General Committee Meeting - November 2023
Date: Monday, 13 November 2023 at 12:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 02:48:03
Synopsis: Major Development Refusal over biodiversity, density, stormwater and urban boundary, Roadside Café to cease with alternative site support, Grants approved, Recycling processing contract endorsed, Financials noted.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Joe Jurisevic Amelia Lorentson Clare Stewart Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Frank Wilkie Executive Officers
Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Apologies (Did Not Attend)
AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Joe Jurisevic: Chaired after approval for Frank Wilkie to attend via Teams and appointment of Acting Chair (00:00–01:28; Minutes: Attendance & Resolutions). Council: Refused MCU22/0118 (RACV Noosa Springs expansion for STA at 94 & 142 Noosa Dr) on planning/overlay conflicts, biodiversity loss, height/density, stormwater, urban boundary breach; no overriding community need (05.1; 03:59–19:24; Minutes Item 5.1). Brian Stockwell: Secured addition directing CEO to review zone and urban boundaries in next Planning Scheme review (25:07; Minutes 5.1 Amendment B). Council: Part-approved roadside stall change at 201 Mary River Rd (MCU21/0194.01) but refused Food & Drink Outlet; ordered café operations cease within 3 months; invited code-assessable home-based coffee roasting (36:28–48:23; Minutes 5.2 C–G). Frank Wilkie: Added directive for CEO to work with applicant to find alternative site for café/bus (41:10–41:50; Minutes 5.2 I). Council: Noted Noosa Springs hotel/resort MCU21/0110 made “Other Change” reverting to Confirmation stage; no decision possible (01:08:34–01:09:40; Minutes 5.3). Council: Approved Community Grants Round Two: $99,459.67 projects; redirected $68,470.65 to youth initiatives and Living Well Noosa; subsequent approvals for Program/Projects, Events, Infrastructure, Equipment (01:10:34–01:31:37; Minutes 6.1–6.5). Council: Approved RADF Round 20: four projects totaling $28,150 (01:32:30–01:36:55; Minutes 6.6). Council: Accepted Non‑Powered Water Sports Feasibility Study; identified area behind Noosa Yacht & Rowing Club as preferred co‑location; refer to future planning (01:45:19–01:59:38; Minutes 6.7). Council: Refreshed Firetech ROPS; added BIA5 Pty Ltd and Geoneon Pty Ltd; potential extensions to 31 July 2027 (02:00:16–02:02:27; Minutes 6.8). Council: Endorsed Tourism Noosa’s Destination Noosa Strategy 2023–2027; to align post‑DMP completion (02:04:51–02:20:09; Minutes 6.9). Council: Noted October 2023 Financial Performance; strong revenue (+$2.2m), underspend in Opex; cash cover noted with restrictions; workforce vacancies acknowledged (02:20:57–02:34:29; Minutes 6.10). Council: Adopted Noosa Council 2022–23 Annual Report; CEO authorized minor edits (02:35:58–02:45:32; Minutes 6.11). Council: Confidential: approved 8‑year MRF processing contract with Re.CYCLE (Sunshine Coast) Pty Ltd; CEO delegated to finalize, up to $900k p.a. (07.1; Minutes 7.1). Council: Supported Emu Mountain Rd shared path grant submission (by SCC) subject to design inputs and safety on David Low Way (Minutes 7.2). Council: Approved purchase under Resilient Homes Fund for voluntary flood buy‑back, subject to QRA processes (Minutes 7.3). Contentious / Transparency Matters Clare Stewart noted SARA’s offset‑conditioned approval on koala habitat did not bind Council; Council prioritized broader biodiversity overlays and urban boundary integrity (10:55–12:20; Minutes 5.1 A(3)(c), A(4)). Frank Wilkie framed roadside café refusal around resident amenity and safety (children crossing 80 km/h road) and litigation exposure if scheme ignored; read public plea (41:58–48:23; Minutes 5.2 C(5)(d), C(6)). Tom Wegener opposed refusal, citing strong community patronage and local product ecosystem; majority held popularity ≠ planning need (36:37–40:35; 55:03–59:20; Minutes 5.2 C(2)–(5)). Joe Jurisevic flagged applicant engagement history and staff guidance to scale down RACV proposal; applicant persisted with larger footprint (16:07–17:55; Minutes 5.1 A). Council/Staff: Clarified tender/permit constraints for siting mobile café on public land; private land options to be explored (49:03–50:08; Minutes 5.2 I). Council: Deputation on Noosa Springs hotel withdrawn after applicant’s “Other Change”; transparency noted to attendees (01:28–03:50; Minutes 4.1, 5.3). Legal / Risk Council/Officers: RACV refusal anchored in Noosa Plan 2020 Strategic Framework, Biodiversity/Waterways/Wetlands Overlay, Water Quality & Drainage Code, Local Plan Code, Zone Codes; SEQRP read “as a whole” provided no support (Minutes 5.1 A(1)–(5)). Richard MacGillivray emphasized overlays outrank zoning; biodiversity across whole site, not just EM&C zone (10:01–10:44; Minutes 5.1 A(3)(c)). Council: Roadside café refused under Strategic Framework, Cooroy Local Plan, Rural Zone, Business Activities, Driveways & Parking Codes; insufficient on‑site parking and safety risks (Minutes 5.2 C(1)–(6)). Frank Wilkie warned approving contrary to scheme risks P&E Court outcomes; Council’s strong record relies on adherence (47:48–48:23; Minutes 5.2 reasoning). Officers: Business Continuity: Optus outage impaired customer service lines; BCP enacted; IT BCP review scheduled; cyber ranked top strategic risk (02:29:08–02:30:02; 02:26:32–02:27:26). Confidential items: Properly closed under s254J(3) LGR 2012; MRF contract entered under s235(a) LGR 2012 exemptions (Minutes 7; 7.1). Conflicts of Interest Frank Wilkie: Prescribed COI on RACV item due to $2,500 sponsorship to Noosa Arts Theatre where he is President; left meeting (04:06–04:29; Minutes 5.1 COI). Amelia Lorentson: Declarable COI (owns STA); Council resolved she could participate on RACV item (04:31–05:46; Minutes 5.1 COI & Resolution). Clare Stewart: Multiple declarable COIs on grants and Tourism Noosa (personal ties, children’s clubs); left room where applicable (Minutes 6.4, 6.5, 6.9). Brian Stockwell: Declarable COI (prior ICEO query re: Leigh McCready); allowed to participate on relevant items (01:30:12–01:30:52; 02:03:26–02:04:34; Minutes 6.5, 6.9). Frank Wilkie: Declarable memberships/volunteering on several grants; allowed to participate (01:18:52–01:22:24; 01:32:30–01:36:03; Minutes 6.2, 6.6). Short‑Term Accommodation, Planning Scheme & Zoning Officers: RACV STA would clear 71–82 native trees, including 27–33 koala food trees; parts outside urban boundary, in EM&C zone, MSES, riparian buffer; stormwater bio‑basin undersized (05:46–18:56; Minutes 5.1 A(3)(c)–(d)). Brian Stockwell: Urged boundary review; mapping may reflect legacy creek alignments; meet‑and‑bounds approach suggested (14:20–15:29; 21:40–26:27; Minutes 5.1 Amendment B). Larry Sengstock/Officers: Indicated applicant could resubmit scaled‑down footprint within Tourist Accommodation zone, but overlays still constrain (09:02–10:44; Minutes 5.1 context). Environmental Concerns Council: Prioritized ecological linkage and koala habitat; refusal aligned with Biodiversity/Waterways/Wetlands Overlay and public interest (Minutes 5.1 A(2), A(5)). Officers: Noted site degradation does not justify large‑scale incursion; covenanting around footprints raises constructability/maintenance risks (11:47–12:20; Minutes 5.1 reasoning). Tourism Noosa Strategy: Embraces “tourism for good,” regenerative approaches; to integrate with DMP; carbon neutrality aspirations discussed (02:06:58–02:12:41; Minutes 6.9). Infrastructure, Waste & Transport Safety Council: New MRF processing contract up to $900k p.a. for 8 years with Re.CYCLE; CEO authorized to finalize (Minutes 7.1). Council: Supported Emu Mountain Rd shared path grant bid subject to design refinement and David Low Way crossing safety (Minutes 7.2). Council: Roadside café refusal grounded partly in inadequate on‑site parking and unsafe road‑reserve parking; formalizing parking infeasible (30:45–38:42; Minutes 5.2 C(6)).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES General Committee Meeting Monday, 13 November 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 13 NOVEMBER 2023 1. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Joe Jurisevic (Acting Chair) Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Clare Stewart Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Frank Wilkie (via Microsoft Teams) EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray APOLOGIES Cr Karen Finzel Council Resolution Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That in accordance with Section 254K of the Local Government Regulation, Cr Wilkie is approved to attend the Meeting dated 13 November 2023 via Microsoft Teams. Carried unanimously. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Cr Jurisevic be appointed as Acting Chairperson of the meeting due to Councillor Wilkie attending via Microsoft Teams. Carried unanimously. 2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson The Minutes of the General Committee Meeting held on 23 October 2023 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 3. PRESENTATIONS Nil 4. DEPUTATIONS 4.1. KIM PETROVIC & JOHN COCHRANE TOPIC - PROPOSED HOTEL DEVELOPMENT AT NOOSA SPRINGS MCU 21/0110 Withdrawn by the applicant. 5. ITEMS REFERRED FROM COMMITTEES 5.1. MCU22/0118 – DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 94 & 142 NOOSA DR, NOOSA HEADS (REFERRED FROM PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE DATED 7 NOVEMBER 2023 - ITEM 5.1) In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Wilkie provided the following declaration to the meeting of a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Wilkie inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter as the applicant, RACV resort, support the Noosa Arts Theatre with an annual $2,500 sponsorship and I also serve as Noosa Arts Theatre President. As a result of this conflict of interest, I will leave the meeting room while the matter is decided. Cr Wilkie left the meeting. In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Lorentson provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Lorentson, inform the meeting I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter. My husband and I own a property at Noosa Parade, Noosa Heads. Since November 2020 this property has been used for Short Term accommodation rental. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias as I have no personal relationship with the applicant, and although I have a STA property, I will not be positively or negatively impacted by the decision. 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. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Lorentson and determine that Cr Lorentson participates and votes on this matter because GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 Council believes that there is no personal relationship with the applicant and Cr Lorentson will not be positively or negatively impacted by the decision so a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Lorentson did not vote on the above motion. Motion Moved: Cr Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 November 2023 regarding Application No. MCU22/0118 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Shortterm accommodation, situated at 94 & 142 Noosa Dr, Noosa Heads and: A. Refuse the application for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development has failed to demonstrate a significant planning need to develop outside of Noosa Plan 2020's urban boundary, particularly at the density and height proposed and is inconsistent with the local landscape character. No overriding community benefit been demonstrated, which would justify approval despite its conflict with the planning scheme. 2. Valid planning grounds have been raised by submitters that the proposal will result in an unacceptable impact on the biodiversity of the locality. Further, the development exceeds what a community member could reasonably expect to be developed outside of the Urban Boundary and within the Environmental Management and Conservation Zone. 3. The proposed development of the subject land is inappropriate, in circumstances where: (a) The proposed development seeks to expand the existing resort complex in circumstances where part of that land is located outside of the urban boundary in Noosa Plan 2020; (b) The proponent seeks to utilise the land for Short-term accommodation, which is an inconsistent use in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone; (c) The proposed development is an overdevelopment of the land at the expense of the natural values of the land, as the proposal would result in unacceptable clearing of vegetation in an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive area, including proposed development located on mapped Areas of Biodiversity Significance, Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES) Environmental Values and Riparian Buffer Area under the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay and mapped Core Koala Habitat area; (d) The stormwater treatment proposed is not of a sufficient size to achieve the water quality objectives and protection of biodiversity areas required under the Water Quality and Drainage Code. (e) The built form of the proposed development is unacceptable, being slightly over height in metres in the Tourist Accommodation zone and substantially over height in metres and storeys in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone. In respect of the above, the proposed development is inconsistent with the following provisions of Noosa Plan 2020: (i) Strategic Framework – 3.2.2, 3.2.5, 3.3.1(b) and 3.3.4(b)(p); GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 (ii) Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay Code – 8.2.2.2(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i) Table 8.2.23 PO1, PO3, PO6 and PO11; (iii) Water Quality and Drainage Code – 9.4.82(2)(a) and (b) and Table 9.4.8.3 PO6; (iv) Noosa Heads Local Plan Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(b)(d)(e) and (ad) and Table 7.2.5.3 PO4, PO5, PO6 and PO26; (v) Environmental Management and Conservation Zone Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(a) and (b), Table 6.7.1.3 PO1, PO5, PO7, PO8, PO9, PO11 and PO13; (vi) Tourist Accommodation Zone Code - Table 6.3.4.3 PO9 and PO10. 4. When read as a whole, the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (SEQRP) does not lend support to the proposed use of the land, as: 4.1. the SEQRP sets a long term, 50-year vision, establishing aspirations for the region up to 2067. Given this, the timing and sequencing of urban development occurring within the Urban Footprint is a finer grained detail, the planning for which is implemented through local government planning schemes; 4.2. the designation of land as being within the Urban Footprint does not imply that all that land with that designation can be developed for urban purposes; and 4.3. when assessed against Noosa Plan 2020, the proposed development is not suitable for urban development. 5. The following relevant matters support refusal: 5.1. The proposed development will involve an unacceptable loss of vegetation in a locality which is an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive and serves as an important ecological linkage, 5.2. There is no planning, economic or community need for the proposed development on the subject land. 5.3. Approval of the proposed development would not be in the public interest as reflected in the provisions of Noosa Plan 2020 referred to in these reasons for refusal. B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Amendment Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Item B be added to read (and the current Item B be subsequently changed to Item C): B. That the CEO be requested to review the zone and urban boundaries as part of a future review of the Planning Scheme. Carried unanimously. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 November 2023 regarding Application GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 No. MCU22/0118 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Shortterm accommodation, situated at 94 & 142 Noosa Dr, Noosa Heads and: A. Refuse the application for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development has failed to demonstrate a significant planning need to develop outside of Noosa Plan 2020's urban boundary, particularly at the density and height proposed and is inconsistent with the local landscape character. No overriding community benefit been demonstrated, which would justify approval despite its conflict with the planning scheme. 2. Valid planning grounds have been raised by submitters that the proposal will result in an unacceptable impact on the biodiversity of the locality. Further, the development exceeds what a community member could reasonably expect to be developed outside of the Urban Boundary and within the Environmental Management and Conservation Zone. 3. The proposed development of the subject land is inappropriate, in circumstances where: (a) The proposed development seeks to expand the existing resort complex in circumstances where part of that land is located outside of the urban boundary in Noosa Plan 2020; (b) The proponent seeks to utilise the land for Short-term accommodation, which is an inconsistent use in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone; (c) The proposed development is an overdevelopment of the land at the expense of the natural values of the land, as the proposal would result in unacceptable clearing of vegetation in an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive area, including proposed development located on mapped Areas of Biodiversity Significance, Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES) Environmental Values and Riparian Buffer Area under the Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay and mapped Core Koala Habitat area; (d) The stormwater treatment proposed is not of a sufficient size to achieve the water quality objectives and protection of biodiversity areas required under the Water Quality and Drainage Code. (e) The built form of the proposed development is unacceptable, being slightly over height in metres in the Tourist Accommodation zone and substantially over height in metres and storeys in the Environmental Management and Conservation zone. In respect of the above, the proposed development is inconsistent with the following provisions of Noosa Plan 2020: (i) Strategic Framework – 3.2.2, 3.2.5, 3.3.1(b) and 3.3.4(b)(p); (ii) Biodiversity, Waterways and Wetlands Overlay Code – 8.2.2.2(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i) Table 8.2.23 PO1, PO3, PO6 and PO11; (iii) Water Quality and Drainage Code – 9.4.82(2)(a) and (b) and Table 9.4.8.3 PO6; (iv) Noosa Heads Local Plan Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(b)(d)(e) and (ad) and Table 7.2.5.3 PO4, PO5, PO6 and PO26; (v) Environmental Management and Conservation Zone Code – Overall Outcomes (2)(a) and (b), Table 6.7.1.3 PO1, PO5, PO7, PO8, PO9, PO11 and PO13; (vi) Tourist Accommodation Zone Code - Table 6.3.4.3 PO9 and PO10. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 4. When read as a whole, the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (SEQRP) does not lend support to the proposed use of the land, as: 4.1. the SEQRP sets a long term, 50-year vision, establishing aspirations for the region up to 2067. Given this, the timing and sequencing of urban development occurring within the Urban Footprint is a finer grained detail, the planning for which is implemented through local government planning schemes; 4.2. the designation of land as being within the Urban Footprint does not imply that all that land with that designation can be developed for urban purposes; and 4.3. when assessed against Noosa Plan 2020, the proposed development is not suitable for urban development. 5. The following relevant matters support refusal: 5.1. The proposed development will involve an unacceptable loss of vegetation in a locality which is an ecologically important and environmentally sensitive and serves as an important ecological linkage, 5.2. There is no planning, economic or community need for the proposed development on the subject land. 5.3. Approval of the proposed development would not be in the public interest as reflected in the provisions of Noosa Plan 2020 referred to in these reasons for refusal. B. That the CEO be requested to review the zone and urban boundaries as part of a future review of the Planning Scheme; and C. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Carried unanimously. Cr Wilkie returned to the meeting. 5.2. MCU21/0194.01 – APPLICATION FOR AN OTHER CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A ROADSIDE STALL TO INCLUDE A FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET AT 201 MARY RIVER RD, COOROY (REFERRED FROM PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE DATED 7 NOVEMBER 2023 - ITEM 5.2) Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 November 2023 regarding Application No. MCU21/0194.01 for an other change to a Development Permit for Material Change of Use (Roadside Stall) to include a Food and Drink Outlet, situated at 201 Mary River Rd, Cooroy and: A. Approve, in part, only (with amended Condition 2) and part refusal. B. Approve the change to Condition 2 as outlined in Attachment 1. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 C. Refuse the Food and Drink Outlet component of the application for the following reasons: 1. This element of the proposal does not advance the elements and strategies of the South East Queensland Regional Plan as it does not value add to the site’s on-farm agricultural activities. 2. This element of the proposal is contrary to the Intent and Outcomes of the Strategic Framework, Section 3.3.1 (e) and Section 3.3.5 (h), (v) and (w) as: a) The proposal is not a rural activity or a rural enterprise and such uses are intended to be located in business centres to contribute to their vibrancy. b) The proposal does not value add to the site’s rural activities, would be the primary use on the site and is in no way ancillary to the approved roadside stall. c) The proposal predominantly caters to passing trade, largely locals in the area, and has only a limited tourism focus. 3. This element of the proposal is not consistent with overall outcomes (b), (i) and performance outcomes PO1, PO4 and PO8 of the Local Plan Code for Cooroy as: a) The proposed use is located outside the urban boundary and the Cooroy town centre. b) The proposed use will adversely interrupt the landscape character and visual amenity of Mary River Road, being very different to uses envisaged in rural areas of the Shire. 