disturbed areas are revegetated
using species identified in PSP3 —
Landscaping Plants and Guidelines.

Can Comply

No demolition is proposed until a
development permit has been issued for
the future use of the site

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

Page 12

-12-

 

APPENDIX A
BASEMENT/GFA COMPARISON SKETCH

 

 

 

Page 13

SdvaH VSOON
sevanaumbS SDNILSVH SE

S.dTIZgVNNV

rome ee
’
’

~ a :
“~~ “SONILSVH_NI SLNAWKdO1SZA30
GaA0UddV A ISNOIASYds NO VAD
® NOILINISSO A@ SLNA o3

eee eee ned

savaH VSOON
1S SONILSVH. ce

 

 

SavaH VSOON -
1S SONILSVH Ie

| S¥anvasgs FHL

' (res)
avauvo inanasve

c
1
a

Garus)

meme SEH ng
1

‘
I
i
i
i

waAOSSOuD
‘ONILSIXa

C|

SANIT LHOIS

3avOSONWT

123s

 

Page 14

-13-

APPENDIX B
TRAFFIC RESPONSE PREPARED BY CARDNO EPPELL OLSEN

ja.

Page 15

Cardno
Eppell Olsen

Our Ref: CE005883

Date: 05 February 2009

Cardno Eppell Olsen Pty Ltd
ABN 82 095 614 154

Transportation and Traffic Specialists

Level 11 Green Square North Tower
515 St Paul's Terrace

Locked Bag 4006 Fortitude Valley
Queensland 4006 Australia
Telephone: 07 3310 2401
Facsimile: 07 3369 9722

Email: [email protected]
www.cardno.com.au/eo

RESPONSE COMMENTS TO INFORMATION REQUEST

NOOSA HEADS, SEAHAVEN RESORT,
IN RESPONSE TO INFORMATION REQUEST BY SUNSHINE COAST REGIONAL COUNCIL

Background

Cardno Eppell Olsen has been requested by Seahaven Development Pty Ltd to respond to an
Information Request by Sunshine Coast Regional Council in relation to the Development Application
Number 2008/1787. The traffic related issues within the Information Request referred to Cardno Eppell
Olsen are summarised below with each point responded to in turn in the subsequent sections:

Point 2.9

Point 2.11

Point 2.12

Details of proposed valet drop-off and collection points demonstrating that the lower
ground entry area is adequately sized to cater for this function without any conflicts
between passing vehicles, pedestrians, vehicle door swings, etc.

As with the ‘majority of on and off street parking and drop-off zones, there will be a

‘degree of conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. This conflict is, however, “.. - ~”
‘considered to be minimal and acceptable in the proposed situation as the combined bay . «"”

and driveway access width allows for parked vehicles and two vehicles passing each |,
other simultaneously, as shown at Appendix B. There is good forward visibility of the +
valet drop-off bays for vehicles entering the car park (i.e. those closest to the bays)
therefore allowing activity within the bays to be anticipated by approaching drivers.

As the proposed operation is similar to most on-street parking and drop-off zones, there
will also be awareness by pedestrians of the shared pedestrian/vehicular nature of the
driveway access.

Amended plans demonstrating vehicle sight lines clear that do not conflict with parking
spaces as currently shown on Dwg SK2000.

This has been undertaken within the architect’s drawing, as shown at Appendix A.
Sightlines between vehicles and pedestrians have been addressed separately within the
Traffic Impact Assessment report issued in relation to the original application.

Demonstrate that a vehicle turning left when exiting the development (eastbound) can
do so without crossing into the oncoming traffic lane (westbound).

An AutoTURN drawing has been provided at Appendix B demonstrating that this
manoeuvre can be executed acceptably.

CE005883 Seahaven Resort Design Note Response to RF/ 05.02.2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 16

Point 14 Demonstrate how each accommodation unit will have an accessible car space at all
times, given that 16 of the 23 residential parking spaces are proposed in tandem.

The proponent has reiterated that a 24 hour concierge service i.e. with valet parking will
be provided in relation to the visitor accommodation. As such, the concierge staff will
have access to all vehicle keys within the visitor accommodation parking spaces, and
will be aware of, and able to respond to, requirements to temporarily move vehicles for
egress.

Point 15 Demonstrate how an appropriate number of parking spaces will be accessible at all
times for customers of the commercial tenancies.

The Traffic Impact Assessment report, Section 3, cites the calculations of required and
proposed provision which remain unchanged except for the net reduction of 1 car space
(see Point 19 below for details). This shows that there is an overall requirement for 59
car spaces which is now met by a total provision of 67 spaces (plus 2 valet spaces).
The required figure has been attained from consideration of cross-utilisation of parking
for the commercial tenancies i.e. that a proportion of trips will make use of more than
one of the retail frontages. Additionally, since the original Traffic Impact Assessment
report, the proposed areas for retail and food and beverage have reduced slightly to
454sq.m and.217sq.m respectively.

Also, the proponent has stated that during the hours of operation of the frontage
tenancies, the security gate will remain open. It is also noted that there will be a 24 hour
concierge service in place, associated with the visitor accommodation, should ‘out of
usual business hours’ egress be required from the car park although such late parking
behaviour would be discouraged.

Point 19 Demonstrate how vehicles can pass at the two internal 90 degree corners of the access
driveway. The vehicle paths and vehicle sizes shall be in accordance with AS/NZS
2890. 1:2004.

It is recognised that within an AutoTURN assessment of vehicle movements at the
internal corners described above there is a conflict between passing vehicles of B85
and B99 size.

However, owing to the overall capacity of the car park and the traffic volume likely, it is
considered that the practice of giving way by drivers to oncoming vehicles is safe and
suitable for this development. The layout closely matches standards adopted by
Brisbane City Council for car parks of two-way traffic up to 100 vehicles per hour, The
proposed operation is in light of a modification to the parking bays (described as Small
Car bays 9 and 16 in the previous submission) to convert these bays to motorcycle bays
(shown at Appendices A and C). The result of this modification is additional radii at the
corners to further aid vehicle movements with the additional intervisibility as a result of
the space in front of the motorcycle bays.

Furthermore, the stone partition wall has been reduced in length to provide further
intervisibility between the two main parking aisles.

The modification of bays described above has the net effect of a loss of 1 car bay
provision i.e. two car bays have been replaced with four motorcycle bays. However
within the Traffic Impact Assessment report this net loss is considered acceptable,
owing to the demonstrated requirement of 59 spaces being met by the now proposed 67
spaces.

CE005883 Seahaven Resort Design Note Response to RFI 05.02.2009

 

 

 

 

Page 17

Point 20

Point 21

Point 22

Point 28

3 cJ> Cardno

Eppell Olsen

Demonstrate how vehicles parked in proposed spaces 8 & 15 can reverse from the
space and exit the aisle in a forward gear in a total of 2 movements.

An AutoTURN drawing showing this has been prepared and is attached at Appendix C.

Demonstrate how vehicles can manoeuvre and exit the site in a forward gear if the
security gate is closed and all of spaces 1 — 2 and 9 — 15 are occupied. The
manoeuvring must be in a total of 3 movements (forward gear entry, reverse and
forward gear exit)

The security gate has been repositioned to the access driveway thereby negating this
request.

Demonstrate how a motorbike parked in the rear isolated parking space of the four can
exit the space when ail spaces are occupied.

Motorcycle parking has been amended so as there is no inaccessibility of bays should
adjacent bays be occupied. Please refer to the modified layouts attached as
Appendices.

Demonstrate that the Bicycle parking spaces comply with AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic
Engineering Practice, Part 14 — Bicycles, Section 10 and provide details of proposed
security category level to be provided.

Bicycle parking related to employees:

The security category of the Bike Store, as shown at Appendix A, will be Class 2 as
defined by the AUSTROADS guidance document i.e. it will be suitable for regular
employees. This is provided by way of bicycle rails to which both the frame and wheet
can be locked and by way of a lockable door to the Bike Store with access limited to
cyclist staff of the tenancies. The visitor accommodation will have provision for its own
bicycle storage within the Resident Store.

The bicycle rail system which will be used is the Ned Kelly system i.e. vertical bicycle
rails mounted to the side wall.

In terms of the bicycle parking provision within AUSTROADS, its guidance for restaurant
staff is 1 space per 100sq.m of public area. Of the two food and beverage frontage
tenancies, the first (adjacent to retail R8) has less than 100sq.m of public area when
kitchen size is taken into account as being 30% of the Gross Floor Area (GFA). The
second (adjacent to retail R10) has less than 200sq.m of public area. The guidance
would therefore suggest 3 bicycle parking spaces for staff.

The AUSTROADS bicycle parking provision guidance for shop staff (in this case, the
frontage retails tenancies, excluding the food and beverage tenancies) is a rate of 1
space per 300sq.m of GFA. In total, there are 10 retail tenancies with a combined total
retail GFA of 504sq.m. No single retail tenancy exceeding 78sq.m (considerably lower
than the 300sq.m per 1 space).

Therefore it can be expected that the demand for staff bicycle parking associated with
the food and beverage tenancies would lie between 2 and 10. Given the relative small
size of each tenancy and their staffing numbers, the likelihood of each concurrently
having a cyclist staff member on duty is very unlikely. It is therefore considered that the
provision should tend towards the lower value i.e. a provision of 5 spaces being
considered a suitable supply for the likely number of cyclist staff on duty concurrently.

CE005883 Seahaven Resort Design Note Response to RFI 05.02.2009

 

Page 18

Conclusions

As such, for employees, it is considered that a total provision of 8 would be acceptable
under the terms of the AUSTROADS guidance. The Bike Store, as shown at Appendix
A, has dimensions of 3.4m by 2.8. From the specifications for the “Ned Kelly” type
bicycle storage system this provides space and access capacity for up to 8 rails.

Bicycle parking related to visitors/shoppers:

For visitor/shopper parking spaces, the security category is proposed to be Class 3 i.e.
the provision of bicycle rails to allow wheel and frame to be locked and located within
public view, as defined by the AUSTROADS guidance.

The provision for restaurants within the guidance is for 2 visitor spaces per restaurant,
which would equate to 4 in total for this proposal.

For shops, the guidance is for 1 per 500sq.m over 1,000sq.m. Because none of the
retail tenancies for this development exceeds 1,000sq.m (with the total combined area
being significantly less, at 504sq.m) the guidance therefore does not specify a provision

tate and therefore could be assumed to be a zero requirement. As the rate for

restaurants specifies a quantity rather than a rate, it is also considered that there will be
Spare capacity as a result of the relatively modest size of these tenancies.

In total for visitors/shoppers bicycle parking, there is guidance for the provision of 4
bicycle parking spaces. Modifications to the plans now includes the addition of two
bicycle rails/loops located in the vicinity of the most westerly retail frontage tenancy
which meet this guidance quantum and are shown at Appendix A.

The points raised in the Request for Further Information have been addressed either in terms of
modifications made to the. proposal or by justifications of the existing proposal and further reference to
the Traffic Impact Assessment report prepared for the original application. The issues regarding
accessibility of the car park and particular bays have been reviewed and found to be acceptable in
terms of geometry and driver behaviour. Bicycle end of trip facilities have been compared against
AUSTROADS guidance and shown to be acceptable also. It is considered that there are no traffic
matters which should prevent approval of the subject development. ‘

APPENDICES:
Appendix A: Basement and Retail Plan Provided by project Architects
Appendix B: Drawing Number 5883-201: AutoTURN movement to Hastings Street

Appendix C: Drawing Number 5883-203: AutoTURN Vehicle Movements into bays

CE005883 Seahaven Resort Design Note Response to RFI 05.02.2009

 

F

Page 19

 

vol

ae TAL we

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Z0) 3 OdLL ere (20) TL AINGAS,
Peraneens oe evar] dnows Salwadoud evo: 99S woorsws Gost GOSS G0) av S05 coBS 0) TAL ~1SVOD GOO
OO EN IS

oP galvanosnoo sume a 8 we ° : 000 pro Hoan “pour Gea perooy

ERBSO0D Petals | SoRLOL Syed IS $19 AO) WVON BeENbs YeRID 11 148)

Vv We FE OOS) 5) wT vw 2tu6 E9vE {401 -Xv4 FORZ OFCE (40! 3 ~~ INVESIE
Sa a seocoud Lwosay Noni vas NOLLOMYLSNOD OS LON oy uasig yeddz j
o0z-e8es SaVaH ¥SOON INIYd AYYNIWITA8d ry eon Simmnwse| | CUpse CTS }

on tena] ute su mt 7a t30 : exe]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

Page 20

aT eg aw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sot “‘ ~~ F . 4
ASRS snr dNOUD SaLwaddYd [roa] SR, Ouse: snes WwOeers13Wos "| BREE Sars (20) Devs COLL on a wt Svod eos al
_— _ GaLVAIIOSNOS “supe! Sewers |sum ee eo, Fee ‘9008 RD A440 somRUD, G0 Beg per301
gq eo980930_ I33YLS SONILSVH see BRSn eect : cravoy sings 515 amo WON SeNbG VON 1A wae E
fer os) = on vIL uws| xv 2226 6908 LO} tv L0Wz O1TE aol ww —3NWESIG &
ne] ANaNBAON NunLoLAY 18083 NBAVH VaS a NOLOMRISNOD 304108 vaso yeddz i
L0z-£88S SOVEH ¥SOON INId AYYNINI TY a [see eons] s|  oupesecy CTS i
mone mutped Pe wn a sare |
et nates
Bees
oa
on
.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 21

*. t

OBL se a OA gg ms Pa is
aa

 

 

 

  

Sermaerees ow OVI] iL

NOUS S31LYadOUd

 

~" omcans| scree sane pene 2 . :
SEEeT ers O05: 1 sW98 sy 8 522430728

 

 

  

‘ABNOAS
A LsvO9 (700
TH pa GaLYONOSNOo panes] Recteenemoneren | S283 6 eet ge so68e $ 4 "POOF 658 PEC
eeasonaD pee i REE Sere Loe - PreuO] RING 1S GLE 2OMOL LVON ArO°Ibg UOBID LL PACT
ZZ = at

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SAWO ONDVd WOU ML HWS] Xv | - Zzeg e900 (tal 30v3sO¥2 ObCe (en) 131" INVES
=|_iP)_™ SLNAWSAOW 668 uosaungavy vag Poel ee NOILLONYLSNOD 404 LON _ camnsoal « ussig eddy j
202-E88S SOV3H VSOON ANd AYYNIAINSdd wae uenmmsworae| oupied i
=

ox Song] rm Bre a ee) =o oo ool

 

GERI

 

 

 

Posapeaem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 22

-14- bo

%

APPENDIX C
ARBORICULTURAL REPORT (HASTINGS STREET FRONTAGE)
PREPARED BY LEAF & LIMB HORTICULTURAL CONSULTANCY

 

 

Page 23

   

HORTICULTURAL CONSULTANCY
PO BOX 3, KIN KIN QLD 4571. Ph: (07) 5486 7164
Email: [email protected]

Arboricultural Report
Prepared for:

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd

Site:
9-19 Hastings Street

Noosa Heads
QLD 4567

Produced by:

Mr Samuel A R Cowie
Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
29" of January 2009

 

 

i"
4
le

q

HORTICULTURALJARBORICULTURAL CONSULTANCY » SURVEYS ». TREE ASSESSMENTS» TREE REPORTS « RESISTOGRAPH TESTING

 

 
 

Page 24

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567

 

 

Summary

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd requested this arboricultural assessment and report for
the site of No 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD. The inspection and this report has
been conducted to assess the trees located on the Hastings Street frontage as per
Sunshine Coast Regional Council’s information request, Item 4 to 6, regarding
application number 2008/1787.

Existing Tree Retention

Given the impacts on the cxisting site from the proposed development design and its
construction, there is no way to retain the five trees specified by council in a long term
heafthy 2 and structurally sound condition. The major impacts will.come from big
changes in surrounding soil and the removal of existing structures that have modified
root growth. These impacts are then compounded by the new structures and
pavement. .At best the trees would survive in a poor and declining condition,

therefore no long-term viability would be achieved.

