Original source · versioned page text
Town planning report
Development Application
Material Change of Use
Service station—Retail business: Type 5
Vehicle uses and Type 2 Shop and salon
Corner of Mary Street and Weyba Road, Noosaville
(described as Lot 21 on RP72829 and Lot 1 on
RP131598)
InsiteSJC ref: GC15-137-T03
Rev 0
www.insitesjc.com.au
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 35 pages
Page 2
Prepared for—
Wessel Petroleum Pty Ltd
c/- Belo Developments
PO Box 287
Carina QLD 4152
19 July 2019
GC15-137-T03-001 | REV A
© InsiteSJC 2019
A 67 Barolin Street, Bundaberg P PO Box 1688, Bundaberg QLD 4670
E [email protected] P (07) 4151 6677 ABN 62 329 746 562
LIMITATIONS STATEMENT
The purpose of this report and the associated services performed by InsiteSJC is to prepare and lodge a
development application in accordance with the scope of services set out in the contract between InsiteSJC and
Wessel Petroleum Pty Ltd (‘the Client’). The scope of services was defined by the requests, time and budgetary
constraints of the Client.
InsiteSJC derived the data in this report primarily from visual inspections, examinations of records in the public
domain, review of previous reports, and interviews with individuals having information relevant to InsiteSJC’s
services. The passage of time, manifestation of latent conditions or impacts of future events may require further
investigations and subsequent data analysis, and re-evaluation of the findings, observations and conclusions
expressed in this report.
In preparing this report, InsiteSJC has relied upon and presumed accurate certain information (or absence
thereof) provided by government officials and authorities, the Client and others identified herein. Except as
stated in the report, InsiteSJC has not attempted to verify the accuracy or completeness of any such information.
No warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied, is made with respect to the data reported or to the
findings, observations and conclusions expressed in this report. Further, such data, findings, observations and
conclusions are based solely upon information, drawings supplied by the Client etc. in existence at the time of the
investigation.
This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of the Client, and is subject to and issued in
connection with the provisions of the agreement between InsiteSJC and the Client. InsiteSJC accepts no liability
or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party.
8/29/2017 5:36 0 36 48 3645 20777
Authorisations
Revision Date Chapter/section/page revised
Originator Checked Approved
A 14/5/19 Initial draft TH NF NF
B 11/7/19 For client review TH DN DN
C 19/7/19 Final issue lodged with Council TH DN DN
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 2
Page 3
CONTENTS
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 7
2 Proposed development .................................................................................................. 8
2.1 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Description .......................................................................................................................................... 8
3 The site ...........................................................................................................................11
3.1 Location ............................................................................................................................................. 11
3.2 Context and details ....................................................................................................................... 11
3.3 Topography ..................................................................................................................................... 13
3.4 Services .............................................................................................................................................. 13
4 Assessment ....................................................................................................................14
4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 14
4.2 Assessment against State Planning Policy (SPP)—3 July 2017 .................................... 14
4.3 Regional plan .................................................................................................................................. 14
4.4 State referrals .................................................................................................................................. 14
4.5 Planning scheme............................................................................................................................ 15
4.6 The New Noosa Plan .................................................................................................................... 23
5 Supporting documents ................................................................................................25
5.1 Traffic impact assessment .......................................................................................................... 25
5.2 Stormwater quality management plan.................................................................................. 25
5.3 Noise impact assessment ........................................................................................................... 25
5.4 Air quality assessment ................................................................................................................. 25
5.5 Light spill report ............................................................................................................................. 25
5.6 Landscape concept plan ............................................................................................................. 26
5.7 Waste management plan ........................................................................................................... 26
6 Conclusions—reasons for approval ............................................................................27
7 Appendices ....................................................................................................................28
Appendix 1—Proposal plans prepared by Alleanza Architecture ........................................... 28
Appendix 2—Traffic impact assessment prepared by Empire Engineering ........................ 29
Appendix 3—Stormwater quality management plan prepared by Empire Engineering 30
Appendix 4—Noise impact assessment prepared by Alpha Acoustics ................................ 31
Appendix 5—Air quality assessment prepared by Air Noise Environment ......................... 32
Appendix 6—Light spill report prepared by Cushway Blackford Consulting Engineers 33
Appendix 7—Landscape concept plan prepared by Saunders Havill Group ..................... 34
Appendix 8—Waste management plan............................................................................................ 35
Appendix 9—Detailed assessment against the Noosa plan ..................................................... 36
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 3
Page 4
SUMMARY
This report addresses the planning instruments relevant to the following development
application—
Applicant Wessel Petroleum c/- InsiteSJC
Proposal Development permit for Material change of use—Service station and
Operational work—Advertising device (pylon sign and awning face signs)
Definition Retail businesses—Type 5 Vehicle uses and Type 2 Shop and salon
Site address Corner of Mary Street & Weyba Road, Noosaville
Real property description Lot 21 on RP72829 & Lot 1 on RP131598
Site area 2483m2
Planning scheme Noosa Plan
Zoning Business centre zone
Precinct Lot 21 on RP72829—Mary/Thomas Street precinct
Lot 1 on RP131598—Nil
Level of assessment Impact assessable
Proposed gross floor area 270m2 (a decrease to the existing overall footprint of 399m² and a
decrease of 146m2 to the existing service station)
Proposed use area 250m2 (130m2 for the service station and 120m2 for the retail component)
Proposed building height 6.83m for the buildings and 7.4m for the canopy
Proposed car parking 17 car parking spaces, 10 of which would be located at the bowsers
State referral Required No
This application seeks a development permit to demolish the existing service station, vehicle
hire premise and dwelling units, and construct a contemporary service station with an
associated small-scale retail component at the corner of Mary Street and Weyba Road,
Noosaville (described as Lot 21 on RP72829 and Lot 1 on RP131598). The proposal is
consistent with the definitions of Retail business—Type 5 Vehicle uses and Type 2 Shop and
salon of the Noosa Plan (planning scheme). The proposal constitutes a material change of
use under the Planning Act 2016, being a material increase in the intensity or scale of the use
of the premises and the commencement of a new use in respect of Lot 21 on RP72829.