4. This element of the proposal is contrary to overall outcomes (a) & (l) and performance outcomes PO1, PO5 & PO13 of the Rural Zone Code as: a) The proposal is not a rural activity, it is an urban activity, and will not value add to goods produced on site. b) The proposal does not have an indelible connection to the rural or ecological values of the site and is more appropriately located in an urban area. c) There is no overriding community benefit for the food and drink outlet to be located on the site, with no particular circumstances relevant that warrant the proposal. d) The proposal will detract from the scenic amenity of Mary River Road being part of the major road network for the Shire. 5. This element of the proposal is contrary to performance outcomes PO1, PO2, PO3, PO11, PO12, PO13 of the Business Activities Code as: a) The proposal is a type of business activity that is at odds and is not compatible with the purpose of the site’s rural zoning. b) The proposal seeks to locate a business activity outside the business centres shown in the Noosa Shire Centres Hierarchy. c) The proposed food and drink outlet is a use that is not typically expected to be found in the rural areas of the Shire. d) The proposal is adversely impacting the amenity of nearby residents, with its early and week-end operating hours, uncoordinated and uncontrolled carparking on the road reserve and coffee shop customers coming and going from the site. 6. This element of the proposal is contrary to overall outcome (b) and performance outcome PO6 of the Driveways and Parking Code and overall outcome (e) and performance outcome PO16 of the Business Activities GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 Code as the proposed on-site car parking is insufficient to accommodate the number of vehicles generated by the development. D. Refuse to amend Condition 4 of the development approval for the following reason: 7. The proposal is contrary to performance outcomes PO25 and PO26 of the Rural Activities Code as the requested change includes the sale of food and beverages that are not ancillary to a bona fide cropping or animal husbandry use on site. E. Refuse to delete Conditions 5 and 7 of the development approval for the following reasons: 8. The proposal is contrary to performance outcomes PO25 and PO26 of the Rural Activities Code as the request to delete these conditions relates to the proposal for a food and drink outlet to operate from the site which is not supported. Any provision for the tasting of foods and beverages proposed to be produced on site would not be ancillary to a bona fide cropping or animal husbandry use on site. F. Advise the applicant that the food and drink outlet must cease operating from the site within 3 months of the date of Council’s decision, with any unapproved structures removed. G. Advise the applicant that the roasting of coffee beans on site must cease within 3 months of the date of Council’s decision, and to lodge a subsequent code assessable development application for a Material Change of Use – Home-based Business (coffee roasting). H. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. I. Authorise the CEO to work with the applicant to find an appropriate location for the food and drink outlet/bus. For: Crs Jurisevic, Lorentson, Stockwell, Wilkie and Stewart Against: Cr Wegener Carried. 5.3. FURTHER REPORT - MCU21/0110 - APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - BAR, FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, OUTDOOR SPORT AND RECREATION, RESORT COMPLEX AT 61 NOOSA SPRINGS DRIVE, NOOSA HEADS (REFERRED FROM PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE DATED 7 NOVEMBER 2023 - ITEM 5.4) Committee Recommendation/Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That Council note the Further Report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 November 2023 regarding Application No. MCU21/0110 for a Development Permit for a Material Change of Use – Bar, Food and Drink Outlet, Outdoor GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 Sport and Recreation and Resort Complex at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Heads and note that the applicant has made an Other Change to the application. This results in the application reverting to Confirmation Notice stage and no decision can be made on the matter today. Carried unanimously. 6. REPORTS DIRECT TO GENERAL COMMITTEE 6.1. 2023-2024 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND TWO) - OVERVIEW Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and: A. Approve the Round Two 2023-24 Community Grants Projects Program to the total value of $99,459.67; B. Allocate the remaining $68,470.65 from the 23/24 Community Grants budget to funding for youth initiatives made up of an out-of-round Youth Grants funding program and youth focussed activities within the Living Well Noosa program; and C. Delegate the Chief Executive Officer to authorise funding to the successful applicants for the out-of-round Youth Grants projects. Carried unanimously. 6.2. 2023-2024 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING – COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND TWO) – PROGRAM/PROJECTS In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Wilkie provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Wilkie, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendations to Cooroora Historical Society t/a Noosa Shire Museum. I state for the record that although general membership of an organisation does not qualify as a declarable conflict of interest, I would like to put on the record my general membership of the Cooroora Historical Society, which is mentioned in this grant round. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person would see this as a conflict of interest. Therefore, I 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 Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Wilkie and determine that it is in the public interest that Cr Wilkie participates and votes on this matter GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 because Council believes that a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Wilkie did not vote on the above motion. In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Wilkie provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Wilkie, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendations to NoosaCare. I would like to put on the record that, although it does not qualify as a declarable conflict of interest, I volunteer playing music at various aged care facilities in the shire, including at Noosa Care which is mentioned in this grant round. I am not a member or executive member of Noosa Care and don’t believe a reasonable person would see this as a conflict of interest and choose to stay in the meeting room. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Wilkie and determine that Cr Wilkie 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. Cr Wilkie did not vote on the above motion. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and approve Round Two 2023-24 Community Project Grants – Program/Projects provided in Attachment 1 to this report. Carried unanimously. 6.3. 2023-2024 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND TWO) - EVENTS Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That Council note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and approve Round Two 2023-2024 Community Project Grants - Events provided in Attachment 1 to this report. Carried unanimously. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 6.4. 2023-2024 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND TWO) - INFRASTRUCTURE In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Stewart provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendation to Sunny Kids Inc as I make regular monthly donations to this charity and in relation to the funding recommendation to Tewantin Noosa Cricket Club as my son plays for the Tewantin Noosa Cricket Club. As a result of my conflicts of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Stewart left the meeting. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and approve Round Two 2023-2024 Community Project Grants - Infrastructure provided in Attachment 1 to this report. Carried unanimously. Cr Stewart returned to the meeting. 6.5. 2023-2024 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND TWO) - EQUIPMENT In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Stewart provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendations to Katie Rose Cottage as I have a personal friendship with Leigh McCready, who is employed as Head of Fundraising and Partnerships by Katie Rose Cottage; Noosa Water Polo Club as my children are members of the club; Noosa Little Athletics Inc as my children are members of this club. As a result of my conflicts of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Stewart left the meeting. 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 on 24 February 2020 I sought a review by the Independent Council Election Observer (ICEO) as to the public claims of the Future Noosa Team, of which Leigh McCready was publicly identified as a Campaign Manager. The conflict involved the application of Katie Rose Cottage as Leigh McCready is the Head of Fundraising and Partnerships, Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 because the ICEO review was an advisory service, not a statutory process, and my queries at that time were in the public interest and neither I nor Ms McCready stood to personally gain or lose from that advice. 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 Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Stockwell and determine that it is in the public interest that Cr Stockwell participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person could not have a perception of bias because the ICEO review was an advisory service, not a statutory process, and Cr Stockwell’s queries at that time were in the public interest and neither he nor Ms McCready stood to personally gain or lose from that advice and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Stockwell did not vote on the above motion. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That Council note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and approve Round Two 2023-24 Community Project Grants – Equipment provided in Attachment 1 to this report. Carried unanimously. Cr Stewart returned to the meeting. 6.6. REGIONAL ARTS DEVELOPMENT FUND (RADF) - GRANT RECOMMENDATIONS ROUND 20, 2023/24 In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Wilkie provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Wilkie, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendations to Zest Factor as Zest Factor applicant Russell Krause is a general member of Noosa Arts Theatre where I serve as President. Mr Krause’s grant does not involve the Noosa Arts Theatre or myself and I therefore don’t believe a reasonable person would see this as a conflict of interest. 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 Clare Stewart That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Wilkie and determine that Cr Wilkie 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. Cr Wilkie did not vote on the above motion. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Wilkie provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: Cr Wilkie, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendations to Little Seed applicant Johanna Wallace, is a general member of Noosa Arts Theatre where I serve as President. Their grant does not involve the Noosa Arts Theatre or myself and I therefore don’t believe a reasonable person would see this as a conflict of interest. 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 Clare Stewart That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Wilkie and determine that Cr Wilkie 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. Cr Wilkie did not vote on the above motion. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic That Council note the report by the Arts and Culture Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 regarding applications to the Regional Arts Development Fund Round 20, 2023/24 and approve the recommendations of the Assessment Committee as outlined in Attachment 1 to the report. Carried unanimously. 6.7. NON-POWERED WATER SPORTS FEASIBILTY STUDY Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That Council note the report by the Sport Strategy and Project Advisor to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 regarding the NonPowered Water Sports Feasibility Study and: A. Accept the Non-Powered Water Sports Feasibility Study; and B. Refer the findings of the Study to future planning activities. Carried unanimously. 6.8. FIRETECH SERVICE PROVIDER PANEL (ROPS) REFRESH Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Joe Jurisevic GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 That Council note the report by the Director Digital Hub and Innovation to the General Committee date 13 November 2023 and A. Award Contract No. T000078 for a Register of Pre-qualified Suppliers for the Provision of Firetech Services to the following two new suppliers as a result of a ROPS refresh for a period until August 2024: BIA5 Pty Ltd; and Geoneon Pty Ltd B. Subject to satisfactory performance of the suppliers, authorise the CEO to approve the option to extend the contract at the expiry of first extension term for a further three (3) terms of up to twelve (12) months each ending on 31 July 2027. Carried unanimously. 6.9. TOURISM NOOSA STRATEGY 2023-2027 In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Stewart provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as Leigh McCready, a Director of Tourism Noosa is a personal friend. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Stewart left the meeting. 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 on 24 February 2020 I sought a review by the Independent Council Election Observer (ICEO) as to the public claims of the Future Noosa Team, of which Leigh McCready was publicly identified as a Campaign Manager. Leigh McCready is a Director of Tourism Noosa. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because the ICEO review was an advisory service, not a statutory process, and my queries at that time were in the public interest and neither I nor Ms McCready stood to personally gain or lose from that advice. 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 Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Stockwell and determine that it is in the public interest that Cr Stockwell participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person could not have a perception of bias because the ICEO review was an advisory service, not a statutory process, and Cr Stockwell’s queries at that time were in the public interest and neither he nor Ms McCready stood to personally gain or lose from that advice and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Stockwell did not vote on the above motion. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Director Strategy and Environment to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 regarding Tourism Noosa's Destination Noosa Strategic Plan 2023-2027 as provided at Attachment 1 to this report and: A. Endorse Tourism Noosa's Destination Noosa Strategy 2023-2027 in accordance with Tourism Noosa's Funding and Performance Deed with Council; and B. Note Tourism Noosa's Destination Noosa Strategy 2023-2027 will be reviewed following the completion of the Destination Management Plan to ensure alignment and to reflect any shifts required in Tourism Noosa's strategic focus as specified in Tourism Noosa's Funding and Performance Deed with Council. Carried unanimously. Cr Stewart returned to the meeting. 6.10. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – OCTOBER 2023 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That Council note the report by the Manager Financial Services (Acting) to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 outlining October 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. 6.11. NOOSA COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT 2022-2023 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Clare Stewart Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Governance Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and A. Adopt the Noosa Shire Council 2022-23 Annual Report incorporating the 2022/23 Audited Financial Statements. B. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make any required minor amendments to the document prior to publication. Carried unanimously. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 7. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3)(according to alpha reference listed below) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing: Item 7.1 - RECYCLING MATERIAL PROCESSING OPTION (NEW MRF) (g) negotiations relating to a commercial matter involving the local government for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government; Item 7.2 - EMU MOUNTAIN ROAD SHARED PATHWAY - (i) a matter the local government is required to keep confidential under a law of, or formal arrangement with, the Commonwealth or a State; and Item 7.3 - VOLUNTARY FLOOD RECOVERY PROPERTY ACQUISITION (h) negotiations relating to the taking of land by the local government under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967; Carried unanimously. RE-OPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That the meeting be re-opened to the public. Carried unanimously. 7.1. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - RECYCLING MATERIAL PROCESSING OPTION (NEW MRF) Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That Council note the report by the Waste Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and A. Enter into a contract with Re.CYCLE (SUNSHINE COAST) Pty Ltd for 8 years, in accordance with Section 235 (A) of the Local Government Regulation 2012; and B. Delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate, finalise and enter the contract and to approve payments to be made pursuant to the contract to a maximum of $900,000 (GST excl.), per year of the term of the contract. Carried unanimously. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 13 NOVEMBER 2023 7.2. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: EMU MOUNTAIN ROAD SHARED PATHWAY Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Director Infrastructure Services to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and A. Support the submission of a Cycle Network Local Government Grants Program Submission by Sunshine Coast Council for a shared path and cycleway along Emu Mountain Road, subject to: 1. Further input by Noosa Council into the design by Sunshine Coast Council to reduce environmental and visual impact of the proposal; and 2. Resolving pedestrian crossing and cycle safety issues on the David Low Way prior to acceptance of the final design. Carried unanimously. 7.3. CONFIDENTIAL: NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE – VOLUNTARY FLOOD RECOVERY PROPERTY ACQUISITION Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Joe Jurisevic Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Community Connections Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 November 2023 and A. Through the Commonwealth and State Resilient Home Fund, purchase the property as detailed in the Report for the purposes of the voluntary home buy-back program, provided that all processes have been satisfactorily completed with Queensland Reconstruction Authority (QRA); B. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to take the necessary action to implement Council’s decision, including but not limited to making, amending, and discharging the contractual arrangement/s; and C. Undertake the necessary actions to fulfil the conditions of the program. Carried unanimously. 8. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 4.01pm
Meeting Transcript
Larry Sengstock 00:00.000
Three. Our chair is unwell today. He has COVID, of all things. So he will be tuning in from home on Teams. So me as the CEO will take charge of the meeting initially until we appoint a stand-in Chair. But initially, what I'd like to do is... I'd like to acknowledge that we're meeting on the traditional lands of the Kabi Kabi people and I pay my respects to the elders past, present and emerging. The next point of order is to... to acknowledge and have Councillor Frank Wilkie be accepted to attend the meeting via Microsoft Teams. Clare Stewart 00:43.857
I'll move that. I'll have a mover. I'll have a seconder. I'll have a mover. Clare Stewart. I'll have a seconder. Joe Jurisevic. in favour? No. That's carried. The second piece is therefore to appoint a chair of the meeting. Can I have a... I'll move that Councillor Joe Jurisevic is the chair for the meeting. I picture second. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 01:09.300
Seconded by Amelia Lorentson. Any discussion? Very fortunate that I haven't been sitting in the chair yet. Councillor Jurisevic, I pass it over to you now to chair the meeting, Thank you. Mr Joe Jurisevic 01:28.780
CEO, welcome everybody to the general committee meeting. I too would like to acknowledge the official owners of the land on which we work, Kabi Kabi people and pay respects to their elders past, present and emerging. As far as attendance am aware that Councillor Wilkie is attending online and Councillor Karen Finzel is an apology today. First item on the agenda is the confirmation of minutes from the last general meeting. I have a mover, Councillor Stewart. I second. Thank you. No discussion. All in favour? In favour. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Can we do that one more time? There are no presentations. There was to be a deputation today with regard to the proposed hotel development at Noosa Springs, but I have been advised that we've received notice from the applicant for the proposed hotel at Noosa Springs... notice advises of another change to the proposed development. The other change includes work to the existing clubhouse building. By virtue of this change, a new use club is introduced into the application. The effect of the other change is that the development assessment process stops on the day... stops on the day notice of change is received by the assessment manager, being today, and starts again at the beginning of the assessment manager's confirmation period. So as a result of that other change, the item 5.3, consideration of the development of MCU 21/0110. Are you moving this item to this section now? We might, we might. Just advising people won't be undertaken. So if there's anybody in the audience that has come to hear the manor on Noosa Springs, that item will not be dealt with in today's agenda. I'm just giving you a full warning that we've got another number of items before that, so if you're here to hear about Noosa Springs, we won't be dealing with that matter today, and as a result of that the deputation has been withdrawn and will not be, not be presented today. So we'll So we'll move on to item 5, items referred from committee. So the first item is 5.1, MCU 22/0118, development application for a material change of use, short term accommodation 94 and 142 Noosa Drive, Noosa Heads which is referred to the planning environment committee. Welcome staff to the table. call Councillor Stewart, you're going to give us an overview on your report. Larry Sengstock 03:50.353
