Response to Submissions and Minor Change - Noosa Council.pdf

Page 2

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




    •   a complete set of the proposal plans providing for some additional minor changes
        made since the response to the information request and for completeness –
        Attachment 1
    •   a response to the koala issues raised in the submissions, including correcting the
        misinformation portrayed in the media and providing an additional environmental
        offset prepared by Gondwana Ecology – Attachment 2
    •   a response to the traffic, parking and onsite manoeuvring issues prepared by Traffic
        and Transport Plus (TTP) – Attachment 3
    •   a response to the bushfire issues raised prepared by Rob Friend and Associates –
        Attachment 4
    •   an updated Landscape Concept Plan provided by the Place Design Group to reflect
        the minor changes made to the proposal plans and to reflect the bushfire mitigation
        measures – Attachment 5
    •   further advice about the odour issue provided by Katestone – Attachment 6
    •   updated and additional photomontages for the development, prepared by Design &
        Visual Communication – Attachment 7; and
    •   additional advice about energy efficiency and increased solar power provision
        prepared by EMF Griffiths – Attachment 8.

Requested further advice

Council has requested further advice about some aspects of the development with respect to
the following:
    • Bushfire issues in terms of the proposed landscaping within the eastern buffer area,
        and more information about the site access and evacuation procedure in case of a
        bushfire emergency
    • additional information with respect to the outdoor recreation areas exceeding the 2.5
        odour unit criterion and the 2.5 odour units being predicated at the façades of the
        accommodation buildings nearest to the Noosa Waste Water Treatment Plant
        (WWTP); and
    • further clarification about the use of the resort facilities by the general public,
        management of the hotel guests who travel by private car, the need for a travel
        management plan and the use of alternative modes of transport, and parking
        demand and supply.

These and other issues raised in the submissions have been addressed below.

Changes to the Proposal Plans

The applicant has made some changes to the proposal plans generally as follows:
   • the removal of 6 units from Building 2 located closest to the porte-cochere. Apart
      from reducing the overall number of rooms from 112 to 106 (which also assists in
      lowering the parking demand) the height of the proposed hotel has also been
      substantially reduced in this location to be mostly below the 12m height requirement

                                                                                 2|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

e acomplete set of the proposal plans providing for some additional minor changes
made since the response to the information request and for completeness -
Attachment 1

e a response to the koala issues raised in the submissions, including correcting the
misinformation portrayed in the media and providing an additional environmental
offset prepared by Gondwana Ecology - Attachment 2

e aresponse to the traffic, parking and onsite manoeuvring issues prepared by Traffic
and Transport Plus (TTP) — Attachment 3

e a response to the bushfire issues raised prepared by Rob Friend and Associates —
Attachment 4

e an updated Landscape Concept Plan provided by the Place Design Group to reflect
the minor changes made to the proposal plans and to reflect the bushfire mitigation
measures — Attachment 5

e further advice about the odour issue provided by Katestone — Attachment 6

e updated and additional photomontages for the development, prepared by Design &
Visual Communication — Attachment 7; and

e additional advice about energy efficiency and increased solar power provision
prepared by EMF Griffiths — Attachment 8.

Requested further advice

Council has requested further advice about some aspects of the development with respect to
the following:

e Bushfire issues in terms of the proposed landscaping within the eastern buffer area,
and more information about the site access and evacuation procedure in case of a
bushfire emergency

e additional information with respect to the outdoor recreation areas exceeding the 2.5
odour unit criterion and the 2.5 odour units being predicated at the facades of the
accommodation buildings nearest to the Noosa Waste Water Treatment Plant
(WWTP); and

e further clarification about the use of the resort facilities by the general public,
management of the hotel guests who travel by private car, the need for a travel
management plan and the use of alternative modes of transport, and parking
demand and supply.

These and other issues raised in the submissions have been addressed below.
Changes to the Proposal Plans

The applicant has made some changes to the proposal plans generally as follows:

e the removal of 6 units from Building 2 located closest to the porte-cochere. Apart
from reducing the overall number of rooms from 112 to 106 (which also assists in
lowering the parking demand) the height of the proposed hotel has also been
substantially reduced in this location to be mostly below the 12m height requirement

2|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 3

          “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
          advice”




                within the Tourist Accommodation Zone (TAZ) (refer – Figure 1 Extrapolated 8m &
                12m above NGL Plane, Drawing No. DA4.01, Rev 10)




        Figure 1 – Extrapolated 8m & 12m about NGL

            •   a viewing deck has been added to the location which occupied the 6 units within
                Building 2, which also has had the effect of lowering the roof. It is not intended that
                the viewing deck will be used for any other purpose other than viewing the golf
                course and surrounds from this location. This change has also reduced the
                dominance of the built form at the entry near the porte-cochere (refer Dwg No.
                DA4.05. Rev 8) – Refer image comparison below

Current 3D View of Entry                                    Proposed 3D View of Entry




                                                                                            3|Page
        16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
“Ad T Planning, ialising i iding high der t lanni
amson own Fianning, spectattsing tn proviatng higher order town planning Adamson
advice e
Town Planning

within the Tourist Accommodation Zone (TAZ) (refer — Figure 1 Extrapolated 8m &
12m above NGL Plane, Drawing No. DA4.01, Rev 10)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1 — Extrapolated 8m & 12m about NGL

e a viewing deck has been added to the location which occupied the 6 units within
Building 2, which also has had the effect of lowering the roof. It is not intended that
the viewing deck will be used for any other purpose other than viewing the golf
course and surrounds from this location. This change has also reduced the
dominance of the built form at the entry near the porte-cochere (refer Dwg No.
DA4.05. Rev 8) — Refer image comparison below

 

Current 3D View of Entry Proposed 3D View of Ent

 

 

 

 

 

3|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 4

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




    •   alterations to the roof over Buildings P1, P2, P4 and P5, with the centre areas
        removed from Buildings P4 & P5, to lower the height and provide a flat central area
        for additional solar panels (refer Roof Plan, Dwg No. DA1.08, Rev 10). The appearance
        of the pitched roofing from the street and publicly assessable places will not be
        affected. Further, the change also substantially reduces the height of the built form
        located on a higher portion of the site (refer Figure 1)
    •   the ceiling heights of the rooms have been increased to 2.7m given a 5-Star resort is
        proposed, which has resulted in an increase in the height of Building 3 by about 1m;
        however, the remaining buildings have reduced in height because of the different
        roof design
    •   increased building setbacks for Building 5 to Resort Drive with the removal of the
        outdoor terrace areas to the east
    •   other changes include the addition of a fourth tennis court located over the upper
        level carpark to the north, which maintains the current number of tennis courts
        already provided. The additional tennis court is an elevated structure located about
        15m from Resort Drive, which will be well screened from the frontage in this location
        (refer Tennis Court Elevation and Section, Dwg No. DA2.04, Rev 2). The tennis court is
        3m in height and provides cover for the existing sealed parking below. The fencing
        for the tennis court extends a further 4.5m, with the total height not exceeding 7.5m
        from the existing carpark level. No lighting is proposed for this additional tennis
        court; and
    •   a relatively small tennis pavilion has also been added beside Tennis Court 1 (refer
        Proposed Tennis Pavilion, Dwg No. DA1..13, Ver 3), providing for some undercover
        outdoor seating, which is an equivalent size to the existing pavilion.

There are no other changes proposed other than minor alterations to the kerbing and the
access road within the porte-cochere to satisfy the requirements of SARA, which forms part
of the approval issued on 5 May 2022. Another change includes two (2) additional
environmental offset planting areas on the adjoining golf course, which is discussed further
below.

Development Assessment Rules

Under part 26.1(a) of the Development Assessment Rules, it is stated for a change that is not a
“minor change”, the development assessment process does not stop if the assessment
manager is satisfied the change is response to a matter raised in a properly made
submission.