The proposal incorporates a high standard of design through materials, landscaping and
articulation in the built form that appropriately responds to local character, environment and
amenity considerations. It would incorporate five (5) double-sided refuelling stations and
provide convenience type goods including, but not limited to, vehicle-related products and
pre-packaged food and beverages that are typical of contemporary service stations. It would
have a gross floor area of 270m2 (a significant decrease from the existing development), a
maximum height above ground level of 7.4m for the canopy and 6.8m for the buildings, and
would provide a total of 17 on-site car parking spaces, ten (10) of which would be at the
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 4
Page 5
petrol bowsers. The proposal incorporates mitigation measures that avoids or minimises
potential impacts of the proposal external to the site.
Consequently, the proposal would be a relatively small-scale material change of use that is
comparable to the existing on-site activities. The overwhelming impression is that the
proposal is merely contemporising the existing facility without upscaling. It would—
• maintain the facility’s ability to operate as intended whilst significantly reducing the
GFA;
• not interfere with the traffic flow and transport network as there would not be a
material net increase in existing traffic volumes; and
• not introduce additional impacts or increase the severity of known impacts on the
surrounding development.
The local community and its economy would benefit from the site’s redevelopment. There is
a demonstrated community need for retailing of fuel and day-to-day convenience goods at
this location. The proposed service station would be of a comparable scale to that existing
on Lot 1 but be spread over the enlarged site, allowing for more site landscaping and more
efficient vehicle manoeuvring. It is comparable to the intensity, scale and effect of other
commercial development in the locality. Importantly it would improve the environmental
performance of the site. Furthermore, it would integrate within the existing development and
support the intent of the zone without undermining the role and function of the higher order
activity centre networks.
This report concludes that the proposal would make a positive contribution to the locality,
especially noting the amenity improvements compared to the existing development, and
that sufficient material has been provided to allow the Council to approve the development
application having regard to the assessment benchmarks and other relevant matters.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 5
Page 6
Figure 1—Rendered image of the proposal (Source: Alleanza Architecture) GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 6
Page 7
1 INTRODUCTION
Wessel Petroleum Pty Ltd has commissioned InsiteSJC to prepare this report to
accompany a development application for a Material change of use—Service
station, consistent with the Planning Act 2016, at the corner of Mary Street and
Weyba Road, Noosaville (described as Lot 21 on RP72829 & Lot 1 on RP131598).
This report—
(1) describes the proposed development;
(2) identifies the relevant assessment benchmarks and any other relevant
matters;
(3) evaluates the likely impacts of the proposal, including considering any
mitigation measures;
(4) assesses the proposal against the assessment benchmarks; and,
(5) provides a summary of reasons for the assessment manager to approve the
application.
The application follows pre-lodgement discussions with Noosa Council to discuss
the opportunities associated with the proposed development. The discussions
highlighted the importance of—
• protecting the amenity of adjoining residential land uses;
• presenting the building’s architecture in a way that was appropriate to the
character of Noosa and to the prominent position at the Weyba Road –
Mary Street junction;
• managing the safety and efficiency of the internal and external traffic
network; and
• providing suitable infrastructure and services to meet the demands of the
proposed development while limiting off-site impacts.
The feedback from these discussions has been incorporated into the final design of
the proposal.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 7
Page 8
2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
2.1 BACKGROUND
The existing service station, vehicle hire premises and two dwelling units form part
of the neighbourhood’s identity as they have been in operation since the late 1980s.
The existing service station has a GFA of 416m2 and includes four (4) double-sided
refuelling stations and underground tanks storing diesel, leaded and unleaded fuel;
an LPG tank is located towards the northern boundary. The vehicle hire premises
has a GFA of 85m2, and the dwelling units have a GFA of 168m2.
The existing service station employs seven (7) staff, with a maximum of two (2)
employees on site at any one time. The existing hours of operation are 5am to
10pm, seven (7) days a week.