Councillor Wilkie has a conflict of interest. Sorry, we have a conflict of interest to deal with? Oh, yes. Councillor Wilkie and Councillor Stewart. Joe Jurisevic 03:59.373
Councillor Wilkie, I I believe you have a conflict of interest. Would you like to undertake your declaration? Frank Wilkie 04:06.675
Thank you, Mr Chair. I have a conflict... I'd like to declare a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter as the applicant RACV Resort, support Noosa... support for Noosa Arts Theatre with an annual $2,500 sponsorship. And I also serve as Noosa Arts Theatre president. As a result of this conflict of interest, I will read the meeting while the matter is decided. you, Councillor. Joe Jurisevic 04:29.397
Councillor Lorentson, I believe you also have a-- Amelia Lorentson 04:31.917
I do. I, Councillor Lorentson, have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter. My husband and I own a property at Noosa Parade, Noosa Heads. Since November 2020 this property has been used for short-term accommodation rental. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias as I have no personal relationship with the applicant and although I have an STA property I will not be positively negatively impacted by the decision 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 That leaves it to the remaining councillors to consider whether Councillor Lorentson should stay for leave or have a motion from any councillor in that regard. Clare Stewart 05:27.558
I move that Councillor Lorentson participates in this matter because the council believes that there is no personal relationship with the applicant and Councillor Lorentson will not be positively or negatively impacted by the decision so a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in public interest. Joe Jurisevic 05:46.956
Councillor Wegener, do you wish to speak to anyone? No I don't, thank you. Any other councillors wish to speak to the matter? Those in favour? Against? That's Councillor Stewart, Stockwell, Wegener and Jurisevic in favour none against and Councillor Lorentson did not vote on the matter. the motion is carried. So this one's coming as a material change of use for short-term accommodation at 94 and 142 Noosa Parade. So, sorry, Noosa Drive. The proposal includes eight buildings comprising 15 different two-storey dwellings. Each of the buildings are elevated above ground level and are connected by an elevated timber boardwalk. The proposal includes The proposal includes 18 additional car parks and requires the removal of a minimum of 71 and possibly up to 82 native trees on site with a minimum of 27 koala trees, potentially up to 33. Access will remain as is from Noosa Drive. The applicant is proposing to amalgamate the lots so the existing the lots so the existing access easement would no longer be required. The proposal is primarily located over the southern lot, being lot three of the development, with cabins two to 15 being wholly located in that lot, and cabin one in the car park being split across the existing developed site and lot three. The subject site is split zoned, being tourist accommodation and environmental management and conservation, with a total site of approximately 5.18 hectares. The short-term accommodation is consistent in a tourist accommodation zone. However, it is inconsistent in the environmental management and conservation zone, so the application is being proposed as a refusal, given that the development is currently proposed over both zones. Given that it's inconsistent in the environmental management. In addition, that section of the site is also outside of this planning scheme's mapped urban boundary. The planning scheme does look to consolidate all development within the urban boundary footprint. The site's subject to biodiversity mapping, including portions of riparian buffer. and the whole of the site is mapped as koala habitat area. So, um, in terms of the environmental significance of the site, it's, it's pretty substantial that it is acknowledged that the site's currently degraded. Um, however, not to the to the extent to allow such a large development on the site, so in terms of the proposal we don't think it's consistent with the community expectations of development in the Shire given the loss of the ecological values loss of the ecological values on that site. 125 properly made submissions were received throughout the notification period. Six of those were in support and 119 opposed the development. Most of those in opposition were raising concerns. concerns regarding the koala habitat and the environmental impacts. Larry Sengstock 09:02.514
Any questions? I'll start off. So if the proposed development So you say that the development sort of overlaps in both zones, the tourist accommodation zone and the conservation zone. So if RSC... change the development to fit within the urban boundary, within the tourist accommodation zone portion of the land, and change the built form of the development, would Council approve the application? with the application? SPEAKER_08 09:40.760
Potentially, so we had had conversations with the applicant about reducing the footprint and squeezing it I guess into that short-term accommodation zoning. There would still be environmental impacts but in terms of having it outside of the mapped riparian area. inside the urban boundary our concerns from a planning perspective would be less than what's currently proposed. Richard MacGillivray 10:01.686
So just to clarify that there's biodiversity values across the whole site. They're not limited to where the zoning is applied. And there are significant environmental values within the tourist accommodations and that also needs to be dealt with. From a hierarchy point of view the overlays sit above the zoning so it is crucial. So whilst it may, by bringing it into the tourist accommodation zone, it might deal with that single matter, there are still issues. Joe Jurisevic 10:33.514
So the elements of vegetation clearing would be one of these considerations. it were to come back before us within that 3,800 metre footprint that is in the tourist accommodation. Richard MacGillivray 10:44.636
It would still be a matter that would need to be addressed, yes. Clare Stewart 10:47.756
There's a question from the chat. So... SPEAKER_08 10:55.786
Yes, so they did lodge a submission. It was outside of the notification period, so it's not taken to be properly made, but they did lodge So a they're supporting the application by ROCB. Okay. And SARA, the State agency in that water quality habitat area, they're in support support of this too, is that correct? Yes, so they have issued an approval. It's a pretty stringent approval, though, in terms of how it's to actually be developed. There's basically the whole of the site, excluding the building footprint and the boardwalks, are all to be under a covenant. So we we have concerns about how the buildings would actually be constructed and then maintained long term, given that those covenant requirements would be quite substantial. They were also required to pay an offset as well to SARA for the... Clare Stewart 11:47.422
So the difference between SARA as an agency authorising or giving stringent conditions for approval is based around how the cabins are being built? SPEAKER_08 11:59.862
I'm I'm not sure in terms of what sort of swayed the approval but essentially I guess from our perspective there's more than just the koala habitat that we're concerned with. It's a larger ecological issue in terms of there is koala habitat but the other environmental aspects on the site also had to be considered whereas they're just looking at the habitat. Richard MacGillivray 12:20.396
It's you know the Noosa Springs application also had koala habitat on it? It's possible that SARA may in some instances request a financial payment as an offset but that still doesn't override our assessment and I believe they actually did require a financial offset. Amelia Lorentson 12:46.848
Can I ask what happens to the site if the development doesn't get approved? It's a bushfire risk, it's heavily degraded, infested with weeds and vines and the report submitted by the applicant says that the long-term prognosis for the site is towards decreased koala value through loss of food resources so it's unlikely that without intervention that that this site's going to be any good for koalas. So the weed invasion of the site is a concern. William might be able to talk to the requirements for that to be dealt with. Yes, to the landowner to be dealing with that, that's correct. So we we have a Local Law 3 that requires that invasive weeds and unsightly properties are maintained. The major weed on this site is a Cranjapani species. Richard MacGillivray 13:54.956
It We have a... Isn't, however, on our list of invasive species, so Local Law 3 for weed removal would not be appropriate. However, unsightly property could be a potential treatment. Larry Sengstock 14:17.040
Noosa, Tewantin, Cooroy, Doonan, Kabi Kabi, Noosa, Tewantin, Cooroy, Noosa, Brian Stockwell 14:20.800
The zoning boundaries and urban boundaries are based on 2006 zone boundaries. Are you aware if there's any environmental reasoning behind where those boundaries were located? Richard MacGillivray 14:42.290
My understanding is the environmental management and conservation zone aligns with the riparian buffer, the natural riparian buffer. Brian Stockwell 14:51.170
So in the area around Cabins 4 to 7 where it takes a big dip, it would suggest at the time the creek would have taken a bend or something at the time to push it in, that that might not be the case anymore? It may not be. And what's the process? Is it only council who can review that urban boundary and the zoning code? There's no rezonings or anything anymore, so the only way to change it would be for a scheme amendment. Richard MacGillivray 15:21.463
So unless there's new information that comes to light when council's reviewing those boundaries, it could be amended and revised for further research done. Brian Stockwell 15:29.963
So before, during the scheme review, we actually had the application extend the previous approval over this site. It was obvious then that the boundaries of the zone weren't great. I can see here that cabins four to seven actually are located to minimise tree clearing. Whereas they're also the ones that raise the in terms of being in the environmental management zone. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. I'll leave the rest. Thank you, Mr Chair, for calling me out. Any further questions? Amelia Lorentson 16:07.932
So the applicant, so we've been on site and spoken to the applicant. He's been working with Noosa Council's respected environmental experts in preparing his application. I've also understood they've been working with council planners now for several years. What's happened that the proposal that's in front of us today is so opposite of, you know, we've got a proposal that's not been supported by council. I just sort of want to understand the process. the process. At what point were they directed to change the development application and when did we tell them that this is unlikely to be approved? there's huge cost involved in putting these applications together. Richard MacGillivray 17:03.728
Well you would have discussed earlier in the process there was concerns that were raised in terms of the ecological values of the site and the need for their footprint to be addressing that. So in terms of conversations around specifically refusing the application would have been I'd say within definitely within the decision-making period. SPEAKER_08 17:25.443
So they were issued an information request and we followed it up with the further advice. We had a meeting with the applicant here in the office. discussed the footprint of the building and recommended that you know potentially it's an over development. Is there any ability to shrink it? We met with them out on site as well and had that same conversation. So it's definitely been raised as you know potentially bringing the scale back and lessening the impact of it. But they've chosen to continue with the current design. Thank you. Joe Jurisevic 17:55.207
I've got a question. With regards to the biobasin size and this talk with the biobasin that's been proposed being undersized and something would require a more significant area of land to be allocated for biobasin to facilitate the runoff from this site, but given that the developers proposed water tanks and the use of water tanks, is there any indication of what that water will be utilised for and does that in any way in any way contribute to the sizing of the biobasin? Has that been taken into consideration when the comments here with regards to the size of the biobasin? Yes, so it has. SPEAKER_08 18:38.849
So Council's who's external has reviewed their stormwater management plan that's been provided, which does reference the water tanks. They're predominantly to be used for maintenance and things like that on site, but the overflow would go out onto the site. So all of that has been all of that has been taken into consideration from now on. Joe Jurisevic 18:56.915
So from the maintenance you mean irrigation, rather than utilising it within the facilities to go down the sewerage system, so it would still flow into the gardens and things like that? Yes, I believe so. Thank you. Any other questions? Anybody moving a recommendation or other motion today? Larry Sengstock 19:24.400
I'll move the staff, I think that's okay, I'll move the staff if you don't mind. Thank you, Councillor Wegener. I do so on the basis of having looked and ground-proofed the site and I do acknowledge the work done by the developer in this case to ground-proof the site and to undertake an understanding of the ecological values. use of that in the event of a crisis. My concern is that there are still a significant number of koala trees that will be removed and as staff indicated there is incursion into areas outside of the footprint allocated to the tourist accommodations area. So I'm happy to support staff's position on this. position on this in that I think there is an element of overdevelopment, I think there is scope here for the developer to consider and review the footprint of the caverns and the like and to bring it within the footprint. concerns with regard to the biobasin sizing is also one that may mean some additional environmental land may be at risk, so on that basis I'm prepared for the staff recommendation today. Brian Stockwell 20:42.340
I'm going to move an amendment but I'd ask Kathy can you bring up the attachment the final attachment on the tree clearing proposals and open up It's the final attachment on tree clearing, I won't get to tell you what it's called. Amelia Lorentson 21:30.100
Figure six and seven, I think, on page five of the report. Brian Stockwell 21:40.580
I'm going to move, if you've got a sheet. You're probably around... Five, page five, Kabi. If you can zoom out a bit. I'll talk to the motion first and then I'll move the amendment so we don't have to... If you can just scroll down a little bit. Yeah, that's probably the next one's a better one without the circles. So you can see... see on that one that cabins four to seven have been located to avoid tree clearing, but they're the substantial areas of Areas of non-compliance with the zone and the town boundary. Cabins two and three on the other hand have probably some of the most tree clearing and only a small part of that is outside the town boundary. I think having looked at this application and the site, it's been a long It's been a long time since I've seen a developer who's tried to do the right thing as much as this developer has. In terms of how to maximise conservation, you would be putting cabins four to seven where they are. You would be trying to maintain that larger body of vegetation. And you'd probably be, you know, if you're cutting anything, the first one to cut would be cabins two and three, in my opinion. I'm going to move an addition to Councillor Jurisevic's motion on that basis. So, yeah, that's okay. I don't need the visual anymore. I just wanted to show that. And if it goes to B, perhaps a new B and then make B C, and the new B to read, that the CEO be requested to review the zone and town boundaries as part of a future review of the planning scheme. Town boundaries, I think that's what it's called. As part of a future review of the planning scheme. As part of a future review. Joe Jurisevic 24:59.060
You have a second? I do so. Brian Stockwell 25:07.920
Most of the development sites left in Noosa are constrained. trying, it's that those constraints in a planning scheme sense reflect the real world constraint rather than a line on the map from 20 years ago. In the development In the development of the review of the planning scheme as I said we actually had a fair bit of information from the extension and I actually suggested we go to a meets and bounds description of the of the tourism zone which would probably come up with something that's a little bit different to what we've currently got. I do think it's time in these sites which going to continue to be highly valuable both from an environmental and from a development perspective to get it right. I think there is opportunities to do as has been suggested a smaller scale scale development and potentially if a scheme review went through then a second stage which would achieve both koala conservation and broader environmental conservation while maintaining as much as possible of the current values, hence the amendment. Joe Jurisevic 26:27.380
I'll speak to it. I'm happy to support the amendment. I think having the challenges that some of these constraints bring, the option to ensure that the boundaries as they are true and accurate reflection of the passes of the land are worth reviewing and ensuring that they are an accurate reflection of the land status as they are at this point in time. Council votes close. All in favour? Unanimously carried. The amendment is added to the motion. Myself and Councillor Stockwell have spoken to the motion so far. Does any of the councillors wish to speak? Very good. I think I'll close in that case. I think the Ls have been brought before us and I think the points raised by Councillor Stockwell are relevant and I don't think anything further needs to be said on the motion so I'll put the motion to a vote. All those in favour? We move on to the next item. Before we do that, we'll have to let Councillor Wilkie know that we've dealt with the first item, and when we move on to item two, we'll get him back into the meeting. Councillor Wilkie, you're back with us? Thank you. Moving on to the next item, which is 5.2, approval for MCU 21/0194.01, application for another change to a development approval for a roadside store, including a Food and Drink Outlet at 201 Mary River Road, Cooroy. This was approved by the Planning and Environment Committee also. I'm just going to close results at the moment, it's just... Intimidations. Not just me. No. Pause briefly while we sort through the technical issues. Now, councillors, while I've got you all, we've got a moment. We have got a fairly full agenda, so I will be keeping a close eye on times as we speak towards matters today. We'll be here till midnight if we all get on. Larry Sengstock 29:24.115
That's all. We'll be back in a second. Frank Wilkie 29:28.340
Seem to be dropping in and out Mr Chair. Joe Jurisevic 29:30.240
Yeah I think there are some internet issues that those staff are trying to deal with. So if you'll bear with us Ray. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 30:02.640
Frank is it just the hearing what's being said dropping in and out? Are you still with us Councillor? Wilkie? Here we go. You're on mute Frank. Yes I'm here. That's alright. So is it just the voices going in and out or is it just a bit quiet you're in? Frank Wilkie 30:27.520
It was all your voices dropping in and out. Joe Jurisevic 30:30.160
Alright we'll see how we go from here on in. Thank you. Okay. So as I said, item 5.2. Councillor, any questions to start? Oh, before we do that, there are no conflicts. Staff, can we have an overview of the matter before us? Sure. SPEAKER_08 30:45.824
