Original source · versioned page text
2015-03-03 Infrastructure & Services Committee Agenda
Very large file: it may take a few minutes
The original of this document is very large (12.2 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.
AGENDA
Infrastructure & Services
Committee Meeting
Tuesday, 3 March 2015
commencing at 9.00am
Committee Room, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin
Committee: Crs Sandy Bolton (Chair), Bob Abbot, Frank Pardon, Noel Playford
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Very 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.
Full text of sections 2 to 77 (of 80)
Section 2
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM PAGE
ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES -
PRESENTATIONS -
PLANNING & INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT REPORTS 3
Infrastructure Planning & Design 3
1 REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO NOOSA LOCAL ROADS OF REGIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE 3
2 MUNNA POINT CARAVAN PARK FORESHORE EROSION 15
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORTS 24
3 REVIEW OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE COOROY BUTTER FACTORY 24
Community Facilities 62
4 NOOSA AQUATIC CENTRE (NAC) - HALF YEARLY REPORT TO 31 DECEMBER
2014 62
5 NOOSA LEISURE CENTRE (NLC) - HALF YEARLY REPORT TO 31 DECEMBER
2014 66
6 THE J AND BICENTENNIAL COMMUNITY CENTRE (BCC) - HALF YEARLY
REPORT TO 31 DECEMBER 2014 71
7 NOOSA COMMUNITY CARE (NCC) - HALF YEARLY REPORT TO 31 DECEMBER
2014 76
CLOSED SESSION -
Page 2 of 80
Section 3
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
PLANNING & INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT REPORTS
(Infrastructure Services only)
Infrastructure Planning & Design
1 REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO NOOSA LOCAL ROADS OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Project Officer, Beth Potter
Planning & Infrastructure Department
Index ECM/ Subject: Roads Maintenance
Attachments 1. Updated list of Noosa Local Roads of Regional Significance
2. Maps of proposed amendments to Noosa Local Roads of Regional
Significance
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Project Officer, Asset Planning to the Infrastructure &
Services Committee Meeting dated 3 March 2015 and:
A. Endorse the changes requested to the approved listing of Noosa Local Roads of Regional
Significance as presented to the Northern South-East Queensland Regional Roads &
Transport Group; and
B. Appoint Cr Frank Pardon as Council’s representative on the Northern South-East
Queensland Regional Roads & Transport Group.
REPORT
This report seeks Council endorsement of a request made to the Northern South-East
Queensland Regional Roads & Transport Group (NSEQRR&TG) to make changes to the list of
roads in Noosa Shire classified as Local Roads of Regional Significance (LRRS). If the request
is approved by NSEQRR&TG it will provide Council with a greater selection of eligible roads to
spend future Transport Infrastructure Development Scheme (TIDS) funds.
Cr Bob Abbot is currently Council’s representative on the NSEQRR&TG and he has requested
that another Councillor replace him in this role. This report also seeks to appoint Cr Frank
Pardon as Council’s representative.
1. Northern South-East Queensland Regional Roads & Transport Group (NSEQRR&TG)
Regional roads groups have been established throughout Queensland with the purpose of
(among other things):
Managing TIDS programme investment on the regional transport network and ensuring the
annual TIDS allocation is spent in accordance with the policy;
Page 3 of 80
Section 4
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Determining the LRRS network and advising changes to the Roads & Transport Alliance
Board (representatives from Transport & Main Roads and Local Government Association of
Queensland).
The NSEQRR&TG is comprised of representatives from four Councils:
1. Noosa Council;
2. Sunshine Coast Regional Council;
3. Moreton Bay Regional Council; and
4. Somerset Council.
This request for amendments will be presented to the group on 27 February 2015.
2. Transport Infrastructure Development Scheme (TIDS)
The TIDS provides funding to local governments for transport related initiatives which support
State government objectives.
Funding categories applicable to Noosa Shire are:
1. Construction or upgrade of Local Roads of Regional Significance (LRRS);
2. Development of cycle-ways, shared paths and crossing provisions; and
3. Provision/upgrade of road and transport infrastructure that improves the safety of children
travelling to and from school.
All funds are to be matched dollar for dollar by Council.
For the current financial year all funds allocated to Noosa Council by the NSEQRR&TG are being
spent on improvements to road and transport infrastructure that improves the safety of children
travelling to and from school.
Funding for the 2015/2016 financial year is expected to increase due to the method used by the
State government in allocating funding based on the number of Council’s within regional roads
groups, resulting in a larger allocation to the Group and Noosa Council.
3. Local Roads of Regional Significance (LRRS)
The LRRS is a network of roads of similar function owned by state and local governments.
Criteria for LRRS are that they:
1. Provide a primary connecting function across more than one local government area within a
regional road network;
2. Form a key part of economic development strategies within local government areas (major
access to rural, agricultural, industrial);
3. Play a key role for regional industry and access to attractions of regional significance and
major natural resources;
4. Connect shires, towns, cities and regions and provide travel time and distance savings to
commuter routes;
5. Provide access from a higher order regional road to rail head, freight depots, ports and major
airfields;
6. Provide access to regionally significant institutions (community health, education, recreation,
youth, aged care and entertainment facilities); or
7. Form the only access to a remote community.
Page 4 of 80
Section 5
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Attachment 1 includes the updated list of Noosa LRRS.
Attachment 2 provides maps which show in greater detail the proposed amendments to the
Noosa LRRS.
The main reasons for the amendments requested to the Noosa LRRS are to adjust for new roads
and changes to roads, to map a more logical traffic route or to include other roads that meet the
above criteria.
The request to add roads to the Noosa LRRS will not increase the TIDS funding allocation to
Noosa Council, however it will enable greater flexibility for Council in future years in allocating
TIDS funds across the network.
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting, 3 April 2014, Item 16, Page 9
That Council note the report by the Administration Officer, Executive to the Planning &
Organisation Committee dated 25 March 2014 and:
E. Appoint Cr Bob Abbot as Council’s representative on the Roads and Transport Alliance.
Ordinary Meeting, 31 July 2014, Item 5, Page 4
That Council note the report by the Civil Operations Manager to the Infrastructure & Services
Committee Meeting dated 22 July 2014 regarding the 2013/14 TIDS funding.
Finance & Risk
Nil.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Nil.
Internal Consultation
Coordinator Design & Traffic
Civil Operations Manager
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Community Services x Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities x Asset Design & Investigations
x Asset Planning
x Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office x Corporate Services
Community Engagement x Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 5 of 80
Section 6
Page 6 of 80
Attachment 1 — Updated list of Noosa Local Roads of Regional Significance
ee eee Start Description End Description Comments or Amendments
Greenridge Pinbarren Road Pomona Kin Kin Road Queen Street Existing LRRS — no change
Queen Street Greenridge Pinbarren Road Bridge Street Existing LRRS — no change
Bridge Street Queen Street King Street Existing LRRS — no change
King Street Bridge Street Traveston Cooran Road Existing LRRS — no change
Traveston Cooran Road King Street Shire border Existing LRRS — no change
Cooroy Belli Creek Road Kenilworth Skyring Creek Road __| Maple Street Existing LRRS — no change
Additional LRRS, connector road to Elm Street
(TMR road), and connector road to regional
Maple Street Cooro Cooroy Belli Creek Road Myall Street institutions
Additional LRRS, connector road to Elm Street
(TMR road), and connector road to regional
Myall Street Cooro Maple Street Elm Street institutions
Existing LRRS — no change
Dr Pages Road Cootharaba Gympie Kin Kin Road Kinmond Creek Road
Existing LRRS — no change
Kinmond Creek Road Cootharaba Dr Pages Road Cootharaba Road
Existing LRRS — no change
Cootharaba Road Cootharaba Kinmond Creek Road Junction Road
Existing LRRS — no change
Junction Road Cootharaba Cootharaba Road Louis Bazzo Drive
Existing LRRS — no change
Hastings Street Noosa Heads Claude Batten Drive Noosa Drive
Existing LRRS — no change
Noosa Drive Noosa Heads Hastings Street Weyba Road
Existing LRRS — no change
Sunshine Beach Road Noosa Heads Noosa Drive Edwards Street, Sunshine Beach
Page 6 of 80Section 7
Page 7 of 80
ee ee Start Description End Description Comments or Amendments
Weyba Road Gympie Terrace, Noosaville Existing LRRS — no change
Additional LRRS, main thoroughfare from
Hastings Street to Gympie Terrace (attractions
Noosa Parade Noosa Heads Noosa Drive Weyba Road, Noosaville of regional significance).
Gympie Terrace Weyba Road Eumundi Noosa Road Existing LRRS — no change
Hilton Terrace Eumundi Noosa Road Memorial Avenue, Tewantin Existing LRRS — no change
Additional LRRS, preferred route between
Weyba Road and Eumundi Noosa Road,
connecting to industrial zones, significant
Mary Street Noosaville Weyba Road Gibson Road commuter route.
Additional LRRS, preferred route between
Weyba Road and Eumundi Noosa Road,
connecting to industrial zones, significant
Gibson Road Noosaville Mary Street Eumundi Noosa Road commuter route.
Additional LRRS, main connector road to
Eenie Creek road, connecting to industrial
zones, significant commuter route and
Reef Street Noosaville Weyba Road Eenie Creek Road regionally significant facilities.
Beckmans Road Eumundi Noosa Road Cooroy Noosa Road, Tewantin Existing LRRS — no change
Eenie Creek Road Eumundi Noosa Road Ben Lexcen Drive, Sunshine Beach Existing LRRS — no change
Eumundi Noosa Road Hilton Terrace Eumundi Noosa Road (State Controlled) | Existing LRRS — no change
Additional LRRS, missing from portion of
Walter Hay Drive already included in LRRS.
Joins to Eumundi Noosa Road. Connector road
to industrial Zones, significant commuter route
Walter Hay Drive Noosaville Eumundi Noosa Road Emu Mountain Road and regionally significant facilities.
Additional LRRS, preferred route to detour
traffic to more direct route on higher order road.
Removes Bicentennial Drive and Ben
Edwards Street Sunshine Beach | Sunshine Beach Road David Low Way Lexcen Drive from LRRS.
David Low Way Sunshine Beach Edwards Street Emu Mountain Road Existing LRRS — no change
Page 7 of 80Section 8
Page 8 of 80
Heathland Drive Sunshine Beach Eenie Creek Road David Low Wa Existing LRRS — no change
Additional LRRS, connector road to Goodchap
Street which services Noosa Hospital,
Ernest Street Tewantin Hilton Terrace Goodchap Street significant regional institution.
Additional LRRS, services Noosa Hospital,
significant regional institution, significant
Goodchap Street Tewantin Ernest Street Eumundi Noosa Road, Noosaville commuter route.
Hilton Terrace Doonella Street Existing LRRS — no change
Additional LRRS, preferred route to detour
traffic from Tewantin CBD, significant commuter
route. Removes part of Poinciana Avenue &
Doonella Street Tewantin Memorial Avenue Sidoni Street Memorial Avenue from LRRS.
Additional LRRS, preferred route to detour
traffic from Tewantin CBD, significant commuter
route. Removes part of Poinciana Avenue &
Sidoni Street Tewantin Doonella Street Poinciana Avenue Memorial Avenue from LRRS.
Sidoni Street Butler Street Existing LRRS — no change
Additional LRRS, newly constructed connector
road, significant commuter route. Removes
Goodwin St and Cullinane Streets from
Butler Street Tewantin Cooroy Noosa Road Cullinane Street LRRS.
Additional LRRS, services Noosa River Ferry,
forms the only access to a remote community
(Noosa North Shore and Teewah village) and
Moorindil Street Tewantin Poinciana Avenue Noosa River attractions of regional significance.
Cullinane Street McKinnon Drive (State Controlled) Existing LRRS — no change
Cooroy Noosa Road Butler Street Cooroy Noosa Road (State Controlled) Existing LRRS — no change
Page 8 of 80Section 9
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Attachment 2 – Maps of proposed amendments to Noosa Local Roads of Regional
Significance
Page 9 of 80
Section 10
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 10 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
SW SASS
TKS SS Tee OF
0 |\_ BRS A 7S ba
| RLY BA | \> Ay PS A
7 A 7» a YI q Ei Sy,
<\_ Ils & anil! S auth RSS f
S28 H J Hie
Ye Sree t 3 a ear ULE oy
L AS A |] Seti Pea | eam 4.
Se ) Fis + HUI E
$5) gon ae PN te OS
<Q eA FG ie eG | ae iE)
NS (oss AR Cee
aN A) Ses 6 A Ne SN
| (FAR IT BAY g
K\— SS : my) FAS ‘
, g i
A aN Ui pre es
“py; Ost
i SS ~~,
Legend Cooroy Proposed LRRS Changes
Water Bodies LRRS Changes
= Esa 0 100 200 300 400 oo
Page 10 of 80Section 11
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 11 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
VX,
| A
ie Batis = a ) fi a |
Ci SBE ae ES a! SSE
ae i ezas
ae SAE EY :
pe Pee
_/E Tippee Ne
[SHH sp 7 a TE Ta, =
S TARY Haag <7
Y D
9 5
BY CAS sSR
Page 11 of 80Section 12
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 12 of 80
— BrYXooa ew. — 3S ALE Bas —
i Seon ey 9 ESS LY —
| a eal éy, WA, = ! Ne SEH es
' rungs YOM Get Ht £9 oS AFB HE See a | Be"
ii ler aed oo lk aa} A L ; : Hepa Pane 6
Salaun S| | io 3 a7 Ma in | a les sree
Bad? Tomy Be LN ES Te by] “Bas T) “aS — see ree | SS BY
BY A e ~ . ep) el Ahm Le Pee Se f BS AE Cay |) pt ta! mo They — ¥
UT b Rete heal Wf. we } We (ay DET a C) fecaee se “Es ar I amy stare
NA pr RO p—~6& Si 3 fey i HT A
bil LTT) ORES : 4 HkUT fal Bie see <4 ww Tare
SEES tea SUSE Sages BE ates ARO EEN
—_j 7 Titty. ns = +r a 6 HSS Ee gS {
Ov. “ee, I roe dit = Fe TT OE CaS Ig F BS ZF)
i : BS mt /Z TT Lae SD, egg UT ennai Al ~ Sa
bs Ben OSH, REIS Ue SO Ne
ae a tt Mey ARI D red STR ! ON KML | E>
RO POT Wann Were AR Q Ll TOS ei | Sy PS
ae oF US BH MGS AS CU» YRS a | YE
BA\ S Soe i Ressay AN’ Cv een Z VDA & | b feo
ey t) } TARAS ES eS OTF RL 4 ci } S Bod ;
CX OSEAY ECR TSG 4 en KO) 6) um OR | BRE
By SRY a Soh, KOS Airs ES RO riish AUTOS
5 ee | T \ HE 2 PS BIN, Sy ope = S ASS 3 ss .
