OPW20-0092 - Applicant's Response to Council's IR · OPW20/0092

Page 2

Council’s Issue

There are concerns regarding potential of conflict between the proposed stormwater connection pipeline
(225mm , FI5/5-G6/5), from the development into proposed stormwater Pit G6/5, with the existing
intersecting services (sewer main, water main, telecommunication cables) within the road reserve verge.


Information Required by Council

1.       Carry out a field investigation to ascertain the locations and depths of the existing intersecting
         services and provide a cross section to demonstrate no potential of conflict in this regard. Also,
         carrying out a field investigation of the location and depth of the receiving stormwater
         structure/pipeline will be an advantage.

         Also, it is to be noted that the proposed stormwater line F3/3-FI5/5 intersects the existing sewer
         connection from the subject site.


Applicant’s Response

1.   The applicant has undertaken investigations to determine the location and depth of the existing services.
     As shown on Drawing Number 20538-C12 prepared by TOD Engineers (refer Attachment 1), the existing
     watermain will cross under the proposed 225 diameter stormwater pipe from FI5/5 -G6/5. An extract
     from the engineering drawing illustrates the location of the proposed pipe in Figure 1.




Figure 1: Extract from engineering drawings indicating proposed stormwater pipe to be located above
existing water line.
Source: TOD Engineers




                                                                     PO Box 1818       07 5474 3873
                                                                     Noosa Heads       [email protected]
                                                                     QLD 4567          rgstrategic.com.au

Page 3

Council’s Issue

Further details/plans are required to demonstrate compliance with Conditions 41, 42 and 43 of the Higher
Order Approval 51901.4274.02 dated 19 May 2020. These conditions state the following:

        Car Parking

  41.   Five car parking spaces must be provided and marked on the site and made available and
        accessible at all times. The works must be undertaken in accordance with an Operational Works
        approval and be generally in accordance with drawing number A.200 Revision F prepared by Zest
        Design. The access and carparking area must be modified to provide sufficient area for vehicles to
        enter the site and access each space in a forward gear, manoeuvre on site and exit the site in a
        forward gear in a total of 3 movements. The on-site manoeuvring area must:

        a.      be for a B99 vehicle as described in AS/NZS2890.1:2004;

        b.      assume that each other space is occupied, and

        c.      include crossfalls and gradients in accordance with Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004
                Parking Facilities

 42.    All vehicles must enter and exit the site in a forward gear.

  43.   Plans demonstrating the required on-site manoeuvring area and vehicle paths must be included
        in the application for operational works.


Information Required by Council

2. Provide information to address the requirements of the above conditions.


Applicant’s Response

The plans approved with the negotiated decision notice dated 19 May 2020 show the 5 spaces required by
condition 41.   Swept paths have been calculated over each of the 5 spaces and are shown in the Hayes
Traffic Engineering plans at Attachment 2.

The swept path diagrams indicate that, while many drivers can improve the turning manoeuvre generated by
the template, some adjustment of the length of the fence to the north of the driveway may be warranted to
provide a clearer and safer turning circle. Figure 2 shows the proposed alteration to the fence to ensure that
any potential conflict with vehicles is removed.

The splay at the kerb is also not shown on the plans as this was left off the architectural masterplan which
became the approved plans for the higher order approval. These two aspects have been annotated on the
plans and the applicant is happy to accept an appropriate condition to have these plans amended to reflect
the noted alterations to the plans.




                                                                       PO Box 1818    07 5474 3873
                                                                       Noosa Heads    [email protected]
                                                                       QLD 4567       rgstrategic.com.au

Page 4

                                                                   Reduce length of wall to
                                                                   min. 1.5m from driveway




                         Low wall with planting
                         behind for screening




Figure 2: Annotation of changes required to front fence due to manoeuvring
Source: Adapted from 51901.4271.02 approved plan 19009 A.300



Council’s Issue

The higher order approval Condition 25 requires:

         Any street fencing must be set back an average of 1 metre from the front property boundary.
         Any fencing on the front boundary must either:
         a. not exceed a maximum height of 1.2m
         b. be of open construction
It is unclear from the supplied plans the type of street fencing to be used nor the height or if it is of open
construction.


Information Required by Council

3. Provide information regarding the street fencing and details how it complies with Condition 25 of the
   higher order approval.