So an application was received in June 2021 for a commercial low use period for trading in Cooroy's industrial area for the existing bus itself. actually travel around that area. The applicant then received that permit but started parking in front of the subject site rather than in the Cooroy industrial area so as a complaint had actually been lodged regarding the use of the bus in the road reserve compliance action was taken by council which resulted in a material change of use being lodged for a roadside stall. In November 2021 so the application went to council in April 2022 the report was recommending refusal at that point because it was believed that the use was commensurate with a food and drink outlet as opposed to a roadside stall. Council approved the roadside stall at the ordinary meeting that month. A notation was included on the decision notice requesting that the applicant provide sorry the applicant lodge an application within a period of time for food and drink for food and drink outlet. They were allowed to continue operating the use on the site provided that it wasn't causing impacts. So council has received a number of complaints in the last six months regarding impacts from the use as it's currently operating. So the current proposal is an other change application to include a food and drink outlet in addition to the approved roadside store. The applicant is looking to expand the range of goods that's permitted to be sold and consumed on site. They're also looking to include dining for up to 12 people on the site at any one time in two different seating areas. So essentially at the moment the applicant is seeking a retrospective approval for the 26 square that's been constructed for the roadside stall component. We are supportive of that so we are looking to improve that structure and we're also seeking retrospective approval for the food and drink outlet which we are not supportive of. So we are recommending refusal for the food and drink component of this application. The current application requires a total of five car parks on site. The planning scheme, that's the minimum required under the planning scheme. The original food and drink sorry the original roadside stall did condition three car parks on site. The planning scheme actually only requires one so I believe that was conditioned because of the scale of it. The applicant is proposing seven compliant car parks on site. To date none date none of the originally approved car parks have been constructed, so the request also includes changes to and deletion of a number of the conditions of the original approval relating to no food and drink to be consumed on site. The removal of the requirement for no on-site dining, things like that. So those conditions themselves are predominantly around the food and drink component, not the roadside stalls, so we're also recommending refusal of that aspect of the application. So under Noosa Plan 2020, a food and drink outlet is considered an urban development and they are predominantly required to be located in centre zones, so this sort of development isn't envisaged to be located in rural areas. the plan 2020 so the application sorry the the subject site is outside of the urban boundary again it's on a 80 kilometer an hour road there is not sufficient car parking car parking being provided on site at the moment for the way that the use is operating, so it is noted that a majority of patrons are parking in Council's road reserve, which has caused some damage to the road reserve. It is lawful parking, our Our local laws have confirmed that the parking that's out the front at the moment is lawful. Our infrastructure team have had a look and to formalise that car parking, there's not enough space in that road reserve to provide compliant, formal car parking in Council. reserve so there are some issues in terms of how the use is currently operating and the impacts in terms of you know safety of accessing to and from the site. They provided a a traffic assessment as part of the application. The assumptions that were used in that assessment though were that all vehicles were entering and exiting via the Worley Court Road Reserve so we know in reality that's not how it's actually functioning. So So there are concerns about people pulling out from the road reserve directly into Mary River Road at the moment. The subject site is outside the SEQ regional plan urban footprint, so it's mapped as regional landscape and rural production areas. So the SEQ regional plan which does the big picture sort of development looks doesn't support retail activities in these rural areas as well as the planning scheme. So at that higher level, at the State level, they're also not looking for these sorts of activities to develop in rural areas. It's not considered to the area and it doesn't add that value add to rural activities that are currently on the site. So at the moment the rural production on the subject side is very limited. The planning scheme supports these types of uses when they're looking to add to the current production on the site. So at the moment the small scale beekeeping, egg production, things like that, doesn't warrant the scale of this food and drink outlet as an ancillary use to what's being produced on site. So essentially the proposal doesn't meet the outcomes of the scheme. we're not supportive of the food and drink outlet. So we're not supportive. Larry Sengstock 36:28.928
Thank you for the answer to those questions. Tom Wegener 36:37.568
I find issue with just about everything. That you say, but not completely. It's like when you say that there's not an overriding reason for this, that we don't need this there, but at the same time, there's so many people going there that that's where the problem lies, is it's too busy. Are you confident that when you say that there's not an overriding reason for this establishment that you're confident in that? that comment considering the evidence seems to be contrary to that. SPEAKER_08 37:16.030
So I guess the popularity of the use doesn't necessarily mean that there's a need for it. So it's a convenient location for people coming to and from Cooroy in terms of car parking. I don't think that that necessarily indicates that there's a need for it. There's, you know, areas within the Cooroy town centre where this use could be located that's more appropriate. Tom Wegener 37:38.292
But when you said in the town people like to go there and sit down under the trees and have a coffee for two hours. That isn't in the town centre. That it's a completely different use than the coffee shop in the town centre. SPEAKER_08 37:54.756
So I guess under the planning scheme, a coffee shop's a coffee shop in terms of the definition. So a food and drink outlet, the expectation from the planning scheme is that they do operate in centre zones where people are going and they're doing multiple multiple things in that centre zone so they're going to the post office or the library or you know as opposed to drawing people outside of the town centre to a rural area where the expectation is that there's rural amenity it's it's not there's no expectation for for these sorts of urban activities that create you know a high traffic flow in these locations. Joe Jurisevic 38:42.732
I think it's just pulling off from Councillor Wegener, I'll just pick up on what you think. think that if you would agree that there is the black letter law is planning scheme law then there is the what you're talking the community side and sometimes they don't always marry up so what what happens in the community or what people feel comfortable with isn't necessarily stipulated on a planning scheme. That's what you're trying to say? Yeah. That's correct. Richard MacGillivray 39:07.482
And I think it's worth adding too that the applicant hasn't demonstrated overwhelming community or planning assessment perspective, the applicant has the onus to demonstrate what that community or planning need is that can provide grounds to support an application despite the conflicts. In this particular case, there hasn't been that planning need. Or community need demonstrated as part of that material for the officers to get to that point where those conflicts can be overridden. Joe Jurisevic 39:47.656
Can I clarify the difference between need and desire in a planning context? What would be an example of need that would help facilitate an application to come forward? Richard MacGillivray 40:08.260
So an example would be if there were no cafes available in the local town centre that could supply the need for that local community, so if there was none there at all or there was one and there was an overwhelming community need, they need coffee, and this is the only place to go and do this for this region. Thank you, I think that clarifies it. So, needs and wants, I guess. Thank you. Joe Jurisevic 40:35.074
Wegener, you've got a burning question. Mr Chairman? Yes, Frank. Sorry, Councillor Wilkie, yes, you've got a question on the line? Frank Wilkie 40:43.388
I'd like to move a motion, please, Mr Chairman. What do you do? I'd like to move the staff recommendation with the addition of an I, point I, to read Authorise the CEO. To work with the applicant. Larry Sengstock 41:10.220
This has been submitted. Authorise the CEO to work with the applicant. Frank Wilkie 41:16.319
Work with the applicant to find an appropriate location for the food and drink outlet /bus. Larry Sengstock 41:46.757
Is that correct? Joe Jurisevic 41:50.137
Okay. I have a seconder. have a seconder? Larry Sengstock 41:52.999
Councillor Joe Jurisevic 41:53.479
Stockwell seconding. Councillor Wilkie, would you like to lead off? Frank Wilkie 41:58.479
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Basically, Councillors, I'm in favour of approving the roadside stall and also finding a safer and more appropriate location for the food and drink outlet and a bus. So when it comes down to choosing between the rights of patrons, whether they be locals or tourists, to have coffee where they want it, when they want it, regardless of the legality of the business providing it, and the rights of the family to have privacy, safety and peace in and around their rural home, as intended under the planning scheme, the choice has to be clear. The Noosa Plan aims to ensure there are no inequalities, negative impacts on residents or traffic hazards through conflicting land uses. And I'd like to read this plea from a neighbour. It was a public plea, not just to show that the planning scheme is not just a box-ticking exercise, but that when when we have non-compliant commercial operations, the impacts on neighbours and residential neighbourhoods are real. So it says, "My name is Joyce Brumley and I live in a Noosa Shire rural zone in Cooroy. have lived in this community for 10 years. I also work in this community as well as the Noosa community as a registered nurse. I'm a single mother of five. My sons are aged 18, 6 and 14 and my twin daughters recently Unfortunately, my life and dream of living and raising my children in a peaceful rural zone is about to be turned upside down forever due to my... seeking approval for a roadside food and drink outlet that they have been operating... This has been the case for approximately two years now, making this business in breach of council regulations. Please note, as per the Noosa Plan 2020, food and drink outlets are not permitted in such zones, let alone on an 80-kilometre-per-hour road. While I support entrepreneurship and believe in giving everyone a fair go, this business... This business, if approved, will be detrimental to my children's welfare. It is located in an 80-kilometre-hour zone opposite the Cooroy Rubbish Transfer Station, which is open Saturday and Sunday and Monday, 8am to 1pm, adding to the traffic hazard along the stretch of road. And this is one of her main concerns here. My children have to cross this road and... and catch the bus to school. The busy traffic created by customers pulling over for coffee adds to their risk on this road. Some customers park outside my property and create blind spots which make it difficult to access the road. Some customers also block access onto my property. Some customers walk through my property and we've also we've also had customers walk up into my property, making my youngest children fearful of playing our stride. Sorry, from the gallery, can I ask that you give the speaker the appreciation of allowing him to speak without being interrupted. Whether you agree with the comments or not, we do not take comments from the gallery. Thank you. this is the plea from a neighbour. The business owners without approval from council have built a medium impact coffee roastery on the property and the emissions are creating an impact also. I'm reaching out to you on a personal level as I am desperate for your support. How would you feel if feel if this was your backyard and negatively impacted your privacy, safety, security and enjoyment of your home. My fate and that of my children and our love lies in the hands of councillors. My family have a right to peace and quiet in our own home, in a rural zone area. Our well-being and of life should be understood by a business, namely a food and drink outlet next door that has been operating, but without approval, seven days a week. Now, there are also 148 residents of the Shire who feel the same way about this and they signed a petition to that effect. All they're asking is for us to do our job, support the right of every resident to peace, privacy and traffic safety through proper planning and the planning scheme. The report would report which states there is insufficient on-site car parking to meet the current parking demands and uses, which has the potential to increase with the changes proposed by the applicant. We've been duly warned by residents and professional council staff about potential traffic safety hazards which... children crossing this busy road at school bus times. We've been warned of the potential for a tragedy. If this is approved and the worst does happen, what then? How will councillors justify the decision then? What could we possibly say? If this bus stop is moved to a more appropriate area, coffee lovers will still be able to get their morning coffee, neighbours will have their amenity restored and we will have acted responsibly. If it is approved contrary to the planning scheme and the pleas of residents for councillors to do their jobs and enforce the planning scheme, the neighbours will permanently have lost what everyone deserves to have in their homes, especially in a rural zone, that is privacy, peace and safety. There may even safety. There may even be a foreshadowed tragedy. And for what? A right to coffee where and when we want it? Let's not send a message that it's okay to set up a business without approval in areas that create traffic and safety hazards and council will cave Let's not make this council the first one to ignore the planning scheme and approve inappropriately located operations against the valid and lawful demands of our residents. Let's not make this council the first one where residents take their council Joe Jurisevic 47:27.580
The Noosa planning scheme as evidence against its own council, according to the planning and environment. Councillor, I'll just make you aware, that's your five minutes. Frank Wilkie 47:37.740
I'll continue, I'm almost finished. Too fast, guys. Yeah, thank you Mr Chair, thank you, continue. Unknown 47:48.193
According to a planning and environment court judge's finding, Noosa Council's success in defending major court appeals, including one the investment arm of the Queensland Government itself, has been a strong record of making decisions that are consistently in support of its planning scheme. Frank Wilkie 48:04.646
Let's not risk throwing this key pillar of Noosa Council's legal defence away and place the success to litigation in jeopardy over this matter. I support approval of the roadside store and also requesting the staff work with the applicant to find a safer, more suitable location. Thank you, councillors. Joe Jurisevic 48:23.687
Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Councillor, anyone else? Amelia Lorentson 48:26.068
I have a question. In terms of the addition that the CEO work with the applicant to find an appropriate location for the food and drink outlet bus, that's some conversation that I've had with you, Richard, and my understanding is that it would need to go through a competitive tender process, that it's not as simple as making a request. making a request, for example, to go to the botanical gardens. Yeah, so to operate on public land, that's right, there would be a competitive tender process for any, you know, and the council would need to decide on particular sites that they would Mike, Richard MacGillivray 49:03.182
Identify for that. I guess there's another opportunity for private land to be used as well, so part of this motion, I understand, would be to engage with them to look at opportunities on private lands also. It's part of that, so there's sort of two different elements that could be explored potentially. Joe Jurisevic 49:23.275
Further than that, my understanding is that in the past, the applicant with the bus has had the opportunity of a low-use permit, which enables the sale of coffee and goods from the bus at various locations, and I believe the Corori industrial area is one of those. Is that still applicable? Yes, originally there was a permit enabled for itinerant trading, so where the bus could be moved to various locations and pull over and provide coffee for short periods of time, similar to van or the like. So that permit could be reapplied for and reinvigorated again. That's not current? Richard MacGillivray 50:05.190
I don't believe so, no. Okay, thank you. Joe Jurisevic 50:08.170
Councillor Wegener. I'll speak to motion. Tom Wegener 50:11.147
Definitely feel for Ms. Grumlin, and I understand that there can be problems with neighbours. On the other hand, our real problem is this bus stop espresso is too busy because it's just being too successful, 'cause people really, really want it. It is providing a serious need for our community, which is to enjoy a coffee under the trees. trees, social distancing in play. It brings the ability to, for people to bring their locally made products, their breads, their coffee, their honey, their eggs, to a place. where they can sell them. That is something that Noosa Council has been driving toward. We are on a road to support our local agriculture, our local small businesses. We want to do that. It's in the planning scheme, it's in the environment strategy, it's in the climate change is in the climate change response plan. And then I can't talk about the planning scheme amendments, but we have clearly set a path towards self-sufficiency, towards local business and this, the bus stop espresso, is the perfect example of what we want to go towards. Our problem is there's not enough bus stop espressos. Our problem is there's not enough of these places because there's only one. If there were every every couple of kilometers or so we would we might not have this problem and bus stop espresso may actually be more confined and happier in that without being actually overrun and having potential problems with neighbours, so I'm considering saying that the waters are just so muddy. We were downstairs discussing whether coffee, if you, if you the beans and prepare the beans, is that value adding to coffee? Is that an artisanal activity or is it not? We, there's just so many questions that this brings up and I don't think that the actually answers the big questions. So I, I won't be supporting this and, and I'm, dare I say, I, I would, I will talk about it in a moment, but say we should, we should, we should hammer out hammer out a lot of these issues before we refuse this application, because we haven't really addressed them. And I think that in the future, if this is refused, and then things change, which we all know what we're talking about, then we're going to be saying, "We want Bus Stop Espresso, that same model, "throughout the hinterland." And hinterland. And so I would like, to the councilors, because this is a bit of our own making by the way. We voted to push this out and to recommend that they look at getting a drink and eating establishment and apply for that. And then we probably, in the back of our minds, knew that it would never happen when we suggested that two years ago or a year ago. So, what do you think? Should we make this decision now and go against where the big train of council is going? Or should we put it off for a while and really hammer through these issues that bother us? And surely, surely we could find a way to address Ms. Brumley's issues with I mean, we must be able to do that, and that's not even a part of the discussion, is how we can work with the council, work with traffic. So that's my speech. Joe Jurisevic 54:01.988
Thank you, council. We're just waiting for the motion. Clare Stewart 54:05.928
I've got a question. I'm a counselor witness. witness. I request the potential that we push it. Is that a question for the applicant? Is that something they have to slip the clock on? Richard MacGillivray 54:17.942
Yeah, the applicant can make a decision of whether they they want the application to be decided, whether they can withdraw or they can reapply, that's a decision for them to make. Tom Wegener 54:34.736
One of the issues is this. Joe Jurisevic 54:37.216
Councillor, are you asking a question? Or are you continuing to speak because your time is up? Tom Wegener 54:42.836
Well, there's so many issues. We refer to it as a coffee shop. it's a mobile coffee shop. Can you have a mobile coffee shop? Joe Jurisevic 54:51.661
Councillor, you're now prosecuting, you're continuing to prosecute when your time is up. Okay. Anything, Councillor Lorentson or Councillor Stockwell? Yeah, I will. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 55:03.601
It is a big It is a vexed application. In terms of what Councillor Wegener suggests, there are elements of it which are totally consistent with what we envisaged in terms of encouraging small-scale artisanal production. That's what is allowed within the roadside store. There is also a service or a food and drink outlet that has gained a lot of popularity because it is an alternate offering within a rural atmosphere. is the relaxed informality of it that has caused the community to rally behind the particular enterprise as well as obviously the level of service and the nature of the service. It is clear. But that doesn't create a planning need. And this is where we're constrained as councillors to assess planning applications in accordance with planning scheme criteria. arteria. Councillor Wegener is right that part of the problem with the proposal is that starting up informally, it's grown, it is causing traffic issues when we When we did a workshop the other day, I looked on Google Maps and it was shown as congested red line, three kilometres outside of Cooroy. We've got lots of people who really enjoy it and they support it, including one example being Porsche drivers who suggest every two weeks they take 20 to 26 people out there, which in itself is a reason to reduce it. Because there's not 20 to 26 safe car parks. We've heard there's not enough room in the road reserve to make car parks according to standard such that they're safe and easy to access. The applicant has proposed seven on site and we've got a petition and a valid objection from neighbouring properties saying the existing way it is operating is creating both amenity Both amenity and but also traffic issues I think our professional staff have identified the traffic issues which is probably the key constraint. Now if we were to approve it with the relevant car parking road works required it's highly likely the business would no longer be available. So while it might good to approve it we're probably just pushing off the inevitable that we can't treat this business any other different to any other business in terms of the requirement to have safe access to provide car pavements fit with need you can't just just continue to be the informal, drive off the road and park on the grass. That is part of its appeal, no doubt, but it's also, if we're going to be consistent with every other person who wants to set up a similar establishment, we have to be bound to be bound by what are the correct standards. I do think there is opportunity for this service to be located in a more desirable location. I do understand that as by... Part of the roadside stall, then it's providing a community service. It's well-known, these peri-heaven communities tend to want somewhere where they can sit and congregate. So it's not something new if not something new if we look at Orange on Sunrise Road. It's the same thing. In a rural residential area, this one's a little bit different in that it's less than three kilometres from town, whereas it's not quite as far out to go. So unfortunately, while I've enjoyed the place and I understand it does provide an excellent service, I can't see how we can we can overcome the constraints of an enterprise of the size that is envisaged within the context without requiring a heck of a lot of cost in terms of building the required road and car parking infrastructure and addressing the amenity issues to the neighbour. Clare Stewart 59:20.459
