All recent comments on applications from Fraser Coast Regional Council, QLD

I am from Brahminy Ct, Coral Cove in River heads and I ask that the trees at the back of the sections, to NOT be removed as they add character, protection, privacy and a home for animals and birds, as well as separating the suburbs from River heads to Booral as it seems there is a proposed road just in the other side of the trees. We have recently settled on this Street and just love the nature aspect etc the trees add.

Please describe exactly what this change is ?

I wish to voice my concerns in regards to this proposed application. Firstly as a resident of Truro st and living in a property directly opposite the said site I have concerns about the traffic congestion this proposed development will cause. The proposed driveway/s are situated where cars turn around for the existing shops and licensed premises (the Junction on Truro) and the Women’s Health Centre.
Since the Junction on Truro St opened the fumes generated by the increased traffic have at times made living in this area almost unbearable. The nearby residences have children and older residents living in them and the increase in traffic will have an impact on the health of these residents. There is also the safety factor as there has also been a number of near misses of cars colliding. This proposed development will greatly impact on the area and will be detrimental.

Burrum Heads population should be capped. We don't have the sewerage system to handle more home & the river wouldn't survive with dozens of individual septic systems. Also further development would change the 'small' coastal town which it is known as. Leave Burrum Heads alone. We don't need another Hervey Bay. People who want/need shops, schools etc need to live close to Hervey Bay. Leave us to our small 'laid back' lifestyle. Once again greedy developers don't care. Council, please do not allow Burrum Heads to become another Hervey Bay with all it's crime etc We just don't want it or need it. If we really have to have development, lots should be 2000sqm size or larger. Any smaller & Burrum River will suffer or die.

Can you please advise why the effects of additional traffic flow along Lady Penrhyn Drive has not been included in the traffic study.
Any additional traffic on Serenity Drive from people exiting this shop will undoubtedly see more people use Lady Penrhyn as an alternate way to the Eli Waters Shopping Centre intersection on Hervey Bay/Maryborough Road rather than queuing up at the lights on Burrum Heads Road.
Lady Penrhyn is not designed as a major thoroughfare and is already picking up much of the traffic from the new Housing estate at the end of Serenity Drive. This estate is expanding as is the Thyme Over 50s village (700 houses apparently) with no alternate road into the CBD other than Lady Penrhyn Drive available which in itself is also very concerning.
We would suggest that any entry and exit to this development should not be to Serenity Drive but to a new dedicated in/out lane along Burrum Heads Road (or possibly via Grinsteads Road if Aldi could do a land swap with Thyme) so that the traffic can safely flow back on to the main road and not encroach on residential roads.
Like those commenting above, we have not been advised of this development (nor did we see the signs) and would appreciate our local member be more proactive in keeping us informed of such a potentially major traffic problem for our area.

What surprise that this store is being built where it is. I live in the area and have only seen Thyme development fencing around this site. Not sure what community consultation is suppose to be done but have seen no signs identifiable indicating this development, nor any notices in mail boxes on Yarrilee Circuit. As to notices in newspapers the digital copy of the Chronicle is extremely difficult to navigate let alone find a notice. Possibly community input has not been done yet or not required.

This whole area is traditional detached houses. Why would you allow a supermarket in the middle. It should be on the corner of Boat Harbour and Toogum rd or behind the medical development in the same area. Definitely would reduce the liveability of the area

I note in the planner’s response to the question regarding stormwater runoff the application states that it will be directed into Collare Court. I would enquire as to whether any sort of detailed analysis of the effect of this has been carried out? Previous nearby lot divisions have led to unacceptable inundation of neighbouring properties despite the responsible planner’s assertion that there would not. I would expect that a hydraulic survey carried out by an appropriately qualified engineer form part of the submission to council. As it is, Collare Court already suffers flood conditions during heavy, prolonged rainfall. Purposely redirecting stormwater from its current natural runoff into the Court is likely to exacerbate the issue further.
A further enquiry is with regard to the removal of existing, established trees and shrubs and what if anything has been put in place to mitigate the loss. The proposed access from Collare Court would appear to require removal of an established tree of over 30 years in age and trunk diameter of over 450mm. This particular tree would also appear to be unique to the area, has any thought been given to its relocation rather than destruction?

Fantastic idea to clear a block! Pity more Pacific Haven folks didn't clear their messy land. Dead trees, overgrown weeds & grass not visually appealing.

My only concern would be the increase in traffic, this will not be addressed by council.
The corner is already a race track for the rev heads.
I would like to see red light cameras installed to protect the locals before the store is built

I think that it is a good idea to have an Aldi Supermarket at this end of town, it is a growing area and needs more shops.
Woolworths shouldn't have a monopoly in the area.

Dear Ms. Hindmarsh,

Are you able to tell me if the Application OPW21/0002 is in relation to the extension of Conservation Drive from it's current termination at the roundabout intersection with Satinwood & Harmony avenues and linking it to Pantlins Lane, Urraween?

Kind Regards & Thanks,
John Askwith.

Will the Pacific Drive be extended through to River Heads Road. This I feel is a must as Mathiesen Road traffic is already very heavy particularly at peak times as is the Maddever Road intersection on both ends.
The 42 Planned Lots on Pacific Drive will make this much worse, plus with there being so much bush land, any potential bush fire issue will make this a serious problem as the only escape road out will be bottle necked and put lives at risk.
Pacific Drive is already gazetted through to River Heads Road and I feel this definitely needs to be completed to ease the congestion issue.