The changes that have been made to the proposal plans have been made in response to the
issues raised in the submissions, primarily with respect to the height of the building. Further,
with respect to the inclusion of an additional tennis court, which is consistent with the
existing number of tennis currently provided and used by members and the general public.

                                                                                     4|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

e alterations to the roof over Buildings P1, P2, P4 and P5, with the centre areas
removed from Buildings P4 & P5, to lower the height and provide a flat central area
for additional solar panels (refer Roof Plan, Dwg No. DA1.08, Rev 10). The appearance
of the pitched roofing from the street and publicly assessable places will not be
affected. Further, the change also substantially reduces the height of the built form
located on a higher portion of the site (refer Figure 1)

e the ceiling heights of the rooms have been increased to 2.7m given a 5-Star resort is
proposed, which has resulted in an increase in the height of Building 3 by about 1m;
however, the remaining buildings have reduced in height because of the different
roof design

e increased building setbacks for Building 5 to Resort Drive with the removal of the
outdoor terrace areas to the east

e other changes include the addition of a fourth tennis court located over the upper
level carpark to the north, which maintains the current number of tennis courts
already provided. The additional tennis court is an elevated structure located about
15m from Resort Drive, which will be well screened from the frontage in this location
(refer Tennis Court Elevation and Section, Dwg No. DA2.04, Rev 2). The tennis court is
3m in height and provides cover for the existing sealed parking below. The fencing
for the tennis court extends a further 4.5m, with the total height not exceeding 7.5m
from the existing carpark level. No lighting is proposed for this additional tennis
court; and

e a relatively small tennis pavilion has also been added beside Tennis Court 1 (refer
Proposed Tennis Pavilion, Dwg No. DA1..13, Ver 3), providing for some undercover
outdoor seating, which is an equivalent size to the existing pavilion.

There are no other changes proposed other than minor alterations to the kerbing and the
access road within the porte-cochere to satisfy the requirements of SARA, which forms part
of the approval issued on 5 May 2022. Another change includes two (2) additional
environmental offset planting areas on the adjoining golf course, which is discussed further
below.

Development Assessment Rules

Under part 26.1(a) of the Development Assessment Rules, it is stated for a change that is not a
“minor change”, the development assessment process does not stop if the assessment
manager is satisfied the change is response to a matter raised in a properly made
submission.

The changes that have been made to the proposal plans have been made in response to the
issues raised in the submissions, primarily with respect to the height of the building. Further,
with respect to the inclusion of an additional tennis court, which is consistent with the
existing number of tennis currently provided and used by members and the general public.

4|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 5

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




Despite the above, the proposed changes are considered a “minor change” as defined under
Schedule 2 of the Planning Act 2016. There are no changes proposed to the intended uses
and the changes do not trigger referral to additional referral agencies. The proposed
development is not substantially different because it does not dramatically change the built
form in terms of its scale, bulk, and appearance. The changes will also have no bearing on
traffic flow or parking and does not introduce any new impacts or increase the impacts on
infrastructure, given there is no change to the scale and intensity of the development. It is
noted the deletion of six rooms also reduces the parking demand for the development. The
changes do not affect the proposed environmental offset, in fact, it is now proposed to
include additional koala habitat planting on the adjoining golf course (discussed below).

Submissions Received

A relatively large number of submissions were received following public notification of the
proposal, some of which raise valid planning concerns. It is noted that a number of the
submissions received were on a proforma letter, with a relatively large number of
submissions not being properly made. While a number of planning issues have been raised,
some of the issues are based on incorrect information about the proposal.

The key planning issues that stem from the submissions include the following:
   • the development extending beyond the Tourist Accommodation Zone and into the
       Recreation and Open Space Zone
   • the use of the Recreation and Open Space Zone not being for community benefit or
       being assessable by the general community
   • building height in terms of meters and storeys being excessive for the land
   • vegetation removal, in particular the removal of koala habitat trees
   • traffic and carparking impacts
   • evacuation during a significant bushfire event from Noosa Springs
   • the proposed bar and dining facilities within the hotel being used by the general
       public and for functions, causing adverse impacts
   • a lack of integration with the existing facilities on the site
   • the allowable site cover being exceeded for the site
   • adverse noise impacts being caused
   • use of the land for a hotel development meant for the “Parkridge Noosa” site,
       amounts to “double dipping”
   • a reduction in the number of tennis courts being currently available
   • a lack of sustainability and energy efficiency; and
   • the development does not accord with reasonable community expectations for the
       site.

With respect to the key issues raised in submissions comments have been provided Table 1
(attached). The application has been changed in response to the submissions received, to
minimise any adverse impacts upon the character and amenity of the area and to improve
environmental outcomes.

                                                                                  5|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Despite the above, the proposed changes are considered a “minor change” as defined under
Schedule 2 of the Planning Act 2016. There are no changes proposed to the intended uses
and the changes do not trigger referral to additional referral agencies. The proposed
development is not substantially different because it does not dramatically change the built
form in terms of its scale, bulk, and appearance. The changes will also have no bearing on
traffic flow or parking and does not introduce any new impacts or increase the impacts on
infrastructure, given there is no change to the scale and intensity of the development. It is
noted the deletion of six rooms also reduces the parking demand for the development. The
changes do not affect the proposed environmental offset, in fact, it is now proposed to
include additional koala habitat planting on the adjoining golf course (discussed below).

Submissions Received

A relatively large number of submissions were received following public notification of the
proposal, some of which raise valid planning concerns. It is noted that a number of the
submissions received were on a proforma letter, with a relatively large number of
submissions not being properly made. While a number of planning issues have been raised,
some of the issues are based on incorrect information about the proposal.

The key planning issues that stem from the submissions include the following:

e the development extending beyond the Tourist Accommodation Zone and into the
Recreation and Open Space Zone

e the use of the Recreation and Open Space Zone not being for community benefit or
being assessable by the general community

e building height in terms of meters and storeys being excessive for the land

e vegetation removal, in particular the removal of koala habitat trees

e traffic and carparking impacts

e evacuation during a significant bushfire event from Noosa Springs

e the proposed bar and dining facilities within the hotel being used by the general
public and for functions, causing adverse impacts

e alack of integration with the existing facilities on the site

e the allowable site cover being exceeded for the site

e adverse noise impacts being caused

e use of the land for a hotel development meant for the “Parkridge Noosa” site,
amounts to “double dipping”

e areduction in the number of tennis courts being currently available

e alack of sustainability and energy efficiency; and

e the development does not accord with reasonable community expectations for the
site.

With respect to the key issues raised in submissions comments have been provided Table 1
(attached). The application has been changed in response to the submissions received, to
minimise any adverse impacts upon the character and amenity of the area and to improve
environmental outcomes.

5|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 6

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




Impact on Koala Habitat

One of the key issues raised in the submissions is in respect to the impact upon koala
habitat. This issue has been considered by Gondwana Ecology with the majority of the issues
being raised largely unfounded on the evidence already provided by an experienced and
qualified ecologist. The further advice by Gondwana Ecology is provided as Attachment 2.

The Gondwana Ecology has confirmed given the context of the site, the mapping and the on
ground environmental values, the proposed development will have a negligible adverse
impact on koalas. Importantly, the development is compliant with both Council and the
State’s relevant koala assessment benchmarks.

In accordance with the Schedule 10 under the Planning Regulation 2017, the application was
referred to SARA because the proposed development is partly located within the Koala
Habitat Area under State mapping. The SARA provided its referral agency response on 5 May
2022, imposing conditions of approval with respect to the impact upon the identified koala
habitat (removal of 19 NJKHTs). The conditions of approval generally provide for the
following:

    •   the development is to be carried out generally in accordance with the Tree Removal
        Plan, prepared by Marchese Partners, dated 2 September 2020, Revision 1
    •   prior to development proceeding a Koala Management Plan is to be prepared prior
        any tree clearing, while noting that Gondwana Ecology has confirmed that there is no
        evidence to suggest that koala are utilising the site
    •   a requirement to deliver an environmental offset in accordance with Environmental
        Offset Act 2014, for the removal of the 19 NJKHTs as proposed by the applicant; and
    •   a requirement to retain the existing fencing around the perimeter of the property as
        koala exclusion fencing in accordance with the Koala Sensitive Design Guideline (Ver
        2) prepared by the Department of Environment and Science.

