Ltr-20190925-IR Response-Noosa Marketplace_FINAL (1)

    16. Please provide a character analysis which demonstrates how the scale of proposed carpark is
        suitably mitigated.
Response to sub-item 16:
As demonstrated throughout this response, the scale of proposed carpark is clearly broken by building
locations around the perimeter of the site, and importantly as viewed from Hofmann Drive and Eenie
Creek Road in relation to the existing covenants which are to be rehabilitated and enhanced.
The architectural package includes sufficient detail that a stand-alone character analysis is not
required.

ISSUE 4: PARKING PROVISIONS
It is difficult to assess parking demand when a range of unknown business uses are proposed in larger
format retail which may have different parking demand; similarly to the smaller tenancies. Given that it
is unknown what businesses are likely to occupy the development, car parking demand should be
assessed against the highest demand uses of the individual tenancies at a rate of 1 space per 20m² (
shop, large format shop, medical, offices). This results in the development being significantly deficient
in car parking.
As an example of the difficulty, the submitted Cambray Consulting parking analysis has assumed that
only 1 of the 11 ground level tenancies with a floor area in excess of 300m² would be used for any use
other than a traditional showroom. When allowance is made for the potential for a large medical centre
(potentially across multiple tenancies), and for other uses that are essentially shops but which might
be argued to fit within the proposed showroom definition (such as Spotlight, Chemist Warehouse or a
Dan Murphys), it is considered that the parking analysis can’t be undertaken with any certainty until
the use issues are clarified. Once the use issues and scale of uses have been clarified, a reasonable
worst case scenario can be assessed.
The Planning Scheme rate for Showrooms is 1 space per 50m², however, some large format retail
attract a higher design parking rate of 1 space per 30m². The Cambray Consulting report has listed a
variety of reasons why a relaxation of Council’s standard parking provisions would be satisfactory.
However, having regard to the potential of some large format retail parking demands being higher than
Council’s showroom standard, a relaxation wouldn’t be appropriate if all the uses occupying tenancies
generate a higher car parking demand, particularly given the developments format that reflects a
shopping centre with a mix of large format retail and specialty shops.
Furthermore, it is not agreed with the proposition in the parking analysis of the Cambray Consulting
report that cross utilisation of parking spaces (where someone parks on the site and visits multiple
tenancies during the one trip) results in a reduced parking demand. Cross utilisation results in lower
traffic generation demands but not reduced parking demands. While the customer is visiting one
tenancy it is generating a parking demand associated with that tenancy, and if that customer then
visits another tenancy it is generating a parking demand at that second tenancy. If the customer only
visits the first tenancy and then departs the site, the vehicle is parked on the site for a shorter period of
time and does not generate the parking demand associated with the visit to the second tenancy.
Information Required
    17. Undertake a further worst case parking demand assessment, having regard to the above
        discussion and:
          a. which includes clearly defined uses under The Noosa Plan for each tenancy and at a
             minimum, identified anchor tenants; and
         b. any changes to the proposed configuration and format of uses.


 Ltr-20190925-IR Response-Noosa Marketplace_FINAL                                                         52