Planning & Environment Committee Meeting - October 2023
Date: Tuesday, 10 October 2023 at 9:30AM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 00:40:32
Synopsis: Planning: Bunnings Trade height, signage, vegetation to General Committee, Appeals: Council defending three court matters, ZEN: 3-yr coordinator funding w/ conflict clauses, Delegations noted.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Tom Wegener Karen Finzel Clare Stewart Brian Stockwell Non-Committee Members
Executive Officers
Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Council approved remote attendance for Karen Finzel under s254K Local Government Regulation 2012 (Qld); unanimous (00:35) (Attendance). Planning item 5.2 (Bunnings Trade, 178 Eumundi Noosa Rd) was referred to General Committee for further consideration; focus: height exceedance, streetscape, signage, vegetation (19:37) (Item 5.2). Planning item 5.1 (Zero Emissions Noosa Inc. grant) referred to General Committee due to significance; draft 3‑year partnership agreement to fund a coordinator, subject to annual budgets (28:18) (Item 5.1). Planning Appeals : Council noted reports and resolved to defend three Planning & Environment Court appeals—Picture Point lot reconfiguration (D130/2023), Cooroy relocatable home park (D153/2023), Sunshine Beach dwelling (D133/2023); all unanimous (30:14–34:18) (Items 5.3–5.5). Delegated decisions : Council noted August 2023 outcomes—97 approvals under delegation; one refusal by Council (Cooroy relocatable home park) (35:57) (Item 6.1). Chair confirmed meeting closure at 10:11, with return of Clare Stewart recorded post COI item (39:26) (Closure). Operational detail : Officers confirmed prior court-approved signage regime on the Bunnings site; any new signage likely constrained unless subdivision finalised or court order varied (08:35) (Item 5.2). Traffic : External review found no adverse impacts for Bunnings Trade; trade peak expected earlier than retail peak (18:04) (Item 5.2). Design negotiation : Officers secured minor articulation/pitched roof; height still 12 m vs 10 m code due to pallet racking and site fall; building set back behind Vision Court (06:28–16:08) (Item 5.2). Vegetation : Request for a plan locating all frontage trees on lot and road reserve to inform screening; to be provided for General Committee (16:41–17:58) (Item 5.2). ZEN scope : Coordinator to strengthen grants, education, and stationary energy initiatives; alignment with Council’s net-zero objectives and prior community battery success (24:42–27:21) (Item 5.1). Agreement flexibility : Annual budget gate, capacity to tweak terms (e.g., conflict disclosure) and role emphasis (coordination vs admin) (25:27; 27:21) (Item 5.1). Contentious / Transparency Matters Brian Stockwell questioned approving a 12 m industrial aesthetic and corporate colour palette inconsistent with Noosa signage objectives (08:58–12:16) (Item 5.2). Signage “creep” risk identified: existing court approval already “significantly oversized” relative to current Local Law intent; officers to constrain any new signs (08:58–11:22) (Item 5.2). ZEN agreement transparency : Amelia Lorentson sought explicit conflict-of-interest disclosure clauses; officers agreed to refine (26:50–27:21) (Item 5.1). Process discipline : Multiple significant items elevated to General Committee to ensure fuller scrutiny (19:37; 28:18) (Items 5.1–5.2). Data clarity : Delegations report enhanced with breakdown table to improve public understanding of approvals vs refusals (35:57–37:00) (Item 6.1). Vegetation transparency : On-site tree survey requested to validate screening and landscaping claims before decision (16:41–17:58) (Item 5.2). Legal / Risk Defending appeals : Council to defend three P&E Court matters—lot split at Picture Point (neighbourhood character), Cooroy relocatable home park (site constraints/character), Sunshine Beach dwelling (height, site cover, setbacks, overlooking) (30:14–34:18) (Items 5.3–5.5). Litigation exposure : Costs and prospects not yet estimable; case management to refine expert needs and duration (31:09) (Items 5.3–5.5). Signage compliance risk : Any additional Bunnings signage may require varying existing court order or completing subdivision to fall under current Local Law; non-compliance risk flagged (08:35–11:22) (Item 5.2). Scheme performance outcomes : Height exceedance (12 m vs 10 m) justified on performance grounds (industrial function/site topography); vulnerability to appeal mitigated by setbacks and screening conditions (06:28–13:26) (Item 5.2). Contract governance : ZEN agreement is 3-year but budget-contingent; amendments permitted to add COI clauses, reducing probity risk (25:27; 27:21) (Item 5.1). Sunshine Beach Appeal D133/2023 : 60 Seaview Terrace dwelling refused for excessive height/site cover/setbacks and rooftop terrace overlooking; Council to defend (33:16–34:18) (Item 5.5). Retail minor works : Delegated approval for extension to Sunshine Beach butcher shop tenancy confirmed as discussed previously (38:27–39:04) (Item 6.1). Material Change of Use / Planning Scheme Interface Noosaville Bunnings Trade : New trade-focused offer distinct from Bunnings Warehouse; dual-level with undercroft parking; compliance except