PM Submission Object - Darren Tindale - MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041

                         important that they do not exceed the height allowed under the Noosa Plan
                         especially along Rufous Lane.
                         9. Sprout Architects Site Sections shows a 12m height above natural ground
                         level especially for Lot 12 which would appear to be grossly excessive.

                         10. Pathway through the development
                         It is proposed to provide a public pathway linking Rufous Lane with the IGA
                         and the Motel and through the Supermarket site to both Sandpiper Lane and
                         David Low Way (via the lift). This pathway is desirable if the DA is approved.

                         11. Sprout Architects Ground Floor Hotel – MPR? Meal Preparation Room?
                         I do not understand why the change from “Motel” to “Hotel” or whether or not
                         this has any significance.

                         12. Sprout Architects Reed House Section Analysis
                         I consider that the amount of solar access and ventilation is limited and
                         inappropriate according to this analysis. The number of hours of solar access
                         that these windows and open spaces will receive is not clear. The apparent
                         inadequacy is caused by the developer’s attempt to maximize the density and
                         ground coverage of the site.

                         13. The Reed Beach Houses - secondary dwelling units
                         While I realize that the developer has provided a physical linkage from each
                         secondary dwelling to the main dwelling unit, the fact still remains that the
                         secondary dwelling can be locked off and separately occupied. If this occurs the
                         secondary dwelling will require a separate carpark which will not be available
                         if the present DA is approved.

                         I submit that the secondary dwelling should either be removed in its entirety
                         or, at very least, the associated kitchen and living area should not be approved.

                         The current DA proposes that these Reed Beach Houses will be for permanent
                         residents and with 2 persons sharing each of four bedrooms that could result in
                         80 permanent residents in the Reed Beach House alone.

                         As stated in the Information Request at page 9 of 13
                              “The proposed land use is a substantial variation from that which has
                              previously been approved on the site or is supported under the Open Space
                              Recreation Zone. As the proposed style of development is more consistent
                              with that expected to be found within the nearby Semi-Attached Housing
                              Zone it is considered that the development should be compatible to both the
                              Specific Outcomes and Probable Solutions for the Eastern Beaches Locality
                              related to the Semi-Attached Housing Zone and the existing built form and
                              established character within Peregian Beach.
                         COMMENT: in the my opinion, the design for the Reed Beach Houses is upside
                         down. The bedrooms should be on the ground floor and the living areas on the



Document Set ID: 20308173
Version: 1, Version Date: 26/04/2017