Original source · versioned page text
ACOVER Castaways Information Request Response PC 10-11-17
Attached to the e-mail RAL17/0501 IR Response email 1 of 4.
Urban Systems Pty Ltd
ABN 89 107 154 601
Unit 4, 24 Kurilpa Street
West End QLD 4101
Australia
Peter Cumming: 0417 622 286
November 10, 2017 [email protected]
Lisa Pienaar Flannan Morley: 0417 191 602
Development Planner [email protected]
Noosa Council
PO Box 141
Tewantin Qld 4565
RAL17/0501 – 2 DAVID LOW WAY, LOT 71 MCH 2854 – RESPONSE TO COUNCIL’S INFORMATION
REQUEST UNDER THE PLANNING ACT 2016
This information response is made under the following section headings:
A. GENERAL MATTERS
B. EXPLANATION OF CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED ROL ARISING FROM THE INFORMATION REQUEST
C. RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC MATTERS RAISED IN THE INFORMATION REQUEST
D. RESPONSE ON BUILDING ENVELOPES
Note that specific responses from the consultant team in section C are included as ATTACHMENTS
to this letter in electronic form. The Council Information Request is included as Appendix 1 to this
letter.
A. GENERAL MATTERS
This response is made in accord with s13 of the Development Assessment Rules. The response is
made to all the information requested as described in s13.2 of the Rules.
SARA has not sent an Information Request regarding this application (s13.4 of the Rules). SARA
issued conditions of approval relating to the ROL on October 5, 2017. These were relayed to Council
and related to the carrying out of development in general accordance with the proposal Plan (S0054-
P4E) and Unexploded Ordinance procedural requirements.
It is also noted that members of the consultant team met with Council Officers regarding the
Information Request on October 18, 2017. This meeting clarified a number of issues for us, but we
did ask that Council respond on two matters to assist our response:
The stream order classification of Burgess Creek, and
A meeting or comment from Stuart Holland (Council’s traffic consultant) in relation to access to
the site.
We have not received any advice on the above at the time at writing but feel that we need to
respond to the IR now in lieu of response timeframes.
B. EXPLANATION OF CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED ROL PLAN ARISING FROM THE INFORMATION
REQUEST
In considering matters raised by Council in the Information Request we have substantially revised
the ROL Plan. Both the submitted plan and the revised plans are shown in Appendices 2 and 3 to this
letter. An electronic version of the revised plan ((S0054-P5) is also included as ATTACHMENT 1.
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 14 pages
Page 2
The key changes/features shown in the revised Subdivision Proposal Plan are as follows:
A small increase in the width of the David Low Way road reserve to accommodate the sight line
to the revised ROL access in accordance with Council’s request at point 13 of the Information
Request.
Retention of the 10-metre-wide road buffer covenant area.
An increase in the access easement width to 6m for its entire length to better accommodate
service vehicles and vehicle turnaround within the site between proposed lots 711 and 712
(points 14 and 16).
Delineation of a “coastal covenant area” of 6.0 metres width along the northern, eastern and
southern sides of building envelopes. This reflects conservation and bushfire plan objectives
(see points 1, 3, 4 and 6).
Clarification that the building envelopes reflect minimum building setbacks only as per Schedule
1 of the Noosa Planning Scheme (see point 8).
Considerable reduction in the size of building envelopes due to coastal buffers, retention of the
10m road buffer and the increased access easement width for northern lots 711, 712 and 713.
A corresponding increase in covenant areas from 3,643m2 to 5,052m2 (52% of the site).
The total area for building location (envelopes) has been reduced from 3,451m 2 to 2,968m2 or
30.7% of the site.
C. RESPONSE TO ALL SPECIFIC MATTERS RAISED IN THE INFORMATION REQUEST
Information relating to detailed responses to specific matters is shown in the following table.