height; conditions to address colour palette and landscaping foreshadowed (01:40–15:52) (Item 5.2). Sign law shift : Historic court-approved signage pre-dates current Local Law; Council emphasis on curbing building-as-sign outcomes, aligning with Noosa character (08:58–11:18) (Item 5.2). Delegated assessments : Range from MCUs to operational works; example queries on riparian setbacks indicate code-based flexibility applied case-by-case (37:22–38:23) (Item 6.1). Environmental & Climate Initiatives ZEN partnership : Funding targets a coordinator to accelerate emissions reduction projects, grants, and community education; leverages ZEN’s DGR status and science-based approach (24:42–27:21) (Item 5.1). Outcomes focus : Annual operational plan and reporting to evidence ROI and target alignment; modeled on updated NBRF framework (27:21) (Item 5.1). Community Transparency & Governance Live COI management : Clare Stewart declared a declarable COI re OPW23/0077 linked to a close friend; left and later returned; vote proceeded without her (35:12) (Item 6.1). Meeting management : Chair rearranged agenda to accommodate presenter availability and elevate significant items, maintaining procedural clarity (00:47; 20:29; 28:18) (Items 5.1–5.2). Conflicts of Interest Clare Stewart : Declarable COI for OPW23/0077 due to close personal friendship with Jane Margaret Blake; exited for item; compliance with Chapter 5B LGA 2009 (35:12) (Item 6.1). ZEN agreement : Proposal to embed explicit conflict disclosure obligations for funded partner to enhance probity (26:50–27:21) (Item 5.1).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES Planning & Environment Committee Meeting Tuesday, 10 October 2023 9:30 AM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Committee: Crs Tom Wegener (Chair), Karen Finzel, Clare Stewart, Brian Stockwell “Noosa Shire – different by nature” PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 10 OCTOBER 2023 1. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Tom Wegener (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel (via Microsoft Teams) Cr Clare Stewart Cr Brian Stockwell NON COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Amelia Lorentson EXECUTIVE Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray APOLOGIES Nil Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That in accordance with Section 254K of the Local Government Regulation, Cr Finzel is approved to attend the Meeting dated 10/10/2023 via Microsoft Teams. Carried unanimously. 2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 3. PRESENTATIONS Nil 4. DEPUTATIONS Nil 5. REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMITTEE 5.1. ZERO EMISSIONS NOOSA (ZEN) INC. GRANT FUNDING AGREEMENT Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 5.1 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. Carried unanimously. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 10 OCTOBER 2023 5.2. MCU22/0051 APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE HARDWARE & TRADE SUPPLIES AT 178 EUMUNDI NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 5.2 be referred to the General Committee for further consideration. Carried unanimously. 5.3. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D130 OF 2023 – APPLICATION TO RECONFIGURE A LOT (1 INTO 2 LOTS) AT 39-41 PICTURE POINT CRESCENT, NOOSA HEADS Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Acting Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 October 2023 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal No. D130 of 2023 and agree to defend the appeal. Carried unanimously. 5.4. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D153 OF 2023 – APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – RELOCATABLE HOME PARK (COMMUNITY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING – 32 DWELLINGS) AT 55 AND 70 CARPENTERS RD COOROY Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart That Council note the report by the Acting Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 October 2023 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal No. D153 of 2023 and agree to defend the appeal. Carried unanimously. 5.5. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D133 OF 2023 – APPLICATION FOR BUILDING WORKS FOR A DWELLING HOUSE AT 60 SEAVIEW TCE, SUNSHINE BEACH Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Clare Stewart PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 10 OCTOBER 2023 That Council note the report by the Acting Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 October 2023 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal No. D133 of 2023 and agree to defend the appeal. Carried unanimously. 6. REPORTS FOR NOTING BY THE COMMITTEE 6.1. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY AUGUST 2023 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 No. 28 OPW23/0077 in the list of applications in the report, as I have a close personal friendship with Jane Margaret Blake. 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 room. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Manager, Development Assessment to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 October 2023 regarding planning applications that have been decided by delegated authority. Carried unanimously. Cr Stewart returned to the meeting. 7. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION Nil 8. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 10:11 AM
