Original source · versioned page text
Information Response
Our Ref: 20210420 Council Ref: MCU22/0003 and OPW22/0014 28 April 2022 Noosa Council PO Box 141 Tewantin QLD 4565 Via email: [email protected] Attention: Nadine Gorton Dear Nadine, INFORMATION RESPONSE - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE (LOW IMPACT INDUSTRY) AND OPERATIONAL WORKS (ENGINEERING AND LANDSCAPE WORKS) AT 3 TAYLOR COURT, COOROY (LOT 4 ON SP324340) Further to Council’s Information Request, we now respond in full to each of the items raised. In support of this application please find enclosed: ● Revised Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group; ● Engineering RFI Response Letter and Revised Engineering OPW Plans prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers; ● Revised Landscape OPW Plans prepared by Anembo Consultants; and ● Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Acoustic Works. Please find below the response to each of the items raised by Council: Item 1 Provide appropriate documentation to demonstrate that the building can be constructed over the relevant easements located on site. Response: Please refer to the Engineering RFI Response Letter prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers, which confirms ongoing liaison with Unitywater to address this item. Should Unity Water not approve these lightweight awnings they will be removed from the design. They have been structurally designed to simply be unbolted for maintenance purposes and have been noted as such on the plans.
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 9 pages
Page 2
Item 2
Provide amended plans that clearly detail existing and finished levels with respect
to building height and R.Ls to the highest section of all buildings.
Response: Please refer to the revised Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group and
revised Civil Design prepared by Barlow Shelley, which clearly detail existing and finished floor
levels. The proposal is less than the allowable 10m building height and we are happy for Council
to condition as such with height certificates accordingly.
Item 3
Provide revised plans that provide a well-articulated façade to the north-eastern
elevation in accordance with AO15.1, AO15.2 and AO15.3.
Response: Please refer to the revised Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group. The
north-eastern elevation has been revised to include a well-articulated façade comprising a mix
of building materials, roof height, colours and finishes. Refer suite of 3d images included in the
revised proposal plans and below extracts of the north east elevation and 3d model.
Item 4
Provide additional plans detailing the treatment of the façade of the buildings
containing Units 01, 11 and 10 including design elements and articulation.
Response: Please refer to the revised Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group, which
now includes façade treatments for buildings containing Units 1, 10 and 11. See below north
west elevation and 3d images highlighting the finishes to Units 1, 10 and 11.
2
Page 3
Item 5
Clarify the external building materials on the elevations.
Response: Please refer to the revised Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group, which
now includes external building materials on the Elevation Plans. See external finishes legend
nominated on the proposal plans.
Item 6
Provide a colour scheme for development demonstrating muted environmental
tones and avoid broad expanses of a single colour.
Response: Please refer to the revised Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group, which
now confirms the colour scheme for the proposal.
Item 7
Provide further information detailing how the development addresses the Outcome.
3
Page 4
Response: Vandal resistant materials can be provided to the external facade. We request a
condition to this effect. All tilt panels will be painted to assist with long term maintenance,
vandal resistance and presentation.
Item 8
Provide amended plans detailing the location of the staff recreation area outside of
the 6 metre setback to Taylor Court.
Response: Please refer to the revised Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group. The
staff recreation area has been located outside of the 6 metre front setback, and is now located
behind Unit 8 at the rear of the site. See extract below.
Item 9
Provide revised plans detailing a significantly greater landscaped area to the front of
the building line.
Response: In response to Item 8 above, the staff recreation area has been relocated to the
rear of the site, which allows for a greater landscaped area within the site frontage.
4
Page 5
The site has also been reconfidered to provide additional landscape opportunities in front of the
building line. See below Aboda Design Group 3d image and extract of landscape plan below.
5
Page 6
Item 10
Provide an amended landscape plan that:
● Is consistent with the changes required to the layout of the development as
detailed in item 8 and 9.
● Removes the 3 Wodyetia bifurcate palms.
● Removes the artificial turf on site.
● Provides additional planting along the front portion of the driveway and
buildings visible to the street.
Response: Please refer to the revised Landscape OPW Plans prepared by Anembo Consultants,
which has been updated as a result of Items 8 and 9 of this Information Request. In addition,
the plans have been amended to:
● Remove the 3 Wodyetia bifurcate palms.
● Remove the artificial turf on site.
● Provide additional planting along the front portion of the driveway and buildings visible
to the street.
Item 11
Provide an assessment of the proposal against PO8 of the Sustainable Building
Design Code.
Response: In response to P08 of the Sustainable Building Design Code the following outcomes
are achieved.
● The orientation of buildings, roller doors and windows to make the most of prevailing
winds, natural ventilation and cross breezes.
● The design maximises shade to east and west walls and reduces glazing to these
elevations.
● Provides extensive vegetation and natural shading throughout the site.
● Incorporates passive building design to reduce the need for auxiliary heating and
cooling.
● Uses low toxic internal and external building materials;
● Uses natural light rather than artificial light via roller door openings and clear glazing.
● The body corporate will permit solar power on each tenancy.
● Opportunities for natural ventilation and cross breezes existing for each tenancy.
● Provides fixed horizontal sun shading devices to the east and operable screening to the
western facade of the building.
● Includes appropriate new planting to complement the proposed development.
● Provides appropriate shading and natural ventilation opportunities to reduce the need for
mechanical ventilation.
The proposal is considered compliant with PO8 of the Sustainable Building Design Code.
6
Page 7
Item 12
The proposal details the provision of roller doors to the western and southern
elevations of the buildings which has the potential for noise to impact on the
surrounding area.
Response: Please refer to the attached Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Acoustic Works.