5 Lome SRO PY) DoH ORs ©: mA, yf ite, A r =) <5
“fp eS , ie t we = CES Y (7 ‘a , ee x Y n >, > til] i! TT} is = Cy
eee ABM SO SERO”_// gf Renu Sty, ss B:
Y SR? a iH \NOSe S Cy ST {} [7 Ca AS
Jesh Be Ste A ORS R ee
Tee WY (Ey EBESZSX SOS PT iy LR, Loe <V§ Om
HEY nity rgeaees Sy T | T) & ' SLO ST Om, STS SONS mo,
ne TX. ie | oe ’ a m I AG Bt = cas x ne Y) cs CS Sy — ™
Ral NC eas mead 2 Rape
PROOF \ ( <p ty EBA ° Dera) eT NOTTS = -
5 , Piped uu OOS LT HS CS =i
QE wYA LTS UT HP AT RSS Ck
ph “eo SOL Fy bes BSS ‘ ud a oo an a . Ve i
Rete ia ¥ rar SORRY — ie Co
pe Ken, es 4 A | = > —_ — = =
SS ee — :
Pe CP) eg dA \ =
Legend Noosaville Proposed LRRS Changes
Water Bodies LRRS Changes a
—— TR Roads. New 0 100 200 300 400 500m @
Cadastre — Existing a
[_] Land Parcel — Remove
Page 12 of 80Section 13
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 13 of 80
|} a q —
| R080 225 No Tyee 3
| % Pa =
oe - |i a
at ERE Na — ba” Ls
wy Sed |e be) by
‘ Sa BY Sle 7
sy <b ae» = Ol ae A
Sats “i &
Te ET eS OB _ | {Tag ‘
ge Fmt TS hy 1
sae oe Dy TT a
- FS \ oy f? Ul BS
FSS VLE RS Se " le SS ay
(red M SES SS ye RS Ns
ge AN) ee wa ch} .\ 34 | Re 4 \ ‘i S
U0 7 EF a Toei sar Ke ll eS 9 VR
o{ ®, AL OR Ne nT eh IER : Si
| ey) Dx Vi [Xé i} TET yes Be, V4 Sige QS
Ne a Li Ade o Bee eda oy
ST CRE SS ep Se I] || Bess i
o Sie Wasim BO emt \ / VE ERs Alls, ear = SS
b (en : : a, = A re Q
ee ONO ES Be) SU \ 1] > Th EEF Seg A Pham
“ae a SAS ‘Seppe STH oop ee] O +, vy o ae va) |
Fa [hs SO SOG BY vel Pete TA aap A Ce 9 ERO La
4% ai CH Fi Rw = a 5 uch bel) (ees ATE _ I = 5 S/ hs 4 On CBE
5) ge? Anes OS, Sa SES ASG Ht,
ty Teaiseisoe sft 2 9 wotha daye TTS HEE BOF SCS ke TT
fl OT eet ES oa tome cone ae a Ss CAG
AU 8 = Pires a a 9 SS Ss a ams SAR EO Ni g
Perec eI TY {) " &y Le
i es Re tel ep ed KIA a ae ek eRe
AY Bg SBeP oro mee? Ease PRS 5
De “ cr - My Se |] | Th dh aan Le iY ] J i et A =
Fig Ke tet lary Street Lf OSHTA Ai — KOT A | A) &) XY
Hea Ss | GM Br. et ESTs p TAY, oh Ara Stest Ss
1 So ORT OER ache CAH
b| 4 ul] J [) (604: Sees 3 5 © .
te oe Sarthe) 2 BST ws: AS
| 6 QAM eae iN , Ps Ta ay t} a, g UU
Legend Noosa Pr =
Water Bodies LRRS Changes Pp S Changes
oposed LRR
Cadastre __ eting .
—— TMR Roads
[-_] Land Parcel — Remove 0 100 200 300 400 500m C)
——
Page 13 of 80Section 14
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 14 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
BY
eR
SS
aa
cr
| =e
) ons WW by 5S
a BE
YS) AWE TT a i
7 VM EVAR Ae ESS, xX
7 S DO WT Taare 6 ~ CX
; eK ALITT Es" NE
SRN EDS. ANG
. NV Aeese ser SS
SS be YF} LK SY SQ
= 5 a QO Xe)
“S| HEI DSSS BR QS Ss
S a REA SRO
\ | Cire 2 s 5, BS
<I Chi % 1
faite So GRE POSS
| 1S x BN C29
' Oe * LB SRS
- — ! WIE BS RRS SF
ci POON
EPG SEO CE SS
y igs ¢ D> KH Bes
| eras | BSB NO C3 Nee = ae
aac LS ISS NO SERS
anh hee Ba ‘iletome Soc PONS fay x
be ara eat) STITT Eady SOR
pln? ares 2 iS > L | Ra ia \\ JS PEL
Be eS Su OQ cant, \ Says
ne aN, A SIS SL
) ay * SIZ, {7 © Oe Stee re d
7 MLSS LD? AER BY
PH late A Os {/) 7 moe Hot
ATE AOR RUD O RII
| = a“ ; i> a A QO OR
| S CAL AR IEA Z e\
| Gramtree Couat ry io 6 > OSS Ce C5
ty — NO Es = ox NR RR NWO V
Y SEU Coe GY lea
b PAA OA Oh SB ow
KN. 1 | xO : SDS) i (EU ER, A
Legend Sunshine Beach Proposed LRRS Changes
Water Bodies LRRS Changes
Cone Roots —— New 0 100 200 300 400 po
—— Existing
[] Land Parcel — Remove
Page 14 of 80Section 15
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
2 MUNNA POINT CARAVAN PARK FORESHORE EROSION
Document i nformati on
Author Technical Officer, Coastal & Foreshores, David Shing
Planning & Infrastructure Department
Index ECM/ Subject/ Beach Erosion
Attachments 1. ICM Drawings
2. Proposed Dredge Area
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Munna Point foreshore was severely eroded during Cyclone Oswald in January 2013. The
erosion caused large trees to become undermined and also a large scarp had developed along
the shoreline. Council immediately installed a geofabic wall as emergent works to stop further
erosion. The Development Approval for these emergent works asked for Council to look at a
permanent solution to address erosion at this site.
The Department of Environment and Heritage Protection recommended Council trial a groyne
field to address the erosion and channel issues which will ensure that any sand nourishment on
the Munna Point Caravan site would be protected.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Coastal & Foreshores Technical Officer to the Infrastructure &
Services Committee Meeting dated 3 March 2015 providing an update on the Munna Point
Caravan Park Foreshore Protection project.
REPORT
The purpose of this report is to advise the Committee of the design, cost estimate and
approximate timelines for the Munna Point Caravan Park Foreshore Protection project.
Design
It is proposed to install three geofabric groynes along with a geofabric scour mattress. The
purpose of this construction is to trap sand between the groynes to maintain a beach profile and
manage the channel flow away from the eroded foreshore to allow sand renourishment. A copy
of the design drawings is provided at Attachment 1.
Cost Estimate
A cost estimate was produced by the consultant International Coastal Management (ICM), for the
three groynes, however their estimate did not include the placement and filling of the three scour
mattresses which were required. Our total cost estimate for all three groynes including scour
mattresses and contingency is $62,000.
Timelines
Designs have been completed. Applications have been lodged with the Department of State
Development, Infrastructure and Planning with approval usually taking 6 to 8 weeks. Approvals
are expected to be finalised mid-April.
It is anticipated that construction will then be completed by the end of May 2015.
Page 15 of 80
Section 16
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Sand Source
An application has been lodged to amend an existing Dredging Permit. A map of the proposed
area is provided at Attachment 2.
Dredging Operator
Broadwater Dredging is programmed to undertake the required dredging to fill the groynes and
scour mattresses. They are due to be back in the Noosa River at the end of March to align with
this work.
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting, 25 September 2014, Item 2, Page 4
That Council note the report by the Director Planning & Infrastructure and Senior Technical
Officer to the Infrastructure & Services Committee Meeting dated 16 September 2014 and:
A. Request that a detailed assessment for the development of a hydrodynamic model for the
Noosa River between Tewantin and the river mouth be prepared for consideration by
Council at the next budget review; and
B. That a Tidal Works application be submitted to the Department of Environment and
Heritage Protection for the trialling of geotextile sandbag groynes at Noosa River Holiday
Park located at Munna Point.
Finance & Risk
Financial risk to Munna Point Caravan Park
Public Safety Risk
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Munna Point Stakeholders
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Department of Natural Resources and Mines
Maritime Safety Queensland
Internal Consultation
The Property & Facilities Branch has been consulted through this process.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
x Community Services x Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
x Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities x Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office x Corporate Services
Community Engagement x Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 16 of 80
Section 17
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 17 of 80
ATTACHMENT 1
. ‘ DRAWING REGISTER
International oo : 06.02.2015
= fe MPG-001 SCHEME OF WORKS
Coastal yo ; . MPG-003. GROYNE 1 SECTIONS
\ MPG-002 GROYNES - PLAN LAYOUT
M t Y z MPG.005- GROYNE 3 SECTIONS
OFFICE 50/G Arm, SYC Marina, Main Beach, 4217, QLD, Australia o :, we pe
POST PO Box 306, Main Beach LPO, Main Beach QLD, 4217, Australia fagaen” ey ) Pee eee
TELEPHONE +617 55640564 FAX +61 755329147 Ss as
WEBSITE www.coastalmanagement.com.au Mun ake SO ee
eee 4 Ne EN i ae a
MUNNA POINT GROYNES lll EE, es
Page 17 of 80Section 18
Page 18 of 80
’ «7's | LY
tie >
7
ae Sey) at ee
- Fn, Was : -
“a eas? Pw
% - NOTES aac ~
an Nits Scheme of works
ace a 3 - . Canesten tig ib eae)
a "s eo Gumiia cine May Saas
: / * einen acne aan eg
I" 4 ee approval IPOCQ00S7404A33 amanaed
nn - to include additional Dredge Area 7 (as
i Ae \) A shown),
a Re 2 Works to be constructed as a tnal witn
A =~ cngomg mantoing evaluate eectveness
oor soe — i ——— J B. oes iretatra festaching ot
ou yaa — cevstaes) Ge widnsaher gs alles.
‘“ Groynes to be marked wah sullable
; << rerprerects of Regional Harbour Mester
7 5 No works within Noosa River Fish Habitat
A Approved Dredge Area 1 ~ Ares or relevant buffer zones Closest point
. && 19m from the boundary
(separate approval) reining
a Ri A B Crm ot more margin refer
Q Grawing Mi! to -005
ern VTE Rel \
SNosis “a eerie Rte ceall ls »s Copier
Pere eee | : ~ elite
. 7 -s <* . eg td , \
Proposed Trial Groynes | ae D ~~ <
/ Sa / " ia a = .
a Py “ 5 LEGEND
| 7 ee a — ‘ ty ‘ fo RP Bound
| 5 aN BS) een Tels) r » m ha ¥ r - F f MHS J MLS
NL Ser +h 4 A werdary ——
ga pipe Y a De . 3 ’ a v ’ f peroved Dredge Area a
2 4 a y . ad - a < 7 cocoa Deena We - -
2 ] a a - y ry Pa ny > 4 | Target nourishment zone SURAT
[ ee | x eK. “= 4 = os) J 7 > b |Ceotextle Structure —
Dea Derren el] a So ae ae PS aes y __ -—
< Ne % - eS *" ’ E es a 4 , ee ae ee
erecta a ; 4 aan " ¥5 Ay r NS) - Su a
; a q A * ¥ - b iF
\ - — oe oF: : = —
q ‘ Ko Pa . coukk ~~
s . » 4 ‘i E
B S\ f Vet Vea / w1-) |||]
Peo, " ee cg’ CP ee aX S Ai i a
9 ? e ee e » Os eo ; Sd se os ax ) : : = International
Ps ; > iam a ys x a . a 4 - > Coastal
4 1) a iy Z , , , oe ry Sa Management
k fe ve $ ey =) — _cereeteiteny
. : ? rae A f P a Bee Se ae
. a . t aie Y F Fa , fs — a ; see
a Re. el Ae we a
tw: Aa es o
© PR wore ox oe
' a bY ie « mh os é oe a* : a _ —
a A ON One 3
a Oa a 4 neanens
Sak. 7 NE OCU ae ae
** ys Lo ss < a a
Pa hei % OP Dat Ae ’ ~~ - mem
st . ut = rs . = . a 4 a) SCALE An ven DATE ores 2aN
Page 18 of 80Section 19
Page 19 of 80
Po 7 |
ra Ze |
@. || Rp, in
* 4
Ll ao | ~
+ QO 4 a =
oe ‘ B
@ , -
Av — ee
Oy Pe
‘ Ad Me
aie < « ie bs 4 By _” a &
eo \ Lime | as
a \ 3 NOTES ~ .
sp \ All measurements are in metres,
\ Dimensions not to be scaled.
6 \ Survey by Noosa Shire Council Jan 2014
\ 3. Tidal levels taken from Queensland
Transport Tide Tables 2014.
4. Containers expected to be stable in
O || velocities of 1.5 - 2.0mis.
fA A Is. Groyne works to be entirely within Lot 131 on
Qe OG | sptasai7
Q, \& |]. Groyne 3 to be located downstream (east) of
Q XO || existing stormwater pipe. Works not to
Za CS || damage existing pipe.
~ Oo x |]? Groynes to be constructed using 0.75m3
Q ho E ‘eS || sand-filled geotextile containers fabricated
2 u : |] using ElcoMAX 1209RP (or equivalent).
@ ‘2 s Containers to be hydraulically filed in
YP Xe accordance with manufacturers instructions
xy “) | and placed such that closures are covered
eS and adjacent containers are well interlocked
|] and butted together.
8. Sand-flled geotextile scour mattress to be
“ \ 507340.3mE | couivatend comprising -20 independent fi
A f \_ fabricated using ElcoMAX 1209RP (or
AA ne 7080717.4MN | oom Fi compartments to be
: compartments with filled dimension 7m x
2 ee sc parallel with the groyne orientation. Mattress
- WY to be well-filled with sand (not mortar) using
‘ pump/ dredge system
— \ 9 Sand to be sourced from approved dredge
Qe. \ areas (separate approval) or imported.
é ® o
2 \\ “
Z@Q o ‘ wer tone oem An
~*~ 6 \\) | MWS 078m CO 0:38 AHD
. @ 2 oO > AHD 0.42m CD 0.00m AHD
® \“e raw | Mus —at7mcd. 025m AHO
oD a NX || LAT 0.00m CD_-0.42m AHD.
e \%
t LEGEND
2D, ‘ RP Boundary ————
\e * MHWS / MLWS ——_—_
Bs \Z - i Approved Dredge Area a
os Z rf: co 0.75m3 RP Container tJ
Y \ Cg
- o Scour mattress GS5ECr
; a \
aa f
\ |
. — §07314.0m E
\ roman os
WS « g =
(\) s\< % le}st sf alflzifis J
\‘G S & wey” Y International
Xe = \ Coastal
\S ~ % \ - Management
Z ~<a \
; iy OFFICE 50/6 Am, SYC Matra Man Beuh 4217 OLD, Ara
Se \ |] East Foc won gexentPo, Maroy OLD 47a
. 5 : TEErONe 517 SRO FAL. 17 SHON?
~ C 5 ig (it saomanniniee
\. Ke Ps 4 iN = [Roma
0 ie
i \ \ x ¢ S NOOSA R - MUNNA POINT TRIAL
se } \ \ .
( \ \ , DRANG TTTE
oe 907289.6m E XS GROYNES - PLAN LAYOUT
\ 7080680.1m N 7 = _/ ‘earn a
MPG-002
PORTE RESO TE PRED AT
ee | | fill oof ~4-
0 5 10 5 20 25m | . 7 Arca 2076
SF fonre: coree.2015 |Section 20
Page 20 of 80
; a YY :
: sa
16.5m (approx) ic PN os ao
r 7 on PRS \\
= OR ee Vas
8 NOTES 7
a li. All measurements are in metres.
a Dimensions not to be scaled.
2. Tidal levels taken from Queensland
Transport Tide Tables 2014.
3. Survey by Noosa Shire Council Jan 2014.
-— Approved nourishment profile - ee ees pears oes
RL +1.0m AHD L_~14.8
ee
a x Os \ Q scour mattress BAT *oesm Ag
=> ( é () 5
0 x () — Ss. AHD 0.00m AHD
@ ——. ———_ 8 MLWS -0.25m AHD
0) “- S LAT -0.42m AHD
* v/
o/
3/
s/
; Ril -2.6m AHD
N
“ ~ “BA
. LEGEND
[REVISIONREGISTER—~—SCi@d REGISTER
— Beet HanireES pes = Bee aif si}
j pepsp sepa] =]
| 26-30 8m ZL 9D is
1 ~ - 4 | / PeeWee fee = |
C5) [= [isi __= _}izafca] =]
eS © , Pa [ceq fae]
2 3 7—Y—Y ~ = cam a ee ta |
eve varies lor nah euecseeceneseueuseee( a as —————_—-
International
Coastal
Management
. . . - cae en a ae
Typical X-Section Typical End X-Section EEETE orcs
FET
ARRON saan
ETE TS
a EL ————aa—EE= s
ieee
Page 20 of 80Section 21
Page 21 of 80
a
X hn
>
EJ, >
- $ ” ,
w Fa < ve soa ,
4 a ae
Gaz Ve
NOTES ——
All measurements are in metres.
