General Committee Meeting - September 2023
Date: Monday, 18 September 2023 at 12:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 03:04:15
Synopsis: Farm-stay at 59 Kabi Rd refused citing scale and bushfire risk, River Catchment Plan deferred for governance clarity, Finances strong, Contracts approved, Court appeal settled.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Joe Jurisevic Amelia Lorentson Clare Stewart Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Executive Officers
Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Brian Stockwell: Council refused the “group farm stay accommodation” change for 59 Kabi Rd, Cootharaba, citing conflict with SEQ Regional Plan and Noosa Plan 2020 rural/agricultural protections, scale, traffic and bushfire evacuation deficiencies (19:32–45:49; Item 5.1). Staff (Planning): Proposal involved 3 accommodation villages and central facility seating 330+, up to 299 guests; most works on mapped Agricultural Land Conservation Area (ALCA), exceeding rural scale benchmarks (19:32–24:27; Item 5.1). Council: Deferred Noosa River Catchment Management Plan for one meeting cycle to enable further councillor/stakeholder review, particularly around a proposed Conservation Park governance mechanism (1:16:42–2:33:12; Item 6.1). Finance: Noted YTD August 2023 financials; operating surplus tracking above budget; cash high due to rates cycle and restricted grants; added sustainability indicators to reports (2:34:09–2:41:03; Item 6.2). Executive: Year in Review 2022/23 noted major delivery across corporate plan themes including flood recovery, capital program, branding, housing strategy and fire management (2:41:34–3:01:14; Item 6.3). Council (Confidential outcome): Awarded CN00209 Cleaning of Open Space and Public Amenities for 2 years with 3x12-month options; authorised CEO to finalise terms (3:02:48–3:03:40; Item 7.1). Council (Confidential outcome): Agreed to settle Planning & Environment Court Appeal D14/2023 for 20 multiple dwellings at 11C Church St, Pomona, per proposed conditions; included bushfire safety property note (3:02:48–3:03:40; Item 7.2). Council (Confidential outcome): Approved novation of contract 2122Q125 to NorthLane Pty Ltd and increased value by $1,236,055.20 to $3,336,055.20 (GST exc.) to 31 July 2024 for 2022 flood recovery project management (3:03:41–3:03:41; Item 7.3). Contentious / Transparency Matters Amelia Lorentson: Led deferral of River Catchment Plan to clarify Conservation Park intent, governance, compliance duties, and to brief former advisory members and boating/fishing stakeholders; carried 4–3 (2:07:22–2:33:12; Item 6.1). Clare Stewart: Supported deferral, citing need for broader communication on implications and prioritising liveaboards/effluent and moorings issues with MSQ (2:13:28–2:17:56; Item 6.1). Karen Finzel: Questioned compliance resourcing if Council assumes supporting roles on river; sought fiscal transparency before committing (1:50:09–1:53:42; 1:58:12–2:01:21; Item 6.1). Tom Wegener: Advocacy for regenerative agriculture within farm-stay item drew points of order for relevance; underscored tension between policy objectives and application merits (59:45–1:04:07; Item 5.1). Community Deputation: Daniel Moisander criticised Council’s bushfire assessment assumptions for a separate two-lot subdivision (RAL22/0027), highlighting standards and evacuation considerations (00:49–12:20; Deputation 4.1). Legal / Risk Council: Farm-stay refusal grounded in SEQRP 2017, Noosa Plan 2020 Rural Zone and Visitor Accommodation Codes, ALCA mapping, and Bushfire Hazard Overlay; recorded per Planning Act 2016 s63(5) (19:32–45:49; Item 5.1). Officers: Bushfire risk for vulnerable use required tolerable/acceptable risk under State Planning Policy; reliance on shelter-in-place with dual egress still traversing high bushfire hazard considered intolerable (35:32–39:49; Item 5.1). Council: Meeting closed under Local Government Regulation 2012 s254J(3)(g) for commercial-in-confidence matters (3:01:22–3:02:00; Confidential Session). Settled Appeal: Court matter D14/2023 resolved via conditions; property note mandates siting/building to bushfire management conditions of MCU22/0031 and related OPW approvals (3:02:48–3:03:40; Item 7.2). Governance Proposal: River Conservation Park concept under Nature Conservation Act to give Council a formal management role as trustee without overriding State heads of power (1:44:15–1:48:20; Item 6.1). Conflicts of Interest Tom Wegener: Declared declarable COI due to interactions with author of a permaculture report (Tom Kendall) and presidency of Permaculture Noosa; Council allowed participation and vote given no close association (13:15–19:16; Item 5.1). Brian Stockwell: Declared two declarable COIs for Noosa District Landcare (member) and MRCCC (historic collaborator/contract); Council allowed participation and vote, noting public interest and no material gain (1:17:26–1:23:48; Item 6.1). Environmental Concerns & River Governance Officers: Catchment Plan targets funding eligibility (Resilient Rivers; Urban Rivers program), monitoring, and a technical advisory panel; embeds collaborative agency roles (1:24:05–1:29:25; Item 6.1). Kim Rawlings/Amy Kimber: Conservation Park would formalise joint management and Council’s “seat at the table,” while State retains fisheries, permits, and compliance heads of power; public engagement required for any management plan (1:39:19–1:45:04; Item 6.1). Joe Jurisevic: Requested precision on industrial runoff to both Lake Wyba and Lake Doonella and practicality of “zero litter” target; officers to clarify control scope and maintain aspirational goals (1:29:25–1:33:25; Item 6.1). Councillors: Reiterated priority issues of liveaboards, moorings, anchoring, and effluent; MSQ remains primary regulator with Council advocacy/support roles (2:15:53–2:19:38; Item 6.1). New Development Applications & Planning Scheme Alignment Officers: Farm-stay GFA and building sizes far exceed Rural Zone small-scale benchmarks (e.g., lodges 250 m², cabins 65 m², non-rural buildings ≤500 m²), with traffic rising from 57 to 356 daily trips (23:09–43:18; Item 5.1). Brian Stockwell: Emphasised longstanding State interest protecting A/B-class agricultural land; mapped site as A1/A2 soils; warned against permanent alienation via large communal facilities and buffers (45:49–54:14; Item 5.1). Councillors Lorentson/Stewart/Jurisevic: Supported refusal: lack of overwhelming planning need, excessive scale akin to resort/convention use, unacceptable bushfire evacuation risk for children (34:02–35:10; 1:07:14–1:10:13; Item 5.1). Finance & Procurement Finance: Noted $141m cash at cycle peak with significant restricted balances (QRA, levies); minor rates revenue timing/valuation impacts; interest revenue up with higher cash (2:34:09–2:39:23; Item 6.2). Council: Awarded multi-supplier cleaning contract CN00209 (initial 2 years from 23 Oct 2023, options up to 3 years); CEO authorised to finalise (7.1 minutes; 3:02:48–3:03:40). Council: Novated flood recovery PM contract to NorthLane; increased total to $3.336m (GST exc.) through 31 Jul 2024 (7.3 minutes; 3:03:41–3:03:41).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES General Committee Meeting Monday, 18 September 2023 12:30 PM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Committee: Crs Frank Wilkie (Chair) Karen Finzel, Joe Jurisevic, Amelia Lorentson, Clare Stewart, Brian Stockwell, Tom Wegener “Noosa Shire – different by nature” GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 18 SEPTEMBER 2023 1. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Councillor Frank Wilkie (Chair) Councillor Karen Finzel Councillor Joe Jurisevic Councillor Amelia Lorentson Councillor Clare Stewart Councillor Brian Stockwell Councillor Tom Wegener EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray 2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson The Minutes of the General Committee Meeting held on 14 August 2023 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. 3. PRESENTATIONS Nil 4. DEPUTATIONS 4.1. DANIEL MOISANDER TOPIC: RAL22/0027 5. ITEMS REFERRED FROM COMMITTEES 5.1. 131998.981211.5 - APPLICATION FOR OTHER CHANGE TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL (12637DA) INTEGRATED PERMACULTURE DESIGNED ORGANIC ORCHARD AND GOLF COURSE COMPLEX (18 HOLES) TO INCLUDE GROUP FARM STAY ACCOMMODATION & ASSOCIATED SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE AT 59 KABI ROAD, GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 18 SEPTEMBER 2023 COOTHARABA (REFERRED FROM PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE DATED 12 SEPTEMBER 2023 - ITEM 5.3). In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Tom Wegener provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Tom Wegener inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest, upon request to staff for the permaculture report which was mentioned in the applicant's submission, it was revealed that the permaculture report was written by Tom Kendall, a local permaculture expert. As the president of the community group Permaculture Noosa, I have learned from Tom Kendall and visited his permaculture property. However, he is not a personal friend and I do not socialise with him outside of our common interest of Permaculture. I believe I can make a judgment in the public interest. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Wegener and determine Cr Wegener can participate and vote on this matter because Council believes that as Mr Kendall is not a close associate and that a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Wegener did not vote on the above motion. The following material was presented to the meeting in relation to this item: Cr Stockwell – refer to Attachment 1 to the minutes. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Acting Coordinator Planning Assessment to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 12 September 2023 regarding Application No. 131998.981211.5 for an Other Change to Development Approval (12637DA) - Integrated Permaculture Designed Organic Orchard and Golf Course Complex (18 holes) to include Group Farm Stay Accommodation (undefined use) and associated supporting infrastructure (maximum 299 beds), situated at 59 Kabi Rd Cootharaba and: A. Refuse the application for the following reasons: 1. The proposal does not further the SEQ Regional Plan 2017 strategy to intensify or diversify on-farm agricultural activities as the proposed permaculture and food production is not of a significant scale, largely intended for farm stay guests, will alienate agricultural land and compromise the rural production of the land. 2. The proposal is contrary to the Strategic Framework of the Noosa Plan 2020 as the proposed farm stay activity: GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 18 SEPTEMBER 2023 a) Will permanently alienate land that is mapped as agricultural land conservation area and will not result in a direct expansion of the site’s agricultural activities. b) Will be more than complementary to the agricultural use of the land, as it will be the proposal’s primary use. c) Is not small scale or fit for its setting comprising 3 villages and a large common communal area with access via a small local rural road that currently has little traffic movement. 3. The proposal is contrary to Overall Outcomes 2(c), (h), (i) & (p), Performance & Acceptable Outcomes PO2, AO2.2, AO2.3, PO4 and PO5 of the Rural Zone Code of the Noosa Plan 2020 as: a) The applicant has failed to demonstrate there is an overwhelming Planning need for the proposal to be located on land identified for Agricultural Land Conservation and the proposal will further alienate land from rural production in the future. b) The scale of the farm stay activity is not small scale, and the traffic anticipated to be generated would detract from the rural amenity enjoyed by nearby residents. 4. The proposal is contrary to Performance Outcome PO3 of the Visitor Accommodation Code as it is of a scale that is not compatible with the zoning intent and preferred character for the local area. 5. The proposal does not meet PO6 of the Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code as it has not been demonstrated that an efficient and safe evacuation route is available to residents and that emergency vehicles can access the site. 6. The proposal is of a significantly different scale and character to the approved golf course and permaculture orchard and has a more permanent nature. B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Carried unanimously. 6. REPORTS DIRECT TO GENERAL COMMITTEE 6.1. NOOSA RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Stockwell provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Stockwell, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter due to my long standing connection with Noosa District Landcare as one of the inaugural members of the unincorporated group dating back to the 1980s and a current ordinary member. Noosa District Landcare is identified as being consulted in the report. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias considering the community nature of this relationship. I believe I can make an impartial decision GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 18 SEPTEMBER 2023 in the public interest in this matter and l therefore choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Stockwell and determine that Cr Stockwell participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Councillor Stockwell did not vote on the above motion. In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Stockwell provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Stockwell, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I have a long-standing relationship with MRCCC as a previous government employee and a longterm collaborator since 1994. I have in the past had a small consultant contract below the limit for a Prescribed Conflict and prior to the declarable time frame. I was up until the last AGM Council's representative on the committee and in this role I played a role in facilitating and developing the group's revised catchment strategy. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias considering the community nature of this relationship. I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Stockwell and determine that Cr Stockwell participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that Cr Stockwell does not stand to gain personally or materially through noting this report, and therefore a reasonable person would trust the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Stockwell did not vote on the above motion. Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That item 6.1 Noosa River Catchment Management Plan be deferred to the next round of meetings to allow Councillors and other stakeholders an opportunity to consider the details and implications of the draft Noosa River Catchment Plan and provide feedback. For: Crs Stewart, Lorentson, Finzel and Jurisevic Against: Crs Stockwell, Wilkie and Wegener Carried. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 18 SEPTEMBER 2023 6.2. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – AUGUST 2023 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That Council note the report by the Manager Financial Services (Acting) to the General Committee Meeting dated 18 September 2023 outlining August 2023 year to date financial performance against budget, including changes to the financial performance report with the inclusion of key financial sustainability indicators. Carried unanimously. 6.3. YEAR IN REVIEW - 2022/23 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That Council note the report by the Chief Executive Officer (Acting) to the General Committee Meeting dated 18 September 2023 providing a review of Council’s progress in the 2022/23 financial year towards achieving the five key focus areas set out in Council’s Corporate Plan and thank Council staff for their efforts in the last twelve months to progress so many significant projects and providing outstanding service to our community. Carried unanimously. 7. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3) (g) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing commercial matters involving the local government for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government for: Report 7.1 - CONTRACT NO. CN00209 - CLEANING OF OPEN SPACE AND PUBLIC AMENITIES Report 7.2 - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D14 OF 2023 – APPLICATION FOR MULTIPLE DWELLING (20 UNITS) - MCU22/0031 & OPERATIONAL WORKS CLEARING OF VEGETATION - OPW22/0062 AT 11C CHURCH STREET, POMONA GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 18 SEPTEMBER 2023 Report 7.3 - 2122Q125 – CONTRACT VARIATION FOR PROJECT MANAGMENT SERVICES FOR 2022 FLOOD RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION Carried unanimously. RE-OPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That the meeting be opened to the public. Carried unanimously. 7.1. CONFIDENTIAL: NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - CONTRACT NO. CN00209 - CLEANING OF OPEN SPACE AND PUBLIC AMENITIES Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council note the report by the Parks & Gardens Coordinator – to the General Committee 18 September 2023 and A. Award Contract No. CN00209 Cleaning of Open Space and Public Amenities to the contractors nominated in the Parks & Gardens Coordinator report to the General Committee 18 September 2023. B. Award Contract No. CN00209 Cleaning of Open Space and Public Amenities for an initial term of up to two (2) years, commencing 23 October 2023 and expiring 22 October 2025 with an option to extend for three (3) further periods of up to twelve (12) months each. The option to extend will be at Council’s own discretion and subject to the Contractor’s ability to meet the requirements under the Contract. C. Authorise the CEO to negotiate the final contract with the four (4) suppliers as listed. Carried unanimously. 7.2. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D14 OF 2023 – APPLICATION FOR MULTIPLE DWELLING (20 UNITS) - MCU22/0031 & OPERATIONAL WORKS CLEARING OF VEGETATION - OPW22/0062 AT 11C CHURCH STREET, POMONA Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 18 SEPTEMBER 2023 That Council note the report by the Manager Development & Regulation to the General Committee Meeting dated 18 September 2023 regarding regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal No. D14 0f 2023 and: A. Agree to settle the appeal generally in accordance with the proposed conditions outlined in Attachment 1. B. Include the following property note on the lots: 1. To ensure the safety of people and property on this property is maintained, all buildings and structures must be sited and/or constructed in accordance with the bushfire management conditions of Council Approval MCU22/0031 and associated Operational Work approvals. Carried unanimously. 7.3. CONFIDENTIAL: NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - 2122Q125 – CONTRACT VARIATION FOR PROJECT MANAGMENT SERVICES FOR 2022 FLOOD RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That Council note the report by the Disaster Reconstruction Coordinator to the General Meeting Dated 18 September, and endorse the CEO to execute all documents and undertake all things necessary to: A. Give effect to the novation of contract 2122Q125 from Erscon Pty Ltd to NorthLane Pty Ltd; and; B. Increase the value of contract 2122Q125 by $1,236,055.20 (GST exc.) from $2,100,000.00 (GST exc.) to $3,336,055.20 (GST exc.), and the period until 31 July 2024. Carried unanimously 8. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 4.40pm
Meeting Transcript
Unknown 00:49.370
