Skip to the record
The gold standard in government transparency.

Council archive · source document

PM Submission Object - Sallie Strang - MCU18/0084

of 11

Text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Check the original when the exact wording matters.

The boundary fence separating my farm from the proposed motel site has been constructed/adapted so as to
suit my keeping of horses. It is not a security fence. There may be a number of reasons why visitors to the
proposed motel villas may decide to enter my property. Under law | am forced to accept a certain level of
liability even if these people trespass and therefore are not invited onto my property or even crawl through
the boundary fence to gain access to my property. The proposed motel villas will increase the potential for
this to occur and therefore increase my exposure to such liability.

a7) Amended Proposal without amending relevant supporting documents

The applicants’ response to the council request for further information, altered their proposal considerable
from what was originally proposed. Their altered proposal has increased the floor area by 50%. However,
amended supporting documents such as site and soil assessment and the site plan have not been updated.

18. Council’s approval of the development application will be in conflict with the preferred outcome
and strategies for the Rural Zone in the Noosa planning Scheme

The proposal will potentially result in a non-rural use that is being proposed because it is in a rural setting,
actually adversely impacting on a lawful rural use of adjoining rural lot. It is considered that the development
application is not consistent with the relevant outcomes and objectives in the Noosa planning scheme when
proposing such a development in a rural zone.

It is ironic that a non-rural development that is being proposed on rural land immediately over my boundary
fence so that visitors can experience the rural lifestyle and rural setting, will potentially complicate the
continued operations of my lawful rural uses. This is even more ironic when it is my rural uses that are
providing more of an authentic rural setting that that on the development property and in so doing are
helping to create the rural setting being used to justify the approval of the non-rural use on rural land in the
first place.

It is unfortunate that a development application has undergone public notification when it failed to provide
information that is considered critical for the public to fully appreciate and properly assess that application
without having to make assumptions on important design and operational elements of that development
proposal.

Noosa Council is urged to consider my concerns and the likely impacts of Council’s approval of the
development application will have on my lawful rural use of my adjoining rural land when assessing this
application.

| request that Noosa Council does not support the development application due to grounds which include
those listed above.

Please note that | would be happy to meet Council representatives on site to discuss my concerns and
illustrate the impacts of the proposed development on my current rural activities on the adjoining land.

Yours faithfully,

Malbt for

Sallie Strang

11|[Page Council Reference: MCU18/0084

Used in these records

About this file

File size
2.9 MB (large file)
File type
PDF

No other editions are linked here.

Original file

Log in to download the original file

PM Submission Object - Sallie Strang - MCU18_0084.pdf · 2.9 MB (large file)

The download may take up to a minute.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.