Dear Council,
I own the house at 329 Ann Street Maryborough which is on the opposite corner to this property. I believe that a low impact industry would not be suitable at this location. I have lived in the house for 10 years and have witnessed numerous accidents. The intersection is very busy and accidents occur on a regular basis by traffic coming from all directions. In fact the installation of Traffic lights would be welcome. This location would be best suited for residential use. Is the town growing sufficiently to support another Tyre Mechanical workshop? I believe it isn't, sadly. Please consider my submission.

Please advise if the proposed works is to take in the land at the corner of Henks Court and Sawmill Road and proceeds down to the kerb and guttering further along Sawmill Road.

Brian Hutchinson
Owner 18 Sawmill Road

My property shares a back fence with this property. Please let me know how this will impact me.

This planning application belongs to a section of the land which was originally part of the Mathiesen property there is no reason we have to object as long as the application comes within all the requirements

I'd appreciate the T intersection at Carkeet & O'Regan Creek Road to have the cement island (that blocks a large area of O'Regan Creek Road) removed.

FCRC seem very keen to approve development plans in O'Regan Creek Road.
A major factor in favour of buying in O'Regan Creek Road 4 years ago was the rural acreages across the road.
i.e. no neighbours with dogs, children, pushbikes, vehicles etc.

The speed limit on O'Regans Creek rd is only 60kmh now. Surely that is slow enoigh

Please can you look at slowing the traffic speed down to built up area limits on Oregen Creek Rd or try to police it, also Carkeet would benefit with lower traffic speed signs on Oregen Creek Rd end

I understand that the date for submissions opposing the Material Change of Use to be considered has now passed, but after reading the owner’s (Tammy Davies) comments expressing her views I can’t help feeling that she is making a very poor argument when she says ‘My property is extremely unique and is valued way in excess of the majority of properties in Toogoom’ It seems to me to be a case of IFYS make better tenants because they will return a higher rent and could be expected to be longer term tenants than a normal family. The council rates are no doubt substantial due to the size of the land area.
Her comment ‘If my tenants were to relocate away from my property who will my next tenants be ????) provides a clue to the possibility that “good” long term tenants are hard to come by. A property of that type requires a tenant that would be able to utilise the land area and therefore is prepared to pay a higher rent.
Her comment that she had over $80,000 worth of property stolen, with no resolution by the police, seems to imply that there are already thieves in the area. Whilst this is possible as it is any other area she may be able to put the record straight, as sometime after that event there was a rumour that the “stolen property” was removed by the then tenants.
I understand it is hard to get “good” tenants when one is relying on rental managers especially when the owner is not living in the area
As I said in my earlier letter the property itself is fairly well suited to the proposed use, it is the conduct of the persons living there and the supervision by the organisation (IFYS) that have allowed it to get the reputation that it now has.
As the property has been in use for the proposed purpose since 2009 would it be true to say that it is only now being made “legal” because of the complaints to police due to the activities of the tenants?

I was not aware that property had been stolen from your property. I have been led to believe that residents from your property had in actual fact been caught on ctv footage at neighbours property at night. If this is incorrect, then l apologise, but l do believe it to be true.I do know that residents from your property have been seen roaming at night. One has to wonder about the proper supervision.This is not helpful to the children involved or anyone else.

Bob and Lorraine, I have known you both for many years.......my tenants were approved and recommend to me by TOOGOOM BEACH REAL ESTATE and spent years at my property without ANY issues being raised. As for the value of my property I was responding to other comments made on here that "MY PROPERTY" was devaluing Toogoom. I whole heartedly support my tenants. As for the Police well they were not interested in over $80,000 of property being stolen from my property WELL BEFORE my current tenants even resided in Toogoom!!! I am still interested to know WHO is responsible for this! But unfortunately no body knows anything, especially the Police!

I am still outraged by Ms Davies comments re being "Un Australian" and " not in my backyard". If her concern is for the welfare of these residents of her property, and not merely a monetary concern for herself, perhaps she could make arrangements for them in "her backyard". I don't think this will happen.I wonder if she has taken the trouble to contact Howard Police to ascertain what has been happening in our area, concerning these "residents" she is so concerned about. Is it "unAustralian" for residents in our area to be concerned about their own welfare and property ?.You are obviously concerned about your property being rented out for monetary gain.We are concerned for our welfare and safety of our property.You mention the "high value" of your property. This is completely irrelevant to the issue.I might add, that l am NOT embarrassed to be Australian, a Toogoom resident, or, a Fraser Coast rate payer.I imagine that l pay about the same as you do for rates.

I ROBERT TAYLOR of 2 RIES ROAD,TOOGOOM object to this application on several
grounds.
1. This property has been run illegally for some time now (a poor indication of the ethics of the operators and owners of this facility) If this is their mind-set what mey expect in the future?
2. This property and its residents have the subjects of many calls to police and thus police investigations some of which are teenagers identified by CCT as residents of this facilitystealing cigarettes, alcohol,and money on multiple occasions. Police have not been able to gain any satisfaction through the legal system. Are we to be held to ransom by these and future thieves?
3.The staffing situation is tolally inadequate for this type of facility.One fulltime staff member is ridiculous to maintain strict supervision 24 hours per day.They could not be expected to control the residents during the hours of darkness(the hours that the resident seem to be most active ).
4.On several occasions in the last week I seen some of these residents (the last time Monday November 2 ) after dark roaming the streets.Why are young people allowed to roam at at will at night?
In reply to the Owner ,of course the property would suit ,-----as far as you she is concerned from a purely monetary point of view ----anybody. As for her other comments I " think she protests too much". Also we and the other protesters have chosen to live in this country and in Toogoom in particular as occupier residents and rate and tax payers