Dimensions not to be scaled.
2 Tidal levels taken from Queensland
Transport Tide Tables 2014.
ls. survey by Noosa Shire Council Jan 2014
15.3m (approx) 4. For groyne location and material
l _— Approved nourishment profile 3 specifications, see drawing MPG-002.
=
8
RL +1.0m AHD a.
~1.8 / «
Nye Ee lee i a a pg ge gy Sarg te . 1» ———HAT 068m AHD
== Q eae 9 erase
: ee ee ee
ieee ° J /— Scour mattress
. y 7 Qf — /——_ - —: /——— + ———MLWS -0.25m AHD
i — 97 (SS
j ¥
X , o
% /
&
Vv
NSL
LEGEND
~ ~
a a
fie fe ee ea
Pe
/— scour mattress ES ae
eS
2.6- 3.0 | 8m Z |-—-__-..
' 4F jaa) |
3 / 3 i, Z toe International
level varies along length Cee TD level varies Coastal
| Management
OFFICE 501A SYC Manna. Men Beach 1217, 0.0, Mowat
FEET F0 poe an Been ?0, Mon Boh GLD.27, use
TELEPHONE 61755640561 FAK 617 SGQ09147
WORST S so ccatamaregeent Sores
. . . . PRORET Was
Typical X-Section Typical End X-Section
STE
prommnaRs ae
° ' 2 ° ‘ “m Pf wer Pre,
RAE Ea FRED AT
tiene
Page 21 of 80Section 22
Page 22 of 80
Py
Sos, ‘hen
7 >
|| ‘ =
¥ % ;
: fe
re arg Paes
[notes es ~
All measurements are in metres.
| Dimensions not to be scaled.
2. Tidal levels taken from Queensland
|], Transport Tide Tables 2014
13m (pron Sei eg oa mig
2 specifications, see drawing MPG-002.
,— Maximum Approved nourishment profile is
/ 3
RL +1.0m AHD j %
: = = i sa /
z De ee eee _——- | |) - —— +» —HAT 068m AHD
(\ Le _—— . ——_— . ——_. _—__. _——— — —— / —— _ - —— MWS 0.36m AHD
() ha oo _——- _ | | > —ARD 0.00m AHD
. ( () ——— Fs .——_" oe | MI -0.25m AHD
Cy SS ——" Sh LAT ode AD
( Ma. Si a =a
() Coe * ee Ss — scour mattress
ae {ar F A.
5 > . ens /
os ~ /
x / eas
/ Sas
RL -2.6m AHD i
=
ss NSL
- ~ BD
¥ LEGEND
|[REVISIONREGISTER
Le lefii safle B |
/— scour mattress jp) __=_) E492
J fefiepi) oe | aifa ee]
| 26-30 | 8m 2 ee
4 4 Pr f= [epi = alli fn |
1 t C3) 2 es ce ee
e S — = |
level varies along length CYT TTY TET TT TT tT TT LT LF tevet varies International
t i t , ‘
Coastal
Management
OFFICE $0 6 Am, STC Marea, an Beh 4217, GLD, sao
PORT Po tarde nvoecntro ten bean cine Aare
ee ee mn
Typical X-Section Typical End X-Section =
NG TE
ee
pe [ [a Prod
| | pramar-ec Fora RDA
fren er
| a Ea
Page 22 of 80Section 23
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 23 of 80
7 Wt oratrry Bl AN
» 8 ATTACHMENT 2
we , \ y .
. s Ly % - by
wee , 2m CS . .
\ ; oe A Pe Fs aie
se \ ; NOTES ae
\ 1. All measurements are in metres.
7: \ Dimensions not to be scaled.
Pe , i l2. Tidal levels taken from Queensland
: i Transport Tide Tables 2014
2 ; P Cc Survey by Noosa Shire Council Jan 2014.
gee “A , dp 4. Extent of dredge area defined as per
\ pre? a co-ordinates below.
we \ gat ‘ [Point | Easting | Northing |
seo oe
od) > [8 | soreez_| rosea
oe :
A oo? \ {=o} sorea2 [7080723 |
\ Let I5. Design dredge depth -3.0m AHD. Maximum
. vertical dredging tolerance to be 0.5m.
‘ Ke Pa 6. Available volume ~30,000m?
\ \ a : 17. Batters may be formed by equivalent box cut
at Ni \8. Previous dredging activities suggest the area
: is highly mobile and contains clean sand
\ =f AI wy suitable for nourishment.
3 ies @ Munna Point Yn
; — =
of 2,
* . Sy Sy Dy LEGEND
. ie "Im IRP Boundary ——
as N . gee Proposed Dredge Area fee feces
D Ne ver Ho
af Noosa River Holiday Park
oe? Lot 131 SP143417
: fe fs fe Jey |
” P fc Pe ler Pl} |
a P[-[ TTT
. man [-[-[ TTT]
b= tefos ee ds |
% g fef-| oo ie f=} «|
«2 s. 8
2 < Zo International
35 g|>
as alo Coastal
a a Management
. ; MHWs EERE, 5G am 5 Mn Mane 217-00, ara
ee MLWS Tibor avsoos tne yea
TERETE sw crtamuragineni soe ts
ANS TTE
DRAWING No REWSION:
es X-Section A-A cr ial 2 ~—
. —— —— ——
0 5 10 15 20 25m ail rea
me
Page 23 of 80Section 24
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORTS
3 REVIEW OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE COOROY BUTTER FACTORY
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Director, Community Services, Alan (Fox) Rogers
Community Services Department
Index ECM/Subject/Branch Management/Community Services
Attachments 1. Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre by d sipher
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2014 Galleries Service Review recommended that a further review of the Butter Factory be
undertaken in consultation with the community, to explore potential contemporary uses and
develop a more sustainable management model. Over the years, both the former Noosa Council
and Sunshine Coast Regional Council have tried different management models for this facility but
none has proven to be sustainable in the long term.
The consultation revealed that many Noosa residents view the Butter Factory as a valuable
community facility with diverse potential. It also demonstrated that the community wanted to have
greater involvement in the decision-making and operation of the facility.
A broad range of ideas and proposals were received through the consultation. The first phase of
analysis determined four of these ideas as having merit:
U3A Noosa operating a Cooroy sub-branch and facilitating other users of the building;
the Cooroy Lower Mill Board managing and programming the Butter Factory;
a Centre for Ceramic Excellence being established and using the Butter Factory as a cultural
and training hub focussed on ceramics; and
a Biosphere Interpretation Centre being established as a tourist attraction and providing
interpretative arts, environment and heritage exhibitions.
Detailed analysis of the community proposals determined that none of them made optimum use
of the facility and none of the proposers had the necessary resources to operate the Butter
Factory as a community facility without some Council support. Therefore after the consultation
period the Review Team undertook a final phase of analysis which considered Council retaining
management and a new hybrid community-management model.
Page 24 of 80
Section 25
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
The options considered were:
Option Comment Cost
Option 1 Council to hire out Simple to manage 2015/16: approx. $45,000
the facility as a venue and Lowest cost option (depreciation &
primarily act as bookings May remain idle for long periods maintenance); assumes
manager Does not respond to community hire income covers other
expectations particularly regarding costs of approx. $36,000
activation & community management
Low economic and social outcomes
Option 2 Council to continue Requires re-instatement of staff and 2015/16: approx.
to operate and manage the budget $207,000
Butter Factory as an arts Most expensive option
centre Does not respond to community
expectations regarding activation and
community management
Moderate economic and social outcomes
Option 3 Butter Factory is a Community managed and driven Approx. $125,000
community managed facility Greater activation of Butter Factory (including maintenance
with Council providing Reduces Council financial and costs) in year 1 reducing
financial support to a operational burden to $100,000 in year 3
community organisation to Responds to community expectations
manage and activate the Incorporates multiple ideas from
facility. community consultation
Strong social outcomes
Moderate economic outcomes
The current budget for the 2014/15 financial year is $157,385.
Taking these factors into consideration the Review Team believes that Option 3 is the most
beneficial.
After further consultation with the community groups the Review Team is recommending Council
enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Cooroy Lower Mill Board to operate the
Butter Factory for an initial period of three years with U3A and the Ceramic Centre of Excellence
being anchor tenants. This model allows for the continuation of arts and cultural activities at the
Butter Factory as well as the exploration of new activities and potential sources of income.
The Cooroy Lower Mill Board believes that over time it can generate enough revenue to
significantly subsidise the costs of running the Butter Factory, however it is also astute enough to
know that this will not happen overnight. In order to give the Mill Board the best chance of
success it is recommended that Council subsidise the operations of the Butter Factory by
$80,000 per annum in the first year with this subsidy gradually reducing over the subsequent two
years. It is further recommended that Council continue to maintain the building over this period.
This option is not without its risks particularly as the Cooroy Lower Mill Board has never
managed a facility before, hence the recommendation to enter into the MOU for an initial trial
period.
Page 25 of 80
Section 26
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Director of Community Services to the Infrastructure &
Services Committee Meeting dated 3 March 2015 and agree to:
A. Adopt Option 3 as its preferred option and enter into a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with the Cooroy Lower Mill Board to manage the operations of the Cooroy Butter
Factory for an initial period of three years;
B. Include in the MOU that U3A Noosa and the Ceramic Centre of Excellence be anchor
tenants in the Butter Factory for this period;
C. Consider as part of the 2015/16 budget process, the allocation of $80,000 to the Cooroy
Lower Mill Board to allow them to meet start-up expenses and employ suitably qualified
staff to support the operations of the Butter Factory. This amount to be reviewed annually
thereafter with a view to the subsidy being reduced to $55,000 in the third year; and
D. Continue to maintain the Butter Factory and Pottery Shed buildings.
REPORT
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of the review into the operations
and management of the Cooroy Butter Factory and a recommendation for a future management
model.
1. Background
The Butter Factory at Cooroy is a local heritage building purchased by Noosa Council in the early
1990s.
Since then, the Butter Factory has fulfilled a variety of community functions as a creative hub, an
art gallery, a workshop space, an education provider, a performing arts venue and an office
space for Council’s creative and heritage staff. Groups and organisations that have used the
Butter Factory include TAFE, Permaculture Noosa, the Butter Factory Arts Inc., the Queensland
Museum Regional Development Officer and Creative Noosa.
A ceramics studio was built on the site when TAFE was based at the Butter Factory site and,
since 2004 when TAFE left the site, the studio has been utilised by local ceramic artists as a
workshop space and pottery studio.
Under the Sunshine Coast Council the Butter Factory operated as a Council-run gallery space for
local and visiting artists with an exhibition program, associated public programs and workshops
as well as being an occasional venue for performing arts and professional development
workshops for teachers in the region.
In 2010 the Cooroy Library, a state of the art facility, was built close to the Butter Factory on the
Lower Mill site further expanding the community facilities on the precinct.
The Butter Factory attracts on average 11,000 visitors annually, made up of local residents,
schools, community groups, practicing artists and interstate visitors.
Over the years, both the former Noosa Council and Sunshine Coast Regional Council have tried
different management models for this facility but none has proven to be sustainable in the long
term.
Page 26 of 80
Section 27
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
2. Review of Butter Factory Operations
In 2014, following the de-amalgamation of the Noosa Council from the Sunshine Coast Council a
service review of the operations of the Noosa Regional Gallery and the Butter Factory was
undertaken. It recommended that a further review of the operations of the Butter Factory be
undertaken in consultation with the community to explore more sustainable management models.
The Butter Factory review was undertaken in the second half of 2014 by staff of the Community
Services Department. Ellen Vasilauskas from d sipher consulting assisted in the development
and analysis of options for the management of the Butter Factory.
The objectives of the review were:
in consultation with the community, to explore and develop options for the management of
the Cooroy Butter Factory.
to identify a future for the Butter Factory that is viable, has contemporary relevance, and is
supported by the local community and users of the Butter Factory.
3. Process
The review adopted an iterative approach, comprising five main phases:
Stage 1: Community consultation and call for ideas (August – October 2014);
Stage 2: Research into other community art centres and other management models used in
similar venues (August – October 2014);
Stage 3: Identification of lead proposals and work with community groups to refine (October
– November 2014);
Stage 4: Analysis of community proposals (December 2014); and
Stage 5: Final assessment of proposals, development of options, preparation of report and
recommendations to Council (December 2014 – February 2015)
4. Community Feedback
The Butter Factory review involved extensive community consultation through public forums,
stakeholder meetings and over 1,500 people participating online via Your Say Noosa.
People who participated in the consultation believed that the Butter Factory needed to be
sustainable on many levels particularly having a sound financial base, wide community support
and a strong community-management model.
In terms of activities and programmes, respondents believed the Butter Factory should:
have a significant arts and cultural orientation, including support for emerging artists;
recognise the importance of the existing pottery facilities and users;
complement, enhance and integrate with existing services and businesses, not compete with
them;
extend functions from visual arts to other community and cultural activities, such as learning,
performances and recreational activities; and
align with and connect to the Lower Mill precinct, the town of Cooroy and the broader Noosa
community.
In terms of governance and support respondents believed the Butter Factory should:
be community run and driven;
be viable and sustainable; and
continue to be supported by Council for operations and maintenance.
Page 27 of 80
Section 28
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
In terms of usage and access respondents believed the Butter Factory should:
be open to the broader community, not just a select few;
be more dynamic and have more energy; and
aim for better levels of use, with access and opening hours extended to include evenings and
weekends.
Respondents also identified:
the importance of the building as part of Cooroy’s history, heritage and community;
a number of building limitations which should be addressed in order to facilitate more
effective and efficient use of discrete and overall areas within the Butter Factory. For
example: poor acoustics prevent use for concurrent activities and access issues constrain co-
location of organisations;
opportunities to incorporate old and new ideas relevant to Cooroy and broader Noosa. For
example: ceramics, heritage, environment, the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Accreditation,
training and creative community-working spaces; and
the building should be used to meet identified needs in the local area. For example: a place
for lifelong learning and helping young people.
5. Community Proposals
A broad range of ideas were proposed through the consultation from informal notions to detailed
submissions. The first phase of analysis determined four of these as having significant merit and
members of the Review Team assisted the groups in developing these initial concepts into
comprehensive proposals. These four proposals were:
U3A Noosa operating a Cooroy U3A sub-branch and hiring out the facility to other users;
the Cooroy Lower Mill Board managing and programming the Butter Factory;
a Centre for Ceramic Excellence being established providing a cultural and training hub
focussed on ceramics; and
a Biosphere Interpretation Centre being established providing interpretative arts, environment
and heritage exhibitions.
In addition to these four community proposals the review team flagged to the community that it
would also consider the option of Council retaining management of the Butter Factory
A brief summary of each of the community proposals is provided below.
U3A Noosa Proposal
Under this proposal U3A Noosa would lease the Butter Factory predominantly using it to
establish U3A activities in the hinterland. In addition, U3A would facilitate other uses of the
building by working with community organisations and hiring out spaces.
U3A is a “self-help; self- managed, lifelong learning co-operative for over fifties who are no longer
in full-time work. They provide opportunities for members to share learning experiences in a wide
range of interest groups and to pursue learning not for qualifications, but for fun.”1 Weekday
classes and weekend social activities are offered.
U3A Noosa (www.u3anoosa.org.au) – is an established organisation with approximately 720
members in Noosa. A Cooroy sub-branch of U3A would be established to run U3A programs.
