MCU14/0087 Notice of Submission - Michael Court

Page 2

                                        •
Notice of Submission under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009

MCU 14/0087

Material Change of Use - Retail Business Type 2 - Shop

13 Noosa Drive, Noosa Heads 4567



The following      submission details the matters of concerns with the above application                            and
material submitted,




Poorly made application

The application,      planning    report and. submitted        plans were of poor quality which made
understanding      how the business;Would operate near impossible.

IDAS form 5 details the use as a Moveable Trailer yet fails to provide information                       of Hours of
operation    or employee         numbers.    Without      this information       it makes it problematic              in
consideration     of impacts of the ~evelopment          and in particular the provision of suitable, safe
and to aust standard carparking and access for existing and new customers to the site.

, General explanation cl the        Planning schom.            No. of dwelling units   Days and          No. of
I pmposed use                       defin~ion Qncludeead!      (if applicable) or      hour.; of         employses
I
                                    definition in a new row)   ll'os. noo, area (if    operation         Cd applicable)
I                                   (non-mandatory)            awlicallle)             (if applicable)




Some of the submitted plans are numbered to make ease of reading and the legibility is poor.
Plans make reference to "paces" and are in a context that cannot be interpreted .



                                       •

Page 3

  4.     Confirm l/lallhe      foliewiniJ mandatory suppOrtlng lnformaHon accompanIes          thl. application

  Mandatory supporting         Informalion                                              ConflnnaliOl1 of     Method of
                                                                                        lodge"",nt           lodgement
  All applications
  A site plan drawn to "" appropriate scale (1:100.1:200 or 1:500 are                   9<;onflrmed
  recommended scales! whicll shOWSthe fOllOwing:
  • th~    location and .ile area 01 the lan<!Ie which the epplication rBI es
      (reIeVlIDtland)
  • the nonh point
  •   the boundaries of the relevanlland
  • theany reed fromages orthe ralevanlland, InCluding tile name orthe mad
           location and ure 01 any existing or proposed buildings or struelures
  •
       on tile relevanlland (oole: where extenslve demoUlion or new l:<Jildings
       are proposed.1WO .t'Parnte pllII1' (an e,dstlng .ite plan and proposed Sile
       plan! may b. eppropriate)
  • any existing or proposed easement. on the reI.vaniland and 1IIeir
       funetlon
      Ihe  locelion and u:;e of bulklings on land adjoining lhe relevant land
  • all vehicle
  •                lllX€SS points and any existing or proposed car parl<lng areas
       on the relevant land. Car parking spa""" for per.sons with disabilities and
       any service vellicle a<CeSs and parking should be .Ieady marl<ed
  • for any new l:<Jildingon the ralo""nlland.llho loca1loo of refuse slorage
  • Ihe    location of any proposed relairing walls 00 lhe fllIev.nt Janel .nd lhelr
       helghl            '
  • Ihelocatlon of any proposed landscaping 00 lhe rel~vamlana             .
  • th81oeatlon of any ~onnw3ler detention tin the relevantla.nd .

The Mandatory           supporting           information      is lacking in its requirements           in regards to the site
plan provided and there is lack of detail in particular to car parking areas, provision for those
with disabilities, service vehicle access etc.

The applicant          confirmed         that     information      provided       demonstrated             the on site parking
provisions, yet the hand drawn plan (not numbered)                               merely shows a line demonstrating
where access would occur and no direct provision or plans of car parking spaces.

 When the application       invol .•••
                                    es new opemtlonal      work

 PI.ns showing the nalUre. Io<:alien, number of new on-Sito car parking bays,          . 0COIIfirmed
 proposed area or new landscaping, proposed type 01 new vehicle cross-over
 (noo-reaide<ll11l1uses), proposed maxlmum new vehlwiar setYlcing
                                                                                        o   Not appll•••~e
 atr.ngemem (non-resldentlal uses) oflhe proposed new operational work.


The applicant has also confirmed                   that plans have been submitted                  to meet this mandatory
requirement          but those provided do not achieve this requirement.

Due to the poor material submitted it is not possible to ascertain the use area, how operation
will occur, and how car parking will be provided.

Size and Scale of development

The submitted          plans suggest a use area of 9m2 yet this makes no provisions for how the
boards wiil be loaded and unioaded of trailer. These boards are up to 305m in length and
require to be removed from the trailer to provide to customers. This wiil in effect make the
use area of the business expand out from the footprint                           pfoposed of 3.6m x 2.4m to approx.
7.5m x SAm           (40m2).     This is in estimation what will be required to service customers as they
chose the hire equipment from the trailer.

                                                                                       •

Page 4

 The location of the trailer and the length of boards being removed will also create serious
 safety concerns regarding the existing access to the Hire Car business that operates and any
 new customers travelling onto the site through the existing heavily congested and conflicted
 access point. Boards and customers will be required to stand into the driveway for the site
 potentially   forcing pedestrians onto the road way as vehicles are blocked from entering the
site, in turn creating a serious safety concern where in the past 12 months one serious
accident involving a car and pedestrians oc~urred.

