Margie Maccoll
Trust and support to construct a $50m, five-star 106-room hotel was what Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort owner GH Properties asked for from about 200 resort residents who attended an onsite forum last week.
The forum, organised by GH Properties, the Australian arm of Hong Kong property and development firm, Golden Horse Group, gave attendees an overview of the proposed development, the progress of its application with council approval and opened the floor to questions.
There was support from one man who rose to say “this would be magnificent for the whole Noosa and I hope to hell you get it,” and received some applause, but most residents raised concerns about the development’s impact around increased noise, odour, traffic, bushfire evacuation, biodiversity and the continued use of tennis courts during construction.
GH Australia director Ellen Guan told the forum since purchasing the resort in 2013 GH Properties had invested most of its profits in maintenance and upgrades
and there was a limit to their investment based on the current business format but the hotel project offered an opportunity to have a higher standard.
“I see a great opportunity for this place to become the best golf resort, wellness centre, golf destination in Australia with the hotel project,” she said.
“Are you willing to be open to change? Are you willing to trust us to deliver a better place, a happier, more vibrant environment? Are you willing to work with us together? I would appreciate your support for this development. I see this is something you will be proud of in the future.”
Project manager Phil Starkey whose family were former owners of the resort said the original master plan for the site included the existing 544 residential dwellings, the sport and recreation area including golf course and tennis courts and a 200-room hotel.
“An important part is a hotel,” he said.
One attendee reminded him the original plan for the hotel was on the Parkridge site, but they sold that and now wanted to build a hotel on an area zoned open space/recreation.
Mr Starkey said there was “some truth in that” but told the forum the hotel would deliver many benefits including financial to Noosa Springs and opportunities for an increased standard of service, and it was “not uncommon for these projects to go from one zone to another”.
“The hotel and its guests are important to underpin the financial stability of Noosa Springs in the long term,” he said.
“The more revenue springs has the less focus on members fee. Financial viability is something very important. I’m not suggesting Noosa Springs is struggling, it’s not, over time these type of facilities close their doors. I’m not saying this will happen, but the overall benefit we’ll enjoy.”
Mr Starkey said to reach its current stage the complex hotel project had taken the efforts of the GH team and a number of consultants, undergone a development application journey before an application was lodged with Noosa Council who engaged their own consultants, reviewed plans, sent it to state government agencies and put it out for public notice. From submissions received changes had been made and the application went to council last year.
“Council officers do an assessment. They have recommended to councillors the application should be approved. That remains their recommendation. We’re still waiting for council to approve the development,” he said.
In response to questions on a bushfire management plan the forum was told a bushfire report had made a number of recommendations but a bushfire management plan had not developed at this stage, but had to be developed. Residents heard a major step in the plan in the event of a bushfire was the intent for residents, guests and staff to not be evacuated off the resort through the only access road in and out but to be evacuated to the clubhouse in the first instance, then on to the golf course.
Several residents raised concerns over increased noise from the proposed hotel from swimming pool activities to events to hotel delivery trucks, some saying noise was already an issue for them from functions, gym classes and the dumping of rubbish.
They were told the acoustics had been measured over a seven day period with receptors at Palms, Oasis and Parkridge and through modelling they determined the noise would increase “by not much more than a whisper”.
In response to the hotel being built on a biodiversity overlay the forum heard the land does sit in a biodiversity overlay but a report had found no evidence of “activity on this parcel of land” and an offset was offered to created more biodiversity by replacing koala trees on land on the golf course.
One attendee involved in the tennis community said each week 150 junior tennis players used the resorts facilities to train, many players being involved in competitive tournaments, as well as about 200 community members, and asked, if the project was approved, how players could maintain training programs during construction.
The response was that there had been discussions and the intention was to organise something reciprocal with another club but nothing had been organised.
One man said he was concerned “there seems to be an insinuation if we don’t support the hotel the golf course will go backwards”. “I feel we’re being held to ransom about that,” he said.
“There’s no threat to support this,” he was told. “When you add multiple strands of income and diversify as a business you protect it,” was the response.
Ms Guan said their commitment to the place went beyond the hotel project.
In July 2023 Noosa councillors said no to the development application in a motion unanimously supported at council’s general meeting, with the developer halting the approval progress before a final decision on the application would have been made at its ordinary meeting.
Inconsistencies with the Noosa Plan 2020 that included being outside the urban growth boundary and inconsistent use of land zoned Recreation and Open Space, the clearing of vegetation in a known koala and glossy black cockatoo habitat, noise concerns and odour concerns, confliction with the State Planning Policy by being in proximity to a sewerage treatment plant (STP), were among the reasons given for the refusal.
Councillors also took into account a large number of “valid planning grounds“ raised by submitters indicating “an unacceptable level of impact on the amenity of the locality“ as well as a valid submission from Unitywater identifing potential risks and flow on costs associated with the proposed development in proximity to the STP.
Council officers recommended the development application be approved, subject to conditions, on the site which is zoned partly for Tourist Accommodation and partly for Recreation and Open Space.
The development application was before council again last month but the developer again halted the approval progress before a final decision on the application was made. The application is expected to return to council this month or next.