An environmental noise assessment was conducted for the proposed light industrial
development to be located at 3 Taylor Court, Cooroy. Based on the predicted noise levels and
subjective assessment of the site and surroundings for all time periods, compliance is predicted
with Noosa Shire Council assessment criteria.
Item 13
Remove the Caretaker Accommodation Use from the proposal. Please note that once
the uses are established on site and it can be demonstrated that there is a need for
the 24/7 use on site, that the use can be applied for at that time.
Response: The Proposal Plans prepared by Aboda Design Group have been revised to remove
the proposed Caretaker’s Accommodation component of the development.
Item 14
Indicate on the plans:
● Any services in the road reserve in proximity to the access driveway,
● The location of the recently constructed access driveway servicing the
adjoining properties to the east, and
● If necessary provide an amended design that does not create issues with
services and access to the adjoining property
Item 15
Provide architectural and engineering plans that are consistent in indicating the
final design of the access driveway.
Response: Please refer to the Engineering RFI Response Letter and amended Engineering
Plans prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers, which confirms the underground
services adjacent to the proposed driveway and neighbouring driveway. The Proposal Plans and
Landscape Plans have been revised to reflect the proposed changes to the access driveway.
Item 16
Provide amended architectural and engineering plans that indicate the parking and
manoeuvring for a semi-trailer sufficient to demonstrate compliance with The Noosa
Plan, Driveways and Parking Code, PO6 (AO6.1) and PO7.
7
Page 8
Item 17
Provide additional detail on how the access to the adjacent unit is not significantly
impacted by a heavy vehicle parked in the service bay.
Response: Please refer to the Swept Path Plan and Engineering RFI Response Letter prepared
by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers. To allow for equitable access to the loading bay and to
reduce conflicts with other tenants during onsite servicing, 3 setdown areas for trucks have
been provided for ease of access to each tenancy. Each service area will only impact 2 tenancies
at a time and will be utilised by the adjacent unit. This arrangement ensures that only 1 tenancy
may be impacted at any time while the adjoining tenancy is being serviced. We need to stress
that only small and medium trucks will only ever service this site due to the small nature of the
tenancies.
Item 18
Provide amended plans of the heavy vehicle manoeuvring path that demonstrates
that the path is clear of landscaping areas and in those locations where it extends
under the roof line, provide sufficient detail to demonstrate that vertical height
clearances are available.
Response: Please refer to the Engineering RFI Response Letter and amended Engineering
Plans prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers. A HRV can manoeuvre on site without
impacting buildings or landscaped areas. Building roofs are at 6-7m which achieves sufficient
vertical clearance for a large truck.
Item 19
Indicate on the adjoining driveway on the engineering cross section plans and also
include on the plans any measures necessary to protect the structural integrity of
the driveway and the adjoining property.
Response: Please refer to the Engineering RFI Response Letter and amended Engineering
Plans prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers.
Item 20
Provide updated OPW drawings for the bioretention basin which address the
following issues:
● Provide survey for the existing drainage system that the bioretention device
will connect into (i.e. existing pit IL and pipe diameter and outfall IL).
Confirm that the basin subsoil drains will drain effectively.
● Show the proposed subsoil drain layout in plan view.
● Inconsistent level information is shown in the boxed text and on the sections
for the bioretention on drawing R07 – resolve inconsistencies
Response: Please refer to the Engineering RFI Response Letter and amended Engineering
Plans prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers.
8
Page 9
Item 21
It appears that a detention basin was provided within the downstream drainage
reserve as part of the original development of the industrial estate. Consider
whether the detention tank proposed is necessary given this downstream
infrastructure.
Response: Please refer to the Engineering RFI Response Letter and amended Engineering
Plans prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers.
Item 22
If the detention tank is retained, address the following:
● Sizing appears to be small given the land use change. This may be due to the
low initial loss values adopted for pervious surfaces in the model. Provide
further information of how rational method flows were calculated, including
tc estimates. Provide, as a comparison, detention sizing based on QUDM
recommended initial pervious loss rate of 20mm.
● Provide survey for the existing drainage system that the detention tank will
connect into (i.e. existing pit IL and pipe diameter and outfall IL).
● The outlet structure from the detention tank is unclear. Is the final outlet an
upstand 225 dia pipe as seems to be shown? If this is the case won’t the
upstream orifices all be drowned?
● Regardless of the above, for whatever outlet pipe is selected for the detention
tank, demonstrate that the final outlet won’t drown the orifices and that the
assumptions in the model will be met (eg. The outlet pipe from the tank
should be set down lower than the lowest orifice so that it does not become
drowned)
● An access chamber to the detention basin outlet structure is shown and is
supported. However why is the lid on this chamber shown as a grate rather
than a sealed lid? Won’t the grate allow flows to bypass the detention tank?
Response: Please refer to the Engineering RFI Response Letter and amended Engineering
Plans prepared by Barlow Shelley Consulting Engineers.
Item 23
Provide amended plans that detail compliance with the Driveways and Parking Code
removing the tandem spaces.
Response: An additional 11 car parks have been proposed in addition to the 32 required by
the code. The tandems have been maintained, however, these are in addition to minimum code
requirements and will be maintained for use by staff. Being located west of the Bruce Highway
this surplus of parking is a crucial feature of this site. It is further noted that there is nothing in
the planning scheme that expressly limits that tandem parking.
9
Page 10
We thank Council on behalf of the applicant for assessing the attached additional application
material.
Based on the information provided in this application we respectfully request that Council
proceed to issue an approval.
Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me
directly.
Yours faithfully,
Adapt Development Management Pty Ltd
Tiani Boulton
Director
E: [email protected]
M: 0404924160
10