This proposal would require Council to maintain, insure and provide security for the Butter
Factory building but otherwise minimal Council subsidy.
1 See www.u3anoosa.org.au
Page 28 of 80
Section 29
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Cooroy Lower Mill Board Proposal
Under this proposal the Cooroy Lower Mill Board would lease and manage the Butter Factory. It
would develop and coordinate programs and activities in partnership with other groups as well as
hiring out spaces. This would enable the visual arts and pottery aspects to continue, as well as
expand activities to incorporate a number of the ideas that have been identified in the community
consultation process.
The Cooroy Lower Mill Board is a not for profit community based organisation with a long
standing association with the Lower Mill site and strong links to the Cooroy and hinterland
community.
The Cooroy Lower Mill Board’s proposal would require Council to continue to maintain the
building and also requires an initial subsidy for start-up expenses and a project officer to
coordinate and promote activities at the Butter Factory. The Mill Board believe that in the medium
to long term (three plus years) they can reduce the subsidy requirement for the project officer.
Centre for Ceramic Excellence Proposal
This proposal sees the Butter Factory develop as a Centre for Ceramic Excellence. Current
pottery activities would be expanded to form a cultural centre focussed on ceramics. Activities
would include industry support, exhibitions, festivals, master classes and accredited training in
ceramics.
This idea has been developed by local professional practicing ceramicists and artists who have
now formed an incorporated association.
This proposal would require Council to continue to maintain the building and would require
Council subsidy to establish the Centre. To be fully realised the Centre for Ceramic Excellence
would need a partnership with a Registered Training Organisation or University and/or ongoing
government subsidy.
Biosphere Interpretation Centre Proposal
This proposal sees the Butter Factory and broader precinct being developed as an interpretative
centre for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve and becoming a major tourist attraction. It would extend
the existing arts focus by adding new technology and collection based exhibits featuring the
environment, community and indigenous and heritage culture.
This proposal was developed and put forward by a group of local residents associated with the
Noosa Museum.
This proposal would require the agreement of the new Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation
and significant financial support in the establishment phase to deliver the exhibition quality
necessary for a major tourist attraction.
6. Assessment of Community Proposals
To assist with evaluating the proposals for the Butter Factory, d-sipher developed an assessment
model comprising six main areas of review:
The concept;
Organisation and governance;
Resources required;
Council policy priorities;
Community outcomes ; and
Comparative assessment.
Page 29 of 80
Section 30
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
A detailed assessment of each community proposal is contained in d-sipher’s full report to
Council, refer Attachment 1. A summary of the assessment appears below.
U3A NOOSA
U3A Noosa offers a convenient solution for Council with a single tenant that proposes to use the
space regularly and will administer the Butter Factory for use by other users.
U3A is well established community organisation and has a proven ability to deliver its programs.
This proposal would extend the programs and activities U3A Noosa currently offers from its
Tewantin facility. As the U3A would not use all of the building for their programs they are
proposing to work with other community organisations to incorporate other uses and schedule
the space for other users.
Of all the proposed concepts, this is the least strategic and most administrative based program
delivery model. The proposed model of management is not a best fit with community aspirations,
as the U3A are logically focused on their members and activities, rather than the broader
community. While there is scope for use by other organisations this is likely to be more reactive
to user enquiries and not realise the same outcomes as a proactive program driven option.
There would likely be a small cost or some initial support needed in assisting the group to
promote the Butter Factory and run some of the online systems as well as some minor building
modifications to enable multiple concurrent users.
Cooroy Lower Mill Board
The Cooroy Lower Mill Board is an established presence in the Cooroy community and has a
proven record for delivering on projects such as the Cooroy Fusion Festival.
In order to animate the Butter Factory, the Cooroy Lower Mill Board proposes to significantly
extend community use and involvement in the Butter Factory through extended opening hours,
cultural programs, events and other activities. It will also have a focus on generating income
through a membership fee structure (similar to Wallace House), a user pays system for hire of
rooms with the aim of recovering costs, other measures that they are considering include a
requirement for exhibiting artist to attend their own exhibitions as has been successfully trialled in
recent months.
The Lower Mill Board proposal most closely aligns with the community aspirations for the Butter
Factory with its over-arching, inclusive, community-driven approach that is encompassing of
other groups, arts, cultural, and other potential activities.
As indicated in their proposal, they would seek funding for the development of a business plan,
the establishment of online systems, communication and programming infrastructure and
ongoing program delivery as well as some minor building modifications to enable multiple
concurrent users.
While individual board members have facility management experience, the Lower Mill Board itself
has not managed a community facility.
This model could readily accommodate a number of the other community proposals, including
the U3A and the Centre for Ceramic Excellence.
Page 30 of 80
Section 31
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Centre for Ceramic Excellence
The Centre for Ceramic Excellence (CCE) proposal is probably the most visionary of all of the
community proposals. However, as a standalone proposal, its focus is singularly on ceramics and
on its vision for the Centre rather than a broader community use. A significant plus is that the
proposers have quickly established their not for profit status as an association as a result of the
Cooroy Butter Factory review process.
This proposal maximises use of the existing pottery facilities, aligns well with state government
policy and potential partnerships with educational institutions. It would require some financial
investment to establish its viability.
This proposal does not require immediate full use of the Butter Factory and would require a
gradual development phase therefore there is scope for it to be co-located with other
complementary users of the Butter Factory.
The CCE proposal could be accommodated in funding for the Cooroy Lower Mill Board proposal
if the project officer worked with the CCE to obtain grants to establish an initial artist in residency,
subsequent arts programs and resources to establish partnerships with educational institutions.
Interpretation Centre
This proposal has gained support from some community members and the proposers have to
their credit, quickly formed a working group. However, support of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve
Foundation organisation, has not yet been established, which is a key factor in progressing the
concept.
The costs involved in establishing an interpretation centre are likely to be significant and the
proposal requires a full business plan and feasibility study to establish its viability. The
experience of other councils with similar interpretation centres has also shown that there are
significant ongoing costs associated with managing and maintaining these centres.
Compared with other proposals, this option is less well aligned with local community values and
with community preferences for a community and arts focus for the building. Other proposals are
more strongly positioned for immediate implementation and demonstration of on the ground
programming outcomes.
7. Final Options
Detailed analysis of the community proposals determined that none of them made optimum use
of the facility and none of the proposers had the necessary resources to operate the Butter
Factory as a community facility without some Council support. Therefore after the consultation
period the Review Team undertook a final phase of analysis which considered Council retaining
management and a new hybrid community-management model.
The options considered were:
1. Council to hire out the facility as a venue and primarily act as bookings manager;
2. Council to continue to operate and manage the Butter Factory as an arts centre; and
3. The Butter Factory be established as a community managed facility with Council providing
financial support to a community organisation to manage and activate the facility.
Page 31 of 80
Section 32
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Option 1. Council to hire out the facility as a venue and primarily act as a bookings
manager
The proposal to operate the Butter Factory as a hire-only venue would see Council act as a
bookings agent for community groups or individuals seeking to hire a venue. In practice, staff at
the Library would hold the keys for the facility and take bookings. The events or exhibitions at
the site would then be managed and manned by the community. Currently, there is a
requirement for any exhibitors to “man” the exhibition for at least one day.
This model provides the least cost to Council, but arguably does not meet the expectations
expressed by residents during the consultation process. Under this model, the venue would be
closed except when being rented for an event or exhibition.
The Butter Factory is currently available for hire however there are very few bookings given the
constraints of the building and the availability of other facilities in the hinterland.
Inevitably there would be demand for the facility to be used outside of traditional working hours,
particularly on weekends. This may present security issues, otherwise the fee structure would
need to accommodate security staff or some other arrangement put in place to handle access
outside normal working hours..
The Community Services zoning may result in restrictions on commercial hiring depending on the
intended use.
Council would still be required to maintain the building. With the building being less active than at
present, there is also an attendant higher risk of vandalism and break-ins.
The Council-managed hire-only option would have a net cost of approximately $45,000 in
2015/16 as the only costs would be depreciation and building maintenance assuming that venue
hire covers other costs such as cleaning, rates and security which would be approximately
$36,000.
Option 2. Council to continue to operate and manage the facility as an art centre
Programming of exhibitions and events would continue to be managed by Council staff with
additional support provided by volunteers. While the arts focus would continue there would be no
significant increase in community engagement or ownership. In addition, this option provides the
most cost burden to Council.
For Council to operate the Butter Factory as an arts centre commensurate with recent years
budget funding would need to be re-instated to approximately $207,000 in 2015/16. The staffing
and programming budgets were reduced considerably across the past three years from a net
cost of $264,000 in 2012/13 to $186,500 in 2013/14 and then down to $157,385 in 2014/15 in
anticipation of a transfer to a community managed model. The current budget is unsustainable as
it relies on significant cross-departmental support which is only temporary.
Option 3. The Butter Factory be established as a community managed facility with
Council providing financial support to a community organisation to manage
and activate the facility.
After consultation with the parties the Review Team considered a hybrid community management
model incorporating three of the strongest community proposals and those which have the
greatest potential to be co-located and complement each other while at the same time delivering
the best community outcome.
The proposed community management model identifies the Cooroy Lower Mill Board (CLM
Board) as the facility manager, with the U3A and Ceramics Centre for Excellence as anchor
tenants.
Page 32 of 80
Section 33
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
This model has particular merits. It is a community-driven approach which is actively inclusive
and encompassing of other groups. It would allow for the continuation of arts and cultural
activities at the Butter Factory as well as the exploration of new activities and potential sources of
income. Of particular significance is the fact that this model can accommodate a number of the
other community proposed concepts as well as the U3A and the Centre for Ceramic Excellence.
The CLM Board, U3A and the CCE have each indicated in principle agreement to this approach.
If successful, this option will activate the Butter Factory, engender community stewardship and
approach long-term sustainability.
There are some risks associated with this proposed model. While individual CLM Board
members have facility management experience, the Lower Mill Board itself has not managed a
community facility and their successful relationship to other stakeholder groups and individuals
needs to be developed. In order to manage these risks, it is recommended that Council clearly
establish roles and responsibilities by way of a Memorandum of Understanding between Council
and the CLM Board. It may be that such agreements would also need to be established between
the CLM Board and its anchor tenants. Expectations and boundaries would need to be clearly
and sensitively established and effective communication developed between the groups involved.
The CLM Board have requested that Council continue to maintain the building and also provide
funding for a project officer to help activate the precinct over an initial three year period. The total
of these costs is less than if Council were to continue to manage the building as a functioning
facility.
Previous Council Consideration
Nil.
Finance & Risk
Budget History
The 2012/13 net cost to Sunshine Coast Council to operate the Butter Factory as an arts centre
was $264,000.
Following de-amalgamation, a reduction was made to staffing and programming levels and the
net cost to Council for 2013/14 was the equivalent of $186,500.
The 2014/15 recurrent budget for the Butter Factory is:
Revenue $ 5,000
Expenditure $162,385
Employee Costs $52,139
Materials and Services $89,643
Depreciation $19,440
Other Expenses $ 1,164
Net Cost to Council $157,385
Page 33 of 80
Section 34
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
2015/16 Financial implications of three final options
Option 1 - Venue for Hire managed and operated by Council
Maintenance $25,000
Depreciation $19,440
Total Operating Cost $44,440
This assumes that venue hire covers other basic costs such as cleaning, electricity, water and
security which would be approximately $36,000. Current revenue from hiring is less than $5,000
per annum, therefore unless there is active marketing of the facility there is a risk that there will
be a shortfall in revenue and additional cost burden to Council.
Option 2 - Arts Centre managed and operated by Council
Revenue $ 15,000
Expenditure $222,000
Employee Costs $106,527
Materials and Services $95,000
Depreciation $19,440
Other Expenses $ 1,033
Net Cost to Council $207,000
Option 3 - Community Facility with the Cooroy Lower Mill Board as the managing organisation
Grant to Cooroy Lower Mill Board $80,000
Maintenance $25,000
Depreciation $19,440
Total Operating Cost $124,440
Capital Works
This current review and previous reviews have highlighted the need for building modifications to
address building constraints and increase potential uses. It is therefore recommended to
consider enhancements across the coming three years. There may be scope for a community
managed model to seek external funding to achieve this.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Consultation and information included:
1. 27 August 2014 - a ‘launch presentation and ‘World Café’ workshop that included information
on the objectives of the review, and opportunity for questions and contribution of ideas to
specific questions [Approximately 110 participants ]
2. September to December 2014 - Your Say Noosa, an online discussion open to all community
members on Council’s website guided by information and questions [Unique Visitors: 1519,
Visits:2033, Page Views: 5219]
3. September to December 2014 meetings and workshops with the Cooroy Lower Mill Board
(CLM Board), U3A, the Centre for Ceramic Excellence (CCE), Bruce Cresswell, and other
interested parties to discuss their ideas and develop up these options proposed by the
community
Page 34 of 80
Section 35
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
4. 25 November 2014 - a public meeting and presentation by council officers on the consultation
process, an overview of ideas received, options being considered, and the review
assessment model. [Approximately 50 participants ]
5. November 2014 – January 2015 – stakeholder meetings with Cooroy Lower Mill Board, U3A
Noosa and the Centre for Ceramic Excellence to workshop proposed hybrid model
Internal Consultation
Alan Rogers Director Community Services*
Kerri Contini Manager Libraries and Galleries
Ellen Vailiauskas d-sipher
Other internal consultation
Cr Tony Wellington
Gallery Director
Community Development Officer, Arts and Culture
* Note: The Director, Community Services has advised the CEO pursuant to Council’s Code of Conduct
that while his partner is a ceramic artist, she has had no involvement in the development of the Centre for
Ceramic Excellence proposal.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
X Community Services Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
X Cultural Facilities Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office Corporate Services
Community Engagement Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 35 of 80
Section 36
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 36 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
ATTACHMENT 1
Review of the Cooroy
Butter Factory Arts Centre
Report
Prepared for Noosa Council
by d-sipher
27 January 2015
Ti \
ss = . ~ “~
Os ee 2
BalCsMiae
sioner
Page 36 of 80Section 37
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 37 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Report prepared by:
Ellen Vasiliauskas
Director, d-sipher
email: [email protected]
ph: 07 5471 1330
postal: PO Box 168 Noosa Heads
Queensland 4567
d'sioher vee
D Member of:
the energy within - Australian Market and Social Research Society
and
- Australasian Evaluation Society.