Applicant’s Response

The proposed fencing on the street frontage is illustrated in the approved plans of the higher order change
application that was approved by Council on 7 April 2020. The fence height is illustrated on the approved
plans and demonstrates a variation in height as the slope of the road frontage falls to the north. The breeze
block section has been clearly indicated as being proposed at 2 metres in height and no notation to the plans
has been added by Council requiring the setback section of fence, which is 1.55m inside the property
boundary, to be anything different.           The open construction of the breezeblock is consistent with the


                                                                      PO Box 1818         07 5474 3873
                                                                      Noosa Heads         [email protected]
                                                                      QLD 4567            rgstrategic.com.au

Page 5

acceptable solution in the Detached House Code. With the inclusion of planting forward of this section of
breezeblock wall, and designed to grow to 2+ metres, this section of the wall is also not likely to be dominant
in the landscape as it will be partially, or fully, screened by vegetation.

The total width of the site frontage is 25.146 metres. The front fence is articulated along its length as
demonstrated in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Fence articulation and setback

                                    Approximate                     Approximate
            Frontage                                  Setback                                Construction Style
                                      Length                          Height

 Southern Fence Section             5.5 metres      1.1 metres     1.5 metres          Open Breezeblock style

 Driveway                           6.1 metres      n/a            n/a                 Unfenced

 Northern Mailbox Fence Section     4.7 metres      0 metres       1.8-2.2 metres      Decorative concrete block

 Breezeblock Section                4.7 metres      1.55 metres    2.2-2.5 metres      Open Breezeblock style

 Northern Fence Section             3.3 metres      0.3 metres     2-2.4 metres        Rendered blockwork




The fence location is proposed as per the approved plans of the higher order planning approval as shown on
drawing number 19009 A.100 prepared by Zest Design dated 20/04/2020. Extracts of the approved plan are
shown below in Figures 3 & 4. As demonstrated above the fence is set back between 0.3m and 1.55m for the
majority of its length. This setback averages at 0.98m for the length of the fence. It is considered that the
20mm variation from the required 1m average setback is negligible and the fence is located generally in
accordance with Condition 25 of the higher order approval.

Only the mail box section of the front fence is located on the boundary and this section is proposed to be
1.8m high at the driveway to allow for the slope of the land up behind the fence and provide sufficient height
to mail boxes and screening of car parking beneath the building. The height difference between the front
side and rear side of this fence would result in the mailboxes being too low to the ground on the rear side
where mail is removed by residents. If the fence were to remain at 1.2 metres, strictly in accordance with the
condition, the mailboxes would result in approximately 0.5-0.6m height from finished ground level on the
inside of the fence and would be ergonomically undesirable.

Figure 5 illustrates the potential lack of screening of the carport area if this section of wall is brought down to
1.2m. As a result, a height of 1.8 metres has been proposed to allow sufficient mailbox height on both sides of
the fence as well as provide screening to the car parking area. It should be noted that this was brought up
as a concern by the assessment manager at the time of assessing the higher order approval.




                                                                         PO Box 1818         07 5474 3873
                                                                         Noosa Heads         [email protected]
                                                                         QLD 4567            rgstrategic.com.au

Page 6

Figure 3: Extract from approved plans showing setbacks to northern sections of front fence
Source: 51901.4271.02 approved plan 19009 A.100




Figure 4: Extract from approved plans showing setback to southern section of front fence
Source: 51901.4271.02 approved plan 19009 A.100


                                                              PO Box 1818       07 5474 3873
                                                              Noosa Heads       [email protected]
                                                              QLD 4567          rgstrategic.com.au

Page 7

As demonstrated in RFI item 2 above, the front fence needs to be shortened by approximately 1.5m to provide
better manoeuvring of vehicles. As a result, the length of the wall containing the mailboxes would be
approximately 3.46 metres in length out of the whole 25.146 metre frontage.

In long section, the land slopes down with a northerly aspect along this section of fence. Due to the slope of
the land, the 1.8m fence height varies with an average overall height for this section of the fence being
approximately 2 metres. Only the slope of the land causes a very small section to be greater than 1.8 metres
in height as illustrated below in Figure 5.

Further north, the next part of the fence is set back behind vegetation so there is no overbearing sense of
enclosure by the fence. This is further reduced by the need to make the length of the fence 1.5m shorter to
accommodate better vehicle manoeuvring. Further, the fence design is not a plain rendered block fence and
incorporates different materials and textures to create interest. Given the circumstances of the site slope,
the need to adequately screen the car parking area from the street and the shortening of the wall due to
vehicle manoeuvring, it is considered that the variation is minor and the fence should be considered generally
in accordance with Condition 25 of the higher order approval as there are a number of issues at play which
need to be addressed by this section of the wall.




