A development application lodged more than four years ago for a commercial car wash in Cooroy has now been approved.
The automated car wash, designed to cater for four-wheel drives, RVs and caravans, will be located between the two petrol stations on Elm St, on land which once housed a motel and since zoned for a small shopping centre, but which has lain barren for six years.
The proposal attracted nearly 500 submissions in support: perhaps understandable given it will be the first of its kind in Cooroy, and where only two others exist in the shire, both located in industrial zoned areas of Noosaville, but on main thoroughfares. It also received 19 objections.
The application had been recommended by staff for refusal on its inconsistency with the planning scheme, also traffic concerns to and from the site, and the building of a wall 19.4-metres long and seven metres – or two storeys – high behind the facility, which is inconsistent with Noosa’s ‘look and feel’ for the area of Cooroy considered to be part of an entry statement to the shire and the coast.
The wall is intended to shield nearby residential neighbours from industrial noise. Interestingly, a bowling club located directly behind the proposed development wall did not lodge an objection to the proposal.
But it seems not everyone holds the Noosa Plan edict that a section of former Bruce Highway (less than 15 years ago – hard to believe) with its two petrol stations holds similar planning status to its CBD counterpart across the railway tracks to the west.
Cr Amelia Lorentson put up an alternative motion in direct opposition to the staff recommendation, saying the public interest outweighed the planning scheme in this instance.
Crs Wilkie and Stockwell expressed contrary views, including the setting of a precedent where some concerns about traffic movement around the site were to be left unanswered before approval, as well as the impact on the shire’s ‘look and feel’ requirements.
Cr Wilkie also held particular concerns that the proposal was to be built on non-industrial land, and was a major departure from standard protocols which could come back to haunt the council down the track.
Cr Wilson raised concerns about the length of time the applicant had waited, despite them having provided all the additional information required by council planners, if somewhat tardily so.
The final vote to approve the motion passed 5 to 2: Crs Lorentson, Phillips, Finzel, Wegener and Wilson in favour; Crs Wilkie and Stockwell against.