Meeting Transcript
Tom Wegener 00:00.000
Everybody, welcome to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting. Tuesday, October 10th, 2023. I declare the meeting open. I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional lands of the Kabi Kabi People and I pay my respects to their past, to the elders past, present, and emerging. I note that we Councillors Stockwell and Mayor Stewart in the room and we have Councillor Finzel attending by zoom. Should we right now have the motion to accept that we can have, we can allow? Yes, so I'm happy to move the standard motion that says we're happy for Councillor Finzel to attend virtually. I'd probably like to speak to that? No. Any questions? No. All in favour? It's been unanimous. I'd also like to note that Councillor Lorentson is in the room and we will be moving to we're gonna put item number one Zero Emissions Noosa back until any and we'll go start with 5.2 application for Material Change of Use hardware in trade supplies at 178 Eumundi Noosa Road, okay, Patrick and Richard speaking. Dedean, would you walk us through this? SPEAKER_05 01:40.900
Yeah, good morning everyone. This is an application, MCU22/0051, for Material Change of Use for. And trade supplies at 178 Eumundi Noosa Road, It's a proposed extension on the existing Bunnings site. If you're familiar with there is a rectangular parcel of land on the northern edge which is currently vegetated and the applicant proposes to construct a hardware and trade supply store on this portion of the site. The total floor area of over 1,000 square metres is proposed, over two levels, with car parking on the ground floor and the upper floor with the trade supplies. This applicant has indicated this is to be primarily timber and trade supplies to service professional builders and tradespeople. They've indicated that it's a different target market than the existing Bunnings Warehouse. This is actually called Bunnings Trade. And green building is called Bunnings Warehouse. So it's actually tailored to suit the trade side of things. There is duplication in this area, so the trade people can buy, again, in bulk, I suppose, screws and nails things like that, minimising the need to go over to the existing bunnies. It also has different external appearance and branding as such. It colour scheme. There is a single elevator proposed within the building, therefore it's not as retail friendly getting from the down to the upper level. Again, maybe providing sort of access for people with trailers. It also has different website to the existing Bunnings Warehouse. They've given us a breakdown of Bunnings, the website has a whole range, of items from tools, garden, kitchen, bathroom, plumbing, paint, flooring, cleaning, lighting, electrical, indoor living. Whereas Bunnings Trade they've indicated focuses on the construction industry. So there's commercial standard power tools and equipment installation, timber and the like. So they've also further indicated that their product lines have a different quality than some of the power tools and power lines you get over on the existing one. The applicant has also indicated they are maintaining the existing trade supplies in the existing Bunnings Warehouse, which is mainly that timber trade area on the northern section of the building. We've had a look at the original as well, so was approved as retail business type 4 showroom, 6 hardware, and a 7 garden and lifestyle centre. So there's a whole range of uses approved for that existing Bunnings. There is no specific condition about we've percentage of different items they can sell. But there is definitely a plan which shows the trade timber in that northern portion of the site. And as I've said, the up-to-date isn't added to us, they don't intend to remove that. The one of the other, so the building generally complies with the planning scheme requirements, but it doesn't comply in terms of the existing, scheme's requirements for a 10 metre height limit. The applicant proposes building with 12 metres in height. We've questioned the applicant during the process about why they needed to go that high. They've indicated that the upper level is metres at its lowest point and that's needed to the racking and stacking of their pallets and the sale of their products. There is also a, when you look at this site, it is actually lower from the Vision Court buildings on the northern side of the building, site, and even the existing Bunnings driveway is higher. There's been substantial fill. So this is actually low and it actually has significant cross hall from the rear to the sort of from the northeastern corner down the southwestern corner. There's at least a six metre fall across the site and it gets quite low at the front. To So it is actually lower than the surrounding sites. In the report on one of the pages there is a of copy a plan. After. 6? Brian Stockwell 06:27.062
Is that what we're looking for? SPEAKER_05 06:28.162
