Information Request MCU23 0090

Information Required
33.   Provide additional commentary discussing the suitability of the proposed DDA car
      spaces. The commentary must be prepared by a suitably qualified person and consider
      the physical ability of those utilising those car spaces to ensure that pedestrian safety is
      not put at risk.


Issue – Pedestrian Network
The Traffic Impact Assessment details how vehicles utilising the Royal Mail’s carpark may not
be patrons of the hotel. Council recognises that the Royal Mail carpark links to an existing
carpark at the rear of 96 and 114 Poinciana Ave. Council is concerned that a clearly defined
pedestrian network has not been provided in accordance with Performance Outcome 12 of
the Driveways and Parking Code (also refer to Issue - Tewantin Framework and Character
Plan).
Information Required
34.   Provide additional detail demonstrating a clearly defined pedestrian network. The
      additional detail must be prepared by a suitably qualified person (RPEQ – Registered
      Professional Engineer of Queensland) and include, but not limited to:
      a. Demonstrate compliance with Performance Outcome 12 of the Driveways and
         Parking Code; and
      b. Consideration of the various occupancies the carpark serves (i.e., vehicle link to the
         carpark at the rear of 96 Poinciana Ave., those that park at the Royal Mail carpark
         and walk to other occupancies, etc.).


Issue – Carparking Depth
The proposed carparks highlighted below do not comply with the depth requirements of
AS2890. It is unclear whether this is in error or intended.




Information Required
35.   Provide clarification if the shortened carparks are intended or are in error. If the
      shortened carparks are intentional, provide additional detail justifying their use.




                                                                                        Page 14 of 18