Skip to the record
Search everything, all in one place.

Original source · versioned page text

2020-01-13 General Committee Agenda

of 172

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

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

Very large file: it may take a few minutes

The original of this document is very large (11.3 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.

Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                13 JANUARY 2020


The proposal may deliver a small portion of the outcomes sought in terms of the commercial
uses proposed but given the scale of large retail shops proposed, the proposal significantly
conflicts with the draft Planning Scheme.
5.   ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The applicant provided an extensive Economic Impact Assessment as part of the application
material and an Economic Impact Assessment addendum (addendum) in response to Council’s
information request. Council engaged an Economic consultant to peer review both documents.
The applicant’s economic assessment prepared by Location IQ (LIQ) originally suggested an
undersupply of large format retail (in a range of low, medium, high) ranging from 45,585m² to
76,653m² by 2031. The addendum reduces this undersupply to 37,959m² by 2031; a significant
difference.
Council’s economic consultant advises:
     ‘LIQ calculates that the proposed 8,780m² of large format retail space will meet about 32%
     of this implied undersupply (Table 1). The specific retention rate applied to an area is a
     matter of professional judgement. While analysts might disagree on such rates, the fact
     that LIQ has adjusted its original (and in our opinion, overly optimistic) estimates satisfies
     our concerns over the methodology used as it now adjusts for uneven demand and for
     boundary effects of overlapping trade areas.
     However, it does not necessarily establish a strong need for the scale of development
     proposed, but it does establish a reasonable case that some need can be met by the
     proposed development.’
Notably, the draft Noosa Plan allows an additional 4,000m² of traditional showrooms and a
further 8,100m² of general retail, bringing the total of additional new retail under the draft Noosa
Plan to 12,100m² distributed throughout the Noosa Business Centre. The proposal goes beyond
that which the draft Noosa Plan contemplates for the site.
The applicant suggests that generally the proposal would not affect the viability or continued
operation of existing large format retail stores in the Noosa Shire and indicates:
     ‘Given the current mix of tenants within the total trade area, there is an opportunity for
     many key large format retail and non-retail showroom tenants which are not yet
     represented within the total trade area (or primary sector) to locate at the subject site and
     service local residents. Tenants which are not currently represented within the main trade
     area would be targeted and as such, sales generated by these tenants would largely result
     from retained spending within the main trade area (i.e. a re-direction of sales from beyond
     the region).’
In regard to the impact on surrounding businesses Council’s economic consultant advises:
     ‘The loading of the single largest impact component ($10.2m) onto the industrial area
     seems contrived, with the effect of potentially understating the percentage impacts upon
     other Noosaville large format retail areas. LIQ says that the impacts in the Industrial
     Precinct will be spread across a range of large format retail and non-retail showroom
     operators, with no one particular facility impacted more significantly than another...
     Given that LIQ makes no assumptions as to the nature of the proposed development’s two
     large anchor tenants or the mix of other LFR traders envisaged, it is difficult to give much
     weight to this claim. The level and direction of impact will very much depend upon the mix
     of large format retail uses in the proposed development.’
Council’s economic consultant is satisfied with the methodology used by the applicant for
estimating the proposed market share and resulting turnovers derived from the trade area,
together with the allowance for external trade. However, given that no tenants have been
nominated, it is difficult to substantiate the impact of the proposal on the surrounding businesses.



                                                                                   Page 90 of 172
Log in to download the original file

2020-01-13 General Committee Agenda(PDF, 11MB).pdf · 11.3 MB (very large file)

Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.

Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.

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”.