Recent comments on applications from Noosa Shire Council, QLD

  1. In Noosa Heads QLD on “Food and drink outlet” at 1 Arcadia St Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    Kathryn Simpson commented

    Please ensure acoustic report is based on noise testing undertaken 200m uphill from noise chamber 'funnel' laneway across the road from Arcadia St, beside 23 Sunshine Beach Rd, Noosa Heads. Unmitigated amplified music can travel uphill from Arcadia St to Noosa Hill via this laneway. Please consider some form of structural noise mitigation measures for outside amplified music.

  2. In Sunrise Beach QLD on “Detached House - Short Term...” at 46 Orient Dr Sunrise Beach QLD 4567:

    Douglas and Patricia Lawton commented

    We wish to raise a concern with the application SPS20/0003 to allow short term accommodation at 46 Orient Drive, Sunrise Beach 4567. Our concern involves parking. The present state of the property does not allow for multiple parking of vehicles, which would appear to be necessary with short term accommodation which often involves multiple stayers. Orient Drive is a very busy street, and there are several properties close to this one where parking on the street is necessary due to lack of facilities offered by other properties offering short term accommodation. This makes manoeuvring Orient Drive quite difficult at times for residents. It also makes passage of the buses along the street somewhat problematic.

  3. In Noosa Heads QLD on “Assessment of Demolition Bond” at 16 Grant St Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    Alan Thompson commented

    My property 18 Grant Street is next door. Tree removal and partial demolition has caused damage to and the collapse of the dividing fence resulting in an unsafe environment for persons living at 18 Grant Street.
    This requires and adequate temporary barrier fence to be installed before injury occurs.

  4. In Doonan QLD on “Shed / Garage” at 19 Wattlebird Dr Doonan QLD 4562:

    Hidden by site administrators
  5. In Tewantin QLD on “Clearing Vegetation under...” at 27 Myles St Tewantin QLD 4565:

    Ms. Marguerite Wickins commented

    I should like to object to the removal of the gum tree at number 27 Myles Street. This tree is a habitat to many wild birds. Due to the removal in the last couple of years of other similar species in this neighbourhood this habitat is of vital importance in maintaining biodiversity. It has been pruned to make it safe and I can see no valid reason for its removal. Perhaps council can look at their planning approval process before allowing buildings being erected so close to existing significant trees.

  6. In Tewantin QLD on “Clearing Vegetation under...” at 27 Myles St Tewantin QLD 4565:

    Peter Hunnam commented

    I think that this blue gum, E.teriticornis, outside 27 Myles Street, should be protected. This tree has been an attractive part of the streetscape for many decades, enjoyed by several generations of residents, used by the many lorikeets, corellas and other birds as a food source or roost, and providing natural shade, humidity and water circulation.
    This particular species of tree is characteristic of Old Tewantin, yet has not been protected adequately from house developers and builders. Too often in the past few years, these mature street trees have been sawn down because the householder has not liked the falling leaves or strips of bark, or the roots spreading through the soil.
    The streetscapes of Tewantin have been noted specifically in the past for their mature trees - notably as part of the formal justification for the region to be designated as the Noosa Biosphere Reserve in 2007. Over the subsequent 12 years, this noteworthy feature has been decimated by individuals who it seems are not prepared to sacrifice any of their property to benefit the local biodiversity, environment or community amenity.
    In Tewantin and other Noosa suburbs, we need much better conservation rules for our ‘green streets’ and urban biosphere, and we need to work as a community to actively enhance the natural values of our limited public green spaces, not degrade and destroy them cut by cut.

  7. In Cooroy QLD on “6-10 Diamond Street Cooroy...” at 6-10 Diamond St Cooroy QLD 4563:

    Cathy Hawes commented

    This development has merit, it should certainly be an improvement on the previous ageing motel.
    However, I am concerned that modern, concrete, boxes with glass fronts and little shading will be planned with additional heat producing bitumen carparking.
    Modern buildings are often black, the worst colour for a Qld summer could not be used.
    These would be out of keeping with the local character of Cooroy.
    The other businesses on Diamond Street have retained the weather board character and several are planted with trees and shrubs. The Opal Street side still has its green verge and trees. I hope these are retained.
    As our summers are getting hotter, it is very important to retain as much greenery and shading as possible.
    Grassed areas are up to 20 degrees cooler than bitumen and paving.
    thank you for your consideration.

