Response to amended plans - John Cochrane - MCU21/0110

4. The verification of building height planes is lacking clarity and rigor. The verification of
height planes is made by reference to assumed Natural Ground Level. I believe that all height
planes should be verified by survey. As access is available there seems to be no impediment
to proper verification.

5. The Application does not adequately support the existing resort facilities. The inclusion of
500 m.sq. of ground level open space and associated kitchen, preparation and storage
facilities are strongly indicative of restaurant and function usage. This potential use is not
defined in the application, nor are the associated impacts arising from this potential use
addressed by way of analysis or mitigation.

6. The amended plans do not reasonably mitigate the impacts identified in my submission of
19th December, 2021. Nor do I believe they address the concerns of the many residents of the
immediate and broader community who have made submissions in respect of this
development proposal.

The table below provides comment on the responses by Adamson Town Planning contained
in Table 1 Issues and Responses

 Table 1
 Issue (Adamson)                         Comment
 The development extending beyond          1. The issue of whether the land
 the TAZ and into the ROSZ                    zoning is somehow affected by
                                              there being a single parcel of land
                                              is fallacious.
                                           2. The development is not well
                                              located. It lacks public transport
                                              and it is poorly integrated into the
                                              site - it will have major impacts on
                                              the character and amenity of the
                                              area.
                                           3. The proposal does not make
                                              efficient use of anything - it is an
                                              imposition and burden on existing
                                              infrastructure - some of which is
                                              paid for by the individual
                                              residential strata plans
                                              There is a development
                                              opportunity for 200 units at Settlers
                                              Cove – this is currently approved
                                              and will.
                                           4. The economic Impact Assessment
                                              for the proposal is conjectural and
                                              does not provide a substantive
                                              planning argument.
                                           5. The community benefit argument
                                              for the proposal is conjectural and
                                              does not provide a substantive
                                              planning argument.


JC-NSH-amended plans– Issue A                  2                                    22 June-22


[OCR of page images]
4. The verification of building height planes is lacking clarity and rigor. The verification of
height planes is made by reference to assumed Natural Ground Level. I believe that all height
planes should be verified by survey. As access is available there seems to be no impediment
to proper verification.

5. The Application does not adequately support the existing resort facilities. The inclusion of
500 m.sq. of ground level open space and associated kitchen, preparation and storage
facilities are strongly indicative of restaurant and function usage. This potential use is not
defined in the application, nor are the associated impacts arising from this potential use
addressed by way of analysis or mitigation.

6. The amended plans do not reasonably mitigate the impacts identified in my submission of
19 December, 2021. Nor do I believe they address the concerns of the many residents of the
immediate and broader community who have made submissions in respect of this
development proposal.

The table below provides comment on the responses by Adamson Town Planning contained
in Table | Issues and Responses

 

 

 

Table |

Issue (Adamson) Comment

The development extending beyond 1. The issue of whether the land
the TAZ and into the ROSZ zoning is somehow affected by

there being a single parcel of land
is fallacious.

2. The development is not well
located. It lacks public transport
and it is poorly integrated into the
site - it will have major impacts on
the character and amenity of the
area.

3. The proposal does not make
efficient use of anything - it is an
imposition and burden on existing
infrastructure - some of which is
paid for by the individual
residential strata plans
There is a development
opportunity for 200 units at Settlers
Cove — this is currently approved
and will.

4. The economic Impact Assessment
for the proposal is conjectural and
does not provide a substantive
planning argument.

5. The community benefit argument
for the proposal is conjectural and
does not provide a substantive
planning argument.

 

 

 

 

JC-NSH-amended plans- Issue A 2 22 June-22