A MOVE to amend the planning scheme around Carnell Raceway has again been deferred by Southern Downs councillors.
Southern Downs Regional Council yesterday opted to further investigate the benefits of having the race track environs overlay included in the Southern Downs Planning Scheme.
The new code would require any new dwelling to use noise attenuation measures such as air conditioning and insulation, and restrict subdivision and the use of land for dual occupancies or multiple dwellings, residential care and retirement facilities.
The council proposed the overlay to encompass the raceway and its surrounds, similar to the existing overlay at Morgan Park, to reduce conflict between the raceway and residents.
The change was among a suite of planning scheme amendments proposed by council in February and tabled at the last council meeting in Stanthorpe.
Councillor Vic Pennisi yesterday argued the proposed amendments were "retrospectively” trying to fix the conflict between residents and raceway users.
"I think we're trying to do what we should have done years ago,” Cr Pennisi said.
"Our predecessors allowed this to go ahead and have the encroachment of the race track on the residential area.
"I think the problem will be there as long as the race track is there.”
Councillor Cameron Gow added the only benefit of creating a new overlay would be enforcing noise attenuation measures for new buildings.
Director of planning Ken Harris said noise levels at the raceway had previously become a court issue.
"If the long-term intention of councillors is to relocate the car club, we would need to revisit the current agreement with the club,” Mr Harris said.
"At the moment the club is required at its own expense to seal part of Rifle Range Rd. It would not be fair to them if they have to pay, if they would be moved.”
Councillor Neil Meiklejohn argued to again hold the decision until the next general council meeting on June 28.
"It is clear not all of the councillors support this sweep of amendments,” CrMeiklejohn said.
"I think it would be better to defer the decision again to make sure we make the right decision once, or else it could take another year or two to go back and fix it.”
Councillors also moved to not proceed with the proposed amendments to prevent residential uses within 1km of an intensive animal industry, but retain the existing provisions.