Skip to the record
NoosaWatch™: The source of truth.

Original source · versioned page text

council email

Attached to the e-mail Not properly made submission (late) Steve Jones MCU12/0184.

Attached to the e-mail Not properly made submission (late) Steve Jones (Email 1) MCU12/0184.

of 1

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

I am concerned about the traffic report that was completed for this proposal. Is the party responsible for the traffic report impartial? Did they even travel the road? Did they try turning right into King Parrot Lane? Did they know that vehicles hauling logs had previously been disallowed? How can a business paid to prepare an application for the proposal to council (the same business preparing the traffic report) be relied upon for the truth when signs declaring the application, were placed in positions not to be seen by the public. I cannot find one resident of Top Forestry Road (other than the applicant) who actually sighted the notification. Notifying themselves multiple times can hardly be considered informing the public. This kind of advice from a town planning company can only be seen as biased and so am asking Council to appoint an impartial company to do the traffic report.

Yours Faithfully
Steve Jones
Log in to download the original file

council email.docx · 13 KB (small file)

Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.

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”.