2.2 DESCRIPTION
The proposal involves demolishing the existing service station, vehicle hire premises
and dwelling units, and constructing a contemporary station to support the local
convenience needs of residents and provide locally-based employment
opportunities. It would incorporate five (5) double-sided refuelling stations, allowing
ten (10) cars to refuel at any one time, and provide convenience type goods
including (but not limited to) vehicle-related products, and pre-packaged food and
beverages that are typical of modern service stations. A small air and water facility
would also be provided in the south-western corner. A 5m high freestanding pylon
sign would be located in the southeast corner of the site to display pricing
information to passing motorists, and additional logo signs would be provided on
roof canopies and above the entrance door.
The proposal would have an overall GFA of 270m² (a decrease to the existing overall
footprint of 399m² and a decrease of 146m2 to the existing service station), a
maximum height above ground level of 7.4m for the canopy and 6.8m for the
buildings, and a total of 17 car parking spaces, ten (10) of which would be located at
the petrol bowsers. 120m2 of the floor area would be available for display of goods
for retail.
The proposal would not change the existing hours of operation (currently 5am to
10pm, seven (7) days per week), or employee numbers (currently seven (7) people,
with a maximum of two (2) employees on-site at any one time).
Because of the proposed demolition and rebuilding, the proposal would—
• improve the streetscape by replacing old and tired buildings and pavement
with a new, integrated development;
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 8
Page 9
• remove the existing fuel storage tanks and replace them with new fuel
storage;
• remove the above ground LPG tanks;
• improve traffic movement to and from the site by removing one of the
existing vehicle access driveways to Mary Street; and
• mitigate off-site impacts to adjoining residents.
The proposal would be of a high-quality architectural design and include extensive
landscaping, especially around the perimeter, to complement the character of the
locality and provide screening to surrounding residential uses. It would be
constructed with a combination of sandstone cladding, vertical and horizontal fibre
cement cladding, and landscaped “grow” walls, and be articulated and modulated to
reduce the overall visual bulk. In consideration of fire safety and the requirements of
the Building Code of Australia for material fire hazard properties, the materials used
for the canopy cladding and finishes would be non-combustible. Suitable setbacks,
3m and 1.8m high acoustic barriers, and landscaping would reduce the potential
impacts on surrounding properties.
The site is prominent and accessible due to its location at the major Mary Street and
Weyba Road intersection. This roundabout is a defining element in the immediate
landscape as all roads connected to it are identified as part of Noosa’s ‘Major Road
Network’. As such, the intersection is characterised by significant traffic volumes and
noise. The existing medians in Mary Street and Weyba Road limit traffic to left-in
and left-out movements, and only vehicles travelling east along Mary Street could
access the site. This would allow vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward
direction, and manoeuvre entirely within it, without affecting the efficient and
effective function of the external traffic network. It is anticipated that the daily
breakdown of typical traffic generation would be—
• 5am to 4pm: 350—410 vehicles
• 4pm to 7pm: 90—120 vehicles
• 7pm to 10pm: 30—45 vehicles
Consequently, the proposal would be a relatively small-scale material change of use
that is comparable to the existing on-site activities. The overwhelming impression is
that the proposal is merely contemporising the existing facility without upscaling. It
would—
• maintain the facility’s ability to operate as intended whilst significantly
reducing the GFA;
• not interfere with the traffic flow and transport network as there would not
be a material net increase in existing traffic volumes; and
• not introduce additional impacts or increase the severity of known impacts
on the surrounding development.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 9
Page 10
The proposal is illustrated in the following documents—
• Architectural plans prepared by Alleanza Architecture, attached at
Appendix 1;
• Traffic impact assessment prepared by Empire Engineering, attached at
Appendix 2;
• Stormwater quality management plan prepared by Empire Engineering,
attached at Appendix 3;
• Noise impact assessment prepared by Alpha Acoustics, attached at
Appendix 4;
• Air quality assessment prepared by Air Noise Environment, attached at
Appendix 5;
• Light spill report prepared by Cushway Blackford Consulting Engineers,
attached at Appendix 6;
• Landscape concept plan prepared by Saunders Havill Group, attached at
Appendix 7; and
• Waste management plan attached at Appendix 8.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 10
Page 11
3 THE SITE
3.1 LOCATION
Table 1—Site details
Address 52-54 Mary Street (corner of Weyba Road), Noosaville
Real Property Description Lot 21 on RP72829 & Lot 1 on RP131598
Area Total—2483m2
Figure 2—Location of subject site (Source: Google Earth—QLD Globe)
3.2 CONTEXT AND DETAILS
The site is rectangular in shape, has an east-west orientation, and is a corner lot
bound by Mary Street and Weyba Road to the south and east respectively. It has
total road frontages of 53m to Mary Street and 30m to Weyba Road. It is currently
occupied by and has existing use rights for a service station1, vehicle hire premises
and two dwelling units. All buildings on site are at the end of their economic life.
The site therefore presents as ‘tired’. There is very little landscaping on the site and
external spaces have an unappealing mixture of concrete and asphalt hardstand
areas.
1
The existing buildings include facilities for vehicle repairs, even though the site is not regularly used
for that purpose. There may be existing use rights for such an activity, although this report or
application does not rely on such rights.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 11
Page 12
The site is surrounded by a mixture of commercial, retail, health care and medium
density housing. A 3.2m wide drainage freehold lot abuts the entire length of the
northern boundary—Lot 26 on RP72829. There are four townhouses on the
opposite side of the drainage lot which are oriented towards the north and away
from the site.
Lot 1 on RP131598 is listed on the Environmental Management Register, but not on
the Contaminated Land Register, due to existing service station use; Lot 21 on
RP72829 is not listed on either register. Necessary remediation works would be
undertaken during construction.
Figure 3—Surrounding land uses (Source: Google Earth—QLD Globe)
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 12
Page 13
Figure 4—Subject site (Source: Google Earth—QLD Globe)
3.3 TOPOGRAPHY
The site is relatively level—contour information obtained from a detailed survey
indicates the site varies little in elevation—from 1.8m to 2m AHD.
3.4 SERVICES
The site has existing connections to all necessary urban services, including Council’s
reticulated water supply and sewerage disposal systems, stormwater infrastructure,
bitumen sealed roads, electricity and telecommunications. It is not encumbered by
any easement.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 13
Page 14
4 ASSESSMENT
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The assessment manager is to assess the application in accordance with the
Planning Act 2016, in particular Section 45(5) and the Development Assessment
Rules. This section presents an assessment against the relevant provisions of the
State Planning Policy and the planning scheme—the assessment benchmarks.
4.2 ASSESSMENT AGAINST STATE PLANNING POLICY (SPP)—3 JULY 2017
The Planning Regulation 2017 requires the proposal to be assessed against the
assessment benchmarks in the SPP to the extent they are not appropriately
integrated in the planning scheme. As the planning scheme was made under the
Integrated Planning Act 1997, there is no provision indicating that State interest
have been integrated into the scheme.
The SPP Interactive Mapping System indicates the site is affected by the following
overlays—
• Flood hazard area level 1—QLD floodplain;
• Flood hazard area—Local government flood mapping area; and
• Medium stormtide inundation.
The proposal would be consistent with the above State matters as it would
significantly reduce the GFA of existing development and therefore not increase the
exposure or risks associated with natural hazards.
4.3 REGIONAL PLAN
The ShapingSEQ: South East Queensland Regional Plan (SEQRP) identifies the site in
the ‘Urban Footprint’ land use category. The proposal complies with the relevant
provisions as it would be a logical consequence of the urban footprint, and be
consistent with the general principles of efficiently focusing urban growth within
urban areas.
4.4 STATE REFERRALS
Although the site is affected by multiple overlays, it would not require referral to the
Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning
under Schedule 10 of the Planning Regulation 2017.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 14
Page 15
4.5 PLANNING SCHEME
The proposed development is assessable against the planning scheme as follows—
Zone Part 11: Noosaville—Business centre
Precinct Lot 1 on RP131598—Nil
Lot 21 on RP72829—Mary Street/Thomas Street precinct
Definition Retail business—"the conduct of a business activity, where goods or
services are displayed or offered for sale to the public. The term includes the
following types—
…
Type 5 Vehicle uses—The use of premises for the retail sale of petrol,
diesel or any derivatives products or the use of premises for the hiring of
motor cars, trucks, motorcycles, mopeds, boats or other registered vehicles.
The term includes a service station and a vehicle hire premises.
Type 2 Shop & salon—The use of premises for an activity that is generally
found in a shopping complex, strip or centre. The use includes a shop,
hairdressing salon, appliance repairs, alterations, dry cleaning and a café
with dining facilities for up to 10 people.”
Applicable Flood hazard area (1% AEP to year 2100)
overlays High potential acid sulfate area 0-5m AHD
Level of Impact assessment (refer Table 11.6)
assessment
Figure 5—Zoning (Source: Noosa Council Interactive Mapping)
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 15
Page 16
4.5.2 Assessment benchmarks
The table of assessment for the Business centre zone (Table 11.6) identifies the
proposal as impact assessable as Lot 21 on RP72829 is within the Mary
Street/Thomas Street precinct; it is important to note that the proposal would be
code assessable and a consistent use if it was not located in this precinct—as would
be the case if the proposal was confined to Lot 1 on RP131598.
Impact assessable development is to be assessed against the entire planning
scheme, to the extent relevant and any matters prescribed by the regulation. This
report explains our assessment against the following sections of the planning
scheme as these are most relevant for Council’s determination—
(1) Desired environmental outcomes
(2) Noosaville locality code
(3) Business uses code
(4) Driveways and carparking code
(5) Engineering works code
(6) Landscaping code
(7) Naturals hazard overlay code
The proposal complies with the relevant criteria of the above-mentioned
assessment benchmarks, with a detailed assessment against each assessment
benchmark provided in Appendix 8. The following sections provide additional
commentary.
4.5.3 Desired environmental outcomes
The desired environmental outcomes set the policy direction for the planning
scheme area and forms the basis for ensuring appropriate development occurs for
the life of the planning scheme. As indicated below, the proposal is consistent with
the DEOs.
The proposal, despite being vehicle-oriented, presents a high level of streetscape
character—certainly significantly better than the current one. Building form, being
single storey, is inherently ‘human scale’. Having regard to the functional needs of
the building to operate as a service station and its location at a busy intersection, it
integrates well with other development in the locality.
Further, the proposal is consistent with the DEOs through—
• providing urban development within an identified urban area;
• mitigating impacts to the environment and preserving existing
environmental attributes by locating development generally within the
existing footprint;
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 16
Page 17
• providing a consolidated urban form that provides a compact and efficient
land use; and
• preserving and protecting the landscape and amenity values of the locality.
4.5.4 Noosaville locality code
The proposal complies with the code as it would serve the local needs of the
community and visitors, be compatible with other existing uses in the locality, and
not introduce any additional significant adverse impacts on surrounding properties.
The proposal is explicitly anticipated by the planning scheme and designated as a
code assessable consistent use in the Business centre zone when on Lot 1 on
RP131598, which is most of the proposed site2. Although the use is an inconsistent
use when in the Mary Street/Thomas Street precinct, most of the site is not in the
precinct. Any incongruity or incompatibility of uses would therefore be less
pronounced. Lot 21 on RP72829 already has existing use rights for a Retail
business—Type 5 vehicle uses, which is an inconsistent use. It would therefore be
appropriate for Council to treat Lot 21 on RP72829 as if it were not in the Mary
Street/Thomas Street precinct for this purpose of this application—the proposal
would not offend the purpose of intention of the precinct and incorporates
significant improvements to amenity on the boundaries, including three-metre wide
landscaping strips and noise barriers.
Despite the precinct trying to maintain a residential character, the existing and
proposed development are not residential in nature, they generate most of their
business from passing traffic, and they involve a partial night time use. However, the
proposal would be consistent with but significantly smaller than the existing service
station, therefore it would only involve a small-scale material change of use that
would—
• maintain the facility’s ability to operate as intended whilst significantly
reducing the GFA;
• improve the overall appearance from the streetscape; and
• not introduce additional impacts or increase the severity of known impacts
on the surrounding development.
Lot 21 on RP72829 already has an existing lawful use right, therefore the proposal
to change the use from one non-conforming use to another non-conforming use is
not anathema to good town planning principles, particularly when both uses display
similar characteristics.
Noosaville is one of the principal visitor destinations in Noosa, therefore any new
development should recognise and reinforce the waterfront location and coastal
urban setting without harming the environment through visual, noise, odour, or
other waste impacts. The proposal would visually improve the streetscape and
2
more than two-thirds of the site
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 17
Page 18
waterfront setting by replacing old and tired buildings and pavement with a new,
integrated development. It would be of a high-quality architectural design that
sensitively responds to the surrounding diversity of architectural styles, scale and
character, and correlate with the intent for the development of Noosaville. It would
be constructed with a combination of sandstone cladding, vertical and horizontal
fibre cement cladding, and landscaped “grow” walls, and be highly articulated and
modulated to reduce the overall visual bulk. Furthermore, the pitched roof lines and
deep overhangs would provide additional articulation and be compatible with the
subtropical environment. Despite the proposal having less than 50% transparent
glazing on the front wall, the main entrance facing the street and outdoor seating
area would present a high-quality streetscape.
The proposal complies with the main built form elements of the code as follows—
Element Requirement Proposed
Section 11.9 Built form
Building height Max. 10m 7.4m for the service station canopy
and 6.83m for the buildings
Setbacks
Front Min. 6m 10.5m (Mary St) and 13m (Weyba Rd)
Side 0m 5m
Rear Min. 3m from residential 3m, plus additional 3.2m by virtue
development existing stormwater easement
Roof pitch Min. 5º 8º-10º
Section 11.35 Mary Street/Thomas Street Precinct
GFA Max. 300m2 270m2
Site cover Max 50% 39%
Landscaping Throughout site Throughout site—all boundaries and
frontages
As noted in the acoustic report, air quality assessment report, and light spill report,
suitable setbacks combined with acoustic barriers and landscaping would be
provided to better manage potential off-site impacts. As noted in the traffic impact
assessment, most of the generated traffic has already been counted and accounted
for in the background traffic volumes on the roundabout, therefore there would not
be a material net increase in existing traffic volumes or impacts on the adjacent
roundabout. These measures would help manage potential off-site impacts on the
amenity of surrounding properties.
The proposal complies with the code and supports the intent of the zone and
locality by providing a new, modern service station that integrates with existing
neighbourhood character.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 18
Page 19
4.5.5 Business uses code
The proposal complies with the code as it would be appropriately located and
designed to maximise the benefit to the community. There is a demonstrated
community and planning need for this type of development as there are not many
small-scale service stations in the nearby vicinity. Most service stations are clustered
near the Eenie Creek Road and Eumundi Noosa Road roundabout, and only one
other service station is located within 2km of the site. The immediate locality is
therefore relatively poorly-served with respect to the type of facility proposed.
The Noosaville locality provides for much of Noosa’s commercial and retail needs,
with residents enjoying high levels of convenience and accessibility to urban
services. The proposal would be located within an existing business centre and
would continue to provide an urban service with high accessibility to the
surrounding road and pedestrian networks. The proposal would be compatible with
the neighbourhood’s identity as the existing service station has been in operation
since the late 1980s, but the new and improved design would continue to reflect the
existing vehicle-dominated activities in a far more attractive form. The proposal
would also improve the streetscape and operate as intended without relying on the
addition of any new GFA or tenancies.
Although the proposal would be located within 150m of a residential use, the
amenity of the neighbouring properties would be maintained as there would be no
changes to the existing hours of operation. As noted in the acoustic report, air
quality assessment report, light spill report, and traffic impact assessment, suitable
setbacks combined with acoustic barriers and landscaping would be provided to
better manage potential off-site impacts on the external traffic network and amenity
of surrounding properties.
The site would be large enough to accommodate the proposal and associated car
parking, accessways and landscaping as it has an area of 2483m2 and a road
frontage of 30m to Weyba Road and 53m to Mary Street. Fuel pumps would be 17m
from Weyba Road and 11.5m from Mary Street, air and water facilities would be
sufficiently clear of residential properties, and inlets to bulk fuel storage tanks would
be located so tankers can stand wholly within the site while unloading fuel.
120m2 of the floor area would be available for display and sale of convenience type
goods including, but not limited to, vehicle-related products and pre-packaged
food and beverages that are typical of contemporary service stations. Despite the
planning scheme limiting the GFA of associated retail sale of goods to 15% of the
GFA (40m2), the retail component would be ancillary to the main service station use
as it would be located wholly within the service station, and no separate tenancy
would be required.
A small-scale, freestanding pylon sign would be located in the southeast corner of
the site to display pricing information to passing motorists, and additional logo
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 19
Page 20
signs would be provided on roof canopies and above the entrance door. The
signface area of each sign would be less than 4m2, and the combined signface area
of all signs would be less than 10m2. The use of small signs would minimise visual
clutter and ensure they are compatible with the scale, proportion and bulk of
buildings and landscaping.
4.5.6 Driveways and carparking code
The proposal complies with the code as transport infrastructure would be provided
in a manner that meet the needs of development without generating off-site
impacts.
The proposal would not be fundamentally different to the existing service station or
other similar service stations in the region. As noted in the traffic impact
assessment, it would not increase the customer catchment area, and the majority of
generated traffic would be undiverted drop-in traffic; this has already been counted
and accounted for in the background traffic volumes on the roundabout. As such,
there would not be a material net increase in existing traffic volumes or impacts on
the adjacent roundabout.
The existing median strips in Mary Street and Weyba Road would limit traffic to left-
in and left-out movements, and only vehicles travelling east along Mary Street could
access the site. The proposal would utilise three of the four existing crossovers so as
not to impact traffic flow or road safety. It is anticipated that the daily breakdown of
typical traffic generation would be—
• 5am to 4pm: 350—410 vehicles
• 4pm to 7pm: 90—120 vehicles
• 7pm to 10pm: 30—45 vehicles
The design and orientation of the proposal, combined with the large site area,
would allow vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward direction, and
manoeuvre entirely within it, without affecting the efficient and effective function of
the external traffic network. Furthermore, sufficient vehicle parking would be
provided to meet the demand generated by the use. A total of 17 on-site car
parking spaces, ten (10) of which would be located at the petrol bowsers, would be
provided to satisfy the demands generated by staff and visitors; this complies with
the requirements prescribed by Table 14-51, as follows—
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 20
Page 21
Element Parking rate Requirement Proposed
Section 14.113 Carpark design and layout
Retail type 5 4 spaces per service 5 spaces 17 spaces
bay, with a min. of 5
provided
Retail type 2 1 space per 20m2 of use 7 spaces
area up to 100m2
AND
1 space per 15m2 or
part thereof of use area
for areas in excess of
100m2
The proposed number of on-site car parking spaces would be sufficient to
accommodate the demand generated by customers and staff. There would be a
high turnover of car parking spaces due to it mainly catering for passing trade, and
many customers would simply stop at the bowser, refuel and leave the site.
Furthermore, most patrons using the retail component would be parked at the
bowser area as it is unlikely it would generate additional vehicle trips. As such, a
proportion of the parking spaces required by the GFA would be accommodated
within the bowser area, and additional parking is available should customers wish to
access the other uses on the site. Further to this, there is sufficient queuing space
behind all petrol bowsers to allow additional vehicles to be within informal parking
and not impact other vehicles circulating through the site.
All on-site car parking areas would comply with the AS2890.1—Parking facilities for
off-street parking with regards to space width, manoeuvrability and sight distances
at the entrance and exit. All spaces would clearly delineated and highly visible. A
sight distance assessment and swept-path analysis are included in the traffic impact
assessment.
Refer to the traffic impact assessment for additional information.
4.5.7 Landscaping code
The proposal complies with the code as landscaping would be provided in a manner
which complements and enriches the natural landscape and built environment.
Extensive landscaping would be provided to enhance the amenity of the site and
soften the appearance of development from surrounding areas. A range of dense,
native species would be planted to provide variation in form and colour, and act as
an acoustic and privacy barrier for surrounding residential development. The species
selection would be consistent with Council’s list of preferred species.
The proposal complies with the main landscaping elements of the code as follows—
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 21
Page 22
Element Requirement Proposed
Section 14.139 Minimum requirements
Area Min. 10% of site area 18% of site area
Width
Frontage Min. 2m 3m to Weyba Rd and Mary St
Side boundaries Min. 3m 3m
Refer to the landscape concept plan for additional information.
4.5.8 Engineering works code
The proposal complies with the relevant parts of the code for the following
reasons—
• it would provide clearly defined car parking, legible traffic paths,
throughout the site, and a reduction in access points to the major road
network;
• earthworks would be minimal and mainly restricted to replacing the
existing fuel storage tanks. Appropriate soil testing would be undertaken to
establish any contamination;
• an erosion and sediment control plan would be implemented prior to
construction; and
• suitable waste bins would be provided and screened from surrounding
development.
4.5.9 Natural hazards overlay code
The proposal complies with the code as it would be compatible with the acid sulfate
and flooding hazards so as not to place people, property and economic activity at
risk.
A Flood Information Certificate obtained from Council identifies the flood level at
2m AHD, with a recommended DFL of 2.5m AHD. However, contour information
obtained from a detailed survey indicates the site varies between 1.8m—2m AHD.
The finished floor levels would be lower than the recommended DFL, but the
proposal would decrease the footprint of the existing development to reduce the
impacts on flooding. The proposal would be compatible with flooding
characteristics of the site for the following reasons—
(1) it would retain the existing primary use of the site and significantly reduce
the existing building footprint;
(2) it would not introduce dwellings;
(3) it would not increase impervious areas and stormwater runoff; and
(4) conditions can be imposed on the location of services and the use of
building materials that make the building more resilient to a flood event.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 22
Page 23
It is recommended that the following conditions be imposed to further increase
resiliency to flooding—
(1) all electrical and telecommunications equipment be located above
2.8mAHD;
(2) all goods stored below 2.8mAHD must be easily evacuated to a level above
2.8mAHD; and
(3) All building materials below 2.8mAHD be flood resilient.
4.6 THE NEW NOOSA PLAN
The New Noosa Plan is a draft planning scheme that would eventually replace the
current Noosa Plan 2006. The major consultation phase has closed, and Council is
considering how the draft scheme should be amended in response to submissions.
The New Noosa Plan, incorporating any amendments, would then require the
Minister to consider it, the amendments, and how Council had dealt with
submissions—prior to a final approval and scheme commencement.
Contrasted to the rules for code assessment that require an assessment manager to
assess only against the assessment benchmarks, section 45(5)(b) of the Planning Act
2016 states “an impact assessment is an assessment that may be carried out against,
or having regard to, any other relevant matter, other than a person’s personal
circumstances, financial or otherwise”. The legislative intention is that the ‘other
matters’ not substitute for the ‘prescribed matters’. The explanatory notes to the act
elaborate on this—
Furthermore, given that the prescribed matters are matters of public record
included in statutory instruments that have been the subject of extensive
community consultation, the prescribed matters are always expected to carry
substantial weight in any assessment.
(https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/bill.first.exp/bill-2015-047 page
53 accessed 10 July 2019)
Furthermore, Council should be cautious and not give too much weight to a draft
instrument [see Coty (England) Pty Ltd v Sydney City Council (1957 2 LGRA 117, and
Nerinda Pty Ltd v Redland City Council & Ors (2018) QCA 146]
However, s45(8) of the Planning Act 2016 may become relevant if the New Noosa
Plan commenced prior to determining the application—it would only allow the
assessment manager to give weight it considers appropriate to a statutory
instrument that comes into effect after the development application is properly
made but before it is decided.
The New Noosa Plan includes the whole site in the Mary Street/Thomas Street
Health and Wellbeing Precinct—meaning that the proposal would be impact
assessable and an inconsistent use. The range of uses allowable in this precinct are
unnecessarily restrictive having regard to the historical uses on the site. The
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 23
Page 24
combination of the range of acceptable uses and the assessment benchmarks is
sufficiently restrictive that the new scheme would be likely to discourage site
redevelopment. The provisions in the New Noosa Plan would merely serve to
prolong the current uses and buildings on the site resulting in a longer-term built
outcome that was inferior to that proposed in this application. If the New Noosa
Plan had commenced as proposed in the public notification version, Council would
be justified in approving the proposal based on the existing use rights and the
proposed building scale being confined to a project comparable to the existing
building envelop.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 24
Page 25
5 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
5.1 TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The traffic impact assessment prepared by Empire Engineering indicates the
proposal would have a negligible impact on the external traffic network. The
proposal would not be fundamentally different to the existing service station, it
would not increase the customer catchment area, and most of the generated traffic
would still be undiverted drop-in traffic. This has already been counted and
accounted for in the background traffic volumes on the roundabout. As such, there
would not be a material net increase in existing traffic volumes or impacts on the
external traffic network and adjacent roundabout.
