RFI response for 11 Senegal Rise

Page 2

Figure 1 – Proximity of existing residence to shared property boundary (3m)




Figure 2 – Eastern side of adjacent residence showing proximity to shared property
boundary and presence of outhouse directly up to the boundary




                                    Page 2 of 8

Page 3

•   The adjacent household sewage treatment plant is positioned approximately 1 metre
    from the property boundary (refer Figure 3). This creates a low hum during operation
    and the positioning of the shed has been determined taking into account the separation
    distance desirable under the Queensland Plumbing and Wastewater Code and the
    acoustic buffering capacity able to assimilate the noise from impacting the adjacent
    residence.




Figure 3 – Adjacent sewage treatment plant approximately 1m off shared property
boundary and presence of existing rock retaining wall to accommodate height variation




                                      Page 3 of 8

Page 4

•   An existing outhouse has been established immediately adjacent to the boundary on
    the neighbouring property (refer Figure 1 and Figure 2).
•   The proposed development will retain and enhance existing vegetation between the
    proposed shed and the property boundary to mitigate visual impacts. A dense growth
    of banana palms and golden cane palms extends along the property boundary within
    the neighbour’s land (refer Figure 4), providing substantial screening to the proposed
    shed location on the applicant’s property. It is proposed that additional plantings of
    native shrubs, such as Syzygium australe “resilience” are established at 6m centres
    along the edge of the shed between the sewage treatment plant and the area of palm
    trees. This species grows to approximately 5m – 6m in height and provide dense foliage
    from low elevations capable of screening the shed from the neighbouring property.




Figure 4 – Existing golden cane palms along property boundary

On the basis of the above, the notion of a shed extending approximately 2 metres above
the ground and separated by some 6m from the existing dwelling, the presence of existing
screening, and the amenity created by the house being located 3m from the boundary all
contribute to a reasonable expectation that a 3m setback from the property boundary for
the proposed shed would be acceptable. We therefore request Council approve the
request for a 3m setback from the side property boundary.

2. Earthworks Quantity
The volume of cut and fill proposed for the dwelling is somewhat dependent on the builder
commissioned to construct the residence, but it is proposed that the extent of cut will be
limited to approximately 1m at the western end of the block to accord with the existing
retaining wall present along the property boundary in proximity to the existing residence
on the neighbouring property. This will enable the shed and the residence to be located at
approximately 74m AHD across the site. Preliminary cut and fill calculations suggest up to
80m3 of material will be included in the cut and fill balance as the overall area requiring
earthworks is not substantial. This is well below the 100m3 permitted under Council’s table
of development assessment for operational works.




                                      Page 4 of 8

Page 5

At this stage, the only retaining wall proposed will be approximately 1m in height along the
western extent of cut. Additional retaining walls have not yet been proposed but will be
progressed in accordance with the recommendations in the slope stability assessment
completed for the site where required. The applicant is open to Council imposing a
condition on the approval requiring retaining structures to be installed in accordance with
the slope stability assessment.

3. Stormwater
All stormwater captured from the shed and the residence will be directed to rainwater
tanks as the land is not serviced by reticulated water supply. Excess stormwater collected
during wet periods will be discharged to the western extent of the allotment via 90mm PVC
pipe. Stormwater from this location will be discharged into vegetated areas and will
dissipate as sheet flow across approximately 150m to the existing waterway in Livistona
Park to the south. This comprises a lawful point of discharge and comprises public land
containing a defined watercourse that ultimately flows to Eenie Creek. The location of the
discharge point will be on the opposite side of a low ridge to the effluent disposal area to
ensure excess rainwater does not saturate the effluent disposal area.

A concept plan has been attached showing the approximate location of the dwelling house,
rainwater tanks, the effluent disposal area and the stormwater outlet. This information
has been provided to assist Council in understanding how it is intended for stormwater in
excess to what is contained in the rainwater tanks to be managed onsite and may be varied
onsite slightly to comply with the slope stability assessment and other legislation. All
stormwater will be discharged as dispersed flow and will be required to move through
significant areas of dense bushland, resulting in no increase in flow concentrations on
adjacent freehold land parcels.

4. Vegetation Management Plan
Further to our teleconference with Council’s environmental officer, all service
infrastructure associated with the initial build will be confined to the cleared area
nominated on the plan. That is, the driveway which extend from the street frontage, and
a pool and other garden features will be established within the existing cleared area on the
north-eastern side of the allotment. Rainwater tanks and the onsite effluent treatment
and disposal infrastructure is proposed within the bushfire setback. The effluent disposal
area will comprise covered surface irrigation or subsurface irrigation and will therefore be
hidden from the rear of the dwelling house. A concept plan showing the potential layout
of this infrastructure has been shown in the plan attached to this correspondence.

5. Koala Habitat Exemption
While substantial information was provided with the supporting documentation included
with the application in relation to the exempted development, it is understood that Council
seeks clarification on whether the rainwater tanks or effluent disposal areas associated
with the residence will require additional clearing to occur, and whether this remains within
the definition of exempted development.