I'm pleased to say I'm not speaking on behalf of an absentee multi-millionaire developer this afternoon. The owner of the subject property is my wife, Tegan, who has lived and worked as a primary school teacher in the Shire for just on 10 years. I provide her apologies today whether she, if she were in attendance at this time of day with our 19 month old daughter, she may experience a record new life at the forum and council meeting. The subject property 28 Saturday night drive is our it's home. I hope I can offer some relevant context to the application and to the planning report before you. At a summary level, the we report that this is an unsuitable degree. Significant and seemingly unsolvable limitations based on crucial counselling assumptions. The report adopts these assumptions in place of the bushfire report completed by Adrian Hansen, a bushfire biodiversity expert with decades of and experience and a volunteer firefighter to boot. I will speak as briefly as I am able this afternoon, as I do appreciate your time and pressure. Firstly, I wish to speak to how, despite the top line conclusions of the report submitted, I consider it remains a reasonable decision to open council to a subject to conditions and application for subdivision of this law. Then I will speak briefly as to why I consider council should grant such an there are two paramount objections approval. Council planning hold against the Tewantin site. The first being performance outcome four, the reconfiguration of the lot code. This is said to be a growth management provision which was expanded in the 2020 town plan to now include Noosa parkland estate. PO4 represents the creation of any new lots the estate. The second being related VAR rating applicable to the site and the resulting effects of such a VAR rating would have on building envelopes once other planning provisions are complied with. The decision to expand performance outcome 4 in the 2020 plan was drafted well before COVID and at that time the current pressures on housing stock throughout the South East Queensland had not materialised to the current extent. I can sympathise why a provision serving as quantity limit on the addition of housing throughout may have been appealing to previous council. I enjoy snagging apart from the surface of it as much as the next resident, but if the aim of the provision was to preserve amenity and character of the estate, the provision appears redundant as there was already other existing and longstanding references to amenity and character throughout the old town plan. Could have served that purpose. In fact due to the subject lot being larger than the large majority of lots in the estate and 2.4 times larger than the minimum lot size zoning, a subdivision of just two lots would yield lots larger in size than at least ten existing sites already within Noosa many if not of parklands most you've got of the other cul-de-sacs in the estate already contain smaller lots. At the end of the cul-de-sac or a density of driveways catering to battle-based blocks, you cannot get to this lot without viewing within the estate lots that are smaller than what is proposed, nor will you know the proposed development has occurred unless you travel to the end of Saturday drive to view it. To its benefit, there is already a variety of lot sizes and construction types within the estate and the street. Saturday drive already contains multiple two-storey homes and homes of varied types of construction without any consistent theme, merely minimum 600 square metre lot size zone for this part of the estate, to prevent any slippery slope with consequential changes to the character and the name of the street, as lots smaller than 1200 square metres are unable to follow suit. The law has lot just one privately owned if we see six cars pass our driveway it has been a busy day. There is capacity to support more with negligible impact on character. When this application was first submitted the information requested for its return indicated was not supported under the PO4 planning provision in large part due to flooding concerns. This was surprising as the lot sits 14 square metres, sorry, 14 metres above sea level and more than 90 metres from the nearest 500 year extreme flood. Exit from the lot via Griffith avenue to Noosa-Cooroy Road remains open even in a 500 year flood extent and this was noted sorry as this was noted the focus of opposition returned to character. Essentially PO4 appears to have been expanded by 2020 plans of broadbush. Brush tool for the restriction of housing supply in selected areas. While the purpose of the revision is now said as being one of character preservation in regards to park lands, character purpose would not be offended by a two lot subdivision of this law. Turning to when this application was bushfire. Lodged an information request was first issued for reports regarding storm water drainage and driveway function which was complied with and returned to council. Initial objections were concerned with character and lot shape only. Only once those issues had been addressed bushfire wishful thinking. Concerns were raised for the first time in the further advice issued in January of this year. The further advice required particular inputs into the bushfire assessment model, most of which are contained within the statewide bushfire resilient communities 2019 document. The inclusions provided for that document, sorry the inclusions conclusions provided from that document are totally accepted without objection. However, the January further advice included atop those requirements an insistence that bushfire analysis must be calculated using a 1200 degree celsius flame temperature in place of the Australian standard 1090. Rejection of Australian standard AS3 AS395 959 is not to my knowledge provided by the statewide bushfire resilient communities documentation and is instead a standard put forward in instances like this. Nevertheless, I acknowledge there are mature trees in the area and a high flame heat assessment may provide superior building outcomes over and above those which may be accepted in similar circumstances in other parts of the State or the country. Even at this best practice heat point, has practiced planning the assessment heat assessment level it is possible to design a two lot-month subdivision outcome for this site which which provides for compliant building envelopes. Where the planning report diverges from the expert built bushfire report in this regard is is planning having out now how, in the most recent report introduced introduce a the basis of assessment which appears to assume that the constant present heat immediately immediately above the normal boundary is is all mature forested at the same time. Same intensity as the old growth state forest to its north this appears to be on the basis that the State may elect to simply stop performing its functions as it has performed to my knowledge throughout the existence of this state since the 1980s it further assumes that event the State will not permit any third party to maintain the firebreak and access right bounding the majority of the existing parkland's estate presumably the assessment then assumes the firebreak will still be abandoned long enough to regrow into old growth logging forest as it sits behind it putting this would put the entire use of parkland's estate at unprecedented increased risk is this is the critical assumption of my department in recommending the application be rejected the State does not appear to have given any advice to this effect in application however QPWS is said to have expressed the view that third parties should not be relied upon in reference to a different application when it is not concerned with a particularly long-standing and crucial fly break and access track in effect this assumption means the property against vegetation and risk that does not exist on the basis that it could come to exist if the State government abandons its current duties. This level of assumption could be amused to apply the maximum bushfire rating to every property in the Shire which borders any road, park, estate asset, trustee asset or otherwise. Indeed if this assumption is adopted every neighbouring lot boundary would require assessment at current timing on the basis the neighbour may in the future abandon their property allowing the forest to grow in place of their vegetation as it has in past. There are already improvements on other lots all the way along the main firebreak at the northern boundary of the estate in similar areas to where building was proposed and I would submit the expert report submitted is not flawed. It simply makes an expert analysis at the highly elevated flame that you requested based on the reality of the estate as it exists. If it cannot be committed to do so, an assessment must fundamentally change for every future development in the Shire. That now said, we remain completely open to working with council's planners to seek alternatives and if this envelope calculation had been raised to us prior to the report being put to council, we would happily have removed our design to relocate the driveway to the opposite side of the lot and thereby move the proposed housing further from the fire risk of mitigating the proposed equivalent envelopes. Indeed, we offer to do that now and would ask that council vote to approve of the conditions requiring the best way and alternative for such mitigation to be implemented. This is how I submit council can reasonably recommend an approval of some of the conditions. I will now speak briefly as to why we consider council should support this application. We are all keenly aware of the change in housing pressures in our over recent years and a consequence of that change is the change of political rule in the State government to be seen taking big and prompt action to address supply issues. I cannot pretend one too much subdivision will materially Resolve these concerns, however as the Noosa housing action plan stated in A5.2.1, the Shire should aim to meet the SEQ development targets as they were at the time of that action plan, by adding new housing capacity in defined urban boundaries with associated efficiencies in infrastructure and service provision. This location is a wonderful place to live. With walking proximity to parks and arterial bus routes, it is connected to all town services. The fire hydrant is already installed at the street frontage. Prevailing wisdom expressed to us by experienced real estate agents is more money will be made by simply hoarding a larger piece of land in perpetuity than building a larger single house permissible on the block for the use of one family. The fact that we are a young working family who are outgrowing a 40-year-old structure on the site, parts of which are approaching end-of-life, means we are the exception to the normal owner of such a lot. We are willing to put forward this land for division and the future accommodation of two families. Opportunity for in such an area which could result in lots larger numbers in the estate is a new form from council's perspective in my opinion, given the supply issues the Shire is facing. Our community's paradise problem may mean that we are head on towards a demographic cliff where many of our residents will require care in proportion to those who can live within a competitive distance to provide and other services required. Staffing businesses for the long term is likely going to become more and more difficult due to the lack of available housing stock of the kind it is proposed to create here. The estate is a hybrid working and gains of stock here bring benefits to community which will not be replicated by the addition of luxury units or high density offerings elsewhere. In addition, depending on the outcome of the State election and the position taken by the next state government in relation to the new SEQ regional plan, the State is going to be pushing hard in our progress on the addition of housing stock. The application before council is one of the lowest impact additions of stock conceivable and undercuts our future negotiations with the State if we are, even at this level, still operating from a position of "Can we find a way not to accrue this? " rather than "Is there a viable alternative way as we were all reminded during COVID, we are a nation of a federation of powerful state governments. If the State decides to override our relative self-determination in planning under the current I it can safely predicted that the added dwelling of the Noosa office application we have offset will not come at as low an impact on the Shire and is highly likely to involve some destruction of existing food and water. I fear allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good could lead us to receive minor. Tewantin and I love living in this community and in the Noosa parklands wales state. Estate. We are willing to our employees give up what is an surplus of backyard in order to fund replacement of our alien under-dwelling, with a new home to be built to modern resilience and energy efficiency standards. I ask only the council to send us down the path to achieve this by acquiring, planning and seeking conditions with us to facilitate a subdivision in a way that best meeting out its bushfire concerns. Thank you all for your time. Clifford brainwatt, our surveyor, has prepared a draft plan for relocation of the driveway in response to the new development stadium study Federal court fairport, anyone would like that. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 12:23.907
Thank you, Mr Noosa, for your excellent submission. If possible, could you email that to us so we can consider it prior to, in case we want to review the application in person. Thank you. Very much. Okay, next item is items referred from the committee. First up is an application for another change to development approval. Integrated permaculture designed organic orchard and golf course contracts, adding holes to include group farm stay accommodation and associated supporting infrastructure. The Kabi referred from the Planning & Environment Committee dated 12 September. I think it was due to the significance of the matter and more information required. Tom, you have a conflict of interest, would you like to be clear? Tom Wegener 13:15.442
Yes, I am Councillor Tom Wegener from the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest as I requested from the permaculture report which was I requested the permaculture report which was mentioned in the application submission was which not required to be included in the report to council. Do you want me to Read that again? It's been a minute. Yeah, okay. The permaculture report was written by Tom Kendall, a local permaculture expert. As the president of the community group Permaculture Noosa, I have learned from Tom Kendall and visited his permaculture however, he is not a property. Personal friend and I do not socialize with him outside of our common interest in permaculture. I believe I can make a judgment in the public interest. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the whether I can remain, participate in this decision. Frank Wilkie 14:10.076
Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Any questions for Councillor Wegener? Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 14:15.676
Can you just clarify the statement you made that you requested the permaculture report? You requested it from applicants or? Tom Wegener 14:23.387
No, I requested it from staff. I requested the permaculture report from staff and it was not mentioned. It was mentioned in the applicant submission but it was not included in our report to us, to us councillors. That was what I was trying Frank Wilkie 14:37.847
To clarify. So only through asking for this report was your potential permaculture review? Does that make sense Councillor Stockwell? Joe did you have a question? Brian Stockwell 14:49.781
I think that needs to be clarified though because it wouldn't make sense after reading it. As you Read that it sounds like he requested the applicant provided it. Frank Wilkie 15:00.861
So what change are you suggesting? Brian Stockwell 15:04.241
Upon request to staff for the permaculture report. Which was in. To staff not from. To staff. Yeah. To staff for the permaculture report. Yeah for the permaculture report. Which was mentioned in the applicant's submission. I Don't think you need the next bit. But... I learned that the permaculture report was written by Tom Kendall, a local permaculture expert. Frank Wilkie 15:47.978
Okay, so which was not required to be included in the report to council? It was revealed the permaculture report was written by Tom Kendall. Yes. Brian Stockwell 16:05.080
If the council wouldn't be as happy with that one, I think that is clear. Joe Jurisevic 16:11.240
Just to clarify Brian Stockwell 16:13.201
So... That with permaculture. Joe Jurisevic 16:20.002
Can I, just a question with regard to Tom Kendall's credentials as a local permaculture expert and your role as president of the Permaculture Noosa group. Noosa community I'm assuming that Tom is a member of that Permaculture Noosa? No, he's not a member of the club. So there's no association with your role in Permaculture Noosa and Mr Kendall as a permaculture expert? No. Thank you, that's all okay. Brian Stockwell 16:45.577
I'm happy to move that Councillor Wegener participates and votes on this matter. I'll second. Because council believes that Mr Kendall is not a close associate, I'll put associate, which is the legal term. Yeah. Worry about personal, it's a close associate. Sorry, just delete the word personal, that's what the legislation talks about. And that a reasonable person would trust a final decision is made in the public interest. Second, Councillor Jurisevic, Councillor stop by and just... Stockwell speak to no, just that I think by declaring we're now aware of what the link is. It's good practice, but the fact that Mr. Kendall isn't a close associate of the media doesn't actually trigger the statutory need to declare. That's being done out of an abundance of caution, as another Councillor's fond of saying. Frank Wilkie 17:48.888
Any other councillors to speak to the motion? Karen Finzel 17:50.788
Yeah, I just have a question through the shed. Yes, so just to clarify then, Councillor Wegener, was that you raised this because of public perception? Tom Wegener 18:00.748
Yeah, the possibility of... That, oh my gosh, the word permaculture is in, you know, Tom's about that and Tom Kendall's about that. There must be some, you know, intertwined connection, which there's not, and it's... Looking into the report, I tried... Diligence and, you know, we all look in and ask for further reports to come. Yeah. So, yeah, just at the reception, I just want to put it on the table and say the original associate. Joe Jurisevic 18:28.252
Thank you. Sorry, possibly a question for staff in this regard. With regard to what the report that was permaculture mentioned in the applicant's submission revealed, what the nature of the report was, was it about the... It was about the proposed use and how the site could be used for agriculture using permaculture practices. Is there a reason why that report wasn't attached to the report so that councils could have been aware of it? Was more detailed. So saying, you know, these are the types of, you know, this is a design layout, this is where we're going to plant, this is the type of plants we will use... So the nature of activity, how the permaculture would be undertaken on the site. Nadine 19:11.055
I didn't see it would add too much more in terms of the planning recommendations. Frank Wilkie 19:15.035
Thank you. All right, do you wish to close, Councillor suffolk? To the vote, those in favour? That's unanimous, and Councillor Wegener can vote on the above motion. Nadine. Hello. Hello. Could you give us an overview, please? Nadine 19:32.423
Okay. Good afternoon, everyone. This is an application for another change to an existing approval. In 1999, council approved an integrated permaculture design, organic orchard and golf course on the site out at Kabi Rd in Cootharaba. This current application, we've got a cantharabah. That we're dealing with, as I said, is another change. We'd be happy to be proposing a group farm stay accommodation and supporting facilities on the site. The proposal is up, it proposes approval to have up to 299 people on the site, and is mainly to cater for it's catered school camps during the school term and then weekend groups and out of school term other groups which might be sporting groups, religious groups, we're not really sure exactly what those groups will be, who those groups will be. As part of the proposal and to address the agricultural uses and designation over the site, the applicant proposes that this is a farm to plate type of visitor accommodation where students will be seeing how food is produced and displayed and eaten on site. Three villages are proposed. And having a total of 7,405 square metres. Sorry, my report refers to 8,300. My math wasn't great on that. There are three villages with the main building having a gross floor area of 2,300 feet square metres. That main building a sitting or restaurant area with full kitchen for over 300 people, plus office reception facilities as well, and next to it is a fully covered basketball court. The scheme talks about this is in the rural zone and it's affected by the rural zone code, plus it also has an agricultural land conservation area designation or ALCA as we call it. The scheme talks about in terms of character amenity, it talks about a maximum of 2,000 square metres for short-term or visitor accommodation in this zone with a maximum building size of 250. Just noting as I said before the main building is 2,300. In the assessing proposal we found that the application does not further the SEQ objectives which are intensifying agricultural activities rather than reducing them. It permanently alienates agricultural land and is not complementary to, fully complementary to the agricultural uses and we consider that this use of accommodation is probably more predominant than agriculture. It is inconsistent with the character the scheme which is for smaller scale buildings. It's not small scale. There's no overwhelming need for the provision of this educational establishment for the residents of Noosa Shire there's no overwhelming and need for this type of facility to be built on public land. We've got concerns with the traffic impacts because on the weekends when it's not being used for school accommodation and traffic there will be significant impacts on that road quite significantly which is detrimental to this area and we've also got bushfire concerns in terms of evacuation from the site because it will have to go through a high intensity bushfire. So therefore the application has been recommended by staff for use of. Questions councillors? Joe Jurisevic 23:05.961
You very much. Yeah thanks Nadine. I want to clarify one of the points that was mentioned in the report about the need to refer to the State with regard to the 5,000 square metre area for development I asked for a breakdown which you've provided thank you and which brought the correction of the total area. Given that the villages total 4,000 square metres and the communal area totals 2,000 square metres and amenities 140 square out of that 7,505, to me that calculates over 5,000 square metres. Why does that not trigger the need to refer to the State of being over 5,000 square metres? It is the accommodation compliance. Components excluded from the State referral. So it's only on the central facilities area. So accommodation doesn't get included in that calculation. Thank you for that. Further to clarifying that the ALCA with regards to uses that will be in the mapped area and or additional uses that may not be. Can you confirm what uses will be actually proposed to be developed within that. Area. Nadine 24:27.645
So the agricultural land conservation area extends basically over all of the cleared area of lot 394. That's where the existing golf course is. So all the cleared areas including the golf course. Does that include the other part? Actually is outside, the block to the north, sorry there's a portion of that, I'm just having a look at my map now, there's a portion of that area that isn't included in the outcome and that's what we're talking about, the effluent disposal area. That's actually outside the outcome. But the three villages, so the central facilities plus the three villages will all be in agricultural land conservation areas and there are also two fields that are proposed in the eastern portion of the site that are also located in the alka area. There is also an existing caretaker's house that isn't actually indicated on the plans. And that's also indicated is also located within the agricultural I assume all the access roads and all the rest of it as well? All the access roads are in the alka as well. Joe Jurisevic 25:33.064
So the only portion of development that isn't in the alka is the effluent disposal area which is on the adjoining lot that isn't covered by that. Alright, 2, 2, 1, 2. There was another question, sorry. I'll see if anybody else has got one and I'll go back to my notes and just see if I can find the third question. Amelia Lorentson 25:54.912
So there was no requirement for state agency referral under this application. If the application was submitted as an MCU, would that have triggered the need for a state referral? No, it wouldn't. No, it's the same trigger. Same trigger, the same trigger, which is the number of people in that floor area that we were talking about. And there's a little bit of discussion in the application about the existing use rights. Yes. Can you clarify how the decision was made that the development approval had not lapsed in 2011? So I've gone through the papers and it just seemed very great to me, Nadine. Nadine 26:41.388
Existing use rights are probably great. We talk about applicator approvals lapsing. So an approval runs with the land. We talk about an approval lapsing when it can be abandoned. So you have to be able to demonstrate that a use has been abandoned. In this instance, the golf course has been maintained. The facilities, that restaurant is still there. So it'll be very hard for us to argue that the use has actually been abandoned. They could come back at any stage and then commence that use with minimal to the existing facilities. Richard MacGillivray 27:21.311
