Town Planning Report - 12 Eenie Creek Rd (RESOLVED DRAFT)

that reading. Application MCU26/0069, for a Showroom for motor vehicle sales at 1/9 Lionel Donovan
Drive within that precinct, was lodged on 17 July 2026 and is recorded by Council as code assessment.
By contrast MCU25/0119, for an Indoor Sport and Recreation use at 26 Eenie Creek Road, is recorded as
impact assessment and has proceeded through public notification. Neither application binds the assessment
of this proposal, and MCU26/0069 remains undecided, but together they show how Council applies the
categorising provisions in practice. The applicant acknowledges the point rather than avoiding it: the
scheme identifies a precinct in which vehicle sales showrooms are anticipated, and this site is not in it. Why
approval is nonetheless appropriate on this land is addressed in the grounds at section 13.


   The use is categorised as an inconsistent use. That categorisation is acknowledged rather than
   contested. The grounds on which approval is nonetheless appropriate are set out at section 13, and
   address the statutory test directly.


09       SECTION 9



         State planning framework
State Planning Policy. Part 2 of the Noosa Plan 2020 records that the Planning Minister is satisfied the
State Planning Policy dated July 2017 is appropriately integrated into the planning scheme across liveable
communities and housing, economic growth, environment and heritage, safety and resilience to hazards,
and infrastructure. Where a state interest is appropriately integrated, assessment against the planning
scheme discharges the state interest and no separate assessment is required.

One state interest is recorded as not fully integrated: natural hazards, risk and resilience in respect of coastal
hazards. That interest applies to development in the erosion prone area. The site is not within the erosion
prone area, is not affected by the Coastal Protection and Scenic Amenity overlay, and is a developed inland
industrial allotment. The interest is accordingly not engaged. Strategic ports are recorded as not relevant
to Noosa Shire.

South East Queensland Regional Plan. Part 2 records that the planning scheme appropriately advances the
Regional Plan. The site is within the Urban Footprint, and the proposal is the efficient re-use of existing
serviced urban land within an established employment area, consistent with the efficient land use outcomes
of the Grow element.

Referral and State Development Assessment Provisions. No referral agency assessment has been identified
under Schedule 10 of the Planning Regulation 2017. The site does not adjoin or take access from a state-
controlled road, is not within a state transport corridor or a transport noise corridor, is not affected by
mapped matters of state environmental significance, and the proposal is not development for which the
chief executive or another entity is a referral agency. On that basis the State Development Assessment
Provisions do not apply and no SDAP response is required.

10       SECTION 10



         Need and demand
For an impact assessable application, and particularly one categorised as an inconsistent use, the question
of need is relevant to whether there are sufficient grounds for approval. Need in a planning sense is not