Further submission from applicant 13.10.2023

satisfactorily answer all questions at the General Committee meeting. Despite all questions being addressed
comprehensively and maintaining support for the development, subject to conditions, the reverse amenity
impact is one of the grounds that has been proposed to refuse the application.


Although we have previously provided our expert advice and recommendations (agreed to by the Council
expert), we would like to remind you:
•   The odour specialist consultants agree the development is acceptable in the location, subject to
    conditions (which are acceptable to us).
•   The hotel buildings are located outside the 2.5 ou contour. The Oasis residential precinct has also been
    developed just outside the 2.5 ou contour and Parkridge Noosa is a short distance further.
•   The proposed hotel is not considered a tipping point or worsening the position of Unitywater. The existing
    residential areas above are much more likely to cause a complaint than a hotel guest.
•   There have been no odour complaints received by the treatment plant operator or Noosa Springs since it
    was upgraded in 1997.
•   When the treatment plant is eventually upgraded, the presence of the proposed hotel will not cause
    greater costs than would otherwise be provided to avoid impacts to other existing facilities. The proposed
    hotel will not cause the treatment plant to be upgraded and its cost applied to the Noosa sewerage
    charges.


Ecology


We engaged a highly regarded ecologist to assess the impact of the proposed development, which was peer
reviewed by Council environmental staff. The removal of a relatively small number of trees and vegetation
mapped as remnant is regarded as acceptable having regard to the ecological values of the location. Changes
were made to the development proposal to preserve the mature trees in the northern portion of the site
mapped as koala habitat. We have also offered to plant 120 koala food trees and 25 glossy black cockatoo
food trees within the golf course that would provide a substantial net environmental gain. A ground for
refusal is that the development would result in unacceptable clearing of vegetation in an ecologically
important area and an environmentally sensitive area, but that is not supported by our ecologist, Councils
own environmental officers or any independent advice.


Need


We are surprised one of the grounds for refusal is that our application fails to demonstrate a significant
planning need. The Noosa Plan specifically intends that a Resort Complex be provided on the land, so need is
not an issue. Nevertheless, we provided an Economic Impact Assessment that identified a significant need for
short-term accommodation in Noosa with an estimate that, even now, there is a shortage of 683 rooms.
Incidentally, at 75% occupancy this is a shortfall of about 187,000 room nights per annum. The assessment
also revealed a chronic shortage of full-service, luxury accommodation in Noosa. Even if the proposed ‘Calile
Noosa’ development in Settlers Cove comprising 178 rooms is approved, there remains a significant need for
the proposed development to be provided on one of only two greenfield sites where this can occur within the
Noosa Heads locality. The report also forecasts a gross regional product of $25.71M and employment for 202
people during construction. When operating, the annual gross regional product is $14.29M and generates 159
jobs. Clearly there is a strong planning need for the proposed development.




                                                                                                              4