John Cochrane

7:38 John Cochran: My name is John Cochran and my co-presenter is Kim Petrick. We both live in Noosa Springs and represent some of the 450 residents who have made submissions against this proposal, the 1500 residents who will be negatively affected by the proposal and the Noosa-wide cohort who will potentially be affected by the likely need for upgrade of the nearby sewage treatment plant and the consequent increases in charges. We ask that council refuse the application on the following grounds. The wide range of non-compliances with Noosa Plan 2020. The wide range of impacts on the community, both local and regional. These include but are not limited to noise, traffic and congestion. The lack of an overarching strategy for bushfire evacuation and management. The divergence from the strategic objectives of Noosa Council in terms of broadening the economic base of Noosa Shire and reducing the reliance on low paid employment in the tourism sector. It's lack of a positive response to climate change in terms of, you know, the lack of

8:46 any passive systems to reduce carbon emissions. Its high use of potable water required by over-scale pools. Its poor solar orientation and control systems. And overwhelmingly, the negative community response to the proposal evidenced by the number of submissions in opposition. The negative sentiment published in the local newspaper. Letters sent to councillors and the petition submitted to council in opposition to the proposal. We ask that council refuse the application on the proposed proposal. In respect of the Noosa Plan 2020, the application is deficient in the following. 65% of the total of the hotel is proposed to be built on a land zone and open space for recreation and non-compliance with Noosa Plan 2020. The proposal does not meet the requirements of Noosa Plan Clause 6.6.1.2 in that the proposal is inconsistent with the purpose and overall outcomes of the plan. The proposal is inconsistent with the Noosa Plan performance outcomes in that it provides minimal community use. The proposal is inconsistent with the Noosa Plan performance outcomes in that it does not increase the range and diversity of recreational opportunities available. The proposal is inconsistent with the Noosa Plan performance outcomes in that the proposal is not consistent with the recreation needs of the community and supporting infrastructure. The proposal is inconsistent with the Noosa Plan performance outcomes in that it does not provide equitable access and comfort for all members of the community.

10:08 The proposal does not comply with the Noosa Plan acceptable outcomes in that it does not A, food and drink outlets are not ancillary to any community activity. B, the food and beverage areas exceed the 150 square metre control. C, the ground floor includes a potential function area exceeding the 300 square metre control. D, the buildings and structures exceed the 8 metre height control. D, the buildings exceed the gross floor area control in AO 17.1. And F, the buildings exceed the wall length control in AO 17.2. The proposal's use of recreational land relies on claims that a hotel cannot be built on existing tourist accommodation zoned land on the site and that the proposal supports existing Noosa Spring Resort facilities. We believe that a smaller hotel can be built on the site. We also believe that the proposal will not support the existing operations of Noosa Springs Resort. The traffic generation model is derived from an example on the Goa Coast where public transport and recreation facilities are immediately adjusted We believe that the traffic and parking strategy is flawed. The acoustic report is flawed. It incorrectly locates the loading dock. It underestimates the number of pool users, 50 persons only, for a 1,000 square metre swimming pool. It makes no assessment of live or recorded music.

11:24 It makes no assessment of function use. The application seeks to construct a facility capable of accommodating 500 persons in a function setting. This facility is supported by extensive kitchen and cold storage areas. The potential impact of this facility is not addressed. The applicant has asserted that there is no intention to use the ground floor area of 500 square metres and its attendant kitchen and cool room facilities for function use. However, the application seeks to construct a facility which is well in excess of the normal provision of these services for a 106 room hotel. The applicant has provided a letter suggesting that this facility is appropriate for the hotel use. I have provided counsellors with five examples of building facilities that are appropriate for the hotel use. This is one of the two buildings I have designed indicating that a facility would easily support a function use of up to 500 persons. The potential function use is significant in that the consequential impacts of an additional 500 persons on site is not considered in terms of traffic, parking, noise, congestion, potential nuisance and impact on existing recreational uses. We also believe that the basis on which the Planning Report supports the proposal are flawed. The rationale for overturning the properly made zone is the following. The potential of the proposal to litigate Unity Water is not adequately weighted.

12:43 The technical analysis of impacts is limited in scope and lacks rigour. Some examples of this lack of rigour are in the acoustic analysis, the failure to consider the proximity of Park Ridge, the lack of consideration of loading dock nuisance, the lack of consideration of impacts on the existing Noosa Springs Resort. We do not believe that the co-ownership of the hotel and golf club is a bar to consideration of impacts on existing golf club users. Specific attention should be paid to the impacts arising from the location of the STP adjacent to the site, as identified by independent third-party advice obtained by Unity Water. The most effective mitigation will be the maintenance of the existing exclusion zone. Further advice from Unity Water includes, any attempt to indemnify Unity Water for odour issues will be problematic. The building form of the proposal is most conducive to odour entrapment. All assessments are best case and do not account for blockages, breakdown, rainfall, heatwave, process, upset or loading events. Hence, not only is there no contingency in the STP systems, there is no capacity to absorb statistically guaranteed events. The potential impacts resulting are higher charges due to consumers, due to enforced uptake, increased grades of the STP, higher probability of odour nuisance due to increased load Noosa Springs residents already experience odour depending on prevailing wind, damage to the Noosa brand by negative hotel experience and a higher probability of nuisance for golf course users and walkers.

14:17 Much has been made by the applicant on the proposed high quality of the facility and its synchronicity with the Noosa brand. None of this is pertinent to consideration of the proposal. It is a 106-bed tourist class hotel with a potential function room. The holiday accommodation market and the ability to manage odour will determine the user profile. I will now hand over to Kim.

14:49 Speaker 1: I will speak to you today on behalf of our community and the concerns that we currently have with the MCU. Our community is made up of residents from Park Ridge, Fairways, Oasis, Noosa Springs and Elysium. There are a total of 670 dwellings in the affected residential enclave. While residents love living in this residential enclave because of the community spirit and peaceful, secure environment, we believe our ability of life will be, our quality of life will be significantly and adversely affected and this has the potential to cause adverse health issues. The MCU is based in New South Wales. The MCU was submitted during COVID when the level of activity was considerably low. The traffic survey was conducted in 2017, some six years ago, and it failed to consider that the Park Ridge residential precinct had not been built and Elysium properties had not been fully completed. Here's a fact. Unlike the developer in Noosa Springs Estate, we know that we had 162,000 vehicle movements of non-residents in and out of the estate in a 12-month period in 2022. This figure excludes resident movements. If we can do it, why can't Council ask for traffic counting to be undertaken on Lynx Drive, Resort Drive and Noosa Springs Drive by the developer?

16:09 We have since learned that a distillery that opened in Rene Street, Noosaville, within the last two years had to undertake two periods of traffic counting before permission was granted to its operation. Another factor is the ageing demographic in this location and their ongoing need for emergency service, including personnel to attend residents to ensure medical emergencies can be dealt with in a timely manner are a major concern within our community. Residents have had some exposures to the delays associated with one road in, one road out, when roadworks in April 2023 caused lengthy delays and frustration. Lynx Drive is within a high potential bushfire intensity zone. Evacuation will be compounded in the event of a bushfire. Residents have been attempting for the past two years to engage with Council about the bushfire risks in this area. Other than the meeting with the Mayor and Councillor Lawrenston in July 2021, nothing has occurred. The developer has indicated that the clubhouse can be the assembly point, shelter for their guests, but that doesn't guarantee guests will use it as such and they decide to drive out of the area like so many residents. As you know, panic sets in when there's a bushfire, so trying to egress via one road will be a disaster when it happens and our residents are fearful.

17:30 Memories of the 2019 fire are fresh in our minds and how close it came to the golf course and residences. The odour from the sewage plant is already overpowering in some residential precincts and can be expected to worsen when the existing system cannot cope with the additional effluent from the hotel. Complaints from Oasis residents to Unity Water have not improved the situation over the past five years. Golfers report they are exposed to the same smells on the 15th hole. The impact of the sewage treatment plant will inevitably increase complaints to Unity Water and will lead to very expensive modifications to be made to the facility which will ultimately be a cost borne by Noosa rate payers through their water bills. Our residents are worried about further increases in an inflationary period as we have now. The increasing burden of utility costs are already hurting some residents. There is a clear disconnect with the luxury brand that the developer is putting forward and the visitors they are attracting. In the past 18 months we have seen the emergence of wedding guests and visiting golfers urinating on the golf course, exposing themselves to residents, swearing and shouting, dropping cigarette butts, trespassing on private property, driving buggies over residents.

18:52 Excessive alcohol consumption on and around the golf course, being intoxicated whilst driving golf buggies, throwing empty bottles at each other due to the level of intoxication and general unruly behaviour. When reported to the hotel nothing is done. In a recent incident our security guard at Noosa Springs approached a trespasser who came through the golf course and moved onto Noosa Springs common property. He was assaulted and the alleged offender now faces criminal charges. This increasing exposure to this clientele base is generating fear that our residents will become a victim of crime. With all due respect to the representatives who are here with GH Property Holdings, this development is about making money and the background of visitors is an irrelevant consideration for them. The impact of their behaviour is felt by our community. The residents are opposed to the proposed development because we feel it will negatively impact on our mental wellbeing. We do not feel safe and positive about our future lives, specifically because of the changes we will experience during the development of the hotel and after its completion.

20:09 For these reasons we ask you to place community interests above the developer and to refuse the application.

20:17 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you.

20:18 Speaker 1: Clicker. Yeah, that's left and right I think.

20:21 John Cochran: Just quickly move onto the slides there. The logo on the top left hand corner is a representation of sustainability. A balance between social, environmental and economical factors. We believe that the proposal is not balanced. It favours economic over social and environmental factors. To make our point, we've constructed a computer model, a BIM model. The accuracy and validity of the model can be sustained. On the left hand side you see the developer's view. On the right hand side what we've designated there the neighbour's view.

21:03 Speaker 1: Sorry.

21:04 John Cochran: Left.

21:07 Speaker 1: To move it. Is it not working?

21:09 John Cochran: No. It appears not to be. Sorry. I'll just call for the next slide then. Just a little bit about the balance between environment, society and economy. Next slide please. This shows the general core planning issues. Zoning, bulk and scale, impacts, habitat, bushfire and whether it's a well-made application. The model there shows the extreme imbalance in scale and proportion between the proposal and the existing Noosa Springs Resort buildings. The heights can be guaranteed as effective. They're taken from the AHD levels within the AHD. There's some notes there on how the model's been derived. So you can see there's an extreme imbalance of bulk and scale.

21:56 The hotel's built on 65% of the floor area is based on land-zoned open space recreation. The green area is the open space recreation zone. The red area is the... 30 seconds. Yeah. We'd better shoot. Okay. That's the imbalance of zoning. Can we move? Next slide please. We dispute the height plane calculations. We've done our own calculations to find a higher level of exceedance. Next slide please. Three great sources of noise and congestion. The pool area, the loading dock and the existing entry to the hotel. One of the big problems will be the impact on Park Ridge. That shows the roadway.

22:42 Speaker 11: That's it.

22:43 Speaker 2: Great.

22:44 Councillor Wegener: Thank you very, very much. Thank you.