Response to Information Request

Page 2

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”



The applicant is conscious of the current situation with respect to adverse amenity impacts
being caused to adjoining residential properties. While it is accepted that this is an important
issue, it must also be accepted that the land currently enjoys existing lawful use rights
(TPC658), which includes for some light industry uses. These use have the potential to cause
some, but minimal adverse amenity impacts to adjoining residential properties. For example,
the current approval (TPC658) allows for a tyre and wheel alignment service and a cabinet
maker, both of which would make some noise during daylight hours of operation; however
this noise is not likely to be significant.

The nature of the low impact industry uses being proposed are at the lower end of the scale.
This includes some of the uses listed as examples under the Queensland Planning Provisions
(QPP), Industry thresholds table for Low Impact Industry, which includes:

      Repairing and servicing motor vehicles, including mechanical components, radiators,
       electrical components, wheel alignments, exhausts, tyres, suspension or air
       conditioning, but not including spray painting.
      Repairing and servicing lawn mowers and outboard engines.
      Assembling wood products, but not involving cutting, routing, sanding or spray
       painting.

The intended uses also include the current Service Industry definition under the QPP, which
states:

                 Definition                                       Examples include
 Premises used for industrial activities that        Audio visual equipment repair, film
 have no external air, noise or odour                processing, bicycle repairs, clock and watch
 emissions from the site and can be suitably         repairs, computer repairs, dry cleaning,
 located with other non-industrial uses.             hand engraving, jewelry making,
                                                     laundromat, locksmith, picture framing,
                                                     shoe repairs, tailor.

It is suggested that the above uses will not have an adverse impact upon the amenity of the
adjoining residential properties and should be allowed. It is noted that there is one residential
property, which partly adjoins the eastern boundary of the subject land, with the other
adjoining land use to the north and east being a low impact industry or warehouse use (Klinge
Scaffolding). Further to the north is another recently approved business use.

There is a residential property adjoining the land to the south located at 105 Eumundi Noosa
Road, which is also owned by the applicant. It is noted that currently a 1.8m high solid fence
is located near the adjoining boundary to this land. Further, it is noted that there is some
separation to the existing building located on the subject land.

The premises at 105 Eumundi Noosa Road is currently not tenanted. This property has a lesser
degree of general amenity during the day, given the land fronts Eumundi-Noosa Road, which
has a reasonably high level of traffic generation. It is also intended in the short term to provide
temporary parking on part of this land for staff and or students attending the Noosaville
Medical and Professional Centre, while carpark construction occurs at the Centre.


 16004 – Response Information Request

                                                                                        2|Page

Page 3

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




It is expected that the hours of operation for any of the industrial or service industry uses on
the land will be 7am to 6pm Monday to Saturday. Given the nature of the above uses, the
hours of operation, the amount of separation from the existing building to any adjoining
residential properties and landscaped buffering to be provided, there is no need for additional
noise attenuation measures to be provided for the proposed development. This is particularly
the case given the proposal makes use of the existing building and is not increasing the scale
of development on the land.

Issue
The application seeks approval for a Retail Business Type 7 – Garden and Lifestyle Centre. As per
The Noosa Plan, the use may include an ancillary coffee shop. No details have been provided in
this respect.

Information Required
2. Please provide confirmation whether an ancillary coffee shop is proposed to accompany the
    proposed Garden and Lifestyle Centre. Consideration should be given to use areas and
    proposed hours of operation in association with the ancillary coffee shop.

Response:

The definition of a Garden and Lifestyle Centre allows for an ancillary coffee shop, as stated
below:

The use of premises for the retail sale of landscape and garden products and supplies and
products made by local artisans. The term includes the sale of plants, seeds, pots, gardening
tools, bagged landscaping products (such as fertilisers, potting mix, mulch and stones) outdoor
furniture and lighting, letterboxes, garden ornamentation, art, and literature on gardening. The
premises may also be used as the sales office for swimming pools or spas. The use includes an
ancillary coffee shop. The term does not include Retail business Types 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 as
separately defined.

This means that the primary use for a Garden and Lifestyle Centre is to be in accordance with
the above definition, with any coffee shop being subordinate to, but forming part of that use.
It is highly likely that any coffee shop component will be limited to about 10% of the floor area
of the Garden and Lifestyle Centre.

This amount of floor space is not excessive and is consistent with being ancillary to the primary
use as a Garden and Lifestyle Centre. Further, being ancillary means that the coffee shop
component can only operate in conjunction with the Garden and Lifestyle Centre and therefore
cannot operate in isolation, otherwise being Entertainment and Dining Business. The hours of
operation of the Garden and Lifestyle Centre will be 7am to 6pm, 7 days. Consequently, the
coffee shop will only operate during this period.

Issue
The application proposes a landscaping setback to the sites frontage which does not meet an
expected 2.0m minimum to the full length. Furthermore, no consideration has been given for the


 16004 – Response Information Request

                                                                                        3|Page

Page 4

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”



provision of landscaping setbacks to the southern side boundary and the eastern rear boundary
to address residential privacy and to maximise visual amenity (landscape buffer).

Information Required
3. Please provide amended plans which give consideration to:
     Removal of car parking (1, 2 & 3) in tandem at building frontage to achieve minimum
       2.0m landscaping setback wholly within lot;
     Landscaping setbacks to the southern side boundary and eastern rear boundary where
       abutting residential uses (where practical); and
     Maximising screening vegetation and landscaping buffers to address visual privacy and
       amenity where the site adjoins residential uses.

