Properly made submission (object) Peregian Beach Business Association MCU13/0092

     Submission to MCU 13/0092                                                            August 15, 2013



8.    The Needs Assessment        prepared for the proposed shopping centre notes that Peregian Beach
      provides the local shopping functions for Peregian Beach, Marcus Beach and Castaways Beach. The
      trade area is also indicated as extending north to Castaways Beach. Based on local knowledge, it is
      known that the trade area does not extend as far as Castaways Beach, as most of these residents
      head north to utilise the existing wider range of commercial facilities at Noosa Junction which includes
      both Coles and IGA supermarkets.


9.    The Needs Assessment report states that there are        no   suitably zoned parcels of sufficient size to
      accommodate a supermarket. The report fails to recognise the existing approval at 215 David Low Way
      (132007.1259.04)which has approval for 387m2 of retail and 306m2 of restaurant plus 70m2 outdoor
      dining which could easily accommodate a local supermarket to assist in meeting the needs of the
      Peregian Beach locality. It is proposed that this development is scheduled to come online within the
      next 12-18 months and further, the existing convenience store located in the Village is likely to remain
      in operation into the foreseeable future.


10. The Needs Assessment report indicates that the applicant sees a need for a supermarket to service the
      Peregian Beach area. The report however does not demonstrate any need for additional shops nor
      does it recognise that there is existing floor area available in the centre which could be utilised for a
      supermarket.

11. The     Needs Assessment indicates that the proposed shopping centre size is that of "small
      neighbourhood centre" and is different to the existing neighbourhood centre due to a ’specialised
      tenancy mix’.      The report therefore clearly indicates that the proposal provides for a new
      neighbourhood centre additional to the existing centre. Comments about a ’specialised mix’ of retail
      uses differentiating the new centre from the existing centre are deceitful and misleading as the actual

      tenancy mix has not been finalised and will not be confirmed until the centre is approved and under
      construction. It is noted that all of the proposed retail uses indicated in the Needs Assessment are
      already well established within the Peregian Village. The Peregian Beach Business Association Inc
      understands that the existing operators of these retail uses have no intention of relocating from their
      current location to the proposed site. Therefore, the duplication of the proposed retail uses would
      severely impact the economic viability of the current traders within the Peregian Village.

12. The    proposed shopping centre is indicated as being a ’convenient central meeting place for office
      workers and shoppers’. This indicates that the proposal will further undermine the intent of the existing
      neighbourhood centre which specifically seeks to create a public place and sense of community.

13. The Needs Assessment          acknowledges that existing shops in the Neighbourhood Centre will be
      negatively affected by the development and are likely to close down. The 70 fulltime/part time/casual
      jobs are not all new jobs to the area as the report notes that the shopping centre will employ those
      people from the existing shops that will close as a result of the proposal. Comments such as this are
      again misleading as the consultant cannot predict that a new centre will employ those business owners
      or staff of shops that may close down.



14. The
,
           proposal will negatively impact on the residential amenity of residents in Woodland Drive and
      Rufous Street   by noise generated by the proposed centre. This is evidenced by the applicant’s
      consultant’s noise report which states:


          ’... generally   our   assessment shows that some    loading activities can potentially   exceed the
          nominated noise limits.


          ’Traffic noise from David Low Way is expected to increase by approximately 1dBA and for
          Woodland Drive and Rufous Street by 5dBA to 7dBA above current levels after the construction of
          the shopping centre. The increase of noise levels due to the increase in traffic volumes will likely be
          noticeable at the residences along Woodland Drive and Rufous Street.


          The possible noise control treatment is provision of acoustic upgrades to existing residential
          buildings, but it is understood that this option is not feasible. A reduction of noise impacts is
          expected if an alternate access the shopping centre via the David Low is provided.’

      It is noted that this noise impact is not able to be overcome by conditions of approval.




                                                Page 3 of 5