Once again we have developers using the courts, to push an ill-placed Tattoo Parlour in quiet Cobham Avenue Melrose Park. This is the third time the applicant is seeking approval.
Please add your name below to my submission to the Land and Environment Court against the proposal. The matter, LS2019/22 – Tattoo Parlour at Melrose Park is set down for hearing on Monday 20th July 2020.
Let's not forget that this was recommended for refusal by Council Staff, and also refused by the Ryde Planning Panel. Unsurprisingly, under the State Government's planning laws, developers always get another chance.
Your added name will help bolster my submission to be delivered to the court. Please share widely.
Application for Tattoo Parlour – 31 Cobham Ave Melrose Park
The application for a tattoo parlour at the above site is incompatible with the intent of the zoning in place.
The subject site is zoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre. The intent of the neighbourhood centre zoning is to provide a range of small-scale retail business and community uses that serve the needs to the people who live within the immediate surrounding neighbourhood as well as to encourage employment opportunities in accessible locations.
A Tattoo Parlour is contrary to the intent of the zoning. A tattoo parlour does not serve the needs of the people in the surrounding low density residential zoning. Uses such as corner shops, bakeries, butchers, chemist or accountants would be more appropriate as these uses provide a direct and ongoing service to the community.
A use such as a tattoo parlour, would be more appropriate in the nearby West Ryde town centre only a few kilometres away.
There is strong community opposition to this proposal. During the notification period, Council received 55 submissions. 49 of these objected to the development. The number of submissions opposing the development is representative of the tattoo parlour being an inappropriate use in this zoning and locality.
Due to the nature of the business, this proposed development is likely to attract clientele from a much broader area than the immediate locality and most clientele are likely to drive to the premises. While the development provides for two parking spaces, this will not cater for any clientele parking. This will result in demand for on street parking.
In summary, this application should be refused. It is inconsistent with the zone objectives and is contrary to the public interest.
3rd July 2020