MCU15/0086 - Attachment 1

PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                             2 FEBRUARY 2016


ATP’s assessment finds both the OLGR criteria and the sensitive receiver criteria listed
above can be achieved provided the following measures are undertaken:
 Erection of a 2.6m high acoustic fence constructed of ship-lapped timber, fibre cement or
   similar;
 To ensure compliance with the day-time/evening (6am to 10pm) noise limit the
   instantaneous volume level in dB(A), at 3m from any of the speakers, must not exceed
   80dB(A);
 To ensure compliance with the night-time (10pm to 6am) noise limit the instantaneous
   volume level in dB(C), at 3m from any of the speakers, must not exceed 84dB(C) with bi-
   fold glass doors open.
 No speakers or live entertainers to be located outside of the building perimeter at any-
   time. The speakers shall always be located along the north-eastern wall facing in the
   south-westerly direction.
A 2.6m fence exceeds a standard 2m fence height limit but is considered acceptable in this
location, given the fence sits below the footpath, as shown below.




                    Figure 7 – Existing Timber Fence (Approx. 1.5m high)


Overall, the assessment of noise impacts for this development is vexed. The site is within
Noosa Junction’s Business Centre zone and is unique in having a primary frontage to Noosa
Drive and a secondary frontage to Bottlebrush Avenue. The Noosa Drive end of Noosa
Junction is increasingly becoming a focal point for food and beverage businesses that add to
the vitality of the area and serve an important function for both locals and tourists. While it is
desirable to see the vitality of Noosa Junction continue to increase, The Noosa Plan also
seeks to protect the amenity of existing residences. Future development of sites east along
Bottlebrush Drive could potentially raise major noise conflicts for residents opposite.
The submitted noise assessments indicate reasonable noise criteria can be achieved but are
based on modelled predictions and there is risk actual levels will exceed modelled levels.
Council asked the applicant to consider additional attenuation measures such as an acoustic
roof and wall to better enclose the outdoor area, as well as reduced business hours but the
applicant only proposed the acoustic fence and requests existing business hours be
maintained. In regard to business hours it submits:



                                                                                       Page 15 of 81