FM1303 Notice of Submission

2017/2018 Planning and Environment Notice of Submission

LODGE BY 16 JANUARY Section 53 (6) and Schedule 1 of the Planning Act 2016 To ensure your submission is ‘properly made’ you must ensure that it is: 1. Made to the assessment manager; 2. In writing; 3. Signed by each person who made the submission unless the submission is made electronically; 4. States the name and residential or business address of each person who made the submission; 5. States what aspects of the proposed development you support or oppose and the reasons (facts and circumstances) for your decision and 6. Received by council during the formal public notification period. As required by the Planning Act 2016, all submissions, including individual details, are published on council’s website (PD Online) and therefore will be accessible to internet search engines. All submissions are published, irrespective of whether or not they are ‘properly made’.

1. Applicant details File no MCU17/0095, MCU17/0096 & REC17/0056 Postal address of land (as advertised) David Low Way, Yaroomba  Preliminary Approval (in accordance with section 242 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009) for Material Change of Use of Premises to establish Yaroomba Beach Master Plan  Development Permit for Material Change of Use for Resort Complex, Multiple Dwellings, Short Term Accommodation, Shopping Centre, Educational Establishment, Community Use and Utility Installation  Development Permit for Reconfiguration of Lots

2. Submitter details Full name/s Postal address Suburb State Postcode Signature/s Date of submission (no need to sign if lodging electronically) Note: This form has been designed for the convenience of the public; any persons wishing to lodge a submission are not obliged to use this form.

3. Details of submission I (We), the above signed make the following submission: (if necessary, use a separate sheet of paper and attach) I wish to lodge my objection to this outrageous development proposal. First and foremost I object to the massive increases in height and density over and above that allowed for this site under the planning rules. This will have a detrimental affect not only on the Yaroomba area but also on the entire North Shore and Noosa area. The increase in traffic alone will be ridiculous. I can only presume that the developer has gone for the absolute maximum in order to get an approval for something less. Well it is my contention that they should use the approval they have which is very generous indeed and also should never have been allowed or respect the provisions of the Planning Scheme. I do not know one

Privacy Council will use any personal information provided for the intended purpose only and for remaining in contact with you. Council is authorised to collect this information in accordance with the Local Government Act 2009 and other Local Government Acts. Your personal information is only accessed by persons authorised to do so. Your personal information is dealt with in accordance with council’s privacy policy.

1 of 2 2017/2018 Planning and Environment Notice of Submission FM1303/5-01/07/2017 person who supports this proposal except for a few people from the SC Business Council and a couple of the developers former employees.

Secondly, it is my understanding that this development will only be approved if it is shown to be in the public interest. What is the public interest? Surely it would have to be the interests of the local community. There is overwhelming objection from the local community so it should be rejected. It is an intensive high-rise residential estate with a highrise hotel, a park and a few shops, tacked on. This hotel is not a high quality resort. The hotel will sit within a high-density residential estate and it will have to contend with having a construction site near it for years. It is just ridiculous. I know if I was staying in this hotel I would be furious with the trucks and the noise and it will give the Sunshine Coast a very bad name in the tourism industry.

There is insufficient infrastructure from the airport north to Noosa to cope with the increase in traffic that will come about as a result of an additional 2000 to 3000 persons, most with vehicles.

The developer has not demonstrated a need for the overriding of the Planning Scheme.

Thirdly, the methods used by the developer in seeking community input were dishonest and sneaky and should not be taken into account. They structured their survey form to work in their favour and they did not accurately advertise their proposal to the public, such that most residents outside of the area think they are only having a say on the resort that was advertised. This was an obvious attempt by this developer to trick the community.

Finally, the endangered sea turtle population should be protected in every way so if there is any possible risk that lights will affect the turtles and/or extra 2000 to 3000 people would trample all over their nests in the dunes, then it should be rejected outright on this basis alone.

2 of 2 Footer