Skip to the record
Noosa's #1 Council Tracker.

Council archive · source document

RFI - Appendix C Traffic Engineering Report · MCU22/0038

of 18

Text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Check the original when the exact wording matters.

Very large file (10.1 MB): the original may take a few minutes to open or download. The page text below is quick to read.

 Stockwell Development Group Pty Ltd                                                     SLR Ref: 620.30769-L01-v0.2 IR Response
 Noosaville Hofmann Drive Medical Centre                                                                         20220520.docx
 NSC Information Request                                                                                      Date: 20 May 2022
 Response to Traffic Matters



     ii.   “Additionally, the location of the subject site within the broader Noosa Business Centre means that a
           significant portion of development-generated trips are likely to be linked with other uses, therefore
           reducing parking demand and spreading it across the existing parking areas proximate to the subject
           site.”

In relation to the two grounds identified in the SLR memo:

      i.   It is understood that the proponent is not proposing to deliver the multi-modal transport hub.

     ii.   While it is agreed that there will be linked trips with other uses at the Noosa Business Centre, all that
           means is that the overall traffic generation rate of the centre on a GFA basis reduces as the size of the
           centre increases, it does not mean that parking demands associated with the proposal will reduce. It
           simply means that some customers will park for longer in the same parking space while they
           undertake other activities at the Centre. The customers and staff of the proposed development will
           still generate the same parking demands.

Information Required

2.         Provide parking provisions consistent with planning scheme requirements.

To inform NSC’s assessment of the application, the following clarifications are provided:

Further justification for the provision of 99 parking spaces is provided through a ‘First Principles’ approach. Table
1 below provides a representative breakdown of tenancy type, along with their corresponding tenancy GFA and
total number of medical practitioners (MP). Whilst the scale and nature of each tenancy will ultimately be
subject to market demands SLR has been advised that there is an inter-relationship between the tenancies that
means that achieving a mix similar to the representative breakdown is quite likely to occur in practice. Further,
due to the typical nature of specialists practicing from more than one location, an Occupancy factor has been
provided.

Table 1       Representative Tenancy Mix
                                              Yield     Number of Practitioners (Total
 Land Use       Component                                                                Occupancy (at any one time)
                                           (sq.m GFA)       capacity/tenancy)

                General Practice              250                     8                                   75%

                Pathology                     60                      2                                  100%
                Dental                        280                     3                                   66%
                Physiotherapy                 150                     2                                  100%
                Radiology                     270                     2                                  100%
 Medical
                Specialist                    260                     3                                   66%
 Centre
                Cosmetic / Plastic
                                              150                     1                                  100%
                Surgery
                Eye Surgery                   150                     2                                   50%
                Psychology                    150                     2                                  100%
                Podiatry                      150                     1                                  100%
                Allied Health                 300                     4                                  100%
 Total                                       2170                    30                                     -



                                                            Page 2

Used in these records

About this file

File size
10.1 MB (very large file)
File type
PDF

No other editions are linked here.

Original file

Log in to download the original file

RFI - Appendix C Traffic Engineering Report.pdf · 10.1 MB (very large file)

The download may take a few minutes. On mobile data, it is best to wait for Wi-Fi.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.