There are absolute merits of the success of this business. It is a place of community, it's a place of gathering, it has you know been so fundamental to so many people especially during the COVID period and beyond where people have seen this as the place they come together. Life-saving in some instances for some people and without planning and without planning scheme it is very important you know we talked before about the black level law and this is the scheme social economic and environmental environmental impacts should be taken into account in this aspect the social impacts should be taken into account but in this location there is we have heard children's safety children's safety at risk and that fundamentally for me is a non-negotiable. I wholly support this business relocating to an area more suitable. I wholly support the merits of the business but I can't potentially put a child's safety at risk in this instance so I'll be supporting the staff recommendation. Amelia Lorentson 01:00:29.657
It was almost exactly the same time last year and the year before that I stood in front of this council to fight for the rights of a neighbour and a community who did not believe that a meat processing facility belonged in a quiet rural residential estate in Timbewer. I lost and I went down 6-1 both times. I said at the time I said at the time that development approvals are public documents that have an impact well beyond the date of the decision notice and that people should come before business. Today the same applies. People must always come before business and anything that compromises the peaceful enjoyment of a residence amenity must always be protected. The mental health and well-being of a person matters. The safety of people and the safety children matter. The Noosa Plan matters. In Ashburn and Brisbane City Council Judge Williamson emphasised that planning schemes are intended to guide development in a region in a way that that achieves the will of the community. Our planning scheme says that the proposed food and drink outlet is contrary to the Noosa Plan 2020, and it's not appropriate for the site. That is the will of the community. The scale, the combined activities is adversely impacting on residents' amenity, with a number of residents, not just Joyce, submitting valid objections to the submission. The bus stop espresso cafe- The scale, the combined- is on every level an incredible and wonderful business. Without any question, it's a community hub, but its success has transformed it into a local attraction. It's no longer It's no longer small in scale and it is, in my opinion, not located in an appropriate location. Today, councillors, to me it's not about coffee and it's not about food. It's about the Noosa Plan it's about people and the value we put on their wellbeing. When you buy into a residential area, you expect it to remain residential. Residents who bought their rural blocks were not expecting to be living next door to a cafe. To go against staff recommendation opens the floodgates to other properties doing the same, setting up a commercial business in rural areas. We've learnt with STAs that they do not belong in residential areas and we've learnt the hard way what happens when the floodgates are open. The Bus Stop Espresso Cafe will succeed in any location. It's the people in It's the people in this business, Rob and Beth, and it's reputation for great coffee and company that makes this business so successful. Today I've been guided by the Noosa Plan and the people that are most impacted by this decision. I support the staff recommendation and the addition to authorise that Council work with the applicant to find a more suitable location. Joe Jurisevic 01:03:36.225
I think the elements of the challenges that this has presented to us have been addressed by all the councils. One of we... I think we were challenged by this proposal when it came to us the first time, was elements that are addressed here in the rural zone calendar. The proposal... It says here the proposal does not have an indelible connection to the rural or ecological values of the site, but I would argue that's... the complete opposite is true, and that's the appeal, and I think that's what we all acknowledge around the table. That's the appeal of the site and the locations being chosen, and cleverly chosen. There's no overriding community benefit for the food and drink outlet to be located on the site. Well, clearly there is. Because the community are willing to support it and have acknowledged that it's a great location. It's the ambience that the facility provides. It's the outdoor locality sitting amongst the trees. And obviously during COVID, it was a sanctuary. sanctuary that was provided by the owners of this facility going forward that have drawn so many people to it. But unfortunately, that overwhelming success is what is now presenting now presenting the challenges to us. I had thought that parking in the road reserve would be one of the options that would facilitate this going forward, but I see that wasn't addressed in the transport consultation that was presented with this application, nor from what I see from staff is there sufficient room to provide... adequate or safe parking in that area that would meet the constraints. As Councillor Stockwell alluded to, the costs to actually facilitate that would probably be prohibitive in the long run, and would probably make the business close just on that alone. I think every councillor and everybody that's enjoyed our coffee at the outlet acknowledges that there is merits Unfortunately, the challenges that it presents as a result of that are the ones that the staff have alluded to today and I will reluctantly have to concur with the staff ruling on this and allow allow and acknowledge the great work that the roadside stall can continue, but that the coffee outlet, the food and drink element of it is probably not appropriate in its current location. Bye. But I think there are opportunities. opportunities for other localities to be sought. So I'll be voting in favour of the staff recommendation. Councillor Stockwell, do you wish to close? Sorry, Councillor? Wilkie. Wilkie. Sorry, you're right. Councillor Wilkie. Can't forget he's online. Councillor Wilkie, do you wish to close? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Frank Wilkie 01:06:40.697
There were some excellent summaries by councillors on this issue. I'd just like to pick up one point that Councillor Wegener made. If I understand correctly, all the great products that he mentioned, the eggs, the honey, the breads, they're still able to, unless I'm incorrect, they will still be able to be sold at the roadside store. So all those other products will still be available on site. Joe Jurisevic 01:07:10.545
Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Put it to the vote. Okay, so it's Oliver Zahler, and his councillors, Lorentson, Stockwell, Jurisevic, Wilkie, and Stewart. And against? As I said, I'm 5.3 to the speed. Brian Stockwell 01:08:10.399
Application and that this matter will therefore not Larry Sengstock 01:08:34.850
It basically says the same, that another change has been made, which means it goes to the confirmation period and can't be decided today. Do you want to do the declaration? Brian Stockwell 01:08:48.422
If we're just moving it, we don't need to do a declaration. The further report by the Manager of Development Assessment in the Planning Environment Committee dated 7 November 2023 regarding application number MCU210110 for a development permit for a material change of use, bar, food and drink outlet, outdoor sports and recreation and resort complex at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Head. Note the applicant has made another change to the application. This results in the application reverting to confirmation notice stage and no decision and no decision can be made on the matter today. Joe Jurisevic 01:09:26.309
I'll second that. Brian Stockwell 01:09:29.289
No need to speak to it. Clare Stewart 01:09:30.969
Can I vote on this? I don't think so. You should have done the declarations. Brian Stockwell 01:09:35.749
No, if you're just putting it off. I don't think... Joe Jurisevic 01:09:40.269
I don't think so either. I think you're as well going on it. This has not been decided today. This is just a procedural motion. Procedural motion. I believe you can vote on the procedural motion. Okay. So, all in favour? Yes. Thank you. Yep. I hope the council still has a place in the room. And we'll move on with the reports to the Director General Committee. Item 6.1 is the community grants program, community project grants round two overview. We have a series of community grants and community program funding opportunities to Council, would you like to give us a bit of an overview of those? SPEAKER_10 01:10:34.805
Sure, thank you Councillor Jurisevic. So the purpose of this report is to give you an overview of the round two projects to Council. We have just over $308,000 for two rounds being presented. So this is the second round. The second round is made up of 24 applications. Officers are recommending 13 applications. They're recommended for funding. The recommended funding amount that we're recommending is $99,459.67. The remaining funding we're proposing that is being put forward to youth initiatives. Where there's a desperate need to support our youth through a funding program and our Living Well program. Brian Stockwell 01:11:18.134
I think those of us who have got conflicts in later subcategories will have to declare a conflict because the 'A' actually recommends approval for those funds. Joe Jurisevic 01:11:31.119
Would that be appropriate that all the declarations be made up front and then just be reiterated for the following item, where conflicts exist? Or do they only have to be made up front from the first item and not the day? It would be my suggestion that we note them up front and that we just note them against the item at which the actual conflict occurs. With the overview, I think we need to make those declarations up front. That would be my suggestion. So if there are councillors that have conflicts, we can go through the... through the process of declaring all the conflicts up front, and that way we don't have to read... we don't have to go through the... the overall... we can just reiterate the conflict... the conflict applies to this matter as these matters come forward. Yes, Mr. Stewart, what we're going to do is we're going to take the different ones. And then, Josh, where you'd write them when they come to all the specific items when they come to us. though we're approving the funding up We may need to actually go through the formal declaration. I need to acknowledge that you've got that. Insert the relevant declaration. Would we then have to vote on each matter? You will because some councils have to leave. Yes, okay. So we'll have to vote on it. We just won't have to vote. Other than to acknowledge. Unless somebody's leaving. Thank you. Kim Rawlings 01:13:23.440
Well this is a different approach to what we've taken previously. Joe Jurisevic 01:13:26.780
Yeah, yeah. Brian's just pointed out that we're actually approving the funds up front in the first iteration. SPEAKER_10 01:13:33.820
Which is what you have done previously councillors and we've separated out the individual elements to, so up Up front, front you're you just have a total figure for the whole grant pool that's being allocated out of the budget, and the individual reports deal with the grants themselves, the organisations and Joe Jurisevic 01:14:00.194
I agree, that is different there. We've dealt with it in the past, we've never actually made the declarations up front. Have we agreed with the total amount? Because basically, A approves them all. Amelia Lorentson 01:14:10.054
No. No, approves the total value. Brian Stockwell 01:14:15.948
We're actually not approving the programs or projects, we're approving the value of $99,459. Disagree. Yeah, we might be able to leave it till the original one up. Amelia Lorentson 01:14:33.048
Poor Cappy. Can I stop doing it? Yeah. I think it's the value of $99,459 we're approving. Can I stop doing it? Yeah. There's no individual projects or organisations attached to this report. So it's not approving the grant, it's approving the value. No declarations until the individual projects are named. Brian Stockwell 01:14:52.238
No. Approved around to... You're actually approving the grants. So actually, the recommendations... So we've been doing it incorrectly in the past? Yeah. Because you're actually saying you've approved the grants grants to to that that value value and then you bring it up. I just moved the change of this recommendation. Approved around to a total value of $99,459.67 be made available to community grants. Larry Sengstock 01:15:29.480
Can I ask through the Chair just advice from Kerri Contini, the Director of Community Services? What is your recommendation? Kim Rawlings 01:15:41.590
I think the approach that you're recommending at this point in time negates having separate sub-reports. If you're going to deal with all of the conflicts up front, then we don't need to separate out the reports. Previously, we have separated out the reports to ensure that as much as possible across the span of different categories that councillor involvement is allowed. If we're to change that approach, then that mean that in most grant rounds we would have a significant number of councillors out of the room. Brian Stockwell 01:16:25.924
And my suggestion is just a slight change of words, so you're not approving the grants, you're approving the values. So approve, round two, approve. I think whatever we approve, council stop. Approve an amount of $99,456 be made available to community grants, be made available to community grants. Therefore you're not saying you're approving the grants. Joe Jurisevic 01:16:54.680
No, we can't do that because the amounts are already available to community grants. Can I... Excuse me, through the Chair, can I just make a suggestion? Just add to the end of grants program. So it's a grants program total value of $99,460.469.67. Yep. Brian Stockwell 01:17:13.226
That's another way to do it. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:14.586
Just add program after grants and I think we'll sort our problem. Brian Stockwell 01:17:21.726
Yeah. And take out the word project after community grants program. Kim Rawlings 01:17:27.300
I would just remind council we have a very broad community grants program. It's our preference normally that a recommendation stands by itself and can be really clear. SPEAKER_08 01:17:41.120
Okay. Kim Rawlings 01:17:41.920
So our community grants program covers a range of things. Community grants project program is very specific which is the nature specific which is the nature of the reports that we're bringing to you today. Yeah. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:52.740
So add project... Or Brian's moving it. Sorry. Brian Stockwell 01:17:56.160
I know. Do you think project is needed? Yeah. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:59.820
Program. Project. Program. Yeah. Joe Jurisevic 01:18:03.020
Okay. Are we clarifying? Yes. Satisfied with all that's been clarified? I'm satisfied with it. Did you see that? Yeah. All right. Move. Councillor Stockwell. Do I have a second? A second? That's Councillor Lorentson. Councillor, do you wish to speak to it? Brian Stockwell 01:18:17.411
No, I just. Joe Jurisevic 01:18:18.051
Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? I'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor Wilkie? In favour. All motion carried unanimously. Amelia Lorentson 01:18:30.791
Oh, all my questions. That's right. We're going on to the individual reports. Joe Jurisevic 01:18:38.007
We'll move on to the individual reports, the sub-reports of this. Item 6.2, community program funding, community project grants round two, program projects. Alison? Yes, Mr Chair? Yes, Councillor Wilkie? Frank Wilkie 01:18:52.947
I'd like to make the record break the record that although general membership of an organisation does not qualify as a declarable conflict of interest, I would like to put on the record my general membership of the Cooroora Historical Society, which is mentioned in its grant round. I don't believe a reasonable person would see this as a conflict of interest, choose to stay in the meeting room, but I will accept the decision of the meeting. I think we have to vote each one individually, so councillors, does anybody wish to? Clare Stewart 01:19:29.516
Move it, that Councillor Wilkie, that council note the, um, yeah, the declarable conflict of interest and, no, it's, it's, it's, it's a declarable conflict of interest, yeah, and, it is in the community interest that Councillor Wilkie stays in the room because he receives no benefit, no gain from the, um, decision. Joe Jurisevic 01:19:57.142
Second. Seconded. Amelia Lorentson 01:20:05.276
I'd like to ask a question through the Chair to the CEO. So membership to an organisation an organisation? Would you like that to, from this day on, be declarable? Because my understanding under our conflict of interest guidelines it's not necessary to make a declaration if we're just a member or-- You're correct, Councillor. Joe Jurisevic 01:20:34.796
It's not a requirement to make a declaration as a member, only if you're on the executive. My question is, given that Councillor Wilkie has made the declaration, is that the preferred action for just any-- No, the rules are that you don't have to, but again-- Again, back to your, in your court, if all councillors call, not just yours, Councillor. Okay, thank you. Larry Sengstock 01:20:58.047
Your requirement is on the individual councillor-- No worries, thank you. To make the assessment as to whether or not they have to make a declaration and for the councillors to assess. Sure. On that basis of the declaration as to whether or not they remain in the room, Councillor Wilkie has chosen to make a declaration on something that's not necessarily required under the statute, but he's chosen to do so anyway. Thank you, yeah, thanks. So, on that basis, as I've said on the screen before, so everybody understands the nature of what we're discussing here. Are there any discussion or here, any discussion or any questions for Councillor Wilkie. If there's no discussion I'll move, ask councillors to vote on the conflict, those in favour of Councillor Wilkie staying in the room. Carried unanimously. Councillor Wilkie did not vote on the matter. Councillor Wilkie, I believe you've got a second declarable conflict. Frank Wilkie 01:21:52.359
Yes, thank you Mr Chair, I'd like to put on the record that although it does not qualify as a declarable conflict of interest, I volunteer playing music playing music at various aged care facilities in the Shire including at NoosaCare which is mentioned in this grant round. I'm not a member or executive member of NoosaCare and don't believe a reasonable person would see this as a conflict of interest. I choose to stay in the meeting room, but we'll We'll see how the meeting feels about that. Does someone like to? Brian Stockwell 01:22:20.955
I'll move that he stays in the room. It's a standard recommendation. Joe Jurisevic 01:22:24.115
We'll vote. Councillor Wilkie? As per the determinements in the interest. That he stays in the room. Seconded. Councillor Wegener? Any discussion or questions for Councillor Wilkie, councillors? On that one, I'll put that to the vote. Those in favour of Councillor Wilkie remaining in the room on this declaration? Carried unanimously. Councillor Wilkie did not vote on the matter. Third declaration here. Councillor Stewart, I believe you have a direct declaration. Clare Stewart 01:22:54.280
I, Councillor Stewart, inform the committee that I have a declarable conflict with the matter in relation to the funding recommendations... Katie Rose Cottage as I have a personal friendship with Lee McCready who is employed as Head of Fundraising and Partnerships by Katie Rose Cottage. Noosa Water Polo Club as my children are members of the club. Noosa Little Athletics Inc. as my children are members of the club. As a result of my conflict of interest, I now leave the meeting room and the matter is considered and voted on. Thank you, Councillor. Everyone feel sorry for me? I'm busy with children. Brian Stockwell 01:23:20.913
Just a question. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:23.113
Why are Isn't this the next item? I'm sorry, I was moving them all into different things. Larry Sengstock 01:23:30.151
My apologies, I've only read them in the place that I don't have. I had to go on the right spot before when I was cutting them all out. Joe Jurisevic 01:23:38.031
I'm heavily reliant on you at the moment, yeah? Sorry, apologies to everybody. So we're still on NoosaCare. Only on the first item. We're only on 6.2, which is community... Kim Rawlings 01:23:50.080
The one that starts arthritis Queensland and ends waves of kindness. Clare Stewart 01:23:57.620
Do I have a conflict of waves of kindness is my dad's favourite favourite shot. Joe Jurisevic 01:24:03.199
It's one of my favourite shots too. So the recipients of grants, councillors, just to clarify so that we know whether you have a declarable conflict or otherwise, is Arthritis Queensland, Noosa Women's Shed, Cooran Organic Shed, Cooran Organic Garden Incorporated, Cooroora Historical Society, Trading Institute, Noosa Shire Museum, NoosaCare Incorporated, Relationships Australia Queensland and Ways of Times Lorentson. All the declarations have now been made, I'll ask Alison and Geri to give them over. SPEAKER_10 01:24:28.697
Sure, so as you understand there's four categories under the community projects, made up of program projects, infrastructure equipment... infrastructure, equipment and events. The first report is looking at the program and projects. Seven applications were received. Officers are recommending three of those applications for funding. We have put the reasons why the other four have been unsuccessful in the copy of the report. Joe Jurisevic 01:24:52.663
Being unsuccessful does not mean you are not eligible to apply again and try again for the next round of funding and start the work...and start the work with all organisations to look at relevant opportunities for funding outside of Council's funding. That's correct Kim Rawlings 01:25:08.460
Yes. And certainly what we've seen is when that occurs that there is an increased likelihood of success in... in following grant rounds when the applicant does work with your staff. Joe Jurisevic 01:25:18.667
Thank you. It's a requirement of all grant recipients to work with Council staff in the first place and ensure that the grant meets the criteria. SPEAKER_10 01:25:25.407
That is ideally, yes. We would like that to happen, yes. Joe Jurisevic 01:25:28.173
Councillor, does anyone have any questions? Comments? Someone want to move the staff recommendation? Councillor Stockwell, seconded Councillor Wegener. He had his hand up slightly before you, Councillor Stockwell. That's right. Any discussion? If there's been no discussion, I'll put the adder to a vote. All in favour? In favour. The ayes have it. Carried unanimously. Carried unanimously. We'll move on to item 6.3, Community Program Funding, Community Project Grants, round two, events. Yes. I'll just mention the recipients this time, so that we get our declarations correct. Friends of Noosa Botanic Gardens, the Noosa World Surfing Reserve, and Noosa Coast Open House. Does any councillor have any conflicts with the item before us? In that event, can I have a mover? Sorry, Councillor Lorentson to the Noosa World Surfing Reserve. Amelia Lorentson 01:26:31.520
I see there's a council representative on the World Surfing Reserve. Just noting it, just asking the question. Yep, Just rather we show it up front than find anything. On that matter, can I have a mover? Councillor Lorentson, then a seconder. Councillor Stewart, any discussion? I'll put the door open. All in favour? Councillor Wilkie? The motion is carried unanimously. Item 6.4, Community Program Funding, Community Project Grants Grant to Infrastructure. Infrastructure. Tell us the difference with this one. SPEAKER_10 01:27:08.580
Yes, infrastructure relates to building works or any type of infrastructure within the community facility or sporting facility. This particular one... This particular one, 50% of the funding needs to come from the applicant. That can be either cash, external grant or in-kind. So they do require that 50%. We had five applications received. Two of those applications were recommended for funding and the other three we've got the reasons why are unsuccessful for this particular round. Joe Jurisevic 01:27:38.019
Well councillors, the recipients this time, or the applicants this time are SunnyKids Inc, Noosa Touch Association, Tewantin Noosa Cricket Club, Kin Kin Community Group, Salvation Academy... Yes there are. Councillor Stewart. Clare Stewart 01:27:51.264
Yes I have two declarable conflicts of interest. I make a monthly donation to SunnyKids Inc and my children are also members of the Tewantin Noosa Cricket Club. So as a result of that I will be meeting room 12 Monday. This is voted off. Thank you, Councillor Stewart. Cheers. Joe Jurisevic 01:28:14.860
I also know for the public record that I'm a member of the Tewantin Noosa Cricket Club, and as a player a player, I have registered again this year, only to be a fill-in, but that doesn't raise a declarable conflict of interest, so it won't be declared. Councillors. Brian Stockwell 01:28:31.740
I'll move to staff recommendation. Joe Jurisevic 01:28:33.220
Councillor Stockwell moving, Councillor Wegener seconding. Is there any discussion? discussion. All in favour? The ayes have it. Moved unanimously. Councillor Stewart is not to be out of the room. We'll get Councillor Stewart back in the room the next time. The next item is Item 6.5, Community program Funding, Community Project Grants, Round 2, Equipment. That's alright, I'll just, again, I'll read out the applicant names so the councillors can be aware of their potential conflicts. We've got Noosa Water Polo Club, Noosa Trailblazers, Mountain Bike Noosa Little Athletics Incorporated, Noosa District Basketball Association, Kimbeawah Hall Incorporated, Redwood Community Oil Association, Life Flight Foundation and Katie Rose Cottage Hospice. Clare Stewart 01:29:26.199
So I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to funding recommendations to Katie Rose Cottage as I have a friendship with Liam McCready, who's employed as Head of Fundraising and Partnerships by Katie Rose Cottage... Cottage, Noosa Water Polo Club as my children are members of the club and Noosa Little Athletics Inc. as my children are members of this club. So I'll now leave it to the members of the club to decide and vote it off. Joe Jurisevic 01:29:46.218
I'm glad we finally got that declaration to the right place. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 01:29:53.058
Yeah, I declare my conflict of interest with Liam McCready based on my previous written declaration as it appears on the screen and choose to...in the meeting room, however I'll respect the decision on the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Joe Jurisevic 01:30:06.705
Councillor Stockwell to make a decision on whether Councillor Stockwell stays in the room. Would somebody like to make a recommendation? Amelia Lorentson 01:30:12.725
I'll move that... Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Councillor Stockwell and determine that it's in the public interest that Councillor Stockwell participates and votes on the matter because Council believes that a reasonable person could not person could not have a perception of bias because the ICEO review was an advisory service, not a statutory process, and Councillor Stockwell's queries at the time were in the public interest and neither he nor Ms McCready stood to personally gain or lose from that advice and thereby a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Joe Jurisevic 01:30:52.195
Do I have a seconder? Councillor Wegener. Any discussion? Any questions? I'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? In favour. Councillor Wilkie, Wegener, Lorentson and Jurisevic in favour. Councillor Stockwell did not vote on the motion. Alison, what are we up for here? SPEAKER_10 01:31:15.849
Yes, the final category which is equipment. As you can see from the eight applications received, it's very sought after equipment by these community organisations. We're recommending seven out of the eight would be funding. And the last one that's not recommended, again, it's written into the application as to why they're unsuccessful. successful Thank you. Joe Jurisevic 01:31:37.052
I'll put it to the vote, seconder. All in favour? We need a mover and seconder. All in favour? I thought we had a mover and seconder. No. Sorry, my apologies, I thought we had a mover and seconder. Can I have a mover? Councillor Wegener, seconder. Councillor Jurisevic? Any discussion? Put it to the vote. All in favour? Thank you Councillor Wilkie, that was carried unanimously. My apologies, there's so many of them I've just lost track. Item 656, the Councillor, well if you can get Councillor Stewart back in the room. Councillor Stewart returns. Item 616, the Regional Arts Development Fund RADF grants. Round 20, 23, 24. Councillors, I'll ask if there are any declarations to be made on this matter before we continue. Councillor Wilkie, I believe. Frank Wilkie 01:32:30.820
Thank you Mr Chair. I'd like to declare that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendations to Zest Factor, as Zest Factor applicant Russell Krause is a member of Noosa Arts Theatre where I serve as President. Unknown 01:32:44.911
Mr Crouse's grant does not involve Noosa Arts Theatre or myself, therefore I don't believe a reasonable person can see this as a conflict of interest. I choose to remain in the meeting room however I will I will respect the decision of the meeting and whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Joe Jurisevic 01:33:00.066
Just one question there, Councillor. When you said the Noosa RC, there's no production or performance of Noosa RC involved in this grant application. I'm assuming that means that there's no element of performance or any undertaking in Noosa RC involved in this grant application. Is that correct? Frank Wilkie 01:33:38.843
That's the advice of staff Mr. Chairman. Joe Jurisevic 01:33:41.443
Okay, thank you. Can I have a mover? Larry Sengstock 01:33:45.143
I'm sorry, a mover, somebody to make the recommendation that Councillor Wilkie either stay or leave. I'll stay. stay. Brian Stockwell 01:33:53.569
I'll stay. Standard motion. Joe Jurisevic 01:33:55.829
Councillor Wilkie by this way is made as a matter because Council believes that a reasonable person would trust upon decisions made in the company of the community. Councillor Stockwell, seconded. Councillor Stewart, any discussion or questions? No. I'll put it to the vote. All in favour? Against? None? Sorry. All councillors in favour? Councillor Wilkie did not vote on the motion. Motion. Is that the last of the declarations, councillors? In that case, Paul, over to the table, may I get a summary of the grant grants for this remit? Richard MacGillivray 01:34:27.708
Certainly. So this report is to endorse the recommendations of the Regional Arts Development Fund Assessment Committee for grant applications received in Round 20 for 2023. After assessing eight applications that were received for Round 20, the committee recommends to Council to fund four applications to the value of $28,150. All four applications were assessed as high quality, meeting the four assessment criteria and the two priority areas for the round. The funding request falls within the current RIDF budget. Frank Wilkie 01:34:59.394
Sorry, Mr Chair. Joe Jurisevic 01:35:00.974
Yes, go ahead. Frank Wilkie 01:35:03.021
I've just noticed there is an application from Little Seed from Johanna Wallace. Johanna Wallace may also be a member of Noosa Arts Theatre. She has her own theatre company. So as a precaution, I don't know if she is a member but she could be, I'd like to declare a declarable conflict of interest that Little Seed applicant Johanna Wallace may be a general member of Noosa Arts Theatre. Where I serve as president. Miss Wallace's, Miss Wallace's, I understand Miss Wallace's grant does not involve the Noosa Arts Theatre or myself and therefore I don't believe believe a reasonable person will see this is a conflict of interest. I will respect the decision of the meeting and whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Sorry about that, Mr Chair. Joe Jurisevic 01:36:03.608
On that basis, I'll move that Councillor Wilkie participates personally in the matter because Councillor believes a reasonable person would trust the final decision is made in the public interest. We can have a seconder. I'll second. Councillor Stewart. Any questions or... I'll put it to the vote. Councillors, those in favour? Carrying unanimously, counting that Councillor Wilkie did not vote on the matter. Did we finish our own view? Sorry. Yes. It's all right. Just double checking. I got distracted by the other group. Councillors, are there any questions or discussion? If there have been no questions or discussion, I'll put the matter to the vote. Those in favour? In favour. Larry Sengstock 01:36:55.980
Sorry, third mover and seconder, yourself. Joe Jurisevic 01:36:59.440
Council will wait and then move. Councillor Jurisevic seconded. Again, I'll put it to the vote. All in favour? Carried unanimous. Carried unanimous. Thank you. It's a call. We're moving on to item 6.7, non-powered water sports feasibility study. Any questions from councillors? We've been going for a bit of time. Is anybody in need of a short recess? Larry Sengstock 01:37:30.894
I think it's a good idea. Joe Jurisevic 01:37:32.134
Okay. Sorry guys, we're Larry Sengstock 01:45:19.883
Noosa online, we're back. Apologies for the temporary break in transmission. The next item on the agenda is item 6.7, non-powered water sports feasibility study. conflicts of interest before we begin? Joe Jurisevic 01:45:36.197
No? We've got our community development officer around the line here to give us an overview on the matter before us. SPEAKER_10 01:45:43.157
Amanda. Thank you, Councillor. The recommendation before you today is to accept the non-powered water sports feasibility study and refer to findings of the study for future planning activities. The need for this study has come out of both the Sport and Active Recreation Plan and the Noosaville foreshore land use... Use Management Plan which we both endorsed in 2019. It's really to look at the need to consolidate and non-powered water sports storage. And to mitigate ad-hoc infrastructure development along the Noosaville foreshore. We engaged Ross Planning as a consultant to undertake this study. They've considered the not-for-profit club use. trends of each of the sports and future projections, both population projections and the trends in each of the sports. The study looked at 13 sites along the Noosaville foreshore. under three different sections to determine where was the most appropriate, where a co-located non-powered sports precinct could be housed, if at all. The rear of the Noosaville... Noosaville Yacht and Rowing Club was deemed to be the most appropriate location given quite significant site constraints along the Noosaville foreshore in terms of access to land, considering the water access that's required for each of sporting activities and environmental concerns. And so what we have before you as part of the report is some high-level concept plans which will feed into the work currently being undertaken for the Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan, which is currently underway and due to be completed in next year, in August next year. Joe Jurisevic 01:47:33.830
If there's questions, can I ask them? Proximity to the ocean for the ocean rowing. SPEAKER_10 01:47:45.860
My understanding is the requirement is approximately two kilometres. That was part of the consultation and that is why it's determined that this is one of the most, this is the most appropriate location for both coastal rowing. Joe Jurisevic 01:47:59.415
I noticed the Noosa Woods, areas within Noosa Woods, was that intended for the ocean rowers as an option? It was just intended as a potential site to look at and to be assessed against an assessment matrix which took into consideration both the access access to open water as well as water access points, current use and congestion within those sites. So they're happy that a couple of kilometres away from... SPEAKER_10 01:48:23.516
Yes, more than a couple of kilometres. Joe Jurisevic 01:48:24.596
Is sufficient, there's no need to look and say somewhere near next to the sand pumping sheds? SPEAKER_10 01:48:27.977
As I said, councillor... We're... Because that doesn't appear to be what was looked at at Noosa. Yeah, so they need... What we've looked at is every site that was deemed appropriate along that corridor, or possible. Clare Stewart 01:48:40.717
Thank you, great report. Could you just explain the study found that... This is on H2D9. The study found that while all sites identified have... area behind the Noosa Yacht and rowing path was its best opportunity to co-locate multiple sport within the scope of the study while complying with the guiding principles of this council endorsed strategies and plans. So some of the constraints, could you talk a bit more about them, some of the area behind the constraints that you mentioned? All sites There are general constraints across every site that we looked at being along the foreshore and obviously the foreshore master plan is looking at the impact of climate change impacts and how that will affect the foreshore moving into the future and so there were significant considerations in part of that as well. Constraints terms of the type of water access that's required for the different activities and as an example rowing requires parallel access into the water whereas outriggers and coastal rower require forward-facing access so when we're talking about about craft that could be up to 15 metres long, that can be, and potentially needing a berth of about 5 metres per craft. It creates significant constraints as to where your points of access to water are. Thank you. Joe Jurisevic 01:50:07.900
On parking constraints, though, a lot of these rowing activities are usually taken very early in the morning, is that that? Does or does not, or does that prohibit or preclude the challenges of Yes, so parking and traffic congestion was was considered within the study as well, and definitely the operating hours of each each sport were taken into consideration into the assessment of each site. Question I've got on page 261 of the under-sailing, it mentions local club and says there's one sailing club in Noosa LGA. I don't believe that to be correct. Aren't there two? SPEAKER_10 01:50:47.711
There are two, Lake Katharabah Sailing Club out at Mooring Point. Joe Jurisevic 01:50:52.351
I think they're referring to along that section of the river perhaps. Yes, I think there was an amendment made to that which may Amelia Lorentson 01:51:09.430
Can I ask, Amanda, the report notes that these restraints that we just discussed might also restrict the growth of membership for a lot of these clubs and the refers to rethinking of traditional operating practices. Can you elaborate on that, please? SPEAKER_10 01:51:31.485
Certainly. So obviously, given the physical restraints of each site, obviously there will be a site capacity for membership. So we're never going to be able to facilitate thousands of people accessing one point at one point in time. as an example, the Coastal Rowers Club has said to us we understand and we accept the fact that, and they've made this judgement call, that we will probably have a capacity of 40 members because that is what we can see feasibly. Feasibly working out of this site. In terms of changing practices, something like the Outriggers Club have a general understanding within the culture of that sport that if you up, whenever you turn up, you have a seat on the craft. So rather than one of the suggestions was particularly perhaps you could have an understanding that you must attend 15 minutes prior to craft launching, that you attend the club 15 minutes beforehand so they know what the numbers are that they're moving forward rather than five seconds prior. Joe Jurisevic 01:52:39.973
And this doesn't preclude if another opportunity comes up somewhere on the river of a facility being considered in the future? SPEAKER_10 01:52:48.853
Definitely not. And this is our recommendation based on the information. So one in one, that's one in one. Based on the information that we have to date. To date, yep. That this is the best, most feasible location. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 01:53:02.894
Any other questions, councillors? Amelia Lorentson 01:53:06.796
So do these clubs need to be located with river access? You know, car parks, the tennis courts, thinking again outside the box, are the locations sort of considered? SPEAKER_10 01:53:25.516
No, they were not considered as part of this because the need for these sports to operate rely heavily on storage and on storage and water access, immediate access. Remembering that some of these craft are in excess of 10 metres long, so in terms of transporting them to the site is actually quite logistically difficult. Joe Jurisevic 01:53:42.758
I know that some of the zoo scales don't actually have immediate access, but they've got close proximity access. They're close, that's right. And the consultations that they gave us said that they didn't need immediate access. immediate access and storage on site. I've seen that they've been operating, Councillor Stockwell may be able to, been operating for 30 years in that location. Longer. Longer. Brian Stockwell 01:54:03.753
So 1954. Fifty... Larry Sengstock 01:54:06.033
Er, twenty? maybe? Seventy-four? Seventy-four. Brian Stockwell 01:54:10.435
No. Anyway, long time. Seventieth. Seventieth anniversary we had recently. So yes, I'm only a common fellowship member now. Joe Jurisevic 01:54:17.215
I'm going to say this doesn't trigger anything for you. No, no. Brian Stockwell 01:54:20.095
I've got to stop being a leader effectively during COVID. Joe Jurisevic 01:54:23.436
Is there any other questions for staff? Thank you. If not, can we get a mover? Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Councillor Stewart, can you speak? Councillor Wegener, would you like to speak to us? Tom Wegener 01:54:35.676
I would like to say that I feel that it's a very courageous that you had to make some hard decisions concerning, you know, the limiting of people that are going to be able to be involved in these things, and you made a very strong decision for PP. For putting it behind the Yacht and Rowing Club, and then allowing some of the longboats to still be in the park, but not a permanent structure there. All those are really hard decisions, and deciding where to go. And also, on... 273, I'm just very excited about how many young people. Under zero to 14, there are one quarter of the participants are under 14 years old, so that's really exciting as well. Thank you. Clare Stewart 01:55:22.666
I want to thank Amanda, I don't know how much work you've given in this. All our staff are wonderful and you're a super staff. thank you very much for all your hard work. I know how much all the clubs and the sporting community mean to you and I know how much they rely upon you and all the hard work that you do. So I acknowledge that and thank you. Brad, of course, thank you so much as well. Kerri, you've got a great team. You're the best of the best there. So thank you. I think there's a lot of good stuff in this space. I think this gives us the blueprint now to move forward, especially when it comes to social management. I think it's really worth it. There's a lot of work going on in TAIL and I think there'll be some great outcomes for the community in regard to this. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:56:13.027
It's good that this body of work is being done. I think the biggest benefit will come once the infrastructure is in there and the different organisations start seeing the benefit of collaboration. I think the overarching constraint is so many people wanting to get access to the river for so many different purposes. And lots of our residents do enjoy non-powered watersports and this provides a mechanism that allows some groups to have facilities that are sadly lacking at the moment but it also hopefully will lead to better interrelationships between the groups so that overall all the infrastructure there on the foreshore can be used by a range of different watersport groups. Joe Jurisevic 01:57:06.100
