PM Submission Object - A White and K Luff MCU16/0090

Page 2

5.   Given the applicants failure to realistically predict the number of clients, staff and day
     visitors to the site, we consider the traffic report and design for an entrance to the property
     from a State controlled road is unreliable. It is probable during busier times of normal
     operation and on occasions when events are held, significant numbers of vehicles may be
     attempting    to enter the property simultaneously.   This provides a safety risk from a
     100km/per     hour road near a bend;

6.   The proposal describes an intention to provide activities including music. It is unclear from
     the applicant whether this is to include live music for foreshadowed events. We note there
     have been no acoustic reports provided or information on whether buildings to conduct
     musical activities have been designed to minimise impact on neighbouring properties.


     Given the development is proposed on a relatively small acreage, approval of such an
     undefined request for live music on site is likely to result in planning conflicts. Historically
     commercial live music facilities in rural areas create planning conflicts and should require
     acoustic designs to minimise impacts on neighbouring residents;

7.   We reject the applicant's contention    the "proposed development      is for a respite centre for
     disabled persons in a rural/rural   settlement   setting in close proximity to the Noosa town
            ll
     centres   •




     The site is several kilometres from the nearest urban area and as such, neighbours of the
     property could have expected to be living in a peaceful rural setting with significantly less
     traffic and noise than is being proposed by the developer.

8.   Considering the scale of the proposed activities and the limited sewerage facility and access
     to water, it is likely the operation will require frequent delivery of water and portable toilets,
     particularly during events. This will increase traffic to the site and considering the limited
     parking and turnaround facility, may cause site access problems for delivery trucks;


9.   It appears from the proposal the applicant intends to develop the site in the future to
     include such facilities as a cate. It is unclear from the proposal whether this would be open
     to the public as well as clients. Such a use is well beyond the scope of a "Wellbeing      type 2
     Application" and should require a separate development permit.


10. It must be noted, the applicant has already commenced many commercial activities of
    Sunshine Butterflies on the site without a development permit. We note in the last few
    months several commercial fundraising events have been held on the property which should
     have required permission. These events and activities created obvious parking difficulties
     with dozens of attendees being forced to park on the road reserve. It is particularly
     concerning that:
     (a) The applicant has proceeded with much of their proposal without        approval;
     (b) Commercial events have been held to raise funds without a permit;
     (c) A number of Noosa Councillors' attended the events and supported these questionable
         activities.
     (d) These events have created road safety hazards on a state controlled       road.


     The applicant's conduct in operating outside a lawful approval raises questions over the
     credibility of information provided in support of this application, particularly in regards to
     projected visitor numbers and frequency of proposed events.




                                                                                             Page 2 of3

Page 3

        It is of concern the applicant has proceeded with an inconsistent       use of the site and now
        seeks retrospective    approval.    Council endorsement    of such breaches of process creates a
        dangerous planning precedent.

        It is also seriously concerning the number of Noosa Councillors who have supported the
        applicant publicly and appear to be prejudiced in favour of the applicant. These issues have
        been raised in correspondence        from Aaron White to Noosa Council dated 11 November 2016
        and 29 November 2016.

    11. We note the applicant failed to comply with Public Notification        obligations as set out in the
        Sustainable Planning Act 2009. The applicant only erected signage on their property
        indicating the application for a Material Change of Use on 24 or 25 November. This was
        approximately one week prior to close of submissions. This provided limited opportunity               for
        the community    and neighbouring        residents to provide a properly made submission.

        This matter was also raised in 29 November 2016 correspondence            to Noosa Council and is
        the subject of a complaint.


CONCLUSION

    •   The proposed development           is inconsistent with the desired environmental      outcomes and
        fails to comply with the Planning Scheme Codes;


    •   With the physical and planning constraints of the site, it is unlikely the proposal can be
        conditioned to mitigate the Impacts of an inconsistent use in a Rural5ettlement     Zone;


    •   Considering there are more appropriate sites for such a development within the shire
        without such constraints, it Is not considered an over-riding need exists for the development
        in the public interest; and


    •   The social, economic and environmental          benefits in developing the site for this community
        use do not justify approving the proposed development.


    •   Therefore the Application     MCU 16/0090 must be recommended           for refusal.



Should you have any questions regarding this submission, please do not hesitate to contact Mr
Aaron White or Ms Kim Luff via telephone on (07) 854 096 or via email at [email protected] Sincerely,




Aaron White         Kim Luff                   Date: 2 December 2016




                                                                                                     Page 3 of3