  8. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    Brian Ford commented

    I agree with all the preceding comments.
    The area designated for development is one of the last bastions of beauty against encroaching concrete in the heart of residential Noosa. Why it ever fell into private hands is beyond my comprehension; I thought that the Veridian Resort was the last of the behemoths to appear in this area.
    How naive of me.

  9. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    John Burge commented

    John and Catherine Burge

    We are hopeful the Noosa Council and Planning Authority " Will Reject this Proposal " to develop the only section of Native Land which has not been developed on the Western Valley side of Noosa Hill.If the development is approved there will be The Viridan on one side of the Creek and this new development on the other.This will effectively remove a corridor for native species movement and precious native vegetation. An outcome which would be contrary to the DNA embed into Noosa's ability to manage development and the preservation of the natural environment. The very quality that makes Noosa so unique.
    If the proposed development is viewed strictly on a logistical basis a number of serious issues become apparent. Attunga Hts was never designed to take the increased traffic the proposed development would create. The movement of heavy construction vehicles would be a nightmare for a street that already has problems with Garbage collection and On Street parking. The stability of the development site could also be severely compromised resulting in land slippage and drainage problems. We are confident the elected Council representatives and Planning Authority will apply the necessary rigorous due diligence and consider the long term consequences this proposed development requires and reject this application.

  10. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    J Smith commented

    Twelve units plus would ultimately bring significant traffic to this area of Noosa Hill - for the residents, of which we are - & in particular use of Viewland Drive, where we are permanent residents. We are constant witness to increasing traffic congestion, trucks, motor bikes & scooters & associated traffic noise, there are parking issues, acts of public nuisance most weekends, limited street lighting in Viewland Dr & limited, safe, continual, pedestrian pathways in the area. Inappropriate tree plantings in the area are also proving to be a nuisance & safety hazard & ongoing expense for rate payers via Council, Energy & internet providers. The Planning authority need to take the residents concern on board & come up with a satisfactory solution to these matters.

  11. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    Gabriela Geispitzheim commented

    I could list here a dozen very good reasons why this application should be refused; I can list them all if required.
    However, it would be wasting my time because my reasons are similar to those already submitted.
    But basically, I STRONGLY oppose this project and it definitely should not go ahead.

  12. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    David and Marianne Seldon commented

    We strongly object to this application.
    It will devastate several hectares of pristine bush that is such an important part of Noosa and the site is totally unsuited for a development of this magnitude.
    The ground is unstable and the massive run-off generated will cause problems down-stream for Council's infrastructure.
    Ecologically, it is a disaster. The area is home to many species and the removal of the natural forest will have a massive impact. They can't just re-locate to concrete.
    The visual impact on those bordering the site will be catastrophic - a transformation from natural jungle to having to face a concrete jungle, and the extra cars, noise and people will have a significant detrimental effect on the area.
    Please - this application is a disaster waiting to happen. You can't undo it once it's approved.

  13. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    Rebecca Stead commented

    This beautiful site is an Open Space Conservation site with two existing dwellings allowed, with remnant habitat for wildlife and Biosphere classification. Please don't allow conversion of the land use or subdivide it.
    - the habitat of native wildlife seen regularly on this site (wallabies, echidna) plus koalas and sugar gliders in the vicinity is in question if 14 dwellings are allowed to build and convert Open Space into 3 new, subdivided lots.
    - all of the building sites (on slip hazard slopes), height (12m total) and the density of Lot 1 (medium density multiple dwelling) are in direct non-compliance with the Noosa Plan
    - even though a donated green area will be 'gifted' to the public from the existing Open Space Conservation there will be high fences erected between the properties and the public pathway, which appears to be of benefit only to unit residents rather than the public.
    - Noosa Council is so very careful to collaborate on sensitive sites with caring partners such as Noosa Parks and Biosphere (eg public boardwalk, logging land reclaimed as National Park corridors) it is galling to think an opportunistic build might contradict this careful focus.