There are situations, councillor, where uses can cease for a period and sometimes referred to as mothball and where they may hold an abeyance. It doesn't necessarily mean that they have extended the use rights, but it does come down to a fact and degree in a lot of situations and can be quite a great area in terms of has that continuity their of use continued and has it been abandoned? So it's quite a complex test to get to. I guess in this case staff are satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated that a use has not been abandoned given the fact that there are some signs that it has been maintained as a facility and therefore those rights continue. Nadine 28:03.055
There's there's some interesting case law that you can Read about it. There was one about... A service station that was shut down basically but all of the facilities were retained. The balances were were there. The shop was still there and that was left unoccupied for years and there was a court case about that and they were able to come back because it hadn't been abandoned. It was the intent that the site was sold. So exactly what Richard's getting saying, so it just held on the basis that somebody else was going to come and use it. So in this instance we believe that the use hasn't been abandoned, it's shown in intent that it will continue to be operated. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 28:51.243
Yeah, in your oh input, and I apologise for my voice, might not make it through, it's nothing contagious, it's too much cheering at a successful grand final for the Noosa lions premier league and other teams. Not pointing hard at the birthday yesterday. I thought you were still there. The application was based on it was an undefined use. In your report you identified similarities to things like short stay accommodation, night space, etc. However, when I Read the definition of a resort complex, I can't see how it's not. So the definition of a resort complex means the use of the premises for tourist and visitor accommodation that includes integrated leisure facilities, including bars, meeting rooms, if they've got furniture facilities, they're not saying they've got furniture, they've got restrooms, they've got sporting and they've got fitness facilities. Staff accommodation they've got. So my is, why wouldn't it be question defined as a result? And does that make an implication on the level of assessment. Nadine 29:50.290
Again, just remember this was another change. So it was a change to an existing approval. It was publicly notified, which is the main difference between a code and an impact assessment application. In terms of the land use, when I look at the definition of a resort, I really think unrelated people. Whereas in this instance, the use is school camps. So we're getting one operator or several, you know, it might be a school who's coming and they're going to basically utilise three camps, the three villages, the whole site, rather than having individual people coming like toppers to the resort. And I would say some of the recreation facilities too. Brian Stockwell 30:29.462
But there's nothing that's in what I've within Read that restricts it to either scoops. Nadine 30:36.042
I do agree with you and I think I've got some concerns in terms of when the school term finishes and we did ask for them to the aren't using it, who is it open to and it was a brief response in terms of it will be open to other groups. Brian Stockwell 30:55.246
And one of the benefits is of education there's nothing within the undefined land use. There's nothing that appears in the undefined land use that links it to education, is that correct? SPEAKER_03 31:05.378
No, it's in their, I suppose, their proposal. They're advising us that it will be used for school groups, predominantly for school groups with a education component associated with that. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic Joe Jurisevic 31:17.478
? Following on from that, if it were to be approved at any stage, something that could be conditioned as to who the users could be? Can it be confined to school groups only as an educational facility? That would be a hard condition. So there's no scope to really define who could use the facility? Richard MacGillivray 31:39.985
I mean, we've been seeking that from the applicant early on, and that's been raised as a concern around the scope of the exact user group. Obviously, a condition could be looked at around that. However, it potentially could be subject to contest, given that's not what they've been applied for. Joe Jurisevic 31:57.545
That's what I'm seeking, whether it's contestable after that. Yeah, okay. Frank Wilkie 32:00.805
Just following on with that, so so this is application approved and it was approved. Be used for convention. Nadine 32:08.633
Yes, I believe so, yes. Unless we, again, try and condition it. When asked about the... Remembering that there are four sort of substantial areas. There's the central facility building, which sit, as I said, over at tables. At tables. With a large kitchen and reception... A large kitchen and there are offices. Then there are... So it could seat possibly more than 300 tables, wasn't it? That's what I... That was on their seating plan, I counted, yes. 330. Then there are the three villages. Each village has its own dining area and kitchen area. So there's a lot of duplication of facilities. So, you know, yes, I'm not quite sure of how these buildings will be when they're not being used for school groups. And yes, I think that there is the potential that they could be used for some form of functions or conferences out there, yes. Tom Wegener 33:03.101
Looking at the plans again. We're looking at the plans. There are small rooms with floor blocks. It just seems to be catering for exactly what they say they're gonna use it for, which is school kids. And then of course the basketball court taking up a lot of GFA also seems to indicate school kids. So the evidence is there that there's not a an atrocious to put trojan horse that in a continued... Using it as a golf course with, you know, the five star. Is that right? SPEAKER_03 33:34.409
No, that's what they had proposed. Each of those little cabins had its own toilet. At the moment they're indicative layout of four... Of, you know, two bunk beds which could have four people in them. Could they be easily converted? Yes, I think they could be easily converted to a double bed. Amelia Lorentson 33:59.284
Nadine. So if we're planning to deviate from the Noosa Plan, there's a requirement under section 63 that we have to establish a planning need. Can you elaborate? You've provided councillors with a list of all the other available school camps and education facilities. Can you just talk to us about that? Nadine 34:23.936
Okay, again it was a brief list. I Don't mean that that is a final list in terms of this area. Applicant hasn't demonstrated that there is a planning need for this type of facility in the area. Sorry, in my opinion, I Don't believe they have demonstrated that. There are a number of existing camps in the area that our existing school groups use. There's facilities on the North Shore and also our existing schools do go outside the Shire to existing camps. So I Don't see that there is a need for this type of facility to service our community's requirements. Thank you, any other answers? Joe Jurisevic 35:09.380
Yeah, in the report there was no mention of bushfire hazard assessment or management plan for the site, but my understanding is the applicant has since provided one. Were there any concerns raised in the bushfire hazard plan that the applicant provided? SPEAKER_09 35:29.012
We'll get will to have a chat about that if you'd like. Will 35:31.973
So the site is considered a vulnerable use and I guess under the SPP requirements the assessment benchmark 3 requires that developments mitigate the risk to people and property to an acceptable and tolerable level of risk. This is done three ways. You know, they need to demonstrate there's an overriding need in the public interest for the near expanded service. There's no other suitable alternative locations within the required service catchment and the site can appropriately mitigate risk. The applicant has determined that they met this requirement by achieving a separation distance of less than 10 kilowatts per square for the metre users of the site, so in an emergency, the idea is that you'll locate the users of the property within that less than 10 kilowatts per square metre of radiant heat, which would be in the centre of the site, essentially. Um... From an officer level, I guess I'd need to look at, is that an acceptable level it's a tolerable of risk, or an intolerable level of risk, and there's three definitions for these. An acceptable level of risk is sufficiently low to require no new treatments. The tolerable risk is low enough to allow the exposure to a natural hazard to continue, but high enough to require new treatments or actions to reduce that risk. Communities can generally live within this level of risk, but as much as reasonably practically should be done to reduce this risk. Risk is one following an understanding of the likelihood and consequences is so high that it requires actions to avoid or reduce risk. Individuals in society will not accept this risk and measures are to be put in place to reduce risk to at least a tolerable level. In an emergency, the current proposal depends on two exit points. Well, both exiting. South via Kabi Rd and gutharbar road before being able to evacuate towards Tewantin or Pomona and where evacuation is not possible. Shelter in place in this 10-kilometre area. Given that the proposal may potentially put large numbers of school-aged children in a situation where they can't be evacuated in an emergency, these guests would have to refuse on the property in case of a wildfire emergency, may be exposed to a flame attack, ember attack, radiant heat exposure, wind, smoke attack. Council would view this as an incurable risk. Joe Jurisevic 38:19.734
You mentioned two egresses from the property in the report that only talks about one. Can we just clarify that on that? Will 38:27.354
Yep, so the original report referred to one evacuation point. Yep. And a secondary evacuation report is then provided to council, which now proposes a second exit point, which is also through highbush fire. They both exit basically through the highbush fire area. Joe Jurisevic 38:46.742
Now, I'm not sure whether you're the right person to ask this question, I will, but with regard to having that many people on a property if they were to remain in from a building code perspective, would something like sprinklers and all that be required in a property of this nature, given what it's being intended to use for? I mean, a school or a school facility or a boarding facility, I would imagine that sort of thing would be a requirement. It's difficult to put a solution to a risk like this, given the use. The individual buildings would be required to achieve a BAL rating, which is different to a radiant heat clutch rating, so that would be undertaken by a certifier. And again, that goes under the building correct. So that would be reliant on building codes. So they have to meet certain building code regulations if these were to be accepted and go ahead in a rural setting with a dam for water supply, one would imagine. Nadine 39:43.398
Also, I think, the number of people on site as well. Yeah, thank you. Amelia. Amelia Lorentson 39:50.818
Just another question. The applicant's town planner has communicated that the applicant's happy to discuss scale and material materials. Would that change the decision? And how, you know, how much smaller does this have to be to get a tick? Oh, I helpful. It is, and I'm struggling with it also, Nadine, just to... Nadine 40:20.410
So on Facebook, I think we are proposing, we're proposing permanent structures, quite large structures, such as the basketball court, within, on valuable agricultural land. So we're reducing our amount of agricultural land available, again, it's a limited resource, so whatever we approve on this site, we'll reduce that resource. So there's that one aspect for me. The one, we're second talking about scale. I know Karen's mentioned about scale involved. When you look at the whole site, yes, this is a small percentage of all three sites, the built form, but I'm not... When I Read the planning scheme, I Don't see that this is what the planning scheme was looking for. Talking about smaller scale, smaller buildings being scattered amongst the environment, and I Don't see that this is really meeting that, so what I think might be appropriate, I Don't know if it's functional, viable, and I Don't know if that's... And I Don't have a number in my head, actually. Richard MacGillivray 41:24.629
Medina's And I guess, Councillor, Council, just to add to that, Nadine's comments, it's always difficult, I guess, putting staff, putting feedback on what is the appropriate scale, and our role is to assist the applicant's proposals as they put it forward. Certainly, staff from an early stage... Pre-lodgement have been very clear around their concerns around the scale of this operation, and usually based on that feedback we'll be thinking that they modify that to reduce it to a point where it's considered acceptable as part of our assessment. We're obviously presenting what's been brought by the applicant today. So sorry I can't answer that question accurately but just to give you some context Frank Wilkie 42:05.633
I'd just like to ask another question in the report you mentioned the impact on road and is it the development points to a six-fold increase in traffic on the feedba road during weekdays? Yes, that's correct. About 57 to 356. Yes, that's correct. Do you want to Read that? Yes. Any independent traffic consultant who's been hired by the council have a different view? SPEAKER_03 42:41.537
Quite possibly. We do find our traffic consultants often have a different opinion to some of the consultants. But in this instance, we have just taken the traffic consultant's practice. Joe Jurisevic 42:52.997
Thank you. Two questions. I'll follow on from that question with regard to traffic management. What was the allowable traffic under the previous development application in compared to what currently operates on that? My understanding is it's significantly more than 57. So as a golf course, it had approval up to 180 or 200 cars. About half of what's proposed here. Sorry, I didn't bring that email. Yes, what I sent previously at its peak when it was approved. It did have up to about 180, I believe. Again, that was based on, I suppose, conservative maximum figures. I'm just going under its current approval. It had approval for up to 180 vehicle movements a day. That's right, but we are going up to almost 400 vehicles. That's right, just for comparison's sake, with regard to that. So the other element is you gave a response with regard to the question raised previously, and I just confirmed terms of bulk, the rural zone code details a range of outcomes relating to built form and small scale accommodation development. The acceptable outcomes detail that individual buildings not used for rural activities do not exceed 500 square metres gross. Is that correct? And further, the Noosa Plan details that small scale accommodation is to take the form of small separate buildings with a lodge not exceeding 250 square metres and no individual cabins or cottages have any area exceeding 65 square metres. So just in relation to that last part, so individual cabins or lodges 65 square metres but in total no more than 500 metres gross. Is that how I Read that? Nadine 44:28.289
Yes, that's how it does Read, yes. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 44:32.329
Councillor Stockwell. I'd like to move to staff recommendation with one small change and that change is down on item D for memories. All right. Oh, no, it's one on D. Keep going down. I think it's down. Karen Finzel 44:57.760
It's number 105. SPEAKER_03 45:08.810
3A, is that the one you're looking at? Frank Wilkie 45:11.430
That's close to D. Very, very close. Yeah, I can start to demonstrate an overwhelming need? Brian Stockwell 45:21.260
Overwhelming, yes, by inserting the word 'planning' after the word 'overwhelming'. There's an overwhelming planning need. There is an overwhelming planning need. Frank Wilkie 45:41.160
Okay, we have a seconder for that, please. Seconder is Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 45:49.800
Yeah, Vicky, if you could bring up, you put on voices pretty flippant, I have. Done a wonderful presentation, but if I could do so so myself... So the first thing is the concept of having a paddock-to-plate school-based education facility in a rural area is a good one. It is one that was if it the right scale and designed well in the right place, that we would support it. But one of the first things that I teach, and I teach anyone about agriculture, is one of the most important principles is that we're not making any more good quality me a cunt, I mean. Agricultural land. That's the State planning policy on protection of good quality agricultural land was the first one gazetted in Queensland in 1992. It is the longest established state interest in local planning schemes. And what is that state interest that affects this? This is out of the current state planning policies. It says avoiding development that will have irreversible impact on or adjacent to agricultural land class A. B. Maintaining or enhancing land conditions and the five physical resources underpinning that and D. It does say facilitating opportunities for coexistence with development that is complementary. To agricultural uses that do not reduce agricultural productivity. Okay and it mentions agricultural tourism. That's the core principle about this one is we have nearly two acres of gross floor area for short-term accommodation that can be used for both school children and the general public of some groups. That's not the only area that is alienated. It's also getting to but it's also, if we have sensitive land uses, then the land, the buffer around them is also alienating from the intensive agriculture. So it's really essential to me. That is number one grounds for refusal is it offends longest. That is number one grounds for refusal is it offends the longest standing state interest in local government planning schemes in the State. Because while we've never had a famine in Australia, the countries that have realised that protecting good quality agricultural land is fundamental. The sustainability of their community. So next please. I did talk about this before. We're talking about a sports hall with basketball. There is no way that a court would approve a basketball court on good quality land. Previous over agricultural in one of my jobs I had the State role of identifying and going through all the court cases on good quality agricultural land up until 20 years ago when I left that job. And while early days there was some doubt about how strong the State's interest was, it's a very well-established principle that you do not alienate state agricultural land in the extent for dining facilities, for land sale kitchens, linesale okay? It talks about, you know, in the report we talk about, it's clearly more prominent, like this is from the report, it's clearly more permanent. There's one area there that has, you know, some of the buildings are built on concrete slabs. Is permanent alienation. There's one thing that isn't identified. We're talking about incompatible land uses. The predominant driver is about recreation. You know, agriculture is a component and it's the part they are looking at if permaculture is a good concept, no argument with it. But, 200 square metres. 7 of changing the waterway for recreational purposes. Once again, inconsistent with the appropriate treatment. Now they're suggesting that might have some rehabilitation benefit. By getting clothes back. I haven't seen the detail, but certainly in my years of waterway restoration, widening it to the point that it's a canoe course would not be considered to be rehabilitation. So we're in a... Yeah, I've mentioned that in my opinion, the closest definition under the State is we're talking about a 300 person resort in a rural area. Simple thing. We're really unusual. Next, please. That's the resort. I'm clicking on here and it's not changing anything. Next time again. Unusual in this particular spot. Thanks, Vicki. Next slide. We've got really good quality soils mapping. We've had a land resource assessment. The State only does this in think have got agricultural potential. So not, I Don't know if there's anywhere else in our Shire that's got such good soils. There's no smaller part done. That just shows the soil that goes to the next one. But from that soils map, you get your angling you that there's a doctor ag land classes. And can see there, the dark green. Is highest quality ag land class A1. The lighter green is A2 and the orange is B. If you go to the next slide, that's overlaid on the development. You can see the site is mapped within class A1 or class A2 agricultural land. Okay if you see through the map. It should have been a slideshow. Go once again and probably you'll off. Hit next again. Oh, there you go that's what it was overlying that's the development concept. We can move on. Ah I've got out of order. Okay keep clicking until that goes away. There we go. Another click? Click, yeah. This is the overarching strategic framework. It talks about we do want economies diverse and resilient and we do want agricultural pathways. It talks about aligning with the Noosa point of distance, Noosa brand, implementing natural environment sustainability and it talks about low impact nature based tourism and rural tourism are supported. And if we go on, that's reflected in the tables of assessment. Next please. And you can see the sort of scale that was envisaged. These are all the sort of uses that were mentioned in the report. You can see the code assessment 25 tens of caravans for a tourist park, for an education establishment involving no more than 20 students. For nature based it talks about 20 guests. So this one is seeking approval for $299 and across the whole area than $5 a metre it's a much larger scale than what we're envisaged. And next slide please. We talked about the South East Queensland plan being inconsistent. Now there's some important words there. Opportunities to further grow and diversify original food which is seen as direct marketing, valuating options, adaption of traditional industries to new players, artisanal food protection, local farmers markets. These are all the things that the pentecostal movement leaps into. High value dairy products, grass fed, free range, sub-tropical fruit. It talks about the sub-regions, hinterland hitler areas. And this is in the northern part where we are. The sub-regions, hinterland areas support the growth of creative and boutique industries. Rural diversification includes value adding, nature based tourism as well as clean industries. These activities will be encouraged, which we should, where they can be managed to preserve the agricultural conservation has. Land resource that's what this development does not do. Now one of the reasons I bring this up is those words are very familiar to Noosa because they are taken straight out of the Noosa Council submission to the regional plan. I wrote most of them and raoul improved on them. So that's what we said we wanted and that's what the regional plan reflects and when we talk about scale that we may accept into future, then, in the they really need to do a better job in identifying how they can get an educational establishment without offending the really core principles of planning. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Frank Wilkie 54:12.359
