Original source · versioned page text
Further Advice (17 10) As Published (2)
Attached to the e-mail Further Advice Response 21-8-26 – OPW Application (Council Ref. OPW24/0142) - Lakelands Resort, 396 Lake Cooroibah Road, Cooroibah.
Officer: Daniel Epps
Direct Telephone: 07 5329 6223
Our Reference: OPW24/0142
Your Reference: 676.2
17 October 2025
BR Williams
C/- Innovative Planning Solutions Pty Ltd
PO Box 1043
MAROOCHYDORE QLD 4558
[email protected]
Dear Sir/Madam,
Further Advice – Development Application
I refer to your application and advise that Council wishes to provide you with further advice
about the application in accordance with the provisions of the Development Assessment Rules
2017.
1. APPLICATION DETAILS
Application No. OPW24/0142
Street Address: Lakelands Resort 396 Lake Cooroibah Rd Cooroibah Qld 4565
Lakelands Resort
2/396 Lake Cooroibah Rd Cooroibah Qld 4565
Real Property Description: Lot 0 GTP 1928, Lot 2 GTP 1928
Planning Scheme: Noosa Plan 2020 (25 September 2020)
2. FURTHER ADVICE
Issue – Development Staging
The justification for the amended staging is insufficient in demonstrating compliance with the
higher order approval (51987.2966.05).
The proposed amended staging:
• Includes an additional ‘temporary’ access from Lot 0 (Common Property) to Stage 1A.
• Does not propose to construct the driveway crossover until Stage 1B.
• Does not propose to seal the driveway crossover or internal driveway until the final
stage.
Advice Required
1. Lodge a Minor Change Application to the higher order approval to amend the staging
layout of the development; or
2. Amend the staging layout of the development to comply with the higher order approval.
ABN 97.969.214.121 PO Box 141
noosa.qld.gov.au Tewantin QLD 4565
[email protected] 07 5329 6500
Page 1 of 5
Document Set ID: 24231086
24231081
Version: 2, Version Date: 17/10/2025
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 4 pages
Page 2
Issue – Earthworks Plan
An Earthworks Plan has not been submitted as part of the application material.
Council is unable to assess the “Earthworks” component of the Operational Works application
against the Noosa Plan 2020 – Earthworks Code.
Council considers the application material insufficient to satisfy Condition 3 of the higher order
approval (51987.2966.05).
Advice Required
3. Submit an Earthworks Plan that satisfies the Noosa Plan 2020 – Earthworks Code,
PSP6 – Engineering Design Standards and demonstrates the extent of earthworks
required below the 3.0m contour to improve the existing drainage in the area. The
Earthworks Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified person (RPEQ).
Issue – Stormwater Management Plan
A Stormwater Management Plan has not been submitted as part of the application material.
Council is unable to assess the “Stormwater” and “Drainage work” components of the
Operational Works application against the Noosa Plan 2020 – Water Quality and Drainage
Code.
Council considers the application material insufficient to satisfy Condition 4 of the higher order
approval (51987.2966.05).
N.B. Council advises that Marshall Civil Engineering’s Stormwater Management Plan (SBSMP, Rev. B)
dated 2 August 2021 is unlikely to satisfy the above because the report does not:
• consider an increase in impervious area from the sealing of the internal driveway;
• include an allowance for climate change when calculating the required detention volume; and
• include a ‘low-flow’ outlet to allow the detention tanks to empty between rainfall events.
Advice Required
4. Submit a Stormwater Management Plan that satisfies the Noosa Plan 2020 – Water
Quality and Drainage Code, PSP6 – Engineering Design Standards and Condition 4 of
the higher order approval (51987.2966.05). The Stormwater Management Plan must be
prepared by a suitably qualified person (RPEQ).
Issue – Driveway Crossover
The proposed driveway crossover shown on SCG Consulting’s Proposed Driveway Crossover
Plan (33140 – OW2.2) dated July 24 does not comply with Council’s standard drawing RS-
056 for the following reasons:
• a culvert, associated headwalls and stone pitching has not been proposed to support
flow and prevent ponding in the existing verge.
• guideposts have not been proposed.
Council considers that the proposed driveway crossover fails to satisfy Condition 5 of the
higher order approval (51987.2966.05).
Advice Required
Page 2 of 5
Document Set ID: 24231086
24231081
Version: 2, Version Date: 17/10/2025
Page 3
5. Provide additional detail demonstrating a compliant a sealed rural driveway crossover
in accordance with Council’s standard drawings RS-056, RS-056.01 and any associated
addendum. The additional detail must be prepared by a suitably qualified person
(RPEQ) and include, but not be limited to:
a. a 375mm dia. RCP culvert, associated concrete headwalls and stone pitching; and
b. guideposts.
Issue – Sight Distance at Intersection
The Proposed Driveway Site Distances detail shown on SCG Consulting’s Proposed Driveway
Crossover Plan (33140 – OW2.2) dated July 24 does not satisfy the required safe sight
distance for a 60km/hr road as per Council’s standard drawing RS-056 (i.e., 123 metres). The
drawing details a maximum sight distance of ~45m and ~55m to the west and north-east,
respectively.
