Further Advice (17 10) As Published (2)

                 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