Thank you. And now the councillors wish to speak. Thank I want to speak to this. Council, wait a minute. We can start Tom Wegener 54:26.139
Okay. Okay. I understand the staff's recommendation, and I understand that they're looking through the lenses of the planning scheme. And they say there's no overwhelming need. And I agree. When I say I will not vote against clear wording of the planning scheme unless there is an overwhelming public interest. And in this case, I think there is a whopping overriding public interest. And I want us to look at this application through all the other strategies and plans that we have. For example, when we the Environment Strategy, 2019 through the lens, a different lens, through a different strategy, we say by 2030, 80% of all grazing land achieved best practice management for agriculture. Where are we right now? As far as I know, and I've spent a lot of time the last four years really trying to understand Noosa agriculture, there's a grand total of one east wall farms properly doing regenerative cattle farming. So if we approve this application, we will double the amount of regenerative cattle operations in Noosa to two. When we look at the climate change response plan, again, a different set of eyes. We're looking at, we know that we need to produce our own food, but we do need to grow it. At the last kalula food trail, where they go around to the different farms, how many crop farmers were there in Noosa on the trail? Zero. There was one east wall farms, which had a token regenerative farm. We have a situation here where we Don't eat what grows here. During lunch, during the summertime, we eat iceberg lettuce, carrots, broccoli, cauliflower, none of them are from here, not from anywhere near here. There's plenty of wonderful greens we can put on our plate, but we Don't grow them. And that is a very, very big problem. When we look at it, this application through the Corporate Plan which is the big daddy plan of ours that the plan states work with agriculture organisations and agencies to support and educate landholders on regenerative agriculture methods and promote local and sustainable food production that's right in the Corporate Plan that went out to public consultation lots of people said yep that's right and we know we live up to that and the question about how the Corporate Plan is how is it going to filter out to other plans how are other plans going to use that lens to perceive what to do next and we looked at the last Business Round Table meeting of the economic development and they stated we will scope the preparation of a food and agribusiness industry development plan so that is how thank you. Our economic policy is looking at the Corporate Plan and the Corporate Plan is filtering through so we're going down this agriculture route. When we look at the Noosa River Catchment Management Plan which we will soon be have a very different view of this application. In page 65 it says the amount of silt or mud coming down was one thousand one hundred and two kilograms per hectare unbelievable which is an ungodly amount of silt coming off of the property. This is in just the Kin Kin area alone. This is twenty eight thousand sixty nine cubic metres of silt washing off of our primed farmland into the river clogging up our river. Page 26 states, this is again of the river plan, the massive decline of our lovely little well it doesn't say, my words, the massive decline of our lovely little creatures which live in the bottom of the river is due to the amount of sediment in the river and on our watch in the last twenty years thirty to sixty five percent of% those creatures that live in the benthic layer are gone, aren't there anymore and what does that do to? Probably silt coming off of our agriculture lands. Unknown 58:19.719
The current cattle farming is an extractive industry. Tom Wegener 58:27.759
Is one where the externalities not incorporated, does not incorporate externalities into the what is it, does not incorporate into government things like that. Does not incorporate externalities into the business. Which is, they have cattle, 60 head of cattle on 100 acres of property. That's normal out there. Eat the grass down improperly. They're not moving around so that the farmer sells the cattle. We get the mud. Our river silts up. So we are subsidizing our cattle industry here in Noosa with our practices. We need to start this regenerative concept. It is so utterly important for us. On page 63, it states that river plants develop a landholder extension program to educate rural landholders on sustainable land management. So we need to educate them on sustainable land management. And what does that look like? Well, Rachel ward, the famous actress from the thorn birds, Don mendo, we're glad, and against all odds, one of our favourite, yes. Brian Stockwell 59:45.816
We're looking at a development application for farm stay accommodation. We're getting a sermon on regenerative agriculture. I Don't think it's relevant to the application because we're not... Refusing or approving agriculture. Tom Wegener 01:00:04.322
What's your response to that? We are looking at an overwhelming need. There is no overwhelming need and I'm demonstrating that there is an overwhelming need. For Brian Stockwell 01:00:12.842
Agriculture, I agree with you. We're a... Frank Wilkie 01:00:20.488
So is your point that this application would develop these sorts of areas that you're championing? Tom Wegener 01:00:26.868
It is this application. For this development is thoroughly supported by many other plans that we have, including our own Corporate Plan. That's the link that I'm making between agriculture and this... Thank you. All allowed. Thank you. The waste... It is interesting. What is? So we have Rachel's farm. So Rachel ward hasn't had a farm. Cattle are dying. She's worrying about climate change. She says, what can I do? Well, it's the best way to sequester carbon is to put it in your soil layer. That's where it belongs. And in hunter farm, she changed to regenerative farming and she came about it. Here to talk she came to Noosa. She played the movie twice. She answered questions and she said... Amelia Lorentson 01:01:13.017
Through the Chair, point of order. Sorry. Tom Wegener 01:01:18.637
Through the Chair. Okay. Okay. Are you talking about another development now, Tom? Okay, let's look at... Let's talk about this one. Let's talk about... Okay, we're looking at it through the waste strategy and zero emissions. How do we... This... Way strategy we are looking towards getting our double grind in our community burning the biochar we are looking at that bringing getting that as I was once a waste product bringing it back putting it on our land sequestering harvest and of course so currently our topsoil is being washed washed away from our different yes yes I would like to raise a point of order. Yes Councillor thinks Karen Finzel 01:02:03.261
So. Yeah I Don't believe the speaker is speaking to the nation before us. Brian Stockwell 01:02:09.421
Okay yeah Tom Frank Wilkie 01:02:13.741
Can you can you keep your comments you've been given a lot of latitude, can you keep your comments now to the application that's before us and the recommendation that's before us. Tom Wegener 01:02:26.666
I spoke to Andrew from CYC and said why why does it need to be so big and he said it's the only way to make this economically viable. 300 kids he said isn't actually that big but when it comes to this sort of development and much much bigger kid camps out there it's not a big one he says it's just the right size and I said well why is there be so fancy he said well teachers if you're gonna have a place like this with lots of kids coming it's actually got to be really nice for the teachers because the teachers have to want to go there and by making a facility like this you'll have teachers to say yeah I want to bring my kids there why court the canoeing because they're kids they they you need something else like not every kid is all that excited about getting their hands dirty learning about the circular economy growing things learning about nutritious plants that they can be eating that they could might not fit that but you got this over there but when these work we're working towards that this is what's called a BHAG a big hairy audacious goal and we need to move forward with this because we are actually in a terrible place with agricultural land and maybe this application is the giant crowbar we need just dislodge the old paradigm that we are living in right now and we desperately need to escape from we are going backwards on our river on this on our river as we'll see in the river plan we're going backwards on sustainable agriculture we're going backwards on teaching our kids about the circular economy about eating what's right we're going backwards on our climate change response plan we're going backwards on so many of the things that we value here in Noosa and perhaps this application is a step forward. Thank you Councillor Wegener. I have a question. Karen Finzel 01:04:11.483
Yes Through the Chair to Councillor Tom. Are you aware they're running cattle on this property? Tom Wegener 01:04:17.742
They are and they're currently running cattle but not in a regenerative meeting meaning that they've got a big paddock with a handful of cattle on it. In the plan, and I think it's in the plan, but it's also in the permaculture plan, they move the cattle every four days. So every paddock has a lot of time, has what, 30-something days to regenerate before the cattle comes onto it next. You drive around Noosa, you are starting to see brown. You won't see that on eastwell farms, on the regenerative. You won't see brown, but you'll get it now. It's already turning brown. The cows are eating the food all the way down. When it rains again, our river's full of water and full of mud. Frank Wilkie 01:04:56.215
Can I ask a question? Yes, thank you. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:04:58.541
I'll speak to this. I support the staff recommendation to refuse the application. The scale of this project, a 299 person accommodation facility the area is a 3,000 square foot building. The area is is excessive and conflicts with the Noosa Plan. Contrary to what I've heard at the table, the proposal does not further, and I'm referencing the recommendation on page 42, it doesn't further the SEQ regional plan 2017 says that to intensify or diversify on-farm agricultural activities because the proposed permaculture and food production is not of a significant scale. The farm stay is of a significant scale. And there are two other major reasons why I'm supporting the application. Does, the applicant hasn't hasn't, hasn't proven or demonstrated this overwhelming planning need. We Don't need another school camp. And the issue on bushfire, there is no way can sleep well at night knowing there might be 299 kids placed in a precarious position. We're in a bushfire season and that is a paramount concern and a strong enough reason to be added to the refusal. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Do you have a question? Tom Wegener 01:06:30.548
We look at the buildings, all three are in the middle of the property. And if you can take into consideration that when you have the syntropic and permaculture gardens surrounding them that it feels wet and that's about the last place it'll burn, so it'd actually add to the safety of the concept of staying on property in case of the worst case scenario where they can't get away, that you actually have got land that will not burn around the property. SPEAKER_05 01:06:58.940
Yeah, was that too yeah, I guess there's a lot of different variables with bushfires. Smoke and ember attack is also another issue that we consider to be a significant issue for the top type of occupants. Thank you, Laura. Will. I'll speak to it. Councillor Stewart. Clare Stewart 01:07:14.620
Yeah, thank you. I support staff recommendations. Think it's excessive inside. I think we have a plethora of school camps. In fact, I know because I'm continually driving my children to them. I'm picking them up at night when I stay over. So, there are many within driving distance of this area. So, I Don't think there has been an overwhelming planning need shown. The real concern I have too is in regard to bushfire, especially when the secondary exit point was in a high bushfire area. That is of major concern to me. And I support staff recommendation based on those three factors. Thank you, Mayor Stewart. Councillor Jurisevic. Joe Jurisevic 01:07:50.332
I agree with everything that's been said around the table. Tom, I take all of your points on board. It's one of the reasons I sat, spent most of the weekend trying to get my head around this. Because I see the value in what's being proposed here. Even Councillor Stockwell acknowledged that in one once of his first comments. There's merit in what's being and proposed here. Once again, great idea in the wrong location to deliver this. The concept of education of sustainable agricultural practices involving and having activities for children are great. Nobody argues that they're great outcomes, particularly with what we're hearing on the news with regard to youth out of control. Here we've got an activity centre that will keep kids occupied, but also educate them in the need for sustainable food and agricultural practices for the future. What a great concept. Brian pointed out, the land is being earmarked as some of the best agricultural land, and taking that element of that, and the Noosa Plan also alludes to, it's not the right location to actually implement permanent structures and the like that should be utilised for ongoing and increasing agricultural practices. So I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place in some elements of this, but there are clearly elements on the size, the scale, and the location, and the land use that challenge that. Nobody's saying it's bad. A proposal, it's just a good proposal in an inappropriate location according to the land availability, the land usage, and according to the plan. And the size and scale of the activities, clearly that in LA. Putting that many people into that sort of sort of area is also a challenge. So I can't disprove anything that's been said around the table. And I thank you for your passion, Tom, with regard to wanting to see more sustainable agricultural practices alike in the region. I just can't support this development application as it currently stands before us. But I do credit the applicant with bringing forward some challenging thinking with regards to what's needed for the future of not only this region, but the entire country. Frank Wilkie 01:10:14.926
Thank you. Councillor Joe. Any other councillors wish to speak before Councillor Stockwell closes? I will. At a risk of oversimplifying, the reason why I support staff recommendation because this is a resort scale accommodation development on land set aside for food security and food production. And as time goes on with the challenges of a changing climate and development, our access to arable land and securing our global food production is going to become increasingly critical. So to put permanent structures of a resort scale accommodation development on some of our best agricultural land will deny us food security going into the future. I also Don't believe there's an overwhelming pain in me because, as has been pointed out, there are 16 other education youth educational facilities. Camps in our region. So it's not as if we need to override the planning scheme and the South East Queensland Regional Plan's intent for this site to provide another school camp. The other factor is the impact on neighbours out there. This would see a six volt increase in traffic on the feeder load and I Don't think people who bought in based on the information they gleaned from the Noosa planning scheme were expecting to see a six volt increase. Increase in traffic out there and the Noosa planning scheme in a sense is a contract we had with our community. It sets expectations, reasonable expectations about what people can expect to see appear on a property next door. I'll be open another application which had the proportions, the ratios of accommodation as opposed to land under permaculture reversed. That is much more land under permaculture and a lot lighter footprint in terms of accommodation provided out there. I think it possibly is the right location but the size and scale is wrong and for those reasons I'm supporting the staff recommendation. Councillor Stockwell, do you wish to close? Brian Stockwell 01:12:50.744
I didn't hear any arguments against the motion. What I heard was a passionate concept of the need being one for more sustainable agriculture, and there's no person who's going to agree with that more than myself. Though. I was the president of an organic growing group in the 1970s, one of the first permaculture conveners on the Coast in the early 80s, and went on doing PhDs in this area. The concept at a planning stage is protecting the most valuable resource we have for the resilience of future communities. After Shilpa, on mesloch's hierarchy of needs, food is next. And we consistently underestimate how important it is to protect our best quality agricultural land. When I grew up, my mother was a travelling piano teacher and she taught the custard apple farmers kids. There are massive urban areas. Why in 1922 did the State bring it in? Because they realised that the incremental death by 1,000 cuts of agricultural land... Threatens the future sustainability of our community. That's what the primary issue at heart of this is. While I appreciate Councillor Wegener's passion for the current regenerative form of agriculture, some of what he said was incorrect. Not all alternative... Mechanisms of grazing or agriculture relate to downstream sediment movement. In fact there's lots of science for other forms of agriculture other than what's considered regenerative that has little or no impact on water quality. And many of the producers in our Shire do adopt a range of the best management practices. Many farmers have spent thousands of dollars putting riparian vegetation along the creeks. Okay? I think that's important to say that we know... Lot about what creates the sediment in the Noosa River. Some of it will be off broad-scale grazing. A lot of it will be from mass movement, floods, stream bank erosion. So the key point here is that if we're going to educate people, we're going to have a transformational change in our food, the place to start is you look after your best assets first. And that's what we're doing by saying no, this has gone too far. Frank Wilkie 01:15:46.486
And Councillor Stockwell, put the motion to the vote. All in favour? That's Councillor Stewart, laurenson, Jurisevic, Finzel, Stockwell and Wilkie. Against? Councillor Wegener? The motion's carried. Councillors, we have another item ahead of us which may you like to take a five-minute break now? Come back for an extended session? Thank you. Yes? Okay, we'll again meet for five minutes. Thanks again. Thank you. SPEAKER_03 01:16:16.763
Thanks, guys. Thank you. We've got everyone. Frank Wilkie 01:16:23.123
Can we have the camera live again? Can we have the camera live again? Ready? Welcome back, everybody. We're up to item 6.1, which is the adoption of the Noosa River Catchment Management Plan. And to give us a bit of an overview, we have Amy kimber, and we have Kim Rawlings, and we have Ben. Ben Derrick, welcome. Can you give us a bit of an overview of where we're at? Amy Kimber 01:17:05.714
Thanks very much. Good afternoon, everyone. Good afternoon. So it's really exciting, I think, to be at this point. A huge amount of work has gone into preparing this catchment plan, and it's been going on for, I think, for centuries. Oh, sorry. Frank Wilkie 01:17:21.588
Brian has a conflict. Oh, he has. Brian Stockwell 01:17:24.748
I have more than one. The always declared a council has conflict, consistent with my previous written declaration in regards to Noosa district stand care, who are acknowledged in a number of locations as being consulted on this plan. I, as in previous times, think I can stay in the room and make an impartial decision in the public interest, and I will remain in the room, but respect your decision. Frank Wilkie 01:18:06.089
That we all checked. No, can I? It's a very long list. Brian Stockwell 01:18:11.349
One page. Paige. You're welcome. 100. NURSE DISTRICT LANDCARE and page 7,146. It's having a significant role. Yep. NICA? Amelia Lorentson 01:18:22.229
NICA is on the list. Kabi Kabi Peoples Aboriginal Corporation, Noosa Integrated Catchment Association, Noosa district landcare group, the biosphere reserve foundation, Noosa River Stakeholder Advisory Committee, Mary river catchment coordinating committee, Healthy Land and Water department, south DES, DAF, MSQ. South East Queensland council of mayors, the nature conservancy, USC, NBFA, boating industry, environmental services, et cetera. Thank you very much. Frank Wilkie 01:19:01.443
On the Noosa River Stakeholder Advisory Committee's constituted... I Don't know if there's anyone on that. No, no. Right, Councillor Stockwell, your report. Brian Stockwell 01:19:14.343
Yes, I've declared it on as my written declaration, so it's up to you. Okay, look, I'll move Frank Wilkie 01:19:20.003
That council note the declarable... Conflict of interest by Councillor Stockwell and in between, Councillor Stockwell participates and votes on this note that council believes a reasonable person would not consider this... Would... Believes that a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest... Brian Stockwell 01:19:48.281
Would believe Frank Wilkie 01:19:49.881
That a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the conflict public interest... In the public interest. Joe Jurisevic 01:19:58.424
It's catching Brian, you're getting, you're starting affect other people's friends. Unknown 01:20:03.924
Reasons made in the wood trust. Good Tom Wegener 01:20:13.145
Second. Frank Wilkie 01:20:15.125
Second, Councillor Wegener. Any questions for Councillor Stockwell? Amelia Lorentson 01:20:20.945
Can I throw a question? Yes. My question is, given recent OIA findings, would your long associate, and I'm referencing Councillor Wilkie, his long association with the PBCA, should we be revisiting this conflict of interest just in light of that decision? A question to the CEO. Larry Sengstock 01:20:48.484
