Skip to the record
The gold standard in government transparency.

Council archive · source document

Submission objecting to development · MCU18/0117

Attached to the e-mail PM Submission - Adamson Town Planning on behalf of N Oliver - MCU18/0117.msg.

of 3

Text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

 “Adamson Town Planning, specialising in providing higher order town planning advice”




provided that sales space does not exceed 20% of the use area. Any space dedicated for administration
or accounting work in connection with such operations does not exceed 20% of the use area.

The above definition allows for 20% of the use area for an industrial development to be used for
retailing goods that are produced, manufactured, dismantled, altered, repackaged, repaired or stored.
Therefore, is questioned that there is a need for the proposed garden centre given some limited
retailing can occur in conjunction with the proposed warehouse use.

Summary
The proposed development seeks to provide a garden centre and industrial warehouse on the land.
The proposed garden centre is defined as Retail Business Type 7 – Garden and Lifestyle Centre, which
is an inconsistent use in the Industry Zone.

The applicant has applied for Industrial Business Type 1 – Warehouse. The definition of industrial
business means that 20% of the use area of a warehouse could be used for a retail purpose, without
compromising the intent of the planning scheme, which is to protect industrial land from incompatible
land uses.

It is evident having regard to both the lower and higher order provisions that the planning scheme
seeks to protect industrial land from incompatible development. The proposed Retail Business Type
7 – Garden and Lifestyle Centre use is not consistent with the following:
     • the purpose and overall outcome (vv) for the Industry Zone under of the Noosaville Locality
         Code;
     • specific outcomes O188 and O189 under the Noosaville Locality Code;
     • part 3.1.3(e) of the Desired Environmental Outcomes for Industrial Business; and
     • part 1.7 of the Strategic Framework.

In my opinion, the applicant has not provided grounds that are sufficient to warrant approval of the
proposal given the significant conflict identified with the planning scheme. Further, there is no
demonstrated planning need for the proposed garden centre at this location and there is likely to be
a need to protect industrial land for industrial purposes in the locality.

Should you have any questions with respect to the above please contact me.

Yours faithfully




Shane Adamson (BEngTech, GDURP, MPIA, MQELA)
Town Planning Specialist
Director - Adamson Town Planning Pty Ltd




                                                                                          3|Page
16014 – NC Oliver Group Pty Ltd

Used in these records

About this file

File size
234 KB (small file)
File type
PDF

No other editions are linked here.

Original file

Log in to download the original file

Submission objecting to development.pdf · 234 KB (small file)

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.