The existing and newly planted street trees will most likely require replanting at the
end of the construction. Currently the retention of the Ficus benjamina isn’t
recotnmended, as the species is inappropriate for the space available and the recent
renovations have caused: problems for the tree. The best option Is to remove and
replace the street trees in Conjunction with designs that increase soil volume,
stormwater collection, and increased planting areas, thus creating a better outcome for
street tree plantings.

Design Limitations

The new. podium with. it: fragmented planter box beams represents only a minor
planting of trees underneath open spaces

> Only the: minimum amount of directional pruning
and maintenance io tnirimise conflict between the trees and the planter boxes.

  

This would consist of the use of directional pruning techniqués to devclop a single
trunk and appropriate canopy up and through the spaces Icft between the planter
boxes. Careful selection of tree stock would also be required so assist in the
development of a single dominant leading growth point. Ongoing tree maintenance
would also consist of careful branch pruning and training to give clearance of the
podium structures over the long term.

The current size of the planting beds appears adequate for the current tree specics
selected by LandGraphics. Also the design should insure that the trees are planted at
or slightly below pavement level and the raised planter beds filled with suitable plant
spccics (not filled to the top with soil). If the trees are planted at the top of the raised
bed this creates future problems with major woody roots impacting the walls and with
carly cstablishment of the trees.

Designing for Trees

Given the Hastings Strect environment and the benelits of good tree plantings on its
amenity, reason exists to implement the best options for tree establishment and
growth.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural ConsultancyO
Prepared by Mr Samuel A R Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 25

Scahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4367

 

 

The site itself maybe used to establish medium sized trees (up to 20 metres height)

that compliment the building and the strect, using structural cells and water catchment #
techniques and designs. For the street trees correct planting spaces in conjunction :
with structural cells and water catchment techniques would significantly improve the

strect tree establishment, growth, longevity and the minimisation of future

maintenance.

Recommendation is made that all cxisting trees are removed due to the inability to
successfully retain them in a condition that would have a long useful life expectancy
or viability.

Reeommicndation is made that the current design with its open spaces between
planter boxes at the podium level is used. At a minimum this would require ongoing
supervision and contro} by an experienced arborist to establish the trees with
minimum conflict between the canopy and planter boxes on either side where
applicable.

Recommendation is made that the engineer, landscape architect and arborist create a
design based on the methods of structural cells, water collection designs, and
optimum planting spaces so as to provide.the Best conditions for new tree plantings
and their future growth on the Hastings Street ‘frontage.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Mr Samuel A R Cowie 29™ of January 2009

 

 

Page 26

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction
Methodology

Observations
3.1 The Site
3.2 The Trees

3.2.1 Tree No4

3.2.2 Tree No 28

3.2.3. Tree No 30

3.2.4 Tree No 31

3.2.5 Tree No 32
33 Proposed Development Impacts
3.4 New and Existing Street Trees
3.5 Architectural Design Limitations

. Discussion .

_ 41 Tree Root Development

4.2 Tree Protection Methods and Roots

43 Design Concepts to Support Trees
4.3.1 Make Space for Roots
4.3.2 Watcr Management under Pavement
4.3.3. Trunk Space

Conclusions

5.1 Existing Tree Retention
5.2. ‘Design Limitations

5.3 Designing.for Trees:
Recommenditions

6.1 Existing Trees

6.2 Future Tree Plantings

References

Page

CDAD UMUMUb dW

t0
il
1
1
14
16

16
16
17

7
17

 

 

 

 

 

Page 27

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 1

 

 

ld

2.1

Introduction

Scahaven Development Pty Ltd requested this arboricultural assessment and
report for the site of No 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD. The inspection and
this report has becn conducted to assess the trees located on the Hastings
Street {frontage as per Sunshine Coast Regional Council’s information request,
Item 4 to 6, regarding application number 2008/1787.

I conducted an inspection of the trees on the 11" and 13" of December 2008.
Scott Sobey of Ken Hicks & Associates supplied the detail survey. Mr
Graham Nottle of Arkhefield supplied the current architectural plans. Mr Rob
Burrell of LandGraphics supplied a vegetation report and landscape plans.

The report details the existing site and the significant trees as highlight in Item
4 of the information request, and where appropriate the street tree plantings.
The aim of this report is to assess the significant trees as per council’s
information request and provide an assessment of retention, possible
replanting issues, and methods to achieve a high valuc treescape on the
Hastings street frontage of the proposed development.

Methodology

Published research by Matheny and Clark (Matheny & Clark 1998), British
Standards BS: 5837-2005, including references from Harris (Harris ct al 1999
& 2004) is the basis of the tree protection methods in this report. ‘Tree
planting methods and designs for urban areas and streetscapes was detailed
using Urban (2008). All other literature cited is listed in the references at the
endofthe report.

Any pruning recommendations are donc to the Australian Standard AS 4373-
2007: Pruning Amenity Trees. A diameter tape was uscd for all

measurements, giving a trunk diameter (DBH- Diameter at Breast Height
measured at 1300mm above ground level) based on the circumference
measurement. Wire multiple trunks occur, the diameter measurement is
based on the trunk just above ground level (as per BS5837:2005, Table 2, page
8). Tree height was measured using a Suunto Clinometer where possible,
otherwise tree height was estimated to within a couple of metres.

The tree numbers are the same used in the vegetation report by LandGraphics
(dated October 2008).

No Resistograph®; Picus®, full laboratory soil analysis or root assessment
was carried out during the time of inspection. Al] assessment was carried out
from ground level, and no climbing was conducted to fully assess canopy
structure thal couldn't be seen from the ground.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29° of January 2009

 

 

Page 28

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567

NR

 

 

ee)

a

Observations

The Site

The site is located on the northern side of Iastings Street Noosa QLD, and is
known as No 9, 11, 13 & 19 Hastings Street Noosa Heads QLD. This report
specifically deals with the five significant existing trees (Tree No’s 4, 28, 30,
31 and 32) specified by council in item 4 of the information request.

The site is highly modified by raised garden beds, retaining walls and services
(eg sewer) for the purpose of tree assessment in respect to construction
impacts. No soil assessment was undertaken to fully assess soil strata,
although it is assumed to be sandy in type although highly disturbed with no
naturally occurring strata or horizons.

The trees have existing structures on the site that have influenced root
development. Tree No 4 has paving over the majority of its root system plus
close proximity to the sewer manhole, and whatever disturbance or damage
that has caused to the roots (see Photo No 1). Tree No 28 is growing in a
raised garden bed with brick retaining walls restricting root distribution (see
Photo No 2). Trees No 30, 31 and 32 are also affected by existing structures
that have restricted root growth and distribution (sce Photo No 3).

   

>
Photo No !- showing Tree No 4 (red) in relation to the paving and various
services that may have caused root damage or uneven distribution.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy©
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 29

 

Ww

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567

faded
IMPORTED
DESIGNER
FASHIONS

V2

 

Photo No 2
factors.

  

Photo No 3- showing Tree No 30 (red), 31 (blue), & 32 (yellow) in relation to
limiting factors.

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural ConsultancyO

Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 30

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 4

 

32 The Trees
There are 5 significant trees that form considerable canopy coverage on
Hastings Street and the site, as noted by council in item No 4 of their
information request.

3.2.1 Tree No 4- Callitris columellaris (c.n. White Cypress Pine)
This species is an endemic tree to the area (Haslam, page 174). This species
may form a medium sized tree, but in the situation on the site with all the
previous disturbance to the root system and distribution, is unlikely to form its
full natural size. This species of tree is considered to have a moderate
tolerartce to root disturbance.

The tree is considered a mature specimen (20-80% of expected lifespan) based
on its size. Trunk DBH was measured at 560mm. Health and condition are
considered below average for the species, most likely duc to its situation (sce
Photo No 4). Due to evidence of major woody roots being severed, it is
assumed that structural instability may exist below ground (see Photo No 1).

   

Photo No 4- showing Tree No 4 with a thinner than expected canopy for an
open situation, mainly in the lower canopy.

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 31

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 5

 

 

 

Photo No 5- showing tree No 28.

Tree No 28- Callitris columellaris (c.n. White Cypress Pine)

The tree is considered a mature specimen (20-80% of expected lifespan) based
on its size. Trunk DBH was measured at 435mm. Health and condition are
considered slightly below average for the species growing in the site
conditions (see Photo No 5). No significant structural defects were noted in
the main trunk or branches.

Tree No 30- Alectryon coriaceous (c.n. Beach Bird’s Eye)
This species is an endemic tree to the area (Haslam, page 17). This species
may form a small sized tree, and is on its preferred coastal sandy soils.

  

lhe tree is considered a mature specimen (20-80% of expected lifespan) based
on its size. Trunk DBH was measured at 230mm. Health and condition are
considered average for the specics, with the canopy one sided due to
competition {rom surrounding trees. Root distribution is severely limited on
the south side of the trunk due to pavement and services (see photo No 3).

Tree No 31- Cupaniopsis anacardioides (¢.n. Tuckeroo)
This species is an endemic tree to the area (Haslam, page 22). This species
may form a small sized tree, and is on its preferred coastal sandy soils.

The tree is considered an carly mature specimen (15-30% of expected
lifespan) based on its size. Trunk DBH was measured at 225mm. Health and
condition are considered average for the species, with the canopy one sided
due to competition from surrounding trees. Root distribution is severely
limited on the south side of the trunk duc to pavement.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 32

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567

 

 

3.2.5 Tree No 32- Euroschinus falcata (c.n. Ribbonwood)

3.3

3.4

This tree was identified by a council staff member, and due to my lack of
experience with the species, this identification is taken as true. McDonald et
al (1984, page 36) documents the tree as a small to medium sized tree endemic
to the coastal NSW and Queensland.

The tree is considered a mature specimen (20-80% of expected lifespan) based
on its size. Trunk DBH was measured at 370mm. Health and condition are
considered avcrage based on canopy density and twig growth.

Proposed Development Impacts
Assessment of development and construction impacts was donc using the
Lower Ground and Podium Plans by Arkhefield (dated 22" of January 2009).

Tree No 4 will have the driveway entrance on the eastern side along with
significant changes to the structures and area around it in the form of paving
and building construction.

‘Tree No 28 will have the existing raised garden bed all but removed with
exteisive paving on the easter side and building construction on the northern
side.

Trees No 30, 31 and 32 will have the raised garden bed removed with building
construction on the northern side and paving all around, including level
changes.

New and Existing Street Trees.

Recent renovations of Hastings Street have resulted in new strect trees being
‘ existing : street trees having extcnsive changes around them.

ily’ limitations ard ‘construction impacts are bécoming evidént with the

new landscaping and renovations, although one‘part shows what good design

may achieve.

 
  

 

The:cxisting Ficus benjamina is currently suffering from construction impacts
that occurred during the Hastings Strect renovation. {t appears that the
previous soil levels have been lowered and damage done to the root system
(see photo No 6). This species has a high tolerance to root disturbance, but
canopy coverage, foliage density and twig dieback (see photo No 7) indicate
that whatever construction occurred around the tree did considerable damage
and/or has severcly reduce or restricted the root system.

The new strect tree plantings have been planted into less than optimal spaces
in the pavement with trec grates. Assessment of the spccics, their cstimated
trunk sizes at maturity and the required zone of expansion for major woody
roots and trunk buttressing found that the plaiiting areas in the pavement are
less than optimum for future growth. Added to that the installation of tree
grates has already started to cause conflict and limitation to one tree (see photo
No 8).

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29” of January 2009

 

 

 

Page 33

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 7

 

    
    

 
   

a ° 4
ction around the Ficus benjamina.

* ae

Photo No 6- showing the new constru

- aa r
Photo No 7- showing the extremely thin

canopy of the Ficus benjamina.

   

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 34

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 8

 

   

PEE cad : wer ‘:
Photo No 8- showing the trunk of a newly planted street tree already
contacting the tree grate.

The one design and planting arca that shows some understanding of the
requirements for street tree planting is on cither side of a sitting arca (see
photo No 9). This area has a wide garden bed with adequate area for zone of
expansion and water penetration into the soil. One minor problem is that both
trees used in the area are being suppressed by surrounding trees, therefore
growth and canopy development will be a future problem (see Photo No 10).

wo
In

Architectural Design Limitations

Assessment of the architect’s design for the podium Icvel shows that the
podium planting beam has been broken to allow ground Ievel trees space to
grow up and through. Also the tree planting areas have been expanded to
allow for the zone of expansion around the trunk base.

Council’s issue with palms is also limiting and outside of the subtropical
landscaping that is representative of Hastings Strect.

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy©
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 35

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 9

 

 

Photo No 10- showing the lower branches of the Ficus benjamina causing
suppression on the new street tree.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy©
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 36

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Sureet Noosa QLD 4567 10
|

   

     

i ite ae : i
Photo No /1- showing the raised planter beds used for tree planting on the site
to the cast, which is not a good design for trees.

4 Discussion

4.1 Tree Root Development
Based on the research conducted, the majority of a trees root system will occur
in the top metre of soil (Perry 1982. page 198). The major woody roots
(25mm to >300mm in diameter) of a tree will radiate horizontally through the
top 200 to 300mm of soil, and have a distinct swelling or buttressing of the
trunk where they attach (Perry 1982, page 201), as seen in tree No 48 and 57
on the beach reserve side. In situations with sandy soils, roots will develop
deeper into the top 1 metre of soil, and also develop sinker roots that look for
moisture deeper within the soil strata.

These major woody roots will decrease in diameter between | to 4 metres
{rom the trunk before forming an extensive network of roots 10 to 25mm in
diameter. The larger the tree, then subsequently the larger the distance that the
major woody roots will extend from the trunk, before forming into rope roots.

Roots are opportunistic in nature, only growing where adequate supplies of
water, nutrients and oxygen are available. In this regard the presence of
structures around a tree will influence root distribution, sometimes limiting
root growth or funnelling root growth in one direction, thus make retention on
construction sites a much more difficult procedure.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

Page 37

Seahaven Development Pty Lid- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 11]

 

 

42 Tree Protection Methods and Roots
Tree protection involves the minimising of damage to the tree’s root and
vascular system during activities such as construction or installation of root
barriers, thus reducing the chance of tree health decline or death, and the
possible damage to the structural stability of the tree from root damage.
Failure to maintain a minimum tree protection zone may result in declining
long term vigour, health and structural stability in a tree on a construction site.
All trees to be retained on a construction site should have protected root zoncs
that are measured off the DBH of the trunk via the Matheny & Clark (Harris
2004, & Matheny & Clark 1998) formula or the use of the British Standards
(BS 5837:2005) for protecting trees, with knowledge of the critical root zone
which takes into account structural stability issues.

Using the Matheny & Clarks method a previous understanding of a tree
species tolerance to disturbance (good, moderate, or poor) is required. For
example, the Callitris columellaris is a tree of moderate tolerance and would
require a 5.22 metre radius protection zone for Tree No 28 (smaller of the two
on site). This distance calculation is the same as BS 5837:2005. Assessment
of the impacts indicates that nothing near this could be achieved.

Under BS 5837-1991 this radial distance could be reduced by 1/3 for 120
degrees of the total circle, but under BS 5837:2005 an offset of the distance up
to 20% in one direction maybe undertaken on open grown trees. Given that
the trees are already in situations where root distribution has been modified by
surrounding structures, this highly unlikely to be achicvable.

The final method of critical root zone is used to calculate the bare minimum
protection zone required to stop damage to the major woody roots and
structural root ‘formations that maintain tree stability. Critical root zone is
based on the triink DBH times by 5; thus giving a minimum of 2.18 metres.
Given that even this minimum distance will be hard to maintain, even all
around cach of the five trees, therefore long term health and structural
instability will result for all five trees.

43 Design Concepts to Support Trees
The establishment of trees on a site must take into account the requirements
for tree growth, that being adequate soi! volume to allow root growth and
spread, adequate above ground space to allow canopy spread, water
penctration into the root zone, and sufficient space around.the trunk to allow
expansion of the trunk base flare. This will be influence further by the specics
of tree, its canopy habit, and eventual size.

4.3.1 Make Space for Roots
Roots support the tree and soil is the primary source of nutrients for tree
growth, therefore adequate soil volume must be made to support root growth
and distribution. In the situation with the Hastings Strect frontage of the site,
adequate soil volume must be provided for tree growth ifa reasonable
oulcome is required. Image No 1 (Urban 2008, page 295, figure 2.6.3) shows
the outcomes from limited soil volumes on iree growth and longevity.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticuftural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

bee

Page 38

w

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

128 cu Sot
pt

 

 

 

 

 

Image No |- showing Figure 2.6.3 & 2.6.4 from Urban 2008 and the affects ~
long term of limited soil volume. oe

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticuftural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samuc! Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

Page 39

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 13

 

 

There are several methods to improving or increasing soil volume for root

growth and distribution:

1) Root Paths- done by installing narrow trenches filled with strip drain .
boards and good soil to guide roots underneath pavement to areas of :
natural soil with adequate volume.

2) Soil Trenches- arc long cnches connecting between trees in pavement
areas with a structural stab over the trench to support pavement.

3) Soil Vauits- arc cnclosurcs that keep roots contained and separated from
infrastructure and having a slab over the top to support pavement.

4) Sand or Amsterdam Soil- is a coarse sand with added clay and organic
matter, allowing compaction for pavement support, but allowing for some
settlement of pavement overtime. Water supply and design issues are
extremely important in this method, including the acceptance of pavement
settlement.

5) Structurat Soils-are a mix of rock and soil with a high air filled porosity
that allow compaction for pavement but still having adequate air for root
growth. These soils require design by an cngincer working in conjunction
with a soil scientist that is experienced with structural soils.

6) Sand/Aggregate Structural Soils- are a new method currently being used
in Germany. They are a combination of the Amsterdam and structural soil :
methods. “

7) Suspended Pavements/Structural Cells- this:method aims to suspend the .
pavement above the soil using a pier and beam system, either engineer
designed or a prefabricated system. An example of a prefabricated system
is the structural cell system by DeepRoot Partners LP
(yveww.deeproot.com) as shown in Diagram No 1 and 2 (Urban 2008, page
308, figures 2.6.30 & 2.6.31).

 

 

age

  
  
 
 

Soil Votume -
Tree Opening - 140 CF a

Structural Cells - 1380 CF i
1820 CF
.
Figure 2.6.30. Structural cells are Ine vedy systara that can e
provide sustainable soil valuine wilh Ihe space of a typical . 3

  

ark solscapre,

 

 

 

 

Diagram Na I- showing the use of structural cells to improve soil volume ~
(Urban 2008, page 308). CF stands for cubic feet.

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural ConsultancyO
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009 . y

Page 40

 

 

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 : 14
Figure 2.6.31, Structural cells. THON, oe
a. Detail. soils,
The

4.3.2, Wa

Y, Starctural calls fillod with soil sudable iar trees,

     
 

  

   
 

 

Leave air space above sai anc! del cell deck, rests ©

2. Apprepate sub base wilh dram line anel ty

3. Gooprid curtain and compacted backfill alone dent 0}

aQuier perimeter of cells. quiren

4, Gootextiie on top af coll deck. Wons.

5. Aapre no COSA dad paving. Hines 1

b. Structural-cell frames can be stacked ip to tires beyond
Javers higtlt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Diagram No 2- showing typical design of structural cells on a site (Urban
2008, page 308). Note design may change based on site, design constraints
and subsoil types.

   
  

 

1 agemicnt: Under Pavement
“urban areas is'a litniting factor when it comes to water
ration inihe root zones of trees. The run off caused by hard impenetrable
surfaces éreates many problems for engineers in the form of stormwater. Ifa
tree has its roots and surrounding soil covered by hard surface that prevents
water penetration, then irrigation or the artificial supply of water to the roots
needs to be addressed.

Two methods are available to improve water penetration into the root zone and

soil surrounding a tree, with the added benefit of reducing stormwater runoff.

All systems have constraints (eg sediment) that need addressing in the design

stage.

1) Porous Paving- is a pavement type that allows water to penetrate into the
soil underneath (sec Diagram No 3). Porous concrete is a particularly
good method that is rarely used in Australia, but is detailed in the book
Porous Pavements by Bruce K Ferguson (USA).

2) Water Harvesting- is the use of surface drains to catch and funnel surface
runoff in the soit underneath (see Diagram No 4). This system is
particularly symbiotic with structural cells used to increase soil volumes.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural ConsultancyO
Preparéd by Samuel! Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

nA

it

Page 41

 

Scahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Strect Noosa QLD 4567

 

 

 

Figure 2.6.39. Prrovs paving, svil renches and

 

 

Diagram No 3- showing the use of porous paving in street tree plantings
(Urban 2008, page 312, fig 2.6.39).

15

 

that culleet surface water and bring dt 1 the feat zene
+ :
od soot paths, Bor saris onder suspended conceete paving, sect as structunil cells or

e

li trenettes. small intets can be installes! ina the pavement dat empriy disectly ina the aic
Papace above the soil

kal

 

 

ain enhance tbe principle Figure 2.6.40, Irth
fees atred vecaleeretsy: Lines,

    

      

 

 

 

 

 

 

Diagram No 4- showing drainage designs to catch and direct stormwater
runoff into the soil (Urban 2008, page 313, fig 2.6.40).

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®

Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

 

 

Page 42

Scahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Strect Noosa QLD 4567 16

 

 

4.3.3 Trunk Space

5.1

5.2

As teces growth so to does trunk girth and the development of trunk flare at the
base, and in some situations the development of buttress roots. Typically the
trunk flare will be 2 to 3 times the diameter to the DBH on a mature tree,
therefore a tree with a 500mm DBH will have a trunk flare of up to |.5 metres.
Added to this equation is the zone of rapid taper that develops from the major
woody roots. The zone of rapid taper will be influenced by both tree species
and soil type on the site.

The interaction between the trunk flare and surrounding pavement is usually
the main cause of disturbance and uplifting of the pavement. Designs in the
opening sizes in the pavement for trec planting and the type of pavement
around those spaces are critical to minimising future conflicts. An example is
a design that allows removal of pavement to accommodate trunk expansion
over time (Urban 2008, page 273-4, incl Fig 2.5.24).

Included in this requirement for design of tree plantings, is the use of tree
grates. Tree grates are generally considered a major problem for the long-term
strect tree (sec photo No 8). Recently some citics (New York, USA) have
started to ban the use of tree grates.(Urban 2008, page 276-8).

Conclusions

Existing Tree Retention

Given the impacts on the existing site from the proposed development design
and its construction, there is no way to retain the five trees specified by
council in.a long term healthy and structurally sound condition. The major
impac will come from big changes in surrounding soil and the removal of

é ave'modifiéd root growth. These impacts are then
coimipoun ed by thet fiw strictures arid pavement. At best the trees would
sutvive,in a poor and decliding condition, therefore no long-term viability
would be achieved.

 
    

The existing and newly planted strect trecs will most likely require replanting
at the end of the construction. Currently the retention of the Ficus benjamina
isn’t recommended, as the species is inappropriate for the space available and
the recent renovations have caused problems for the tree. The best option is to
remove and replace the strect trees in conjunction with designs that increase
soil volume, stormwater collection, and increased planting arcas, thus creating
a better outcome for street tree plantings.

Design Limitations

The new podium with its fragmented planter box beams represents only a
minor limitation to tree establishment. The planting of trees underneath open
spaces between planter boxes would require only the minimum amount of
dircctional pruning and maintenance to minimise conflict between the trees
and the planter boxes.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

ae

Nae

Page 43

vk

Scahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 17

 

 

5.3

6.1

6.2

This would consist of the usc of directional pruning techniques to develop a
single trunk and appropriate canopy up and through the spaces left between
the planter boxes. Careful selection of tree stock would also be required so
assist in the development of a single dominant leading growth point. Ongoing
tree maintenance would also consist of careful branch pruning and training to
give clearance of the podium structures over the long term.

The current size of the planting beds appears adequate for the current tree
species selected by LandGraphics. Also the design should insure that the trees
are planted at or slightly below pavement level and the raised planter beds
filled with suitable pliant species (not filled to the top with soil). If the trees
are planted at the top of the raised bed this creates future problems with major
woody roots impacting the walls and with carly establishment of the trees.

Designing for Trees

Given the Hastings Street environment and the benefits of good tree plantings
on its amenity, reasons exist to implement the best options for tree
establishment and growth.

The site itself maybe used to establish medium sized trees (up to 20 metres
height) that compliment the building and the street, using structural .ceils-and
water catchment techniques and designs. For the street trees correct planting
spaces in conjunction with structural cells and water catchment techniques
would significantly improve the street tree establishment, growth, longevity
and the minimisation of future maintenance.

Recommendations

 

inability 16 sticce: sfilly retain them in a condition that would have a long
useful life expectancy or viability.

Future Tree Plantings

Recommendation is made that the current design with its open spaces between
planter boxes at the podium Icvel is used. Ata Minimum this would require
ongoing supervision and control by an experienced arborist to establish the
trees with minimum conflict between the canopy and planter boxes on cither
side where applicable.

As to the overall tree plantings, the use of structural celfs to provide optimum
soil volume, water collection designs, and optimum planting spaces to
accommodate trunk flare will provide the best conditions for tree growth.
Recommendation is made that the engineer, laridscape architect and arborist
create a design based on these methods.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticuftural Consultancy©
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

s

Page 44

aes

Scahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 18

 

 

If anyonc has questions relating to this report, please contact me and [ will be happy
to answer them.

Yours Sincerely

 

Samucl A R Cowic

Diploma of Hosticulture (Ryde), Diploma of Arboriculture (Ryde)
Member A.LLH., H.LA., 1S.A., LA.C.A. & QAA.

Qualified and Practicing Arborist/Horticulturist.

Since 1986

QTRA Licensed User No 787
© COPYRIGHT RESERVED: Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy, 2009.

Disclaimer and Assumptions:

Care hag been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verificd as far as possible.
However Leaf & Limb-Horticultural Consultancy can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of
information provided by ethers,

Unless stated otherwise:

© — Information contained in this report covers only the trees that were examined and reflects the condition
of the trees at the time of inspection, and
© Theil inspection was lifnited to the visual examination of thy subject trees without dissection, excuvation,
probing or coring, unlessrothe v y stited within this report. There is no warranty or guaranice.
cs i that prob s or deficiencics of the subject trees may nat arise in the future.

  
  
     

vir, local governmicnt or regulatory authority that has so requested a

   
 

 

 

ef

 

tion Mentioned within this report, and has a tegal right to request a ve fem gy
copy. bcaf & Limp Horticittuiral Consu ‘reserves-the right forward a full copy of this report anto any Tocal Mae *
government or reputulary authority that s it for making an assessment of thc irces on the site. . x
‘This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client and Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy:
accepts no responsibility for its use by other persons. The client acknowledges that this report, and any options, ard i” ‘
advice or recommendations expressed or given in il, are based of the information supplicd by the client and on the oe \
data inspections, measurcments and analysis carticd out or obtained by Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultaney on
and referred to in the report. ‘The client should rely on the report, and on its contents, only to that extent. ° ‘
oh
ae
1a
ye
Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy® .
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009 oe
tk
ane

Page 45

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 19

 

 

References;

Allaby, Michael (1998). Oxford Dictionary of Plant Scicnces (New Edition). Oxford
University Press, Oxford.

AS4373-2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees. Standards Austratia.

Bailey, Jill (1999). Penguin Dictionary of Plant Sciences (New Edition). Penguin
Books, London.

BS 5837:2005, Guide for Trees in relation to construction. Standards Australia.
BS 5837:1991 Guide for ‘T'rees in relation to construction. Standards Australia.

Hanson, Peter (2000). Dictionary of Botany. Golden Books Centre SDN. BHD, Kuala
Lumpur.

Harris, R.W; Clark, J.R; & Matheny, N.P (1999 & 2004) Arboriculture; Integrated
Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs & Vines 3" Edition, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey.

Haslam, S. (2004) Noosa’s Native Plants. Noosa Integrated Catchment Assoc Inc.
Tewantin QLD, Australia.

Matheny, N.P. & Clark, J.R. (1998) Trees & Development: A Technical Guide to
Preservation of Trecs During Land Devciopment. International Society of
Arboriculture, Savoy, Illinois.

Perry, Thomas O (1982). The:Ecology of Tree Roots and the practical significance
thereof. Journal of Arboiiculture, Volume 8; No 8, ‘Page 197-211.

Urban, 1. (2008) Up By Roots, Healthy Soils and Trees in the Built Environment.
International Society of Arboriculture, Illinois, USA.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samucl Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

 

 

Ms

Mm

sr

Page 46

   

aa,

-15-

wi URE te ER

APPENDIX D
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN PREPARED BY LANDGRAPHICS

 

 

 

 

Page 47

] —
———
¢

 

 

: =f i
Se
ee, |

(Er et

Ey The

Sie. Tee |

 

 

MRA TS PraeeE 19850 9. 4 ‘3
¥ ACH yniinihies y

(fll > Me! (Aer mp

} CoMtg tops st

nl
> ! Pee FST
Seite

WR MUDOON Ce! MDP
f
ai SoS a |
M0 Ci Ziel et) DP —
7 y '
*

er |

     

Mad Lae wep 2 2 ae
LL p i . ~ ‘ |

 

“SUNDA prot a
OL pasodoud aue savor FOO peurrrariais JepKuié 2s UpaIB aocuy
SAUDZ JOY JEINPNMYS UBaIy IoGgiy

 

SANIT HSuy Jay 350NV1
SOIHdVUOGNVI

p

 

Page 48

First Light NOOSA

Landscape Masterplan

   

LANDGRAPHICS

wwwandgraphics.com.au

Approach to landscape provision

The situation with the Sealtaven site is somewhat unique in Hastings
Street in that it represents a single development lot of extensive
frontage. Side boundary setbacks.that provide for landscape
separation and buffer strips as required by the:town plan occurat
either end of the site though considerably separated by a frontage of
some 30 metres,

The architectural template recognises the virtue of scale and
articulation in presenting a modulated facade with individually
Presented (though integrated through design) discrete buildings
over a common basement, Consequently much of the sites
landscape treatments are to podium. Measures for development of
Innovative, high quality and sustainable planting areas within. these
podium areas are therefore integral to the (andscape design
Approach adopted throughout this development,

While the detailed caléulations arid explanations are reported
elsewhere, this design rationale attempts to demonstrate
mechanisms that have been adopted inthe design to facilitate the
delivery of 3 project that meets or exceeds =

| ne ni ,
a TUTTE

“The expectations of the landscape codes as expressed in the
scheme, “Visual character established within the Hastings street
residential and commercial precinct " Broader community aspirations
as. demonstrated in thé “attributed! community benefit’ referenced
within the landscape plans

nee EE

Sores

In addressing acceptable measures of the planning scheme. the
landscape design takes a threefold approach to deliver the qualityof
hard and soft landscape features that are expected to accompanya
development of this calibre in this unique position within the
Hastings Street precinct.

In short these objectives are summansed as follows:

|, The incorporation of innovative horticulturaily responsive
construction measures to ensure that podium planting areas can
function as true “deep planting areas” supporting advanced and
multi-tiered planting combinations in situations that meet or
exceed the planting opportunities afforded in the Hastings Street
frontage.

 

 

2, The multi-purpose or layering of design (code) requirements, such
thatthe pedestrian access to.the westem boundary designed.as a
floating boardwalk.can function to facilitate active street frontage,
permeability, public pedestrian, connectivity to the beach as well
as fulfilling requirement for water sensitive urban design (water
table replenishment, nutrient stripping, runoff control and the like)

h
}
(|
4
iM
a
u
rs
a
t
A
4
4
d
I
he
a
4
s
;
4
.
i
cf
/
5
"
>
J
:
5
be!

