McDonald's has received an official knock-back from Wollongong's independent planning panel, which has labelled its proposed Wongawilli outlet "unacceptable" and and "overdevelopment".
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The panel, which met last week to deliberate over the controversial plans, said the only part of the fast-food chain's proposal which "may be appropriate" was the childcare centre "as it would serve the needs of the local community".
"However, it is considered that the service station and fast-food components represent an overdevelopment of the site in that they are very intensive 24-hour developments which are more suited to a highway location," the panel decision said.
"The impacts of the development from the 24-hour operation, frequent visits by large heavy vehicles including semi-trailers for both refuelling and deliveries and high traffic volumes are considered to be unacceptable within the low density residential environment."
In issuing a refusal, the panel agreed with the assessment made by Wollongong City Council officers, and with the concerns raised by the Wongawilli community.
Panel members said the land owned by McDonald's was designated for a "local village centre which provides a range of small scale retail, business and community uses that serve the needs of the people who live or work in the surrounding neighbourhood".
Additionally, the fast-food proposal would "prevent more appropriate uses from being established in the future as demand for local services increases".
Despite this now unanimous rejection, McDonald's last week made it clear that it would continue to fight the decision in the NSW Land and Environment Court.
The company launched a pre-emptive court challenge to a "deemed refusal" in August, as it said the council was taking too long to approve its plans.
Then last Thursday, McDonald's senior development director Joshua Bannister asked that any decisions on the plans be deferred - instead of refused as recommended - and dealt with in court.
He said the company was exploring ways the council's issues "might be able to be addressed" and that this "may potentially lead to amendments to the development application" during the court process.
However, he said the company's own experts had confirmed that the site "is suitable for our proposed development".
We depend on subscription revenue to support our journalism. If you are able, please subscribe here. If you are already a subscriber, thank you for your support.