Ultimately you are, you are revisiting it now. He's putting up this conflict of interest, it's just that he's not reading it in total, but it's still a conflict of interest your department. Thank you okay. Brian Stockwell 01:21:03.024
Very much. It hasn't changed from being a declarable conflict to a prescribed conflict, to a declarable conflict. Karen Finzel 01:21:09.841
I understand it's not prescribed, but have you earned money? In your association with these groups that have been mentioned? Brian Stockwell 01:21:21.374
So, from memory, under the act, I only have to go back to the 2016 election. I did earn a small amount with landcare doing a half day workshop for them, which I think was still less than, or just, I can't recall, but it was a small amount still within the declarable if it was taken to be a gift, if you had a donation of 500 or more. Think it was around that $500 moment, but it was before the time. Before 2016. Before 2016, actually. That's it. Frank Wilkie 01:21:57.749
And if I remember rightly, when this district land care has been, your association with, and it's been mentioned before, you've declared it on stage. Consistent with that, I've moved this to the vote. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Councillor Stockwell did not vote. Councillor Stockwell, you have a second declarable. Brian Stockwell 01:22:20.911
Yeah, I'll Read this one just because I Don't do it that often. I wish to inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I have a long-standing relationship with MRCCC as a previous government employee and a long-term collaborator since 1994. I have in the past had a small contract below the limit of it for a prescribed conflict and prior to the declarable timeframe. I was up until the last AGM council representative on the committee and in this role I played a role in facilitating... I played a the surveillance of the cryptidised capital city. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias considering the community nature of this relationship. I choose to remain in the meeting room and have a respected decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Thank you. Joe. Joe Jurisevic 01:23:05.522
I move that council note the declarable conflict of interest by council of Stockwell and determine that council of Stockwell participates and votes on the matter. Because council believes that council of Stockwell does not stand to gain personal materials through this report and therefore reasonable personal trust the final decision will make the public interest. I'll second it. Again as we've done in the past I believe this is fairly consistent with the approach that we've had in past mentions of this conflict by Councillor Stockwell and the nature of the relationship being predominantly community-based in nature. Frank Wilkie 01:23:47.090
Okay. Any questions or comments? Good to take a vote. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Councillor Stockwell did not vote on the matter. Sorry for that. It's okay. Anybody else? Unknown 01:24:03.512
Thank you to all of you. Okay. Amen. Amy Kimber 01:24:07.341
So over the years we've had many improvements in managing and coordinating river-related issues, including speed limit changes, ecological restoration, marine zone regulations, improved environmental monitoring, and enhanced river infrastructure for boat access. We've had various types of governance models, so at the beginning in 2004, when council had its first plan, we had a coordinated group of government agencies around the table. In 2016, we had the community jury considering changes to the river, and then we also had, more excellently, the Noosa River Stakeholder Advisory Committee, which concluded its term in March this year. Now, we did have a subject subcommittee meeting of the NSERAC about the vision and plan for the river moving forward. It sort of went around in circles a little bit, and I think that the committee felt that having MSQ, and I think that the committee felt that having MSQ, as a co-Chair for the committee really meant that we needed to focus on MSQ matters, so I think there was a fair bit of frustration that over two years it really only focused on anchoring and mooring, but that was the situation that we were dealing with. More recently we've had very targeted stakeholder engagement. We had a dedicated workshop with Kabi Kabi, spoken with a whole range of state government contacts, council of mayors... Healthy Land and Water, landcare, MRCCC, NICA, green age conservancy, a local commercial Fisher. So there's been a lot going on behind the scenes and that has all been documented and incorporated into the terms of our updated plan, we've really tried to draw on consultations, scientific research and the many partnerships we already have underway. So I think we've been going over this ground for a long time. I think given the amount of consultation that's been undertaken, we do have a good picture of river management issues and concerns and we've really tried to take that feedback on board in terms of this updated plan. It's really important that we get a plan finalised because without it we can't access state and commonwealth funding. We really need a Roadmap to guide our investment moving forward. There are two major opportunities through South East Queensland passport amends. Resilient Rivers opportunity as well as the commonwealth department of climate change, energy and the environment. Waters, urban rivers and catchments program. So there's been advice received that funding will become available later this year for that. The plan provides an overview of the key threats and pressures for the Noosa catchment and we've identified prioritised management actions. But the next part is using... The intention is that this will be monitored annually, both in terms of the ecological condition of the catchment, but how we're going to actually implement the new plan itself. And one of the ideas that we've been thinking about in terms of future governance is whether we have a small technical advisory panel that can help guide that ongoing monitoring and risk assessment. The plan includes an action to consider the establishment of a conservation park under the nature conservation act across fish habitat areas. This would provide a statutory head of power for better integration improvement management across government agencies under a trust agreement and a joint management plan with department of environment and science. In the very very early stages of considering that we have received legal advice that indicates it is possible. Completion of this plan is listed as a signature project in the 2023-28 Corporate Plan, so we do have a mandate in our head document to get on with it. Really, without it, as I said, it's a framework to protect and improve the catchment, better monitor conditions and trends, and collaborate to build shared ownership and attract investment. We have peer review on the undertaken by four independent experts, and what we've done is divided the plan up into six management areas to try to prioritise management focuses in each of those areas. So I think that's it. Think that's an own view of what we've tried to achieve, but I Don't think I can take any more questions. Joe Jurisevic 01:29:26.093
I've got a couple of questions with minor changes that I believe are necessary to the document to clarify a couple of things. The first one being... That I note in regards to lake Doonella. The runoff from the industrial area west of Noosa-Eumundi Road drains into lake Doonella, as I understand it, but I can only see Lake Weyba mentioned as having runoff from the industrial area. Is that something that can be reviewed before the final document is released to the public to correct that element of where industrial area runoff falls into? Brian Stockwell 01:30:00.719
Councillor Joe, we're talking about the report that reviewed the runoff into Eenie Creek. SPEAKER_01 01:30:06.059
But the other side doesn't. Brian Stockwell 01:30:08.699
If you look at project avenue venture drive and that was where we had river water quality in Eenie Creek just after the first stormwater outlet from the industrial estate. So it does flow both ways now? That's right, that's what I'm saying. Joe Jurisevic 01:30:26.128
It flows both ways. We only mention it flowing into Lake Weyba, we Don't mention it flowing into lake nairlock. I think that's a correction that could easily be addressed. Okay, I just think in that, where it's I think you're talking about that study though. I realise that, but as far as an understanding of the concept of the river and what the impact of the industrial area potentially is, I think it should be mentioned that the industrial water flows both ways. That's one of the minor editors. That's a minor edit. The other element with regard to water quality. Thank you. Mentioning zero litre entering the river under desired actions on page 110. But my concern is that what we've said there is that, and I'll go back and actually quote it. Quoted, wrong page, that one. I think we're just being a little under water quality point C. By 2030, zero litre enters the Noosa River system. I Don't know that we're capable of making sure that every litre going into the river system is under our control, I.e. someone in a boat throwing something out of the boat. This is a question, Councillor Kerr. The question's coming, Councillor Wilkie. Thank you, Councillor clarify within that element of what areas council can control waste entering the river from, I.e. whether it's coming through a stormwater system, the areas that we will manage litter entering the river from, as opposed to litter in general entering the river system, because we couldn't stop anything. Blowing into the river either. That's an aspiration, isn't it? Kim Rawlings 01:32:00.609
That's right. So I think there's two aspects to it. I think there is an aspirational element to it. Zero litter in our river, and that flows through to education campaigns. So I think there's an aspirational element that should be maintained in the river. But I think in of detail, we terms can clarify that what also can be controlled at the council level. But I think there's two aspects... And that Joe Jurisevic 01:32:27.100
Was my second part of my question was, yes, I mean, aspirationally, education is a fundamental part of that, making people understand their role and relationship with the river is you come to enjoy, Don't destroy. That sort of mindset, brandy's words, which I think everybody should live by when enjoying the environment. But I think that the language there, that zero litter enters the Noosa River system, is just a bit too nonspecific with regards to what we can manage and what we intend to facilitate through education in other words. That can be just a little bit, I think it's a bit of a bridge if they can be expanded I think it'll be an improvement. Amy Kimber 01:33:07.299
I think that with a lot of these initiatives, what we see is that they evolve over time as well. We're only at the beginning point of scoping some of these things out. So I think it will become clearer exactly what we're trying to achieve with each initiative as we get to work on the particular projects. Joe Jurisevic 01:33:25.480
It also means if we're controlling the elements that we can control, we can then focus on the other areas where litter is coming from and education is a key part of that. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:33:35.440
Thank you. For the... Was good. I've just got a question then around comments you made around statutory head of power under the department of environment and science and also in the report about a conservation park. Now, I've community contact me with concerns about regulation and balance to the, you know, all users and everyone having opportunity for inclusivity and use of the river. Can you just talk to me a bit about how that's going to happen with this idea of governance? Can you stop? Yeah, thank you. Kim Rawlings 01:34:16.133
So the river plan has an implementation action that says consider the mechanism of the conservation park under the nature conservation act for the fish habitat areas in the river. There has been some confusion and I've been contacted also by Councillor Finzel about that act and that head of power because the marine zone, marine parks act also has what's called conservation zone. Okay. So there was some misunderstanding. We were talking about a marine park conservation zone which is a far more strict and limiting legislative head of power. That's not what we're talking about. Okay, thank you. It's and you can see the confusion. One's called conservation park, one's conservation zone. Easily confused. So what we are looking at is the under the nature conservation act the conservation park that we have there are examples of conservation parks around Queensland that have provide the local government with a level of a greater level of management. And authority over those areas because we would operate as a trustee. A management plan would need to be developed for the conservation park and that would need to be done in collaboration with obviously the department of environment but of river. With stakeholders the so commercial users, rep users, interested parties. So there's quite a bit of work to be done to get to that point. So at the moment we're just saying let's consider it as a mechanism. A mechanism that would give council some more. At the moment we Don't have any jurisdiction really in the river. That's been an issue over many years to try and deal with such things like encroachments or you know anchoring and mooring or derelict vessels or you know things like that. This would give us a seat at the table via the management plan. This mechanism we specifically looked at because it does allow-existence of commercial use. So it specifically says in the principles of the conservation, have you got it there? SPEAKER_09 01:36:29.205
So providing explicit recognition that all current regulations the area. Regulations and management principles are retained. That existing commercial efficient can continue that in the arbitrary efficient sustainability. I just wanted to add to what Kim was saying there as well. We learned from the 2019 draft plan review that the community and others, I think state government agencies not were too happy with the idea of council taking over. Tradition it is to have government responsibilities so we definitely want to avoid that perception and I think this model that we're looking at about setting up an arrangement so we can continue to liaise with state government agencies in a more structured way. We've been doing it with MSQ for the past couple of years and it goes to show how much work he's involved in each of these relationships, and we really need a mechanism around how we continue that engagement with the board. Thank you very much. Frank Wilkie 01:37:33.356
An email suggesting that there might be some confusion, thinking that the council's going to take over management of those sections of the river. That's not the case. It's, as you say, a seat at the table with the agencies that are responsible for that. That's exactly Amy Kimber 01:37:48.909
Right. They've all got very different focuses and, I guess, it's that they see as their responsibility and it's quite different. It's about getting that holistic approach. You know, Maritime Safety Queensland are obviously very concerned with safety, whereas DES is more concerned about ecological conditions, so we're trying to get that arrangement in place with each of them. Kim Rawlings 01:38:16.808
Frank, just to, sorry, before we go to the next question. So the, the... The nature conservation act specifically outlines management principles for conservation parks. Just, it might be worth just... Could you Read it? Yeah, it gives a good sense of what can occur in management in a conservation park. So parks manage to conserve and preserve and preserve the area's cultural and natural resources and their values, provide for permanent conservation of the area's natural condition to the greatest possible extent, provide opportunities for educational and... Recreational activities in a way consistent with the area's values, and ensure that any commercial use of the area's natural resources, including fishing and grazing, is sustainable. So, you know, it's a good mechanism to balance all of these things... And you said it's Frank Wilkie 01:39:06.569
Clear in the report that it's going to be applied the to fish habitat. Yes. Could you explain how far they extend, where they exist currently, so what areas of the river they're looking at? Amy Kimber 01:39:19.519
Yeah, you might need to help me out here. It's about, I think, 80 or 90 per cent. You yeah, it's it's quite easy to need to find define Kim Rawlings 01:39:26.157
What's not. What's yeah, what's excluded excluded? What's excluded is the area from probably probably about here down to... The the river now. Yeah yeah, so so all the foreshore offshore areas where the commercial, community recreational, Noosaville foreshore area, that area is excluded. There is a fish habitat around the centre part of the river, but the foreshore areas are excluded. Yeah, that's probably the most, otherwise most of the rivers covered by fish habitat area already. Yeah. Amelia Lorentson 01:39:58.827
So, just again, just getting my head around all this. Conservation parks. The moment, we've got DAF and DES and all these state agencies that determine what recreational activities are sustainable and what are harmful. Is the fact that now council is getting involved. Does that mean that if we deem something not sustainable, e.g. commercial fishing, then we can override? Department of environment and service, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. So can Kim Rawlings 01:40:46.609
We... No okay. No, what it does is say we've got a seat at the table at the local level. So if there are concerns that the council have got about activities that are happening in that space, then we would have those conversations in the State. But the head of power for sustainable fisheries is with DAF. And that would absolutely change, that would absolutely not change. They they quotas, they determine what's sustainable. And they're looking at that all the time annually about what's sustainable. That remit would not shift to council. That would stay the State. And the same with permits for approvals in the fish habitat area. That would stay with fisheries. So those heads of power wouldn't change. But it just gives us a seat at the table from a management perspective. At the moment, we Don't have one. Amelia Lorentson 01:41:40.533
Again, excuse me. Are we saying that state aren't doing or aren't capable of doing their job? Why aren't we just leaving it to them to do their job? Why are we stepping have they failed? Kim Rawlings 01:41:54.750
We're not stepping in to manage commercial fisheries. That's not what this is about. Saying there's a large portion of river that is... Noosa warrants conservation. And that council should have a seat at the table to deal with some of the issues. We Don't at the moment. And things that come into council, which often do, they bounce around about whose jurisdiction is this? Again, what head of power is this? Whether it's about derogatory votes or whether it's about pollution. This give us seat at that table. Would a and there would be a management plan where we could actually have more say in how those things are managed. Amelia Lorentson 01:42:38.782
So the NSERAC committee that folded in March this year, so two years, 14 members, really good cross-section diversity representation of all water users, was this plan particular the conservation park, was that discussed and more importantly endorsed by the committee? Kim Rawlings 01:42:59.132
No, it wasn't discussed or endorsed by the committee. That wasn't the remit of that committee, no. Clare Stewart 01:43:08.670
Can I ask a question? The conservation park, if that gives us a seat at the table and gives us a voice, I mean we're still beholden though to big brother, aren't we? We're still the overarching group responsible. That's on certain issues. There's a different number of different agencies responsible for different things. So I'm just wondering the conservation park, how would that, I know you said we have a seat at the table, but you know we worked with state to get the permits for the oysters that was obviously required state approvals. So how would a conservation park and sitting at the table, how would that differ from where we are now? I guess it's a formalised arrangement, whereas at the moment it's sort of just through our advocacy efforts that we've managed to, for example, work with MSQ. So it puts, I think, a form of governance around it that will enable us to I guess my point is we had a seat at the table with the MSQ. We're co-chairs for the Noosa River stakeholder advisory group. We're still beholden to state. They're the ones who make the final decision. So whether or not we advocate, whether or not we've got a seat at the table... Kim Rawlings 01:44:14.704
This goes beyond a seat at the table. So we've had a seat at the table with MSQ but ultimately they're the arbiter of the issues and they'll determine the way forward. Yes, we've had import. Port, this would, this vests more in council in terms of having the management plan in place where there'd be shared objectives. For what needs to happen or what should happen in the conservation plan that would be developed by council and signed up by other agencies. So the conservation park, if council was to engage or go down this track, when that's being set up, does that go to community consultation? It would be an engagement process, absolutely, to develop a management plan, yes. With all the people noted? With all the stakeholders, whoever's got an interest in that space, and the management plan will be developed collaboratively with engagement, yes. Okay. Frank Wilkie 01:45:17.573
Councillor Stockwell, then Councillor FitzGerald. Yeah, it's gonna have to be a long question to the background. Brian Stockwell 01:45:22.890
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but historically I've sat as a state government representative of both the DNR and the department of primary and interest securities, unless you ever play in working groups. They've always been aligned on the goodwill of state government to implement what was largely seen as a council plan, even though the initial one was launched by the minister. That goodwill waxes and wanes with individual staff members in individual departments over time. And when have committed you people on those state government, you do get action. But there are some actions that have been there since the very first river plan that haven't been progressed, because they haven't had the minute and goodwill. Is my understanding right that conservation park and its management plan then becomes not just a council head of power but also gives the State government the management plan which they have to respond to. So, for example, we talk about fisheries from a recreational or a commercial. Most of the fisheries modelling is done on a regional level. What the conservation park may give us, the head of power to say no, we want to do a local fish assessment to work out local fishing rules that reflect the objectives of the conservation park. So it does give us that ability to set in place A more formal structured governance mechanism to achieve those long-standing aims of the Noosa River Plan, is that correct? Kim Rawlings 01:46:55.659