Reference to Schedule 1 of the Noosa Plan 2020 defines a dwelling house as a residential
use of premises involving—


                                       Page 5 of 8

Page 6

•   one dwelling for a single household and any domestic outbuildings associated with the
    dwelling; or
•   one dwelling for a single household, a secondary dwelling and any domestic
    outbuildings associated with either dwelling.

The proposed shed and any support infrastructure that is necessarily associated with and
ancillary to the dwelling house is inherently included in the definition of a dwelling house.
While the proposed shed is for the most part located outside of the mapped core koala
habitat, the proposed residence extends for a portion of the structure inside the mapped
core koala habitat.

The definition of exempted development for koala habitat includes two clauses that are
relevant to this application:
(k) development that results in a total area on the premises of 500m 2 or less of 1 or more
koala habitat areas being cleared of native vegetation since 7 February 2020
(n) the clearing of native vegetation in a koala habitat area if the clearing (vii) is necessary
for essential management and is qualifying clearing.

The definition of essential management includes clearing native vegetation (a) for
establishing or maintaining a necessary firebreak to protect infrastructure, other than a
fence, road or vehicular track, if the maximum width of the firebreak is equal to 1.5 times
the height of the tallest vegetation next to the infrastructure, or 20m, whichever is the
wider. The bushfire hazard assessment completed for the subject land has identified a
minimum asset protection zone of 28m of cleared vegetation is required to achieve an
adequate separation distance for a BAL 29 construction standard to be appropriate. As the
clearing of the asset protection zone to service the residence complies with this definition
and the aforementioned service infrastructure will generally be located within the cleared
area, no additional clearing for infrastructure is proposed as part of this application.

6. Bushfire Management Plan
We note that the application is a bounded assessment and Table 5.9.3 excludes a dwelling
house from being assessable against the Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code. Therefore, it is not
entirely certain as to the extent this particular item can be included in the assessment.
Notwithstanding, the bushfire hazard assessment shows the required setback to service
the Class 1a building proposed for the site if it is constructed to a BAL 29 in accordance with
AS3959. The BAL assessment is typically only relevant for Class 1 buildings (residential
dwellings) or roofed Class 10 structures within 6m of a residential dwelling which are
deemed to be at risk of potentially serving as a flame source. Bushfire setbacks for Class
10a structures are not required for outhouses that extend beyond the 6m separation
distance. The proposed dwelling is sited in excess of 7m from the proposed shed.
Therefore, the shed remains outside of the bushfire assessment.

To provide further background for Council, the proposed shed at its closest point to the
edge of the asset protection zone nominated for the residence is 11m, however this is
located outside of the mapped core koala habitat. The edge of the proposed shed at this
point is 19.8m from the mapped core koala habitat. Notwithstanding, clearing of this
vegetation can occur as of right on the basis of providing a 10m wide fire break along the


                                        Page 6 of 8

Page 7

property boundary, as this activity would be considered exempted development with
regard to mapped koala habitat, and would be unable to be made assessable pursuant to
Schedule 6 of the Planning Regulation 2017. Land to the west of this area comprises
maintained lawn on the neighbouring Lot 12 on RP887986. The lawn would be considered
a low fire risk.

Of final consideration, Performance Provision P2.7.5 of the National Construction Code
which provides direction on the standard for construction requires a Class 1 building or a
Class 10a building or deck associated with a Class 1 building that is constructed in a
designated bushfire prone area must, to the degree necessary, be designed and
constructed to reduce the risk of ignition from a bushfire, appropriate to the—
(a) potential for ignition caused by burning embers, radiant heat or flame generated by a
    bushfire; and
(b) intensity of the bushfire attack on the building.

A designated bushfire area in Queensland is defined as Land which has been designated
under a power of legislation as being subject, or likely to be subject, to bushfires.

Reference to the Section 3.10.5.0 Application of the Code of the National Construction
Code states as follows:

(a) Subject to (b), Performance Requirement P2.7.5 is satisfied for:
    • A Class 1 building; or
    • A Class 10a building or deck associated with a Class 1 building
located in a designated bushfire prone area if it is constructed in accordance with-
    • AS3959; or
    • NASH Standard – Steel Framed Construction in Bushfire Areas.
(b) The requirements of (a) do not apply when, in accordance with AS3959, the classified
    vegetation is Group F rainforest (excluding wet sclerophyll forest types), mangrove
    communities and grasslands under 300mm high.

As the proposed structure is of steel framed construction, there are no specific building
requirements nominated in the National Construction Code with respect to bushfire in
relation to the proposed shed.

In consideration of Council’s approval requirements, the applicant is of the view that the
setback shown in the assessment is sufficient, however would not be opposed to a
proposition by Council that the 28m setback is also provided to the shed as a condition of
approval.

Concluding Comments
We trust the above information is of assistance for Council in its assessment of the
application. This concludes the applicant’s response to the information request and we
submit for Council to progress with its assessment of the application.




                                      Page 7 of 8

Page 8

Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned should you require any further
clarification in relation to the matters raised in this correspondence.


Yours faithfully,



Daniel Willis
Urban Catalyst 3 Pty Ltd
Director




                                     Page 8 of 8