Gondwana Ecology has also made a number of recommendations which go beyond what is
required to meet State requirements. While the applicant is providing the required financial
environmental offset, additional koala habitat planting is now proposed within the adjoining
golf course in two (2) locations shown on Attachment B in the report, which provides for an
additional 60 trees, at a replacement ratio of 3:1 (refer Attachment 2).

Gondwana ecology advises … the planting of trees in these areas will provide additional koala
feed trees, a variety of habitat tree species and “close gaps” between existing koala habitats.
The golf course and planting areas are also adjacent to conservation land, a further benefit to
planting and enhancing the area. Locally refined koala habitat is also mapped along the
southern and south eastern portions of the golf course, contiguous with a planting area.
Further, that … the golf course supports the most intact and valuable koala habitat in the local
landscape, notably large open space area with a diversity of koala habitat trees for feed, refuge
and movement opportunities and generally free from dangers such as dogs and cars. Planting

                                                                                      6|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
y

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

on Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Impact on Koala Habitat

One of the key issues raised in the submissions is in respect to the impact upon koala
habitat. This issue has been considered by Gondwana Ecology with the majority of the issues
being raised largely unfounded on the evidence already provided by an experienced and
qualified ecologist. The further advice by Gondwana Ecology is provided as Attachment 2.

The Gondwana Ecology has confirmed given the context of the site, the mapping and the on
ground environmental values, the proposed development will have a negligible adverse
impact on koalas. Importantly, the development is compliant with both Council and the
State's relevant koala assessment benchmarks.

In accordance with the Schedule 10 under the Planning Regulation 2017, the application was
referred to SARA because the proposed development is partly located within the Koala
Habitat Area under State mapping. The SARA provided its referral agency response on 5 May
2022, imposing conditions of approval with respect to the impact upon the identified koala
habitat (removal of 19 NJKHTs). The conditions of approval generally provide for the
following:

e the development is to be carried out generally in accordance with the Tree Removal
Plan, prepared by Marchese Partners, dated 2 September 2020, Revision 1

e prior to development proceeding a Koala Management Plan is to be prepared prior
any tree clearing, while noting that Gondwana Ecology has confirmed that there is no
evidence to suggest that koala are utilising the site

e arequirement to deliver an environmental offset in accordance with Environmental
Offset Act 2014, for the removal of the 19 NJKHTs as proposed by the applicant; and

e¢ arequirement to retain the existing fencing around the perimeter of the property as
koala exclusion fencing in accordance with the Koala Sensitive Design Guideline (Ver
2) prepared by the Department of Environment and Science.

Gondwana Ecology has also made a number of recommendations which go beyond what is
required to meet State requirements. While the applicant is providing the required financial
environmental offset, additional koala habitat planting is now proposed within the adjoining
golf course in two (2) locations shown on Attachment B in the report, which provides for an
additional 60 trees, at a replacement ratio of 3:1 (refer Attachment 2).

Gondwana ecology advises ... the planting of trees in these areas will provide additional koala
feed trees, a variety of habitat tree species and “close gaps” between existing koala habitats.
The golf course and planting areas are also adjacent to conservation land, a further benefit to
planting and enhancing the area. Locally refined koala habitat is also mapped along the
southern and south eastern portions of the golf course, contiguous with a planting area.
Further, that ... the golf course supports the most intact and valuable koala habitat in the local
landscape, notably large open space area with a diversity of koala habitat trees for feed, refuge
and movement opportunities and generally free from dangers such as dogs and cars. Planting

6|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 7

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




koala habitat trees in this area will enhance the existing environment for koalas. Consequently,
having regard to the advice and recommendations provided by Gondwana Ecology, and the
approval that has issued by SARA, the proposed development will provide a net benefit to
the koala in the locality and the community more generally.

Given the golf course is currently owned and maintained by the applicant and a covenant
provides that both Lots 3 and 4 cannot be sold separately, it is reasonable for a condition to
be included requiring the additional koala habitat planting within the golf course, which
provides for some real benefit. Further, the additional koala habitat planting will be
maintained as part of the current management of the golf course into perpetuity, which is
highly desirable and is consistent with this existing use.

Carparking

Another key issue raised in the submissions is with respect to carparking. Further, Council’s
traffic consultant has requested further advice about aspects of the development in the email
received on 18 March 2022. The parking and other issues raised by Council have been
considered by Traffic & Transport Plus (TTP) with additional advice provided as Attachment
3.

While a range of uses have been applied for including a Resort Complex, Bar and Food and
Drink Outlet, as stated in the application material1 the operation of bar and café areas are
ancillary to the Resort Complex as defined. The Sport and Recreation use has been applied
for to maintain the existing four (4) tennis courts.

The Resort Complex definition includes … tourist and visitor accommodation that includes
integrated leisure facilities (examples of integrated leisure facilities—bars, meeting and
function facilities, restaurants, sporting and fitness facilities) … . Despite this, Council insisted
that the uses be applied for separately.

It is intended that the bar and café components of the “Boutique Hotel” would primarily be
used for guests. It is noted that TTP has advised that in their experience is it not routine for
significant numbers of externally based patrons to frequent an internal resort restaurant,
while this might occur to a limited degree, at the design level this is considered insignificant2.

The proposed development is to be integrated with the existing facilities of the Noosa
Springs Golf and Spa Resort, which includes the “Relish” restaurant, pro-shop and health spa
and gymnasium. The existing four (4) tennis courts on the site are to be reconstructed in a
different location. The existing tennis courts are currently available for use by the general
public which has also been considered in the parking surveys undertaken.



1
    Town planning report, page 21
2
    TTP Advice Letter, para 3

                                                                                         7|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

koala habitat trees in this area will enhance the existing environment for koalas. Consequently,
having regard to the advice and recommendations provided by Gondwana Ecology, and the
approval that has issued by SARA, the proposed development will provide a net benefit to
the koala in the locality and the community more generally.

Given the golf course is currently owned and maintained by the applicant and a covenant
provides that both Lots 3 and 4 cannot be sold separately, it is reasonable for a condition to
be included requiring the additional koala habitat planting within the golf course, which
provides for some real benefit. Further, the additional koala habitat planting will be
maintained as part of the current management of the golf course into perpetuity, which is
highly desirable and is consistent with this existing use.

Carparking

Another key issue raised in the submissions is with respect to carparking. Further, Council's
traffic consultant has requested further advice about aspects of the development in the email
received on 18 March 2022. The parking and other issues raised by Council have been
considered by Traffic & Transport Plus (TTP) with additional advice provided as Attachment
3.

While a range of uses have been applied for including a Resort Complex, Bar and Food and
Drink Outlet, as stated in the application material' the operation of bar and café areas are
ancillary to the Resort Complex as defined. The Sport and Recreation use has been applied
for to maintain the existing four (4) tennis courts.

The Resort Complex definition includes ... tourist and visitor accommodation that includes
integrated leisure facilities (examples of integrated leisure facilities—bars, meeting and
function facilities, restaurants, sporting and fitness facilities) ... . Despite this, Council insisted
that the uses be applied for separately.

It is intended that the bar and café components of the “Boutique Hotel” would primarily be
used for guests. It is noted that TTP has advised that in their experience is it not routine for
significant numbers of externally based patrons to frequent an internal resort restaurant,
while this might occur to a limited degree, at the design level this is considered insignificant?.

