20250212-NC- Change representations to the decision notice.pdf

Comments
It is contended that this condition is unreasonable as it is adequately addressed by other amenity related conditions
included in this decision notice. Some of these requirements include:
       Limiting hours of the operation
       Limiting the number of events per year
       Compliance with an approved noise report
       Limiting the noise to 39dB(a) LAeq,adj,15min external to any offsite residence
       Requirement for noise to be continuously monitored
       Implementation of an acoustic wall
       Sealing of the access driveway
       Prepare and implement a noise management plan
       Undertake the use in accordance with the provisions of an Operational management plan (as amended), and
       The Operational management plan is required to be evaluated every three years.

The above conditions ensure the function facility will operate in an orderly manner and mitigates any adverse impacts
on adjoining premises. In light of this, it is questioned whether Condition 20 is reasonably required, and as such, is
considered an unreasonable imposition on the proposed use. The development would also be subject to compliance
and enforcement action where any non-compliance with the subject conditions of approval has been identified.

Furthermore, it is considered that the condition is not reasonable as it is ambiguous and uncertain in its operation. In
particular, it requires Council to form a subjective opinion as to whether any compliant is frivolous or vexatious (which is
often difficult to ascertain) and states that where (valid) complaints are received Council “may” require the applicant to
undertake reassessment of approved management documents such as further noise assessments and implementation
of additional measures. It seems to allow Council the right to reassess certain aspects of the approval that have already
been endorsed as accepted. This is not considered reasonable or necessarily required and, in any event, is covered by
condition 28 which requires the applicant to review the OMP every 3 years. As such, we request that Condition 20 be
deleted.

Amended Condition 20
20.   Where complaints (other than frivolous or vexatious complaints) are made to Council about noise from the
      approved use, Council may require the site management entity to:
      a.     submit a Noise Impact Assessment prepared by a suitably qualified, and/or
      b.     undertake further noise amelioration measures or operations, install volume limiting devices or barriers
             and/or shield or relocate mechanical plant and equipment and have such measures certified by a
             suitably qualified person. Deleted

Condition 21
21. Prior to commencement of the use, certification must be submitted to Council from a suitably qualified person that
      the development has been constructed is in accordance with report “Environmental Noise Level Impact




JFP Ref: M3155P                                                                                                 Page 3