Original source · versioned page text
NOOSA PLAN 2020 PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 2 - POST PUBLIC NOTIFICATION FOR FINAL STATE GOVERNMENT MINISTERIAL APPROVAL · Attachment 1 Table of submissions
Plans and drawings: the text below has words only, no drawings.
Original PDF page 89, section 1. The text section number identifies this passage in the reader.
Your Say ECM Submitter comments Response Recommendation
Reference reference
5807533 23114512 I support the proposed allowance for rural property owners with Voluntary Conservation Agreements to However, because it has potential to affect how neighbouring property owners can use their land, letters
choose to have their land rezoned to Environmental Management Conservation in a split zone were sent to adjoining owners to advise them of the proposal. ▪ revise specific building
arrangement to ensure ongoing environmental protection. However, I would like to request that the The Rural Zone Code specifies increased setbacks to property in the Environmental Management and setbacks for the
western boundary of the environmental management and conservation rezoning over part of my Conservation Zone as follows: boundary of adjoining
property at 423 Old Ceylon Road Ridgewood (2RP40869) requested by me as part of the current round It is suggested that this increased setback should only apply if the adjoining EMC land is in public ownership properties in the
of Noosa Plan amendments be moved 100 metres east of the current line. by state or local government. Environmental
Management and
23109532 I see no point in owning land and not doing anything with it, farmers are disappearing this is why I’m The requested boundary realignment of the EMC zone is noted and will be accommodated. Conservation zone
looking to use the knowledge I have gained over the years to start a small scale diversified farm gate where such land is
type business selling fresh reasonably priced produce and as a way to add more value creating in State or Local
networks and teaching others how to grow their own food, which given to the rising cost of living is more Government ownership.
relevant in these times than ever. I’m also looking at environmentally friendly options to herbicides and ▪ revise the
slashing by exploring the possibility of creating a business I’ve seen online where they are using goats Environmental
to clear the land of invasive weeds. Management and
It was the wish of the neighbouring land owners to put a voluntary conservation agreement on their land Conservation zone on
and receive funding to manage it. Now they are seeking to add further protection to their land to split Lot 2 RP40869.
the zoning of the land to an Environmental Management and Conservation zone, their choice.
The restrictions that this would put on our land not our choice your letter outlines the changes to
boundary setbacks of adjoining land for certain types of buildings within 100 metres all the items
mentioned are what you would expect to be able to do on a farm (Rural property) basically what is being
proposed takes away the normal use of approximately 12 acres, a third of our land. Not within 100
metres are there to be buildings that house animals and areas of animal waste, guess where our cattle
have always preferred to camp and produce large amounts of organic fertiliser, up on the ridge under
the trees where the grass is lush within metres of the boundary to said property, who is going to tell the
cows?
As farmers living and working on the land, we seek to keep our rights to our land and not be forced to
give up our way of life. These changes would be devastating and have great impact on our future on
the land and its value to us and others that may follow. It’s our opinion that the current setback should
remain as they are, for all rural properties and the proposed setback of 100 metres is ludicrous and
unjustified. Please support Farmers to stay on the land and not be replaced by the privileged few .
23118326 On 28th April 2020 when I nominated part of my property to be rezoned to Environmental Management
and Conservation Zone, I was not made aware by Noosa Council the process would affect my
neighbours' land usage. I believed the re-zoning of my property would affect only my property and not
the property of my neighbours.
I note several clauses in the Noosa Plan 2020, under the headings Built Form, and Acceptable
Outcomes, do place limits on the usage of land on my neighbours’ properties to within 100 metres of
my boundary. I consider this limitation on the rights of my neighbours to be unjustified.
I do not wish the rezoning process of my property to continue while these clauses apply, or until they
are amended or replaced so that the rights of my neighbours as outlined are not compromised in any
way
5808204 23108863 The proposed planning scheme amendments to rezone 60 Stanfield Lane (of which I share a boundary
and of 396 meters) to an Environmental & Conservation zone includes many restrictions to adjoining or
5808206 adjacent properties relating to both building structures (sheds & holding yards) and agricultural purposes
and at a distance of 100 meters from the boundary of the proposed planning amendment lot.
5808207 These restrictions render what is presently zoned on my property as ""agricultural land"" effectively
useless as the 100-meter depth will encompass the entire agricultural area and in fact almost my entire
property (see below “proposed affected reach” images via Noosa councils interactive mapping).
396 lineal meters x 100 meters = 39,600 m 2 of affected land on my property of a total 46,000.00m 2
leaving 6,400m2 of unaffected land (just under 86% of our property effected by the proposed
restrictions).
These proposed restrictions if enacted will severely hinder the practical use of my land for agricultural
purposes in an area classed as such in a Rural zone which in turn will severely lower the value of my
land, the proposed neighbouring lot and all relevant neighbouring lots as detailed below.
These proposed restrictions will also prohibit future plans for my children to own a horse, chickens etc
and will delay or prevent future plans to host eco accommodation on our property of which is known to
the Noosa council by way of email enquiries to this affect.
These proposed restrictions will also prohibit the effective care of our well-established decades old
citrus/ lychee/ longan/ pomegranate/ jack fruit/ mandarin/ jaboticaba/ Mango & Davidson Plum orchards
which we are in the processes of re trenching and re-laying our irrigation system.
I believe this may also hinder future plans to renovate our home for our growing family (my youngest
son is 9 weeks old).
Whilst I am all for the conservation and the preservation of natural flora and fauna, I believe these
proposed restrictions are not in alignment with the general use of land in Black Mountain nor with the
ethos of the majority of its residents who believe in self-sustaining natural living.
87
Table of Submissions made regarding Noosa Plan 2020 Proposed Amendment No. 2, 2024
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.