Yes, it does give us a more formal mechanism beyond Cooroy. Amelia Lorentson 01:46:59.979
So clarify what Councillor, okay, just as a clarification, maybe Brian or Kim. So are saying that local, that we under this management, that we can use our own local scientists as opposed to state scientists or commonwealth scientists, and they can determine what's sustainable, what's harmful? Is that what I've sort of understood? You're referencing local... I'm saying that, Brian Stockwell 01:47:27.842
Using the example of fisheries, most of the fisheries management is based on regional assessment of stock, but they wouldn't probably have in the Noosa River, for example. This one, we might want to do our own set of commercial and recreational fish species and say, "Actually, this is probably the local management regime." It just gives you that head of power where you can get all the State government to say, "To meet these objectives, we do a bit more analysis." Amelia Lorentson 01:47:54.144
So we can then, as a council, deem, say, fishing as unsustainable and override state... No, it still can't override. That's still... It's Brian Stockwell 01:48:06.735
Just about giving a more formal structure, governance structure in place to get to the point where the State government regulation reflects the aspirations of the community as expressed in the plan. River plain. Kim Rawlings 01:48:16.838
Yeah, that's right. Talks about sustainable fisheries. I mean, this is-- the driver behind the conservation plan is not commercial fishing. I Don't think we just see ourselves in that space. The river plan also talks about commercial sustainable-- sustainable commercial fisheries. And, you know, council continued-- council over the years has-- our approach to influence sustainable fisheries has been advocacy through this-- through the fishing reform process. And there's been-- significant reform of fisheries in-- across the State and, you know, and our local fishers, our local commercial fishers have felt that reform. You know, there's been a tightening, tightening, tightening and quotas and-- everything to commercial fishery over many years. So that-- that will still stick with the State government to determine what's sustainable, what quotas are, licenses, all of those things that will not sit with us. Amelia Lorentson 01:49:14.685
And in terms of recreational Fisher persons, what would be the impact? Kim Rawlings 01:49:20.474
Well, at the moment, it's not regulated, wreck fishing. Apart from catch limits and things? Catch limits and ties. Yeah, there are catch limits, but yeah, it-- it is still a state issue. You know, it-- some stage, we have talked about doing a recreation fishing strategy, but, you know, it-- it's not something that we're currently looking at doing. Amy Kimber 01:49:40.904
I think one of the actions as well is to develop a dedicated monitoring and evaluation research program to support this, because I think we Don't have a very good sense of the baseline with some of these matters at the moment. So wreck fishing, we Don't have a good understanding of what impact that's having. So yeah, having that dedicated monitoring program, I think, in place will help us be able to monitor things better over time. Councillor Finzel has been very patient. Karen Finzel 01:50:09.423
Thank you, Mr Chair. Given there's a lot of conversation around governance, formal structures and conversations about this moving forward, given our investment in transparency to our community and promising to be outward-facing council and generating trust given the history over the river, I'm interested in when we're looking at governance and agencies and, you know, everyone on the table playing in the space, who is going to be, like, in terms of comes out of whatever it. Who is going to then be the people that regulate and, for example, give out fines for breaches of whatever across all of the many things? At the moment, we've got MSQ, for example, they're short staffed. I understand that they're regulated by the number of hours it's given through their recruitment process and, you know, contracts. Of employment, so they're limited to the number of hours that they can be on the river policing it. Moving forward, these are really vital questions about it's all good to, like, talk about governance. How are we going to deliver good governance? What's the plan around how this is going to be regulated? And also the administration of that moving forward so that it is clearly communicated back to our community. Like, for example, if someone's, you know, exceeding, I Don't know, speed limits in your zone and your management plan for your conservation park, who's policing that? Is there a point where the local council is going to be regulating and handing out fines it's still MSQ. SPEAKER_09 01:51:45.935
It still reminds me of MSQ. We've been having workshops with MSQ to work what this like it's sort of tossed it back into the court that council could play a bigger role in some of the compliance activities but I think it really sits with the State government agencies. Have enough resources to do it. Karen Finzel 01:52:15.854
Thank you back Through the Chair. So then when we talk about compliance and they've called on local council that we have a role to play in that, what do you envisage that role is around compliance? Amy Kimber 01:52:26.114
So at the moment only commitment we have suggested is that our local laws offices could play a greater role in terms of being shipping inspectors. So we're still in the process of working out what council support might look like but the head of power sits with the State government department. Joe Jurisevic 01:52:47.726
Only supporting role. Kim Rawlings 01:52:49.966
Like you know the conversation we had about TUR North Shore and how councils like the law officers would have a supporting role but ultimately not the authority. So that's what's being talked about. Like the law's potentially having a supporting role. We've also talked about the river ranger program and as you know Kabi Kabi corporation has been seeking land and sea ranger funding for Noosa River catchment and they would like to, you know, if they're successful, like to have a presence on the Noosa River around education, cultural values those sorts of things so there's there's the intention is that we have a stronger presence probably mainly around education compliance and support supporting the agencies but the heads of power to find the speeding and things like that. Sits within MSQ, not with us. Joe Jurisevic 01:53:42.311
From the educational perspective things like fishing line bins and things like that and getting the community to utilise and understand what they're there for, where they're located and actually utilising them, ensuring they're empty. Clare Stewart 01:53:54.711
Councillor Stewart. Thank you. Just coming back to the conservation park I'm just noting of Queensland that in this report and it says, this is page 91 of the report, it's 19 of the report 91 of our agenda. It says significant parts of the catchments, fresh waters and estuary are designated high ecological value under the environmental protection water act. Management intent for these waters is to maintain them as underdeveloped. Now if the idea is to protect those fish habitat areas that are already status quo, doesn't that legislation right like they're protected. There protect it? And what are we over regulating by then having the conservation park deemed? I mean is it necessary if we've got legislation that already, state legislation that is our big brother, that already actually deems these areas protected and unusable? Kim Rawlings 01:54:49.065
Ms EASTMAN: there you go. It's not that the areas are unusable. You can see that our areas are very highly, highly... So there are layers... Undeveloped. There are layers and layers of legislation and there are also a range of agencies involved in management of the river. So yes, there are multiple layers. It's fish habitat area. There's limitations of what you can do in a fish habitat area. The challenge for for us is we currently, council Don't currently have a seat at that table in terms of any legislative power. So issues, and I can tell you from experience of being in this organisation for many years about trying to get clear direction. On issues in the river and you would all know, you've all experienced being part of the NSWRAC and trying to get action on certain things is very, it's been very challenging around this, this mechanism gives us a greater opportunity to have a greater say in what happens in the Noosa River catchment. Clare Stewart 01:55:50.129
So does it give us an additional head of power? That you said? Exactly, is what you're saying? It will Kim Rawlings 01:55:54.124
Give it, it does give us a legislative head of power. Clare Stewart 01:55:57.584
So that means that we then as a council or councillors can determine, have more say of what can and can't transpire in the river irrespective of what the State deems. Kim Rawlings 01:56:07.944
Now if you're alluding to whether Karen Finzel 01:56:10.484
We can say or not commercial fishing is appropriate or not, that's not what this is about. It's Kim Rawlings 01:56:17.014
We Don't... We can't override state legislation. Sits there. They have the remit. So this is not about overriding state legislation at all. But it is about saying there are... A range of objectives that we are wanting to achieve for our river and have been wanting to achieve now for just under 20 plus years and have struggled to get some of them in place. This puts us in a much better position by having some legislative power around achieving some of those things. Joe Jurisevic 01:56:53.017
Would an example of that be rehabilitation of seagrass, seagrass and mangroves? Kim Rawlings 01:56:57.157
All of those sorts of things. Managing erosion, managing... Clare Stewart 01:57:00.797
Erosion management, yes, there's another one. But isn't that what we're doing with the keep it in Kin Kin projects we're doing in the oyster reefs? We've got kilometres worth of reefs in the... Isn't that already what we're doing? I'm just wondering why the adoption of this has to include a conservation park when it seems to me I understand that the seat at that table, SPEAKER_03 01:57:20.191
But legislation is clear that it's state government. State government will override anyone at the table anyway. And is it necessary when we have protection measures already in place? SPEAKER_09 01:57:32.872
So the actioning in in the plan is actually to consider this. We haven't gone right down the rabbit Warren in terms of understanding all the ins and outs of what this might look like, but we've seen as one option it could be a good governance model for us. Kim Rawlings 01:57:51.177
It's put to you for consideration. As officers we think it's a good mechanism. We think it's a good balancing mechanism. We've taken into account all the feedback over many years around trying to get outcomes in our river and so we think this is a good mechanism. Now put to use for consideration. Karen Finzel 01:58:10.471
thank you Mr Chair. So I do acknowledge that we do need a call of action. 20 years to keep something on the table and kicking the ball down the road is like incredulous to me and I do acknowledge there is a big lot of people engaged. Yeah for you know good governance we do need to make some serious decisions in terms of good fiscal management, in terms of transparency and engendering trust in our community given our history and what's gone on in the river before my time here and during. I think we've really got to look at when you say we're not going down the rabbit hole but we need some transparency around what does that mean just today when you raise that around local laws having you know a role in compliance like that the question is then this would have to go to budget to consider Through the Chair and how is how do you see that and what's going to be the impact on our staffing that's already we're at capacity as an organisation how are we going to acknowledge that and bring that to budget and how many years down the track we've seen how long it's taken with STA STA, putting officers in that for compliance writing you know all that there's to me a lot a large volume and body of work do you think one of the reasons we need the this management plan when you talk about securing funding is that funding going to be used for what purpose? The implementation of the actions in this plan yeah and and will that include budget conversations about requirements Kim Rawlings 01:59:48.188
Yeah yeah absolutely like the plan very clearly says at the moment the council are investing over $350,000 in revamped actions yeah and and projects and studies and you know, since you're already investing substantial amount in the river yeah the plan very clearly says any future implementation actions are subject to budget consideration absolutely so that they all come back through council as it does annually around anything we invest in our in our waterways for your consideration. Of the, like Amy mentioned at the beginning, we need a catchment action plan in place to start to attract funding from state and Federal agencies for our catchment. If we compare, and I Don't have the figures here but I know we've looked at them briefly, compared to amount if we compare the of investment that other surrounding catchment like Mary catchment for instance get because they've had strong catchment management plans in place for some time, it's substantially different. We Don't, we Don't have the ability to attract that funding. Not a clear catchment management plan is one of the big pieces to that. We know of two funding streams already available that require a catchment management plan to be in place to attract that funding. So we will be working really diligently and working on something at the moment in terms of the investment strategy for South East Queensland and the new zealand rivers to try and attract that external funding to help us achieve a whole lot of these implementation actions. Frank Wilkie 02:01:20.196
Pamela, you had a question? Amelia Lorentson 02:01:22.616
I've got a few, but I'll start with this one. The peer review, a note on page 149, that the draft catchment management plan was provided to alluvium consultancy, nature conservancy, the marine... Restoration and oceans project coordinator, a local ecologist, and former NR stakeholder advisory committee member, and Noosa district landcare for the purposes of peer review. My question is, the former NR stakeholder advisory committee member, was that a rep from either the recreational fishers or commercial fishing group? Because the rest seem to be like in the conservation or environmental group. Was there a bit of diversity in that selection? SPEAKER_09 02:02:12.600
So the intention of the peer review is very much to do a scientific review of the plan and in terms of the threats and community... Values which where do we really need to focus our efforts. It was not intended to be a community consultation review process. We deliberately selected scientists and people that work in that space in the catchment round. Clare Stewart 02:02:41.280
I guess the concern with that though Amy is part of this plan talks about jetties and pontoons, public and private, talks about public safety. I mean these are all things that are beyond the scientific research persons. SPEAKER_09 02:02:55.245
Yeah so as you know we have those dedicated workshops on the recreational boating facilities study which MSQ commissioned and we're continuing the engagement. With NMSQ with regards to that we have been meeting with the Noosa Boating and Fishing Alliance to talk about some of these matters so the intention is moving forward absolutely we will continue to engage with the the specific areas. Community on of interest that they have. Karen Finzel 02:03:25.276
Yeah I just have a question where does Noosa Shire sit in the Noosa River catchment? Where do we in geographically where where do we fit in that Mary river catchment area? SPEAKER_09 02:03:38.941
One-third of the Shire is the Mary river catchment and the other two-thirds is the Noosa River catchment Brian Stockwell 02:03:45.961
The whole of the catchment is in the Shire. Karen Finzel 02:03:49.661
The whole of the Noosa River catchment. Oh except for the deer creek. The bit up north is it? Yeah. Is that why we've had trouble attracting funding from a higher level? Because we haven't had a plan. Oh because we haven't had a plan. Joe Jurisevic 02:04:04.646
And that's, just to clarify, that's the difference in the river plan that we've had in the past and what we've developed here. It's not just a river plan. Now catchment plan incorporating all of those inflows and things where council has remit to actually undertake erosion control management and all of those sort of things that we haven't had a plan for in the past. Do you want to test it if you Don't mind? Amelia Lorentson 02:04:29.200
Oh, yeah. I will test this. And as I'm doing this, I'm on DAF's site reading the Queensland sustainable fisheries strategy 2017-2027. And I'm looking at it going, what's so nothing wrong. So does this plan circumvent that? I'm just full of questions at the moment, Kim, because that looks great to me. And I've Read the management plan too. So this is aligned... It's meant to circumvent... No, I Don't know how much clearer I can say it. Yeah, please. Kim Rawlings 02:05:11.323
Sustainable fisheries is regulated by the State under the sustainable fisheries act and the sustainable fisheries strategy. They've had a review and reform agenda. For a number of years to move to what's deemed sustainable fisheries and they're looking at it all the time. Yep, they've got... So our plan does not circumvent that. Correct SPEAKER_03 02:05:32.944
Okay. Just needed clarity. You get regular updates from them with regard to... I've got a question while you're ready to go because I've got a question you're still looking at. Just on page 22, 94 of the agenda, 22 of the report. I think that's right. It might be the other way around. Page 94 of the agenda. We talk here about the Kabi Kabi. It's critical that the indigenous historical, cultural, environmental and conservation heritage, this will be achieved by ensuring Kabi Kabi are key partners. Absolutely, they should be. What has their involvement been in the past and what's their advice going forward? What involvement have they had in the past and what's their advice going forward? Amy Kimber 02:06:13.719
That predates my time. That Jane Madden was liaising with them when she was developing the 2019 draft. I think we've had a particular model of engagement in place with the Kabi Kabi for the past two years I think it is but unfortunately that hasn't been working too well and so we've now moved to more of a distributed engagement approach. And that that seems to be working better we had a dedicated workshop with them on this river plan they also shared in confidence with us their health country plan which sets out their aspiration. Aspirations. So it's very much an important priority for us to ensure they are properly engaged. Thank you. Tom Wegener 02:07:02.584
Tom, do you have a question? Just the following one. Does Kabi Kabi or the native title cover the river, cover the water areas as well? Frank Wilkie 02:07:11.721
Can we have a second for Amelia's motion first to test it? I'm having a second for debate. Seconded by Councillor Finzel for purpose of debate. I'd like to move Amelia Lorentson 02:07:23.861
A procedural motion defer this matter like move to to the next round of meetings to allow councillors and other stakeholders an opportunity to consider the details and implications of a draft Noosa River Catchment Management Plan and provide feedback. And I do so because I've spoken to two members from NSERAC and members from the Noosa boating fishing alliance all who have raised some concerns about the draft and today a lot of my questions have been answered but deferring it to the next round of meeting allows them that same opportunity, oh excuse me, allows them that same opportunity. I acknowledge NSERAC was up earlier this year but I think out of respect to the representatives of the committee and to their wealth of knowledge there were 40 members who essentially represented every water user, Noosa River water user so I think it would be just the right thing to do to invite them for feedback and ideally endorsement of the draft plan as you know we've all witnessed just now there are there are lots of issues, implied, unknown implications. Implications confusion concerns so so the deferrals not only to allow feedback from the NSERAC but it's also to allow councillors and what I'd be requesting is a further workshop for all the councillors again to understand the is the first time the draft has come to our attention the full draft and I've got you know as everyone can see a thousand and I and I look at detail and I need to be certain that a that all river stakeholders maintain equitable access to the river and that all the key players partake in this draft it's important and it is certainly exciting it's a plan that needs to be endorsed but I just think we've waited so long can we just allow another month so that can just we dispel confirm whatever just just the unknowns or what I call the confusion so I'll leave it to the table but my request is defer the motion for the next round of meetings to allow all players councillors to have a say and understand again the details and implications of what's been put before us. Thank you Councillor Wilson. Councillor Jurisevic any questions? Joe Jurisevic 02:10:23.321
With regard to this document what is the level of community engagement that we've date to get to this point of having something ready for council to endorse? SPEAKER_09 02:10:35.419
We've had two rounds of public consultation that occurred for the 2019 draft. We've had three Councillor workshops one of which was squarely focused on the MSQ stuff but nonetheless we've had as you can see all those different groups being consulted in the development of this version of the plan. It has been laborious, there's been a lot that has gone on. Joe Jurisevic 02:11:02.500
And as you said earlier there's ongoing communications with the voting... Fishing alliance. Kim Rawlings 02:11:07.321
That's correct, that's the intention. With all stakeholders. Yeah, there's a lot of implementation. Joe Jurisevic 02:11:14.101
That was the one that Councillor specifically mentioned, that's why I mentioned that. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 02:11:18.861
