PM Submission Object - Kerry Simmonds - MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041

                        The Wallum Units (along Rufous Lane). There are 7 of these with 3 bedrooms. (21
                        persons). Carparking is 5x3 and 2x2. Estimated price $725-800K
                        Reed Beach Houses (behind the Hotel) – There are 10 of these with 4 bedrooms
                        upstairs and living down. (40 persons). Carparking is 10x3. These units will be
                        approximately 6m below the Hotel level. Estimated price $850K.

                 Essence Hotel/(Motel) & Conference Centre – 40 beds
                       The developer proposes to develop and run the hotel with 20 visitor accommodation
                       rooms and 12 apartments (4 x 1 bedroom and 8 x 2 bedroom) which are described as
                       “multiple and visitor”. (40 persons). The 12 apartments are proposed for
                       PERMANENT RESIDENTS.
                       The Hotel will apparently employ 15 people (full-time and part-time) including
                       conference facilitators. The Conference room is small and apparently will seat 40. 40
                       Car parks are proposed with all bar 3 (Visitor parking?) under the Hotel and behind a
                       security gate.
                 3. Lack of compliance with the Noosa Plan
                 PBCAI’s Objection to the DA is firstly based on its lack of compliance with the Noosa Plan
                 Open Space Recreation zone requirements. PBCAI specifically seeks to protect and retain
                 the site for low cost visitor accommodation reflective of the site’s previous use as a caravan
                 park.

                 The Noosa Plan resulted from a community consultation process and was subsequently
                 approved by the State Government. It should not lightly be ignored by a developer being
                 granted an approval which significantly conflicts with the Plan.

                 In addition here, in order to obtain the Council’s previous approval, although it should be
                 stated that no attempt was made to get community approval, this same developer agreed
                 with conditions which kept the then proposed development in compliance with the Town
                 Plan (See above). Now that developer, six years later and having done nothing with the
                 approval, proposes another development in conflict with the Noosa Plan. Once again the
                 developer wants to change the rules for its financial benefit and not for the benefit of the
                 Peregian Beach community.

                 This DA proposes only 20 visitor beds in the Hotel/Motel. It does propose a further 12
                 apartments designated as “multiple and visitor” which the developer proposes to make
                 available for permanent residents although whether this on a lease or sale basis is
                 unknown. All of the 88 beds in the Multiple Housing are proposed to be for permanent
                 residents contrary to the Noosa Plan and the previous, now lapsed, approval.

                 I agree with the comment in the Information Request at page 12 of 13 “the limited range of
                 visitor accommodation proposed in conjunction with the primary use of the site for
                 permanent residential living remains a significant concern.”

                 This concern is increased by the fact that the commercial building, which the developer
                 replaced with the IGA supermarket, provided for visitor accommodation. Now this DA




Document Set ID: 20308174
Version: 1, Version Date: 26/04/2017