MCKENZIE Council Ref 132007_2446_05 (1) · 132007.2446.05

Page 2

In addition, we would like to question the proximity of the building to the property boundaries, as
the setback is very close to the fence. At the current moment, we are overseas until the 16th so
I am not home to measure the setback, but we will need to monitor this closely and would like to
open a discussion regarding the setback of the proposed addition.




‘Low density residential’ is inconsistently applied in the neighborhood and impacting the
value of the neighborhood

The following is from the Noosa council fact sheet on Low Density Residential Zones -
full document here

Protecting Housing for Permanent Residents The purpose of the Low Density Residential zone is to provide
housing for permanent residents, generally in a low rise and low density format, with little impact from visitors. This
purpose will be reinforced with proposed amendments to the the Overall Outcomes of the zone to: • Clearly specify
the use of dwellings for shortterm accommodation is limited to four times and 60 days per calendar year and only
within a resident’s principal place of residence; and • require visitor accommodation be compatible with the
permanent residential character and use of the area to not cause loss of residential amenity. For instance,
short-term accommodation is not to unreasonably impact the residential amenity enjoyed by adjoining or
surrounding properties (for example by noise, light spill, vehicle parking and movements or waste disposal). The
proposed amendments clarify that short-term accommodation and home-based business (bed and breakfast) are
not permitted to operate in a secondary dwelling….

Page 3

Flashpackers is built in a ‘low density residential’ area zone. WIth 80 proposed beds plus a
managers unit, this is hardly in line with the intention for this to be a quiet, residential area
where families feel comfortable. The above excerpt says ‘short-term accommodation is not to
unreasonably impact the residential amenity enjoyed by adjoining or surrounding properties (for example by noise,
light spill, vehicle parking and movements or waste disposal). The proposed building absolutely goes
against the intention of the plan as it will impact all residential amenity including noise, light spill
and vehicle parking.

The above excerpt also mentions that short-term accommodation is not permitted to operate in
a secondary dwelling. The proposed build goes against this, as the location of the 11 new beds
is a second story on a building that does not currently have beds. The building is the admin
building, so the proposal is actually requesting to repurpose this building as a secondary
dwelling, which we believe goes against the requirements stated in Noosa Plan 2020.

At 27 Nebula street, we recently (Nov. ‘24) applied for year-round short-term stay letting so that
we can make our primary residence in a quieter neighborhood with more privacy for our
children, but our application was denied by council, allowing us only to let for up to 60 days/ 4x
per year. We are also considering selling our house due to congestion and noise in the
neighborhood, caused largely by the existing Flashpackers. However, two potential buyers have
pulled out of negotiations due to the following:

Potential buyer 1: Saw the proposed building assessment discussed here online and withdrew
her contract.

Potential buyer 2: Withdrew contract after finding that our property shared the back fence with
the Flashpackers.

The dramatic increase in beds - potentially bunk beds, allowing 22 additional guests would
significantly impact the noise, parking, and feel of the neighborhood. The existing dwelling
already causes significant disturbances and we are anticipating the issues to escalate. The
property value in the area is at significant risk due to the congestion and is impacting the resale
value of homes. This will further deteriorate with the proposed build.

Increased demand on street parking and inadequate parking spaces

From our plan review, there does not appear to be adequate additional parking created. The
demand on street parking in the neighborhood is already very high. In addition, at peak times

Page 4

during the day, many parents utilize Nebula street and Pacific Avenue for additional school
parking for Sunshine Beach School. The area cannot sustain the additional demands on the
available street parking. Nebula street is already very congested with many cars parking
halfway on lawns etc as the street is not wide enough to accommodate street parking and two
way traffic. Additional parking on the street will further deteriorate the perceived value of this
area.



Conclusions
      Given the significant concerns about the obstruction of our view from 27 Nebula street,
significant privacy concerns, noise concerns, property value concerns and parking concerns raised
by application for new development, we strongly oppose the addition of a second story and
additional beds in the proposed plans. We feel the development will significantly negatively impact
not only our home, but the quality of residential life in all of the surrounding homes as well.
Disruptive noise, parking congestion and obstruction of views will significantly diminish the resident
experience in the area.




     Elizabeth McKenzie (Elizabeth Walsh on house title)
     9/12/24


     Luke McKenzie
     9/12/24