Yeah, I'll be supporting the deferral motion. We've had six years of consultation leading up to this point. Motion in January 2017 to review it and put the Noosa room plan into management framework as generally outlined by the staff report at the time and to undertake... Stakeholder analysis to determine a proper way forward in terms of community engagement. We have had multiple forms of community engagement. We should as... Councils have really clearly understood what the issues facing the river is and what our aspirations for the river are. We have currently got a report that has been workshopped and I'm quite clear where it's all come from because we've had the chance. To workshop the key elements of this draft. To suggest a small group that no longer exists should have a final say over what has been thousands of hours of community consultation to me is an affront to the others. It's time for political leadership. I certainly have a clear idea of what the outcome to the Noosa River should be and I believe the plan that has been put before us is a professional plan that respects the input and views of the broad range of the community and is based on achieving best practice going forward. I Don't believe be in the same position as we were this time last term of putting it off. We were in a position to be able to adopt it in late 2019, early 2020 and we decided we'd put it off and avoid doing it before the election. We need to do it now. I Don't need more. Any advice from the community. I'm quite aware of what the different points of view are. I'm quite aware of what the science is and I'm quite aware of what the overwhelming majority of the community want for the Noosa River and I believe this plan will help us achieve it. Councillor Councillor sopron? Unknown 02:13:29.321
Soprano. Yeah, I'll speak to it. Clare Stewart 02:13:31.441
I do support the deferral for one month. Councillor Stockwell we weren't here in 2017, we weren't here in 2019, we weren't part of that draft river plan in 2019. This is the first time as of this weekend I have seen this plan in full all the details. I understand that there have been groups engaged and it is a great plan, there are fantastic things to this plan and you should be commended. I'm sorry, I'm saying something positive. You should be commended, the staff should be commended on all their hard work. But if I have questions and Councillor Lorentson has questions and we're fielding questions, one month, we're not asking Councillor Stockwell to defer this to March, to April, we're asking for one month. So Kim, what you've told us, and I Don't even want to look at you because I could get a lady this way, what Kim's told us at this table makes sense. It puts our minds at ease. It puts any concerns raised to bed. However, that to be dispelled. Not everyone in the community watches this meeting, we know that. That needs to be able to be achieved or expelled to the community at large. I feel that we've waited this long. What is one month? And we can have it back, we can have, you know, we can provide that information to our community, the information we've heard at the table today. And we can, the main thing, we need all buy-in from all the community. That's what this is about, it's about our community, about the best interest of our community. It's about to be completely transparent to our community. They should be across all the facts and the justification and the reasoning. And as I said, it all makes sense, it's a great plan, but it needs to be considered..org community it needs to be communicated, I believe, in more detail with the broader members of our community who do have those concerns. I think the number one problem, the number one concern that was very clear when I sat as an observer on NSERAC, and it was a bipartisan agreement, was the liveaboards, the coming from the liverboards, effluent liverboards, was the moorings, was the anchorage, was getting rid of those eyesores in our river, you can't do that in the Maroochy River, you can't just go and park your boat, you can do it in the Noosa River, that's the number one thing that we should be focusing on, the effluent coming from that. Is a disgrace, it affects our safety of our people swimming, it affects our environment, that is what we should be focused on, now that's noticed here at 30, 3.3, item 30, 31 and 32, that should be front, that should be number one, so it's documented and it's noted and I understand MSQ are working in that space, which is great, you know, and that's been achieved through the hard work of Amy and the NSERAC. And MSQ, Larry, you Chair that. And this plan, as I said, is a good one, but I just think one month, it doesn't, it won't hurt. In fact, I think it'll actually give support and full credence to a plan that is very good. Thank you. Joe Jurisevic 02:16:45.085
Good job. Just to clarify a couple of things you said there. Who was responsible for all of those elements that were mentioned by Councillor Stewart with regard to river boards, moorings, jumping in dumping the river and all of those? SPEAKER_09 02:17:02.944
Components. Within the plan you mean? Yeah. So the plan has been developed using the 2019 draft, the public consultation period, the input from river committee members. I'll hop to all those other stakeholders. Then who's responsible? Who's Joe Jurisevic 02:17:22.069
Responsible for administering? State agencies? Yes. That's clear. Kim Rawlings 02:17:30.169
But Joe, as you know, to get the action that we've got has taken a lot of work from this council. I get it. I get Joe Jurisevic 02:17:39.194
That doesn't change though, does it? Those elements still go down. Our role, as is articulated in this, is to continue to advocate and continue to get a better relationship to try and ensure that those matters are addressed and continue to be addressed by those state agencies. SPEAKER_09 02:17:56.521
That's correct, and at the operational level, I have fortnightly catch-ups with the MSQ officer to make sure that we're ticking things over locally as well. Amelia Lorentson 02:18:07.101
So, can I ask a question? Just follow up... Far away, far away. With of the claims Joe, one action plans I think what I Read in the report was to continue to work with MSQ to regulate the management of anchoring, mooring and liveaboards in the Noosa River and the status was subject to future budget consideration. So, that contrary to what I understood the Noosa River advisory committee had already done that and now it's up to MSQ to implement the plan. So why are we continuing to work and why is their budget sort of allocated for that? I thought that was done and dusted. SPEAKER_09 02:18:49.322
So they're still working through the machinery of government process and have asked us to have another workshop with them soon. I Don't know when. So we've had one already, as I mentioned, to look at what role does council need to play in supporting them to implement these reforms. And I think we'll have to continue Kim Rawlings 02:19:08.270
To keep working with them to keep the presence here. Investment I think we're just going to have to keep up with that. Amelia Lorentson 02:19:15.560
Yeah, I agree because the pressure is working. Yeah, absolutely. Joe Jurisevic 02:19:19.720
Council oriston alluded to where my next question was going and that is this plan are to continue to work and negotiate with those state agencies for implementation of better actions or further actions with regard to the concerns that have been raised by NSERAC and the community at large over many, many years with regard to derelicts. So I'm happy, I'm happy that those, those issues are addressed quite clearly and articulated quite well within this work. Frank Wilkie 02:19:44.699
And I note this in the staff recommendation that there's the implementation will involve more stakeholder engagement. As an involving partnership with key stakeholders, and that will involve explanation of what certain action may mean, and also minor edits. So it suggests dynamic I it's a relationship we're going to be having with the community. Kim Rawlings 02:20:10.161
This is a road map. It has to be a collaborative effort. We've got a swag of state agencies, we've got jurisdiction here, we've got a multitude of uses, so anything that we go to implement is going to have to be a co-design, collaborative approach and in that, you know, I'm pretty comfortable with the plan. It says that in a number of ways. It says it right up front. It's a partnership where many people are involved. It says it in the outcome statements that collaborative governance and stakeholder engagement is a fundamental tenet and then it lists the partners in every action. So it's very embedded in terms of partnering and engagement. This just provides us a road map and a head of power to actually move into implementation. Frank Wilkie 02:20:58.321
I'll speak to this particular motion. I really appreciate Lewis has where this is coming from because this is a very important document with a lot of detail. It's a very significant piece of work. It will take a lot of time to develop. And it's very difficult to get across all the detail. There's so many pages. But there is opportunity between now and the Ordinary Meeting on Thursday night for councillors that have outstanding questions to sit down with staff. If staff think it's merited, we can have a briefing session submitted along with that on June 22nd where we talk through the key actions. No questions are off the table. We've got the final draft before us. We can thrash that up between now and Thursday. But I agree, this is a leadership pursuit. Decision. After so many years, we've had a period of consultation during this term. There's been targeted stakeholder consultation. I agree with what's been said. It is a fantastic document. It will if we it be this endorsed at round of meetings. Allow staff to start applying for the funding. And unlike other catchments in South East Queensland, Noosa doesn't have a river catchment plan. And if we're waiting for all get buy-in from all members of the community, it's not going to happen because there's so many diverse stakeholders involved. And therein lies the difficulty for decision makers such as us. You're never going to get two senses consensus on something like this. There'll be some things that various stakeholders will like and those won't, and vice versa. So seeking to delay this to get a consensus I think is a bit unrealistic, and I think the staff recommendations suggest dialogue with key stakeholders to have the sort of discussions we've had today at this table about the suggested action to consider a conservation park and what that means, the benefits, the pros and cons, and dispel the uncertainties. I think this is a great invitation to a conversation with the key stakeholders. This is a great piece of work. I think I'm in favour of showing leadership, backing the process so far, putting it out, endorsing it, letting the staff get on with applying for much needed funding and having those conversations with stakeholders and any councillors that do have outstanding questions to seek the one-one. Time-on take hours if you need it, to get the detail you need before clues go out. So for those reasons, because we've got a lot of other work we need to endorse before the end of this term, so for that reason I won't be supporting this motion to defer for an because I Don't know where that might lead. Will it lead to another, because it's, will there be more dissension that it leads to further dilemmas. Unknown 02:24:10.471
So I'll be glad to hear from can I meeting now? Tom Wegener 02:24:16.868
Guess what, I'm interested in silts going into the river. Okay. Frank Wilkie 02:24:20.788
All Tom Wegener 02:24:22.228
Right. I heard that today, can I cancel the meeting now? I enjoyed the plan, you know, to actually address that, and you even brought the dirt roller situation up. It's interesting. Karen Finzel 02:24:35.155
I'm calling a point of order. What before us now, the speaker is not speaking to the motion. The motion is we're discussing whether or not we're going to allow an extension of time to give community members further conversation. Frank Wilkie 02:24:50.374
Yeah, it's a very good point of order. Can you speak to the motion to defer? Or not? Tom Wegener 02:24:56.905
I think there is an urgency to get this plan over the lines because I think that we need to get hammering down dirt roads, changing our aspects of dealing with those. Sorts of things need to get in the acts and I'm so happy that the plan addresses those and so as you say there's a lot of different aspects that people are interested in and that happens to be my primary focus and we've been waiting on this for I'd love to see it get implemented ASAP because I think it needs to happen, we need to get moving on this. SPEAKER_09 02:25:35.211
Thank you, Councillor Wegener. I'd just like to add something as well. There's been a lot of work happening internally this as well and I really want to acknowledge all the other areas of council that contributed to this because it's about trying to get our own house in order as well. So by having that plan there, it means all the areas of council committed to the same thing. We're not working at odds with each other. Amelia Lorentson 02:26:00.346
KESSELMAN, I have a question. No, can I close or not? Sorry, I'm thinking about you. Get a vote. Join us. Vote and do it. Karen Finzel 02:26:09.926
Oh, happy for you to go, Councillor. Joe Jurisevic 02:26:15.406
Yeah, I'm not going to support this. Mentions other stakeholders. An opportunity to consider the day housing bill. We've had umpteen opportunities for all stakeholders to have an input into the draft Noosa River capital plan. I appreciate that not everyone will agree with every element of the plan. I Don't think we get that with any plan that we undertake. But I, like Councillor Stockwell and Councillor Wilkie, have been through this for a number of years going forward and heard much input from all the stakeholders over a long, long time. And I think. I commend staff that the draft plan is here, ready for implementation. It means it's been. To be at this point, it's been through stakeholder engagement. It's been through. The level of council workshops and studies and all the. And all the like. And I think the time to act is. Is now. I have a question of staff. Frank Wilkie 02:27:12.450
Out of respect for some of the concerns that your council has had about. Being asked to move, is it possible to have a scheduled briefing time between now and Thursday where we all can attend and have questions asked? I think Larry Sengstock 02:27:31.847
This is up to you. If you can your do it. Clear diaries to then I'm more than happy to do it. Joe Jurisevic 02:27:39.384
Otherwise, another month will give you a bit more time. Karen Finzel 02:27:44.604
Thank you, Through the Chair. Thank you everyone for your voices at the table today. I appreciate what's been done and I acknowledge the volume of work that's been. Undertaken and I do respect that. I understand the volume of engagement over the years, but when we're here today talking about leadership, good decision-making, leadership to me is about being flexible, we've got community. It's not about me understanding deeper the rabbit holes that everyone's had to go through. This is about giving voice to our community that has contacted me when they've seen this report with some concerns. I have not been here... For all the iterations and when we talk about purposeful leadership and political acumen, I'm more for anyone for a call to action for something that has gone so on for so long I support this motion because what it's giving is opportunity for community who we serve and we're outward facing to given good leadership is about acknowledging failure and conflicts in the past that hopefully by giving one month we can actually give to our community a better voice and understanding around what's gone on the river given the historical sometimes outcomes that gone on through this council and previous councils with regards to the river it's passionate it's divisive and we need a lot of technical expertise and engagement so today I support this motion we're asking for four weeks only four weeks to alleviate the concerns that have been raised to through the Mayor Amelia myself and I'm sure you've all received the emails surely we can afford our community four more weeks to help have a bit narrative and conversation rather than further down the track when we are being bombarded because where is the transparency how is this happening how are we administrating this you heard the questions asked at the table today I would prefer to be more proactive than have to but be reactive further down the track so I support this and I thank for bringing this to the table today. Unknown 02:30:07.341
Thank you Councillor Finzel. Councillor Lorentson do you wish to close? Amelia Lorentson 02:30:09.261
I will I'm going to close by actually quoting a former NSERAC committee member they said public policy must be transparent consultative and allow players to have a say that's what this deferral motion is about. It's about us honouring our commitment to transparency to consultative purposes and to genuine community engagement. You that's what leadership is to me. Fear of further dissension is not a reason not to defer this. Fear of further dissension should be a reason to actually support this motion to defer for one we've missed something we need to keep an open mind and we need to allow every player an opportunity to have their say doesn't mean we're going to agree to it doesn't mean I'm not going to approve the plan I love the plan my concern is that we've waited so long what's another four weeks thank I just think the risk of not allowing proper time to consult with the members of the community that have approached us is the wrong decision. The draft has been out but the members that I've spoken to said it was the first time they had ever heard of a conservation park that had never been raised before and for reason you know for that reason alone we need to know does the community actually want a legislated marine park? What are the implications for pro-fisherman rec users and those users caught outside conservation? It is a point of order that there's a no it's not it's clarification with mention of a marine park and that's not intended. Oh excuse me conservation excuse me conservation park the just been given over the last hour to have a lot of our questions answered and our concerns settled and they have been settled I think we owe that to community as well so I hope that someone will reconsider their decision and allow this motion to go through. Well spoken Councillor Lorentson. I hope the motion goes in favour. Frank Wilkie 02:33:02.696
I'll reconsider. Councillor Stewart, larson, Jurisevic and Finzel against, councillors Wegener, Stockwell and Wilkie the motion is carried and Tewantin has been deferred for a moment. Next item is the Financial Performance Report. Thank you staff. Shaz. Thank you. Trent. Hello, Trent. Welcome. Can I ask you a question? Unknown 02:33:59.920
Just note that Karen's left the room. Could you give us a note of the Financial Performance Report? Trent Grauf 02:34:09.320
Good afternoon, councillors. The agenda referred to you presents the August of 2023 financial decision for council. The numbers presented in the report are the revised budget for budget review one. You please will carry on presenting the emergency matters through the first two months of the year. You'll notice in the report that the net budget position of council is $1.3 billion operating... This is a mix of what we call $7 million of general or unrestricted operating funds and a further $0.6 of... Constrained funds through levies, waste, or commercial business activities. Comprising that one point is very positive return. 0.9 million of that is revenue of that budget. Thank you very much. There's a number of movements up and down on that. Overall, we were seeing revenue and sales and grants upside is offsetting grants revenue, sorry, rates revenue and fees in the budget. For more detail, we'll see kauri sinha. Community I'm going to take a look at this account. Valuation changes where rate payers have queried and reviewed their UCV valuation the department of and the take up of the potential rebate. As I've said, as I mentioned, more interest revenue which is only $4,000 a month budget due to the additional interest revenue we're getting from holding cash funds for prior return. Also to note, sales are up in terms of holiday parks and community facilities fees. Now in those noting fees are often offset with corresponding direct costs for commissioning and operating costs for those facilities. So you'll see that feature through the operating costs. In terms of expenses, two months through the financial year salaries and wages. Are tracking slightly over the budget due to vacant positions, but you also know this is partially upset by an increase in casualty in private time as council staff work to accommodate that vacancy. Materials and are budget. There's some modern movements between business areas in terms of timing of their spending at this early stage of the financial year. In terms of capital, capital works support and they're supporting grants and external funding of an ambitious $52 million capital program is largely tracking budget at this early stage. On the but you will receive your quarterly capital work to be covered through the first quarter of the course next month. To close off, in terms of cash, council has just issued its annual rates, so August position is the peak in the cash cycle for council. It's $141 million sitting in cash, to note the majority of that is working capital for the next six months. Between now and then we will re-issue the rates in January. And also a significant amount of restricted cash, for example, QRI funding for recovery and other disaster recovery grants. Yeah. We do a quarterly deep dive in our restricted cash, and we provide that through Federal reports. And that is the executive summary for the August report. Thank you, Trent. Thanks, Pat. Joe Jurisevic 02:37:45.482
You went over the general rate, being $193,000. That's not something we often see when we're looking at the rates and levies. You mentioned the pensioner discounts. But the pensioner discounts, from my recollection, were accounted in the budget and shouldn't be impacting bottom line of general rate. We had that factored in to our calculation of the general rate return, did we not? The combination of the impact of some of the calculations on the pool take-up, but also there's been an increase in some of those as well. It's not the key driver, but I thought the transparency would include the fact that it is a combination of... So we didn't actually get the figure, right? We've recalculated? Yes, we've recalculated. Okay. And the other element there with regard to those land revaluations, does that defer, do people then defer payment to their rates until that land revaluation occurs, or are they still required to pay their rates and then receive a discount if their land valuation is, is, alters as a result of a request of the State? I do believe it's a lag, but I'll take that on notice, Councillor. I'm just trying to ascertain, yeah, why, if there's a lag in payment of those rates as a result of that deferral for land. SPEAKER_05 02:39:01.672
