PM Submission - Oliver Noonan - MCU25/0118

                        • Unproven Surplus Land: It has never been explained publicly how this Council-
                          owned land was identified as "surplus" to the needs of the adjoining cemetery.

                        • Ageing Population: Noosa’s changing demographics include an ageing population,
                          many of whom prefer burial over cremation. If Lots 1, 2, and 3 are filled with housing,
                          where will Council provide land for future burials, especially given other shire cemeteries
                          are close to capacity?

                        • Loss of Amenity: Remediation work has already caused a loss of the sense of enclosure
                          and intimacy of the cemetery for burials. Locating a public housing block immediately
                          adjacent to the cemetery boundary will further degrade this crucial quality of the
                          cemetery.

                 5. Inadequate Stormwater Handling and Flooding Risk

                 The proposed stormwater handling capacity is inadequate and poses a high risk of flooding:

                        • Insufficient Detention: The current On-Site Detention (OSD) design allows for less than
                          20 minutes of rain capture, which is insufficient for severe weather events. My dad Paul
                          Noonan has done the calculations in his submission.

                        • Failure of Existing Infrastructure: Recent rain events (30 Oct and 15 Nov) were not
                          major in duration or total rainfall but were short, heavy downpours. Lake Macdonald
                          Drive (LMD) became impassable during the brief 30 October and 15 November
                          downpours, contradicting Council's previous assertions the road wouldn't get blocked.

                        • Loss of Retardation: The removal of the 2200 pine trees on the hill has eliminated the
                          natural retardation of stormwater flow, increasing the risk of local flooding.

                 6. Car Parking, Traffic, and Safety Deficiencies

                 The traffic and parking assessment seems oversimplified, creating safety concerns:

                        • Inadequate Car Parking: The DA proposes only 31 car parks. This is based on only one
                          visitor spot per four units. With 15 x 1-bedroom and 10 x 2-bedroom units, the potential
                          resident vehicle need alone could be 35 cars (15×1+10×2), before accounting for visitors
                          or tradesmen. This deficit will lead to vehicles spilling onto Dianella Court, creating
                          safety issues.

                        • Poor Sight Lines: Cars exiting the new development intersection onto Dianella Court
                          will likely have poor sight lines looking south (the direction existing residents travel).
                          Vehicles must see past No. 2 Dianella Court and any parked cars before gaining a clear
                          view of oncoming traffic.

                        • Unwanted Through Traffic: The road reserve on the C2B southern boundary appears to
                          be intended to bring cemetery traffic into Dianella Court. This contradicts assurances




Document Set ID: 24329283
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/11/2025