3. The presentation of quality soft landscape elements in profile
areas such that they.contribute significantly ta the visual amenity,
the micro climatic conditions and the general feel of the of the
Hastings Street and beachside precincts adjoining,

 

Page 49

Landscape Vision

   
  
 

 

 

 
 
 
 

  
 

SHUABS AND TUFTING PLANTS FERNS AMD GROUNDC OVERS
Jandtcabing bes teen diestgred ta northe vellvery ot Botanteal marie Botanical name Commies name. Botanical asme © (ran rare
She Noosa eaperience, by ressrecting the moxtiny Noose ca ret ihet Serene btpwgech ste ulertg Pree LAY Piiricetiun bifmengen 2 horn Epes
Character nd \etegratinig incScape and built form through preruingy lasts pL Demis "Sifwws Jit lee Seah Pharycenun Togo Fen STONE
IBAVAIWE GENET = Corwen cree iene | rare Mirmatane = Myrerunr Ls {pod cuping & slats)
aT S! Ltr
Caretta comdenition of the pubte; oman: w eument in the eaten Gere ee eee ES L— fonate ares}
Creral site desigit by maintaming generous tpotpath walthe Pry thank
aOR MASH Ve Stet and prowding an additronal Pry ll kas TIMBER boardvalk)
“ermlueway! [othe Meach Helin Hast ret, Active: wr Cercle Srcat TURE | . iraterlayaul! datas!
frontage wy Fasuie Direet will Be Intreased liting the Ernie Zaye “Soo galing
Vibraney of rhiv pur al the aurestscape
Presarvetor obawistirig trees on
inberna) langsacnis have to invite the Nogsu

    

northern ule of develogmen:
schernes and the . maintains beikfslde charactor
prowsion of large mepans: GO Witter edges, 1
Thm essence of the Noosa Hfestyleis playat the watery
edge’ Mis “recreate at the wuthors edge’ theme cemrpdiedt
rouktout

 

Dap planting scree utility
rts ond balpy motierate ati Existitiq trees tr
temperstiine be refalned

Existing serv’?
Intermiften lawn area

| ‘New turied kawr:
(alia! ‘New trees //paims

Street ees and padium planters incorpacite leadirig edge
Tectmalogus tor manure tree estublisnminnt and jong terry
sastemmnce. Stroctured call Technology greatly nereases the
Wallible deep phamting with subsequent low om benafin
for tree anid plant performance Specially dovigned ttomprty
'NETeese Ine Rrowing Meds, available nralsture are Gayger
to our urban tses wnile Irsating surtece water Punott
The result being go erhadcet streetscape anid more
ILnuune rt growin,

 

Retentiort of exiting trees will be mancrnised through
carefully designed and Warned artoncultural programs

a

ai SS

Se ae Ad

SpeCINN Nave Weer Chosen Leased ory river,
Tofgrayson of dacal ceaditioits, Hite 1s,
4nd Noosa P93 Gunctelines
WOULS te madimise visual tmpact Shwe
basedl.on Saectés presently used in Hantingy Street.
ACOMDIenENKivE DaMming pHlette ties been develapid

  

ae 11)

   

 

ee ee Ee

AVTAITIp CORLISUIng To The biantsidy network destined Jer
accordance with relevant Austrailan Statens provites
ciiiblied access To thi seafront Irom Hastings Street

RS St er

Suh linds<aping fas Grd Incdirpoeateit Int large stews to
‘OPTUnise plane CLOTH TChiting 2feas OF deep phanting
aang all facades of the building Desa praying: willbe

 

AS SF

LAND GRAHICS

 

sed partitalanty alory
ot facade Landscaping Will be Glantudiand
Maintained ip accordance wilh PSPS Landscapiia Matti and
Suitelines

          

 

rst Light
Aeeungs Street

LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN :
First Light, 19 - 21 Hasting Street, ce Cortera et

FOrWiNE atnortaniiies tgeduuang residents and warkwrs yagting to Western walls for

    

   

henna effiteinctes ls prowded:
: SRra Watt SIGE Be; € ¢ Hort tert afer paige SOLM
N O0$g H eg ds SS Maater Plant Retentign of vegenmnon wil) pe onentalioy @idoa eriignTent ang arnvity.

 

Incarporatel as auutauiiate in accordance with the acyue
ob the ppointed arborist and lnntieame anchitecr

Page 50

 

 

Beachside

Parkside

 

 

 

 

 

First Light

 

1 1908 ar A

Tia

 

 

 

 

 

 

easiest! Ouupiopenvan Py Lut

ARMMETTELD 1 essocanon wit
LANDSICARE DOWCEPT PLAN

Hastings Street
Pins Fei

 

 

 

 

1 |
s

a

[

 

 

-

yo, |

= 1

& ipilefi

eae,

o Q i yu!

Pa S i " il

3 & ‘)

% = f
@
K

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'
Ai
Pl
|
—) ) |
Spe
Wy
[Pr , l Afrit{ piri
= a 4
H {/ edi
i ot yet q ‘5 , =
j Its = os Ty =
Oot aE; ry} =
oe ssl!)
UY
= — FR |} i
i)
“a
| t
no

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘hastings street

 

 

Streetscape Detail

 

Page 51

First Light

Niele hy.

Sections

 

Street trees - Podium planting
Graduate height of building

PODIUMPLANTERS =, __. Pandanus tectorius
Zamia furfuracea
Cycas reveluta

Alpinia zerumbet

 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
       
 

Mix of Street Trees

Bromeliad ‘y

Phyllanthus WS » Acmena hemilampra
Caustis blake) » 2 Cupaniopsis anacardivides
Beach cherry : 4 Syzygium jambeos

Midyim berry = Banksia integrifolia

Lifted canopy for
{pedestrian comfart
‘- - Under tree streetscape
columns

Acmena allyn magic

Dianella ‘silver streak’

Liriope evergreen giant’
exo) Namo plant

Shop
windew

  
  
  
 

a

PLANTERS k

Phyllanthus Strelitzia reginae oer .
Austromyrtus dulets Melastoma affine puuctured sol polis
Viola hederacea Liriope'spp paving
Beach cherry Acmenaallyn magic

  

 

  

” Wo

 

ing Concepts

BEACH FRONTAGE INDICATIVE PLANT

Beach Section ARRANGEMENT SECTION
fasting vegetation ———$ ee
19 beach front |

~

}
7 —_ SS

— rT

Salt tolecant clumped! palms
Howea or Wodyetia

  
  
     
 

  
    
   
  

A —
os Building Facade
“Se Leg ae m
> - =
: we Soft plants that
xy | " sway in wind
. =< 1 to soften &
Sey ’ ; ff re ‘showcase'polished
lee . Timber decking y aby concrete wail
Detailing to Jelamia ts |
Blade wall = =] saga Cyperus spp
aint y
) — } ee yo Gabnia clarkei
i Pa

saw  Caustis blake

  
   
  

  

 

ae fe rg | lar
Timber Planter
: Planter Decking ,

/ Waterfall Mixed tropical plants to approx
Strong architectural plants that allow 0.75m. Max,
views to waterfall

Phylanthus Doryanthes
Zamia palm Beach cherry Cyperus spn
Cycas Carpobrotus
Liniepe

     

Magnolia ‘little gem’

Minimal debris drop to water Austromyrtus dulcis

Species Trantage
indicative plan

 

 

« “
LAND GRAPHICS

vat tes Steatlia LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

Page 52

aloe Oy Vin)

 

_ — Hees ele DOH MULE Y ANSI) BMD
An eats aut BIH Sumney Bur ruMnYdoy OL yay
ayeed yan Burren seaby Prony O82 npg myakpoay,

ARIOLSHIGNN

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2
7 oonrg
waa omsawo ome | 17
be
(duit ff Bee
ahs OF seo watidl
muon amy
> goa, Fatssopsunst Adouwa wyed
OD sS2700) wrewory fulnaopd ayhys
sOPUIOO BaIALIS, Peepemn miwos
AR HTUSITEN USOT, ne
I - _&k i | Beastie
TS ~T sOauBFing done
_. i eunleatn waa! | t f owen)
yous Bure — & {) Aeon ipmaeciscrred ganas ’ ery
nes Bunseea 4 ONICYGT PWS BASWAUONE 01 30 Hoya SOAVMEL SINISHTBONN StINyCINVYeE 1 }0s BUE-SeBINIY Bao sO
¥ I 10H INY, Peta
—_f ft DOT “BS
= a - — ’ le
ao al : : We — '
| _ Woes? om eat jE.
a i oa serene Fe mae Yo
me \ <1 saz PUB = | 5 Bred Fae (Ura Oy )
| nl it Mien tons eresccag | J
| — NE ag !
warn ‘ _ —~— _-— +>
——! C4 ; ¢ > . Gurrsea jb ie i aera y |
IT = Th (uti ivi ? | 1 \
\ ‘aunes'o | — SEH abaahy i |
—— — at
| | i va —- = a Lute! Gs Cyo sdhmg, |
ny FREY PL? <4 ‘ 92a wel i

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘ 200d YI NOSTWN

 

ANIINdOTIAIG D3S0d0Ud

 

 

 

A 44 eas "
issonusvsz IH NANO TENIG CAsOacTBE < iP rapa ao |

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RUUD UH Id VOSONT ¢
SOIMd VAD ANY T INIWEC AF TSGdoua i FOV WI NOSIV

§1d93U07) Bul yxjoqq - SuONda¢5 YSOON WW bnasuly

 

Page 53

 

 

        

smyuenAug

sing smkwouwsny
sbueg jo sung, e10x)
esouimy BIGULISay,

SwaLNVId wnIdod

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

rt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RISMOUpaIEM,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SsNuO pa}

snuepued
n *

BIEN IUNpUadIAa PaUeIG
suaasaane|6 smouqodie}
sPINP'sngakwonsny
eon BIDUISAM

 

repels

5D ey

swe Ballade,
UD}YSMD jEIseOD RIsHUeE
abueig jo aauidg,es0r;

S3SSVHD ONY SENYHSGIXIW
Saruys jeseo3
Burncab mo) pariossy

®

 

—

Rrer hee Wal f
ga) aka spiig

/ Kuaus useag

seg

URS jeune
p a4 ' N yano2 punosh Burburyiang

Hem auaig |

Painira4
Jaye;

 

 

snluepued

 

 

 

 

 

 

sain URoT0 WIE UIE

sued WEIKO4
40 eBeqaeg

 

sydaou04 Bur

peuex, uospuapliiyd

suadsaanejh smougodie>

BeasenyRy eWeZ

sassvu any sanuns aaxiw 2

apueyajor yes Yum sere
Jesnazanyque jerdon ac7

dds Biuoqyay
Pajruses erurdyy
[ayep eye
PINjahss sey
dds espuewioy

Spugay eaueig

ae
== =
z Ji 7
seaqueye 5 _
pasodolg 0
= rh Gauugsuen
ne - 0) 969998)
we JOP WI? BINS
<4 aa i_§_
“— - SS
' 4 ‘ mu omneay
fem Buysixg- |] > 5 | Ne hy i ash.
A h
sasse/6 pur +: y¥
4 SQTUYS PAX, A H
i
| 29H ODT L-
4 at
y bei
1 2 1 “
z 2 ms 7 ape x :
¥ * |
_ - San) >»!
ws a aA = — —
2 rel 7 ¢ 1
eudwejway ¥ , r I
AUNIISERAISNE LuNUaldsy euawioy fo '
aunbo? e1zijaa5 ~~ at |i |
sabads peiauiaig Shugo ~ i
wiQnssuyApiod L | i if -—<— <s
Npetiex, uolpuapiiug io -
LL seme ote M
S3SSVUD ONY SSNYHS GaxXIW ™

 

JOAA “

 
          

SUOIWDAS

SpUgAY eYaUEIG

Binjonas sea TVW ———__+!

 

aS

   

 

 

 

SOIHAVAOANVI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1S SONLISVH £2 i ANIJWdOTSAIT GASOdOdd

VSOON

elo] BLE

 

Page 54

   

SOUT PIBUDISIAA

Ne wos said eyGpue-Maam
SOIHGVUDGNVY

 

4208 NS$S 40 J bor EbrS £9 L
FUNLOALTHIYY AdvOSANYT

Sid

sayeyq stisneD

        
     

JgJIUO

 

susos@one|p shyoiqodie>

 

ide

Ie
—_ ~

d$

a

p Le

 

|

 

}

UND HG)s WNIOdOky

 

  

ssuyddes,,

ABIDIA PANEN
FBMOY EY
wroodoky jeiseo>
Moy RM

SUA ayeUS

AOE} S,Bld

GWYN NOWINOD

peas obes

wad yembung
“idly ion
JIWYN NOWWO>

Aupwasoy jeiseo3)
wusng BuIppaM, 242
SUPMelsSE] SAEN
uopiog uAqoYy
SpRiPULEy ABUEIC
Aijarads

ersqie9 YOULL
eysue deueMG
WABI,

Aid MAIS,
eyouBew pend
injed auLabeqqe>
Wid PHUSY
Aney yreag
PULICUE aAnEN
oouayony

ade §,piig peag
HeO-SYS {IE A510}
eupAuOYyKpeag
3WWN NOWWO>

JOS , error Te Te

suyddes, eshoz aap aun
PaICAPHE PjOA, Pay OIA
Bate[NpUsles BAOABeIS (Ys
winspdyje winodoAy 1 OAW
SIEASTIE CAG], SAE ADH

suppUeIs ELega 225 gH
Suposaoney6 snacmqodie, BiG yy>
aW¥N TOINLOS 300)
SU3SWNTD B SUZAODIUNNOUD
BINYGNEISEIAD Aad DAD

wNoIpU) LunUYD al 4) Nd
MUNKUORINS WURBAIe Vie
Many EQNy Co eAye) 4 #9 Wid
WYN TVDINWLOB #009
SGVDA>‘SHADNID ‘SNH34

eso ny eihULysom fu) 2M
SMyPQHUS SoCueIOUIy uid ry
FUE BUIOISeayy e-BW
Byoyiidus Poyceyoany ake O3IN
wOpIOD WAY WaljtAauty Du 385
APEPUUEYy AUB PaYIASID WO 345
RSD Foye MOK fed you
AROS 48qf5, ELAUELT ss¥id
eysabuas eae) OD ¥Ig
EFEMNIUNIpaCl yas] BURL aq Vid
wiryjeyrouhpad Windy pad iu
1aye1q SuSTED tia nwo

Yoo) uleide> UOUWAIsI}e5> 33 WD
edresoiBeld epsyueg et Nva
AME}OS BISHU ve

sp auueene pany
aWY¥N TWOINYLOS 3002
SINW1d ONILINL ONY S8NwHS
smiensunped snuepued ved Nv
Mad appr, ex eyouBeyy eb OVW
STEAM UO SNe AST
BUELIGYSIO) PSMO}4 30) MOH
2ueppiemujas Brain: iat 53
syeusne soBodig sre did
seplorpuEoeue sisdayuedny Bue dD
snaprioo uoknapy 403 37y
ByOYRSENbs EULERSEOOYY nbe Thy
Mwopeduy eypAUaDy dwi ey
aWYN TWOINVLOS g00>
SWiV¥d GNY Saaqul

ajNpayrs JUe}g aAljed!1puy

 

Page 55

- 16 -

APPENDIX E

ARBORICULTURAL REPORT (MAIN BEACH FRONTAGE)
PREPARED BY LEAF & LIMB HORTICULTURAL CONSULTANCY

Page 56

 

|

   

 

 

HORTICULTURAL CONSULTANCY
PO BOX 3, KIN KIN QLD 4571. Ph: (07) 5486 7164
Email: [email protected]

Arboricultural Report
Prepared for:

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd

Site:

9-19 Hastings Street

Noosa Heads . _
QLD 4567 ms

Produced by:

Mr Samuel A R Cowie
Leaf and Limb Horticultiral Consultancy
29" of January 2009

 

 

n

HORTICULTURAL/ARBORICULTURAL GONSULTANCY + SURVEYS * TREE ASSESSMENTS TREE REPORTS + RESISTOGRAPH TESTING -

 

Page 57

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567

 

 

Summary «

Scahaven Development Pty Lid requested this arboricultural assessment and report for
the site of No 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD. The inspection and this report has
been conducted to assess the trees in closc proximity to the site on thc Noosa beach
Teserve as per Sunshine Coast Regional Council’s information request, Item 7.
regarding application number 2008/1787.