Council considers that the proposed driveway crossover fails to satisfy Condition 5 of the
higher order approval (51987.2966.05).
Advice Required
6. Provide additional detail demonstrating that 123 metres of unbroken sight distance is
available in both directions at the proposed driveway crossover in accordance with
Council’s standard drawing RS-056. The additional detail must be prepared by a suitably
qualified person (RPEQ) and include any treatments to achieve the required sight
distance.
Issue – Carparking on Lot 2 & Internal Driveway on Lot 0
The proposed carparking layout shown on Ecolibrium’s Overall Site Plan (DD01, Rev. O)
dated 11 September 2025:
• Proposes twenty-one (21) car parking spaces to service Lot 2 when twenty-two (22) is
required.
• Does not include a sealed access to Lot 1 whereby Condition 11 reads “… for Lot 1,
and access there to which are to be provided with a sealed pavement…”.
• The carparking layout plans have not been prepared by a suitably qualified person
(RPEQ).
Council considers that the proposed carparking layout fails to satisfy Condition 11 of the higher
order approval (51987.2966.05).
Advice Required
7. Provide additional detail demonstrating compliance with Condition 11 of the higher order
approval (51987.2966.05). The additional detail must be prepared by a suitably qualified
person (RPEQ) and include, but not be limited to:
a. Twenty-two (22) car parking spaces contained entirely within Lot 2 and remain
consistent with the approved staging of the higher order approval, i.e.-
i. Stage 1 – 8 total carparks (including 1 PWD)
ii. Stage 2 – 7 total carparks
iii. Stage 3 – 7 total carparks
Page 3 of 5
Document Set ID: 24231086
24231081
Version: 2, Version Date: 17/10/2025
Page 4
b. A sealed internal access driveway extending from the front property boundary to
the shared property boundary between Lot 0 (Common Property) and Lot 1 which
must be provided as part of Stage 1.
c. Details of all associated drainage works, pavement details, road cross-sections,
etc.
Issue – Waste Management
A hosecock and hose(s) has not been provided in the vicinity of the refuse container as per
Condition 15 of the higher order approval (51987.2966.05)
Additionally, it is unclear how:
• a waste collection vehicle will service the bin storage area; and
• visitors/occupants will access the bin storage area.
Advice Required
8. Demonstrate compliance with Condition 15 of the higher approval (51987.2966.05).
9. Provide a Waste Management Plan in accordance with PSP9 Waste Management. The
Waste Management Plan must demonstrate how a waste collection vehicle will service
the site (including vehicle manoeuvring) and how visitors/occupants will access the bin
storage area.
Issue – Bonds
The $10,000 bond called for as part of Condition 17 of the higher order approval has not been
paid (51987.2966.05).
Council is unable to issue an Operational Works approval until this condition has been
satisfied.
Advice Required
10. Provide a receipt confirming the bond has been paid in accordance with Condition 17 of
the higher order approval (51987.2966.05).
Issue - Vegetation removal
The operational works plans indicate that the proposed structures and activities will
necessitate the removal of vegetation identified as having biodiversity significance.
Advice Required
11. Demonstrate how the existing vegetation on the site will be retained in accordance with
Condition 12 of the higher order approval (51987.2966.05). Where vegetation removal
is proposed, an arborist report prepared by a suitably qualified professional must be
submitted. This report should include an assessment of all trees proposed for removal
and provide sound arboricultural justification for their removal.
Page 4 of 5
Document Set ID: 24231086
24231081
Version: 2, Version Date: 17/10/2025
Page 5
Issue – Open Space landscape and revegetation
The Operational works landscape plans have not addressed the Planning Scheme Policy 2 –
Landscaping or incorporated the requirements of condition 12 of the higher order approval
(51987.2966.05).
Advice Required
12. Provide revised landscape plans that are in accordance with the higher order approval
(51987.2966.05) development layout.
13. Provide detailed landscape plans that incorporate the requirements of the Riparian Zone
Plans, prepared by Environmental Landscape Planning dated 02/2022.
14. Provide revised landscaping plans that substitute the use of Ravenala Rivularis for a
mixture of native tree species found with the local Regional Ecosystem 12.2.5.
15. Provide revised landscape plans that demonstrate that suitable landscape buffering is
provided to ensure the development is screened from neighbouring properties. This
must include landscape buffering to all boundaries of Lot 2.
3. DUE DATE FOR RESPONSE TO FURTHER ADVICE
A response to the further advice is required by 3 December 2025. Email your response to
[email protected]. OTHER DETAILS
Should you have any further queries in relation to the above, please do not hesitate to contact
me on the number above.
Yours faithfully,
Daniel Epps
Senior Development Engineer
Page 5 of 5
Document Set ID: 24231086
24231081
Version: 2, Version Date: 17/10/2025