REFERENCE IN THE RESPONSE NOTES
INFORMATION REQUEST
VEGETATION
1. Protection of Community Refer ATTACHMENT 2 – Ecological and environmental
Assets and Resources Response by Cardno response
Refer ATTACHMENT 3 – Environmental engineering
Response by Dr Trevor response
Johnston
2 & 3. Biodiversity Overlay Refer ATTACHMENT 2 – Refer to the ecological and
Area – Environmental Response by Cardno environmental response and
Protection the Vegetation Management
Plan.
Refer ATTACHMENT 1 –
Revised ROL Plan S005-4-P5
4. Biodiversity Overlay Area – Refer ATTACHMENT 2 –
Riparian Buffer Response by Cardno
5. Potential for UXO Refer ATTACHMENT 4 –
Response by OPEC Systems
BUSHFIRE
6. Bushfire Management Plan Refer ATTACHMENT 2 – A Bushfire Management Plan
Response by Cardno has been prepared
FAUNA
7. Fauna Assessment Refer ATTACHMENT 2 –
Response by Cardno
2|Page
Page 3
REFERENCE IN THE RESPONSE NOTES
INFORMATION REQUEST
BUILDING ENVELOPES
8. The extent of building Refer to section D. below in
envelopes this letter
WATER QUALITY OF BURGESS CREEK AND STABILITY AT STORMWATER OUTLET POINTS
9. Water quality objectives Refer ATTACHMENT 3 –
Response by Dr Trevor
Johnston
10. Preliminary Stormwater Refer ATTACHMENT 3 – Preliminary Stormwater Plans
Strategy Response by Dr Trevor are provided
Johnston
11. Stormwater impact on site Refer ATTACHMENT 3 –
stability Response by Dr Trevor
Johnston
EASEMENT AND COVENANT DOCUMENTS
12. Draft covenant and Refer ATTACHMENT 5 – Draft documents are provided
easement documents Response by Anderssens
Lawyers
SITE ACCESS AND TRAFFIC
13. Safe Intersection Sight Refer ATTACHMENT 6 – Safety impact assessment
Distance requirements Response by TTM
14. HRV and BAL treatment Refer ATTACHMENT 6 – Assessment and engineering
Response by TTM plans
Refer ATTACHMENT 7 –
Response by Sheehy and
Partners
15. Vertical alignment of the Refer ATTACHMENT 6 – Assessment and engineering
proposed access to David Low Response by TTM plans
Way Refer ATTACHMENT 7 –
Response by Sheehy and
Partners
16. Refuse bin pad storage Refer ATTACHMENT 6 – Assessment and engineering
locations Response by TTM plans
Refer ATTACHMENT 7 –
Response by Sheehy and
Partners
D. RESPONSE ON BUILDING ENVELOPES (POINT 8 IN THE INFORMATION REQUEST)
Issue – building envelopes
The building envelopes on each of the lots are very large and not appropriate in this sensitive dunal
area. Vegetation will be removed in these areas increasing the risks of erosion in the Coastal
Protection Area.
Additionally, the building envelopes of Lots 712 & 713 have a site cover of more than 50%. The
Eastern Beaches Locality Code and the Detached House Code specifies 50% for a single storey
dwelling or for a building of 2 or more storeys – 50% for ground floor and 30% for the upper storey/s,
or 40% for all storeys for a building of 2 or more storeys.
3|Page
Page 4
Information Required
8. Provide an amended plan with appropriate building envelopes that have considered the
provisions in the Eastern Beaches Locality Code and the Detached House Code. Assessment
must also be provided identifying the extent of vegetation site and the resultant clearing that
will occur within the envelopes.
Response:
This application is for a planning permit for an ROL. Specific building dimensions cannot be drawn
without final building designs for lots in accordance with relevant codes.
The building envelopes shown on the revised ROL Plan (S0054-P5) do not indicate the final extent of
building on each lot. Building envelopes are not defined in Noosa Scheme nor the Queensland
Planning Provisions. Their common meaning is to define an area within which a building can be sited.
