Info Request MCU17/0054

Officer	Patrick Murphy
Direct Telephone:	 07 5329 6436
Our Reference	MCU17/0054
Your Reference	2142

19 June 2017

Tewantin Retail P/L
C/- Martoo Consulting
PO Box 1684
NOOSA HEADS  QLD  4567

Dear Sir/Madam

Information Request
Sustainable Planning Act 2009

application details
Application No:	MCU17/0054
Proposal:	Development Permit for Material Change of Use of Premises - Retail Business Type 2 - Shop & Entertainment & Dining Business Type 1 - Food & Beverages
Street Address:	11 Hilton Tce TEWANTIN  QLD  4565 17-19 Hilton Tce TEWANTIN  QLD  4565
Real Property Description:	Lot 3 RP 152351 Lot 2 RP 152351
information required
The information requested is set out below:

Issue – Acid Sulfate Soils
The State Planning Policy applies to lands at or below 5m AHD for filling with 500 cubic metres or more of material with an average depth of 0.5m or more. The SPP requires these developments to avoid disturbance of acid sulfate soil by not undertaking filling that results in moving of ASS below the water table, or where this is unavoidable, preventing the release of groundwater flows containing acid and metal contaminants into the environment.

Specific Outcome 25 of the Natural Hazards Overlay Codes requires that works avoid the release of acid or associated contaminants (i.e. via avoidance of filling that moves acid sulfate soils through the groundwater table, or via preventing release of such waters to the environment)

Specific Outcome O1 of the water sensitive design code requires downstream Ecosystems, properties and infrastructure are not adversely impacted by either changes to flow, water quality or ecosystem health caused by development.

The application proposes to fill the property by a depth of 1.2m across the 3,665m2 site.  The Geotech and Potential Acid Sulfate Soil report notes to prevent rising of groundwater through capillary action by preventing vibration, however, it is expected that the weight of the fill along with general construction trafficking will contribute similar processes that can move of groundwater through acid sulfate soils. It is therefore not clear whether the development will not release groundwater flows containing acid and metal contaminants into the environment.

Information Required
Demonstrate how the development is designed to meet the aforementioned Specific Outcomes of the Noosa Plan and State Planning Policy and will not cause release of acid sulfate soil related metals to the receiving environment.

Demonstrate why filling is the only option to raise areas of the development required to be elevated above the flood zone.

Issue – Management of Gross Pollutants
Specific Outcome 10 requires that the development design and operation facilitate nil increase in gross pollutants entering stormwater systems. It is acknowledged that the development design has proposed measures to capture stormwater pollutants, however operational measures are not proposed to prevent the pollutants entering the stormwater system in the first place.

Information Required
Suggest operational measures to facilitate nil increase in gross pollutants from operation of the site. (i.e. signage/ messaging/packaging/bins etc)

Issue – Bioretention Basin Footprints
Specific Outcome 8 requires that development design includes adequate footprint to integrate all elements of the stormwater treatment infrastructure without the need for retaining walls. At operational works phase there are sometimes conflicts between the areas required for batters compared to areas necessary to meet landscaping codes.

Information Required
Provide a cross section of Bioretention Basin A to demonstrate that there is sufficient room allocated for the 30m2 filter media area plus the footprint required for batters to that bioretention basin, without the need to compromise landscaping footprints.

Issue
Site plans appear to detail a retaining wall to each of the sites frontages and also includes a stone entry wall adjacent to the Hilton Terrace boundary. Elevation plans do not provide sufficient details of works to each frontage.

Information required
Elevation plans and cross sections which clearly detail all work to each frontage. It should be noted that walls on the boundary are not supported.

Issue
The submitted plans detail works external to the site. It should be noted that Council has only prepared concept plans in relation to works within Hilton Terrace, Earl Street and Ernest Street and that any development approval would require frontage works. It is expected that these works will include the provision of the 8 new car spaces on Hilton Terrace, kerb and channel road pavement widening, full width concrete footpath, pedestrian refuge and associated landscaping. The provision of 8 new car spaces on Hilton Terrace may provide the opportunity to reduce the number of car spaces on site.

Information required
Assessment of the existing car parking provision to the front of the site on Hilton Terrace against the provision of 8 new car parking spaces in the same location. The net difference to be used to reduce the amount of car parking on site to provide for an increase in landscaping.

Issue
Outcome 19 of the Landscaping Code seeks landscaping which softens building bulk and creates pleasant settings for visitors and staff that function well in an intensively used environment. It is considered that there are opportunities to provide improved landscaping outcomes consistent with that attached Review of Site Plan SK01.

Information required
Landscaping in line with architects recommendations as detailed on the attached plan Review of Site Plan SK01. This includes:

Broader landscape strips within the car park;
Increased landscaping adjacent to the external dining areas; and
Broader landscaping in areas adjacent to the proposed pedestrian crossings

It is also requested that the reference ‘GB1” be clarified

Issue
The height differences between Hilton Esplanade, Earl Street and Earnest Street and the proposed carpark are not shown in detail to fully understand the impact of such a proposal. Of note is the provision of landscaping and the retaining structures required to support the carpark.

Information Required
Provide cross sections of the proposed development from the edge of kerb to the buildings showing the landscaping and including

Typical cross section of the Hilton Terrace landscaped frontage
Cross section through the Hilton Terrace ramp structure
Cross section of the Earl Street landscaped frontage
Cross section of Earnest Street landscaped frontage.

Issue
The landscape drawings show a predominance of non-local tree species to be used in the development which is not supported by the planning scheme. In addition, the planting areas of the tree species is proposed in fill area. The ability of the tree species to grow in fill areas to full form is compromised.

Information Required
Provide amended landscape drawings demonstrating the use of local native tree species in a structure soil suitable for their optimal growth performance. Information to be provided is to include:

Local native tree species suitable for the area including 100L Melaleuca quinquenervia along the frontage.
Local native species for understorey and shrubs.
Details, including volume, of the structured soils to be used for each advanced tree species in accordance with written recommendations of a suitably qualified person.

Issue
Council has concerns with the proposed wheel stops in the car parking area due to potential trip/fall hazard.

Information required
Consideration should be given to design changes to relocate/extend the kerbing on the edges of the car parking area such that vehicles can overhang the garden beds or footpath by 600mm (refer dimension C2 of Figure 2.2 in AS/NZS2890.1:2004)

Issue
The traffic report identifies that the Ernest Street access point shall be ‘left in and left out’ only however the application does not include details as to how this will be enforced.

Information required
Clarification as to how the Ernest Street access point is to be managed to ensure that it is ‘left in and left out’ only.

Issue
It has been identified that the use of the loading bay/bin collection area may result in conflict with pedestrian movement.

Information required
Clarification of the control measures or alternative solutions that are to be implemented to ensure that pedestrian safety is acceptable.

Issue
It is noted that the north and east elevation plans includes some details of proposed signage. It is noted that a reference to 3.75sqm is detailed on the plans however it is unclear as to whether this applies to all tenancies, there appears to be no signage detail for Restaurant 1.

Information required
A signage concept plan that identifies the proposed signface area for each property.

Issue
The proposed plans refer to vertical retractable screens to perimeter of the outdoor dining areas. Elevations/perspective drawings do not include details of these screens.

Information required
Elevation/perspective drawings which include details of the vertical retractable screens.

End of Information Request

Under the provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, you have three options available in response to this Information Request. You may give the assessment manager (in this instance Council) and each referral agency (if any):

all of the information requested; or
part of the information requested together with a letter asking the assessment manager and each referral agency to proceed with the assessment of the application; or
a letter;
stating that you do not intend to supply any of the information requested; and
asking the assessment manager and each referral agency to proceed with the assessment of the application.

Please be aware that under Section 279 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 the applicant must respond to the Information Request within 6 months of the request or otherwise the application lapses.

A response to the above is required to be submitted, prior to further assessment of the application.  If any further matters arise as part of assessment of this application, you will be advised accordingly.

Council prefers that all the information requested be submitted as one package.  A preliminary assessment only of the application has been undertaken and during the formal decision stage, or as a result of public exhibition, other matters may arise.  You are requested to advise your client directly regarding this request.

You may wish to follow the progress of this application online at www.noosa.qld.gov.au .  The “PD Online” page can be accessed via "Quick Links" on the left hand side of the screen.  A disclaimer will appear; upon clicking “agree”, a search for a development application or property address can be carried out.

Should you have any further queries in relation to the above, please do not hesitate to contact Patrick Murphy on the above number.

Yours faithfully

Patrick Murphy
COORDINATOR PLANNING

[word/footer1.xml]
Page 5 of 5

[word/footer2.xml]
PO Box 141		P. (07) 5329 6500	[email protected]	
	TEWANTIN  QLD  4565	F. (07) 5329 6501	www.noosa.qld.gov.au
				Page 1 of 5

[word/header1.xml]
MCU17/0054