The proposed development is to be integrated with the existing facilities of the Noosa
Springs Golf and Spa Resort, which includes the “Relish” restaurant, pro-shop and health spa
and gymnasium. The existing four (4) tennis courts on the site are to be reconstructed in a
different location. The existing tennis courts are currently available for use by the general
public which has also been considered in the parking surveys undertaken.

1 Town planning report, page 21
2 TTP Advice Letter, para 3

7|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 8

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




Two (2) parking surveys have now been relied upon to quantify the current and expected
demand for parking for the mixed use development as an integrated Resort Complex. The
first parking survey was conducted in June-July of 2017, and the second was conducted
January-February 2022. The surveys involved monitoring the parking areas on site at various
times during the day, at 7am, midday, 3pm & 7pm and counting the cars that were parked at
those times.

The advice from TTP is that both surveys show the parking onsite is significantly under-
utilised. The peak parking times are midday on a weekday, with weekend midday parking
being less than midday parking from Monday to Friday. Parking at 3pm is the next busiest,
with parking demand at 7am and 7pm being the lowest.

The consultant has advised the expected peak parking demand for the hotel synchronises
well with the existing uses on the site. The survey data demonstrates that the existing uses
have the highest parking demand during the middle of the day on weekdays and the
proposed hotel will have its highest parking demand overnight on weekends, which makes
for efficient use of infrastructure.3

The consultant has considered the parking numbers having regard to the peak operating
times and under two (2) different scenarios assuming a parking demand of one space per 1.5
rooms, which is considered a generously high provision rate for a resort (refer Figure 3 –
Attachment 3). Having regard to Figure 3, the exceedance cases occur on a small number
times on the Monday to Friday midday period. The demand for parking for the hotel is
maximised overnight and therefore would not interfere with the parking provided for the
other uses onsite4.

Despite, the parking being adequate under the former proposal, the applicant has provided
another carpark which provides for a further 48 spaces. This stems from concerns raised in
the information request and also by members of the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort,
about a lack of onsite parking for the integrated development. Having regard to the advice
provided by TTP, it is suggested the additional 48 parking spaces are not needed, with
effectively one space being provided per room when considering Figure 4 (Attachment 3).
Under this scenario, even less of the non-hotel uses parking demand would exceed the
residual capacity that is available5.

In summary, the traffic expert has advised that based on the carparking survey data that has
been collected, the parking is more than adequate for the proposed development. This is not
to suggest that the proposed alternative modes of transport, including the provision of a
shuttle bus and at least five (5) electric bikes and mopeds will not be provided. The applicant
intends to actively encourage alternative forms of transport for the development consistent
with the Noosa Plan.

3
    TTP Advice Letter, paras 21-23
4
    TTP Advice Letter, paras 24-25
5
    TTP Advice Letter, paras 26-27

                                                                                    8|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Two (2) parking surveys have now been relied upon to quantify the current and expected
demand for parking for the mixed use development as an integrated Resort Complex. The
first parking survey was conducted in June-July of 2017, and the second was conducted
January-February 2022. The surveys involved monitoring the parking areas on site at various
times during the day, at 7am, midday, 3pm & 7pm and counting the cars that were parked at
those times.

The advice from TTP is that both surveys show the parking onsite is significantly under-
utilised. The peak parking times are midday on a weekday, with weekend midday parking
being less than midday parking from Monday to Friday. Parking at 3pm is the next busiest,
with parking demand at 7am and 7pm being the lowest.

The consultant has advised the expected peak parking demand for the hotel synchronises
well with the existing uses on the site. The survey data demonstrates that the existing uses
have the highest parking demand during the middle of the day on weekdays and the
proposed hotel will have its highest parking demand overnight on weekends, which makes
for efficient use of infrastructure.?

The consultant has considered the parking numbers having regard to the peak operating
times and under two (2) different scenarios assuming a parking demand of one space per 1.5
rooms, which is considered a generously high provision rate for a resort (refer Figure 3 —
Attachment 3). Having regard to Figure 3, the exceedance cases occur on a small number
times on the Monday to Friday midday period. The demand for parking for the hotel is
maximised overnight and therefore would not interfere with the parking provided for the
other uses onsite’.

Despite, the parking being adequate under the former proposal, the applicant has provided
another carpark which provides for a further 48 spaces. This stems from concerns raised in
the information request and also by members of the Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort,
about a lack of onsite parking for the integrated development. Having regard to the advice
provided by TTP, it is suggested the additional 48 parking spaces are not needed, with
effectively one space being provided per room when considering Figure 4 (Attachment 3).
Under this scenario, even less of the non-hotel uses parking demand would exceed the
residual capacity that is available®.

In summary, the traffic expert has advised that based on the carparking survey data that has
been collected, the parking is more than adequate for the proposed development. This is not
to suggest that the proposed alternative modes of transport, including the provision of a
shuttle bus and at least five (5) electric bikes and mopeds will not be provided. The applicant
intends to actively encourage alternative forms of transport for the development consistent
with the Noosa Plan.

3 TTP Advice Letter, paras 21-23
4 TTP Advice Letter, paras 24-25
5 TTP Advice Letter, paras 26-27
8|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 9

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




Bushfire and Landscaping

With respect to bushfire risk and mitigation, Rob Friend and Associates has provided further
advice, which is provided as Attachment 4. This includes an updated Bushfire Hazard
Assessment, which incorporates an Emergency Response Plan to be used by the hotel
management to respond to a bushfire emergency.

With respect to the request for further information by Council’s consultants, the Landscape
Concept Plan has been updated by the Place Design Group (refer Attachment 5), which
provides for a 5m wide turfed area (identified as 31 on the Landscape Concept Plan, Dwg No.
LCP5, Rev D). It is noted that changes have been made to the building setbacks from Resort
Drive to Building 5, with the removal of the outdoor terrace areas. This area now provides for
the 5m wide turfed area described above, for improved bushfire separation to the bushland
to the east, which is to remain as a managed grass area.

The bushfire consultant has confirmed that emergency services will access the site from
Cooyar Street, into Noosa Springs Drive and Links Drive, which is not required to be
upgraded, and would be an unreasonable imposition placed on the development. The
development relies on onsite evacuation in accordance with the Emergency Response Plan,
which is to be implemented by hotel management as required. The Bushfire Hazard
Assessment acknowledges constraints in terms of vehicle access to the site and has made
recommendations including the removal of some vegetation from the verge within Resort
Drive.

While the submissions have raised the issue of an alternative access to be provided for the
Noosa Springs area as a whole, this is a matter that is beyond the development proposal.
The bushfire expert has confirmed that onsite management of the risk associated with
bushfire is the best option for the proposed development and made a number of
recommendations under the Bushfire Hazard Assessment. The recommendations made
include building location, landscaping, access, water supply, future planning in terms of a
Bushfire Management Plan and an Emergency Response Plan, provided in the updated
Bushfire Hazard Assessment (Attachment 4).

The Landscape Concept Plan has been updated to reflect the changes made to the proposal
plans including the additional tennis court (30) and the 5m wide turfed area (31) discussed
above (refer Attachment 5).

Odour from the Noosa Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP)

With respect to odour issue Katestone has provided further advice about this issue (refer
Attachment 6). The further advice confirms the assessment that has been undertaken on the
basis that the hotel operates 24 hours a day, seven (7) days a week, with the outdoor
recreational areas operating from 7am to 8.30pm for the tennis courts and 7am to 7pm for
the pool.

                                                                                   9|Page
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
y

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

on Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Bushfire and Landscaping

With respect to bushfire risk and mitigation, Rob Friend and Associates has provided further
advice, which is provided as Attachment 4. This includes an updated Bushfire Hazard
Assessment, which incorporates an Emergency Response Plan to be used by the hotel
management to respond to a bushfire emergency.