Yes, figure 6. The one above it. There are two elevations there. So one is the. Page 34. Yeah. Page 34, figure 6. The top one shows the applicant's impression of the Vision Court buildings, this proposed so it's above where it says Gateway Drive. That's the middle building extension proposed development. And then there's existing development of Bunnings. So we've considered the performance outcomes, the proposals in terms of its impact on the streetscape. State today, and in further. This instance, in light of the proposal, the surrounding development, the setback, which is actually behind those existing Vision Court, we've supported that increase in height. So basically, the planning report recommends approval of subject to conditions. It was also mentioned about signage, Councillor Stockwell mentioned signage. We've also pulled out the old signage approval. There is a separate court approval for the signage, which is specific for the Bunnings. There are pylon signs and fascia signs, sorry, fascia signs, wall There are wall signs, a pylon sign, and it's quite specific, so. The applicant is aware that to change, they've probably maxed out, sorry, their existing signage, so they're-- Brian Stockwell 08:06.431
They're like about 10 times more than what we'd normally give, yeah. SPEAKER_05 08:10.171
I haven't looked, I must say, in to see whether the existing signage is compliant with this court approval. Therefore, if they want to put any additional signage, would, there are two options for them. One is subdivide the site up or they'd have to go back and change this existing court order and make an application back to us to vary in this approval. Patrick Murphy 08:35.792
And there is an existing subdivision that's been approved on Brian Stockwell 08:38.912
That same scene because we're assessing this development against standards that exist now not as they did when the last one went through it's part of one side as currently sits we appear to be and to give you a background in when we reviewed the sign laws one of the things we tried to stop was businesses using their whole of the building as a sign by using corporate logos and colours which appears to be what is a continuation of here and so court approved is because of the no doubt the reason we changed from the planning scheme using the sign laws because it was a performance criteria rather than what we actually to achieve it is significantly oversized etc in my opinion so to me I wonder why we're going down a path of approving an aesthetic that is over-height and is inconsistent in terms of colours to allow a business to once again do what the signing policy, law tries to avoid. SPEAKER_05 09:52.842
Applicant, the plans indicate that the signage as part of this application on this building. But the colour scheme is part of the signage? Yes, that is. So it's a white and a green. We could condition it that it's to be no corporate colours up to the unit. Brian Stockwell 10:09.582
Well, it's not so much necessarily as bad as some of the corporate colours. With the yellow and pink and stuff, but I've noticed that the acceptable outcome says no white. SPEAKER_05 10:18.492
Yes, we can condition that. Brian Stockwell 10:20.172
And so we're sort of going, and I can see the logic in the hype, high, but we just appear to not necessarily trying to get the best outcome. That's my gut feeling, is that the best outcome from this side is to make the whole of the frontage of this lot look like we would like to see businesses in Noosa and that's not making very large standout signage that is you know you don't need two metre sign saying when you're open they're not proposing no no but that's existing yeah they've got a seven eight open seven am here. Huge sign you know like part of the what we have to do in my opinion we're assessing this site and as you say one of the leaders will be okay well your sites got more than what you can't we have so you can't have any signs on your trade centre but I just wonder whether there's something we can do as part of this development application that really try and get them to lift the game in terms of the street. So you're talking about the existing? I'm development site. SPEAKER_05 11:24.654
As I said they've indicated that and that the signage for this new building is not part of it we can easily condition and change the colour. I did, when we were looking at this to make it trade related we were trying to really try and make sure it was differentiated to the existing Bunnings. So most of their existing trades are actually, their trade sites are actually, they're all this white. And cream colour that's their Brian Stockwell 11:52.154
Yeah yeah know that it is a commercial enterprises will want the corporate colours they would spread over their buildings. Noosa we don't. We want what our scheme says which is muted tones. Think they can do better. Are you seeking better in terms of colour scheme or building design? Well it's hard that like it is an industrial building you've mentioned that you're looking at some articulation the front by awnings and things like that. It's hard like that figure six you had the top has the top one is the old was an old plan okay and the bottom one is where you've negotiated a bit of change that was what SPEAKER_05 12:42.107