  14. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    Marilynne Cahn commented

    I understand this site is a wildlife corridor and know that koalas have been spotted while walking up the public pathway. The area is also home to some very old pine trees that are protected. Any development interfering with this protection and the detriment of wildlife and residents is not part of the Noosa philosophy. You can see from new properties at this end, that native trees have been removed, detracting from the leafiness of the area. I understand that residential planning is in place but isn't it just good enough to replace or improve the property that already exisits there? We need to observe that Noosa is a biosphere - development can be limited to areas that are already dense - there isn't a satisfactory reason for wanting large scale development here. Locals and visitors using this path will be impacted greatly by the disruption of the planned development. Twelve units plus would bring significant traffic to this quiet corner of Noosa Hill - for the residents it will be unpleasant.

  15. In Noosa Heads QLD on “27 Atunga Heights Nosa...” at 27 Attunga Hts Noosa Heads QLD 4567:

    Leon Gheysen commented

    I am 91 years old and per se of limited mobility. I have no personal interest in the development proposal of 27 Attunga Hts and do not even know its present owners. I am however very concerned that the continuous neglect of that lot, almost stretching to the bottom of the hill, is a disaster waiting to happen.

    It containsvery few native trees, the rest being wild bush and pine and lots of accumulated dead wood. I am afraid that a bushfire, Accelerated by a strong northerly racing up the Hill, could become catastrophic and that the Council could be held at least partially responsible for this lot’s neglectful underdevelopment.

  16. In Tewantin QLD on “58 Hilton Terace Tewantin -...” at 58 Hilton Tce Tewantin QLD 4565:

    david brailsford commented

    Hi, Would we please be able to obtain a copy of the plans for the development at 58 Hilton Terrace. We are at 56 next door and are quite concerned about what type of building is going to be erected on the land as most of our light comes from that direction.

    Kind Regards


  17. In Sunshine Beach QLD on “1/19 Nebula Stret SUNSHINE...” at Lara Cottages 1/19 Nebula St Sunshine Beach QLD 4567:

    Jean - Pierre Dollé commented

    The larger Candlenut tree on the front is a real nuisance to the neighbors the leaves and the nuts are falling on 21 Nebula street blocking drains of the driveway.
    The large nuts falling in the middle of the night on the roof make a very loud noise
    The property has also to many trees on the back that are a concern regarding fire , the whole area is very dangerous.

  18. In Peregian Beach QLD on “4 Kestrel Crescent Peregian...” at 4 Kestrel Cres Peregian Beach QLD 4573:

    P Dwyer. commented

    Property to have maximum ht of 8 meters above ground level . thanks.

  19. In Peregian Beach QLD on “Material Change Of Use -...” at 215 David Low Way Peregian Beach QLD 4573:

    J West commented

    I have concerns in relation to the amount of additional traffic and road congestion 50 units, plus their visitors, in the same small area will cause. Peak hour & holiday times through Peregian Beach/Springs area is already slow and disruptive to local workers who need to commute through this area on a daily basis, please don't add to it further.

  20. In Noosaville QLD on “Operational Works -...” at 119 Shorehaven Dr Noosaville QLD 4566:

    Stuart Greenough commented

    Why does this property need need tidal works when it is a controlled (lock to enter) canal estate.

  21. In Sunrise Beach QLD on “Operational Works -...” at 20 Columbia Dr Sunrise Beach QLD 4567:

    Bettina Walter wrote to local councillor Brian Stockwell

    Hi Brian,
    Could you please tell me if Council is planning on removing any of our mature street trees in Columbia Drive? If so, could you please tell me how many, the reasons for it and also let me know time frames?
    I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you so much.
    Kind regards

    Photo of Brian Stockwell
    Brian Stockwell local councillor for Noosa Shire Council
    replied to Bettina Walter

    Hi Bettina,

    I'm away for a few more days yet but have passed on to relevant staff. I have promulgated a review of our trees on public land policy to dissuade some if the less necessary removals, but that drafting process is still with staff.

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts