2014-01-20 Ordinary Meeting Agenda

ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA   20 JANUARY 2014




                             Page 33 of 86

ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA                                                            20 JANUARY 2014

   ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA                                             14 NOVEMBER 2013

      reduce the carparking available for
      community uses.
    - The community carpark was paid out of
      contributions in lieu money from the
      square over time. Any new development
      should be obliged to contribute
      disproportionately to carparking.

    Built Form                                 The proposed design of the new shopping
    - The proposal is a mundane prototype      centre is considered ‘out of scale’ with the
      development, with poor aesthetic design | surrounding developments and streetscape.
      and layout, which is out of character with | The design includes large expanses of blank
      the area.                                walls to its northern boundary and the Rufous
    - The proposal will obscure the view from _| Street frontage, effectively turning its back to
      David Low Way to the west, substantially | the only street frontage — a poor design
      blocking the view to the national park.  outcome.
    ~ The houses along Woodland Drive and      The design attempts to maximise its
      Cormorant Cres to the north east, as     prominence to the David Low Way and limits
      well as the adjoining residential houses —_| vegetated views to the Noosa National Park
      in the south east will overlook the      from this major road. As a result, the proposed
      proposed development from their          development is not considered to meet the
      bedrooms.      /                         design outcomes sought in The Noosa Plan
    - The proposal fails to address the Rufous
      Street frontage.
    - The proposed building has a 50m long
      wall and includes 2.5m to 3.5m high
      noise barriers, which is not a desirable
      solution of The Noosa Plan.
    - Di Hurst Oval already suffers from a lack
      of passive surveillance and this proposal
      serves to entrench this position by the
      construction of blank walls along this
      facade. This is unacceptable from an
      urban design perspective and will impact
      on the perceived safety of ad hoc use of
      this recreation space.
   Amenity                                     The development proposes substantial
    - Light pollution on neighbouring          acoustic barriers along the north western and
      dwellings, with restrictions already     south eastern boundaries in order to alleviate
      imposed for lighting impacts on the      noise emanating from the site. These walls
      existing site.                           affect the aesthetic treatment to the main
    - The proposal will affect the amenity and | frontage of the site and provides for no
      character of Di Hurst Oval (recreational | surveillance or integration with the adjoining Di
      area).                                   Hurst recreational oval to the west.
    - Noise from the development (including    Council’s Environment Officer comments that
      car's and trolleys) will interrupt the   appropriate light attenuating measures could
      neighbouring Peregian Beach              be designed to address residential neighbour's
      Kindergarten’s rest times.               concems.

   Sunshine Coast Regional Council                              OM Agenda Page 73 of 360

                                                                                        Page 33 of 86