Original source · versioned page text
Ltr-20191105-Response to Submissions-Noosa Marketplace_Final
Attached to the e-mail MCU19/0054 - Response to submissions - 2-18 & 20 HOFMANN DR NOOSAVILLE.
4 November 2019 Glen Conforti Assessment Manager Noosa Shire Council PO Box 141 TEWANTIN QLD 4565 Via email: [email protected] CC: [email protected] Dear Glen, RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE (UNDEFINED USE) AT NOOSA MARKETPLACE AT 2-28, 20 HOFMANN DRIVE, NOOSAVILLE (COUNCIL REF: MCU19/0054) We continue to act on behalf of the Applicant, Noosa Spotlight Property 2 Pty Ltd, in relation to the abovementioned application for the development at 2-18, 20 Hofmann Drive, Noosaville. As Council is aware, this application has recently been publicly notified for a period of 15 business days between 27 September 2019 to 22 October 2019. During the public notification period, we understand that a total of four (4) submissions were received by Council which were all properly made submissions. We have provided a response to the key issues raised in the submissions below. The majority of the issues raised have already been addressed in either the town planning report submitted with the application or in the response to Council’s Information Request. Rather than repeating sections of these documents again, we have simply referred to the relevant sections of these documents. Issues raised Our response Sensitive land uses • The proposed development will bring • As the proposed development is for a range of sensitive receptors within close undefined land uses, proposed tenancies T3- proximity of the existing, and long T13 are intended to be remain unallocated and established, industrial estate. flexible at this stage of the project. Specifically, for impacting on the Nevertheless, The Noosa Plan does not existing Boral Concrete Plant’s 24-hour specifically include indoor sport and recreation Ltr-20191105-Response to Submissions-Noosa Marketplace_Final
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 3 pages
Page 2
operation. In particular, the T3 to T13 land uses as ‘Sensitive Receptors’. Whilst a
Indoor sport and recreation/ Kids play children’s play centre is a possible use, this
centre backing onto the existing type of operation would be undertaken indoors
industrial development. and visitation would typically be for short time
periods, and predominantly on weekends.
• As noted in Boral’s submission, neither the
current Noosa Plan nor the Department of
Environmental and Science provide
recommended separation distances for
concrete batching plants.
Public areas and walkways within proximity
• The design of Building 1 includes open • The breaks in Building 1 are provided in direct
corridors between buildings – these response to Council’s request to break up and
appear to look into the existing articulate the built form and to future proof the
industrial development. development by allowing a future ‘potential’
• Significant pedestrian walkways and pedestrian connection to Leo Alley Road
awning structures at the main building (adjoining the industrial land west of the site). A
frontages and along entries to the landscape treatment can be considered to
tenancies. remove any overlooking or interface concerns.
• The concerns on pedestrian walkways appear
to be overstated, given that any developed site
of this size would have a significant number of
persons on site at any one time. The site
contains no residential, short-term
accommodation or caretakers dwelling, and is
zoned as Major Centre for urban purposes.
Seeking specific land uses
• The proposal does not specify the • As mentioned in the town planning report, the
specific land uses. There are no proposed Noosa Marketplace seeks to deliver a
specific gross floor areas for an curated precinct-based experience, supporting
undefined use. a range of new and emerging businesses and
creating a destination anchored by ‘retail
showroom’ uses. The Undefined Use intends to
provide for flexibility, however all uses are
stated and there are several restrictions in
place for certain tenancies within the definition.
• The proposed shop component is • As mentioned in the town planning report, the
inconsistent use under both the current key principle of the specific outcomes of the
and draft Noosa Plan. development supports a range of co-located
2
Page 3
uses (with certain restrictions where considered
necessary).
• This concern has been previously addressed in
our response to 0147 of the Noosaville Locality
Code forming part of our Information Response
letter.
Showroom land use
• Seeking a consideration for the • There is a demonstrated need for large format
additional development yield to be retail / showroom uses over the site and this
applied consistently and extended has been covered off in the application and
across to the Noosa Emporium. information request response material. Need for
further showroom uses may be established for
other parts of the centre, however this does not
form part of this application.
Acoustic and air quality treatment
• No air quality report or noise impact • The acoustic assessment report can be
assessment report is provided for this conditioned as part of the development
application. The development is approval to specifically determine the scope of
introducing new sensitive premises on an appropriate western boundary fence
the ability of the Boral’s concrete plant treatment to protect visual and acoustic
to comply with its current obligations to amenity.
control noise and air emissions.
Seeking covenant on title to limit nuisance complaints
• Covenants are required to be placed on • This is considered an unreasonable request as
Title acknowledging the order of the existing use rights of adjoining industrial
occupancy and limiting the ability of tenancies will need to be respected.
tenants to make complaints on
nuisance grounds.
Building height
• The proposed development disregard • As addressed in the information response
for the current Council height package, the proposal provides a range of
restrictions. building heights.
• Significantly, Building 4 (co-working / office) has
been reduced to 3 storeys and 12m to meet
Council’s expectations.
Traffic impacts
3
Page 4
• Major congestion due to the large scale • As addressed in the information response
of the project and its impact on the package, an additional SIDRA traffic impact
surrounding traffic network and current assessment has been completed and the
infrastructure has not been designed to results conclude that there will be cross-
accommodate the volume of traffic. utilisation of the carparking, and the proposal is
expected to generate a lower traffic volume
• There are significant safety issues than the previous Masters approval.
turning into the developments proposed
secondary carpark off Hofmann Drive
directly across oncoming traffic.
If you have any questions regarding the above responses, or require any further information, please
do not hesitate to contact the undersigned or Andrew McKnight on (07) 3007 3800.
Yours faithfully,
Ashley Lane
Director
4