They initially applied but that was the only one that had the three buildings in the elevator in the other okay whereas and then sorry yes should have explained the biggest six is the final plan Brian Stockwell 12:59.009
And looking at the 12 metres it would appear that to be compliant they'd be coming somewhere through the middle of the windows there to get the 10 metres yes so it's a substantial relaxation and I can see why it's justified but for that relaxation I thought we could have pushed a bit harder on aesthetic if SPEAKER_05 13:26.476
You go and have a look you go back a couple I think I should be I don't think we don't have pages on our system yeah it should be figure three and then you go actually Figure 4. Bigger form yeah yeah and the one before that one yeah the typical long section and you can see the undercroft slope of the site and the frontage Brian Stockwell 14:06.265
Yeah yeah I can understand the reason for it but it's also the highest elevation is the plainest yes dark the most stark and it is a lot closer to the road even though it's more setback and more than the minimum six it's than the existing building which SPEAKER_05 14:26.179
The existing findings is setback is essentially totally correct yeah that's my thinking anyway Brian Stockwell 14:32.719
Has anyone requested this one question others I'll let others if they don't have any. Tom Wegener 14:47.108
So from the street it will be pretty simple it'll be substantial size you were looking at the first story which is the car park and then it's been above that two stories about that correct yes get me a track yeah that's SPEAKER_05 15:06.754
Did so yeah so they'll be car parking level and one of them one yes sorry get one of us it's only two stories Tom Wegener 15:13.814
So that I told me starts at the car Clare Stewart 15:17.717
Ground floor, yes. So I think the internal dimensions of the warehouse SPEAKER_05 15:22.658
About six for the upper level it's about six on and then it does go up um they'll put a pitch roof on they don't have to but it's part of our trying to get it to make it a little bit more attractive they did on it's only three degree but Clare Stewart 15:43.971
They did put the pitch roof on. Is there any reason not to approve this. SPEAKER_05_b 15:51.185
Well I suppose it's the height. The non-compliance with the height. As I said we have discussed it with them at length yeah it was brought up in the information request and again it was really again, the impact of the adjoining industrial building. Patrick Murphy 16:08.483
So when you look at it from the street the building to the left it's got like a quite a large retaining wall that is on the street page. It might be two, and a half metres, feet maybe in height visibility, yeah. You know, above that and what faces that street is roller doors. So aesthetically it's quite ugly. I think this building is certainly an improvement on what is presented on the property and there's also an opportunity to provide some landscaping front of this building yet. Brian Stockwell 16:39.770
If we look at figure seven, can we bring up figure seven? Yes. Because there's to screen it. Yes. Is there any intent to retain any of the existing vegetation? Is that vegetation all on their property, or is it some on the road reserve, because that would be. SPEAKER_05_b 17:06.000
Some's on the road reserve, but then you put the footpath. The required Brian Stockwell 17:13.561
Have they got a. Plan that shows where the centre of each tree is? So I'm going to move it to general and I'd ask for that information to be provided at general. No, I'll leave it to general. If I could just have, either before or at the meeting, a plan that actually marks where all the vegetation is are we across the frontage? Both on their property and on the footpath. Did you want further report or. No, just for further information. Tom Wegener 17:58.291
Before we move that, we should ask Councillor Lorentson, do you have any questions? SPEAKER_05_b 18:14.040
Is highly applicant Amelia Lorentson 18:15.100
And no issues there in terms of potential traffic flows given the location in an industrial precinct. SPEAKER_05_b 18:26.690
Now I'm Clare Stewart 18:27.570
Out of topic consultancy. Also reviewed that traffic report. SPEAKER_05_b 18:33.373
He initially was concerned about the cross coming through and crossing. And in terms of their assessment, no, it all works. It does work. But even coming out in terms of the peak times, they're anticipating that the trades will have an earlier peak than the Bunnings Warehouse peak. So they should be out of there before it really, I suppose, hits up down at the Bunnings Warehouse site. So yeah, it is, first of all, they've indicated, our consultant has indicated that it will have functions. Thank you. Tom Wegener 19:08.879
And Councillor Finzel. Sorry, I didn't see you. Any questions? Karen Finzel 19:14.739
Yes. Thank you, Mr Chair. Through the Chair, I just have a question with regarding the height. If they were to remove the pitch, does that- how significant is the height reduction? It's not significant, Karen. Maybe half a metre. Okay, thank you. Tom Wegener 19:37.385
Well, anything else? Councillor Stockwell has moved. I'll second. To move this to the general. All in favour? Brian Stockwell 19:52.990
