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

To:                                                                                    Date: 2 December 2016
Chief Executive Officer
Mr Brett De Chaste I
Noosa Shire Council
9 Pelican St Tewantin
                                                        D.                         . ,... unter
Q4565
and;
Development      Assessment Manager                                     Z DEC 2016
Mr G Conforti


From:
                                                                    Tewantin

Mr Aaron White and Ms Kim Luff
77 Bunneys Lane
Kin Kin
QLD 4571

RE: - Application no: MCU 16/0090 - Sunshine Butterflies                                                    6
Request for Development Permit - Material Change of Use to establish Wellbeing                   Type 2 -
Social (Respite
Centre) 468 McKinnon Drive. Described as Lot 2 on RP214534 • Coorolbah

Dear Mr Glen Conforti,

We writing in regards to the above application      for a Material Change of Use on a property situated In
the Rural Settlement Zone.

We are requesting Noosa Council reject the Sunshine Butterflies application           for the following
reasons:


      1.   The proposed development:

           (a) is an inconsistent use in a rural settlement area;
           (b) conflicts with the Noosa Planning scheme; and
           (c) fails to justify an overriding need for the approval in the public interest that outweighs
               the constraints of the site.

      2.   The scale and intensity of uses described in the application exceed what is appropriate for a
           property of only 2.02 Hectares. We note the applicant intends to operate a Respite Centre
           (including accommodation), kitchen facility, a future cafe, library, gift shop, a commercial
           landscaping enterprise, first aid training, care programs and various support groups, "Work
           for the dole" employment    training programs, open to the public visitor hobby farm and
           major events facility;

      3.   The extensive range of proposed activities raises questions over the projected staff and
           visitor numbers. Given this facility is proposed to be open to the public it is highly likely at
           peak times the visitor vehicles will exceed the proposed parking facilities;


      4.   We question the applicant's projected traffic and parking volumes, visitor numbers and
           frequency of forecast events based on our observation of the numerous fundraising and
           promotional   events and activities already undertaken on the site.



                                                                                                     Page 1 of 3


                                                             ~cx~IH~\I'~''''''''     R:          .