Original source · versioned page text
2018-01-15 General Committee Agenda
The original of this document is very large (13.6 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 15 JANUARY 2018
Issues Comments
become a shopping strip. Business should be that has been specifically identified by The Noosa
located in a shopping precinct. Plan for use as a general store which may include
Not the ‘spirit of the hinterland community of the the sale of prepared food and dining facilities for up
Noosa lifestyle’. to 10 people.
Does not fit with the neighbourhood character and The proposal is for a small restaurant/cafe in a rural
intrudes on lifestyles of residences. setting generally for local residents.
We do not need a restaurant in our street, as there
are many other restaurants in the area.
No benefit to local residences, in fact has ‘a
detrimental effect on our country atmosphere’ and
peace and quiet.
Do not wish to put up with businesses 6 days/5
nights a week. Deliveries also occur outside of
these hours.
The business has grown to an unbearable level It would seem that the popularity has increased the
numbers over time, which in turn has increased the
impacts. Submissions and complaints have
identified at times there may be large numbers of
people. The proposal may be conditioned to limit the
maximum number of diners at any one time to 10.
Not approved for the use – but has been allowed Council officers have allowed the use to continue
to continue. while the application was being assessed. The
applicant has scaled back operations during this
time.
Devaluation of properties if approved. There is no evidence that this is the case. This is not
a planning issue.
It is noted that the site has approval for a general
store and that the Noosa Plan also identifies a
general store as a consistent use for the site.
The acoustic report has contradictions and The report clearly identifies the noise criteria being
inconsistences – this is outlined in detail in the used and compares these criteria with the data
submission (Document # 20201551). collected. It is clear that the recorded noise levels
are within the criteria being referenced. Under the
suggestions for improvement, the author does state
compliance with the relevant criteria, however
makes suggestions to help mitigate some of the
noise being received at the closest residence.
The observed sources of noise from the restaurant
appear to be a reasonable representation of the
various sources of noise mentioned in the
complaints received.
The noise levels allowable outside are higher than
those allowed for inside the house. Rather than use
two sets of levels throughout the report, the author
has used the lower inside levels. Using the levels
allowed for outside the building against the
measured levels, show compliance.
Noise levels reduce over distance, so the 3.6dB(A)
reduction used for the distance between the
measuring area and the nearest residence is based
on this known mathematical analysis. It is possible
that levels at the residence may for some reason not
fit this analysis, but this is not expected to be the
case.
Recorded levels do indicate that the different
Page 94 of 135
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalVery large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.