PM Submission - Paul Noonan - MCU25/0118

                     4) Cemetery Impacts
                     It has never been explained how this Council-owned land has been identified as surplus to the
                     needs of the adjoining cemetery. Noosa’s ‘changing demographics’ includes an ageing
                     population - not all of whom want to be cremated. Where will Council provide land to bury
                     them if Lots 1, 2, and 3 are filled with housing? (and other shire cemeteries are close to
                     capacity).

                     I suggest now the site is being remediated, council should use some of it’s publicly declared
                     financial surplus to create cemetery land on Lot 2 or 3 by paying back any grant funds for
                     infrastructure that were conditioned to housing. This would be consistent with the visionary
                     goal of the Council who in 1999 bought 62 Lake Macdonald Drive for cemetery purposes
                     and floated the 2008 Cooroy cemetery expansion DA. To my knowledge there is no
                     published public evidence that the 0.8Ha of effective cemetery land allowed for by Council
                     in the 62/62 LMD subdivison is adequate for the needs of the shire long term.

                     5) Stormwater handling capacity grossly inadequate- see calcs below
                     Stormwater control on that hill beside the cemetery is a massive issue that needs to be
                     addressed comprehensively now even though the future use of Lots 2 and 3 is said to be not
                     locked in. Squeezing this Lot 1 C2B development and whatever is proposed for Lots 2 and 3
                     into this hilly pocket of Cooroy needs to be considered in entirety, not piecemeal (one DA at
                     a time).

                     A) The planning report states “It is understood that the Proposed Lot 1 will be flood-free,
                     with only the adjoining bio-basin over approved Lot 900 being subject to Council’s Flood
                     Hazard Overlay.” The problem is that the Dianella Ct, LMD, Wilgee Ct intersection is
                     basically at the same elevation as the bio-basin and at risk of flood impassibility in storms.

                     B) Site runoff risks are very high.

                     (i) Re ‘3.9.1 Earthworks’ - substantial performance improvements are necessary for Erosion
                     and Sediment Control (ESC) on 64 LMD as indicated by two recent failures of stormwater
                     controls on site. This must be taken into account in designing C2B earthworks should this or
                     a later version of the DA be approved.

                     (ii) Re ‘3.10.2 Stormwater Quantity’ - the on site stormwater detention capacity needs serious
                     review.

                     In less than 1 hour on Sat 15 Nov, 2025 the site received 64mm (0.064m) of rain. The DA
                     proposes an On-site Stormwater Detention (OSD) tank with a capacity of 30kL. On 15 Nov
                     the 3161m2 of DA land received 3161 x 0.064= 202m3 (202kL) of rain in less than one hour.
                     So the OSD tank would overfill in 202/30 = about 1/7th of an hour (9 minutes). The previous
                     major uncontrolled polluted stormwater breach event at 64 LMD occurred 2 weeks earlier on



                                                                     6
Document Set ID: 24329288
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/11/2025