PM Submission - Paul Noonan - MCU25/0118

                     Section 3.7 goes on to say that “These residents are likely to have low car ownership levels”,
                     contrary to face to face advice given by Andrew Elvin of C2B (in the presence of Council)
                     that tenants “mostly have cars”. Section 3.7 also says “Tenancy allocation will favour those
                     with high transportation needs given the proximity to Cooroy train station and bus services
                     along Tewantin Road. What to believe?

                     In fact, there:

                     A) is no bus stop on Lake Macdonald Drive (LMD) for scheduled bus services. (There is a
                     school bus).

                     B) there may not be scheduled bus services for some time.

                     C) the top Cooroy - Noosa Rd bus stop is serviced by an inadequate and definitely dry
                     weather only pathway through a rough bush track.

                     D) there is no pedestrian crossing across the busy Cooroy - Noosa Rd road by the top bus
                     stop.

                     E) pedestrian access to Cooroy town is poor: poor street lighting, only one formal pedestrian
                     crossing although multiple road crossings and a need to cross an inclined rail pedestrian
                     bridge (not ideal for older persons). Also cars speed on LMD (often ~80km/h) while
                     pedestrians have to cross LMD (to start the journey to access the town centre). Other
                     pedestrian access to town is only available uphill through the cemetery, or the
                     aforementioned rough bush track.

                     3) Proposed building bulk and density highly contrasts adjoining low
                     density residential and cemetery landscape and impacts existing
                     resident privacy.
                     [Referring mainly to 6.3.2 Community Facilities Zone]

                     A) Figure 5 suggests a semi underground carpark and other detail in the report indicates the
                     max 8m height is utilised by a part of the roofline. Given the site on the side of a hill this
                     means top floor residents can look into nearby Dianella Court home windows and backyards.
                     Such a development would need privacy screens installed to protect Dianella court resident
                     amenity.

                     B) QUESTION: Does the quantity of Lot 1 fill unexpectedly exported to offsite landfill affect
                     the final legal finished ground level and hence the height of C2B development above original
                     ground level?

                     C) QUESTION: Planning Report Section 2 - type a units are tiny at 64m2 and type d one-bed
                     are smaller at 57m2. Are such small dwellings code compliant?




                                                                   3
Document Set ID: 24329288
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/11/2025