L conducted an inspection of the trees on the tt and 13" of December 2008. Scott
Sobey of Ken Hicks & Associates supplied the detail survey. Mr Graham Nottle of
Arkhefield supplied the current architectural plans. Mr Rob Burrell of LandGraphics
supplied a vegetation report and landscape plans.

The report details the site and three significant trees in close proximity to the site and
its construction impacts. The aim of this report is to assess the three significant trees
as per council’s information request and provide a tree protection and management
plan for all trees on the council reserve.

Retainable Trees and the proposed development ,
Given the impacts on root distribution for Trees No 57 and 70, and the lack of further

impacts from the proposed development and its underground carpark, both trees

maybe retained with minimum effort and no major affects on health and structure (if

properly protected prior, during and after development construction).

Tree No 48 will have impacts down to its critical root zone, but not within it, for an

area consisting of approximately 60° of its RPA circle. Given that this specics has a

good tolerance to root disturbance and that the remaining 300° of its RPA circle will

hot be impacted. on Within 7.2 metres of the trank (sce attached plan showing impact

area), reténtion is possible if j proper protection and remedial actions are undertaken

priof, during a and afiér development construction. Some minor disturbance will occur

between 7 & 7:2 metres from the trunk on the south and northwest comers where the : a"
underground carpark will be. nt

The deck and wall construction within the required tree protection fencing, as per
attached diagram that shows the location of TPF, should be constructed using pier and
beam methods. ‘he site arborist as per the tree protection and management plan of
this report should supervise all pier foundations for this. re

All other trees and monocots on the council reserve maybe retained with appropriate
protection measures.

Retained Trees.
All trees on the council reserve maybe retaincd if the tree protection and management
plan of this report is undertaken.

Recommendation is made that the Tree Protection and Management Plan in this
report is used to retain any specified trees prior, during and after development.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy©
Prepared by Mr Samuel A R Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

Page 58

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction
Methodology

Observations
34 The Site
3.2 The Trees
3.2.1. Tree No 48- Ficus obliqua
3.2.2 Tree No 57- Ficus obliqua
3.2.3 ‘Free No 70- Banksia integrifolia
3.3 Proposed Development Impacts

Discussion
4.1 Tree Root Development
4.2 Tree Protection Methods and Roots

Conclusions
5.1. Retainable Trees and any proposed development

Recommendations
6.1 Retained Trees
6.2 ‘Tree Protection & Management Plan

References

Attachments
- Basement Plan with impacts on Tree No 48
- Location of Tree Protection Fencing
- -Lower Ground Floor pian by Arkhefield
- Podium Plan by Arkhefield

Page

RAW & &

nan

 

*
4

Page 59

 

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 1
i Introduction

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd requested this arboricultural assessment and
report for the site of No 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD. The inspection and
this report has been conducted to assess the trees in close proximity to the site
on the Noosa beach reserve as per Sunshine Coast Regional Council's
information request, Item 7, regarding application number 2008/1787.

I conducted an inspection of the trees on the 11” and 13” of December 2008.
Scott Sobey of Ken Hicks & Associates supplicd the detail survey. Mr
Graham Nottle of Arkheficld supplied the current architectural plans. Mr Rob
Burrell of LandGraphics supplied a vegetation report and landscape plans.

The report details the site and three significant trees in close proximity to the
site and its construction impacts. Phe aim of this report is to assess the three
significant trees as per council’s information request and provide a tree
protection and management plan for all trees on the council reserve.

Methodology

Published research by Matheny and Clark (Matheny & Clark 1998), British
Standards BS: 5837-2005, including references from Harris (Harris et al 1999
& 2004) is the basis of the tree protection methods in this report. All other
literature cited is listed in the references at the end of the report.

Any pruning recommendations are donc to the Australian Standard AS 4373-
2007: Pruning Amenity Trees. A diameter tape was used for all
measurements, givirig a trunk diameter (DBH- Diameter at Breast Height
measured at 1300mm above ground level) based on the circumference
measurement. Where multiple trunks occur, the diameter measurement is
based on the trunk just above ground level (as per BS5837:2005, Table 2, page
8). Tree height was measured using a Suunto Clinometer where possible,
otherwise tree height was estimated to within a couptc of metres.

The tree numbers are the same used in the vegetation report by LandGraphics
(dated October 2008).

No Resistograph®, Picus®, full laboratory soil analysis or root assessment
was carried out during the time of inspection. All assessment was carried out
from ground level, and no climbing was conducted to fully assess canopy
structure that couldn't be scen from the ground.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural ConsultancyO
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

ye

 

“eee

Page 60

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 2

3 Observations

wo

The Site

The property is located on the northern side of Hastings Street Noosa QI.D,
and has a council reserve on the northern side between the site and Noosa
Beach. The site is known as No 9. 11, 13 & 19 Hastings Street Noosa I leads
QLD. This report specifically deals with the three significant trees (Tree No’s
48, 57, and 70) on the council reserve in close proximity to the northern
boundary of the site. The council reserve has no structures or other features
that would influence root growth in close proximity to the three significant
trees.

The site is flat for all purposes of tree assessment. The council reserve soil is
sandy. No soil assessment was undertaken to fully assess soil strata. Soils
within the site are considered sandy, but are regarded as disturbed and possibly
containing building construction debris from previous building constructions.

‘The trees have existing structures on the site that have influenced root
development. Tree No 70 has a stairwell (see Photo No 1) located within 2
metres of the trunk, thus restricting root development onto the site. ‘Tree No
57 has an existing in ground swimming pool (sec Photo No 2) approximately
3.5 metres from the trunk, limiting root development onto the site. Tree No 48
has no significant structures within close proximity that would affect root
distribution, although there is an in ground pool to the southeast that is
approximately 5 metres from the trunk (see Photo No 3).

   

Photo No I- showing Tree No 70 (red) in relation to the stairwell (bluc).

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural ConsultancyO
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 61

 

le

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567

 

 

Photo No 2 - showing t tree No 57 (red) in 5 relation ti to the in eratinal pool (blue).

   

Photo No 3- showing the trunk of Tree No 48 (red) in relation to the site
boundary and in ground swimming pool (blue).

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy©
Prepared by Samucl Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 62

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 4

 

we
No

The Trees

There were 3 significant trees within close proximity to the northern boundary
of the site and proposed construction impacts. The remaining 24 trees picked
up on the detail survey weren’t assessed as they have already been

| documented in LandGraphics vegetation report (dated October 2008) and are

| consider far enough from construction impacts to warrant no further detailed
assessment. It is assumed that no access to the development site during
construction will be through the council reserve.

we
te

Tree No 48- Ficus obliqua (c.n. Small-leaved Fig)

This species is an endemic tree to the area (Haslam, page 338). This species
may form a large tree, but in the situation on the Noosa Beach reserve, sandy
soils and an exposed site will limit growth and eventual size. This species of
tree is considered to have a very good tolerance to root disturbance, due to the
case of transplanting.

The tree is considered a mature specimen (20-80% of expected lifespan) based
on its exposed position and size. Trunk DBI was measured at 600mm.

Health and condition are considered average for the species growing in the site
conditions. No significant structural defects were noted in the trees main trunk
or branches (sec Photo No 4). Major woody root distribution was considered
even and regular based on buttressing at the trunk base (see Photo No 5).

   

Photo No 4- showing ‘I'ree No 48 and its overall condition, structure and
canopy coverage.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy*)
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

Page 63

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567
|

   

Photo No 5- showing the trunk base of Tree No 48 and its even root
distribution

Tree No 57- Ficus obliqua (c.n. Small-leaved Fig)

The tree is considered a semi-mature specimen (5-20% of expected lifespan)
based on its exposed position and size. Trunk DBH was measured at 610mm
at 900mm above ground level, due to the trunk formation of root buttresses
and branch interference. Health and condition are considered average for the
species growing in the site conditions. No significant structural defects were
noted in the trees main trunk or branches. Major woody root distribution was
considered even based on buttressing at the trunk base.

Tree No 70- Banksia integrifolia (c.n. Coastal Honeysuckle)

This species is an endemic tree to the area (Haslam, page 18 & 224), although
no specific identification was undertaken to distinguish between subspecies.
This species may form a medium sized tree, but in the situation on the Noosa
Beach reserve, sandy soils and an exposed site will limit growth and eventual
size. This tree is considered to have existed prior to previous construction on
the site although to have been much smaller when impacted by the stairwell
construction.

The tree is considered a mature specimen (20-80% of expected lifespan) based
on its exposed position and size. Trunk DBH was measured at 390mm.
Health and condition are considered average to above average for the species
growing in the site conditions. No significant structural defects were noted in
the trees main trunk or branches, apart from a minor trunk wound (south-
eastern side). cause unknown.

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 64

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 6

 

3.3

4]

Proposed Development Impacts is
Assessment of development and construction impacts was donc using the r
Lower Ground Plan and Pedium Plan by Arkhefield (Dated the 22"! of
January 2009).

Tree No 70 will have the existing limitations on its root distribution (stairwell)
removed and replaced with a stairwell in the southeast side from the tree, and a
walkway coming through from Hastings Street. It is assumed a boardwalk

will extend across to the existing boardwalk above the beach, most likely
consistent in construction to the existing timber boardwalk in the council
reserve (on ground with no significant foundations).

Tree No 57 will have the existing in ground pool removed and replaced with
underground carparking, therefore no major impacts will occur on the already
existing root distribution in close proximity (3.5 metres) to the trunk.

Tree No 48 will have underground carparking impacting on its root system at a
minimum distance of 3 metres from the trunk. Measurement of construction
impacts within the calculated root protection area (RPA) of 7.2 metres found
that 60 degrees of the RPA would be affected. Root impacts will be on.the
compression side of the trunk based on prevailing winds and protection from
the south, sotithwest and southeast. This is also the side where the existing
pool is located on.

Discussion

Tree Root Development

Based on the rescarch conducted, the majority of a trees root system will occur

in the top metre of soil (Perry 1982, page 198). The major woody roots

(25mm to >300mm in diameter) of a tree will radiate horizontally through the

top 200 to 300mm of Soil, and have a distinct swelling or buttressing of the

trunk where they attach (Petry 1982, page 201), as seen in tree No 48 and 57.

In situations with sandy soils, roots will develop deeper into the top 1 metre of :
soil, and also develop sinker roots that look for moisture deeper within the soil *
strata.

These major woody roots will decrease in diameter between | to 4 metres
from the trunk before forming an extensive network of roots 10 to 25mm in ,}
diameter, The larger the tree, then subsequently the larger the distance that the .
major woody roots will extend from the trunk, before forming into rope roots. o
Roots are opportunistic in nature, only growing where adequate supplies of
water, nutrients and oxygen afc available.

Tree Protection Methods and Roots

Tree protection involves the minimising of damage to the tree’s root and oF
vascular system during activities such as construction of installation of root
barriers, thus reducing the chance of tree health decline or death, and the
possible damage to the structural stability of the tree from root damage.
Failure to maintain a minimum tree protection zone may result in declining
long term vigour, health and structural stability in a tree on a construction site.

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy® 1 €
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009 pa?

Page 65

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—=
Scahaven Development Pry Lid- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 7 4
All trees to be retamed on a construction site should have protected root zoncs o
that are measured off the DBH of the trunk via the Matheny & Clark (Harris . oe
2004, & Matheny & Clark 1998) formula or the usc of the British Standards
(BS 5837:2005) for protecting trees, with knowledge of the critical root zone *
which takes into account structural stability issucs. ‘
The following table shows required tree protection zone distances based on ‘
Tree No 48, given that the tree has a DBH of 600mm and is regarded as
mature.
, | Tree Protection Method Required Tree Protection Zone
(radius from tree trunk)
Matheny & Clark-
Species of good tolerance —
90mm per 10mm of Trunk DBH § 400 mm
Matheny & Clark-
Spccics of moderate tolerance —
120mm per 10mm of Trunk DBH 7200 mm
BS 5837:2005 :
Singlé Stem tree- radius 7 200 mm
Single Stem tree- area 162.88 square metres
Critical Root Zone 3 000 mm a
(5 times trunk diameter)

 

 

 

 

Table No {- tree protection zones under different tree protection methods for oe
Tree No 48. cae

 

Using the Matheny & Clarks method a previous understanding of a tree er
species tolerance to disturbance (good, moderate, or poor) is required. As seen mo
in Table No 1, the tolerances of good and moderate are compared, but usually 7
Ficus obliqua is considered to have a good tolerance to disturbance given . ae

previous experiences. Thus a minimum of 5.4 mctres is required to adcquatcly
protect the tree where disturbance is all around the tree.

‘The British Standard (BS 5837-2005) would require a protection zone based

on the trunk diameter, either as a radial distance or as an area. Therefore a -
minimum of 7.2 metres or an area of 163 square metres is required. Under ‘we
BS 5837:1991 this radial distance could be reduced by 1/3 for 120 degrees of aid

the total circle, but under BS 5837:2005 an offset of the distance up to 20% in 5 |
one direction maybe undertaken on open grown trecs.

The final method of critical root zone is used to calculate the bare minimum
protection zonc required to stop damage to the major woody roots and
structural root formations that maintain tree stability. Critical root zone is
based on the trunk DBH times by 5, thus giving a minimum of 3.0 metres.
For Ficus obliqua and its tolerance to root disturbance, this distance would be
used for transplanting (Harris ct al 2004, page 210-212).

cnt og wee tap erie Sezer +

Lb

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

Page 66

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 8

 

 

5.1

In general ficld experience on construction sites has shown that the distances
under Matheny & Clark and British Standards may be reduced under the
following circumstances, if the remaining protection zone may be increased
and the reduction in protection zone doesn’t go closer than the critical
root zone. If only one third of the tree protection zonc is to be impacted on,
then the distance may be reduced by one third (BS 5837:1991, 7.5.5, page 9),
for example 7.2 metres may be reduced to 4.8 metres.

If only one quarter of the tree protection zone is to be impacted on, then the
distance may be reduced by one half or to critical root zone, for example 7.2
metres may be reduced to 3.6 metres or 3 metres in the case of Tree No 48.
‘This scenario on the site maybe achieved due to the undisturbed nature of the
remaining RPA on the council reserve, and the already limiting factor of the in
ground pool to the southeast.

Conclusions

Retainable Trees and the proposed development

Given the impacts on root-distribution for Trees No 57 and 70, and the lack of

further impacts from the proposed development and its underground carpark,

both trees maybe retained with minimum effort and no major affects on health : “e
and structure (if properly protected prior, during and after development

construction).

Tree No 48 will have impacts down to its critical root zone, but not within it,
for an arca consisting of approximately 60° of its RPA circle. Given that this
spccics has a good tolerance to root disturbance and that the remaining 300° of
its‘RPA circle will not-bé impacted on within 7.2 metres of the trunk (see
attached plan showing impact, area), retention is possible if proper protection
and rémedial ; actions are. undertaken prior, during and after development
Construction. Some minor ‘disturbance will occur between 7 & 7.2 metres
from the trunk on the south and northwest comers where the underground
carpark will be.

‘The deck and wall construction within the required tree protection fencing, as
per attached diagram that shows the location of TPF, should be constructed

using pier and beam methods. The site arborist as per the tree protection and
management plan of this report should supervise all picr foundations for this.

All other trees and monocots on the council reserve maybe retained with
appropriate protection measures. .

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural ConsultancyG
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

Page 67

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567

 

6

6.1

62

Recommendations

Retained Trees.
All trees on the council reserve maybe retained if the tree protection and
management plan of this report is undertaken.

Tree Protection and Management Plan

Recommendation is made that the following Tree Protection and Management
Plan is used to retain all trees on the council reserve on the northern side of the
site prior, during and after development.

Tree Protection & Management Plan

Site address: 9-19 Hastings Street (Beach Front}
Noosa Heads QLD
Builder: -
- Business:
- Mobile:
Site Arborist: -
- Business:
~ Mobile:
Tree contractor: -
- Business:
~ Mobile:

The following tree protection procedures are to be undertaken during the development
of the Site to ‘insure the safe, healthy; -and long-term retention of retained trees on the
council reserve as identified i in the site, building and landscape plans approved by
Sunshine Coast Regional Council.

A laminated copy of these tree protection procedures is 10 be attached to any tree
protection fencing on the site, and a copy is to be retained on sitc by the building
contractor supervising the project.

Pre Construction

Prior to construction works, a site arborist shall be contracted to supervise all
tree protection procedures detailed in this document. The site arborist is
required to have a minimum level 5 AQS qualification in Arboriculture, and a
minimum 5 years experience in tree protection on building sitcs. Their details
are to be filled in at the top of the document.

Prior to construction works, a tree contractor shall be contracted to conduct all
pruning operations detailed in this document or instructed to by the site
arborist. The tree contractor cannot be the site atborist due to perceived
conflict of interest. The tree contractor must have a minimum level 3 AQS
qualification in Arboriculture, and be able to follow AS4373-2007. Their
details are to be filled in at the top of the document.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samucl Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

 

 

 

 

Page 68

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 10

 

 

Prior to construction works, the site arborist should consult with the
construction company or builder to outline appropriate tree protection methods
dunng construction, to convey the importance of irce protection, and open
communication channels.

The builder or construction company is responsible for all tree protection
procedures on the site as per this document, whenever the site arborist is not
on site. [t is the responsibility of the builder to advise the site arborist of when
their presence is required on site or of any breaches of the tree protection
procedures.

All trees being retained as specified by Sunshine Coast Regional Council on
the council reserve should be appropriately marked by the site arborist.

Tree Protection Fencing (where used or designated) is to consist of 1800mm
high chain mesh fencing or similar appropriate fencing approved by the site
arborist. TPF is to be anchored by star pickets to prevent movement during
construction. TPF is to be instalied atong the northern boundary of the site to
protect the whole of the council reserve.
o For Tree No.57 the. TPF is to be extended onto the site to the edge of
the existing in ground pool. ~
o For Tree No 48 the TPF is to be extended onto the site to a distance of
7.2 metres from the trunk, until such time that construction of the
underground carpark is required.

The construction workers or subcontractors working on the site are to be
informed of tree protection importance by the builder.

The site‘arborist and the builder should agrec upon and designate storage,
dumping.and wash arcas that will riot impact on the trees during construction.

The site arborist should organise soil injection treatments to improve the
health and assist root regeneration in Trees No 48 & 57.

At no point should a tree be removed unless approved by Sunshine Coast
Regional Council (site arborist (6 document reasons for removal and contact
council to organise a site meeting).

During Construction

The sitc arborist shall be present to supervise any excavation, trenching or
tunnelling ocated on the site that may affect any tree roots, and shall keep a
record of works to present to Council after completion of construction.

The site arborist should supervise all excavation along the northern boundary
within 7 metres of a Council reserve tree. Specifically;
o Removal of the existing in ground poo! near Tree No 57.
o Removal of the existing stairwell near Tree No 70.
o Excavation for the underground carpark near Tree No 48. TPF then
moved to the location shown in the attached diagram.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

 

Page 69

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Steet Noosa QLD 4567 i]

 

 

o Installation of the deck and wall on the southern and southwestern side
of Tree No 48.

e Sheet piling is recommended in close proximity to trees No 48 & 57. Prior to
installation of shcct piling, the first 1000mm of soil should be excavated by
hand or othcr suitable method that minimises root damage, to find and clean
cut any roots grcater than 25mm.

® The TPF should be modified to protect all remaining soil outside of the
basement carpark in close proximity (7.2 metres) of Trees No 48 & 57.

* Where possible the first 1000mm of any excavation should be dug by hand to
identify any significant tree roots (25mm or greater in diameter). Grabbing
and tearing of tree roots by machinery is prohibited, and the contractor
responsible will become liable for any arboricultural work to rectify the
damage.

e No roots greater than 25mm shall be cut during construction without consent
of the site arborist. All tree roots cut are to be identified and documented by
the site arborist.

® Where access is required within a {PZ the recommendations of 9.3 of
BS5837:2005 are to be followed (see Diagram No I as an cxampic).
Specifically this scaffolding will be along the northern boundary.

Protective fencing {in
accordance with 8.22
ot 8.2.3) (may be attached

    
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to scaffolding)
Y Platform level at
{i first Uft of brickwork
Protective Fencing “{ Toeboard
(in accerdante with 4
8.2.2 of 8.2.3) ii
§
Ground undisturbed and ?
protected by geotextite ‘
Protected fabric, and sidé-but bing iY Protected
scaffold boards | area
i\ Timber sole
Ce j vate
Sap cee ry 3
t3 T SH

 

 

 

 

  

 

Not less than distance - | Not-less than distance =
recommended in table 1 recommended:in table +

Ground undisturbed and
protected by geotextile
fabricand side-bulting
scaffold boards

(a) Initial stage (b) Secandary stage with scaffolding
Diagram No 1- showing scaffolding methods to minimise soil and root disturbance.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

 

Page 70

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 12

 

 

e After installation of any floor or ground level, the site arborist is to identify
any low branches that will intrude directly on the approved building structurc.
Any pruning required to remove low branches that impede on the building
shall be documented and then removed by the tree contractor, as required and
to AS4373-2007.

e The council road reserve shall not be used for the storage or dumping of any
building materials (particularly cement based products), or be used for access
onto the site, unless under the supervision of the sitc arborist.

se

Where a boardwalk or any other service is required to be constructed in the
council reserve, the site arborist should be contacted for discussion of
construction methods that minimise the impact on any retained trecs.

Post Construction

e A post construction assessment shall be undertaken by the site arborist to
determine the health and vigour of all retained trees on the site. Any
documentation that council may require will be submitted for review at this
time.

« The assessment shall include recomnicndations for any future pruning works
or any corrective arboricultural action to be taken if required.

© The site arborist will liaise with the landscape architect and landscaper so as to
minimise any disturbance to the retained trees on the council reserve during
landscaping. If at any point landscape works are identified that may cause
damage to the trees, the site arborist is to work with the landscaper to
eliminate detrimental impacts.

Work or.construction. that is contrary to these guidelines shall make the person
responsible, or liable for any damage to any tree.

Tf the work or construction contrary to these guidelines results in the loss of any tree,
implementation of remedial arboricultural procedures, and/or required removal of any
tree, the person responsible is liable for any cost incurred for these actions, in addition
to any fines imposed by Sunshine Coast Regional Council.

If this work or construction results in the loss of any tree, a tree valuation (Thyer’s
Method based on the tree condition prior to construction) undertaken by the site
arborist will determine the amount of compensation available to the owner of the
property, on and above any other costs incurred by the person responsible.

At no point are these guidclines finite, and at anytime the site arborist may
designate additional procedures or requirements to protect the trees on the site
when required.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samucl Cowic 29" of January 2009

o

Page 71

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 13

 

 

These guidelines are certified, acknowledged and approved by:

 

 

 

Name: Authority: Builder
Signed: Date:

Name: Authonty: Site Arborist
Signed: Date:

 

 

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy® :
Prepared by Samue! Cowie 29" of January 2009 ‘

Page 72

 

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 14

 

‘accepts no responsibility for its use by other persons. ‘The client acknowledges that this report, and any options,

if anyone has questions relating to this report, please contact me and I will be happy
lo answer them.

Yours Sincerely

Samucl A R Cowie

Diploma of Horticulture (Ryde), Diploma of Arboriculture (Ryde)
Member A.LH., H.LA.,LS.A.LACA.,& QAA.

Qualified and Practicing Arborist/Horticulturist.

Since 1986

QTRA Licensed User No 787

© COPYRIGHT RESERVED: Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy, 2009.

Disclaimerand Assumptions: . Y

Care has becn taken to abtain all information from nzliable sources. All data has been verified as far as possible.
However Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy can neither guarantec nor be responsibtc for the accuracy of
information provided by others.

Unless stated athenvise:

¢ — Information contained in this report covers only the trees that were cxamined and reflects the condition
of the trees at the time of inspection, and

¢ — ‘The inspection was limited to the visual examination of the subject trees withoul dissection, excavation,
probing or coring, untess otherwise stated within this report. ‘There is no warranty or guarintes,
expressed or implied, (hal. problems or deficiencies of the subject trees may not arisc in the future.

‘This report is to be provided in full wo any person, local government or regulatory authority that has so requested a

copy, and is associated with any tives or.vegetation mentioned within this report, and has a legal right to request a

copy. Leaf & Limb Horticulturad Consultancy reserves the right to forward a full cupy of this report onto any local

government or regulatory authority (hat reqitests i for making an usscssment of the trées on the site. ot

 

 

‘This report has been prepared for the exclusive usc of the clicnt and Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy

advice or recommendations expressed of given in it, arc based on the information supplicd by the client and on the ‘
data inspections, measurements and analysis carried out or obtained by Leaf & Limb Horticultural Consultancy
and referred to in the report. ‘Fhe clicnt should rely on the repon, and on its contents, only to thal extent,

 

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy®
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009 a

 

Page 73

Scahaven Development Pty Ltd- 9-19 Hastings Street Noosa QLD 4567 15

 

 

References;

Allaby, Michael (1998). Oxford Dictionary of Plant Sciences (New Edition). Oxford
University Press, Oxford.

AS4373-2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees. Standards Australia.

Bailcy, Jill (1999). Penguin Dictionary of Plant Sciences (New Edition). Penguin
Books, London.

BS 5837:2005 Guide for Trees in relation to construction. Standards Australia.
BS 5837:1991 Guide for Trees in relation to construction. Standards Australia.

Hanson, Peter (2000). Dictionary of Botany. Golden Books Centre SON. BHD, Kuala
Lumpur.

Harris, R.W; Clark, J.R; & Matheny, N.P (1999 & 2004) Arboriculture; Integrated
Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs & Vines 3" Ldition, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey.

Haslam, 8. (2004) Noosa’s Native Plants. Noosa Integrated Catchment Assoc Inc.
Tewantin QLD, Australia.

Matheny, N.P. & Clark, J.R. (1998) Trees & Development: A Technical Guide to
Preservation of Trees During Land Development. International Socicty of
Arboriculture, Savoy, Illinois.

Mattheck, C & Brelocr, H. (1.994) The Body Language of Trees. Research for
Amenity Trees No'4. The Stationary Office, London.

Perry, Thomas © (1982). The Ecology of Tree Roots and the practical significance
thereof. Journal of Arboriculture, Volume 8, No 8, Page 197-211.

Quantified Tree Risk Assessment practice note Version 03.4-07. Quantified Tree Risk
Assessment Ltd, Poynton, United Kingdom.

 

Leaf and Limb Horticultural Consultancy
Prepared by Samuel Cowie 29" of January 2009

ee

Page 74

MP aC

 

 

 

     

     

----L----|
|
|
|

    

 

 

 

DT

 

 

res,06-13

 

 

 

 

 

ras.14-24 |

¢

 

 

 

 

 

poo! heat pump

Page 75

=_
"

TRE PRoteoray

Fence”

 

 

   

__- Le]

 

 

 

 

 

 

LULL
Y

 

res.04-05

 

 

 

es.06-13

 

 

“AR 22-9R

reg.44-21 |

~

 

 

 

 

 

    

    

      

 

|
|
t
i
1
I
{
\
i

 

710.0m setba:

 

 

Page 76

yoous sBuysey

upid puna6 semo|

we ectta: t

 

2

   
  

 

 

 

 

 

Baa
ctey J
4 4
8
el ms a 4
bok . i 1 ———
‘ ie? . ——
a 1 : £
sees arth evsee_ uted 1G z 1
; ; T .
: root .
Boot
‘ :
wil pre my ove eam ee anal sees G fo Q scam -———
sae eee _ eae EE ee + wee ae Ht
sy ees pees pm ern en es ee ee ee ee ——_ — |
Fe LE pS : e tae =
1 jee em i. q G ll i t ied
_.  * i : t
moe A . t
_— | | - i =

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 77

\
speay esoou Y6i 1s4y

             
         

ugid wiped
Dose op. ety Wess Fe TL et De ra Tae ce BD trae ets

eens shuyeey

“Tar

era ay Pe

 

        

ED Glan]

_ tebe

 

 

ioe

 

a

yoeeq ujeW EsooU . _ Seen,

 

Page 78

-17-

APPENDIX F
EXISTING COMMERCIAL AREA

Page 79

gets

 

 

—yS

FON Bupanig

SVAN W495 - LNaWaSv - N3AVH vas a710

JAN : UMEIg
a0'vorre : sea
sOOYS Z¥ UO 002: | : EIS

v0-80

¥SOON 15541S SONILSVH
ON Gor FemwODY

AGALS
ALINGW3SV34 NBAVH vas
pelo

 

 

san, Seweig

  

 

oaupueury | area [ores

 

arenansincne oe | wwe] +

 

 

 

"pe200 <N “Oey Tioay pated FID E09 MD
SICALHOUY aN Ald

SuUBisapJe|SQ}

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(400]4 JSulJ 0} suleys SapNjoul) WS 76 = TWLOL
‘( LASYLS SONILSVH 9} TIV13u ) YOOTS GNNOND 1 “vW49

 

teas ty uF 010 ped aoe: 4 eo

 

SV3uV V49 - dO!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

le.

 

 

ewvals

 

sees

 

qo cern ees

WS ZZ/p = VAUW ALIS. |

= oa

—— met

 

 

 

STF

ee
Po Fibs hoe yaa Vso 7Ivias 2

 

 

 

f.

 

 

+

 

oa

 

—"

 

 

 

 

 

Og ONNOUD NSAVHvas aio 2

Jeeus Zy uO peywud ] 00%: 1 = 3TWOS

et ee

wot ne wr 0

L ss

 

 

Page 80

 

 

d WS 0-80 dyn waa rucontnens ape y wong cio conte paezatvonsmaraseass Geman [oot
th Sater x s a cal * = 2.
senBs| 20N @uywaug, :ON O0F y9O4S ZY ed 7 : eo YSOON 133418 SONS SBIE SHS UO a emis a2 ees emit en te
- NSAVH WS G10 AGNES *pauz00 abou “ew ping bo siete onngraiyagsi ters te
SV3eVv VAD ALIavasvad N3AVH 3S cetontt 2 ona eat Lava coe a
sey Bune ‘eld SUBISSH19 {SO} Seven aren orwcrwe a
: ze n zs BION TWHANIS:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘whs g€zS = V4D J1IEVSSINYAd

Wbs pbG¢ = IWLOL VID ONILSIXS

 

‘Whs Z/Z7y= = =WLOL VA9 WILNAGISSY “Ws 2221 = WLOL V49 W134
‘WDS pZpL = (4YOO14 ‘Me)  TVILNSQIS3y

'WDS Zbl = (YOOT4 ‘PUZ) 1 IVILNSGIS3Y ‘Whs O¢e = YOOT14 LSHld 91 1IV.L3Y
‘bs pzpL = (YOO 381) 1 IWLLNSCISSY ‘wos 2v6 = YOOTS GNNOYS 4 VLAN

  

aot poniing

 

 

ARS O&e = VaNV vi TwvLae

  

 

{Q3ANIONI LON MIVLS)

   

He = a

f-logonaaiyapiavishy ——
NOS Lep=Vvauv 7)
_ W495 TWIINSGISSY

fe a KE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YET 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

i Hl
ae ei -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

pe [et

 

‘WbS 222 = VANV JLIS

“wbs 029 =
Wauv v4 IWILNSCISSY

 

 

        

weet ty

 

vo corms # 00Z +4 eRos

 

SVauV Vdd - NSAVHYAS 010

yaoys Zy UO payuud W OOZ: 1 = 3WOS

(AINO YOOTS LSUls)

NY #0012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

(aaa MONI LON HtVvLS)
‘Wbs €Z¢ =
Vadv Vd9 IWILNAdISay

 

 

 

Page 81

-18-

APPENDIX G
ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION PERIOD AND IMPACTS

3
at
Bate

Page 82

vam

SEAHAVEN REDEVELOPMENT

Hastings Street Noosa Heads

Dated — 10.01.09 4

Response to council information request

Item 18

Anticipated Construction Period

1.
2.

Demolition = 16 weeks
Construction = 64 to 72 weeks

Anticipated Traffic volumes ae +

1.
2.

Demolition = 13 trucks per day
Construction

for 90% of the time = 10 trucks per day
for 10% of the time = 5 trucks per day

Anticipated impacts and mitigation measures

Noise — Measures to minimise impact as follows:-

1.
2.
3.

Working hours kept strictly to Council approve days and hours of work

Tower Crane to be Electric. IE: Not Fuel driven

Piling will be methods requiring minimal vibration which will be monitored by a
qualified Soil Engineer :
Hutchinson Builders shall take all practicable precautions to minimise noise
resulting from work activities. Equipment shall be fitted with noise suppressors
when appropriate and available and used so that noise in public areas is
minimised and complies with the Occupational Health and safety Noise
Regulations — 1992 and EPA Noise Control Guidelines.

Effective noise and vibration management strategy will be achieved by continual ;
Communication by all parties. Establishment of a dynamic response process, *
which allows for the adjustment of control methods and criteria for the benefit
of all parties. The affected parties directly adjacent to the work will be contacted
on a regular basis and kept informed of the progress of the site and measures 4
taken to minimise Noise and vibration. Where loud activities and generation of .
high noise levels are unavoidable, early notification will be given to the
representative of ail adjacent residence and Businesses. Consultation in all areas
of noise management will be undertaken with affected parties.

Page 83

Page 2

Dust— Measures to minimise impact as follows:-
1. A program of dust suppression PVA sprays and water to be applied as required
preventing dust from leaving the bounds of the site.
2. To mitigate dust emissions the use of water where practicable will be used
when:-
> Loading out, Transporting and dumping scrap onto stockpile. Travel roads
and dumping are will be watered down to prevent dust generation. This
will be achieved by using a water truck and pumps and sprays
> Conducting construction and deconstruction works, before during and
after. We will at all times wet down structures and surrounding areas as
much as practicable.
Hand tools with dust extraction facilities will be used where possible
4. Shade cloth to the entire perimeter boundaries of the site, to a minimum height
of 1 metre above roof height, will be erected and maintained during the
Structural and external finishes trades of construction.
5. Any minor soil leaving the site to the street, will be removed with out delay by
way of mechanical street sweepers
6. Regular onsite clean up will be adopted not only as good house keeping, but is
required to a high standard by Work Place Health and Safety Legislation.
7. Hutchinson Builders will at all times endeavour to minimise dust emissions and
continually monitor the effectiveness of dust mitigation strategies.

w

4
§

 

Page 84

Page 3

Traffic— Measures to minimise impact as follows:-
1. Demolition phase of Construction:-

a)

b)

c)

Provisions have been made to mobilise and demobilise each
item of plant and equipment during out of normal working
hours between Monday and Saturday with a pilot escort service
through Noosa where required, to minimise the impact on the
local community. The use of the plant and equipment is subject
to Sunshine Coast Regional Councils’ approval.

Demolition of Seahaven 3 to be loaded out utilising 10t Tippers.
Strategies to be in place in conjunction with our Traffic
Management Plan to minimize the impact on the local
community. Minimising the number of trucks to move the
material from site. Staggering all vehicles so that there is no
undue congestion on Hastings Street. No parking and/or
standing of plant on Hastings Street. All plant must be of sound
condition and well maintained.

Demolition of Seahaven 1 & 2 and all other associated areas to
be loaded out utilising Truck and Trailer, 30t capacity. This
change in transport is to minimise expense, time and to reduce
the impact of traffic flow on Hastings Street. This is first subject
to Sunshine Coast Regional Councils’ approval and once space
has been established for plant to maneuver on site.

2. Construction Phase of the Project:- ;
a) Construction vehicle parking impacts will be minimized by car

b)

pooling, onsite parking when available and parking outside the
immediate Hastings Street precinct.

A designated drop-off and construction parking zone will be
established on site and including the use of street parking bays.
This zone will enable delivery vehicles and plant such as cranes
and concrete pumps to safely park and enter/exit the project.
Traffic controllers will be used in this area where required to
warn members of the public on the footpath of the moving
equipment and to safely direct the vehicles and plant. Efforts
will also be taken by Hutchinson Builders to reschedule any
plant and material movements outside busy public access
periods.

Develop a footpath and road management plan to control heavy
and light construction

ee,

 

 

 

Page 85

Page 4 .

d) Trucks wishing to enter the site are required to contact the
Project Manager to arrange access to site. Drivers will remain in
their vehicle at a location specified, until they are informed of or *
escorted to the correct site entrance.
e) During the Project the Project Manager and other site personnel
will constantly review and assess whether changes need to
made to routes taken by vehicles to ensure the safety of and
minimize disruption to the public and businesses.

Visual impacts — Measures to minimise impact as follows:-

1. The visual impact of the site works will be managed by good house keeping
of the Hoardings and Gantries and the shade cloth to site perimeter scaffold.

2. The Hoardings and Gantries be erected in a professional and Tradesman like
manner and will have paint finishes maintained. The Shade cloth will be new
when installed and be erected taut and maintained in an aesthetically
pleasing condition. It is a company policy of Hutchinson Builders, to take
pride in the appearance of all of our building sites and all of our Building sites
look neat and tidy promote a professional image.

too an

ord

 

Pedestrians— Measures to minimise impact as follows:-

1. Hutchinson Builders have identified that specific public protection and
exclusion controls needed to be implemented throughout the duration of
this project. That is, control measures will be implemented at the site to
warn members of the public and neighbours of the site activities and ,
exclude them from entering the construction area and to prevent from a
being exposed to the risk of illness or injury. To achieve adequate public
protection and exclusion zones, Hutchinson Builders will undertake the
following: Erect a hoarding fence on the propose line boundaries where
exclusion is deemed necessary

2. The hoarding will be supported by metal supports that are to be fixed with '
additional incline bracing and supports (F brackets or star pickets secured ‘
to fence panels), where required, to ensure the hoarding cannot easily SO, j
topple or collapse. 4

. The hoarding will be erected in the approximate locations as
specified on the above boundaries, and contain lockable gates to
allow worker, vehicle and machine access.

s Installed and maintained to manufactures specifications

. The condition and placement of the hoarding fence will be
monitored on an ongoing basis, and during documented site
inspections by the site team member. j

 

Page 86

Page 5

3. Erect a gantry that complies to an engineers design criteria to with stand
storage and design loads, on the proposed line where exclusion is deemed
necessary or where loads are being lifted over public access areas;

s Installed to the engineers details and commissioning signed off by
installers

. Provide warning signs, flashing lights and audible alarm during lifts

. Provide access lighting of at least 80 Lux or natural lighting

Where existing buildings and properties form a boundary of the site
construction work area, Hutchinson Builders will erect temporary barricading,
sheeting or exclusion zones in any area where a member of the public could
potentially be exposed to an on-site hazard.

4. Signage will be displayed at all entrances to the site and at various points
on the perimeter hoarding and gantry, that describe:

* Hutchinson Builders as the construction company,

= the site as a construction site, accessible to workers and
authorised personnel only,

* Hutchinson Builders Safety Sign — hard hats, foot wear etc,

= Other safety signs as deemed necessary

5. Perimeter Containment screening (Mesh guards and shade-cloth) will be
fixed on the external sides of all scaffolding, to ensure objects are
prevented from falling onto members of the public.

6. Traffic controllers will be used to temporarily close the footpath and direct
pedestrians to stop or use the other footpath during times when there is
an increased falling object risk due to work activities or the movement of
vehicle traffic to and from site as required.

_—? 3

ao ee yn foe

hala 7

ve,
fk

 

Page 87

Page 6

Local Businesses and residents— Measures to minimise impact as follows:-
1. Any possible disruption to local businesses to be Communicated well in

advance, via methods of — Media, personal contact and/or letter drops

Traffic & Pedestrian controls as mentioned previously

Car parking controls as mentioned previously

Working hours to Council approval as mentioned previously

Dust and vibration controls as mentioned previously

Aesthetics of site controls as mentioned previously

AU RWH

Hutchinson Builders recent Projects and proven performance in
Hastings St Noosa Heads :-

Further, we would advise that Hutchinson Builders are the nominated Builder for the
project.

Hutchinson Builders have recently completed construction 2 projects in Hastings
Street Noosa Heads (being the Noosa Heads Surf Life Saving Club Redevelopment
and the Visitor information Centre Building ).

These projects were compieted at the end of January 2009.

The Visitor information centre is a Sunshine Coast Council Project. Please refer to
Adam Brown for a reference.

In order to complete these projects, Hutchinson Builders will have occupied the
highest pedestrian and vehicle traffic flow location in Hastings Street, being eastern
end directly adjacent the round about adjoining Noosa Parade, for a period no less
than 11 months. During this time, through diligent Pedestrian and Traffic control
plans and measures, we have had so incidents of safety and kept traffic impacts to
an absolute minimum through all times of the year, including peak holiday periods.

We have also managed to achieve good communication with the local Council,
Residents and Businesses in the street by regular and good communication and
development of working relationships. We ensure that any minor disruption is
notified well in advance by personal contact, media and letter drops. By adopting
these methods we have been able to achieve a harmonious environment during
construction works.

ant!

 

te
a

 

 

 

 

Page 88

-19-

APPENDIX H

WAVE ACTION/WATER INUNDATION AFFECTS
PREPARED BY COFFEY GEOTECHNICS

Page 89

a

coffey > geotechnics -

SPECIALISTS MANAGING THE EARTH

 

3 February 2009

Seahaven Development Pty Ltd
Mezzanine Level, 88 Creek Street
Brisbane 4000.

Attention: Mr Tom Low
Dear Sir,

RE: Seahaven Resort Development, Noosa

Response to SCRC Request for Information.

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd (Coffey) were commissioned on behalf of Seahaven Development Pty Ltd (Seahaven),
to undertake geotechnical and acid sultate soil investigations tor the proposed redevelopment of Seahaven resort
at Hastings Street in Noosa. The factual results and engineering assessments and recommendations of the
investigation are set out in Coffey report GEOTKPARO1484AA/A dated 11 November 2008, This report outlined
surface and subsurface conditions, design considerations and acid sulfate soil considerations.

 

In response to Sunshine Coast Regional Council (SCRC) request for information Item 23, Coffey is able to make

the following comments with respect to geotechnical aspects of wave action and possible water inundation caused
by a major storm event. J

« Storm surge and wave action may cause temporary rises in groundwater levels on the site. The design of
the basement will need to account for this possibility. Our report has already noted the need to allow for
fluctuations in water tevels although not specifically associated with storm surge/wave action. hoa

« Any high level basement footings will be founded in dense sands below mean sea level. Rises in .

groundwater levels due to storm surge and wave action will not impact on the bearing capacity or “4
suitability of these strata to support the structure. Providing there is no erosion under the basement, the *,
founding strata will not be compromised. The basement design is in keeping with current best practice a
and is the standard adapted for other modern buildings in the area. x,

e The capacity of deep piled footings will not be impacted by changes in groundwater levels or upper level
erosion. Providing there is no deep erosion around the piles, the Integrity of the piled foundation will not
be compromised. Oeep piled footings are in keeping with current best practice and are the standard
adopted for other modern buildings in the area.

op

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd ABN 93 056 929 483 GEOTKPARD1484AA/B(Rev)
1/36 Kerryl Street Kunda Park QLD 4556 Australia

PO Box 5537 Maroochydore QLD 4558 Australia ms 5
T (+61) (7) 5445 4952 F (+61) (7) 5445 3764 www.coffey.com vo

 

Page 90

Seahaven Project, Noosa Heads

Response to Information Request

Should you wish to discuss any aspect of this response, please contact Ron McMahon at Coffey's

Kunda Park office.

For and on behalf of Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd

en
RON MCMAHON

Principal Engineer

Attachments: important Information about your Coffey Report

 

 

Coffey Geotechnics
GEOTKPARO1484AA/B(Rev)
3 February 2009

Page 91

coffey? geotechnics

SPECIALISTS MANAGING THE EARTH

important information about your Coffey Report

As a client of Coffey you should know that site subsurface conditions cause more construction
problems than any other factor. These notes have been prepared by Coffey to help you
interpret and understand the limitations of your report.

Your report is based on project specific criteria

 

Your report has been developed on the basis of your
unique project specific requirements as understood
by Coffey and applies only to the site investigated.
Project criteria typically include the general nature of
the project; its size and configuration; the location of
any structures on the site; other site improvements;
the presence of underground utilities; and the additional
risk imposed by scope-of-service limitations imposed
by the client. Your report should not be used if there
are any changes to the project without first asking
Coffey to assess how factors that changed subsequent
to the date of the report atfect the report's
recommendations. Coffey cannot accept responsibility
for problems that may occur due to changed factors
if they are not consulted.

Subsurface conditions can change

 

Subsurface conditions are created by natural processes
and the activity of man. For example, water levels
can vary with time, fill may be placed ona site and
pollutants may migrate with time. Because a report
is based on conditions which existed at the time of
subsurface exploration, decisions should not be based
on a report whose adequacy may have been affected
by time. Consult Coffey to be advised how time may
have impacted on the project.

Interpretation of factual data

 

Site assessment identifies actual subsurface conditions
only at those points where samples are taken and
when they are taken. Data derived from literature
and external data source review, sampling and
subsequent laboratory testing are interpreted by
geologists, engineers or scientists to provide an
opinion about overall site conditions, their likely
impact on the proposed development and recommended
actions. Actual conditions may differ from those inferred
to exist, because no professional, no matter how
qualified, can reveal what is hidden by

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd ABN 93 056 929 483

earth, rock and time. The actual interface between
materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than
assumed based on the facts obtained. Nothing can
be done to change the actual site conditions which
exist, but steps can be taken to reduce the impact of
unexpected conditions. For this reason, owners
should retain the services of Coffey through the
development stage, to identify variances, conduct
additional tests if required, and recornmend solutions
to problems encountered on site.

Your report will only give
preliminary recommendations

Your report is based on the assumption that the
site conditions as revealed through selective
point sampling are indicative of actual conditions
throughout an area. This assurnption cannot be
substantiated until project implementation has
commenced and therefore your report recommendations
can only be regarded as preliminary. Only Coffey,
who prepared the report, is fully familiar with the
background information needed to assess whether
or not the report's recommendations are valid and
whether or not changes should be considered as
the project develops. If another party undertakes
the implementation of the recommendations of this
report there is a risk that the report will be misinterpreted
and Coffey cannot be held responsible for such
misinterpretation.

Your report is prepared for

specific purposes and persons

To avoid misuse of the information contained in your
report it is recommended that you confer with Coffey
before passing your report on to another party who
may not be familiar with the background and the
purpose of the report. Your report should not be
applied to any project other than that originally
specified at the time the report was issued.

 

 

 

Page 92

coffey > geotechnics

SPECIALISTS MANAGING THE EARTH

Important information about your Coffey Report

Interpretation by other design professionals

Costly problems can occur when other design professionals
develop their plans based on misinterpretations
of a report. To help avoid misinterpretations, retain
Coffey to work with other project design professionals
who are affected by the report. Have Coffey explain
the report implications to design professionals affected
by them and then review plans and specifications
produced to see how they incorporate the report
findings.

Data should not be separated from the report”

 

The report as a whole presents the findings of the site
assessment and the report should not be copied in
part or altered in any way.

Logs, figures, drawings, ete. are customarily included
in our reports and are developed by scientists,
engineers or geologists based on their interpretation
of field logs (assembled by field personne!) and
laboratory evaluation of field samples. These logs etc.
should not under any circumstances be redrawn for
inclusion in other documents or separated from the
report in any way.

