A proposal to build a five-storey, 112-room hotel with luxury suites, three tennis courts and two swimming pools at Noosa Springs Resort and Spa is to be considered by Noosa Council, most likely at its March 17 meeting.
And already more than 500 objections from homeowners from Noosa Springs, Parkridge, The Oasis and Elysium, as well as local golfers, have been submitted to the council saying they don’t like it and they don’t want it.
They have also sent a 21-point public impact statement outlining their opposition to the $29 million proposal.
The property is owned by Chinese company Golden Horse Nine Dragon Lake Holdings, a major Hong Kong-based real estate and resort developer, which bought the land and spa eight years ago.
Leading the fight for the objectors are former State MP and local body councillor, Earle Bailey and architect John Cochrane, a specialist in residential, commercial and hospitality developments. Both men live at Noosa Springs.
“This is a very bad proposal. It is substantially wrong,” Mr Bailey told Noosa Today.
“The so-called boutique hotel is six times bigger than typical boutique accommodation.
“Two-thirds of the land, which will be taken up by the hotel, is not zoned for development – it is zoned open space/recreation. It will adversely affect every person who lives here.
“And not only villa owners but our koalas as well. If the development is approved, it will mean tearing out koala habitat trees and relocating them to somewhere else.
Mr Bailey said bushfires in the area were a serious concern.
“We have hundreds of homes here and there is only one road in and out. If there was a mass evacuation I don’t know what would happen.
“Also, with 200 or so guests plus additional staff, there will be a huge increase in traffic which is already over capacity at peak times and noise. Most guests at this type of hotel do not arrive by bus.”
Mr Bailey was MP for Toowong from 1984 to 1987 and a councillor with Port Douglas Council from 1993 to 1999. He received an Order of Australia Medal in 2001 for his services to the Port Douglas community and the radio and television industries.
“In all my years in politics I don’t think I have ever seen such a gross over development, on such a scale and footprint and so visually overpowering. I’ve seen situations when people get carried away with something and this is one of them.”
Architect John Cochrane said: “The only argument presented for this extraordinary proposal is that the site generally is set aside for tourist accommodation and there are no other sites available in Noosa (other than Settlers Cove). The argument is that the public good is served by the development and therefore the zoning is inconsequential.
“The proposal exceeds the 12m height by 10 metres.”
Mr Cochrane said the parking study was lacking in any meaningful analysis of existing use. There was reference to a survey but the results were not included as an appendix. Also, the study was at one time in the day and would be completely inadequate in establishing the real pattern of use, he said.
“The parking study argues for a net reduction in parking while the need for parking is increased. The justification for this is that the site is urban and guests could scooter to Hastings Street or use a shuttle bus. There is no analysis of rental car use.
“The parking rate is proposed as one per four rooms as opposed to one per room as per the current Noosa plan. The justification is made by using an example of the Gold Coast. The differences are clear. Noosa Springs is not an urban site; there is no walking to town or restaurants.
“The proponent suggests that providing no parking will encourage users to catch a bus or use a scooter. Hard to believe…
“The parking study does not address staff needs other than to suggest destination facilities – jargon for a shower for people who ride or walk. Again, totally inadequate for a site with poor public transport. Also, bearing in mind that the working hours for most staff will not suit public transport even if it did exist.
“There is no analysis anywhere of the impact of the development on existing users of the resort and this is a valid issue for assessment.”