Page 37 of 80Section 38
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 38 of 80
=
7
Bs)
=| bs
S § m 9 > 6D ee =
3 (8 D 5 ow U
Ba PO ye p a 2 OF g 2
& @ § 5 OR O => DH BD =
Pra & 23S4VRFYNE RB AG s@se 2@®§ ®o oO 9°
72S SC SBPoOZ 0023%72 S288 s = 7 a
moo 9 58228298 8 3 2 3533 2328 0 cS
S556: 8 @8 + 2 =o — ® E 3 < 6
S2Zi a2s2Fassezage > 3336 22e8 2 m
ori ¥ PeezrSSeSavEF FRFRB R2QeE F 0
rPi § SRERSFeosee® gaat FoR: B wn
>i i 3 88S FO <oue 2 SB2aw 2B ZF: Sj mm
Pit 32 3@BhR Sm® 2565 ® § 2 es fo § } a m
di: @® § & a 92? 58 &>- @89On8 : oh: 2
O : : ; ££ e 35 5 m Ag © GQ 56 ? $i: : 5
Si i ft @eeer nea es an peak ET FE: fA
Sii ft @o @aReVasa 8 3 §& =o ? i 3 } m
Sppop @ae: &§2Se23 $24"%38 FEE:
Si i i: :0ufi @RAKR BD B o2<02 : ff } O
Ai: : ? g8iiprpeatg ees oo 8S : : f } O
ne : Poi i S@e RSPR BOER Fi:
s $s $s € § > ' 6 = oO 4: = @ © : : : 3: =
PoP PoP fb &@ i Pb ®e SRSi:r zgea w FEE: =
fof Fld UE EE le PR it SOmpv : ft ti =
iio b fb POE Pi 222: bE as 8: £ EE
ii ob oP be:biid:P® er ii Fa AE EE: i 5
if bo oP PS: i @ et it @: Fi EF EE i . =|
jt te¢¢eii f ©: i: fi mi mi : : ii i m
2 $ to of : Bibi Bridi:i &@ boi :ii:i a
$$: $ ¢ ; $ $ Big fF § $ oF Be F fF F SE 3
Pid ob bP BRidi Biidid: i gi Pi: & =
i foi o£ £ ME EE oi d $$ Bi Bi EE Et g =
i of fb ob Goi i EP i Qi i $ bo mi S i o£ Ed i : m
i fob oP oP bo bE EP S bo bobo io @ ba: fb EE: $ m
iti: ¢€ £ ft dtdta@t:itt g@twoet ¢€ ¢: tt a 4
tf £ ef ¢€ $ £ ¢ € 8 $s FO st itsStiaet «i ¢: tif 9 >
i obo od oP bobo: iPod: bi bib 2: ei : i bi 2 rs
i bob oP Po PoP Pop bP bP: bE pri 2: ob ib 3
i bof ob od bo fb Eb EP EP boi bP io ob iE Pi ob i bi S >
ii: ¢: ¢ 6: td id: éi::dst tt i¢éi:ddt i¢@ ¢:tit 2 @
i obo Go ob Go bob bob EP ob i bod ob dp bE ob Ed: a
Peet £ Pi b bib babi db £biabd baba a m
i obo ob oP ob ob EP EP EP EP PEE bE ob Eb ob Eb ob boi q S
i obo bod ob oP EP PE PE EP Eb E ob iE boi ob boi 6
i fob oP od obo bob EP bo dP dob o£ E dP io ob Ei 3
i fob ob od ob bE Eb bod: bo Eb o£ EP bo o£ EE 3
Pre fF Eid db badd db oP bad ad ET Ed f
Pry fF Tid db badd bb oP baad Eb ad § oo
PRE § ERLELELELEE PEEP EEE 8 S
MMR th Bo it ' a
S PER DBRPSRKRKREEE ©wD DWYNMDD Vues = >
° Oo
‘ =
ioe]
e 8
s o
© —_
SoSection 39
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 39 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
4 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report signer
Review overview
Introduction
The Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre (CBFAC) is a well-loved historical and iconic site in the
district. With the recent redevelopment of the nearby sites by Council of a major library
resource as well as the Lower Mill site, Council considered it timely to address options for the
Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre.
Noosa Council commissioned independent market research and evaluation consultants
d-sipher, to undertake a review of the CBFAC in conjunction with Council.
The review included identifying, scoping and assessing options for the CBFAC and took into
consideration and evaluated the Butter Factory history, identification and analysis of potential
operating models and assessed the financial viability and sustainability of the options
proposed by the community. The options were developed in consultation with residents, local
artists, businesses and community organisations. This report has been prepared by d-sipher.
Background of the Butter Factory
The Butter Factory at Cooroy is a local heritage building purchased by Noosa Council in the
early 1990s for community use.
Since then, the Butter Factory has fulfilled a variety of functions in the community such as a
creative hub, an art gallery, a workshop space, an education provider, a performing arts venue
and an office space for council’s creative and heritage staff.
Groups and organisations that have used the Butter Factory include TAFE, Permaculture
Noosa, the Butter Factory Arts Inc., the Queensland Museum Regional Development Officer
and Creative Noosa.
A ceramics studio was built on the site when TAFE was based at the Butter Factory site and
since 2004 when TAFE left the site, the studio has been utilised by local ceramic artists as a
workshop space and pottery studio.
Under the Sunshine Coast Council the Butter Factory operated as a council-run gallery space
for local and visiting artists with an exhibition program, associated public programs and
workshops as well as being an occasional venue for performing arts and professional
development workshops for teachers in the region.
In 2010 the Cooroy Library, a state of the art facility, was built close to the Butter Factory on
the Lower Mill site further expanding the community facilities on the precinct.
The Butter Factory attracts on average 11,000 visitors annually, made up of local supporters,
schools, elderly groups, practicing artists and interstate visitors.
There is strong community ownership of the Centre. There are existing groups using the
Centre as well as good support from local volunteers.
Review objectives
e In consultation with the community, to identify, explore and develop options for the
Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre.
e To identify a future for the Butter Factory that has contemporary relevance, is viable
and is supported by communities of interest to the Butter Factory.
Page 39 of 80Section 40
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 40 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Asoher Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 5
Summary of approach
The overall approach to the review included a research, community consultation and
evaluation. The review adopted an iterative approach, comprising five main phases:
e Stage 1: Community Consultation and Identification of Options (August — December
2014)
e Stage 2: Desk research into what other communities in similar arts-related situations
were doing successfully and how this was being achieved (August — October 2014)
e Stage 3: Selection and analysis of community proposals (October — November 2014)
e Stage 4: Assessment of proposals, preparation of report and development of paper and
recommendations to council (December 2014 — January 2015) — Community Services
project team in discussion with d-sipher.
Review method
Council specified that the review consider and evaluate the Butter Factory history,
identification and analysis of potential operating models and consult with residents, local
artists, businesses, and community organisations.
Overall, over 150 community members and stakeholders contributed to the consultations. The
method included:
1. Design of a community consultation and engagement method supported by a
communication strategy and a risk assessment of potential sensitivities (council with
d-sipher input). Communications included media coverage in local newspapers and the
direct email distribution of invitations and information to community members on
council’s mailing lists.
2. Desk research —of community arts centres and other models used in similar venues
and communities and research into additional ideas for the future of the CBFAC (d-
sipher and council).
3. Community consultation and identification of initial options (council with d-sipher
input). Consultation and information included:
a. 27th August - a ‘launch presentation and ‘World Café’ workshop that included
information on the objectives of the review, and opportunity for questions and
contribution of ideas to specific questions
b. September to November - Your Say Noosa, an online discussion open to all
community members on Council’s website guided by information and questions
c. meetings with the Mill Board and local Cooroy community members
d. September to December meetings and workshops and with U3A, Noosa
Museum, the Cooroy Lower Mill Board (CLM Board) and the Centre for Ceramic
Excellence (CCE) proposers to further develop up these options proposed by
the community
e. 25 November - a public meeting and presentation by council of the process so
far, an overview of ideas received, the lead concepts being considered, the
review assessment model.
4. Analysis of all community input and desk research (council with d-sipher input)
5. Development of a model for assessing CBFAC options - based on a synthesis of the
literature, evaluation models and community feedback (d-sipher)
6. Refining options to a small number to develop and investigate in further detail
7. Development of options — meetings and workshops were held with some of the
proponents (d-sipher and Council officers)
8. Reporting to Council.
Page 40 of 80Section 41
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 41 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
6 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report sinner
Overall community feedback and values
The following section summarises the key themes of community feedback identified as a result
of the consultations undertaken by council in the community workshop, meetings and the
online discussion forum and written proposals from the community. Further detailed verbatim
community comments are available from council.
The community responded with a keen interest to participate in the consultations (more than
200 individuals and groups participated in the consultations) and the opportunity to propose
options for Council’s consideration. Most importantly, the community acknowledged and
responded positively to Council’s initiative to review the CBFAC governance, activities, and
programs and to provide an opportunity to contribute to possible opportunities.
As a result of the CBFAC consultation process, a reliable list of values priorities and drivers for
the Butter Factory was developed, as well as an outline of the basic principles the community
would like to see adopted by Council and the CBFAC with regard to the CBFAC’s:
Role and function, preferred governance and support, range of users, usage and
accessibility, and opportunities that may need to be addressed in future planning and
development.
Community and Council's Values for the Butter Factory
Synthesising community and Council input, the core draft values for the CBFAC can be
summarised as:
¢ acommunity run and driven facility
e part of Cooroy’s history, heritage and community
e alignment with and connected to Cooroy and Noosa community
e having a significant arts and cultural focus and orientation
e contemporary relevance (identified by Council)
e viable (identified by Council)
¢ supported by communities of interest to the Butter Factory (identified by Council).
Additional aspirational values for the CBFAC included:
e Creative Hub strongly aimed at sustainable/viable employment
e Contemporary Arts - emerging, cutting edge.
Page 41 of 80Section 42
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 42 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Aspher Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 7
Key themes and community opinions
Key principles - Role and function:
* Animportant community asset - part of Cooroy’s history, heritage and community
* Key role in building social capital
* Strong support for maintaining a visual arts focus
* Support for maintaining a cultural role and supporting emerging artists
* Needs to be sustainable on many levels — e.g. sound financial base, wide community
support, strong management model.
Key principles - Activities and programs
* Recognition of the importance of the existing pottery facilities and users
¢ Activities should complement, enhance and integrate with existing services and
businesses, not compete
* Needs to be dynamic and have more energy
* Support for extending functions from visual arts to other community and cultural
needs and activities, such as learning, music performances, lunches, and recreational
activities.
Key principles - Governance and support:
* Should be community run and driven
* Governance needs to be sustainable, and for some proposers, financial support from
Council and/or other sources is a requirement
* Council needs to continue to maintain the building.
Key principles — Users, usage and accessibility
* Open to the broader community, not just a select few
¢ Needs to be better used, with access and opening hours extended to include evenings
and weekends.
Opportunities identified that may need to be addressed in future planning and development
* Some building limitations need to be dealt with in order to facilitate more effective
and efficient use of discrete and overall areas within the CBFAC. For example: poor
acoustics for some activities when there are concurrent users and access to bathrooms
and kitchen from other areas
* There is an opportunity to incorporate old and new ideas relevant to Cooroy and
broader Noosa e.g. ceramics, heritage, biosphere, broader creative industries (such as
creative community-working spaces)
* As appropriate, the building should be used to meet the needs identified in the local
area e.g. helping young people, a place for life-long learning.
Page 42 of 80Section 43
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 43 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
8 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report sioner
Community concepts proposed for the Butter Factory
As part of the community consultation process, community members and groups were invited
to submit written proposals for council’s consideration. Council particularly encouraged
submissions from community groups that may be interested in managing the CBFAC. Council’s
preference was to hand-over management of the CBFAC to the community.
Overall, 17 proposals were received from individuals and community groups, ranging from
notional ideas through to full proposals. Support was provided to a couple of proponents to
develop their concept in more detail.
The proposals can be grouped into six broad themes, many of which overlap or have common
threads of arts and exhibitions, culture, and community use. Further detail on the proposals is
shown in Appendix A and Appendix B.
ARTS, CREATIVE SPACE, EXHIBITIONS:
1. Noosa Community Raft
2. Creative Hub
3. Art Space
4. Artist in Residence Visual Arts and Music Program
5. Centre of Arts Excellence
6. Centre for Ceramic Excellence
7. Grandpa’s Shed
ARTS AND CULTURE:
8. Community Managed Space
9. Cultural Centre
CULTURAL, INTERPRETIVE AND HISTORICAL:
10. Interpretation Centre
11. Entrepreneurial Centre
12. Aboriginal Cultural Centre
13. Butter Factory Events and Visitor Space
14. Family Research Centre
LEARNING and RECREATION:
15. U3A Cooroy Sub-branch
OTHER IDEAS:
1. Creative Co-working Space
2. Social Enterprise Facility
From these 17 proposals, council and d-sipher identified five lead concepts that merited
further exploration and development. These concepts were selected on the basis of the level
of community support from the proposer, the proposed governance arrangements and that
there was at least some alignment with the CBFAC and the values identified in community
consultations. These five lead concepts are:
1. Managed by one Tenant - U3A Noosa
2. Community Managed Model — Cooroy Lower Mill Board
3. Interpretation Centre
4. Centre for Ceramic Excellence
5. Council Managed Model.
Page 43 of 80Section 44
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 44 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
sicher Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 9
Assessment of the five lead concepts
To assist with evaluating the five proposed lead concepts for the CBFAC, d-sipher developed a
review assessment model based on a synthesis of existing models, the literature, evaluation
logic models and community feedback. The assessment model was refined with Council and
comprises six main areas of review, as shown in the diagram on the following page:
1. The concept
2. Organisation and governance
3. Resources required
4. Council policy priorities
5. Outcomes
6. Comparative assessment.
Figure1: Cooroy Butter Factory Review Assessment Model
1. The Concept 3. Resources required
Description of concept, vision or Resource Stream — e.g. volunteers | (To be developed later)
outcome and the proposer/s, \ 5 Short term Mid term Long term
SWOT analysis Income streamn— ee: Brent, Group/s are set u Group/s
: workshop revenue, rental income. Pi Pp
to manage the BF manage the BF
=e Existing BF facility — e.g. how well supported by with minimal
2. Organisation & Governance Bienen facility meet the proposal’s Council. support from
requirements? Council.
Orne Council Budget & Staff Resources — Venue and Venue and Programs /
ay e.g. funds for building maintenance, programs are: programs are activities are
support from staff. *contemporary viable. financially
Stee Lo relevant i
im hi = sustainable.
t . ‘! Council Capital Works Budget e.g. «supported by Hl
funds for building modifications to a
\ f t long term financial viability com Dieles cr
: SUPPLE i interest.
Sol co
4. Council policy priorities 6. Comparative assessment
How does this concept align How does this concept compare with other
with Council priorities? concepts proposed?
The review assessment model
1. The Concept
A description of the proposal, who is driving it, the vision or intended overall outcome and
Who is this for and who will benefit? What is the interest and demand for this concept? How
will the community benefit? How sustainable and financially feasible is this?
2. Organisation and Governance
This section looks at the strengths and weaknesses of the community group or the proposers
using the ‘7S Framework’ developed by McKinsey Consultants. The 7S applies a simple
checklist framework to assess structure, strategy, systems, skills, style, people/staff and
shared values. It provides a focus for thinking across all elements that need to be considered
now or in the future in regard to a group that may be involved with the CBFAC. The basic
assumption is that each area is dependent on the other and each area is important and all
Page 44 of 80Section 45
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 45 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
10 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report sioner
need to work together. In the case of the CBFAC, the 7S are applied with consideration of the
sustainability of the group proposing the option:
Shared Values — these are central to the development of all other elements in the
framework. Overall, what are the overriding goals important to this group, the
community and to those participating in the CBFAC? What are the factors that will
unite everyone in achieving long term successful outcomes for the CBFAC? These
values or goals generally do not change over time.
Skills — community group and staff skills. What skills do the community group have?
What skills are missing? Are specialist skills needed to support the achievement of the
overall outcomes for the CBFAC?
Systems — the systems needed to be in place to ensure success of the proposal. What
IT, HR or risk management processes (including insurances) need to be in place? Who
and how will these be managed? How will work be monitored and managed — e.g.
customer /community/participant management systems.
Structure and Governance — What are the governance arrangements for this group?
Are they sound? Who is involved? Are there champions? How will the relationship
work between the community group/organisation and Council and other organisations
involved? Who makes the decision and in what situation? Who is responsible and
accountable? How will Council cultural policy be implemented? Does this structure
allow application to grant or funding bodies?
People and Staff — Who are the people involved, their talents, interests and qualities?
What happens if a key individual or volunteer leaves? Is there diversity to give
strength? What capacity building or support might be needed?
Strategy — What is the concept or the activity trying to do and how? What does the
concept add to the area? Is there competition or duplication? How does the CBFAC
need to evolve and develop over time?
Style — Culture and the way things are undertaken in the group. These are the informal
rules of conduct. They tend to reflect the individuals and the leadership or champions
involved. These can also be the characteristics that cause the group or the CBFAC to
reject outsiders. What blind spots do we need to be aware of?
3. Resources required
Inputs identify what needs to be in place to make this CBFAC option work. This may include
identifying:
e the Resource stream - e.g. volunteers available to support the proposal
e the Revenue stream - e.g. grants, workshop revenue, rental income from an ongoing
tenant
e the adequacy of the existing CBFAC facility — e.g. how well does the facility meet the
proposal’s requirements? What modifications may be required?
