Properly made submission (object) Ralph Rogers MCU13/0092

~...




       14. Peregian Springs provides a local centre that can cater for the higher level of goods
           proposed to be provided by the shopping centre on the site.

       15. The proposed shopping centre is indicated as being a ’convenient central meeting place
           for office workers and shoppers’. This indicates that the proposal will further undermine
           the intent of the existingneighbourhood centre which is specifically seeks to create a
           public place and sense of community.

       16. The Needs Assessment acknowledges that existing shops in the Neighbourhood Centre
          will be negatively affected by the development and are likely to close down. The 70
          fulltime/part time/casual jobs are not all new jobs to the area as the report notes that the
          shopping centre will employ those people from the existing shops that will close as a
          result of the proposal. Comments such as this are again misleading as the consultant
          cannot predict that a new centre will employ those business owners or staff of shops that

           may close down.

       17. The proposal will negatively impact on the residential amenity of residents in Woodland
           Drive and Rufous Street by noise generated by the proposed centre. This is evidence by
           the applicants consultant noise report which states:


                 ’...generally   our    assessment shows that   some   loading activities can potentially
                 exceed the nominated noise limits.


                 ’Traffic noise from David Low Way is expected to increase by approximately 1dBA
                 and for Woodland Drive and Rufous Street by 5dBA to 7dBA above current levels
                 after the construction of the shopping centre. The increase of noise levels due to the
                 increase in traffic volumes will likely be noticeable at the residences along Woodland
                 Drive and Rufous Street.


                 The possible noise control treatment is provision of acoustic upgrades to existing
                 residential buildings, but it is understood that this option is not feasible. A reduction
                 of noise impacts is expected if an alternate access the shopping centre via the David
                                    ’
                 Low is provided.


           It is noted that this noise impact is not able to be overcome by conditions of approval.


       18. The applicant’s noise report states that all loading and service activities on site are to be
           limited to between the hours of 7am to 6pm. This will result in service vehicles and semi
           trailers being forced to share Rufous Street with the existing low key and users of the Di
           Hurst Oval, Peregian Veggie Village, Peregian Tennis club and Peregian Community
           Kindergarten. These community and sporting groups will be detrimentally affected by the
           additional heavy vehicles and overflow carparking that will occur as a result of the
           shopping complex

       19. The   applicant’s traffic consultants have not indicated the extent of works required to
           Rufous Street nor provided any detailed designs on the stated required upgrading of the
          Woodland Drive and David Low Way intersection. Therefore the extent of roadworks and
           impacts on the road system is unknown.

       20. The applicant’s traffic consultants report notes that properties on the northern side of
          Woodland Drive will be      negatively affected by the additional traffic generated by the
           proposed Shopping Centre. The owners of these sites would not have anticipated the
           potential delays or conflicts and therefore the proposal has a significant impact on their
           amenity.