Response to Information Request · RAL22/0006

Page 2

2.0    INFORMATION RESPONSE

The information request items and responses are set out below.

PLANNING

ITEM 1

Issue:
A suitable location for a new dwelling on proposed Lot 1 has not been
demonstrated, noting the topography of the site and mapped overlays (landslide,
bushfire, riparian buffer, biodiversity).

Information requested:
1. Include on the amended plan, the proposed area that is a suitable building
envelope.

Applicant’s Response:
In response to Item 1 of Council’s Information Request, please refer to the
Amended Plan of Development, Plan No. 100418/A prepared by Murray &
Associates (Qld) Pty Ltd and attached at Appendix A of this response. A suitable
building envelope outside of the proposed covenant area and required road/side
boundary setbacks is demonstrated on Proposed Lot 1.

ITEMS 2-4

Issue:
Council has concerns about the accessibility of the proposed driveway onto the
proposed lot.
The lawful point of entry must be practical and adhere to Noosa Council’s standard
drawings.

Information requested:
2. Provide a driveway design plan that is in accordance with RS-056 and prepared
by a suitably qualified persons (RPEQ – Registered Professional Engineer of
Queensland).

3. Provide a longitudinal section of the centreline of the proposed driveway
extending from the centreline of the road formation to the level at a point 10m
inside the property.

4. Include on the amended plans, sufficient detail to demonstrate that a B99 vehicle
(as described in AS/NZ2890.1:2004) will not scrap or bottom out on either the road
formation or the driveway when entering and existing the site.

Applicant’s Response:
In response to Items 2-4 of Council’s Information Request, we request that Council
condition the provision of a driveway crossover into proposed Lot 1 where it can be
seen on the aerial image there is an existing access point. The condition of approval
can specify compliance with the RS-056 standard and require RPEQ certification.




                                         2

Page 3

In regards to the existing access location, please refer to the Amended Plan of
Development, Plan No. 100418/A prepared by Murray & Associates (Qld) Pty Ltd
and attached at Appendix A which shows the approximate existing access location
point into Lot 1 which can clearly be seen on the aerial image.

ITEMS 5-6

Issue:
The lot is mapped under the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay of the
Noosa Plan 2020 including: MSES Environmental Values, Area of Biodiversity
Significance, Waterways, MSES Regulated Vegetation – intersecting a watercourse
areas and Riparian Buffer Area. No assessment has been provided detailing how
the application meets the requirements detailed within the Biodiversity, Waterways
and Wetlands Overlay Code.

Information requested:
5. Provide a full assessment of the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay
code and how the application meets the requirements.

6. Provide an Environmental Assessment and Management Report detailing all
environmental aspects of the site.

Applicant’s Response:
In response to Item 5 & 6 of Council’s Information Request, it is important to note
that the proposed development represents a logical vinculum subdivision which
utilises the existing road formation as the new boundaries. As such, no new
boundaries are being established through the mapped areas of the Biodiversity,
Waterways and Wetlands Overlay of the Noosa Plan 2020. Considering this, an
assessment against the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay Code is not
considered necessary as the proposed development will not result in any adverse
impacts to the mapped vegetation areas. Furthermore, the proposal will result in a
better outcome for the surrounding natural environment by establishing a
vegetation covenant over the mapped Riparian Buffer Area.

ITEMS 7-10

Issue:
The application is proposing two vegetation covenant areas one on each proposed
lot however no environmental evidence has been provided to determine these areas
are the most appropriate areas.

Information requested:
7. Ensure the Environmental Assessment and Management Report includes
assessment and management of the proposed covenant areas.

8. Justify the appropriateness of the proposed covenant areas and the proposed
extent.




                                        3

Page 4

9. Provide justification as to why the covenant area on proposed lot 2 does not
include the cut out section along the western boundary between the riparian buffer
areas?

10. Justify the proposed use of an electric fence only as a protection measure for
the covenants rather than a fauna friendly fence.