¢ Council budget and staff resources — e.g. Council funds for building maintenance,
support from Council staff.
e Council capital works budget — e.g. funds for building modifications to support long
term financial viability.
Page 45 of 80Section 46
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 46 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Osher Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 11
4. Council policy priorities
Where relevant, how does this proposal align with Council policy and, where relevant, to
government policy priorities?
5. Outcomes
In general, the overall outcomes expected to be achieved by this concept would be developed
at a later stage. Intended short, medium and long term outcomes, including financial
sustainability may be flagged.
6. Comparative assessment
Finally, what is the comparative assessment of this proposal? How does this option compare
with the other proposed options? What are the pros and cons?
Summary of proposals and assessment
The following section summarises the key points in each of the five lead concepts submitted in
written proposals to Council. These are included in Appendix B as attachments to this report,
with the exception of the Council Managed Model, which should be generally viewed as
maintaining the status quo. Each proposal provides significant additional detail that should be
reviewed in assessing the merits of each proposal.
1. Managed by One Tenant - U3A Noosa
* Concept: U3A, leases the Butter Factory predominantly using it for its own activities.
When not using it for its own purposes other groups are allowed to use the space.
* U3A is part of a “self-help; self- managed, lifelong learning co-operatives for over fifties
who are no longer in full-time work. They provide opportunities for members to share
learning experiences in a wide range of interest groups and to pursue learning not for
qualifications, but for fun.”’ Weekday classes and weekend social activities are offered.
¢ Driver: U3A Noosa - is an established organisation with
approximately 500 members in Noosa. It proposes to use the CBFAC to establish a Cooroy
sub-branch to run U3A programs. It would facilitate existing activities at the CBFAC and
allow other group’s to use the building outside of its own class times. See also U3A
proposal for more detail.
¢ This proposal would require Council to maintain the building, and some start-up funding,
but no ongoing Council support.
2. Community Managed Model - Lower Mill Board
* Concept: A community organisation leases and manages the Butter Factory and programs
activities in partnership with other groups. This would enable the visual arts and pottery
aspects to continue, as well as expand activities to incorporate a number of the ideas
which have come through community consultation.
* See www.u3anoosa.org.au
Page 46 of 80Section 47
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 47 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
12 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report @sipner
¢ Driver: The Lower Mill Board — is an incorporated community based organisation, with a
long history of involvement in the site and in the area.
¢ This proposal would require Council to maintain the building and would require some
ongoing Council support.
3. Centre for Ceramic Excellence
* Concept: A Centre for Ceramic Excellence (CCE) would be established using the pottery
and parts of the Butter Factory. Current pottery activities would be expanded to form a
cultural hub focussed on ceramics. Activities would include industry support, exhibitions,
festivals, master classes and accredited training in ceramics.
¢ Driver: Centre for Ceramic Excellence Association and professional practicing local artists,
Rowley Drysdale, Vit Martinek and Sue Coburn. This would require financial support for its
establishment and to be fully realised, potentially partnerships with Registered Training
Organisation/s.
4. Interpretation Centre
* Concept: The Butter Factory and the broader precinct would become an interpretative
centre for the Biosphere. It would extend the existing arts components by adding new
segments of nature, indigenous and heritage tourism through technology and collection
based exhibits.
* Driver: Noosa Museum- put forward by Committee members. This concept requires the
agreement of the new Biosphere organisation and additional financial support to drive it.
5. Council Managed Model
* Concept: The Butter Factory would be operated by Council and would continue as a
cultural exhibition and activity space.
* Driver: Council would continue to manage and program the Butter Factory, ideally with
greater community involvement.
Page 47 of 80Section 48
Page 48 of 80
@sprer Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 13
COUNCIL
- Cooroy Lower Mill Board
MODEL
Council Budget Funding and supportlikely — Full-time staff equivalent funds Part-time staff in establishment Requesting $25,000 for Retain full-
to be required to allocated to CLM Board to engage _ phase in role of project manager, preparation of a business __ time staff.
communicate new contractors / consultant to program coordinator, retail plan.
management model, U3A undertake establishment and manager, grant writer,
as tenant, new ongoing day to day management community liaison, conference
programming format and of area supported by Board and organisation assistance. Additional funds: Not
ongoing information for volunteers as well as website specified at this stage.
CBFAC users and development, and related
community members. computer support.
Estimated $20,000 $80,000 Included in the Community $25,000 (first year) Net cost to
budget Managed Model Council
required: $144,299
Council Capital © Minor works to reduce Minor works to reduce noise Minor works to reduce noise Not presently identified. Potentially
Works Budget noise transference transference between areas to transference between areas to none if status
between areas toimprove | improve multiple use of areas. improve multiple use of areas. quo
multiple use of areas. maintained.
Resource / Minimal income from ad Some income from ad hoc and Grants, crowd funding of artist Minimal income from Minimal
Income hoc activities andrental of scheduled program, activities and spaces, small income retail sales, admission fee and rental income from
Streams space to others. rental of space to others, arts conference fees. of space to others. existing
grants. programs.
Page 48 of 80Section 49
Page 49 of 80
14 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report @sipter
COUNCIL
- Cooroy Lower Mill Board
MODEL
SHARED = Average alignment with = Strong alignment across all = Strong alignment across all = Average alignment with General
VALUES the identified values for identified values for the CBFAC. identified values for the CBFAC. the identified values for alignment
the CBFAC. * Well networked and have the CBFAC. Willingness _ with identified
* Extension of activities to established relationships with to accommodate area __values for the
include learning, local community across groups for ceramics and CBFAC.
recreational and social and businesses. woodwork. However,
activities. does not
address
aspirational
values and
community
interest in
expansion of
opening
hours,
increased use
and extension
to other types
of use.
SKILLS = Demonstrable skills in = Proven experience in ® Significant intellectual pool of * Business professionals
existing program delivery successfully running a not for professional practicing ceramic and local residents
and governance. profit. artists locally. groups. Arts community
" Proven experience in members need to be
successfully running local events engaged.
e.g. underwritten and managed
Cooroy Fusion Festival.
Page 49 of 80Section 50
Page 50 of 80
i) aE Review of the Cooroy Sutter Factory Arts Centre Report || 13
OOUNCIL
COMMUNITY MANAGED MODEL - -
TENANT - Centre Excellence = interpretation Centre MANAGED
ONE USA - Cooroy Lower Mill Board for Ceramic MODEL
SYSTEMS Funds retained inseparate © Some systems in place, but will Systems to be developed. Systems to be developed. | Systems
account. require systems to be developed already in
ho manage programs, establish place.
website etc.
STRUCTURE = Well established = Well established organisation = Committee formed and « No formal group in No formal
AND organisation with with constitution and aasociation status recently place. community
GOVERNANCE constitution and governance arrangements in achieved. * Driven by interested involvernent.
—overnance = place. =o proven projects or individuals.
arrangements in place. * Additional committees/interest achievements as a group. «= No proven projects or
vuccesstully hance 3 groups tobe establishedtobe =» Group in its forming phase. achievements as a
secs ly tune mnvoived in Programming, * Additional community group.
. members need tobeengaged. § = Requires agreement of
= New executive to be * Role would be to contribute to Biosphere organisation
ae een COOEN- the development of policy, which has been
ne Program and operating identified as a key
elect the new executive. ac il representative able to 7 Committe. Structure
* Council representative attend meetings at any time proposed of indivicluals
able to attend meetings | and/or review records. and local residents and
at any time and/or ratepayers groups that
review records. have expressed an
interest.
Page 50 of 80Section 51
Page 51 of 80
16 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report @sipner
COUNCIL
ONE TENANT - U3A eee Centre for Ceramic Excellence Interpretation Centre MANAGED
- Cooroy Lower Mill Board
MODEL
STAFF AND * Overall, well established = Well established, experienced = Passionate and experienced * People with a passion Permanent
PEOPLE and experienced group. and diverse board members with professional artists. for heritage, museums and contract
Skills in programming business skills. Would benefit ® Requires staff with specific skills and culture. staff involved.
arts and cultural areas from additional representation to assist with development. * Support for establishing
unknown/limited. of artists on board. Skills required include a committee involving
* Able to provide * Limited time available for a conference organisation, local residents groups,
volunteer reception staff hands on role. community group indigenous individuals
and training. * Able to organise volunteers. management, grant writing, and others.
* Require staff with specific skills arts Programming and ..
to assist in establishment and organisation, marketing, liaison.
ongoing management.
* Funding required for:
- development of a business plan
- a building assessment to
determine possibilities for CBFAC
(unless this is able to be
determined with Council’s
assistance)
- legal advice — to deal with
issues as required and to ensure
any engagement of staff or
contractors is undertaken
appropriately
- ongoing programming and
management of regular CBFAC
programs, activities and event.
10Section 52
Page 52 of 80
@sipher Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 17
COUNCIL
ONE TENANT - U3A Combai Meee MODEL Centre for Ceramic Excellence Interpretation Centre MANAGED
- Cooroy Lower Mill Board
MODEL
STRATEGY " Leverage off existing . . * Vision: To establish a local, " Business plan to be
. Concept has a broad and inclusive . . .
U3A membership base. focus national and internationally developed.
New members pay , acclaimed Centre for Ceramic « Strategy relies on:
annual membership fee CLM Board would: Excellence based on successful - government funding
($50). 1. oversee policy formulation and models in locations nationally - significant tourism
* Direct e- direction, staff oversight, broad and internationally. Centre is in visitor numbers, which
communications, venue management, promotion community of Cooroy, with are not demonstrable
bulletins and website to —_and financial security of the facility cultural relevance to region, for the area
members. 2. verify financial models available state and nationally as a - paid admission fees by
« U3A would build on from study of similar venues and cultural destination. visitors.
existing program of implement aspects that can be = Aimed at emerging and
classes and activities and | adapted to CBFAC structure and practicing artists who are mid-
focus on needs of broad based community demand. career, TAFE graduates, degree
Cooroy over 50's. This modelling must encompass and masters level local, national
ie Beesdes affordability for users and and international participants.
saikeholdersandnesds reasonable return on asset value. " Main objectives: a cultural hub
of other groups / 3. with input from the BFAC focused on all ceramic forms,
audiences would be Committee, prepare media through offering activities and
ateacted and weluded ( (website, social media, print, radio programs and learning and
oneieam and TV) to be used to expand education.
i i sWaiPRiessie? BEAC abu It " Uses established ceramics
® Unlikely to drive and programs iat s
facilitate non-U3A 4. Besureopening hoursare community in Sunshine Coast.
activities. conducive to public interest and Focused Gn Bernice.
arendance = Potential relevance to state and
5. ensure presentation of facility to nation.
take maximum advantage of = Requires partnership with
exhibits, classes etc. government and in part with an
educational institution.
Page 52 of 80Section 53
Page 53 of 80
18 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report @sipher
COUNCIL
ONE TENANT - U3A eae Centre for Ceramic Excellence Interpretation Centre MANAGED
- Cooroy Lower Mill Board MODEL
STYLE " Hierarchical style. = Collective decision making style = Group recently formed.
" May have a more fixed, within group. * Participants are strongly
conservative culture. = Culture established and networked with local
maintained through managed community, artists and TAFE. As
cyclical turnover of board experienced professionals seek
members. to work cooperatively with all
= Generally cautious and other groups.
reflective.
= Focused on financial income and
viability, that may be unrealistic
in the arts and cultural sector.
.
Short term (12 " Facility being used by Develop business plan, review Establish CCE facilities and ® Business plan Status quo
months) U3A members, pottery previous program of events and stakeholder and community developed. maintained
users and other ad hoc exhibitions, formalise working relationships; apply for grants and = Likely to require Council
users. relationship with Council, existing crowdfunding, initial workshops to continue conducting
« Systems established. and new groups, apply for relevant funded by RADF and / or artist in existing programs.
grants, establish stakeholder and residence grant.
community relationships, prepare
an initial program, gain community
interest and support, extend use
of CBFAC to other groups, prepare
marketing and communications
plan (including website and social
media).
BOSection 54
Page 54 of 80
@sorer Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 19
COUNCIL
COMMUNITY MANAGED MODEL . .
ONE TENANT - U3A Centre for Ceramic Excellence Interpretation Centre MANAGED
- Cooroy Lower Mill Board
MODEL
Mid-term Facility being used by U3A_—_— Review and evaluation of " 2017 Australian Woodfire wee: . Status quo
(three years) . . . Initial interpretive oe
y members and expanded to outcomes, adjustment as required. Conference as milestone event. elements established maintained
include other users. Indicators of success include = TAFE courses conducted, ,
increased community use of / visiting artists, workshops and
CBFAC and extension of opening expansion of use of studio by
hours to include weekends. interested potters.
Economic and social benefits to . .
: = Review and evaluation of
Cooroy and Noosa community. .
outcomes, adjustment as
required. Indications of success
as a cultural tourism
destination.
" Economic and social benefits to
Cooroy and Noosa community.
Long term (five —Ajternative trust structure | Agreed percentage of economic Proportion of activities achieve Unknown. Status quo
years) established to take over sustainability with support from economic sustainability. maintained
management of CBFAC for Council.
the community.
Page 54 of 80Section 55
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 55 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
20 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report @sipter
Comparative assessment of proposed concepts
The following section is a comparative assessment of each of the five lead concepts.
One Tenant - U3A
U3A offers the easiest, most convenient solution for Council: one ongoing tenant that
proposes to use the space regularly and will administer the CBFAC for use by other users ona
user pays based system. The U3A is well established and has a proven ability to deliver its
programs. There would likely be a small cost or some support needed in assisting the group to
promote the CBFAC and run some of the online systems.
Of all the proposed concepts, this is the least strategic and most administrative based program
delivery model. The model of management is not a best fit, as the U3A are focused on their
priorities and their members, which are aged over fifty and no longer working full-time.
Although offering the facility to schedule the space for other users, users will need to actively
pursue and investigate using the space.
Community Managed Model - Cooroy Lower Mill Board (recommended)
The community managed model is the recommended model. It has particular merits over the
other proposals in its over-arching, inclusive, community-driven approach that is actively
inclusive and encompassing of other groups, arts, cultural, and other potential activities. The
CLM Board is an established community group presence in the Cooroy community and has a
proven record for delivering on projects.
As indicated in the CLM Board’s proposal, funding would be required for the development of a
business plan, the establishment of online systems, communication and programming
infrastructure and ongoing program delivery and minor building modifications to enable
multiple concurrent users. The CLM Board’s grounded and pragmatic approach, focused on
generating income (e.g. through a membership fee structure), a user pays system, on cost
recovery and on financial sustainability is complemented by a strategy to significantly extend
community use and involvement in the CBFAC through extended opening hours, cultural
programs, events and other activities. Some of this may need to be balanced within Council’s
policy guidelines and be tempered with the limitations of income generation in arts and
cultural programming and exhibitions.
This model could accommodate three of the other community proposed concepts, including
the U3A, the Centre for Ceramic Excellence and possibly the Interpretation Centre (if this
were feasible in a downsized, volunteer-driven model). The CLM Board, U3A and the CCE
have indicated in principle agreement to be included in this approach.
Council has identified risks associated with multiple independent community group users. In
order to manage these risks, it is recommended that Council clearly establish roles and
responsibilities, governance, partnership or Memorandum of Understandings between each
group and with Council. Expectations and boundaries would need to be clearly and sensitively
established and a mode of communication between groups developed and agreed across
parties and routinely monitored.
Page 55 of 80Section 56
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 56 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
sicher Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 21
Centre for Ceramic Excellence
The CCE proposal is probably the most visionary of all of the community proposals. However,
as a stand-alone proposal, its focus is singular on ceramics and on its vision for the Centre.
The proposers have quickly established their not for profit status as an association as a result
of the CBFAC review process.
