MCU15/0095 & REC15/0022 PM Submission Object - N Asher

                                        The Precautionary    Principle demands that, particularly       in relation to
                                        young children, we address possible risks where scientific
                                        understanding    is yet incomplete     in a way that is not harmful. In the
                                        absence of scientific consensus that the Development            is not harmful,
                                        the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on the Developer and the
                                        Property Owner. The Applicant provides no such evidence or assurance
                                        and in all the circumstances      the Development    must be rejected.


Conclusion
The Noosa Biosphere Reserve is sought after and special because of its natural beauty, range of plants
and animals,     the committed         groups   who look after     it - and the community        that    strives towards
becoming a healthy community           in a healthy environment     that can be enjoyed for generations.


As parents we have chosen this environment              in which to raise and school our children because of the
specific nature and life-style the Noosa Biosphere has to offer. It ill behoves a Developer, from outside
of our community,     with very different       values, to pillage our prized neighbourhood      and strip our children
of the clean, green, safe privilege we have sought out for them.


A petrol station does not belong adjacent to our school.


Indeed our children     have raised concerns for the frogmouth             owls, possums, grey egrets, whistling      tree
frogs, rosella, plovers, green tree snakes, ducks and lizards that frequent             the Good Shepherd Lutheran
College's grounds, should there be an increase in traffic and a hazardous increase in air pollution                       and
poisonous fumes.


For all these reasons the proposed development            application    is NOT Compatible with other uses and
works. It:


    a.   DOES NOT Maintain          the safety of people, specifically children and works;


    b.   DOES NOT Avoid significant adverse impacts on the amenity enjoyed by users of other premises,
         specifically children, including acoustic and health and well being qualities;


    c.   DOES NOT Avoid significant adverse effects on the natural environment,               including native habitat
         removal, fragmentation and attrition and


    d.   DOES NOT avoid significant adverse impacts on, and compromises,                the amenity enjoyed by the
         users of other premises in the adjoining Community              Services, Housing and Open-space
         Recreations Zones.


I/We urge you, the Assessment Manager, and/or the elected representatives                   to reject the Development
as it conflicts with the interests oJ the public and its obligation          to protect the health and safety of our
school children. From the assessment above, the following               contrary conclusions are able to be drawn:

    1.   The proposed use is an inappropriate           and unreasonable       form of development       within the area
         in wh ich it is located.




                                                                                                                           26