Looks like we're good. I said thank you for the body of work that's involved here. I think the locality is well chosen, well thought out locality. I think you've followed through all the due process to source this as the ideal locality and look at what infrastructure needs to be implemented and so like Councillor Stockwell, I think once this is in place, once all the infrastructure is in place and the opportunities the opportunities for social gatherings at the Yacht and Roaming Club, which is right alongside, as well as toilet facilities and showers and the like that a number of these don't currently enjoy. makes it a fairly common thing sort of at Option LA Kelly. Also looking at other needs and future needs being facilitated. I think this is a well thought out and well considered option and I'm sure all the clubs will in the long run, once the infrastructure is in place, be able to enjoy the benefits of their sport far more safely than they currently are. Amelia Lorentson 01:58:10.358
I think challenging too, Amanda, and I respect the work that you do in this space because know, as a member of sports clubs, we all want standalone facilities and clubhouses, and it's challenging. Someone for four years that's been, you know, driving you nuts about clubhouses, but it's challenging because it's not as simple as let's use this open space near a toilet facilities. There are conflicting uses and there's processes as well. So thank you for the challenging and great work that you yourself and your team do. Frank Wilkie 01:59:02.192
Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you, Amanda. I especially want to acknowledge the respect for our precious open spaces that you've shown in this report. That is. Joe Jurisevic 01:59:21.060
Give me more. Sorry, you're getting muted there, Frank. I'm finished. Okay, thank you. Councillor Wegener, would you like to close? Tom Wegener 01:59:30.900
I'd just like to add, Ross Manning seems to write a good report. Amelia Lorentson 01:59:34.860
It was really good, I agree. Joe Jurisevic 01:59:38.240
Okay, Councillor, we'll put the matter to a vote. All in favour? In favour. Carried unanimously. Thank you, ma 'am. Thank you, team. Well done. I acknowledge the work done by the properties team as well in supporting this. SPEAKER_10 01:59:54.220
And the environment. Joe Jurisevic 01:59:58.200
And planning. All the planning and all the stuff that was involved in the report. Moving on to item 6.8, fire tech service provider panel refit. Is that alright with you? Yes. Kim Rawlings 02:00:16.380
You're going to give us the overview on this. Is there any, I've just checked, there's no conflicts on this matter. Over here, Kim, can you please give us an overview on the report from the director of digital hub and innovation. Yeah, sure. Apologies, Chris isn't here today. He's got commitments down at the hub today. Councillor, this report provides an update on our registered pre-qualified providers, which we call ROPS, which is like a panel of providers for the fire tech program. We have an existing existing pre-qualified suppliers list in place. This was a refresh process to extend it for another year. So we advised all of those suppliers on the existing one they didn't need to reapply but would continue to be on the panel. But also advertised it publicly to invite any others who would like to join. We had three responses to that. The panel assessed those and are recommending the addition of two. So this is just for a year extension of that panel of providers and pre-qualified suppliers. Joe Jurisevic 02:01:21.817
Are these providers new to the region or new facilitators or are you going to ask me a question you couldn't answer? Kim Rawlings 02:01:30.757
One of them is a military robotics provider and the other one is is a data analytics provider. Yes, which is which for that. Thank you. So they're new for us in terms of pre-qualified. Joe Jurisevic 02:01:48.153
Just wondering why they haven't come up before. Kim Rawlings 02:01:51.950
Emerging, emerging technology, emerging companies. There's a lot happening in that space. Joe Jurisevic 02:01:57.070
Councillor, any questions? Kim Rawlings 02:01:58.310
I'm happy to move it. Joe Jurisevic 02:01:59.530
Councillor Stewart, I'll move it. I'll second it, sorry. Clare Stewart 02:02:02.749
No, thanks Kim. And please thank Chris for his bio-technetic program. What you're doing down there is literally world-class. So this is just a great addition to the supplies list and shows that we're just, you know, always looking at it, especially down there, Chris and the team, always looking at innovation and how it progressed. So especially going into disaster season, we have our launch of our emergency of our emergency action guide tomorrow. So I think it's really timely. So thank you, and please think of Chris Forrest. Joe Jurisevic 02:02:27.730
Do those thoughts. Thank Chris and the team down there. I believe we may even get down there and get a bit of an update on how it's progressed. Absolutely. the not too distant future. In about two weeks. I'm looking forward to it. Anything further, councillors? I'll put to the vote. Those in favour? All in favour? All in favour? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Kim. Moving on to item 6.9, the Tourism Noosa strategy term 2023-2027. I believe we have some declarations of conflicts. Councillor Stewart. Clare Stewart 02:03:02.182
I, Councillor Stewart, declare, inform the meeting that I have declared my conflict to be dismissed now as William McCready, Director of Tourism Noosa, is a personal friend and the result of my conflict to be dismissed. I now leave the meeting room where the matter is considered and voted on. Thank you for the check. Thank you councillor. Joe Jurisevic 02:03:24.040
Next declaration, councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 02:03:26.080
Yeah, I'll declare my standard declaration as has been put before you before in regard to Lee McCready who is a Director of Tourism Noosa and I will choose I will choose to remain in the meeting room however I already respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Joe Jurisevic 02:03:59.045
I'm in the public interest and neither he nor Mr Predix were to personally gain or lose from that advice and therefore a reasonable person would trust the final decision is made in the public interest. I have a seconder, Councillor Wegener. I do say on the grounds of consistency with how we've dealt with this matter in the past. Any other councillors have any questions or anything to add? I'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor Wilkie. Larry Sengstock 02:04:34.060
Okay, so councillors Wegener, Wilkie, Jurisevic and Lorentson voted in favour, Councillor Stockwell did not vote on the matter. Is that the end of the declarations? you. Kim, would you like to give us a bit of an overview on the Tourism Noosa strategy going forward? Kim Rawlings 02:04:51.482
Sure, councillors this report presents to you Tourism Noosa four-year strategic plan for 2023 to 2027. Councils, in April this year Council endorsed a new funding and performance deed with Tourism Noosa for a two-year period through to June 2025. That deed is attached to the report for your information. Under the funding and performance deed there are a number of requirements and KPIs for Tourism Noosa to achieve. A key one of those is for Tourism Noosa to prepare a strategic plan to guide the organisation and reflect the priorities of the funding deed in this strategy. And for this document, Tourism Noosa strategy to be reported to Council by 31st December 2023. So that's what this report does. It reports to you Tourism Noosa strategic plan that they have developed and delivered to accordance with the funding deed to Council, with Council. Importantly there is, as I mentioned, there's a requirement and Tourism Noosa is aware and have acknowledged that once Council's destination management plan is prepared, the Tourism Noosa strategy will most likely need to be reviewed to align with the destination management plan. But as we have completed the destination management plan, Tourism Noosa are required to have a strategic plan to guide their organisation and that's what this document is. want to understand and clarify that this document is not the DMP. This document is Tourism Noosa document, not Council's. It's prepared by Tourism Noosa to guide their operations and is done as a requirement of the funding deed. developing this the Tourism Noosa strategy they sought feedback from council officers and took feedback on board. They also presented a draft of the strategy to councillors and sought councillors feedback prior to submitting it to it to council. So it's here for your consideration. Amelia Lorentson 02:06:58.995
Question, and I know this is the DMP, once that's complete it's going to help guide or... guide and drive and maybe introduce different KPIs with Tourism Noosa. My question is where are we up to with the DMP and when are we anticipating completion? Kim Rawlings 02:07:21.529
We have just completed consultation with hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of responses and thousands and thousands of ideas and I'm not exaggerating with thousands and thousands of ideas so we are in the process of collating all of that information and we will present the outcomes and overview of that to you later this week and then subject to the discussion with councillors how we move forward based on all of that information. following the conversation we have this week but great feedback really pleased with the process and the level of engagement but there's as you can imagine there's lots of ideas and lots of feelings and lots of thoughts about this issue and so there's going to be a lot for council to get their head around Amelia Lorentson 02:08:12.350
And through. And how fantastic that this is you know the more feedback we get the more a community document it becomes. Absolutely. So that excites me. Yeah. In terms of the strategy Tourism Noosa strategy Fantastic. Do you think they've gone are you encouraged inspired by the document in front of you? Kim Rawlings 02:08:33.852
Look absolutely you know we've worked closely with them on getting this document to be you know visionary and aligned to the principles that council have put out around the destination management plan process and moving towards a more regenerative approach to tourism you know tourism for good leaving the place better than you found it you know, those sorts of things. Tourism News has very much embraced that and you'll see that in the document. They talk about a journey towards regenerative tourism and tourism for good is one of their pillars, embedding sustainability more in everything that we do with our visitors. So yes, it's a journey, you know, we're all on a journey, the Council and Tourism Noosa, towards where we want to be in terms of a destination and what that looks like and until the destination management plan is developed and in place, I think this document takes for Tourism Noosa a step towards that. Thank you. Tom Wegener 02:09:37.780
Brand management. I know that in the last document, the strategy, they put brand, Noosa brand management right at the top, but it's not mentioned. Clare Stewart 02:09:48.900
No, it is. Is it mentioned in here? Tom Wegener 02:09:51.276
Sure it is, yes. It was front and centre before, it seems. Amelia Lorentson 02:09:56.176
Page seven. Tom Wegener 02:09:57.376
Drifted to page seven. Amelia Lorentson 02:09:58.796
Our story, Noosa brand story. Who we are. Tom Wegener 02:10:04.452
Yeah. Before, it said that managing the Noosa brand is a key, the most important thing that tourism business does, and I actually really agree with that. Anyway, that's just my little input. I'd love to see that creeped back closer to page one. Kim Rawlings 02:10:25.840
The document is built around a number of pillars, five key pillars, and which you know I don't think the page numbering indicates level of importance. They're all equal and all important. Not everything will be on page one. That's right. And you know, I think they're up in the start of their document capturing things The around destination regeneration and then the values, you know, they're really important pieces to have in the front of these documents. the journey. Joe Jurisevic 02:10:56.696
Okay. Mr Stockwell, do you have a question? Brian Stockwell 02:10:58.216
Yeah, I know there's one mentioned in terms of in the future the Noosa Shire collectively works towards carbon neutrality. Tourism Noosa will first support industry visitors. will first support industry visitors to give back. That appears to be the only mention in terms of any action with regard to industry development to help the transition to zero. Is that correct? Kim Rawlings 02:11:21.056
Yes, there is that, mentioned in the strategy. From conversations, tourism Noosa will also be developing an operational plan, annual operational plan that actually then operationalises some of these higher level strategic directions. around key actions or tasks in that space would be captured in their operational plan as opposed to here. Brian Stockwell 02:11:43.900
And just one... I know you must be nearly towards the end of your input analysis. Did the aspiration towards being carbon neutral feature highly in our feedback on the destination management plan? Kim Rawlings 02:12:01.540
I'd be but there's lots of feedback around climate, eco-anxiety and our young people definitely moving towards that way but we are still going through hundreds and thousands of information so I wouldn't want to be categorical about where that sits in terms of the number of issues but it was definitely part of the conversation. Brian Stockwell 02:12:26.188
And if it does prove that that is a key element of the destination management plan then this plan could be in its next iteration reflect that more broadly with say a dedicated industry development program around the transition. Kim Rawlings 02:12:41.668
Yeah absolutely absolutely Tewas and Noosa will review this document in line with what the DMP priorities are to ensure it aligns. Amelia Lorentson 02:12:52.808
I'm happy to move the recommendation. I think it's clear from the Tourism Noosa strategy in front of us that there's a genuine desire and commitment for the TN to align closely with Council's destination management thinking and approach. In fact it can be that TN is in some aspects already leading the way and has for years taken actions towards better tourism and building a more sustainable future. As the chair of Chair of the Tourism Noosa Board said in her opening statement of the strategy: "Our responsibility goes well beyond economics. We enhance community wellbeing and preserve our environment." The strategy highlights Noosa long history of environmental protection and preservation, its status as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and designation as a World Surfing Reserve. The strategy has been intentionally developed to respond to the values not only the tourism industry and tourism key partners but also respond to the values of environmental groups, our residents and Noosa Council. TM values on page three one four of the report their pursuit of excellence and innovation natural harmony and stewardship cultural respect and preservation enriching experience Travel for good, authentic community engagement and accountability and transparency. More importantly the document also recognises that our community is at the heart of TN's success and that we have a responsibility for maintaining Noosa character and also environmental legacy and that TN is committed to genuine engagement with businesses, community organisation, residents and visitors. Tourism is big business bringing 1.7 billion dollars in visitor spend to our region. We are fortunate to have TN managing our brand and protecting our backyard. I sit on the board and I've sat on the board now for four years and I and I say that with conviction. We need to deliver to our visitor a clear message about who we are and what we value and that is to enjoy and respect Noosa, our environment and the people who live here. I want to take this opportunity to thank TN, it's amazing. It's amazing staff, 65 volunteers and the TN board. They are all locals who are passionate and committed to protecting this incredible mind-blowing beautiful place that we are all lucky to call home. Joe Jurisevic 02:16:03.242
Wilkie? He's not unmuting his life, assuming no. I'll speak to him. Do you have something, Councillor Wilkie? Would you like to speak to the idea, the matter with Boris? I'm delighted there's one particular passage in here that excites me about what tourism needs to do and what tourism can. I know a lot of people feel impacted by bringing to the to the community the way they bring business and tourism community on board with understanding their role their impact and the programs that they have implemented to try and offset some of that impact as well as active participants in the reduction of single-use plastics and the like is commendable. I think this is a great and probably one And probably one of my favourite elements of what Tourism Noosa does and brings to this community, as well as events that not only bring an economic benefit, but a community benefit and a charity benefit, such as the Noosa Triathlon. A million dollars in charity and $50,000 to the local community. there are elements that they do, and again, the programs within that Tourism for Good program are ones that I commend, and I note that the new CEO actually got to attend Trees for Tourism within her first week and was absolutely blown away by the program, which I think is great to see. I'm pleased with the direction they're taking. I'm seeing the opportunity to align with the DMP as we go forward, and I think we're heading in the right direction with regards to where Tourism Noosa is headed for the future. Brian Stockwell 02:18:15.001
Tourism Noosa has always been very good at what they do, and we've seen over recent years with different CEOs and different boards that perhaps direction going either side of where council is going. What I read of this document is a genuine attempt to align with community values as expressed through council and the destination management process. I see there's a lot of good new initiatives initiatives built in there and I suppose that when the rubber hits the road what you know the return on investment from council's perspective will be how that is divvied up in terms of the overall budget but as you say that's an operational matter. have obviously highlighted one area where I would have liked to see a specific action but that as I said I'm happy to wait for the results of destination management to come out and say well is this where Noosa thinks it should go, should be part of being a destination that embodies stewardship that we fulfilled our global responsibilities in terms of reducing air pollution of the atmosphere. I think think it's essential as part of the brand and an area that there's a lot more work to be done with both our organisations. So other than that, as Councillor Jurisevic has pointed out, there are lots of good new concepts in here. it is heading in that direction towards a thinking of we are stewards of a place for both residents and for visitors. The better we can look after it, the more beneficial it will be from a range of different attributes, one of them being economic return, the other being social and lifestyle. Joe Jurisevic 02:19:55.940
Any other councils have anything to add? Councillor Lorentson, would you like to go? Amelia Lorentson 02:20:00.760
No, everything's said. Just shout out to the team. The strategy is really well done. Joe Jurisevic 02:20:09.520
I'll put the matter to a vote. All in favour? In favour. Carry unanimously. Thank you, Kim. Thanks, Kent. Thanks to Tourism Noosa for the hard work they've done. Item 16. The next item on the agenda is the financial performance report. Larry Sengstock 02:20:36.560
Are we called in clearing? My moustache is all forward cause. Joe Jurisevic 02:20:51.887
You'll have to send us a link for some fundraising. Certainly can. Richard MacGillivray 02:20:57.707
I think we're fundraising for my wife tonight. It's been removed on the 1st of December. I'll get all the staff to go on the unit and make the best of my wins. Pauline, welcome back. Thank you. Nice to see you. Nice to see the smiling faces on the table. Thanks, Jack. Pauline, would you like to give us an overview on our current financial performance for October 2023? SPEAKER_09 02:21:19.289
So financial performance year to date to October continues to be positive with operating revenues outperforming our forecast and operating expenditures slightly under forecast. Absolutely. Operating revenue is $2.2 million above budget, which comprises, the majority of this comprises $1.3 million relating to interest revenue, which is resulting from the investment in term deposits at about 5%. $700,000 relates to the sale of goods and services for holiday parks, waste and council facilities and $327,000 relates to operational grants. This has been offset by low budget fees and charges. Some of this is timing and some issues in terms of getting some invoicing into the system as well, but there are some areas that are down here today. Operational expenditure is $925,000 underspent with employee costs $901,000 under budget and materials and services $55,000 under budget. Overall Council's year-to-date operating position at October is $3.1 million above budget. Of this, $2.9 million of these funds are currently unconstrained and $2.5 million coming from General Council top-up operations and $4.4 million or $400,000 from holiday parks and waste. This surplus will be utilised to offset the forecast deficit that we adopted at Budget Review 1 and will fund operations and emerging works during the remainder of this financial year. Capital revenues above budget with a receipt of grants from QRA and other programs. QRA and other programs and expenditure is also slightly above budget year-to-date due to timing of delivery. Council is currently holding 126 million dollars in cash reserves with 40 million dollars invested in term deposits. This position will degrade through to 30 June 2024 as business as usual operations occur in capital and grant programs including the QRA funded projects. Just for councils to note, while council's cash cover is currently equivalent to 13.8 months, if we removed externally restricted funds which is grants, levies and developer contribution, this would reduce cash cover to 9.7 months and if we were to reduce internally restricted funds which is disaster recovery provisions, fleet replacement and landfill provision, that would reduce to 7.6 million. So we would usually aim to three to six months coverage so we are above that but also we need to take into account that we still need about $40 million to deliver our capital program. Larry Sengstock 02:23:52.429
