Original source · versioned page text
2016-10-17 General Committee Meeting Notes
The original of this document is very large (11.2 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 17 OCTOBER 2016
This means that the planning scheme is seeking to retain the Cooroy Memorial Hall as part of an
historic streetscape and any external building work would require a code assessable application.
Section 13.21 of the code details the circumstances under which a character building or a
heritage site can be removed or demolished. These circumstances include where the building is
structurally unsound and not capable of economic repair (S5.3.c).
Management and maintenance of the Hall
As Trustees of the DOGIT, the Cooroy RSL Board is responsible for the management and
maintenance of the Hall.
The Hall was reroofed and restumped in 1991/1992 at a cost of approximately $20,000. Council
funded half of the project while the remainder was funded by the Hall committee, Noosa Rotary
Club and other local businesses. The Hall was repainted in 2000.
Over the past few years the Cooroy RSL has found it difficult to allocate adequate funds to
properly maintain the Hall which has meant that the condition of the Hall has gradually
deteriorated.
In the second half of 2015 after deciding it could not adequately maintain the Hall and concerned
about issues of public safety, the RSL Board commenced discussions with DNRM about
surrendering that part of the DOGIT on which the Hall is located back to the State and identifying
a new trustee. This trustee could be Council or another suitable party.
While the RSL Board’s proposal to partially surrender their trusteeship is possible under Section
55 of the Land Act 1994 it is significantly complicated by the fact that:
there are two buildings on the DOGIT
both buildings encroach onto Council freehold land; and
returning the Hall but not the Club to the State requires a sub-division of the DOGIT which
further complicates the land tenure issues.
Page 17 of 67
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalVery large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.