The envelopes reflect the minimum setbacks required by Schedule 1 of the Scheme which is a basic
development parameter for dwellings in the Detached Housing zone. A note has been included on
the revised ROL Plan to clarify this. Individual buildings will be the subject of assessment under the
Eastern Beaches Locality Code and the Detached Housing Code as Council has pointed out.
The ecological reports undertaken by Cardno indicate that no significant vegetation occurs within
the building envelope minimum setback areas defined on the Subdivision Proposal Plan.
We hope that these responses adequately address Council’s Information Request and if you have
any questions or require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Yours Sincerely,
Peter Cumming
Director, Urban Systems Pty Ltd
4|Page
Page 5
APPENDIX 1 – COUNCIL INFORMATION REQUEST
Officer: Lisa Pienaar
Direct Telephone: 07 53296514
Our Reference: RAL17/0501
5|Page
Page 6
Your Reference: n/a
7 September 2017
Kenlynn Pty Ltd
C/- Urban Systems Pty Ltd
4/24 Kurilpa Street
WEST END QLD 4101
Dear Sir/Madam
Information Request
Planning Act 2016
I refer to your application and advise that Council requires further information to satisfactorily
assess the proposal.
1. APPLICATION DETAILS
Application No. RAL17/0501
Street Address: 2 David Low Way Castaways Beach Qld 4567
Real Property Description: Lot 71 MCH 2854
Planning Scheme: The Noosa Plan (3 July 2017)
2. INFORMATION REQUIRED
The information requested is set out below:
Issue - Vegetation
Protection of Community Assets and Resources
Coastal dune vegetation plays an important role as a first line of defence for storm surge and sea
level rise in the protection of community assets such as David Low Way. The site is located in a
Coastal Management District and a Coastal Protection Area. Protection of vegetation in this location
is important for site stability and protection of community assets.
Information Required
1. Demonstrate the development can provide suitable protection of community assets
including David Low Way, the dune systems, the adjacent vegetation, and
accommodate storm surge, sea level rise, and extreme storm events and allow for
ambulatory changes to the head of Burgess Creek. Include an assessment of the on-
going use and the impacts on the fore dunes through increased access, whilst not
burdening regulatory services to manage the area. Also include an analysis of the
clearing required for provision of sight lines for safe access as required in Item 13 of
this Information Request.
6|Page
Page 7
Biodiversity Overlay Area – Environmental Protection
The planning scheme is designates the lot as having an Environmental Protection area. A review of
the supplied information does not adequately address this designation.
Information Required
2. Provide an analysis of the vegetation on the lot with regards to the Environmental
Protection designation and the Vegetation of Noosa Shire, Ed 2, 2003.
3. Provide amended plans that show vegetation along the seaward boundary of all
proposed lots to a minimum width of 6.0m protected by covenant.
Biodiversity Overlay Area - Riparian Buffer
The site is mapped as a riparian buffer area and the Biodiversity Overlay code does not support new
development in these areas. The supplied information does not adequately address the riparian
buffer overlay code.
Information Required
4. Provide suitable planning and ecological grounds for the proposed development that
increases the scale and intensity of use within a Riparian Buffer area.
UXO
The site is located in an area with substantial potential for UXO. The development will increase the
amount of people living in a UXO area. UXO assessment and UXO rehabilitation can lead to clearing
protected vegetation.
Information Required
5. Provide further information regarding the UXO clearances required and the amount of
vegetation clearing necessary to render the site safe.
Issue - Bushfire
The development is located in a bushfire hazard area and increases the number of people living in a
hazard area.
Information Required
6. Provide a Bushfire Management Plan that complies with the Natural Hazards Overlay
code of the Noosa Plan.
Issue - Fauna
The site contains remnant vegetation which provides habitat and forage values for native fauna
(refer Fauna and its associated biodiversity values in Noosa Shire 2003). Insufficient information has
been provided regarding the fauna habitat values of the site.