There's a reason why we're holding so much cash. So with one third of the financial year complete, Council's financial performance continues to be strong. Joe Jurisevic 02:24:10.560
Questions? Councils? I'll get us off the mark if there's no one else. I said when I see capital revenue 327% above variance, I said there we go. What? I noticed that we have a grant that probably wasn't a capital grant. It's 6.3 million. It probably wasn't expected. Can you just allude what the grants are like? Many of the grants were like to the QRI disaster fund. So as the submissions are approved and come through, we get a different funding for various projects as well. That's all right. But given that we've received a significant amount of funding from QRI at this point, is 6.3 the current balance? SPEAKER_09 02:24:51.828
6.3 Relates to this current financial year. So we've received funding in QRI years as well, which obviously aren't what they're digging into. OK, so it's sometimes down-down timing as to what's in this one. Yeah. We will be looking at addressing that at budget review too, to accommodate the funding for both the capital program and revenue. Joe Jurisevic 02:25:06.593
I was expecting more, but it was in the previous way. Yeah. Hence the bank balance being there. Yeah. Clare Stewart 02:25:14.773
Pauline, one more question and I think you answered, or you mentioned certainly, there's such a high operating surplus ratio and a high cash expense cover. Do you want to elaborate any more on that? SPEAKER_09 02:25:26.173
So, because we are in the early stage of the year, we still have obviously quite a few months obviously quite a few months before the next round of rates. Our operating profit is high at this time of year. It's particularly higher with interest revenue that we've been able to generate off of the cash flow. So that will degrade over time as we go through the year and as we hit through to 30 June it will come down is generally the trend. What was the other one that you mentioned? The cash expense cover. The cash expense cover. Clare Stewart 02:25:53.079
No, the operating surplus ratio, sorry. We're at 30.3% in the target. Yeah, so that relates to our operating profit incentive. As that comes down that will reduce down time. Yeah, and then the cash expense cover, but there is 20. SPEAKER_09 02:26:03.242
So the cash cover is what we were talking about before in terms of it holding. We're calculating that on our pooled cash cover and it includes restricted balances as well. Okay, because that's that, they're a bit, I mean that. looks really, like it looks like we're over, being overly cautious but we're not really. No, the operating one is generally more of our timing in terms of where we are in the year and as we progress and deliver programs and operations. The cash cover also similar in that regard but there is an over inflation at the moment. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 02:26:32.458
In terms of risk that might impact Council's operational performance, you haven't noted cyber attacks. Is there any reason? My understanding it's still right up the top as one of the risks. risks. Clare Stewart 02:26:51.478
Do you want to go? Richard MacGillivray 02:26:53.598
Through the Chair, so obviously in addition to the risk at the end of the report, Council does have a strategic risk register and obviously below that we have operational risk in each of the business areas. So cyber risk is identified as one of our top strategic risks. And that does identify obviously the impacts to a range of matters both financial and non-financial from in terms of service delivery data etc. I guess with what you see in the report here it focuses purely on financial operations. the risk of the risk around that but certainly from any cyber event and should anything serious occur to the operations of councils networks the impacts could be significant across a range of areas. what keeps you up at night other than your child financially the last the last two years financially has been that the challenge of cost escalation on that type of award. program I've been doing a lot of work on that infrastructure services team over the last 12 months so it's not keeping me as much up overnight this financial year and we're seeing that in terms of our year-to-date performance on our capital the biggest financial challenge we face this year the other one is is the smoothing off as we come off the back end of the major capital works over our this long year-term forecasting of our cash and liquidity once we settle back into BAU in 18 months time will be a big discussion now that's interesting so once the works are done then it's the whole of life costs they've got to be somehow built into whole of life of life costs costs, but but also also our our 10 year forecast for what future major works are in the pipeline and how we fund those. Joe Jurisevic 02:28:44.080
Following on from that question, we obviously had an impact of Optus on the organisation when they shut down for the day. How did that impact operations and was our business continuity plan able to... put into place? And did it have an impact on Council's operations? Sure. Richard MacGillivray 02:29:08.024
Again, through the Chair. Yes it did. Our main customer service phone line is an Optus phone line. So obviously it had an impact primarily on our connectivity to our community. Obviously through our BCP best we could communicate it out to the public through various media channels that we had impacts of service delivery. But in terms of the impact, in under one day's worth of interruption, I think our operation has accommodated quite Joe Jurisevic 02:29:39.645
Well. Does that cause us to make sure we think on only having one service provider? Richard MacGillivray 02:29:46.077
One of the things we do every year is review our business continuity plans. Our audit committee requires us to ensure that all our BCPs are up to date. We are actually due for that PIS worker on our IT BCP over the next few months, so it'll be a conversation we'll definitely incorporate into... Joe Jurisevic 02:30:02.557
What was happening here, thank you. Anything further, questions? Brian Stockwell 02:30:08.057
It might be more to the CEO, but to the CEO, but I note both planning and building and development, planning and applications are below budget and that's sort of consistent with what we're seeing coming through with new applications and the delegate decisions that we look to be on a bit of a downward trend. Is there, and I think it's the CEO because Richard's not here... Are we looking at that? Are our timeframes coming down? Are we reallocating staff into areas where there's a bit of backlog? That sort of thing. Are we looking at how to respond to that yet? Well, I was going to say, we have seen a decline, obviously, in VA, but we also are aware of several other developments out in the ether, and whether they eventuate or not will impact where we end up. In terms of where we are for the current year, dare I development assessment area is actually quite underspent in some of the areas as well, so that kind of offsets that deficit in revenue, so you wouldn't necessarily expect us to have a bottom line of financial, huge financial impact from the VA point of view. There's more, as I said, understand that there'll be swings and roundabouts, but have we looked, is there an opportunity now to make hay while the sun shines and try and get those time frames back, try and get all those outstanding short-stay levy type issues, etc. Kim Rawlings 02:31:40.337
My area, it's Richard's area, but, you know, it's hard to let go of some things. It's true. Yeah, pretty much. What I will say is it would be lovely to..it would be lovely to be in that space, but the reality is we're not there. There are vacancies in our planning department and our files are currently at 50 files per planner. Now, we usually work on 25 to 30 files per planner, so even though we've seen a dip in revenue... haven't seen a dip in the workload yet. And that's linked to not being able to fill positions. That's right. Which is driving a lot of employee cost variances. So we're not there yet. We haven't seen that flow-on benefit. benefit unfortunately. Joe Jurisevic 02:32:26.403
Thank you Mr Chair. Frank Wilkie 02:32:32.523
That leads on to a question I was going to ask about the 1.5 million underspend in staff vacancies. So obviously we're missing a few planners. It's a question to the It's a question to the CEO. Is it possible to quantify in FTE terms the number of staff that we're down? Which departments are particularly affected in what we're doing to mitigate this? Larry Sengstock 02:32:59.487
I don't have the exact numbers. SPEAKER_09 02:33:01.767
I don't have FTE available to me, but I do have the particular... I won't give you the amounts, but I will tell you that it's development assessment, there are vacancies in civil ops. There's some, a couple in corporate services, some in strategic planning. Some of those are new positions that have yet to be finalised and recruited that were endorsed in the budget. in the budget, but there's certainly those particular areas, and a couple in the infrastructure as well, that are driving that variance. Just in terms of your $1.5 million, there are several positions being funded via labour hire, which offsets that. Joe Jurisevic 02:33:39.916
$500,000 In temporary positions. Richard MacGillivray 02:33:42.736
And through the Chair, that also excludes where we might outsource to specialist positions where if we don't have the expertise in-house, we're also outsourcing to a firm or a consultancy to help fill the gap. An example might be where we've got a gap in our ICT manager. we need some strategic ICT support. In the interim, we don't have the capacity, capability, cyber security and IT is a critical issue, as we talked about. So we engage a CIO on demand to assist with that in the interim. Frank Wilkie 02:34:16.233
Do we have a full complement of customer service staff? Richard MacGillivray 02:34:20.373
We'll have to take that one on notice, Councillor Wilkie. is we do. I'm not aware. SPEAKER_09 02:34:25.189
I'm not aware of significant vacancies in that area. Larry Sengstock 02:34:29.049
No. But there's no question, Councillor, that we're still on the hamster wheel. As are many employees. Absolutely. We're not alone. Unknown 02:34:39.589
We've slowed things down, but there is still movement. Larry Sengstock 02:34:42.489
There's still constant movement. So we're constantly dealing with that and trying to make sure we cover where we can. Any other questions for Councillor Wilkie? Frank Wilkie 02:34:51.799
No thank you Mr Chair. Joe Jurisevic 02:34:52.999
Any more from the floor? Can I have a mover for the recommendation, Councillor Stockwell? Seconder? Councillor Stewart? Councillor Stockwell would you like to talk to it? No. Any discussion councillors? No. Councillor Wilkie anything to add? No thank you. I'll put it to the vote. All in favour? Thank you. We'll move on to item 611 which is the Noosa Council annual annual report. The year in the view. I've been here a while guys! I can't imagine there's any confidence in you for this, Matt. Welcome to the table, Governor Spenerger, Diana Stewart. Diana, would you like to give us a bit of a summary of our annual report? Kim Rawlings 02:35:58.488
Yes, not a problem. So, as you know, Councillors, each year, in accordance with Section 182 of the Local Government Regulations, Council must prepare an annual report. The in front of you today is to inform our community of Council's activities and financial performance throughout the last financial year. There is, I note, there's a minimum standard of regulatory reporting that must be included within the report, primarily relating to accountability, governance and financial matters. As per previous years, Council has addressed that standard as outlined. in the legislative compliance section of the appendices at the back if you're interested in having a look. However, as per previous years, we are about further increasing transparency and improving our reporting. So each year, Council goes above and beyond the minimum regulatory reporting standard by including additional information in our annual report. And as you will this year, a substantial amount of new content has been included, ranging from outlining Council's various roles and responsibilities with the community, to showcasing our new values, our new corporate values, procurement deliverables, and even our numerous completed infrastructure projects across our Shire have been highlighted. So each year essentially we continue to build on our stories so that we achieve greater transparency and alignment to the Australasian reporting standard that we're aiming for. And finally on a lighter note I'd like to thank all the staff, stakeholders, and teams that work with us to deliver this annual report as it was certainly a team effort and hopefully a report that Council is proud to adopt. And finally And finally, on that note, I would like to state that I have picked up one content error on page 224, which will be amended. We just missed the pages in that content schedule, but that will be definitely included by the time the final report is published. Larry Sengstock 02:38:09.035
Questions? Joe Jurisevic 02:38:14.740
We've got a mover, Councillor Stockwell, do I have a seconder, Councillor Lorentson, or would you like to speak to us? Clare Stewart 02:38:18.800
Well, I have a whole thing here. It is a delight to present out there. I won't read my message. Larry Sengstock 02:38:25.280
I was doing notes, I don't know if this happens at all, but thank you, Di, because I know it's a huge amount of body of work and it really marries the big parts to the staff. There is, I think, when is I think when we counted there was five when I looked at it there's 527 employees so this is very much a team effort we have 174 voluntary workers you know we've had the largest ever capital works program at 43 million we've yielded a host of projects or that has certainly completion of the first phase of the Tewantin bypass revitalization of our bridges with Poonga Lane bridge and Cooroy Bella Creek Road bridge completion of Noosa bridge, completion of this parade upgrade, which is helping to realise our cycling and walking strategy objectives, dedicated bike lanes, expanded pathways, completion of the 1.68 million per hour trail upgrade, continued hazard reduction burns, launched the continuation of our world class 5 tech connect program, they completed the housing strategy, the corporate plan, the library service, which is we've got a lot more of an outreach service. The housing strategy, as I said, was a huge one. Environmental, we have more land under conservation than ever before. And I mean, I could go on and on and our waste is incredibly exciting. I'm having trouble reading So I want to continue on. But I think it's all there to be read. But thank you. And as I said, Larry, this is very much a team effort. I want to thank you too, Larry, for your leadership and stepping in. You've been terrific. And to all the executive team. Absolutely. Any other councillors? Any other councillors? Amelia Lorentson 02:39:57.248
I'll speak to it just really quickly. You asked whether we would be proud to adopt the report. Absolutely, Diana. To me the report speaks volumes. Volumes of the people and the team in council. It speaks of long hours, hard work, passion, sweat, blood, commitment to service and commitment to community. You know, local governments, not for the faint hearted or thin skinned. And I just would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank your team and all the executive staff, acting CEO. This is big business, but big business need great people to operate big business. So thank you. Tom Wegener 02:40:48.009
Any other councillors? Fantastic work. It's nice to be a part of this incredible team. Frank Wilkie 02:40:56.826
Thank you, Mr Chair. Look, every annual report makes for exhausting reading, reflecting on the achievements of each year, and this Council which council, which is a relatively small council, is an incredibly ambitious one. It has undertakings and achieves so much every year. And as has already been said, that's down largely to the commitment and the work So really this is a tribute to them, really. So thank you, Diana. Thank you, Larry. Please pass on our thanks to the staff. Brian Stockwell 02:41:34.787
I've just got stopped on the page that said supporting our community highlights, and there's probably a lot we do that isn't controversial, isn't hard work, but is really meaningful. You know, you start at the bottom, you know, 33,000, over 33,000 members of our libraries, you know. 71 referrals, our community service department, 71 referrals for community issues such as homelessness, housing, mental health. You know we've looked at alliance grants with 15 different community groups and you know eight community halls so these are all the things that happen that don't often get to this place in terms place in terms of debate but which are really critical to achieving that cohesiveness and resilient community and I think that's really important to acknowledge that throughout our organisation we have a whole lot of committed and valuable staff really take the role of working with our community seriously and I think it's one of the great strengths of this community is that the relationship between Council and our community groups and our community more generally. That should be great. Joe Jurisevic 02:42:42.897
I'm delighted to hear the Mayor excited about our waste, but as I say that I realise it probably doesn't sound right. I'm delighted in this and to all those that are no sayers of anything the Council undertakes, have a read of this document. Get an idea and an understanding. an idea and an understanding of what actually goes on in this place and the amount of work that this organisation undertakes in a year. I just shared the Noosa Shire quick facts. One page out of this and the amount of interest it got online and social media was incredible. Imagine what if they saw the other 300 pages of information and data. What goes on in this organisation. So tremendous amount of work, a tremendous summary of a very challenging year, another very challenging year. I commend it as reading to everybody in our community to understand more thoroughly and more closely what your council undertakes and the amount of effort that goes effort that goes into that work, I'd like to acknowledge our Acting CEO, all the senior staff and all the staff across every element of council that puts in. Day in, day out for our community that this report clearly articulates that workload and that commitment to this community. I'd like to thank you all so much for So much for the time, the effort, for all the challenge that we present you, and the professional way in which you bring those results back into the organisation. That's it from me. Nothing further? Can I just make one point? You can make, please do. The staff have done an amazing amount And you can see that across the board. We need to thank everybody for their continued support of the organisation, of the community, of the work that they do and their dedication. Also, I want to make the point of young Diana here, who has done a massive amount of work just to pull this together. I mean, you look at the volume of work, that all has to get compiled into a readable document. So, to do that. On top of everything else she does. It's a team effort. We're all in team efforts, but this is a great thing that all comes together. We get all the finance stuff, all comes in together, comes together in this one document, then we're able to present it. Clare Stewart 02:45:16.403
Well done, Diana. Thank you, Diana and staff. And Mary, please pass it on. I know the execs are here to hear it, but please pass it on. Our thanks to them. the 527 people who really, this report's all out there. I've had a few staff online that have been watching, so. Amelia Lorentson 02:45:32.824
Fantastic. And can you call me Young Amelia? I say Young Amelia because she jokes a lot, doesn't she? I should not say Young Amelia. Catherine Stewart, did you like your close? Joe Jurisevic 02:45:46.424
Yeah. Well done. I'll put the two of you on the vote. two of you on the vote. All in favour? In favour? Carried unanimously. Thank you. We'll move on to the next item which is, we're coming up to a confidential session. The next item, the next three items are confidential. I'll move that we go into... confidential session for the reasons outlined in the agenda. Clare Stewart 02:46:14.693
I'll second it for the three items? Brian Stockwell 02:46:16.413
For the three items, yes. Item 7.1, 7.2, 7.3. We'll close the public review of the section 245J3 on the local government regulation for the purpose of discussing the three items. That's it. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 02:46:29.673
Council is all in favour? I'm sure there'll be thousands of people waiting with bated breath. Joe Jurisevic 02:46:44.460
Back out? Thank you. We're back out of the confidential session. I'll need... Any mover for item 7.1, the residing material processing option in MIRV? MIRV, Councillor Stockwell, seconded by Councillor Stewart. Any discussion, councillors? If there's no discussion, I'll put it to the vote. All in favour? In favour. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Carried unanimously. Moved by item 7.2, the end of... I move...mountain shared roadway. Moved by Councillor Wilkie. Seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Any discussion, councillors? If there's no discussion, I'll put it to the vote. All in favour? In favour. Carried unanimously. Moved by item 7.3, voluntary flood recovery property acquisition. I'll move this one. I'll second it. Seconded. Councillor Wegener has seconded. If there's no discussion from me, I'll put it to the vote. All councillors in favour? In favour. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Carried unanimously. That is the final item on the agenda. That brings the meeting to a close at 4.01pm. Thank you all Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
