Response To Amended Plans

                                            be graphically verified to be of any
                                            meaning.

 Adverse noise impacts being caused    1. The acoustic report is flawed. It
 by the proposed development              must be redone based on correct
                                          design assumptions. Specifically, it
                                          is based on the wrong location of
                                          the service courtyard; the numbers
                                          used for calculation of pool area
                                          population are grossly inadequate;
                                          and there is no assessment of
                                          recorded or live music.
                                       2. The proposed service court and
                                          waste collection is not as
                                          described. The drawings clearly
                                          locate the service court adjacent
                                          the proposed hotel directly
                                          opposite the residential areas of
                                          Parkridge.

 The use of the land for a hotel
 development meant for the Parkridge   1. Notwithstanding any comment by
 site amounts to a “double dipping”,      the developer, the land set aside for
                                          tourist accommodation in the
                                          original Noosa Springs
                                          Development Plan was sold for the
                                          residential development of
                                          Parkridge. This was the choice of
                                          thew owner based on commercial
                                          reasons.
                                       2. The use of the Parkridge site for
                                          residential use to the exclusion of
                                          tourist accommodation was a
                                          choice of the owner.
                                       3. There is no demonstrable
                                          community benefit - no it amounts
                                          to a gross land grab for a parcel of
                                          land set aside for open space and
                                          recreation.
                                       4. The double dip is to increase the
                                          site development area by specious
                                          argument that somehow there is
                                          benefit to the community.

 A reduction in the number of tennis   1. The maintenance of the status quo
 courts being currently available         in terms of the number of tennis
                                          courts is hardly a compelling
                                          argument for ignoring the zoning
                                          overlay.



JC-NSH-amended plans– Issue A           5                                     22 June-22