Objection MCU18

Local Residents’ Attitudes to and Experiences of STA in the Hill St and Surrounding Locales.

As I have previously asserted, the number of complaints received by Council does not
adequately reflect community feeling. Likewise the number of MCU-STA objections does not
adequately reflect the level of opposition to this application in particular (noting the effect
of Mayor Stewart’s comments) and to any further increase in STA in this area in general.
Many residents, for various reasons, are reluctant to engage with formal processes and do
not lodge formal objections. Failure to actively oppose does not equal support. I am
confident Council: Councillor Lorentson and Mayor Stewart in particular; are fully aware of
the views of the residents in this area. Opposition to further STA approvals reached tipping
point with the approval of 1/27 Hill St. That approval, against trenchant opposition from
residents and local accommodation providers, galvanised residents in this locale into action.
They commenced to meet and organise. Council has received numerous representations
from residents in this area and has engaged in meetings and negotiations with residents’
representatives. Council can be under no illusion regarding the intensity of opposition to
further STA approvals in this Hill St locale.

‘Noosa Shire has been shaped ... by the actions of passionate and creative residents...’ Noosa
Plan 3.2.3.

Those passionate residents are seeking to impress upon a so far unresponsive Council that,
to quote Councillor Stockwell, ‘enough is enough!’

Council has a responsibility in this matter to represent the interests of it’s constituents in
this area and vote resoundingly to reject this application. The application lacks technical
merit; does not conform to the Noosa Plan and the Plan’s performance outcomes. It should
be refused.

I and my fellow residents did not seek this (STA saturation). We did not choose this. It came
to us. It came to us via inadequate Council management. And no amount of personal effort
or expenditure by residents will adequately mitigate the damage done to our amenity and
to the fabric of our community. No landscaping; no screening; no architectural modification;
no bunker; no double glazing; no blackout curtains, no noise cancelling headphones; no
earplugs; no living with all doors and windows closed - nothing - will sufficiently mitigate or
adequately ameliorate my residential amenity; that of my neighbours; or the overall
damage being done to the fabric of this community by STA saturation. This Council needs to
act, swiftly, promptly, immediately, to protect the amenity of its residents - its constituents,
and refuse this application.

I oppose this application. My partner, Roger Prowse opposes this application. Residents in
the area oppose this application. Residents’ groups oppose this application. Local
accommodation businesses oppose this application. Key workers and hospitality workers in
the businesses of Sunshine Beach village oppose this application. It is reasonable to assert
the homeless workers and working families of Noosa oppose this application. I presume (by
Ms Coyle’s comments) that Planning staff too, will recommend to refuse this application.
Accordingly, properly, Council must vote to refuse this application. It is the only right and
proper thing to do.

                                                  13