2020-01-13 General Committee Agenda

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                       13 JANUARY 2020


6.    CONSULTATION
6.1. Referral Agencies
The application was referred to the following Referral Agencies:
    Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (SARA)
The Department is a referral agency for Infrastructure – state transport infrastructure.
The Department has responded advising that the application has been assessed against State
code 6: Protection of state transport networks of the State Development Assessment Provisions,
version 2.4, and determined that with conditions the development achieves compliance with the
performance outcomes of the State code. A condition has been provided to include a dedicated
taxi rank to support passenger services.
6.2. Other Referrals
The application was forwarded to the following internal Council officers:
    Principal Strategic Planner
    Infrastructure Design and Delivery Officer
    Environmental Health Officer
    Waste Officer
    Engineering Officer
    Ecologist
The application was also forwarded to the following external consultants:
    Phil Smith Architect – Architectural and Design Consultant
    Holland Traffic Consulting – Traffic and Parking Consultant
    Foresight Partners Pty Ltd – Economic Consultant
    Switchback 48 Consulting – Hydrology Consultant
6.3. Public Notification
The application was publicly notified for 15 business days in accordance with the Planning Act
2016. Four properly made submissions were received, 3 objecting to the development and 1 in
support. The following table provides a summary and assessment of the issues raised by
submitters.

 Matters Raised                                   Comments
 Objections
 The flexibility of uses requested creates        Agree
 ambiguity as no specific use or floor space      As part of a minor change to the application, the
 area was indicated, except for some minor        applicant provided specific uses for most of the
 tenancies.                                       tenancies which reduced the ambiguity. However, the
                                                  showroom as defined by the applicant, (being the bulk
                                                  of the development) still allows for a broad range of
                                                  uses including showrooms, large format retail and
                                                  large shops.
 The shop is inconsistent in both precincts on    Agree
 the subject site.                                The applicant removed the shop use as part of the
                                                  change to the application in the Decision Period.
 The submitter agrees that there is substantial   Disagree
 demand for showrooms. However, the floor         Council’s economic consultant disagrees with the
 space proposed should be accompanied by          quantum of undersupply of large format retail floor
 provision for additional floor space in the      space in Noosa and the development significantly
 existing ‘Emporium’ to allow it to grow.         exceeds the retail floor area envisaged for the site
 Should council be of the view that there is      under The Noosa Plan.
 additional demand for showrooms of               It is not the scope of this application to allocate floor


                                                                                            Page 91 of 172