Notice of Appeal_(Sealed)_1Dec2015 (PAE00394436-004)

trading bank guarantee will be returned on performance of the conditions of approval
less any costs incurred by Council in respect of enforcing performance of this permit.
Council reserves the right to call upon the bond or guaranteed sum to effect compliance
with conditions.

13) Condition 5 should be deleted.

a) This condition is not reasonable or relevant and is an unreasonable imposition on the
development.

b) The condition is penal in nature.

c) The condition is for the purpose of operational works and has no application to the
material change of use or reconfiguration of a Lot (Access easement).

d) If the bond is appropriate for the purpose of an operational works permit, which is not
conceded, then it can be appropriately conditioned upon that approval.

14) The Decision Notice included condition 6:

6. All grow media, grow bags and plants within the greenhouse shall be raised above the
10% AEP flood level. Any structures supporting the crop (including the building frame)
shall be designed to withstand minimum velocities associated with a 1% AEP Flood.
Certification confirming the heights and strength of the structures must be submitted
to Council from a suitably qualified professional (RPEQ) prior to the issue of an
Operational Works approval. The elevated planting system must be installed prior to
planting the next crop.

15) Condition 6 should be deleted on the basis that:

a) The condition is not reasonable or relevant and is an unreasonable imposition on the

development.
PARTICULARS

(i) | the Stormwater Management Plan-02 report number SC 15-0070\R 003370
issued June 2015 (the SMP) provides for the protection of the environment from
potential pollutant loads from the Land;

(ii) the cost of elevating the grow bags and plants above the 10% AEP flood level on
stands able to withstand a 1% AEP flood is excessive and estimated between
$300,000 to $400,000.

{iii) | to enable pickers to reach high fruit further infrastructure will be required;

b) The condition, as part of the Development approval, has failed to have proper regard
to the lawful use of the Land and adjoining lands.

PARTICULARS

(i) the Land is in the Rural zone;
(ii) | the Land is in the Agricultural Land Conservation Area;
(iii) | the Land was used as a turf farm for the previous 30 years;
(iv) fertilisers were applied for the purpose of the turf farm;
(v) herbicides were applied for the purpose of the turf farm;
(vi) agriculture is an as of right use in the Rural zone;
ar (vii) tomatoes could be grown on every part of the Land previously utilised for a turf
VSN farm without an approval;
S <b \ (viii) the impacts of the proposed use are consistent with the lawful use of the Land.

    

c) The condition is not imposed as a consequence of the development as the impacts of
the proposed use are consistent with the lawful use of the Land.

Page 3 of 9