Council archive · source document
0-Response to Objection Received during Public Notification Period · MCU14/0009
approaching traffic. We therefore allow bus drivers to offload their often elderly
passengers outside the building, but ask them to move the bus once they are all
safety on the footpath.
Applicant’s Response
In response to Objection 4, the applicant’s acknowledge this objection raised by the
submitter; however, this objection has no relevant to the proposed development.
Objection 5
5. If the sheds are to be made with steel rooves, the heat generated by the close
proximity to the theatre and the reflection of heat to both the green room
(dressing room, bathroom, relaxation area for entertainers backstage) and the
stage itself would be unbearably hot and render the theatre virtually unusable
during the summer months.
Applicant’s Response
In response to Objection 5, the Rolton’s bring to Council’s attention that the Majestic
Theatre features a steel roof; the construction of which promotes hot air to rise (the law of
thermodynamics), and the internal spaces in question (the green room and the stage) are
typically utilised of a night. Therefore, whilst the Rolton’s acknowledged the concerns of
the Majestic Theatre, the natural cooling/heating of the existing theatre has no relevance
to the proposed development.
Objection 6
6. The Majestic Theatre has excellent acoustics and sound travels through the
auditorium as though it is ‘wired’. Any noise produced by industrial tenants close
to the theatre will impact negatively on any performance being conducted.
Industrial businesses sometimes work at night and attendant noise, such as
grinding, hammering etc. would be disastrous as would any fumes produced.
Applicant’s Response
In response to Objection 6, the Type 2 Industrial Uses (x 2) will be subject to hours of
operation, to be conditioned by Council. In this regard, the proposed development will
adhere to hours of operation, and will not operate outside of the conditioned hours.
Objection 7
7. We (Majestic Theatre) are currently landscaping our back garden and are in the
process of submitting an application to have our liquor license extended to this
area to provide a pleasant outdoor gathering place for events, such as weddings.
We have been required to produce a qualified sound audit because Pomona has
been described as ‘noise sensitive’. Will the owners be required to provide a
similar audit? What noise levels are likely to be permitted under the MCU if
approved?
Applicant’s Response
In response to Objection 7, the Type 2 Industrial Uses (x 2) will be subject to noise
limitations, to be conditioned by Council. In this regard, the proposed development will
adhere to hours of operation, and will not operate outside of the conditioned hours.
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalUsed in these records
0-Response to Objection Received during Public Notification Period.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 1.7 MB (small file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.