Nonetheless, it maximises use of the existing pottery facilities, aligns well with state
government policy and potential partnerships with educational institutions and would merit
some financial investment to establish its viability.
The CCE proposal could be accommodated in funding for the Community Managed Model to
obtain grants to establish an initial artist in residency, subsequent arts programs and
resources to establish partnerships with educational institutions.
Interpretation Centre
This proposal has gained support from some community members and the proposers have to
their credit, quickly formed a working group. However, support of the Biosphere organisation,
has not yet been established, which is a key factor in progressing the Centre.
The costs involved with an interpretation centre are likely to be significant. The experience of
other councils with similar interpretation centres has shown that there are significant ongoing
costs associated with managing and maintaining these centres.
Compared with other proposals, this option is less well aligned with local community values
and with community preferences for an arts focus for the CBFAC. Other proposals, such as the
community managed model and the one tenant U3A model are more strongly positioned for
immediate implementation and demonstration of on the ground programming outcomes.
Council Managed Model
Existing costs of staffing would need to continue. Assuming the limitations of the current
financial climate for Council, no additional initiatives would be introduced to the CBFAC and
programming would reflect the status quo.
The Council managed model has significant limitations in meeting community needs for
extended hours and activities due to the staffing costs involved.
Additional investment of staff resources is likely to be required if greater community
involvement in the CBFAC is a priority.
Other options better meet community aspirations and expectations and are likely to be more
sustainable.
Page 56 of 80Section 57
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page
Page57
57ofof80
80
22 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report @sipher
Preliminary Program Model
. =
The following table shows a program delivery model of drafted based on the many suggestions
made by the community and the proposals received. Activities, events, area used and
potential income sources are identified based on community feedback or past CBFAC
programs.
COOROY BUTTER FACTORY AREA
2.00pm volunteers
Various programmes, including:
arts, crafts, languages, cards, USA -F, various times Willing to offer programmes to a
http://www.u3anoosa. ¥ v v broader range of community
james, yoga, music and arts org.au/site/ - see website members
appreciation, coach trips etc. e.
Games /Mah Jong / Cards /
M-F 9.00am - Cover kiln firing
ae Centre for Ceramic
, . Centre for Ceramic
Artist studio space for hire, Several different v 7 days ae senee ements may conflict an ea
requi ul
cottage industry model Proposals with exhibition areas. funded
Cooroy Potters Group
Pottery classes and workshops & other individual Y= Weekly In operation Small income
potters
Pottery workshops and Centre for Ceramic
classes and workshops - w / school
painting, jewellery making, v vee! School To be developed Small income
acrylics, glass etc lay:
Children's and holiday arts Individual artists, Weekly / school
Small income from
a . Centre for Ceramic Small income from
Of locally owned collections ,
Small income from
Cooroy used to be known for the
Furniture exhibitions v Annual / Bi-annual fine furniture exhibition which Small income from
“ . moved as a result of management sales commission
turmoil
Could be a combined event held
t periodically or held separately Small income from
ca f Laurel v Annual / Brannual from Woodies with a different sales commission
emphasis on wood working
Extra space compared with
sales commission
interesting
Horacutre therapy 06% Ce Cathanued—_¥ Te Sarwar
ll -com/| -
Business networking drinks v v v v Quarterly Yes
Including use of parking lot.
Cooroy Long Lunch v TBA Catered by local eateries with —_Yes
their own serveries.
sales commission
istralian Woodfire and
Suggested by Margaret from
Page 57 of 80Section 58
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 58 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
@sipner Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 23
Conclusion and Summary
In conclusion, the community consultation and CBFAC review process has successfully engaged
the interest of the local community in the future of the CBFAC. The community responded
enthusiastically to the opportunity offered by Council and expressed interest in seeing
increased community use made of the CBFAC in terms of access, programs, activities and
events that aligned with arts and cultural related areas.
Overall, 17 proposals were received from the community, most of which were arts and cultural
related. The review identified five lead proposals as meriting further investigation and
assessment using a customised review assessment model developed by d-sipher with Council.
RECOMMENDATION
As a result of this review, a hybrid of the community managed model proposed by the
Cooroy Lower Mill Board is recommended as the optimal model that has contemporary
relevance, is viable and is supported by communities of interest to the Butter Factory. This
model will meet community expectations as identified in the consultations, will significantly
enhance the current level of programming and use of the CBFAC.
The hybrid community managed model comprises:
e the CLM Board responsible for managing the direction, overview and broader ongoing
arts, community and cultural programs and activities at the Butter Factory and
supporting the establishment of the Centre for Ceramic Excellence
e two key anchor tenants: U3A and the Centre for Ceramic Excellence.
While this model will require Council to continue to maintain the building and provide an
ongoing operational subsidy for a minimum of three years, these costs will be less than if
Council were to continue to manage the building and programs itself. Furthermore, there is
the potential to reduce these costs over time.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council:
1. Continue negotiations with the Cooroy Lower Mill Board, U3A and the Centre for Ceramic
Excellence to develop a Memorandum of Understanding with all three parties with regard to
the management and future use of the Butter Factory with the aim of having these
arrangements in place by July 1 2015.
2. Communicate the outcomes of this decision and the next steps as a result of this review to
the broader community and to those community members and groups who generously
contributed their time and effort to this review.
Page 58 of 80Section 59
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 59 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
24 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report iver
Appendices
APPENDIX A
Future of the Cooroy Butter Factory List of Submissions
APPENDIX B - ATTACHMENTS
1. U3A Proposal
2. Cooroy Lower Mill Board Cooroy Butter Factory Proposal
3. Centre for Ceramic Excellence Proposal
4. Interpretation Centre Proposal
Page 59 of 80Section 60
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 60 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
sioner Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report | 25
Future of the Cooroy Butter Factory List of Submissions
ARTS, CREATIVE SPACE, EXHIBITION THEMED PROPOSALS
Noosa Community Beany Palmer Using a cottage industry model, the Butter Factory becomes a hub for working
Raft artisans which has a commercial side to sell merchandise, an educational side
to inform and educate artists and other community members and provides an
industry base for artists and associated businesses to connect with each
other.
Similar example: Jam Factory in Adelaide[http://www.jamfactory.com.au/|
Creative Hub Anne Yang Offer individual artists/crafters studio spaces from which each can
work/demonstrate/display and sell work and a public gallery space. It could
function as a commercial artist-run collective gallery run, staffed by the
artists.
Similar example: Makers’ Workshop in Burnie, Tasmania
Art Space Annie Wallis Continue to be an exhibition space with commissions used to assist in
managing the centre and a place for artists to work and connect with each
other.
Artist in Residence Wendy McGrath, An artist-in-residence visual arts and music program, to operate in
Visual Arts and Music Kathleen Hunt, collaboration with existing organisations. Professional artists in a variety of
Program Louise King disciplines would be offered a place to live and work and engage with the
community on a short-term basis, The Butter Factory would also be used as a
base for some arts organisations.
Centre of Arts Gerhard Herbst Evolve from its current use into a Centre of Arts Excellence. Similar example:
Excellence Sturt: Centre for Australian contemporary craft and design in Mittagong, NSW
(Bean stare nsw.eduaul]
Centre for Ceramic Rowley Establish a local, national and internationally acclaimed Cooroy Butter Factory
Excellence Drysdale, Vit Centre for Ceramic Excellence which would incorporate exhibitions, retail
Martinek sales, workshops and accredited training. Similar examples: Jam Factory and
Sturt as per above.
Grandpa’s Shed Tony Slattery Extend the exhibition aspect of the Butter Factory to include diverse
collections held by private owners, often older people in the community.
Incorporate programming and learning aspects to the exhibitions such as
passing on skills and expertise to younger people eg Grandpa’s teaching
Grandkids.
ARTS AND CULTURAL THEMED PROPOSALS
Community Managed The Cooroy Develop the CBFAC as a vibrant community hub where the Cooroy, Noosa and
Space Lower Mill Board Sunshine Coast community come together to celebrate, learn, develop
networks, collaborate and practice arts, cultural and other activities through
events, activities, workshops and gatherings.
Cultural Centre Karen Gosling Extend the exhibition aspect to include diverse range of events including live
music, forums, workshops, dancing, classes, cooking demonstrations/lessons
partnering with the Noosa Jazz festival, the Noosa Food and Wine festival as
well as the Noosa Long Weekend or potentially a boutique brewery venue
showcasing local food and entertainment.
Page 60 of 80Section 61
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Page 61 of 80
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
26 | Review of the Cooroy Butter Factory Arts Centre Report sioner
Concept Title Submitted By Summary
CULTURAL, INTERPRETIVE AND HISTORICAL THEMED PROPOSALS
Interpretation Centre Bruce Cresswell, An Interpretation Centre using the historic Cooroy Butter Factory sitting at the
Jeanette geographical centre of the Noosa Community Biosphere. It would extend the
Alfredson existing arts components by adding new segments of nature, indigenous and
heritage tourism through technology and collection based exhibits.
Entrepreneurial David McCready Anentrepreneurial centre for young people to support them in start-up
Centre ventures.
Aboriginal Cultural David McCready An Aboriginal cultural centre showcasing and celebrating the local Aboriginal
Centre people.
Butter Factory Events Ray Kelly Extend the exhibition aspect of the Butter Factory to incorporate other
& Visitor Space cultural aspects and capitalise on the Pottery. Develop a retail and visitor
information space to increase revenue.
Family Research Cooroy-Noosa The Butter Factory would become the new home for the Cooroy-Noosa
Centre Genealogical & Genealogical & Historical Research Group, housing their collections, providing
Historical research facilities and creating public exhibitions and displays.
Research Group
LEARNING and RECREATION THEMED PROPOSALS
U3A Cooroy Sub- U3A Noosa Establish a sub-branch of U3A Noosa within the Butter Factory, offering
branch classes and activities. It could incorporate existing Butter Factory activities.
OTHER PROPOSALS
Creative Co-working Tim Nixon A creative co-work space for the Hinterland region where you can rent a space :
Space (often just a desk) for a flexible amount of time, from hours to months... It’s
all about the ‘co-working’, about facilitating communication, interaction and
collaboration.
Social Enterprise Andrew South
Facility
Page 61 of 80Section 62
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Community Facilities
4 NOOSA AQUATIC CENTRE (NAC) - HALF YEARLY REPORT TO 31 DECEMBER 2014
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Noosa Aquatic Centre Coordinator, Stephen James
Community Services
Index ECM/ Subject/ 51.04 Sporting Facilities
Attachments Nil.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Noosa Aquatic Centre Coordinator to the Infrastructure &
Services Committee Meeting dated 3 March 2015 providing an update on the activities of the
Noosa Aquatic Centre (NAC) to 31 December 2014.
REPORT
The purpose of this report is to advise Councillors of the Noosa Aquatic Centre’s (NAC) activities
for the half year ending 31 December 2014.
The NAC comprises a 50m Olympic Pool, 25m Pool, Warm Down Pool/ Learn to Swim Pool,
Toddlers Wading Pool, Fitness Studio, Change Rooms and Amenities operation. The
maintenance of the Sunshine Beach Skate Park is also overseen by the NAC.
The NAC provides a broad range of aquatic and leisure programs e.g. recreational swimming,
learn to swim (LTS) programs, elite squad training, aqua aerobics, and water polo.
1. Finance
The objective of all services within the Community Facilities Branch is to balance the demands of
access, equity and community service obligations with sound financial management, and
improving revenue through innovative and entrepreneurial approaches, whilst minimising
operational costs.
NAC Half Year 2014/15
Variance Budget Full
Actual YTD Budget YTD (YTD) Year
Total Revenue $791,507 $782,589 $8,918 $1,546,236
Total Expenditure $807,302 $857,916 $50,614 $1,723,819
Net Operating Surplus/Deficit -$15,795 -$75,327 $59,532 -$177,583
Depreciation $81,551 $81,551 $0 $163,101
Internal Charges $165,133 $165,133 $0 $330,266
Total Surplus/Deficit -$262,479 -$322,011 $59,532 -$670,950
Page 62 of 80
Section 63
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
NAC Half Year 2014/15
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
Actual YTD
$400,000
Budget YTD
$200,000
$0
Total Revenue Total Expenditure Net Operating
-$200,000 Surplus/Deficit
The NAC’s half yearly performance sees sound results across the board. Assisting the half yearly
result were favourable weather conditions during this quarter. Revenue is $8,918 in front of a
challenging budget target with expenses $50,614 under predictions. The NAC’s net operating
result is $59,532 in front of year to date expectations.
The variance in expenditure is mainly attributed to the building and facility maintenance budget
being underspent by approximately $30,000, however this is expected to align more closely to
the budget at the completion of the financial year. The reason for this is that, where possible,
major maintenance is conducted during Quarters 1 and 4 which are outside of the peak customer
usage periods.
Improvements in profiling maintenance expenditure are part of the development process for the
2015/16 budget and will ensure greater accuracy for future reporting.
The General Operations area (general swimming admissions, pool hire, etc.) is $11,464 behind
the revenue budget. The half yearly result has improved for this area, however it continues to be
impacted by the quieter than expected start to the financial year (as highlighted in the Quarter 1
report).
Program Operations have returned revenue exceeding budget by $21,371. Numbers in the
NAC’s Swim Squads have expanded by nearly 20% and numbers in the Learn to Swim program
have increased to 1,049.
The Gym has a current membership of 198 which is the highest number at the completion of the
calendar year since we began operating in 2008. This increase has seen revenue exceed budget
by $13,340 however the need to update ageing equipment remains. A review of the operation of
the Gym remains ongoing and will be the subject of a separate report.
Group Fitness remains steady with revenue on track year to date. Attendance numbers for the
half year are 5,597 which are on par with the previous period.
Page 63 of 80
Section 64
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Retail Operations continue to perform very well with the net result $11,707 in front of predictions.
The biggest improvement has been seen in purchasing, with actual Cost of Goods Sold (COGS)
year to date approximately $10,000 under the budgeted amount of $48,014. The introduction of a
popular new product line of Speedo has been well received and provides lower COGS
percentage. Staff have also focused on having less stock on hand which equates to much
improved expense levels.
2. Customers
The NAC has seen 121,706 attendances for the half year. Quarter 2 attendance equate to
79,019 compared to 74,344 in the same period 2013/14. This increase of 4,675 visits is
predominately an increase in program operations most notably the Swim Squad, Gym and Learn
to Swim areas.
Half Yearly Attendance Comparison
80000
70000
60000
Attendances
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Q1 Q2
2013/14 43984 74344
2014/15 42687 79019
The NAC has limited capacity during most weekday afternoons. While lanes are open to the
public, these are generally limited to one or two during the peak times of 3.30pm – 6pm.
3. Staffing
Staff numbers will remain at current levels until the completion of School Term 1 when they will
drop substantially as patrons move onto winter pastimes and maintenance of the 25 metre pool is
undertaken.
As part of the development of the 2015/16 budget, management will assess the current mix of
casual and permanent staff within the existing NAC structure, particularly where there are long
term casuals. Consideration will be given to the feasibility of converting a small number of key
positions from casual to permanent, where a business need can be identified.
4. Systems & Processes
The automatic payment system for the Learn to Swim program is now in its fourth month.
Unfortunately, systems errors resulted in a number of incorrect amounts being debited during the
December payment run. All affected customers were notified and the system error has been
rectified through the software vendor.
Night swim squads have been introduced on a Tuesday and Thursday in an effort to alleviate
some pressure on the availability of water space during the daytime.
Page 64 of 80
Section 65
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
5. Future Direction
The review of the NAC gym operation is ongoing and will be the subject of a separate report to
Council.
Capital Works – A Brick N Pave product trial was completed in the Sunshine Beach Skate Park.
Whilst this has been a marked improvement on the trial patch laid over the existing surface, it is
doubtful that this will be an economical long term remedy for the aging concrete.