With respect to the request for further information by Council's consultants, the Landscape
Concept Plan has been updated by the Place Design Group (refer Attachment 5), which
provides for a 5m wide turfed area (identified as 31 on the Landscape Concept Plan, Dwg No.
LCP5, Rev D). It is noted that changes have been made to the building setbacks from Resort
Drive to Building 5, with the removal of the outdoor terrace areas. This area now provides for
the 5m wide turfed area described above, for improved bushfire separation to the bushland
to the east, which is to remain as a managed grass area.

The bushfire consultant has confirmed that emergency services will access the site from
Cooyar Street, into Noosa Springs Drive and Links Drive, which is not required to be
upgraded, and would be an unreasonable imposition placed on the development. The
development relies on onsite evacuation in accordance with the Emergency Response Plan,
which is to be implemented by hotel management as required. The Bushfire Hazard
Assessment acknowledges constraints in terms of vehicle access to the site and has made
recommendations including the removal of some vegetation from the verge within Resort
Drive.

While the submissions have raised the issue of an alternative access to be provided for the
Noosa Springs area as a whole, this is a matter that is beyond the development proposal.
The bushfire expert has confirmed that onsite management of the risk associated with
bushfire is the best option for the proposed development and made a number of
recommendations under the Bushfire Hazard Assessment. The recommendations made
include building location, landscaping, access, water supply, future planning in terms of a
Bushfire Management Plan and an Emergency Response Plan, provided in the updated
Bushfire Hazard Assessment (Attachment 4).

The Landscape Concept Plan has been updated to reflect the changes made to the proposal
plans including the additional tennis court (30) and the 5m wide turfed area (31) discussed
above (refer Attachment 5).

Odour from the Noosa Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP)

With respect to odour issue Katestone has provided further advice about this issue (refer
Attachment 6). The further advice confirms the assessment that has been undertaken on the
basis that the hotel operates 24 hours a day, seven (7) days a week, with the outdoor
recreational areas operating from 7am to 8.30pm for the tennis courts and 7am to 7pm for
the pool.

9|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 10

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




The assessment confirmed that the concentrations of odour for the accommodation are
predicted to comply with the odour guideline at the façade closest to the Noosa WWTP.
Given the hours of operation for the outdoor recreation areas, the odour concentration at
ground level for these facilities also complies with the guideline.

The further analysis undertaken by the consultant has revealed the odour concentrations are
highest when the wind speed is less than 2 m/s and from the north and northeast. The peak
odour concentrations are higher overnight between 5pm to 5am and very low during the
day. The majority of the odour predications are below the odour guideline. The adverse
meteorological conditions are predicted to occur for approximately 3% of the time.

Photomontages

Given the changes made to the design of the proposed Resort Complex, in terms of lowering
the roof for Buildings 4 and 5, by removing the centre portion and adding solar panels,
removing six (6) rooms from Building 2, and altering the roofline for Building 1, an updated
photomontage package is provided as Attachment 7.

The proposed development sits below the tree line and does not protrude into the skyline.
The most prominent part of the development is Building 2 facing southwest, as shown in the
original photomontage provided (refer Drawing VP01 – Attachment 5). An extract of the
original photomontage for the development before the reduction in building height is
provided as Figure 2, below.




Figure 2 – Original photomontage for the development (extract from VP01 – Attachment 5)



                                                                                10 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
&

Adamson
Town Planning

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
advice”

The assessment confirmed that the concentrations of odour for the accommodation are
predicted to comply with the odour guideline at the facade closest to the Noosa WWTP.
Given the hours of operation for the outdoor recreation areas, the odour concentration at
ground level for these facilities also complies with the guideline.

The further analysis undertaken by the consultant has revealed the odour concentrations are
highest when the wind speed is less than 2 m/s and from the north and northeast. The peak
odour concentrations are higher overnight between 5pm to 5am and very low during the
day. The majority of the odour predications are below the odour guideline. The adverse
meteorological conditions are predicted to occur for approximately 3% of the time.

Photomontages

Given the changes made to the design of the proposed Resort Complex, in terms of lowering
the roof for Buildings 4 and 5, by removing the centre portion and adding solar panels,
removing six (6) rooms from Building 2, and altering the roofline for Building 1, an updated
photomontage package is provided as Attachment 7.

The proposed development sits below the tree line and does not protrude into the skyline.
The most prominent part of the development is Building 2 facing southwest, as shown in the
original photomontage provided (refer Drawing VPO1 — Attachment 5). An extract of the
original photomontage for the development before the reduction in building height is
provided as Figure 2, below.

   

Figure 2 — Original photomontage for the development (extract from VPO1 — Attachment 5)

10|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 11

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




  Building 2   Roof of Building 3
                                          End of Building 4




Figure 3 – Photomontage showing the reduced building height of the development (using
the original photo from VP01, as cropped)

A new photomontage showing the reduced building height has been prepared, which shows
the development is less visually prominent, being well integrated within the site, and does
not protrude above the existing tree line (refer Figure 3).

By way of comparison, another photomontage has been prepared from a slightly different
angle, providing a comparison of the proposed development and the existing “Parkridge
Noosa” development (refer Figure 4).

                                         Resort Hotel                   Parkridge Noosa




Figure 4 – Photomontage of proposed development and ‘Parkridge Noosa” (new photo – as
cropped)


                                                                                          11 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
&

Adamson
Town Planning

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
advice”

Building 2 Roof of Building 3
End of Building 4

t

   

Figure 3 — Photomontage showing the reduced building height of the development (using
the original photo from VP01, as cropped)

A new photomontage showing the reduced building height has been prepared, which shows
the development is less visually prominent, being well integrated within the site, and does
not protrude above the existing tree line (refer Figure 3).

By way of comparison, another photomontage has been prepared from a slightly different

angle, providing a comparison of the proposed development and the existing “Parkridge
Noosa” development (refer Figure 4).

 

 

Figure 4 — Photomontage of proposed development and ‘Parkridge Noosa” (new photo — as
cropped)

11|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”

Page 12

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




The views used in the photomontages are considered to be the most important view having
regard to the site characteristics, location of vegetation within the golf course, with the
development effectively being not visible off the site, including from the residential
properties in Noosa Springs to the west. This includes having a minimal if any impact when
viewed from Lake Weyba, as shown in the existing photomontages provided as Attachment
5 with the application material.

In terms of impact and visibility, the proposed development is far less prominent when
compared to the existing “Parkridge Noosa” development which extends above the treeline
and into the skyline (refer Figure 4).

Summary

In summary, the changes made to the proposal plans are in response to the submissions
received. The primary change is with respect to the height of Buildings 1, 2, 4 & 5. These
changes have had the effect of reducing the visibility and prominence of the built form. The
reduced height of Building 2 has also reduced the dominance of the built form near the
entry to the hotel at the porte-cochere. An additional tennis court and pavilion have also
been added to maintain the current status quo.

The applicant has provided further advice with respect to the risk of bushfire and in relation
to the proposed landscaping concept. Further, has provided additional advice about the
parking demand generated by the resort hotel and with respect to the impact of odour from
the Noosa WWTP.

Importantly, the applicant has further considered the concerns expressed by the community
about the removal of 19 NJKHTs. In response, the applicant sought further advice from
Gondwana Ecology and is now proposing to provide 60 additional trees in two (2) selected
locations in the adjoining golf course. The planting of additional koala food trees will provide
a net benefit in terms of koala habitat in a known koala location. The additional planting is of
real benefit to the community, given the financial environmental offset is also being
provided.

The applicant has also addressed the concerns raised by SARA and has received the referral
agency response providing conditions of approval. Consequently, pursuant to part 21 of the
Development Assessment Rules, parts 1, 2, 3 & 4 are completed. The Decision Stage (Part 5)
for the application commenced on 6 May 2022.




                                                                                   12 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

The views used in the photomontages are considered to be the most important view having
regard to the site characteristics, location of vegetation within the golf course, with the
development effectively being not visible off the site, including from the residential
properties in Noosa Springs to the west. This includes having a minimal if any impact when
viewed from Lake Weyba, as shown in the existing photomontages provided as Attachment
5 with the application material.

