2017-06-06 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                       6 JUNE 2017


Council engaged bushfire consultants, Rob Friend & Associates, to assess the proposal. Whilst
acknowledging that the building has the capacity to withstand fire, the consultant has raised
significant concerns with the proposal.
The primary concern relates to the placement of vulnerable persons in a location where there is a
high risk from the threat of bushfire and smoke. The site is identified as located in a buffer to a
Very High Potential Bushfire Intensity area.
Whilst the applicant has provided a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) it is Council’s consultant’s
opinion that it is not sufficient to effectively respond to the bushfire hazards and threats within
and around the proposed facility. The applicant has also submitted an Evacuation Management
Plan (EMP) however this has also been considered unsuitable.
It is Mr Friend’s opinion that neither the BMP nor the EMP provides suitable evidence that the
facility can operate as a standalone facility. In the event of a bushfire, it is Mr Friend’s opinion
that the facility will require evacuation and that assistance from Queensland Fire and Emergency
Services (QFES) will be required. Mr Friend also anticipates that Queensland Parks and Wildlife
Service (QPWS) will have an on-going duty of care to manage fuel reduction efforts within the
adjoining National Park as an on-going consequence of the development.
Mr Friend has also raised concerns with the single road access to the site as the access could be
cut off, which is likely to have a negative effect on the ability to facilitate an evacuation.
Based on the advice of Mr Friend, it is considered that the proposal does not accord with
numerous provisions within the Noosa Plan as the proposal does not adequately address the risk
attributed to bushfire, particularly with regard to enabling safe evacuation of the vulnerable
residents from the premises.
QPWS made a submission raising concerns with the siting of an aged care facility adjacent to the
national park. In the submission QPWS
     …confirms its position that the proposed development for an aged care facility at the
     location adjacent to the Weyba Creek Section of the Noosa National park is inappropriate
     on the basis that it puts at risk a vulnerable community facility by locating them adjacent to
     bushland that is conducive to wildfire.
     …Further, there should be no reliance on QPWS for fire protection measures including the
     establishment of buffer zones on protected area estate, fire hazard reduction or response
     to wildfires. Whilst QPWS will make every effort to manage smoke during planned burn
     programs, the issue of smoke management impacting on the facility should not be used as
     an impediment for QPWs undertaking its responsibilities for fire management on the
     adjoining protected area.
The application was referred to QFES seeking advice; the response from QFES was received on
16 May 2017 and includes the following:
     Conducting an entire evacuation from a 90 bed aged care facility is not an easy task to
     undertake. In aged care facilities it is common to find people who have mobility impairment.
     Residents who can’t walk themselves to a waiting vehicle will have to wait until whatever
     assistance needed, can be provided. The staff/evacuee ratio for residents with poor
     mobility would be 1:1 as a minimum and will often be higher. Staffing levels at aged care
     facilities will generally be adequate enough for day to day duties but the demands of a full
     scale evacuation will require extra staff involvement.
     Effective filtration can do a good job at excluding smoke particles but it should be noted
     that P1 or P2 air masks will not provide adequate protection. While filtering smoke particles
     can reduce the irritation caused by bushfire smoke, filtration does not remove carbon
     monoxide that is always a by-product of burning vegetation.
     QFES firefighters use P3 face masks to mitigate the irritating effects of smoke when
     attending bushfire incidents. However, these masks do not provide any protection against
     carbon monoxide (CO). CO is a poisonous gas and because of the risk posed, firefighters

                                                                                     Page 26 of 73