PM Submission Object 2 of 2- Richard Kirkpatrick MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041

     I consider that the developer should be required to submit a noise mitigation plan agreed between the
     Peregian Beach Hotel and the developer with a formal commitment by each party to implement the plan, prior
     to any proposed development being considered by Council. The implementation of the plan is to be certified by
     a suitably qualified and independent acoustic consultant. It will be too late if Council approves the DA and the
     Peregian Beach Hotel and the developer cannot reach agreement.



     8. The Vista from David Low Way

     It appears that the Hotel/Motel will not obscure the vista of the western mountains from David Low Way. This
     vista needs to be protected. The accommodation units will be behind and below the Peregian Beach Hotel by
     about 6m and, therefore, will not be visible from David Low Way but it is important that they do not exceed the
     height allowed under the Noosa Plan especially along Rufous Lane.



     9. Sprout Architects Site Sections shows a 12m height above natural ground level especially for Lot 12
     which would appear to be grossly excessive.



     10. Pathway through the development

     It is proposed to provide a public pathway linking Rufous Lane with the IGA and the Motel and through the
     Supermarket site to both Sandpiper Lane and David Low Way (via the lift). This pathway is desirable if the DA
     is approved.



     11. Sprout Architects Ground Floor Hotel – MPR? Meal Preparation Room?

     I do not understand why the change from “Motel” to “Hotel” or whether or not this has any significance.



     12. Sprout Architects Reed House Section Analysis

     I consider that the amount of solar access and ventilation is limited and inappropriate according to this
     analysis. The number of hours of solar access that these windows and open spaces will receive is not clear.
     The apparent inadequacy is caused by the developer’s attempt to maximize the density and ground coverage
     of the site.




     13. The Reed Beach Houses - secondary dwelling units

     While I realize that the developer has provided a physical linkage from each secondary dwelling to the main
     dwelling unit, the fact still remains that the secondary dwelling can be locked off and separately occupied. If
     this occurs the secondary dwelling will require a separate carpark which will not be available if the present DA
     is approved.



     I submit that the secondary dwelling should either be removed in its entirety or, at very least, the associated
     kitchen and living area should not be approved.




Document Set ID: 20306845
                                                                                                             Page 7 of 9
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/04/2017