2022-06-07 Planning & Environment Meeting Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                       7 JUNE 2022


2     MCU19/0089.02 & OPW19/0160.02 - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO
      D928 OF 2022 – MINOR CHANGE TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR RETAIL
      BUSINESS TYPE 5 VEHICLE USES, RETAIL BUSINESS TYPE 2 SHOP AND
      OPERATIONAL WORKS – SIGNAGE AT 52 – 54 MARY STREET NOOSAVILLE

Author            Coordinator Planning, Patrick Murphy
                  Environment & Sustainable Development Department

Index             ECM/ Application/ MCU19/0089.02 & OPW19/0089.02

Attachments       Nil


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.

RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning &
Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 June 202 regarding Planning & Environment Court
Appeal D928 of 2022 and agree to defend the appeal.


REPORT
On 17 March 2022, Council at its Ordinary meeting resolved to refuse an application to change the
permitted opening hours of the service station from 5am to 4am and permit illumination of the BP
Helios signs on the awning facia sign for the following reasons:
1.    The proposed change does not constitute a minor change to the development approval as
      the change in hours will increase the severity of known amenity impacts and likely attract
      further submissions objecting to the change were the application to be publicly notified given
      the site’s proximity to residential properties.
2.    The proposed trading hours do not comply with Overall Outcomes 2 (d) & (h) and
      Performance Outcome PO11 & PO24 of the Business Activities Code as the proposed hours
      will adversely impact on nearby resident’s amenity.
3.    The proposed trading hours do not comply with Overall Outcome 2(m) and Performance
      Outcome PO42 of the District Centre Zone Code as the proposed change in hours will impact
      the amenity of nearby residential premises as nearby residents would not reasonably expect
      the service to be operational at this time.
4.    The proposed illuminated signage does not comply with Specific Outcome AO7 and Overall
      Outcome O7 of the Advertising Devices Code within the Noosa Plan 2006 as it proposes
      more than one illuminated sign and is not compatible with the visual amenity of the
      surrounding area.
5.    The proposed additional illuminated signage is not consistent with provisions of the Local
      Law signage requirements as the proposal exceeds the maximum number of signs permitted
      to be illuminated and is prohibited by the Local Law.
Council also resolved at the meeting, to request the CEO to convene a Councillor workshop for
Councillor’s, to allow the review and further discussion, regarding the signage laws, and associated
policies and request the CEO to, if necessary, provide a report to a future Council meeting outlining
any changes, updates or improvements to signage laws and policies, as may be proposed at the
Councillor workshop.


                                                                                     Page 22 of 83