You yeah, I'll take it on that. If you can, that'd that would be, just the important part... Trying to understand how that works in the process. The important part is, as you know, that it's well within the powers of rate payers as those valuations come out every year of YA that they can query those with the partner resources and then we recalculate the rates accordingly based on advice from them. Joe Jurisevic 02:39:23.601
Yeah, I'm just wondering whether that puts a hold on them paying their rates or until that revaluation SPEAKER_03 02:39:29.698
I have any other any questions, a question. Answers? Trent, thank you. Always a very comprehensive report. The cash expense cover, we're at 15.4 months. That's, I mean, it's always pretty high, but that's a lot higher than it has been. Sure. Trent Grauf 02:39:46.138
One of the things we need to do, obviously one of the improvements we can do for that is that is our total cash catch so position. So it's not, so... In terms of a best practice approach, we break out what is our free cash or our unrestricted cash for our everyday operations in our working capital, versus that cash which is restricted. The reason why it's sitting so made a comment earlier about the cash balance with restricted cash grants in advance. When you look at factors such as the prepayment that QRA have come through on a number of the disaster recovery, as well as prepayment for state waste levies, they are one that over the next five years to residential, domestic and residential waste generators, that's all sitting in restricted cash and we understand levies, there's a significant amount of that cash that is restricted. When you consider just the unrestricted component, which is your day-to-day operating, it's well within that three to six month gap. The counterbalance Joe Jurisevic 02:40:45.010
Of that is that there's a higher balance in the bank account and interest earning on that higher balance until that money is expended it. Unknown 02:40:52.490
Thanks, john. Any other questions for staff? Frank Wilkie 02:40:56.427
I'm pretty good with half of that. Can we move the motion? Yeah, I'll move it. Moved by Councillor villisic, seconded by Mayor Stewart, Joe. Joe Jurisevic 02:41:03.007
Yeah, thank you for the ongoing work of the finance staff. I can see clearly in our financial performance summary that we're on track or above budget in all elements and the sound financial position speaks for itself. Thank you for all the efforts in keeping us in Yin-Chi. Check. Any other questions to Frank Wilkie 02:41:22.053
Thank you trine. Next item is the year in review. SPEAKER_03 02:41:32.313
What a big year it's been, hey Larry? Goodness me, I feel tired just reading. I just think of cactus island every time I hear that. Larry Sengstock 02:41:39.123
I'm seeing him as before. Okay. Okay, I'll give you a quick summary and then I've got three directors here as well so if you've got questions for them. This report really has been put together by the staff and the directors in line with our Corporate Plan. Runs from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023. I would say right up front it is a good effort, as you know our CEO Scott waters was with us for the majority of this period but left in mind 2020. May of this year, 2023. So I've been acting in that role since. And so to pull together this report and to pull together the work that's involved in this report is really very much a group effort from the whole of the organisation, led by the executive team, so commendations. I guess, to those across the whole staff, but certainly to the leadership group as well. As you say, it is a massive amount of work and it's a privilege to lead the organisation. So I think when you look at it, when you pull it apart like this, you see the amount that actually is happening behind the scenes. A lot of it comes to this table, but a large majority of it doesn't come to this table, so there are many things that are happening. It's based on the previous Corporate Plan, so it's directed to that Corporate Plan. As we know, we've created a new Corporate Plan during this period, which is a Corporate Plan that we're now working forward on for the '20 through '24 budget. The five themes of the Corporate Plan are Noosa environment, Noosa community, Noosa economy, and long-term planning and excellence as a council. So that's the way the report is geared. It talks to those particular themes of the Corporate Plan. As I said, it's compiled by the departments based on their branch plans, which is the plans that they work off is our organisation across the operational plan for the organisation, which then feeds back up into the Corporate Plan. I've pulled out 10 highlights for the year, but obviously they are just some of them, and so I'm more than happy to feedback on those as take well as to whether they are considered the 10 highlights. This also has to go into our annual report as well. So in terms of the highlights, if there's other things in here that you think need to be certainly brought to the surface and applied to the surface, then I'm more than happy to take that. I'll take you through those top 10 if I can indulge your time for a moment. The first one being the rebuilding of our flood impacted communities. As we've seen, that's just a massive piece of work that's ongoing. Unfortunately, it's taken us a lot of time to get through some of those pieces because it's just, you know, we weren't the only ones impacted. Getting the right people on the job and making sure that we do it properly and do it correctly and work with QRA who are our major funders in this. The somewhere. Budget is closer to a hundred million dollars now unless it you know it's a massive piece of work we need to consider. Our overall budget as an organisation but our infrastructure budget is 50 million dollars there abouts. So to have a hundred million dollars overlaid on top of our capital works is the Corporate Plan now that took a massive amount of work to get to that point as well from our staff right through the staff but again we need to give the thanks and support to the directors. So it really is Kim and Kerry who were the main drivers in the end of that document obviously with you as councillors so that's a 23, it's a five-year plan from 23 to 2028. Infrastructure achievements so we've delivered the largest couple of works this year 43 million dollars. So again didn't quite hit the absolute number there's some that roll over but again some of that is also in stuff that we can't deliver in the 12 month period so it rolls over into the current financial year. So it's been a massive piece of work and again just ongoing. Eating it our infrastructure team is just a constant wheel that's rolling and trying to get through all the work that's there. Our new council brand which we see around the place. Some of our venues have now taken up that branding. And I personally think it's a great great brand. It's a great new change for us. It just refreshes exactly what we do and what we stand for. And I think we'll see more of that so again, it's just been a large piece of work that goes on but I think that's a really key piece for us to throw a line. This is where we're now going forward and it is looking forward. It's a brand that helps to improve. Us look forward. It's clean, it's fresh and quite dynamic, I think, and useful. Stable financial management, as we've just heard, you know, that if you go to any of these conferences with local government, there are a number of local governments who, you know, really do struggle to keep their head above water. Think and you'll have to keep your head above water. We've been able to achieve here through a whole lot of change, but we are a reasonably small council in a lot of respects, and to be able to do what we do and deliver what we do keep ourselves in the financial position and we're at. It's a real credit to everybody involved. We've also implemented our SPARC values, so our supportive, passionate, accountable, respectful and committed values, which we've now rolled out and Scott waters was leader of that, pushing that through, and of course the staff in endorsing and accepting and living those values, and that's very much now starting to show great value to the organisation. Housing Strategy, we that's a piece of work and we spoke to that on Friday at a meeting, but it's, or a presentation, the Housing Strategy is something that we've done to give us, not dissimilar to group a plan, gives us a path forward, gives us something to hang everything on as we get these challenges. We're now currently facing housing issues of affordable housing and the likes in every area of Australia. So I think that's a big piece of work. The strategy is something that's really to accept that and to have that as our baseline to utilise is really important. Fire management, as we know, we've now been through the floods, we're fire. Into a issue and just while I'm sitting here, there's bees going off. Bee wire, I've spilled some. I've got them too. SPEAKER_01 02:48:53.338
Got them over the weekend. Larry Sengstock 02:48:55.018
Everything is okay up there, but that's just an indication of what we're potentially, across Queensland, not just us, but across many areas. But we've got 178 bushland reserves covering over three and a half, nearly three and a half thousand hectares. We've got a plan in place. We've been able to do a whole lot of planned burns and we've increased our median in recent times. We've actually increased our capacity to do those planned burns. We Don't deliver the firefighting exercise. We have people, our job is to help and support. If there's a fire it's QPERS and the local authorities that take over in that area but we do have the ability with all of our technology that we're putting in place now to have the ability to support and do a lot. So that's a huge piece of work and it's keeping our community as safe as we possibly can. The living well Noosa is a program which offers the residents free and low-cost access to a range of health and well-being activities which again is just a thing us to be able it's a great for to do and again, within our financial ability and our service ability. So I think again, it's a great marker in front of what we're doing. I Don't know why we're doing this. And then the last one in here, but it's certainly, there's no order of number, is our climate change resilience. And there's been a huge amount of work, not to mention with CHAP, zero emissions, exercise, the work that we're doing with our community factories, rolling that out, and just continuing to look at new ways and better ways to deal with it. The climate change that potentially is coming our way, or everybody's way, so we need to put ourselves in this possible position to do that and I think that we're achieving that within the means that we have. Clear the chain? As I say, there's a multitude more, but this is just a quick highlight of everything that's going on. If anybody's got any questions, then I'm more than happy. Moving forward. If you'd getting into the vernacular of the organisation, but we are trying to get on with it. The idea is to support our staff to be able to get on with it, and it seems that we are. If you look at the amount of work that's happening here. Clearing the path for our staff to just be able to get on with their jobs is a really important piece, and that's a huge direction that we're trying to move across the organisation as we go forward. SPEAKER_03 02:51:35.261
Thank you, Larry. Questions? Hey, Stuart. I was going to say, I was happy to move it. Frank Wilkie 02:51:40.054
Mayor Stewart, seconded by Councillor Jurisevic. Clare Stewart 02:51:42.834
Thank you, Larry. I had all the 10 written down, but I've also got some others. I won't rehash the 10 that you've gone through, but it just shows that there is... I mean, I was tired. It's late last night, but I was tired reading this. So there is a huge amount of work, and the staff should be very much congratulated and please pass on our thanks and appreciation because there is so much to this and as I say all the time for small council we certainly continue to back well above our average so please pass on our appreciation and to all the directors too to each of their groups. On top of the 10 highlights these few things I picked out as well we've got more land 42 percent of land under conservation which is more than ever before we've upgraded our Noosa trail network we've got a new mobile library service and we've got the two new vending kiosks making our library services more accessible we've had the shade cell erected over the 25 metre pool at the knack and the starting blocks upgraded from the 50 metre pool to world rated we've had ongoing maintenance and upgrade works at The J and the Leisure Centre we've had over three million in funding secured through six different funding programs for sports strategy and development from our great sports strategy and development team led by Brad Amanda and Margaret Gatt uh the Donaldson pavilion at Tewantin has delivered an upgrade and of one and a pump track at sundial park uh our sports strategy development team are also supporting or have supported community groups and some of 360 000 for community-led projects across the Shire looking at led lighting upgrades field renovations fencing and irrigation uh same sports strategy development team have to have delivered or working on five different planning projects with an approximate value of four hundred and eighty thousand this includes the region feasibility and the Noosa District Sports Complex LMP core sports redevelopment and fencing project and non-powered water sport project and commencement of Noosa Leisure Centre needs assessment project they've been get we've engaged and supported over one thousand six hundred and fifty seniors from across the Noosa Shire who one or more of our services I think that's such a great number it's a huge amount of people we have serviced. Over 50,000 hours of service have been provided from individual care home cleaning to in-home support services. Our prydgian Peregian Digital Hub thanks to Chris Boden and all the team down there with the new AI Lab state-of-the-art. They are leading the FireTech Connect program down there and it really is world-class. We've adopted the small business friendly charter. We've had $50,000 secured by the economic development team who worked so hard in grant money to develop an industry and employment action plan for Noosa Shire. We've had the Destination Management Plan draft is out for consultation, the Noosa business roundtables continued. We've had planning scheme amendments sent to state our stay the government a short team established to administer local law and a whopping amount of capital infrastructure projects on page 119 onwards so really well done that's again that's just a snapshot. Frank Wilkie 02:54:39.133
Thank you. Another Councillor is Mr Smith-Jones. Joe Jurisevic 02:54:45.443
Yeah more like 110. Mr CEO or 210 or 310. Like the Mayor over there rereading it again over the weekend you know I was exhausted. Ending and the Mayor's probably mentioned a few that'll get a mention again next year because they Don't culminate until the until this financial year. Anybody doubts the diversity and the complexity of work that council undertakes? It's like no other business that you can ever imagine. The length, breadth and scope of commitment to the community here is overwhelming to say the least. And I commend the CEO, the former CEO, the Acting CEO, all of the directors, all of the achieving this. Staff that are involved in achieving the outcomes for the last financial year. Thank you very much to all of you. Thank you, john. Karen Finzel 02:55:43.514
Anyone else wish to speak? Karen? I'll go on, yeah. I'd just like to reiterate everything that's been done in the table. We had community tell us they wanted a call to action, so I think this can show where the call to action's been. I'd just like to mention the Cooroora trail upgrade, which was great to see that opened and, you know, getting a lot of users. I think we're here in about 500 or 600 a week going through there, which is fantastic, giving us that connectivity between the towns and the hinterland. And also, what I'd like to see too is the activation of community with health and wellbeing. The programs we've got out there to engage, you know, all levels of our community and interests is... It's really great to see that being delivered and being embraced by the community. So, a big thank you to everyone that's worked hard in the space. Brian Stockwell 02:56:32.942
Yeah, since he put out the challenge about his top ten, by the look of it. Here we go. Here's the PowerPoint. Yeah. Well, the first thing I got was two of the ten are internally focused. Mm-hmm. They're both good initiatives. Spark and the brand. So the brand is an artifact about where we're heading, which I think can be, if you're saying it's informing the annual plan, to me, that's an it. Entity itself. And I thought, well, then what's missing? So I went to what the top five community values of the liveability survey. Elements of the natural environment, number one. Protection of the natural environment, two. Conditions of public open space, number three. Landscape and public open space, number four. They're missing from the top ten and excessively needs to work there so when we do look at how we prioritise, let's put it through the lens of the community rather than through the lens of the organisation. Good point. But other than that, it gives a lot done. Amelia Lorentson 02:57:36.870
I'll keep mine brief. We often get told what we Don't do so it's really refreshing to understand what we do really do and we do it really well. I think most corporations biggest asset definitely it's people. We are only as good or as great as the people that support the work this council does. I was at a meeting this morning with the Noosa Junction Association and they spoke so highly of a recent experience with our waste staff and I walked away really quite proud so in terms of you know our values supportive, passionate, accountable, respectable and committed. Have a team of great people that make this organisation great so thank you to our executives, our staff, Acting CEO and current and ex-CEO. I think we've got a lot to be proud of. Thank you. Tom, Tom Wegener 02:58:39.498
just quickly first about that. Brian mentioned lenses. Second, I think that the spark is really important. I'm so honoured that the crew, that the staff have taken that and we ran with what Scott mentioned and of course Larry you've taken that and continue to run with it and I think that that's actually really reformed. Reforming the way we think about things and one of the another highlight of the year was actually with that when Clare said when kairon was in the room with the way his team was in here and kairon had these big ideas what we need to do and you know how he stuck down and Clare said, well, you know, that's your job. That's what you need to do. That's your kind of a nimble Council is that we were actually able to change that, give cairo, put him into a place where he could actually make a difference, put our aspirations, get the rubber on the road. So yeah, but no, obviously. Everybody works so hard, I'm so proud of staff. Driving around also, I look at the roundabouts and the incredible land and how well it's managed. It's just beautiful. You drive into Noosa, you know it. Thank you, thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:59:52.327
Thank you very much. I think it's all been said, the council provides a service, but it's not just a service, it's hundreds of services on a daily basis. Some major projects as the Mayor listed them all. Thank you Larry and please pass on thanks to the executive team, the managers and all the line staff as well. Thank you. SPEAKER_03 03:00:17.436
I want to thank you too Larry, because you came on board when we were uncertain, so I want to thank you for all your support and for really driving the organisation forward and I know you've got a huge amount of respect among the staff and you certainly have a huge amount of respect around this table, so I want to thank you as well. Well certainly. Frank Wilkie 03:00:39.985
Put the motion those in favour? That's unanimous. Now that brings us to the end of our open session items. We've got some commercial and confidence matters that need to be discussed. So we'll take, yeah, a quick suggestion now, we'll take that's a good idea. We'll move into confidential session, so someone care to move that? I'll make the motion. SPEAKER_01 03:01:09.213
Council note the report by the CEO, that's the one, that's a year in review, that's the previous one. We've done that, I'm just going to Read it across the board. Oh, I can't do that. Amelia Lorentson 03:01:17.773
Me too. Joe Jurisevic 03:01:22.702
I'll move that the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 245J3G of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing commercial matters involving a local government for which public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government for reports 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3. Sorry, you need to remove discussing Frank Wilkie 03:01:42.822
8, Just discussing commercial-- can we have a seconder for that, please? A seconder for Amelia. Discussing more than one. A seconder for Amelia. All in favour? That's unanimous. We are in-- I do want to take a five-minute break. You can take five minutes off the break. Thanks. Amelia Lorentson 03:02:03.431
How much more food can I eat? You SPEAKER_01 03:02:05.010
Should have made the five-minute break commercial complex. Complex. Unknown 03:02:10.450
One is three. How are we doing? Just three. Individual. One at a time. All separate? Yes. Two. Two. One at a time, please. Sorry. No, I'm just kidding. Sorry. Frank Wilkie 03:02:47.820
Let me know when the water's in. Okay, welcome back everybody. We now have some recommendations before us for approval. Someone can move this one about the contract for parks and gardens. Moved by Councillor Jurisevic, seconded by Councillor Finzel. Uh-huh. Next item is the decision to settle an appeal before the court. Someone can move this one. Moved by Councillor Wegener, seconded by Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? It's carried. A report by disaster redistruction coordinator. Thank you. Yeah. A contractual agreement, seconded by moved by Councillor Stewart, seconded by Councillor Jurisevic, all in favour? It was carried. That brings us to the end of today's agenda. Thank you. SPEAKER_03 03:04:06.832
Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you. Well done. Thank you, Linda. Thank you. Thanks, Linda. Thanks, Vicky. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
