FURTHER REPORT - MCU21/0110 - APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - RESORT COMPLEX AND ANCILLARY BAR, FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, OUTDOOR SPORT AND RECREATION, AND CLUB (MINOR EXTENSION To EXISTING CLUBHOUSE) AT 61 NOOSA SPRINGS DRIVE, NOOSA HEADS

Amelia Lorentson88:32

Tyra, I do visit the kink, or should I say my dog, my labrador Piper does, not me, and I've never seen a car park for, I think there's only very limited amount of vets there and it's always really well managed. Great. Any, no? So, all in favour, please. Thank you. And I think that brings us to the last report for consideration of this committee and it's report a further report MCU21-0110, application for Material Change of Use, resort complex and ancillary bar food and drink outlet, outdoor sport and recreation. And club. Minor extension to exist in clubhouse at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Heads and if I could start with just an overview. I note the matter will probably be moved to general because of the significance of the matter so we'll continue asking questions today but please a summary of what's in front of okay.

This is a 106 bed resort that is proposed at Noosa Springs, also with an ancillary bath, food and drink outlet, outdoor support and recreation it's brought in a and club use through the most recent other change to the application. I've also got Will Lowe here at the table. He's our senior Environmental officer so he'll be able to assist with questions regarding biodiversity and bushfire. As you know, this one's been around for a while. It was almost one year ago that a report was first put to Council with a recommendation to approve the application. It might be worth just bringing the proposal plans, specifically page 3, just so I can maybe talk to the development. I'll let you bring that up. Proposal plans, attachment six. 6. And then the page 3. This is a site plan and it shows the split zoning that's applied to the site and it also has the 2.5. Odour unit line and the site under the previous planning scheme was all open space recreation. That's the 2006 scheme. And when the implementation or the design of the scheme, it was identified that the park ridge development, which was intended to be a resort facility, didn't eventuate as such. The approval was a multiple. Dwelling approval and allowed for either permanents or short-term residents and the take up has been primarily permanent residents. So that, opportunity or that preference that was part of the master planning for this area wasn't realised. And so the new scheme address that by applying a Tourism Accommodation Zone to this part of the site was probably quite opportunistic, really, because at that time, we didn't going to be getting the Olympics and so it's a great opportunity for Noosa to provide further accommodation, particularly luxury accommodation that's proposed in this location. The reason for the split zoning was to create a buffer between the sewage treatment plant and the resort and also I think to recognise the open space activities that were occurring on the land. There was no science that was applied at that time to determine where that line should be, interestingly the 2.50 unit line shows that part of that zoning has allowed for tourist accommodation zoning within 2.50 unit line. So, and also importantly the existing facilities on the site, being the resort building and the clubhouse and car parking, take up the majority of what was zoned tourist accommodation. So, in our assessment of this application, it was always a ground-truthing exercise in terms of the suitable location on the site for the resort to be located, and that was around the buffer. So, the applicant has provided an odour report that's been reviewed by our external consultant, and the methodology used is one that's recommended by DES and also applied in the Planning & Environment Court of using the 2.50 unit line to determine that area where it's appropriate for the development to occur. The buildings are fully contained outside of the odour line. There is some recreation area associated with some of the tennis courts and part of the pool that's outside of that area. Noting at the moment we've got four tennis courts on the site which are primarily all you know all located outside of that area. There is conditions that are of jumping ahead but there are conditions that are recommended to address those outdoor areas and when they should be used to make sure that the use of it won't result in many impacts to the users. So very vigorous assessment of assesment the odour through the course of the assessment. Unitywater did not make a submission to the application. They were not a referral authority but we engaged with them as we understood that they may have an interest in the development and they made comment through the process around the suitability of the siting. Again no, but no science has been provided by Unitywater in the assessment of the suitability. That science was done by the applicant and reviewed by consultant. And found it and it was verified? And supported the location of the buildings and with conditions how the outdoor areas are used.