Response:

With respect to the first dot point above, the applicant has considered the request to amend
the proposal plans to delete the three (3) parking spaces fronting the existing building;
however this is not desirable or practical in the circumstances. Since the operation of the
premises, there has been three (3) spaces fronting the building, which provide ease of access
to patrons, in particular for the loading and unloading of materials. That is, these spaces are
generally used for short term parking.

Rather than remove these spaces, the applicant has amended the proposal plans (refer
Attachment 1) to provide additional landscaping to the frontage on the southern side of the
exit driveway, making this area 3m in width. While this landscaping does not front the existing
building, it does substantially increase the amount of landscaping fronting the development
as a whole.

It is requested that the existing arrangement be allowed to continue given that the location of
the building is to remain unchanged. The applicant intends to undertake additional
landscaping fronting the building, both on site and in the road reserve (as existing), which
should greatly improve the streetscape appearance of the development in any event.

With respect to the second and third dot points, the proposal plans has been amended to
provide 2m of landscaping along the eastern boundary of the site, which adjoins the residential
property to the east (refer Attachment 1). This landscaping is to extend to the boundary of
105 Eumundi-Noosa Road.

It is intended that the landscaping will be densely planted to provide a suitable buffer to the
adjoining residential properties to the east. Further, landscaping is to provided partly along
the southern boundary to the extent of the proposed stormwater detention basin, which will
provide an additional buffer (refer Attachment 2).

While the property at 105 Eumundi Noosa Road is also a residential dwelling, there is an
existing fence along the boundary, which provides some buffering to the existing
development. It is suggested that it is not necessary to provide additional landscaping along
the eastern boundary. The future intentions of this land are not known as this time and the
house is currently not tenanted.


 16004 – Response Information Request

                                                                                        4|Page

Page 5

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




Issue
The submitted report makes reference to stormwater quality requirements and runoff “being
discharged to the existing stormwater drainage easement located in the adjoining land to the
east.” Council’s mapping system does not indicate that an easement exists and there are no
indications of drainage rights in favour of the subject site.

Information Required
4. Provide additional detail on the suggested “existing stormwater drainage easement located
    in the adjoining land to the east” and demonstrate that the subject site has the legal right to
    connect to the system.

The matter of discharging stormwater drainage to the easement over the adjoining land to the
east has been resolved. The Council has confirmed that the easement does contain stormwater
infrastructure under the control of Council. Consequently, it is expected that subject to
demonstrating that this infrastructure can cater for the proposed development (refer below),
the Council will include a condition requiring the applicant to connect to this system. It is noted
that the stormwater drainage from the land currently falls to the existing field gullies located
in the easement.

Issue
The submitted layout plan does not indicate the location and extent of any required stormwater
detention or treatment areas. It appears that sufficient area is available within the site to provide
for stormwater detention and/or treatment areas.

Information Required
5. Provide a preliminary stormwater management plan for the site. The plan must include the
    location of the stormwater detention and/or treatment areas necessary to cater for the
    proposed development.

The applicant has engaged TOD Consulting to look at the matter of stormwater drainage from
the development. TOD Consulting has provided a General Arrangement Plan for stormwater
disposal and treatment (refer Attachment 2). The design provides for on site detention and
treatment system for the development, showing the proposed stormwater being disposed to
the existing stormwater drainage system, located in the easement on the adjoining land. A
Stormwater Management Plan is to be prepared by Aquaintel, which will be provided at the
operational works stage.

Issue
The proposal includes the construction of a new crossover adjacent to the existing crossover at
the northern end of the site. This will result in a wide crossover on a busy pathway that is
frequented by school students. It is preferred that the accesses be combined. This will require
agreement with the adjoining land owner and potentially the creation of an access easement.

Information Required
6. Provide comment on the potential for a combined northern access or alternatively provide
    detail on how Council’s concerns with the length of the potential conflict can be addressed.


 16004 – Response Information Request

                                                                                         5|Page

Page 6

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




In the initial stages of preparing the development proposal, the applicant approached the
adjoining land owner about obtaining an easement over the access handle to the north, to
allow for shared access between the properties. The owner of the adjoining land refused to
consent to the lodgment of the application and for an easement to be established over this
land.

Consequently, the applicant had no choice but to provide an additional access beside the
existing access to the property, given the location of the existing building and the general
layout of the existing development on the land. This allows for the continued use of the
separate left entry and left exit, which is desirable at this location. If in the future an easement
is able to be obtained over the adjoining land to the north (Klinge Scaffolding), then a request
to change the approval will be made along with a separate application for reconfiguring a lot
to allow for this access easement, if necessary.

It is accepted that the total width of the driveway at this location will be increased by the
proposed new access; however the number of vehicles using both crossovers will not
substantially change. This is because the scale of the development on the subject land is not
being altered. Further, given the nature of the adjoining land use (Klinge Scaffolding) being a
warehouse, it is unlikely that this is a high traffic generating use. While the proposed driveway
is located beside the existing access, this in itself does not increase the level of conflict, given
the existing traffic levels for both sites will not materially change.

This completes the response to the information request made pursuant to section 278 of the
Sustainable Planning Act 2009. Consequently, it is requested that adjoining owners details be
provided as soon as possible.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above, please contact me direct.


Yours faithfully




Shane Adamson (BEngTech, GDURP, MPIA)
Town Planning Specialist
Director of Adamson Town Planning Pty Ltd ATF




 16004 – Response Information Request

                                                                                        6|Page