In terms of impact and visibility, the proposed development is far less prominent when
compared to the existing “Parkridge Noosa” development which extends above the treeline
and into the skyline (refer Figure 4).

Summary

In summary, the changes made to the proposal plans are in response to the submissions
received. The primary change is with respect to the height of Buildings 1, 2, 4 & 5. These
changes have had the effect of reducing the visibility and prominence of the built form. The
reduced height of Building 2 has also reduced the dominance of the built form near the
entry to the hotel at the porte-cochere. An additional tennis court and pavilion have also
been added to maintain the current status quo.

The applicant has provided further advice with respect to the risk of bushfire and in relation
to the proposed landscaping concept. Further, has provided additional advice about the
parking demand generated by the resort hotel and with respect to the impact of odour from
the Noosa WWTP.

Importantly, the applicant has further considered the concerns expressed by the community
about the removal of 19 NJKHTs. In response, the applicant sought further advice from
Gondwana Ecology and is now proposing to provide 60 additional trees in two (2) selected
locations in the adjoining golf course. The planting of additional koala food trees will provide
a net benefit in terms of koala habitat in a known koala location. The additional planting is of
real benefit to the community, given the financial environmental offset is also being
provided.

The applicant has also addressed the concerns raised by SARA and has received the referral
agency response providing conditions of approval. Consequently, pursuant to part 21 of the
Development Assessment Rules, parts 1, 2, 3 & 4 are completed. The Decision Stage (Part 5)
for the application commenced on 6 May 2022.

12|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 13

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




Please advise if further information is required or if Council has any concerns about the
proposal.

Yours faithfully




Shane Adamson (BEngTech, GDURP, MPIA, MQELA)
Town Planning Specialist
Director - Adamson Town Planning Pty Ltd




                                                                                13 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
‘

Adamson
Town Planning

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
advice”

Please advise if further information is required or if Council has any concerns about the
proposal.

Yours faithfully

_—_

Shane Adamson (BEngTech, GDURP, MPIA, MQELA)
Town Planning Specialist
Director - Adamson Town Planning Pty Ltd

13|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 14

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




Table 1 – Issues and Responses
               Issue                                                   Response
The development extending beyond                  The proposed hotel development is defined as a
the Tourist Accommodation Zone                    “Resort Complex” which is a consistent use within the
and into the Recreation and Open                  TAZ, being for short-term accommodation, which is
Space Zone.                                       encouraged.

                                                  It is accepted that the proposed development
                                                  extends into the ROSZ and is not consistent in that
                                                  zone; however, is on the same parcel of land, and is
                                                  to be integrated with the existing Noosa Springs Golf
                                                  and Spa Resort facilities.

                                                  The development is well located within Noosa Heads,
                                                  has been integrated within the site and will not cause
                                                  any significant off site impacts upon the character or
                                                  amenity of the area. Further, makes for efficient use
                                                  of land and infrastructure, which from a town
                                                  planning perspective is highly desirable. This is
                                                  particularly the case in the Noosa area, where there
                                                  are very limited development opportunities.

                                                  The Economic Impact Assessment confirms there is a
                                                  significant lack of luxury, full service hotel experiences
                                                  in the Noosa area, which suffers from a shortage of
                                                  short-stay accommodation rooms and chronic
                                                  shortage of high-end luxury accommodation 6 . The
                                                  only other full service hotel in Noosa is the Sofitel,
                                                  which was constructed in 1989.

                                                  There are a number of relevant matters that warrant
                                                  approval of the proposal, including a significant need
                                                  and considerable community benefit including
                                                  economic benefits in the short and long term. The
                                                  economic benefits are substantial, including provision
                                                  of 202 jobs and $25.7M (in GPR terms) during
                                                  construction and 14.3M (in GRP terms) and 158 jobs
                                                  once operational7.

The use of the Recreation and Open While part of the subject land is included within the
Space    Zone    not    being   for ROSZ, the land is privately owned, and not available


6
    Economic Impact Assessment, part 6, page 24
7
    Economic Impact Assessment, part 6, page 24

                                                                                               14 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
a

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

on Adamson
advice

Town Planning

Table 1 - Issues and Responses

 

Issue Response

 

The development extending beyond | The proposed hotel development is defined as a
the Tourist Accommodation Zone | “Resort Complex” which is a consistent use within the
and into the Recreation and Open | TAZ, being for short-term accommodation, which is
Space Zone. encouraged.

It is accepted that the proposed development
extends into the ROSZ and is not consistent in that
zone; however, is on the same parcel of land, and is
to be integrated with the existing Noosa Springs Golf
and Spa Resort facilities.

The development is well located within Noosa Heads,
has been integrated within the site and will not cause
any significant off site impacts upon the character or
amenity of the area. Further, makes for efficient use
of land and _ infrastructure, which from a town
planning perspective is highly desirable. This is
particularly the case in the Noosa area, where there
are very limited development opportunities.

The Economic Impact Assessment confirms there is a
significant lack of luxury, full service hotel experiences
in the Noosa area, which suffers from a shortage of
short-stay accommodation rooms and_ chronic
shortage of high-end luxury accommodation®. The
only other full service hotel in Noosa is the Sofitel,
which was constructed in 1989.

There are a number of relevant matters that warrant
approval of the proposal, including a significant need
and considerable community benefit including
economic benefits in the short and long term. The
economic benefits are substantial, including provision
of 202 jobs and $25.7M (in GPR terms) during
construction and 14.3M (in GRP terms) and 158 jobs
once operational’.

 

 

The use of the Recreation and Open | While part of the subject land is included within the
Space Zone not being __for | ROSZ, the land is privately owned, and not available

 

 

 

© Economic Impact Assessment, part 6, page 24
7 Economic Impact Assessment, part 6, page 24

14|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 15

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




community        benefit    or  being for general public use. The use of some of the land
assessable       by     the    general included within the ROSZ for the proposed integrated
community.                             hotel development is logical in the circumstances,
                                       given the location of the TAZ. This is because of the
                                       location of the existing facilities onsite, the existing
                                       site constraints, and the identified significant need
                                       and community benefit.

Building height in terms of meters The proposed building height of the development
and storeys being excessive for the has been lowered for Buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 in
land.                               response to the submissions already explained above.
                                    As shown on the plan provided (Extrapolated 8m &
                                    12m Above NGL Plane – Dwg No. DA4.01, Rev 10 –
                                    Figure 1), small portions of Building 2 exceed 12m in
                                    height with generally small portions of Buildings 3 &
                                    4 exceeding 8m in height.

                                         The development remains predominantly three (3)
                                         storeys in height but is integrated into the slope to
                                         present as two (2) storeys to Resort Drive and when
                                         viewed off the site (refer Dwg No. DA4.08, Rev 8).

Vegetation removal, in particular the    This issue has been discussed above, with additional
removal of koala habitat trees.          offset planting for 60 habitat trees to be provided
                                         within the golf course as shown in the attached plan
                                         (refer Attachment 2). Further, SARA has conditioned
                                         the payment of an environmental offset for the
                                         removal of the 19 NJKHTs, this being the requirement
                                         to meet the relevant State assessment benchmarks.
                                         Further, a condition has been imposed by SARA for
                                         the existing fencing to be retained to discourage
                                         koala from entering the site, which is appropriate in
                                         the circumstances.

Traffic and carparking impacts           The matter of traffic impacts and the provision of
                                         parking for the development has been addressed by
                                         TTP. The proposed development will not cause
                                         adverse traffic impacts upon the existing road
                                         network in the locality. Further, as discussed above,
                                         the parking is more than adequate for the proposed
                                         development, essentially equating to 1 carparking
                                         space per room, when having regard to the parking
                                         surveys that have been undertaken.


