Council archive · source document
PM Submission Object ADDITIONAL - Christine Lee Martin - MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041
From: Christine Martin
Sent: 25 Apr 2017 16:45:33 +1000
To: Mailbox Council Mail
Subject: MCU 16/0153 & REC 16/0041
For the attention of:
Mr Patrick Murphy,
The Assessment Officer,
Noosa Shire Council
[email protected]
Dear Mr Murphy,
Submission in opposition to the Development Application
MCU 16/0153 & REC16/0041
EFFECTIVE PLANNING POINTS THAT DEFEND THE INTREGRITY OF THE NOOSA PLAN
I strongly object to the inclusion of the housing estate in this proposal, but in particular, the lack of visitor accommodation being
provided as required by the Noosa Plan.
The proposed development significantly conflicts with the Noosa Plan for the following reasons:
The proposed development being located within the Open Space Recreation Zone does not contribute to the desired
lifestyle of residents because it does not offer a variety of passive and active recreational experiences that are conducive
to community interaction and wellbeing;
The proposed development seeks to provide a small lot housing development and, in particular, Multiple Housing Type
4 – Conventional which is not a consistent use in the Open Space Recreation Zone;
The proposed development seeks to provide Visitor Accommodation Type 4, but not in association with Visitor
Accommodation Type 2, and therefore is not consistent with the Open Space Recreation Zone;
The proposed application appears to reflect an incorrect site cover percentage where some structures have not been
included in the calculation. An example of this is the stair and entry for the Reed Beach Houses (refer pages SD12 and
SD23). This is a clear omission and indicates that either the developer is seeking to misrepresent the proposed site
cover or they have been inaccurate in their calculations by error. In either case the Noosa Council has an absolute duty
to reject the application until all inaccuracies have been identified and included in the Council’s deliberations on
whether this DA should be accepted.
The proposed development does not protect the Peregian Beach caravan park site for low cost visitor accommodation;
Visitor Accommodation Type 4 is being proposed on the land, but is not integrated as part of a caravan park use or
other form of budget accommodation;
Document Set ID: 20307807
Version: 1, Version Date: 26/04/2017
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 1 page
Page 2
The proposed buildings and structures are not designed and sited to be attractive, comfortable and accessible to the
public or provide suitable landscape treatments and amenities, conducive to community interaction and convenience
and public safety;
The proposed development is not consistent with the reasonable expectations of residents in the locality, given the
Peregian Beach Caravan site is to primarily provide for budget visitor accommodation, which is in the public interest;
The Proposed development does not in any way conform to the written advice, cited below, from the Council to the
developer prior to the pre-lodgment meeting held on 14 December 2016 (between Council and the developer):
The Open Space Recreation zone in Peregian Beach specifically seeks to protect and retain the site for low cost visitor
accommodation needs reflective of the site’s previous use as a caravan park, but also acknowledges that a range of
visitor accommodation may be provided where integrated with budget accommodation. There is no support given to
permanent residents on the site.
It is noted that the current approval included only visitor accommodation, with no permanent resident accommodation
proposed. This approved development was supported by Council through an appeal process as it was acknowledged that
it included low to mid cost visitor accommodation being a reasonable alternative to the Planning Scheme’s intent to
retain the caravan park.
It is considered the current proposal does not meet the Planning Scheme’s intent for the site as there is a lack of and a
limited range of visitor accommodation proposed…….
The Noosa Council has correctly performed, as reflected in the cited correspondence above, its role as custodian of
what was formerly publicly (ratepayer) owned land by informing the developer that the DA proposal does not comply
with the requirements requested by the Council in regard to provision of low cost, non-permanent accommodation. For
Noosa Council to now allow the development application would be a failure of its duty to the Noosa ratepayers.
There are no grounds provided that are sufficient to overcome the level of conflict identified with the Noosa Plan.
The proposed development application should be refused for the above reasons.
Christine Lee Martin
4 Gannet Street
Peregian Beach Q 4573
E: [email protected]
Document Set ID: 20307807
Version: 1, Version Date: 26/04/2017
Used in these records
PM Submission Object ADDITIONAL - Christine Lee Martin - MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041Related documentApplication case desk ↗
PM Submission Object ADDITIONAL - Christine Lee Martin - MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041Related documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 116 KB (small file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.