One plan labelled Sheet 1 of 3 has the proposed trailer located on the boundary with no front
setback, another plan sows a 2m setback. Again due to the poor quality of material submitted
it is hard to make an assumption of what is being requested.



Compliance with Relevant eodes

With the submitted       planning material supporting     plans it is difficult to how the application
intends to meet the requirements        of the following relevant Codes, their overall and specific
outcomes.

Business Use Code

  Car Parking
  09 Sufficient carpar1<ingis available to                59.1 Off street carparking is provided at a
  accommcxlate the number and type of vehicles            rate of 1 space per 20m' of gross floor area;
  likelv to be oenerated bv the uses on the site

The applicant within the supporting        material has underestimated     the total use area of the
operation.     9m2   is not realistic and in a true sense the activity will require 40m2• As such
carparking need to be provided for 2 vehicle spaces, the included plans and description do
not detail how and where this will occur to the relevant standard.

Driveway and Carparking Code

 14.111.2 The overall outcomes sQught for the Driveways and CarpaJ1tingCode are the follO'•••.
                                                                                            ing-

 a)    Safe and reasonable access to and from vehicle accommodation and standing areas within a
       property and from the public road is provided;

 b)    The safety of pedestrians and cyclists is protected;

 d)    Carparking spaces and the associated manoeuvring areas provided are designed to !J.esafe
       and functional and meet the reasonable requirements of the particular land use;

 e)    Adequate provision is made for the smnding, parking, loading and unloading, access and
       manoeuvring of service vehicles within the development site;


The application fails to demonstrate with material provided how compliance can be achieved
to meet these outcomes. The site presently has a vehicle hire business established which
utilised an unformed gravel carpark for both maintenance and washing of hire vehicles and
their storage and promotion.      Additionally   on site, motor scooters and bicycles are hired and
displayed taking up further land within the sites boundaries.

Page 5

                                                                                                  ..   ..


The present access to the site is unsafe for both vehicles and pedestrians and there is not
being proposed within plans a car parking layout to meet standards for customers or delivery
vehicles. Vehicles accessing the site have the potentjal to block the pedestrian flow along
Noosa Drive in turn forcing pedestrians onto the busy road.

  Table 14-49 -    Driveways

                          column 1
              Specmc Outcomes
  14.113 General
  01     Vehicular access does not adversely impact on
  safety, capa city and operations of the existing or
  planned road network, the proposed driveway,
  cycleways or pedestrian pathway systems.


Allowing an additional   use to occur on site that may require deliveries, and customers to
collect hire equipment   will only increase the possibility of safety being compromised   on an
access arrangement which is at present dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists. The applicant
has not demonstrated     compliance.

Page 6

'.   ..I




               Table 14-50 -    Carparking   and manoeuvring

                                     column 1
                                Specific Outcomes
               14.114 Carpark design and layout
               07     Sufficient carparking is provided to
               accommodate ttle number and type of vehicles likely
               to be generated by the development having regard
               to the specifies of the use including-
               a)    the type and intensity of land use;
               b)    any existing parking avliilable on the site;
               c}    hours of operation;
               d)    likely numbers of users;
               e)    the peak parking demand periods of uses on
                     the site; and
               fl    the ava~abilitv of alternative camarkino.
               08      The layout of the development provides
               adequate. Clearly defined and easily accessible-
               a)    on-site vehicle parking and manoeuvring
                     areas; and
               b)    loading and manoeuvring areas for delivery
                     and service vehicles




              09 Parking areas are located where they will not
              unduly conflict with pedestrians an!! will not
              dominate the sireetscaoe.
              010 Provision is made ror aj'easonable number of
              on site carparking spaces identified and reserved for
              people with disabilities.

              011 Access and egress points do not impact on the
              safety and operations of the road system.




           The submitted    plans do not detail how the Specific Outcomes 507, 508, 5010 of the
           Carparking   Code will be achieved. This again reflects the poorly     made application,   no
           consideration   of the existing use on site and limited    understanding   of the Noosa Plan
           requirements.   The applicant has not demonstrated   compliance .




                                             •

Page 7

                                                                                                       .'   .~.


Summary

I do not support the application lodged and advertised as detailed in this submission. I believe
the applicant has failed to demonstrate     compliance with the relevant Use Codes with the
Noosa Plan and as such the application be refused.

The application is,



    •   Poorly made application with inadequate plans to demonstrate        true operational size
    •   Has a size and scale of operation greater than the those submitted on plan
    •   Location is proposed in one set of plans within front boundary setback
    •   Vehicle access is unsafe and additional       traffic   create extreme   safety   issues for
        pedestrians
    •   Insufficient space on site to provide carparking for customers at present up to 5 hire
        vehicles and 4 staff vehicles parked at anyone time
    •   No carparking design submitted to meet aust standards
    •   No vehicle turnaround    capacity so vehicles leave site in forward direction
    •   Existing carparking surface a non-pervious material making provision and compliance
        with disability access codes not possible
    •   Insufficient   space on site for operation   with existing Hire Car use and associated
        workshop, detailing and vehicle storage requirements.