                                                                                   15 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
y

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

on Adamson
advice

Town Planning

 

community benefit or being | for general public use. The use of some of the land
assessable by the general | included within the ROSZ for the proposed integrated
community. hotel development is logical in the circumstances,
given the location of the TAZ. This is because of the
location of the existing facilities onsite, the existing
site constraints, and the identified significant need
and community benefit.

 

Building height in terms of meters | The proposed building height of the development
and storeys being excessive for the | has been lowered for Buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 in
land. response to the submissions already explained above.
As shown on the plan provided (Extrapolated 8m &
12m Above NGL Plane — Dwg No. DA4.01, Rev 10 -
Figure 1), small portions of Building 2 exceed 12m in
height with generally small portions of Buildings 3 &
4 exceeding 8m in height.

The development remains predominantly three (3)
storeys in height but is integrated into the slope to
present as two (2) storeys to Resort Drive and when
viewed off the site (refer Dwg No. DA4.08, Rev 8).

 

Vegetation removal, in particular the | This issue has been discussed above, with additional
removal of koala habitat trees. offset planting for 60 habitat trees to be provided
within the golf course as shown in the attached plan
(refer Attachment 2). Further, SARA has conditioned
the payment of an environmental offset for the
removal of the 19 NJKHTs, this being the requirement
to meet the relevant State assessment benchmarks.
Further, a condition has been imposed by SARA for
the existing fencing to be retained to discourage
koala from entering the site, which is appropriate in
the circumstances.

 

 

Traffic and carparking impacts The matter of traffic impacts and the provision of
parking for the development has been addressed by
TTP. The proposed development will not cause
adverse traffic impacts upon the existing road
network in the locality. Further, as discussed above,
the parking is more than adequate for the proposed
development, essentially equating to 1 carparking
space per room, when having regard to the parking
surveys that have been undertaken.

 

 

 

15|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 16

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




Evacuation during a significant           The issue of bushfire risk, including a Bushfire
bushfire event from Noosa Springs         Management Plan and Emergency Evacuation Plan
                                          for the development have been considered by the
                                          bushfire expert. The bushfire expert has made a
                                          number of recommendations that are to be
                                          implemented. The provision of alternative emergency
                                          access for the whole of Noosa Springs is not a
                                          relevant or reasonable condition that could be
                                          imposed on the proposed development.

The proposed bar and dining               As discussed above, the uses that have been applied
facilities hotel will be used by the      for was at the bequest of Noosa Council and not
general public and for functions,         because it is intended the general public would utilise
causing adverse impacts                   the facilities within the hotel. These uses are to
                                          remain ancillary to the hotel, forming part of the
                                          Resort Complex as applied for, to be used primarily
                                          by quests of the hotel. The existing uses at the Noosa
                                          Springs Golf and Spa Resort will remain available to
                                          the general public as is currently the case.

A lack of integration with the It is not agreed there is a lack of integration between
existing facilities on the site the proposed Resort Complex and the existing
                                facilities. The proposed development relies on the
                                integration with the existing uses on the site. The
                                addition      of  the    5-Star    hotel    component,
                                complemented by the existing facilities, provides for
                                new full service resort hotel which has not occurred in
                                the Noosa area for many years.

                                          The proposed development has many similar design
                                          elements such as roof tiling and forms and a design
                                          that is in keeping with existing Noosa Springs
                                          character, while also having regard to the
                                          requirements under the planning scheme. Further, the
                                          five buildings or pavilions have been integrated into
                                          the site with substantial landscaping provided, which
                                          is also in keeping with the existing landscaped theme
                                          of Noosa Springs.

The allowable site        cover    being The proposed development has a site cover of 9.65%
exceeded for the site                    for the resort hotel and an overall site cover of
                                         17.84% for the development as a whole. The site is
                                         unusual in that it has a split zoning, with the
                                         allowable site cover within the TAZ being 40%. While

                                                                                     16 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

y

 

advice” Adamson
Town Planning
Evacuation during a_ significant | The issue of bushfire risk, including a Bushfire

bushfire event from Noosa Springs

Management Plan and Emergency Evacuation Plan
for the development have been considered by the
bushfire expert. The bushfire expert has made a
number of recommendations that are to be
implemented. The provision of alternative emergency
access for the whole of Noosa Springs is not a
relevant or reasonable condition that could be
imposed on the proposed development.

 

The proposed bar and_ dining
facilities hotel will be used by the
general public and for functions,
causing adverse impacts

As discussed above, the uses that have been applied
for was at the bequest of Noosa Council and not
because it is intended the general public would utilise
the facilities within the hotel. These uses are to
remain ancillary to the hotel, forming part of the
Resort Complex as applied for, to be used primarily
by quests of the hotel. The existing uses at the Noosa
Springs Golf and Spa Resort will remain available to
the general public as is currently the case.

 

A lack of integration with the
existing facilities on the site

It is not agreed there is a lack of integration between
the proposed Resort Complex and the existing
facilities. The proposed development relies on the
integration with the existing uses on the site. The
addition of the 5-Star hotel component,
complemented by the existing facilities, provides for
new full service resort hotel which has not occurred in
the Noosa area for many years.

The proposed development has many similar design
elements such as roof tiling and forms and a design
that is in keeping with existing Noosa Springs
character, while also having regard to the
requirements under the planning scheme. Further, the
five buildings or pavilions have been integrated into
the site with substantial landscaping provided, which
is also in keeping with the existing landscaped theme
of Noosa Springs.

 

 

The allowable site cover
exceeded for the site

being

 

The proposed development has a site cover of 9.65%
for the resort hotel and an overall site cover of
17.84% for the development as a whole. The site is
unusual in that it has a split zoning, with the
allowable site cover within the TAZ being 40%. While

 

16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

16|Page

 

Page 17

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




                                         the allowable site cover for the ROSZ is 10%, the site
                                         cover for the proposed development is not excessive.
                                         The site cover is well below what is reasonably
                                         considered acceptable for this type of development,
                                         in an urban area, not forgetting the clubhouse could
                                         be located within the ROSZ.

Adverse noise impacts being caused The potential noise impacts from the development
by the proposed development.       have been considered by ASK consultants and
                                   provided with the application material (refer
                                   Attachment H). The Noise Impact Assessment
                                   considered the potential noise impacts from the
                                   various sources and made a number of
                                   recommendations, including:
                                   • the use of the tennis courts and pools to have
                                       limited hours of operation
                                   • mechanical plant is to be designed to prevent off
                                       site impacts
                                   • deliveries and waste management is expected to
                                       occur near the existing clubhouse between 7am
                                       and 6pm and not impact upon sensitive receivers
                                   • the use of the carparking and the traffic
                                       generated also being compliant with current
                                       standards.
                                   Subject to the imposition of conditions, the proposed
                                   development will not cause significant off site noise
                                   impacts.

The use of the land for a Hotel          The proposal is for a new Resort Complex on land
development meant for the                partly located within the TAZ with this use being a
“Parkridge Noosa” site, amounts to       consistent use. The proposal is to be integrated with
“double dipping”                         the existing facilities already provided within the TAZ.

                                         As explained in the Town Planning Report (page 12),
                                         it was originally intended that a Resort Hotel would
                                         be provided in Precinct F under the former Noosa
                                         Springs Plan of Development. This site is now
                                         improved by the “Parkridge Noosa” development,
                                         which is for multiple dwellings, providing
                                         predominantly for permanent residential living, and
                                         not necessarily for visitor accommodation.

                                         Under the current development approval for the
                                         “Parkridge Noosa” development, while short term

                                                                                    17 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
y

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

on Adamson
advice

Town Planning

 

the allowable site cover for the ROSZ is 10%, the site
cover for the proposed development is not excessive.
The site cover is well below what is reasonably
considered acceptable for this type of development,
in an urban area, not forgetting the clubhouse could
be located within the ROSZ.

