Jen Drysdale submission 17 Dec 15

 

Code Objective

Developer’s Assessment

Objectors’ Assessment

 

road system

proposed access and egress point
does impact adversely on the safety
and operation of the Eumundi-Noosa
Road.

 

014 Provision is made for
pedestrian and vehicular
queues at conflict points;

014 Complies
Can comply via condition
where applicable.

Does not Comply

The Applicants response is
inconsistent and vague. The
Development will significantly affect
traffic on the Eumundi-Noosa Road,
the roundabout outside the School
and pedestrian children on the
footpath entrance in the event of
queuing to access the proposed
Development. The Applicant has
provided no objective analysis of the
likely queuing frequency or extent.
The Applicant’s response is indicative
of the fact that the Applicant has not
conducted the required analysis and
expects the Assessment Manager to
determine what is appropriate, which
is unacceptable in the already
challenging circumstances.

 

O17 Car parking areas are
landscaped...

 

 

017 Complies
Car parking areas have been
suitably landscaped.

 

Does not Comply

Cannot be compliant as they do not
meet the requirements of the
Landscaping Code Objective 028.

 

The Application does not comply in the areas outlined above and has completely failed to address

adequately the potential impacts on the adjoining School. At 6.2 of its Town Planning Report the

Applicant makes unfounded, unqualified and unsupported opinion as to the potential impacts on the

adjoining School. The assessment is neither comprehensive nor soundly validated for example:

 

Applicants Response / Assertion

Objectors’ Response

 

boundary

 

1. The proposed petrol store building is
located more than 10m form the school

 

its relevance.

This is a statement of fact without justification as to

10m is in effect too close to the School boundary to
ensure the safety of the children attending the
School. We have demonstrated elsewhere in this
document that international and Australian best

 

23