Skip to the record
Beware of cheap imitations.

Original source · versioned page text

MCU22 0038 01 MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT [As Published]

of 11

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

               PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT                                             11 APRIL 2023




               Assessment of Request
               The applicant submitted a Traffic Report prepared by SLR Consulting Australia to justify the
               carparking requirements and removal of 8 tandem carparking spaces. The report was
               subsequently reviewed by Councils Traffic Consultant who advised after liaison with the applicants’
               traffic engineer the following:
               (i)     While the GFA of the proposed radiation oncology tenancy (497m2) appears large for the
                       proposed number of users at any one time, the proposed operator has taken me through
                       how the tenancy will be used and operated (with several specialist oncologist consulting
                       rooms although with each specialist only attending on specific days of the week, having
                       minimal overlap with other specialist attendance, and the specialists not sharing rooms –
                       together with the other staffing needs of the tenancy appearing sensible and logical for the
                       usage of the bunker area).
               (ii)    I questioned whether other oncology services would be provided in that tenancy and was
                       advised that they would not, and that if would only be radiation oncology services and
                       patients associated with use of the bunker.
               (iii)   I questioned whether the tenant might decide at a later date to use the tenancy more
                       efficiently and sub-lease part of the tenancy to another medical use, and advised that would
                       not occur.
               (iv)    I was also advised that there was a long term lease arrangement proposed being an initial
                       10 years plus 2 additional 10 year options. Thus, if the proposal is approved it is likely that
                       the radiation oncology use would operate for a long period of time.
               (v)     The SLR memo and the document describing use and operation of the radiation oncology
                       tenancy present a supportable position in relation to the proposed car parking provision, that
                       in my opinion would be acceptable provided appropriate development approval conditions
                       are imposed to limit use of the proposed radiation oncology tenancy area to only that use.




                                                                                                        Page 9 of 11

Document Set ID: 22314040
Version: 13, Version Date: 28/03/2023
Log in to download the original file

MCU22 0038 01 MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT [As Published].pdf · 2.5 MB (large file)

The download may take up to a minute.

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”.