Information Required
7. Provide a fauna assessment in accordance with Planning Scheme Policy 18 Ecological
Assessment Guidelines Section 7.
7|Page
Page 8
Issue – building envelopes
The building envelopes on each of the lots are very large and not appropriate in this sensitive dunal
area. Vegetation will be removed in these areas increasing the risks of erosion in the Coastal
Protection Area. Additionally, the building envelopes of Lots 712 & 713 have a site cover of more
than 50%. The Eastern Beaches Locality Code and the Detached House Code specifies 50% for a
single storey dwelling or for a building of 2 or more storeys – 50% for ground floor and 30% for the
upper storey/s, or 40% for all storeys for a building of 2 or more storeys.
Information Required
8. Provide an amended plan with appropriate building envelopes that have considered the
provisions in the Eastern Beaches Locality Code and the Detached House Code. Assessment
must also be provided identifying the extent of vegetation site and the resultant clearing that
will occur within the envelopes.
Issue - Water Quality of Burgess Creek and Stability at Stormwater Outlet points
The proposed subdivision has the potential to increase hardstand area which changes frequent
flows, peak runoff velocities and water quality. The State Planning Policy (SPP) requires
developments of this nature to demonstrate that they provide mitigation measures in stormwater
runoff to manage frequent flows to not change to 1% AEP and achieve pollution reduction targets of
80% reduction of Total Suspended Solids, 60% reduction of Total Phosphorous and 45% reduction of
Total Nitrogen compared to a non-mitigated scenario. Additionally, Specific Outcomes O1, O9 and
O10 of the Water Sensitive Design Code of the Noosa Plan requires developments to not adversely
affect water quality, water flows or ecological values of the receiving environment. For this
development, further information is needed to confirm the receiving environment will not be
adversely impacted. The concerns with flow management are to do with scour at the stormwater
outlets, impact of scour on slope stability. Concerns with changes to water quality have to do with
potential for nutrient increases to Burgess Creek, especially when it is closed as well as impacts of
locally increased nutrients to dunal vegetation.
The application is unclear whether runoff from the development will discharge via groundwater or
overland flow to Burgess Creek or elsewhere. The size and location of any required stormwater
management devices that will result from the proposed subdivision and the impacts it could have on
site stability, asset management etc. may potentially affect lot layout/ easements etc.
Information Required
9. Demonstrate that the proposed development will meet the environmental objectives for
water quality management as required by the SPP and The Noosa Plan.
10. Provide a preliminary stormwater strategy which identifies the proposed stormwater outlet
locations and flow paths as a result of the proposed development.
11. Provide advice from a suitably experienced and qualified geotechnical engineer to confirm
that the proposed stormwater discharge strategy will not affect stability on landslip areas or
cause erosion.
Issue – Easement and Covenant
Council has concerns with the administration and ongoing maintenance of the covenant areas and
the access easement.
8|Page
Page 9
Information Required
12. Provide draft covenant and easement documents that clearly define the administration and
ongoing maintenance responsibilities of the relevant areas.
Issue - Site access and traffic
David Low Way is an arterial road. The Transport Roads and Drainage Code at O7, specifies that
roads are to be planned and designed to support the hierarchy and functional aspects identified in
Sections 2 and 3 of PSP5. PSP5 states at 2.1 (iv) that general access to arterial roads shall not be
permitted, and that access shall be indirect via service roads. The proposed access onto David Low
Way would thus need to be designed to satisfy road access requirements, rather than driveway
access requirements for sight distances and functionality. PSP5 at Section 3.10 also specifies that
property access shall be located to achieve sight distances as outlined in the Austroads guidelines.
The TTM report has assessed sight lines at the new driveway based on the requirements of
Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.1 -2004 for a 70km/hr design speed. This is a substantially lower
sight distance requirement than required by the Austroads guidelines. Note also that the TTM
report has not strictly achieved the sight line requirements of the Australian Standard because it has
not measured the sight line to the closest lane edge, which would increase the sight line
requirement suggested in the TTM report even when measured using the lower requirements of the
Australian Standard.
Information Required
13. Assess and achieve Safe Intersection Sight Distance requirements at the proposed driveway as
defined by the Austroads guidelines, consistent with the requirements of Section 3.10 of PSP5,
based on the design speed of David Low Way determined from a speed survey.
14. Modify the proposed site access design so that a HRV can turn into the site from wholly within
the proposed BAL left turn lane, without using the adjacent through lane, so that the vehicle
can wait in that lane clear of through traffic, if there is another vehicle waiting to depart from
the access at that same time. Otherwise the site access should be redesigned to
accommodate turning to the access by a HRV at the same time as a car is departing the
site. Also, the taper for the proposed BAL treatment needs to be lengthened to comply with
Austroads standards.
15. Modify the proposed vertical alignment of the proposed access to David Low Way, to satisfy
the grading requirements of AS/NZS 2890.1-2004, particularly in achieving satisfactory grades
across the verge and on the approaches to the existing pedestrian / cycle path from both
directions on the driveway (as vehicles using the driveway will need to give way to pedestrians
/ cyclists on that path). The proposed alterations to the existing vertical alignment of the
existing path should also be identified.
16. Prepare a plan identifying refuse bin pad storage locations for each lot (2 wheelie bins per lot),
together with the path of a refuse vehicle to/from and within the site, satisfactorily servicing
each bin location. Visitor parking should also be identified on that plan (satisfying a minimum
requirement of 0.5 visitor spaces per lot) clear of those refuse collection requirements and
clear of potential driveways to the individual sites. Titling arrangements would also need to
be clarified for the visitor parking to ensure that visitor spaces are available for all 6 lots,
rather than being associated with specific allotments. Visitor parking would need to be clearly
designated and signed as being for visitors only. This is important because overflow parking
from the site will not be acceptable.
1. DUE DATE FOR RESPONSE TO INFORMATION REQUEST
The due date for providing the requested information is 7 December 2017. Please advise Council of
your response to this information request in accordance with section 13 of the Development
Assessment Rules.
9|Page
Page 10
If you do not provide a response before the due date, it will be taken as if you have decided not to respond to the information request and Council will continue with the assessment of your application. 2. OTHER DETAILS You can follow the progress of this application online at www.noosa.qd.gov.au. The “Online Services” page can be accessed via "Quick Links" on the left hand side of the screen. Should you have any further queries in relation to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me on the number above. Yours faithfully Lisa Pienaar Development Planner 10 | P a g e
Page 11
APPENDIX 2 – SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL PLAN AS SUBMITTED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 11 | P a g e
Page 12
12 | P a g e
[OCR of page images]
This pean has been aS 3 proposed subdivision
3rd chow not be for any omer purpose.
The dimensions, areas and total number of lots shown
hereon are to field survey and are also to the
Tequirements of counc® and any other aufhority waich
may have requirements under any relevant leqisiation.
Certificate of Title for this ste has not been obtained
Therefore, no reflance should be pkaoed on the
information on this plan for any fiancial dealings
volving the land
Oe!
_ L211 m2 Bldg En’
egg 85Im* | 8
Scale 17760 = Lengths are in Metres.
a
wr)
SASZAUNS SIV VW
Tun
wre 3 rrizeaas in
iF HO WRORNN PonaB ener LA
NV1d 1VSOdOdd NOISIAIGSNS
Easement Schedule *%
Wentifie] Benefit Type \
A 712 Access/Services'
B 711,713 Access/Services
c 711,712,714 | Access/Services
Do 711-713,715 Access/Services
5 711-714,716 Access/Services
F 711-715 Access/Services
Statistics Table
Lots 6
Area range 046m’ - 3338m
Area average 1612m
Road Nil
Park Nil
Covenant 3643 m’
Contour Interval - 1m, 5m major
REVISIONS:
aor ae
sacar] Oe a at come fe L
see See ae
o wb
20 » o 50
60 ro * ~
fase vow ows sama [LEVEL DATUME| aITE:
cane ed cree ceren ame
Proposed Lots 711718 & Ente AF & Cov PV
Canceling Lot 71 on MCH 2864
2 David Low Way.
CLENT:
Kenlynn Pty Ltd
SCALE —1-760{A3}
PLAN REF: $0054-P4(E}
oss.
12|Page
Page 13
APPENDIX 3 – REVISED SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL PLAN AS A RESULT OF THE INFORMATION REQUEST 13 | P a g e [OCR of page images] APPENDIX 3 — REVISED SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL PLAN AS A RESULT OF THE INFORMATION REQUEST 13|Page
Page 14
14 | P a g e [OCR of page images] ‘This pian has been prepared as 3 proposed subdivision 3nd should not be wsed for any other purpose. The dimensions, areas and total number of lots shown hereon are subject to field survey and are aso to he fj requirements of counci! ang any other suthorty which is / may have requirement under any reievant legisiation. jf f Q ” g acute Certificate of Tite for this site has not been obtained / Ny Therefore, no reliance should be placed on the / j information on this plan for any tnancial dealings = wong the land. omer ry "eres SAAAMNS STV C] Covenant (Coastal) NV1d 1VSOdOud NOISIAIGSNS Easement Schedule Identifier| Benefit Type A 712 Access/Services/Council B 711,713 Access/Services/Council c 711,712,714 Access/Services/Council D 711-713,715 Access/Services/Council E 711-714,716 | Access/Services/Council F 711-715 Access/Services!Council Note: Statistics Table Building Envelopes refiect a a oa i minimum building setbacks a aeage —— as per schedule 1 of the Road 72m Noosa Planning Scheme. Park Ni Covenant ei4ar Contour Note: Total Site Area 0677 m* (Comtour interva’s are at 1.0m (minor) and 5.0m (major) ; SEaSou SU eng ep ee — ag —— ~ = to ° to 20 wD 4 so 6o % a a ay Ww mere ae ce mae LEVEL DATUM | SITE: Proposed Lots 711-106 & Emf's A-F & Cow HN & Pov CLIENT SCALE 1-750 (a3) a fem see ———— 2 urtd Loe Wn, Costnnaes Beet Kenlynn Pty Ltd [pu rer. seosers 14|Page
Page 15
15 | P a g e [OCR of page images] a i urban systems and should not be used for The dimensions, areas ard Invatving the land This pian has Deen prepared as a poposed subdivision Certificate of Tite for tits ste has not been obtained. “Therefore, no retlance should be placed on the information on this pian for any francial deatings ‘The aertaé photo undertay is dertved from information ! supped by Nearmap.com. itis approximate only. manierat recess 6 LAAMNS STV ——— New Road n i oO 9 Q ° = Note: 3 Building Envelopes reflect ° minimum building setbacks as per schedule 1 of the Easement Schedule en i Benefit Type 0 A 712 Access/Services/Council | eee 8 711,713 Access!Services/Council > c 711,712,714 | Access/Services/Council D 711-713.715 | Access!Services/Council a E 711-714,716 Access/Services/Council F 711-715 Access/Services/Council Statistics Table Lots 6 Area range 942m* - 3336m* Ares average 1601 m* Road 72m Park Nil Covenant 5052 m° Total Site Area 9677 m* t SEYIRICRR. rE Luton 1 1 - + 60 70 20 no 10, cans un Jos em [LEVELDATUM:| aire. Proposed Lots Tit-T18 & Emre AF SCovMING PV |CLIENT- ScME trea) we ee oS emer Lat Ties Scales, Kenlynn Pty Ltd |ruaver: SOStPS