The proposal has been designed to facilitate unrestricted forward gear access and
egress from the site for all required design vehicles, including a 10.5m WCV, 10.5m
MRV and 19m semi-trailer.
5.2 STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
The stormwater quality management plan prepared by Empire Engineering indicates
the proposal would not impact existing upstream or downstream properties. The
existing service station does not have underground drainage infrastructure or
environmental controls—therefore the proposal would be significant improvement
over the current situation, resulting in a benefit for the surrounding environment.
5.3 NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The noise impact assessment prepared by Alpha Acoustics indicates forecast noise
emissions would comply with the noise criteria requirements of the Environmental
Protection (Noise) Policy 2008. An on-site survey was conducted for a period of
seven days.
5.4 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT
The air quality report prepared by Air Noise Environment indicates forecast
pollutant concentrations of VOC and odour would comply with the criteria
requirements of the Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2008.
5.5 LIGHT SPILL REPORT
The light spill report prepared by Cushway Blackford Consulting Engineers indicates
the proposal passes the maximum obtrusive light test results of relevant standards
and would not interfere with the amenity of surrounding uses.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 25
Page 26
Screen fences and landscaping significantly improve the opportunity to improve
existing and potential light spill onto adjoining premises.
5.6 LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN
The landscape concept plan prepared by Saunders Havill Group indicates
contemporary and complementing landscaping would be provided to enrich the
natural and built environment. A range of species, forms and outdoor spaces would
be incorporated.
5.7 WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
The waste management plan indicates waste produced by the proposal would be
no more than what is produced by existing on-site activities. Waste would be stored
in a 240L bin and be emptied three times per week, and recyclables would be stored
in a 3000L storage container and be emptied when required by an external
contractor. Small-scale waste bins would be provided throughout the site for
customers and staff, and these would be emptied into the main 240L bin.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 26
Page 27
6 CONCLUSIONS—REASONS FOR APPROVAL
Council should make the following conclusions from this report—
(1) the development application has been made in accordance with the
requirements of the Planning Act 2016 and Planning Regulation 2017;
(2) this report addresses the relevant assessment benchmarks, including the
performance outcomes and acceptable outcomes of the applicable codes
in the Noosa Plan and the State Planning Policy;
(3) the proposal would service the needs of local customers without impacting
the role and function of higher order activity centres;
(4) the site is appropriately zoned for the proposal, and the proposal is
explicitly anticipated by the planning scheme;
(5) the proposal incorporates a high standard of design that appropriately
responds to local character, environment and amenity considerations;
(6) it is a relevant matter3 that the proposal would replace development that
has similar or greater scale, and in doing so significantly improve the
environmental performance of the site, including improved visual amenity,
landscaping, traffic movement, pedestrian safety, noise, light, stormwater
quality, and VOCs; and
(7) transport infrastructure would be provided in a manner that meets the
needs of development without generating off-site impacts.
Council should therefore approve the application in full subject to reasonable and
relevant conditions.
3
Council may have regard to ‘any other relevant matter’ under the Planning Act 2016, s45(5)(b). The
Planning Regulation 2017, s31(1)(f) requires that the assessment be carried out having regard to “any
development approval for, and any lawful use of, the premises or adjacent premises”.
GC15-137-T03-001 REV C 27
Page 28
7 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1—PROPOSAL PLANS PREPARED BY ALLEANZA ARCHITECTURE GC15-137-T03-001 REV C
Page 29
APPENDIX 2—TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT PREPARED BY EMPIRE ENGINEERING GC15-137-T03-001 REV C
Page 30
APPENDIX 3—STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED BY EMPIRE ENGINEERING GC15-137-T03-001 REV C
Page 31
APPENDIX 4—NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT PREPARED BY ALPHA ACOUSTICS GC15-137-T03-001 REV C [OCR of page images] APPENDIX 4—NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT PREPARED BY ALPHA ACOUSTICS SEEDER €°) Insite SC
Page 32
APPENDIX 5—AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT PREPARED BY AIR NOISE ENVIRONMENT GC15-137-T03-001 REV C [OCR of page images] APPENDIX 5—AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT PREPARED BY AIR NOISE ENVIRONMENT SEEDER €°) Insite SC
Page 33
APPENDIX 6—LIGHT SPILL REPORT PREPARED BY CUSHWAY BLACKFORD CONSULTING ENGINEERS GC15-137-T03-001 REV C
Page 34
APPENDIX 7—LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN PREPARED BY SAUNDERS HAVILL GROUP GC15-137-T03-001 REV C [OCR of page images] APPENDIX 7—LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN PREPARED BY SAUNDERS HAVILL Group SEEDER €°) Insite SC
Page 35
APPENDIX 8—WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN GC15-137-T03-001 REV C [OCR of page images] APPENDIX 8—WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 4 insi GC15-137-T03-001 REV C ™ Insite SJ
Page 36
APPENDIX 9—DETAILED ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE NOOSA PLAN GC15-137-T03-001 REV C [OCR of page images] APPENDIX 9—DETAILED ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE NOOSA PLAN SEEDER €°) Insite SC