PM Submission Object 1 of 2 - Richard Kirkpatrick MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041

     O10 There are no significant adverse effects on biodiversity, natural vegetation etc…including those related to-
              a) changes to natural drainage;
              b) …
              c) disturbance of the …wetland system;
              d) …


     The Covey Associates Pty Ltd Engineering Services Report of March 2017 states:

     “The interface with the western boundary to the Council reserve will require approximately 2.0m of fill to be
     placed. It is proposed that a rock filled gabion wall is constructed along this boundary to retain the fill material.
     The proposed retaining structure would be subject to Geotechnical investigation and advice to determine an
     appropriate design. The photograph below (Figure 6), illustrates the ‘swampy’ nature of the lower area of the
     site in the vicinity of the proposed gabion wall.

     Along the southern boundary with the Noosa National Park, a ‘fill’ wall of approximately 2.0m will be required.
     These walls will most likely be of a concrete sleeper, or similar, construction. This would continue the existing
     wall in-situ.

     Along the northern boundary, ‘fill’ walls of approximately 1.5m height will be required. These walls will most
     likely be of a concrete sleeper, or similar, construction.”



     While the Report speaks of the ‘Swampy’ nature of the area it does not refer to the creek or watercourse.
     Likewise, it does not refer to the fact that the gabion wall will be on the bank of or in the bed of the creek
     requiring footings to suit.

     The development will result in changes to the natural drainage of the site and disturbance of the wetland
     system contrary to the Noosa Plan. I submit that Noosa Council should refuse approval to develop under these
     circumstances.



     The developer should now be requested to provide a detailed survey of the site showing the location of the
     creek/watercourse in relation to the site boundaries and the proposed location of the Wallum Houses numbers
     10 to 13. The developer should also be required to provide plans and appropriate expert advice on what is
     proposed in regard to the creek/watercourse.



     Perusal of the latest version of the DA shows that the applicant did not tick the box (Item 7) indicating that
     there is a watercourse in the site. There is a watercourse on the site and this is plainly misleading. Noosa
     Council must clarify why the applicant did not indicate the true situation and cannot grant approval for the DA
     until this question has been answered and the implications of the fact that there is a watercourse have been
     fully resolved. The DA covers a site that abuts directly onto a Noosa National Parks National Park and this is a
     serious issue.



     Until this information is provided neither the Council nor the community are in a position to assess the
     development and can only oppose it.




Document Set ID: 20306956
                                                                                                                 Page 5 of 6
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/04/2017