Council rejects Windsor concrete company’s application for extended operations
Brisbane City Council has rejected an application for a Windsor based concrete plant to extend its hours of operation following residents’ year long ‘anxious’ wait for a decision.
North
Don't miss out on the headlines from North. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Brisbane City Council has rejected an application for a Windsor concrete plant to increase its operating hours to 22 hours a day following community concerns of increased noise and emissions.
Just days after the Northside Chronicle revealed residents were suffering from an “anxious” year long wait for an answer from Council, City Planning Chair Matthew Bourke said the Neilsens Concrete application had been deemed “unsuitable” for the area.
Cr Bourke said the DA, submitted in August 2018, proposed extending the plant’s current operating hours “from 6am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 6am to 3pm on Saturday to 4am Monday and 2am Saturday”.
“We are committed to ensuring our city remains a great place to live, work and relax and that any developments do not take away from our great lifestyle,” Cr Bourke said.
“We were concerned the extended operating hours of the concrete plant would raise issues of noise, air quality and general amenity impacts for the surrounding area and Council raised this with the applicant in November.
“Local Councillors David McLachlan (Hamilton) and Andrew Wines (Enoggera) have been working with residents throughout this application process, encouraging local residents affected by the concrete plant’s proposal to have their say.
“Throughout the assessment process 146 objections were received, with all information put forward by residents considered.
The News has reported since 2018 on the concerns of residents following the company’s initial application to extend the operating hours to 24/7.
In November 2019 the Neilsen Group CEO Mario Panuccio said the application was to “run very limited activities outside of normal hours from Monday to Saturday and not for all hours.
“The changes will both reduce the impact of delivery vehicles on local traffic at peak hour times and allow Neilsens to conduct the night-time road repair work that is preferred by the local community,” Mr Panuccio said at the time.
“We have conducted a thorough impact study which addresses all surrounding streets and neighbours, including worst-case scenarios.”
Mr Panuccio said it was important to note “that neighbouring multinational competitors – some operating in the same street – are already operating well beyond the scope of the changes requested by Neilsens, a Queensland owned and operated company.”
The News has approached the company for comment regarding Council’s decision.
Windsor Park Community Association spokesman Dominiqe Bird told the News earlier this week community was still waiting to know the outcome of the application which, if approved, he said would be “disastrous for the community”.
“Our concerns regarding toxic sediment run-off into Breakfast Creek, relentless noise, dust pollution, pedestrian and cyclist safety have still not been addressed and to add insult to injury, BCC have recently launched campaigns about revitalising Brisbane’s suburbs and creating a “green city” and yet we see no evidence of this in Windsor Park,” Mr Bird said.
Cr Bourke said it was important Council supported business that provided “much-needed services and jobs for Brisbane, however impacts on neighbouring residents must be managed and in this case residents’ concerns about the proposal were well founded”.
“This proposal was not a good planning outcome for Brisbane, and it has not been supported.”
Cr McLachlan said he was pleased the right planning decision had been made for residents in Brisbane’s inner-north.
“A 22-hour operation was unsuitable for this area, and while I understand the proposal caused concern for a lot of residents during the assessment phase I thank them for having their say and helping us achieve the best outcome for residents,” Cr McLachlan said.
Cr Wines said residents had put forward concerns about increased noise, vehicle movements and possible health concerns and these were all issues Council worked to address with the applicant but failed to reach a suitable outcome.
“Our preference was to seek a refusal to this proposal as it did not meet the planning expectations of either Council or the community,” he said.