A section of wall tiles of the 25 metre pool have separated from the concrete shell. This will
require emptying of the 25 metre pool and retiling of the section of the wall. The extent of the
damage will not be known until the pool is emptied and inspected. This project was proposed for
the 2015/16 Capital Works Program and may need to be brought forward.
Previous Council Consideration
Nil.
Finance & Risk
Nil.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Nil.
Internal Consultation
Management Accountant, Corporate Services
Departments/Sections Consulted:
X Community Services Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
X Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office X Corporate Services
Community Engagement X Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 65 of 80
Section 66
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
5 NOOSA LEISURE CENTRE (NLC) - HALF YEARLY REPORT TO 31 DECEMBER 2014
Author Noosa Leisure Centre Coordinator, Cathy Simon
Community Services
Index ECM/ Subject/ 51.04 Sporting Facilities
Attachments NIL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Noosa Leisure Centre Coordinator to the Infrastructure &
Services Committee Meeting dated 3 March 2015 providing an update on the activities of the
Noosa Leisure Centre (NLC) to 31 December 2014.
REPORT
The purpose of this report is to advise Councillors of the Noosa Leisure Centre’s (NLC) activities
for the half year ending 31 December 2014.
The NLC caters for Badminton, Futsal (Indoor Soccer), Netball, Basketball, Volleyball, Jump
Bunch (children’s gymnastics), Group Fitness classes, Indoor Rock Climbing, corporate training
inclusive of Council programs and school sessions, special events and venue hire. Meeting and
conference rooms are available for meetings/training, TAFE classes, etc. The indoor rock
climbing and yoga classes are managed by separate entities.
1. Finance
The objective of all services within the Community Facilities Branch is to balance the demands of
access, equity and community service obligations with sound financial management, and
improving revenue through innovative and entrepreneurial approaches, whilst minimising
operational costs.
NLC Half Year 2014/15
Variance Budget
Actual YTD Budget YTD (YTD) Full Year
Total Revenue $213,494 $230,917 -$17,423 $474,013
Total Expenditure $337,015 $376,401 $39,386 $747,404
Net Operating Surplus/Deficit -$123,521 -$145,484 $21,963 -$273,391
Depreciation $72,643 $72,643 $0 $145,286
Internal Charges $73,079 $72,638 -$441 $145,276
Total Surplus/Deficit -$269,243 -$290,765 $21,522 -$563,953
Page 66 of 80
Section 67
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
NLC Half Year 2014/15
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000 Actual YTD
$100,000 Budget YTD
$0
Total Revenue Total Expenditure Net Operating
($100,000) Surplus/Deficit
($200,000)
Half yearly performance sees the NLC net operating position $21,963 in front of year to date
projections. Actual revenue is $17,423 behind budget projections however expenditure is also
$38,945 behind projections.
Revenue:
The NLC has four revenue streams:
program operations;
group fitness program;
café/retail operations; and
general operations.
Revenue shortfalls are predominately seen in the group fitness and jump bunch program
($37,000), however this is offset by an increase in venue hire bookings (general operations) and
the centre run volleyball and netball programs ($20,000).
A marketing strategy for jump bunch was implemented in the second quarter, which is expected
to increase revenue in the third quarter.
Group fitness revenue continues to be monitored as a result of the change in the business model
for the delivery of Yoga classes. As part of the change, NLC contributes an amount per person
each time pre-existing NLC membership holders attend yoga classes. The impact of this will
continue to decrease as customer memberships and visit passes expire. A true reflection of the
full group fitness program will be clearer throughout the next half of the financial year.
Expenditure:
Total expenditure is $38,945 behind the year to date budget for the half year. This is
predominantly due to underspend in building and facility maintenance which could not occur in
Quarter 2 as a result of venue hire bookings and availability of contractors. Several areas of
maintenance expenditure have been committed for the next six months, including:
Annual stadium floor resurfacing (which would normally occur late December);
The centre’s tiered seating units, which were serviced in this quarter require further work to
ensure health and safety compliance. Work on the units will be completed in February 2015;
Page 67 of 80
Section 68
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Basketball structures in and outside of the centre also require assessing and servicing –
which have been scheduled for early 2015;
Professional cleaning of the tiled floor areas (after in-house cleaning/gurney has proved non-
effective); and
Sandblasting stadium louvres/framing to remove potentially dangerous surfacing.
2. Customers
There have been approximately 18,930 recorded visits to the Centre for this quarter,
approximately 37,199 for the half year. Increased attendance has been noted in group fitness
classes, netball and volleyball while there’s been a slight decrease in badminton. The second
quarter is usually a quieter period for NLC attendances due to the Christmas holiday period and
term programs and school bookings winding down in late November - early December.
Unavailability of The J (due to other events) and
Bicentennial Community Centre (due to Noosa
Gymnastics Club move) resulted in a major
booking for NLC in December while the centre
was closed for normal business operations.
Hillsong Church utilised a number of spaces
within the centre for their Christmas services.
Approximately 1,400 people attended and the
versatility of the centre was demonstrated in
preparation for upcoming major events in 2015.
Facility Usage
4000
3500
3000
Hours Booked
2500
2000 2013
1500 2014
1000
500
0
1st Quarter 2nd Quarter
Facility occupancy steadily increased again in the second quarter, is up by 6% compared to the
last quarter, and considerably higher than the same period last year. This is due to an increase
in bookings by various groups including Noosa District Basketball, local schools, first aid course
providers and Noosa Yoga who have a long term hire agreement of two rooms in the centre.
Page 68 of 80
Section 69
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
3. Staffing
Staff training for essential CPR and First Aid qualifications was completed this quarter for the
majority of staff.
Recruiting for an extra casual café assistant will be undertaken in January, due to three café staff
members taking long service leave in the next six months and extra bookings secured on
Sundays from 2015.
4. Systems & Processes
The NLC Coordinator is working with the Health & Safety Advisor to update the centre’s
emergency evacuation plans.
Various equipment from the Bicentennial Community Centre has been re-located to the NLC,
including Noosa Table Tennis tables and equipment in preparation for the group to begin their
regular bookings at the NLC in January 2015.
5. Future Direction
Jump Bunch program – casual play sessions to begin in January 2015 school holidays.
Major bookings have been secured for 2015 with preparation of works for the events to begin in
January 2015. Scheduled events as follows:
Australian Badminton Championships;
Noosa Long Weekend Festival’s production by Opera Australia;
Noosa Long Weekend Festival’s Noosa and Brisbane Symphony Orchestra’s anniversary
performance; and
Sunshine Coast Area Rollers – 6 x roller derby league events throughout 2015.
Previous Council Consideration
Nil.
Finance & Risk
Refer Section 1 of this report – Finance.
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Nil.
Internal Consultation
Management Accountant, Corporate Services
Page 69 of 80
Section 70
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Departments/Sections Consulted:
X Community Services Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
X Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office X Corporate Services
Community Engagement X Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 70 of 80
Section 71
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
6 THE J AND BICENTENNIAL COMMUNITY CENTRE (BCC) - HALF YEARLY REPORT
TO 31 DECEMBER 2014
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author The J Coordinator, Scott Braby
Community Services
Index ECM/ Subject/ 72.01 The J
Attachments Nil
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the The J Coordinator to the Infrastructure & Services Committee
Meeting dated 3 March 2015 providing an update on the activities of The J and Bicentenntial
Community Centre to 31 December 2014.
REPORT
The purpose of this report is to advise Councillors of The J and Bicentennial Community Centre’s
(BCC) activities for the half year ending 31 December 2014.
The J is a versatile community space. It hosts a wide range of programming, school holiday
activities and regular live entertainment. It is also home to current tenants University of the
Sunshine Coast (and TAFE) and Noosa Community Radio. Within The J there is a 330 seat
theatre and a combination of flexible meeting spaces, conference rooms and facilities for hire,
complemented by covered outdoor areas and stylish open foyers.
The Bicentennial Community Centre (the BCC) includes a Main Hall, Annexe and Demountable
building. The BCC is used for a variety of community, sporting and cultural activities by individual
community members and organisations for activities such as classes, meetings, rehearsals and
workshops.
1. Finance
The objective of all services within the Community Facilities Branch is to balance the demands of
access, equity and community service obligations with sound financial management, and
improving revenue through innovative and entrepreneurial approaches, whilst minimising
operational costs.
Page 71 of 80
Section 72
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
The J
The J Half Year 2014/15
Budget Full
Actual YTD Budget YTD Variance (YTD) Year
Total Revenue $225,872 $245,736 -$19,864 $438,572
Total Expenditure $308,006 $370,535 $62,529 $755,202
Net Operating Surplus/Deficit -$82,134 -$124,799 $42,665 -$316,630
Depreciation $147,702 $147,702 $0 $295,405
Internal Charges $100,133 $99,692 -$441 $199,385
Total Surplus/Deficit -$329,969 -$372,193 $42,224 -$811,420
The J Half Year 2014/15
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
Actual YTD
$100,000
Budget YTD
$0
Total Revenue Total Expenditure Net Operating
($100,000) Surplus/Deficit
($200,000)
The half year summary performance sees the The J net operating position $42,655 better than
year to date projections.
Revenue is behind budget projections, mainly in the area of venue hire ($21,169), a trend which
has continued from Quarter 1. The venue hire budget was recognised as being challenging
when it was developed, however, December also saw a reduction in revenue as a result of
groups moving from the BCC to The J, and the requirement for Hillsong Church’s major
Christmas booking to be held at the Noosa Leisure Centre.
Expenditure is down in three main areas; maintenance ($29,990), electricity ($10,097) and
water/sewerage charges ($6,328). Contractor commitments prior to Christmas delayed some
maintenance which is now scheduled for early 2015. Electricity and water and sewerage
charges also appear to have been overestimated during the budget development and a BR3
adjustment has been submitted to reflect this and the decrease in revenue.
Page 72 of 80
Section 73
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
BCC
BCC Half Year 2014/15
Budget Full
Actual YTD Budget YTD Variance (YTD) Year
Total Revenue $23,641 $23,846 -$205 $72,000
Total Expenditure $42,807 $57,520 $14,713 $115,040
Net Operating Surplus/Deficit -$19,166 -$33,674 $14,508 -$43,040
Depreciation $26,037 $26,037 $0 $52,075
Internal Charges $8,839 $8,839 $0 $17,678
Total Surplus/Deficit -$54,042 -$68,550 $14,508 -$112,793
BCC Half Year 2014/15
$80,000
$60,000
$40,000
Actual YTD
$20,000
Budget YTD
$0
Total Revenue Total Expenditure Net Operating
($20,000) Surplus/Deficit
($40,000)
BCC revenue is on track for the half year while expenditure is down due mostly to overestimated
electricity, sewerage and water charges, reduced contract cleaning expenditure (new contractor)
and maintenance not being able to be scheduled until the new year as a result of changes at the
site.
2. Customers
The J
In addition to normal activity and regular hirers this quarter, 26 events and performances
occurred at The J, including:
October
Greenzone Disco
Noosa Chorale
Blue Light Disco
Network Ten event - ad shoot
November
Molly’s Song
Hat Fitz & Cara
Fitness Rocks School Aerobics
Noosa Heads Jazz Club
Dave Hughes Comedy
Page 73 of 80
Section 74
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Blue Light Disco
Performing Arts Factory
CQU Badging ceremony
December
Greenzone Disco
Sunshine Coast Youth Theatre
Santa’s Classy Helpers
Noosa Christian College Awards
Noosa Professional Dance Academy
Noosa Chorale
The overall attendance figure at The J for the quarter is 14,858, totalling 33,693 for the half year.
This figure includes people attending the site for venue hire bookings, performances,
Xbox/Lounge use, SCU, TAFE, radio station attendance and general public use. Statistic are
down for this quarter (compared to Quarter 1) mainly due to Sunshine Coast University holidays
and The J being closed over the Christmas new year break.
BCC
The main focus for management during the second quarter of 2014 was preparing the BCC Main
Hall for the Noosa Gymnastics Club, who took up a long term lease over the Hall in January
2015, whilst at the same time transferring user groups such as the Chorale, the Jazz Club and
Noosa Table Tennis to more appropriate venues such as The J and Noosa Leisure Centre.
Having a major new anchor tenant will help reposition the BCC and significantly improve its
revenue stream effectively giving it a new lease of life.
3. Staffing
Staff training has been identified for Links booking and point of sale software.
4. Systems & Processes
The ECM pilot at The J is continuing to test the ECM system to determine how it best works for
Community Facilities branch.
Some minor technical issues have occurred with the booking software system since a recent
upgrade. Staff are working with the vendor to assist in solutions to ensure ongoing operational
efficiency.
5. Future Direction
Completion of The J Service Review and implementation of recommended actions.
Finalising negotiations and agreements with all major user groups for 2015 at both The J and
BCC.
Previous Council Consideration
Nil.
Finance & Risk
Refer Section 1- Finance.
Page 74 of 80
Section 75
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
Consultation
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Nil.
Internal Consultation
Management Accountant Corporate Services
Departments/Sections Consulted:
X Community Services Planning & Infrastructure
Disaster Management & Public Order Building & Plumbing Services
Waste & Environmental Health DA Planning
X Community Facilities Strategic Land Use Planning
Cultural Facilities Asset Design & Investigations
Asset Planning
Civil Operations
Environment
Executive Office X Corporate Services
Community Engagement X Finance
Customer Service ICT
Executive Support Procurement & Fleet
Governance Property & Facilities
Human Resources Revenue Services
Page 75 of 80
Section 76
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
7 NOOSA COMMUNITY CARE (NCC) - HALF YEARLY REPORT TO 31 DECEMBER 2014
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION
Author Noosa Community Care Coordinator, Greg Tucker
Community Services
Index ECM/ Subject/ 1.05 Community Care Management
Attachments Nil
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Noosa Community Care Coordinator to the Infrastructure &
Services Committee Meeting dated 3 March 2015 providing an update on the activities of Noosa
Community Care (NCC) to 31 December 2014.
REPORT
The purpose of this report is to advise Councillors of the Noosa Community Care activities for the
half year ending 31 December 2014.
The services provided under the HACC (Federal & State) funding are:
Domestic Assistance
Social support
Allied Health Care
Personal Care
Centre Based Day Care
In Home Respite Care
Case Management
Client Care Coordination
Counselling /Support, Information & Advocacy
Transport
Home Maintenance
Home Modifications
The services provided under the HAS (State) funding are:
Information and Referrals regarding home safety and security
Home Maintenance
Home Modifications
Page 76 of 80
Section 77
INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 3 MARCH 2015
1. Finance
The objective of all services within the Community Facilities Branch is to balance the demands of
access, equity and community service obligations with sound financial management, and
improving revenue through innovative and entrepreneurial approaches, whilst minimising
operational costs.
Noosa Community Care operates under funding agreements with both the State and Federal
Governments.
Noosa Community Care Half Year 2014/15
Budget Full
Actual YTD Budget YTD Variance (YTD) Year
Total Revenue $1,345,505 $1,373,288 -$27,783 $2,695,913
Total Expenditure $1,086,809 $1,090,395 $3,586 $2,215,459
Net Operating Surplus/Deficit $258,696 $282,893 -$24,197 $480,454
Depreciation $16,348 $16,348 $0 $32,695
Internal Charges $225,771 $225,771 $0 $451,542
Total Surplus/Deficit $16,577 $40,774 -$24,197 -$3,783
Noosa Community Care 2014/15
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000 Actual YTD
$600,000
Budget YTD
$400,000
$200,000
$0
Total Revenue Total Expenditure Net Operating
Surplus/Deficit
The budget position sees NCC operating within the funding grants for the half year, although
$24,197 behind the projected budget surplus.
Reduced client numbers due to sickness, higher service needs and natural attrition have resulted
in lower revenue than budgeted.
There is also a slight overspend in the Home Assist budget for the first half of the year due to
extended sick leave of one Field Officer, requiring the use of contractors to backfill the workload.
Page 77 of 80
The text continues on section 78.