MCU15/0095 & REC15/0022 PM Submission Object - Petition

 would seem evident that the School and the Church had intended the area to be protected             for the
 benefit and protection of the children at the School. This arrangement would appear consistent with the
 Church's publicised    desire, and Council's demonstrated     willingness   to cooperate,   at the time of
 purchase to prevent the construction       of a proposed service station on the lot. This agreement          is
 suggestive the parties intent to creating a negative equitable servitude or negative easement over the
 property.


 The planning scheme exists, among other things, to provide some certainty to the community in relation
 to the types of development     that can be approved for a specific property. Deviating from the planning
 scheme and in particular deviating from this very inconsistency has already caused significant problems
for Noosa Council. As has been extensively reported the Council is currently attempting      to deal with lax
adherence to the planning scheme related to retail intrusion into the industry zone.


Noosa Council's Infrastructure      and Planning Director   Martin   Drydale said in May 201S that        "It's
important that we protect this area for industrial functions.        Residences, community organisations,
 commercial and retail business, and most sport and recreational land-use activities, shauld not aperate
fram industrial premises," He furthermore added that: '7he reason for having a town plan is so that we
can ensure that various land-use types are appropriately located to best serve the community. Calling for
community      and industry support he said: "Property owners and real estate agents ploy on important
role in helping to uphold the town plan's integrity" ... adding: "Just as the community would likely object
to a factory opening up in a retail precinct such as Noasa Junction, retail shops and professional offices
are nat appropriate in industry zaned areas."


It is incumbent upon the Assessment Manager and the Council at large in this situation to uphold the
plan's integrity   and to do anything other than rejecting this Application     is making no reflective    of
Council's attempts    to hold the industry and community    to account in relation to the maintenance of
appropriate zoning in the region.


Any decision of the Assessment Manager must not conflict with the planning scheme, unless there are
sufficient   grounds to justify the decision despite the conflict.   Conflict means to be "at variance or
disagree with" and must be plainly identified. The proposed Development is clearly in conflict with the
planning scheme, a fact that is well demonstrated       throughout   this document. The conflict with the
planning instruments is not insignificant. Any sufficient grounds to justify approval under SPA s 326(1)(b),
must be of public interest, excluding the personal circumstances of the Applicant, owner or interested
party. The Applicant has shown no public interest grounds, nor do any exist, sufficient to justify approval
in the event of the conflict.


The Application must therefore be rejected as is required under the planning instruments as to allow it
by exception is not only contrary to SPA but a denial of the rights of the School's parents not to have
their children exposed to negative impacts of this inconsistent development.




                                                                                                          11