Council Report MCU22 0094 · MCU22/0094

4.      CONSULTATION
4.1. Referral Agencies
The application was referred to Energex as an advice agency due to Schedule, 10, Part 9, Division
2, Table 2 – Premises near a substation site or subject to an easement.
The application was referred by the applicant on 17 June 2022, with no response received from
Energex. Notwithstanding this, lots 4 and 5 are located well clear of Energex infrastructure, and
accordingly are not expected to have any requirements for the proposed development.
4.2. Internal Council Referrals
The application was forwarded to the following internal Council officers:
•    Coordinator Engineer
•    Senior Environment Officer
The application was also forwarded to the following external consultants:
• Switchback Consulting – Hydraulic Engineer
• Holland Traffic Consulting Pty Ltd – Traffic Engineer
4.3. Public Notification
The application was publicly notified for 15 business days in accordance with the Planning Act
2016. One not properly made submission was received. The following table provides a summary
and assessment of the issues raised by submitter.

     Matters Raised                               Comments

     The submitter supports the proposed          It is agreed that a child care centre is an
     centre as it is a much-needed service for    appropriate use for the Shire Business Centre
     the current business’s located in the        however it should be located in the Village Mixed
     Noosa Civic Centre. It will provide for a    Use Precinct not the Business Park Precinct.
     greater level of convenience, and ease for
     working parents, along with new
     employment opportunities for skilled
     childcare works.

5.      CONCLUSION & REASONS FOR DECISION
It is concluded that the proposed childcare centre is not consistent with the Noosa Plan 2020
requirements as it will not deliver the commercial and employment uses intended for the Business
Park Precinct. The proposal fails to maintain the required 10m landscape garden bed conditioned
as part of the subdivision of the land and this is an important element to achieve the park like,
vegetated setting envisaged for the centre, which is synonymous with the Noosa style. Further the
proposed bioretention device at the front of the site will negatively impact on the amenity of the site
limiting opportunities for landscaping across the frontage of the site.
To maintain the required 10m landscaped garden bed would require a significant change to the
site’s layout and accordingly cannot be appropriately conditioned. Therefore, the application is
recommended for refusal.