MCU15/0095 & REC15/0022 PM Submission Object- Linda Suter

                                       The Precautionary    Principle demands that, particularly      in relation to
                                       young children, we address possible risks where scientific
                                       understanding    is yet incomplete    in a way that is not harmful. In the
                                       absence of scientific consensus that the Development           is not harmful,
                                       the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on the Developer and the
                                       Property Owner. The Applicant provides no such evidence or assurance
                                       and in all the circumstances     the Development    must be rejected.


Conclusion
The Noosa Biosphere Reserve is sought after and special because of its natural beauty, range of plants
and animals,    the committed        groups   who   look after    it - and the community       that    strives towards
becoming a healthy community          in a healthy environment     that can be enjoyed for generations.


As parents we have chosen this environment             in which to raise and school our children        because of the
specific nature and life-style the Noosa Biosphere has to offer. It ill behoves a Developer, from outside
of our community,     with very different     values, to pillage our prized neighbourhood      and strip our children
of the clean, green, safe privilege we have sought out for them.


A petrol station does not belong adjacent to our school.


Indeed our children    have raised concerns for the frogmouth           owls, possums, grey egrets, whistling       tree
frogs, rosella, plovers, green tree snakes, ducks and lizards that frequent           the Good Shepherd Lutheran
College's grounds, should there be an increase in traffic and a hazardous increase in air pollution                     and
poisonous fumes.


For all these reasons the proposed development           application   is NOT Compatible with other uses and
works. It:

    a.   DOES NOT Maintain         the safety of people, specifically children and works;


    b.   DOES NOT Avoid significant adverse impacts on the amenity enjoyed by users of other premises,
         specifically children, including acoustic and health and well being qualities;


    c.   DOES NOT Avoid significant adverse effects on the natural environment,             including native habitat
         removal, fragmentation and attrition and


    d.   DOES NOT avoid significant adverse impacts on, and compromises,              the amenity enjoyed by the
         users of other premises in the adjoining Community            Services, Housing and Open-space
         Recreations Zones.


I/We urge you, the Assessment Manager, and/or the elected representatives                 to reject the Development
as it conflicts with the interests of the public and its obligation         to protect the health and safety of our
school children. From the assessment above, the following contrary conclusions are able to be drawn:

    1.   The proposed use is an inappropriate          and unreasonable      form of development       within the area
         in which it is located.




                                                                                                                         26