                                                                                     Approximate height if
                                                                                     fence is 1.2 metres - would
                                                                                     not screen vehicles from
                                                                                     street.




                                                                                     Area of fence likely
                                                                                     to be over 1.8 metres



Figure 5: Extract from approved MCU drawings indicating the section of front fence over 2 metres.
Source: 51901.4271.02 approved plan 19009 A.300




                                                                   PO Box 1818        07 5474 3873
                                                                   Noosa Heads        [email protected]
                                                                   QLD 4567           rgstrategic.com.au

Page 8

Council’s Issue

The higher order approval Condition 26 requires:

        The area of land between the fence and the front property boundary must be densely landscaped
        to screen any fencing from the street. Understorey planting must grow to a minimum height of 2m.
        The supplied landscape plans show understorey planting of Alpinia and “Cousin it” which will not
        achieve a minimum height of 2m in these conditions.


Information Required by Council

3.    Provide revised landscape plans which adequately address condition 26 of the higher order approval
      by providing local native understorey species, suitable for the location, which achieve a minimum height
      of 2m


Applicant’s Response

Casuarina Glauca is a ground cover which is intended to provide a green understorey that fills any gap in
foliage cover between the surface of the garden bed and taller species. Such an understory provides a
transition from the hardscape elements of the fence design to woody or bare stems of other species within
the plant selection.

The applicant’s research indicates that the Australian Native Ginger, Alpinia Caerulea, will, in normal
circumstances will achieve up to 3 metres height. The selection is considered appropriate for the situation
and will provide the taller green elements desired in the landscape design. It is proposed that this species
will be densely planted and with its long broad leaves will provide the screening required by the conditions of
the higher order approval.

Attachment 3 illustrates some of the research obtained by the applicant in researching species that
complement the landscape design at the desired height. Figures 6 and 7 are photographs taken from the
Noosa Region which demonstrate the height that these plants can achieve in a residential garden setting.

Figure 7 shows clearly how dense planting of this species can totally block any rear fencing or structure
behind. This semi mature planting was between 1.8 – 2.2m in height.




                                                                    PO Box 1818        07 5474 3873
                                                                    Noosa Heads        [email protected]
                                                                    QLD 4567           rgstrategic.com.au

Page 9

Figure 6: Landscaped garden featuring Native Ginger Alpinia Caerulea
Source: RG Strategic




                                                             PO Box 1818   07 5474 3873
                                                             Noosa Heads   [email protected]
                                                             QLD 4567      rgstrategic.com.au

Page 10

Figure 7: Alpinia. Caerulea in residential garden setting
Source: RG Strategic




It should be noted that the landscaping is proposed in a residential, controlled environment. It is not in the
best interests of the residents to have the landscaping looking sub-standard as it will detract from the
attractiveness of the premises and the revitalised architecture of the renovated development. Further, the
fence that the Alpinia Caerulea will be planted against is a visually permeable, breezeblock design and any
effect of solid structure will be offset by the open fencing style. It should also be noted that the approved
plan 19009 A.300 Revision I prepared by Zest Design dated 19/03/2020 illustrates this open breezeblock
design. Figure 8 below is extracted from the approved plans showing a 3D illustration of the proposed fence.

                                                                   PO Box 1818        07 5474 3873
                                                                   Noosa Heads        [email protected]
                                                                   QLD 4567           rgstrategic.com.au

Page 11

Figure 3: Extract from approved MCU drawings indicating the location and style of the front fence.
Source: 51901.4271.02 approved plan 19009 A.400

This area of the fence is set back from the front boundary and the orientation of this fence and the section of
fence to the north, creates a partly shaded, protected area which is anticipated will provide conditions for
which the selected species can succeed. The current planting palette and landscape design is appropriate
for the location.

This ends my client’s response to matters raised by Council within their Information Request.

We ask that Council proceeds with the assessment of this application under section 13.3 of the Development
Assessment Rules, effectively ending our applicant’s response period.

Should you require any additional information or have any queries please to not hesitate to contact us.



Kind Regards,




Russell Green APIA MQELA
Managing Director
RG Strategic




                                                                    PO Box 1818        07 5474 3873
                                                                    Noosa Heads        [email protected]
                                                                    QLD 4567           rgstrategic.com.au

Page 12

STRATEGIC SOLUTIONS,
CREATIVE THINKING