 

Adverse noise impacts being caused | The potential noise impacts from the development

by the proposed development. have been considered by ASK consultants and

provided with the application material (refer

Attachment H). The Noise Impact Assessment

considered the potential noise impacts from the

various sources and made a number of

recommendations, including:

e the use of the tennis courts and pools to have
limited hours of operation

e mechanical plant is to be designed to prevent off
site impacts

e deliveries and waste management is expected to
occur near the existing clubhouse between 7am
and 6pm and not impact upon sensitive receivers

e the use of the carparking and the traffic
generated also being compliant with current
standards.

Subject to the imposition of conditions, the proposed

development will not cause significant off site noise

 

 

impacts.
The use of the land for a Hotel The proposal is for a new Resort Complex on land
development meant for the partly located within the TAZ with this use being a
“Parkridge Noosa” site, amounts to | consistent use. The proposal is to be integrated with
“double dipping" the existing facilities already provided within the TAZ.

As explained in the Town Planning Report (page 12),
it was originally intended that a Resort Hotel would
be provided in Precinct F under the former Noosa
Springs Plan of Development. This site is now
improved by the “Parkridge Noosa” development,
which is for multiple dwellings, providing
predominantly for permanent residential living, and
not necessarily for visitor accommodation.

Under the current development approval for the
“Parkridge Noosa” development, while short term

 

 

 

17|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 18

    “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
    advice”




                                                      accommodation is to be promoted and managed,
                                                      there is no restriction on the number of units being
                                                      used for permanent residential living 8 . Under the
                                                      planning scheme the “Parkridge Noosa” development
                                                      is located within the TAZ and is intended for visitor
                                                      accommodation, which now is unlikely to be realised.

                                                      In contrast, the proposed development is for purely
                                                      visitor accommodation, to the exclusion of
                                                      permanent residential living, which will provide
                                                      substantial community benefit for reasons already
                                                      explained. The proposed development is for a
                                                      different      development     providing     visitor
                                                      accommodation and does not amount to “double
                                                      dipping”.

A reduction in the number of tennis                   The changes made to the proposal plans include an
courts being currently available                      additional tennis court to maintain the status quo, all
                                                      of which are located within the ROSZ, and a
                                                      consistent Sport and Recreation use. Further, the
                                                      existing tennis pavilion has also been replaced.

A lack of sustainability and energy                   A Sustainability Design Report has been provided as
efficiency                                            Attachment 4 in the application material. The changes
                                                      made to the proposal plans in terms of reducing the
                                                      height of Buildings 4 & 5 has provided areas for
                                                      additional solar panels, which substantially increase
                                                      the amount of solar power (50kVA PV System) able to
                                                      be generated as stated in the advice provided (refer
                                                      Attachment 8).

                                                      A number of sustainability and other energy
                                                      efficiency measures are being adopted for the
                                                      development as explained in the Superior Design
                                                      Outcomes Report (Attachment 8). The applicant is
                                                      committed to providing a high level of sustainability,
                                                      which reduces cost in the long term, by achieving a
                                                      high stand of energy efficiency.

The development does not accord                       It is not agreed that the proposed development does
with reasonable community                             not accord with reasonable community expectations.
expectations for the site                             The subject land was partly included within the TAZ


8
    Refer condition 4 of the development approval issued 23 June 2020

                                                                                                 18 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
y

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

on Adamson
advice

Town Planning

 

accommodation is to be promoted and managed,
there is no restriction on the number of units being
used for permanent residential living®. Under the
planning scheme the “Parkridge Noosa” development
is located within the TAZ and is intended for visitor
accommodation, which now is unlikely to be realised.

In contrast, the proposed development is for purely
visitor accommodation, to the exclusion § of
permanent residential living, which will provide
substantial community benefit for reasons already
explained. The proposed development is for a

different development providing visitor
accommodation and does not amount to “double
dipping’.

 

A reduction in the number of tennis | The changes made to the proposal plans include an
courts being currently available additional tennis court to maintain the status quo, all
of which are located within the ROSZ, and a
consistent Sport and Recreation use. Further, the
existing tennis pavilion has also been replaced.

 

A lack of sustainability and energy A Sustainability Design Report has been provided as
efficiency Attachment 4 in the application material. The changes
made to the proposal plans in terms of reducing the
height of Buildings 4 & 5 has provided areas for
additional solar panels, which substantially increase
the amount of solar power (SO0kVA PV System) able to
be generated as stated in the advice provided (refer
Attachment 8).

A number of sustainability and other energy
efficiency measures are being adopted for the
development as explained in the Superior Design
Outcomes Report (Attachment 8). The applicant is
committed to providing a high level of sustainability,
which reduces cost in the long term, by achieving a
high stand of energy efficiency.

 

 

 

 

The development does not accord It is not agreed that the proposed development does
with reasonable community not accord with reasonable community expectations.
expectations for the site The subject land was partly included within the TAZ

 

8 Refer condition 4 of the development approval issued 23 June 2020

18|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”

Page 19

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning
 advice”




                                         under the Noosa Plan 2020; however, the location of
                                         the zone is mostly over land where the existing
                                         Noosa Springs Golf and Spa facilities are provided.

                                         Under the planning scheme it is reasonably expected
                                         a Resort Complex would be provided within the TAZ,
                                         this being a consistent use in that zone. While the
                                         Resort Complex extends into the ROSZ, this is
                                         unavoidable, given the location of existing facilities
                                         which are to be retained and integrated as part of
                                         proposed development.

                                         It also a relevant consideration that “Parkridge
                                         Noosa” is a multiple dwelling development, which
                                         provides mostly for permanent residential living.
                                         While some of the dwellings might be used for visit
                                         accommodation, the development is not for purely
                                         visitor accommodation as intended under the
                                         planning scheme. The proposed development is
                                         consistent with that intent and is located beside this
                                         site.

                                         It is noted technically the existing clubhouse facilities
                                         could be located within the ROSZ, which is a relevant
                                         consideration for the overall development of the site.
                                         The proposed new four (4) tennis courts and pavilion
                                         (Outdoor sport and recreation use) are located within
                                         the ROSZ, which is also a consistent use.

                                         When the site and the proposal are considered
                                         collectively under the planning scheme, having regard
                                         to the existing facilities, the site constraints, the
                                         minimal adverse impacts being caused, if any, the
                                         proposed development accords with reasonable
                                         community expectations for land within the Noosa
                                         Heads locality.




                                                                                     19 | P a g e
16022 – Noosa Springs “Boutique Hotel”


[OCR of page images]
|

“Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning

, Adamson
advice

Town Planning

 

 

under the Noosa Plan 2020; however, the location of
the zone is mostly over land where the existing
Noosa Springs Golf and Spa facilities are provided.

Under the planning scheme it is reasonably expected
a Resort Complex would be provided within the TAZ,
this being a consistent use in that zone. While the
Resort Complex extends into the ROSZ, this is
unavoidable, given the location of existing facilities
which are to be retained and integrated as part of
proposed development.

It also a relevant consideration that “Parkridge
Noosa” is a multiple dwelling development, which
provides mostly for permanent residential living.
While some of the dwellings might be used for visit
accommodation, the development is not for purely
visitor accommodation as intended under the
planning scheme. The proposed development is
consistent with that intent and is located beside this
site.

It is noted technically the existing clubhouse facilities
could be located within the ROSZ, which is a relevant
consideration for the overall development of the site.
The proposed new four (4) tennis courts and pavilion
(Outdoor sport and recreation use) are located within
the ROSZ, which is also a consistent use.

When the site and the proposal are considered
collectively under the planning scheme, having regard
to the existing facilities, the site constraints, the
minimal adverse impacts being caused, if any, the
proposed development accords with reasonable
community expectations for land within the Noosa
Heads locality.

 

 

 

19|Page
16022 — Noosa Springs "Boutique Hotel”