PM Submission Object - Marian McCarter MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041

Page 2

PLEASE SEND IN SUBMISSIONS TO COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE FINAL DATE OF 26TH APRIL 2017


For the attention of:
Mr Patrick Murphy,
The Assessment Officer,
Noosa Shire Council
[email protected]

Dear Mr Murphy,

              Submission in opposition to the Development Application
                            MCU 16/0153 & REC16/0041

EFFECTIVE PLANNING POINTS THAT DEFEND THE INTREGRITY OF THE NOOSA PLAN

I strongly object to the inclusion of the housing estate in this proposal, but in
particular, the lack of visitor accommodation being provided as required by the Noosa
Plan.

The proposed development significantly conflicts with the Noosa Plan for the following
reasons:
   • The proposed development being located within the Open Space Recreation Zone
      does not contribute to the desired lifestyle of residents because it does not offer
      a variety of passive and active recreational experiences that are conducive to
      community interaction and wellbeing;

   •   The proposed development seeks to provide a small lot housing development
       and, in particular, Multiple Housing Type 4 – Conventional which is not a
       consistent use in the Open Space Recreation Zone;

   •   The proposed development seeks to provide Visitor Accommodation Type 4, but
       not in association with Visitor Accommodation Type 2, and therefore is not
       consistent with the Open Space Recreation Zone;

   •   The proposed application appears to reflect an incorrect site cover percentage
       where some structures have not been included in the calculation. An example of
       this is the stair and entry for the Reed Beach Houses (refer pages SD12 and
       SD23). This is a clear omission and indicates that either the developer is seeking
       to misrepresent the proposed site cover or they have been inaccurate in their
       calculations by error. In either case the Noosa Council has an absolute duty to
       reject the application until all inaccuracies have been identified and included in
       the Council’s deliberations on whether this DA should be accepted.

   •   The proposed development does not protect the Peregian Beach caravan park
       site for low cost visitor accommodation;

   •   Visitor Accommodation Type 4 is being proposed on the land, but is not
       integrated as part of a caravan park use or other form of budget
       accommodation;

   •   The proposed buildings and structures are not designed and sited to be
       attractive, comfortable and accessible to the public or provide suitable
       landscape treatments and amenities, conducive to community interaction and
       convenience and public safety;

Page 3

PLEASE SEND IN SUBMISSIONS TO COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE FINAL DATE OF 26TH APRIL 2017

   •   The proposed development is not consistent with the reasonable expectations of
       residents in the locality, given the Peregian Beach Caravan site is to primarily
       provide for budget visitor accommodation, which is in the public interest;

   •   The Proposed development does not in any way conform to the written advice,
       cited below, from the Council to the developer prior to the pre-lodgment
       meeting held on 14 December 2016 (between Council and the developer):

       The Open Space Recreation zone in Peregian Beach specifically seeks to protect
       and retain the site for low cost visitor accommodation needs reflective of the
       site’s previous use as a caravan park, but also acknowledges that a range of
       visitor accommodation may be provided where integrated with budget
       accommodation. There is no support given to permanent residents on the site.

       It is noted that the current approval included only visitor accommodation, with
       no permanent resident accommodation proposed. This approved development
       was supported by Council through an appeal process as it was acknowledged
       that it included low to mid cost visitor accommodation being a reasonable
       alternative to the Planning Scheme’s intent to retain the caravan park.

       It is considered the current proposal does not meet the Planning Scheme’s
       intent for the site as there is a lack of and a limited range of visitor
       accommodation proposed…….

   •   The Noosa Council has correctly performed, as reflected in the cited
       correspondence above, its role as custodian of what was formerly publicly
       (ratepayer) owned land by informing the developer that the DA proposal does
       not comply with the requirements requested by the Council in regard to
       provision of low cost, non-permanent accommodation. For Noosa Council to now
       allow the development application would be a failure of its duty to the Noosa
       ratepayers.

   •   There are no grounds provided that are sufficient to overcome the level of
       conflict identified with the Noosa Plan.

The proposed development application should be refused for the above reasons.

Marian McCarter

34 Currawong Crescent, Peregian Beach

Signature unless this is lodged via email