Applicant’s Response:
In response to Item 7 of Council’s Information Request, an Environmental
Assessment and Management Report is not considered necessary as the proposed
subdivision will not result in any adverse impacts to the mapped vegetation.

In response to Item 8, covenant areas have been provided in order to preserve the
mapped Riparian Buffer Area on the site in accordance with the pre-lodgement
meeting outcomes / agreements. These vegetation covenant areas are considered
appropriate as they demonstrate the intent to preserve the environmental values
of the site.

In response to Item 9, the covenant area on Proposed Lot 2 does not include the
cut out section along the western boundary between the riparian buffer areas as
this portion of the site does not comprise any vegetation of importance. This area
of the site has been converted from a dense weed infestation to highly productive
and high value pasture.

In response to Item 10, the purpose of the vegetation covenant is to preserve and
protect the vegetation in these areas. The use of an electric fence is crucial in
preventing the livestock on the site from entering the covenant area and degrading
the vegetation. A fauna friendly fence is not considered a sufficient measure in
stopping livestock from venturing into this portion of the site.

ITEM 11

Issue:
As detailed within the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay Code
ecologically important areas are required to be protected and enhanced.

Information Requested:
11. Provide a Rehabilitation Concept Plan detailing how the ecologically important
areas across the entire site are proposed to be protected and enhanced.

Applicant’s Response:
In response to Item 11 of Council’s Information Request, a Rehabilitation Concept
Plan is not considered necessary. The proposed development represents a logical
vinculum subdivision, which will simply result in a rural dwelling being established
on Proposed Lot 1. Given the simple nature of the subdivision, the proposed
development will not result in any adverse impacts to the ecologically important
areas on the site. All built form is to be sited entirely outside of these mapped areas
and the ongoing rural pursuits within Lot 2 will be preserved.

It is noted that the existing rehabilitation measures on the site will be retained,
which include weed management, increasing soil cover, reducing runoff, greatly




                                          4

Page 5

increasing soil carbon and using grazing land best management practices
(accredited producers) for primary production.

ITEMS 12-14

Issue:
The lot is covered by the Bushfire Hazard Overlay including High and Medium
Potential Bushfire Intensity and Potential Impact Buffer areas. Although the
application states the built form will be built outside the medium and high intensity
areas an increase in people is likely therefore a Bushfire Hazard Assessment and
Management Plan is required to determine the risk and mitigation factors.

Information Requested:
12. Provide a Bushfire Hazard Assessment and Management Plan.

13. Provide proposed locations of dwelling location and proximity to hazardous
vegetation, detailing if vegetation is required to be removed to meet the Bushfire
Hazard Assessment.

14. Provide an assessment against the Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code detailing how
the application meets the requirements.

Applicant’s Response:
In response to Items 12-14 of Council’s Information Request, please refer to the
Bushfire Hazard Assessment prepared by Equilibrium Ecology and attached at
Appendix B of this response. The assessment finds that the site is in a low hazard
area and that no specific mitigation measures are required.

3.0    SUMMARY

In accordance with Section 13.2 of the Development Assessment Rules, we hereby
provide Council with a response to all of the information requested and ask that
Council proceed with the assessment of this application. We trust Council can now
issue a successful Development Permit in due course and should Council wish to
discuss any of the above elements of the information request further please don’t
hesitate to contact me on (07) 5441 2188.

Yours faithfully,




Blake Bell BRTP, M.P.I.A., CPP, MDIA
Director / Principal Town Planner
MURRAY & ASSOCIATES (QLD) PTY LTD




                                         5

Page 6

                                                  Appendix A


Amended Plan of Development (Plan No. 100418/A)

Prepared by Murray & Associates (Qld) Pty Ltd




                                           6

Page 7

                                      Appendix B


Bushfire Hazard Assessment


Prepared by Equilibrium Ecology




                                  7


[OCR of page images]
MURRAY&
ASSOCIATES

SURVEYORS & TOWN PLANNERS

 

 

Appendix B

 

Bushfire Hazard Assessment

Prepared by Equilibrium Ecology