Geoenvironmental concerns are not at issue

 

Your report is not likely to relate any findings,
conclusions, or recommendations about the potential
for hazardous materials existing at the site unless
specifically required to do so by the client, Specialist
equipment, techniques, and personnel are used to
perform a geoenvironmental assessment.
Contamination can create major health, safety and
environmental risks. (f you have no information about
the potential for your site to be contaminated or create
an environmental hazard, you are advised to contact
Coffey for information relating to geoenvironmental
issues.

Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd ABN 93 056 929 483

Rely on Coffey for additional assistance

Coffey is familiar with a variety of techniques and
approaches that can be used to help reduce risks for
all parties to a project, from design to construction. It
is common that not all approaches will be necessarily
dealt with in your site assessment report due to
concepts proposed at that time. As the project
progresses through design towards construction,
speak with Coffey to develop alternative approaches
to problems that may be of genuine benefit both in
time and cost.

Responsibility

Reporting relies on interpretation of factual information
based on judgement and opinion and has a level of
uncertainty attached to it, which is far less exaci than
the design disciplines. This has often resulted in claims
being lodged against consultants, which are unfounded,
To help prevent this problem, a number of clauses
have been developed for use in contracts, reports and
other documents. Responsibility clauses do not transfer
appropriate liabilities from Coffey to other parties but
are included to identify where Coffey's responsibilities
begin and end. Their use is intended to help all parties
involved to recognise their individual responsibilities.
Read ail documents from Coffey closely and do not
hesitate to ask any questions you may have.

 

* For further information on this aspect reference shouid be
made to “Guidelines for the Provision of Geotechnical
information in Construction Contracts" published by the
institution of Engineers Australia, National Headquarters,
Canberra, 1987.

72520 ! 07-05

F

 

fat

 

 

ph

 

Page 93

-20-

APPENDIX I
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SEWER RELOCATION PLAN "
PREPARED BY CONSTRUCTION HYDRAULIC
BUILDING SERVICE ENGINEERS

 

Page 94

 

 

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

    
 

 

 

       

 

     

     

 

 

  
 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

      

 

 

 
 

     

 

 

 

         

 

 

   

 

 

 

(£661 NO-193HS YZAOD O1 Ya43u 08a] '
(v] (2661. ew 1 j™nne me : Sas cswony 59 Cy
. Lax fon tag” $O~CD-G1 | ove i. aise .
le wag (oorozu/sv s06 20 bees waeks som oH sa CF
© spon wer sow) S08 Gos) Suey Jom SIH : aPeOuS aus iM aan om an
NOILVOILIN MOS Vdd wena WFOH td WHS ‘—«
ari
WASVNYN a7 meg 18
1N3W39' MFLVMAYOLS 90) wonuatep wi UO aso ce
. t nae ee 1g 2 8
on nd
. cee UL reavyg /0 nto coy KIO
savaH goon aiken
"LS SONUSVH 61- am any kapuney
LNJAVHWIS,_s23r0ug 3
, NOISIO ¥I1SOS ® OTAdIHNUY . 3 “so
4. 2S oamow, : wh "382 on
‘ “QL0 “Ald IN3MdOT3AIO NGAVHYIS |? a ae 5 evo terse comnna 290
: * . m as sebwy ue eee
220 wees ant canphqornua
4 SHB8 yrOG thd ; . . 1 . es wabiqus 3409229 92
- syd AYOB pyo 1 $0 YONs Sa2M—P UoAA OL “>|, snnap euoz. singsa ae Ozex os yooh
. 4 Phen tr wana een 6 “sbonog Gace’ wan Sat mane"

~ 7 S0iE) IO PUD Ego 1D ai ibe
. wsiog os
. : saw ssien tot

‘ . woe poet

' oy Wan 12ApQ

* A sta ey wan dows,

' Cos . . me

| mower donne mf ‘ cg mon peo

90-60-81 1 Nonosdoy Tuswoojecen soil : ee 308 491M PROD
2190 aiON 1 anes” . .

. a= Ta=oF Ea ETT ST 4
. ! rd
. 2 . 3
: ao a, =} © me

“SRAUWHL> OL AVO UId NOSUId Y3d ONWAG Ht ZONO3Y OL Si LIOWWL TWHIAD BHI 3
. : . “SNBLGAE MOLL SMOMMUNOD 40 SIH AB egHUID G3ARHOW 8
' --- -- re +38 NYO SIL “OBSINININ SI_Y3M3S 3H1 O1 OIDYVHOSI ATSSITISN DaoUNE Oy yNOUDAD “O'S
_ —"] | ne eile gt io ath ocr aohans Bh aN ee he Eyeg vee om cues
05 TRIB in) | ROMLENGO Gh NDaIO Se The Sms Valen Yom 1 noe
Sia SSS AL at ET
a 238 VHS saunins HSwA YY) ONY HSYM NIG ‘NONLWORIME weeeen QN3931
. . . Seve svelsures
+ | ant nous cscuma 30 vas Stow sane the a sane e008 pm
we “MIAZIS NYHL 2YOW
38 10N TIYHS Junuxts HOVS “JO MOTI IHL ONY UVSC ONILVY “woppuos GuIpod} 104 6
. \ "EAL STBA AMMININ BHA HLM ATANOD THE SINLxL TW ene, . (anhe pencsdda 40
an , . Boys 2. Ss GNOUsNORy ‘nena DNILONNE * " . :
“aos . . * SoG ‘ouuviosuodN 30 OL SIuNSYa" YaL¥M > ’ - UST OPNS[OT TaTHRUIIO;STHjST) : _ : ’
_— an veh : - some z . * poTe-WONV LIN MO AVIS Vos SHAVESOTAN Lob eg : :
te, oot os cog use t , ‘
a : , a She tm pe (eyo) oun woo, ‘
ame . “~: . . Lh be ty x 1 , ?
“ . (39s 01 10N) “oy , a :
x JAMY tHe . ? i
, AY000'R nApoay aye! AAIAOIT ‘wArTUON
ons RR Ree we bee we eo mUyON 140 | g yap mi nnn sty
"BOE Fa2y70 MOBI MOIS — YKOI ZF GSO 20) UdoBOIpAH s9OMUUOIS
: ; ‘oun ssosos 10 (ounpuieheuyr gs
=] ’ tin 9 2 318VI_INIAHOIVS OSS Sah tg By eats OP
: 4 toe . g err vie ~ OEE 008 . ae AIdAS “Y3LYM
+ - r | © $ zazt | row |. Soar | ShOveaZRI sana void avoveuioul sae
aot aren | { -m006've anton g var | wis | > eter ae Sa Sottta pave eer
é . 7 ae { 4uina ] ng i + ¢ PUMA AUOL a COIN 0014 SPOb URL MS $40)9 DAG OIF ODL 9G HOVE waORadd punoubapun
; Set ot if iva | 183m | aus 3)0HM 7 aan BOVNIVYO UALVMNYOLS *
. : in ee Ginmea 19 peed em ii ae chains aie 22 an
Lia aver t og sou owes

> Guaeanioy ' z : enon buys, “3d0H 10 ADi> novi 2g OWE o

: i wo uartuey, 04 eS Bonds soy cae Huse oi
| (NAD SEO Dr 94 NOME HsOmAid popuadang
' 1 . “ON OG:1 90/8 UW ‘ARO TAd ‘BP ODL Bq HONS yJOKdd0 punosBsapUA
1 so ' ! JOVNIVYO AUVLINYS
, . 1 23)094 swonaen
| tujwenise mop Duct aoyteas #8 jy bree wonuog 2000 vores “1 so fs rte .
|

sy | ‘
|

; te ee Sumi oe

a, t : “Aiousny 9020) ou) jo B]sIWONIOE 4) OVD

“ ! . a ° “EPIOPUDIS UOYOLIEMY JuDABED 1 YOOCE Sy eC] ebOUID.G Ovo BuHmLLIMGs fOUONON But

' ve + 4 “a1 MAINS 4010 PAOPYOIS 1,9 "MO sbasdMOS PIDPUDIG O.0 *y i's 9940010990
} lJ ut Bnaeigeed tt weak pus bojeae‘ubea ean obec Wives” pus Keane” om
J . S3LON 1WH3N39
1204 s00y von ‘

. Od
ae SYOM TWNOILVY3dO NOILVOOT3N YaMIS - £-LE6L. SQV3JH VSOON
Bk SHYOM TWNOLLVY3dO % NVId LN3NJOVNVA YSIVMNSOLS - Z-Z661 “

: NOILVOILIN MOTE 3V3d % NVId LN3W3OVNWN Nal VMNYOLS - ‘12661 1S SONILSVH 61-6
° . ae ‘TINGSHOS ONIMVYC "
LOOSSOLdS INO 8Z L107.

: a4 O99806da fNO ZL -LO7 we otc
‘geyo6edd NO “SR v 101 °

 

 

 

 

Page 95

 

      
      

                           

 

 
     

 

   

 

 

 

     

 

 
 

 

¢
a] z-266r ce | : nig Gyo gun3H25)
Lan vow fag » 0-60-81 re Feo eae stash Be oghe ENE (001: 38)
: [note 0) strouznp “r007 nS SO
PRS MARUI > Pe ARE
UALWMAUOLS © . z, 2 Le a_i a as
*- Jao tiei09 - ~ a
- a? wore us / nae _
~ FTW SNANIO * UROG #4 8) HOH ~
“savaH SOON 2 ON . Suysanoy sromoy
“LS SONILSVH 61-:

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

THM oF aBoua46x
*yoa7 mois Cole

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LNSAVHVSS”
NOISIG Y3LSOd % O13I43HNNV

we

 

 
  

   

 

ou

wupy Ov ZR 1 s9MoL
wor) Faw VOT

 
  

                       

“| wwe coor,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
  

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

| }— 4a 21 cuore:
—!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“QL “Ald LNANdO13A30 N3AVHY3S-"=- +— Surry 4 o2uam4 006" [ f [
+228 vee ox ios phyvoriaia ye B any a} (Aira ks0%) s2n09 ese20y
2 oun Bina 00g “un wo)
G08 ree oma worphwasoys anus’ * ~ Spadeaunies us 24 . duneoy aoevIoe
Divmesaesd

 

 

ae ws oq

{204 OW O3dy JEN BUJLUEOY —PlOYU|eY 11>7INOD
NK
Kmeubugs exases buying
aynespAy uopsoniysueg

 

     

Sos gt
8 tea3-010n perwoneg

   

      

;

 

 

Tapua] 04) +
terastey Supine 201 .

 

 

 

 

 

sae” A ames
TH POS TORT ATV
ae ag jounysaudn RON] g ,
oe» ck

 

 

‘Janome popowp ©) i20lQne
110 Jeiomuvors Bunsen 10 1947 anu]

 

 

            

 

wana my)

 

 

 

 

24080 0) 8042p 01° ¢ s9m04

[PUnsune winpog 10 Sbouosp 820):n6 iy “i FOS0

oy buoy 1 f1K94 punowine weypog
20}08 iy 'BOUROLD UByaM

        

 

 

mn
" 2 va
01 240) judwubyio Ud GuIz® “uo:10901
204 2HUSO OF © 49K01 10 B90 WO UOT

 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHW OF UIOUR pu
uran 20% WWI

 

 

 

“\F (aso) 4201 voweieg 815 40) OPrang

             

 

 

 

"U3H1Z9011I¥ YNVL NOILN3L3G v¥ ONIDIAOQdd WOYd
NIVY33Y -ONV (S34LI1000'09) WIISAS ONILSIAYVH
G3SV3YONI NY 30IA0Nd OL Xida¥ IM 2u0s3u4

    

’ us “ANANHOLVD
YBAIY WSOON ZHL 40 ON3 -WV3YLSNMOO

i@SO 01 wipwp puo aj. yourn ep wud, Sprctd)
AY3A FHL NO O31V901" St AININEOTEARO ‘SIHL |

 

"MOTE W3d

HL FON3M1ANI ATZALUVOIN ONV ‘133 JON3H
‘3SV3T3N AIMONS AVA SNGISAS NOILN313G 31IS
Y. NO SHE SV3YV INSNHOLV) Y3MO7 3H HOW3Y
+OL ANIL NIVLY3D ¥ S3MINDAY V3IYV'IN3WHOIVD

 

 

 

  

(2 somes ra

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“ Lyne a uy ‘ows:
call uaddh BML 40 MO1d XW3d 1 Shaan LEA \ “a0 pun asi 85 09 aly
% 3SN¥O TIM ONY 3AvH INJWHOLVO "SHI. JO ONG || ‘ I,
WVBYISNMOG FHL IV SW31SAS“NOILN3130 3211S NO || > iE
AWHL 3ONaaINg O20 BAWH S2mus 41N3934 “ é -
I 18
U 4
id

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Le“
as one aE

 

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

 

 
 

ako TO aA kph wet

 

Page 96

   
 

      
             

 

 

 

    
                                
                         
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1-£66l NO 133HS 83A09 OL 43494 --0du * t a 4 *
vj £-2661' cies [ore GOR ye fa? te oF
Ce i td ea en eu syog mys Sbap InAs Toye
‘os oon aan : - er
Ss ice ** poo . - . W3AOT HONIA “Wvisd
SHYOM TVNOILYYRdO - ‘eben # eund .
me 40295
. NOILV9073Y .43M3S eee ¥
‘ . * os
Pk Se STN ore is ee f —
‘1s SOMTSEH"tSS : Heme ee atte
SanvHY38,._ inven owen somone, vcnsruzvey |EREET  (LdusRsseeanenteeeeusastsserctssersee
NOIS30 ¥3LSO4 F OVIIIHAY sevoreem aan sores |/80885 ode gugsecssachsscsasesceagses soccagge
2 PURoeY So asa 3 Sescosasaogacvesea|  posscooan
= “ae sa \| Ee
“1 “ALd ANSNdOTIAIO NBAVHVIS. 7 2, Tae | g's vor tim we BES, “Teen HEEREGES — lewaesGSBEaReS se Sa eB seeacasaassensy
sien vee ' a. ae " cee] Hula Hiiauaieeauaicce
Srse reve tha 3 tees ong sowng Boaessd  JoasSangabsc sees ausceuessesascccaaces
6 ‘92tt *09 Od “ = yuawseaa Bosses Sceassgeocd bec accoaucgeeaacgocapocg|
SZoL ON O308 Wam BuyuUEOy POYUyeYy =DvWWOD ft VouRnz gs e8aceq) eoeaccagoner coc nacooscoos sacgqacaagca|
.

  

 

 

rs" Japusy 404)
eroucey bupyng 904] ,
80-60-a1f +X 1OACUCay" ypauiBoqenng 304

100 sai0N i
fsa 10-08 |

a -

—T =

 
 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

anesR—G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

        
                                

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rn
ae yume mg
ay
o aT . .
oN : br = ,
$ . Arr ey ' .
\
| ck
4 PO {
Saerttee <
! = 7 N }
va <]
: N\ .
‘eal | dell »
e ecersod | ip «le yg 2 & ls a zt igor ues = '
i] 3 “Sere saorue 0H) wa) 20) BORO oul
1 Aq paeodoud $0 sm
baw
t- 1 :I
1
] wow som w0ig ang
- 1843) 820) 6
sbouig Layw0s, aS,
efunee hevtasd esi as
10g Ayederg joy Gay
saan Gk
areung Qi Buvedg weet) te
bauses wofasaeny ee
situa 20,0 sea wore
coun one 3
‘ron oe

 

 

 
 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

“ean ose :
Sei oa:
* "OF86 ‘YErsE
« 3 os: “QEPRE “OZZBG : SBinmosp psopuDjs SON 49j8y .
“Sat JONp e21019— JO epjsinc UC euDIGUIGW joord Jej}OMmM
a SS9LE @POIE oq oj s6uxyy puD sbi oe
me £ ‘ - Jorouddp soy uDjd uolonssU0> r
we vs iw, ost inugns of 40}20u0D Penczddy |
* i. ~ hoe . . . SALON TWH3NI9
. r ~ .S Ae ot ‘
7 7 ™ =
: - ~ ce
roe ay . + af
. “ : * ° ea ¥
a - s: > . .
: af tone <e ye Fs
‘ a. ct - ® aed i
« ~ - vy. . t Tree | a PAD _ 7 ‘ . wet ee