Stevens Gerber Submission MCU 15 0095 115 Eumundi Noosa Road

                     Provision is made for pedestrian and vehicular queues at conflict points
                     Development with the potential to generate significant traffic and parking
                      impacts gives appropriate consideration to transport and land use issues

82.   The above justifies the Noosa Council rejecting the DA on the grounds that it is not
      compatible with traffic objectives contained in the Noosa Plan. Sufficient grounds do
      not exist for the Noosa Council to approve the DA, notwithstanding the fact that it fails
      to meet these outcomes. In addition, the adverse traffic impacts generated by the DA
      cannot be acceptably mitigated by the use of conditions.


           v.       NON-COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER RELEVANT LOCAL CODES


83.   In relation to a range of other, applicable codes in the Noosa Plan, it is evident that the
      applicant has failed to address the numerous and significant potential impacts of the
      DA on the adjoining GSLC. The specific areas of non-compliance are set out in the
      table provided at Annexure A.

      C.        SUFFICENT GROUNDS FOR COUNCIL TO JUSTIFY REFUSAL OF THE APPLCIATION

           Section 326 of the SPA

84.   Section 326(1)(b) of the SPA stipulates that a decision to approve a DA must not
      conflict with a relevant instrument, including a planning scheme, unless ‘there are
      sufficient grounds to justify the decision’. Accordingly, if the Noosa Council concludes
      that the DA compiles with the Noosa Plan, it will nonetheless be incumbent on the
      Noosa Council to refuse the DA if there are sufficient grounds to justify the refusal of
      the DA, despite its compliance with the Noosa Plan.

85.   Section 326(1)(b) of the SPA states:

                326 Other decision rules

                (1) The assessment manager's decision must not conflict with a relevant instrument
                    unless—
                     …
                     (b) there are sufficient grounds to justify the decision, despite the conflict;
                     or
                     …

86.   The term “grounds” is defined in Schedule 3 of the SPA to mean matters of public
      interest. It does not include the personal circumstances of the applicant, the owner of
      the land or another interested party.

87.   “Statutory Guideline 05/09 - Sufficient grounds for decisions that conflict with a
      relevant instrument”, made under section 759(1)(a) of the SPA, states that an
      assessment manager may refuse an application, even though the proposed
      development complies with the relevant instruments, if there are sufficient grounds
                                                                                                       22