A.White Kabi Submission

         As outlined above, the CYC proposal exceeds a scale and density that could be considered
         ‘compatible with the intent of the zone and the preferred character of the local area in
         which it is located’.

         Considering the property sits in a quiet rural hamlet, it is clear the range of activities and
         commercial tourism accommodation products being proposed by CYC would adversely
         impact local amenity with its increased traffic, noise etc.

     45. Were the CYC proposal assessed under ‘nature-based tourism’ guidelines I contend the
         CYC application would conflict with the Noosa Plan 2020:

         9.3.5.3 The criteria for assessment of Nature-based tourism is to be “subordinate to rather
         than dominating the natural features of the site with a site layout and design that blends
         into the landscape”

         I contend the scale and layout of the CYC proposal dominates the natural features of the
         site with its large buildings which fail to blend into the landscape.

         I note the CYC proposal is of an entirely different scale and character to the original golf
         course development where a Queenslander was renovated as the clubhouse/restaurant,
         which was in keeping with the character of the surrounding area.

     46. I note the Noosa Plan 2020 Acceptable Outcome for Nature Based Tourism 20.5 which
         states: Buildings take the form of small, separate buildings:

            (1) the gross floor area of any one building, such as a lodge, does not exceed 250m²;
            (2) the average area of all buildings does not exceed 90m².

         I contend the proposed site of what appears a conventional tourism activity of significant
         scale, would be more suited to a genuine Nature-based tourism facility that complies with
         ‘Acceptable Outcomes’ of the Noosa Plan 2020.

Lot 650 on M37380

     47. I have concerns with the application’s inclusion of Lot 650 on M37380, which increases
         the potential development area by 40 Hectares, over and above the previous approval
         site.

     48. It is unclear from the application what is planned for this large parcel of adjoining land,
         however it’s notable that by increasing the overall site area of a proposal, an applicant can
         increase the maximum Gross Floor Area (GFA) and visitor numbers allowable.

     49. In any case, inclusion of Lot 650 on M37380 (40 ha) constitutes a significant and seemingly
         unnecessary expansion of the original approval area, which I contend opens the door for
         future applications to exploit this very developable parcel of land.

     50. I note CYC’s Pivotal Perspective Planning Report asserts the historical use of Lot 650 for
         cattle farming somehow supports their claim of an ongoing Permaculture “Use” on the
         golf course/orchard.

                                                                                            Page 9 of 10