If there's a large body of work to locate those trees, the easiest thing would be for me to go and walk it. So, just let me know if there's nothing on file and I'll go and measure them up. Yeah, I don't remember seeing anything. So, you still want me to. Well, if you've got the information, but if not, I'll. Tom Wegener 20:14.340
I'll do a foot in campus traffic, no. Okay, Nadine, CEO general. Thank you very much. Thank you, Patrick. Actually, I won't see you. I will not be at the General Committee. Do you want to give it to Jenny? So, let's go to 5.1: Zero Emissions Noosa, Zero Emissions Noosa incorporated, grant funding agreement. The great Annie Nolan. Annie Nolan 20:43.410
Thank you for joining us, it was a pleasure. Do give you have a lecture? No, she'd be here early. I wish I could have just plugged it in and charged it from home, unless it was too late. All right, five ounces before you this morning. Is the report about the funding for the partnership with Zero Emissions Noosa (ZEN) Inc, referred to as ZE. And it's basically requested authorise to actually enter into the partnership and make any changes. And I just wanted to note also that there was a funding approved in the 2023-2024 budget for this, in fact, funding yeah, allows to pause any to actually zero emissions. Put on board a coordinator so that they can really work through their projects and really focus on what they do best, which is really to help Noosa get to net zero emissions. I think you're all very well aware of the incredible work that zenith does over a wide variety of projects for this community to help reduce its emissions, electricity consumption. And that in fact helps reduce costs to residents as well. So their work is very, very professional. They do it on very much a science-based process of actually determining their projects. And they also have been very diligent in one being their deductible gift status as well, and they also look for funding in other means than Council funding as well. So what this funding will enable them to do is to actually put on a coordinator that will assist them in all the scenes, particularly in grant funding, in actually allocating and administering all the projects that they do right across the plethora of things particularly around spatial energy, which is around. Electricity consumption reductions. And as you know, ZEN Inc. Has been very, very pivotal in helping Council to get the grant funding for the community battery as well. Provide a lot of education through their website, through their newsletters. They're very, very focused in getting their message out via Noosa Today. And by having this funding for a coordinator, this will really help them to promote that even wider and even broader. So that's pretty much what you've got in front of you and the draft agreement that has been drafted, which actually goes through the requirements of ZEN Inc. In terms of their administration requirements, reporting They are required to put together an annual operational plan, which they do anyway, and that actually outlines all the projects, the reasoning behind those projects and the return on investment for those projects as well. So that's what the report is about. Tom Wegener 24:07.450
But my first gestalt is I'm so happy that they're going to hire somebody because that person that takes that job will have such a qualification, such a broad amount of learning in this new field that's emerging. And so hopefully they'll stick around and help us in the further. But just having that sort of education and in that position creates the knowledge in somebody that will be enormously beneficial on an ongoing basis for a long time. So that's just another aspect of how important this funding is. Any questions? Brian Stockwell 24:41.978
You mentioned the word coordinator a few times which I think is the core of what makes groups like this go to the next level and I'm just checking through the actual wording of the agreement how that's reflected, because you also mentioned administration and the time we were looking at this in the budget we said is it better to have a this person focused on a little bit of administration coordination or actually focus it more on the coordination of programs is that was that negotiated? Through or is there scope within the agreement that each year if we happen to get for example a single coordinator or a single admin person working across a number of community groups that this agreement can be flexible enough to cater for that? Annie Nolan 25:27.749
Yeah, absolutely. It is a three to budget requirements every year and of course that's always open to negotiations as well. Tom Wegener 25:40.391
Would this be an employee or a contractor, do you feel? Annie Nolan 25:48.950
That is that important ah that would be thing for them to determine what their most appropriate employment arrangements are. Councillor Finzel, do you have any questions? Karen Finzel 26:00.073
At this stage Mr Chair I report is very comprehensive. It lists the requirements of the agreement. I think it's pretty much covered. I guess I could just take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that Zero Emissions Noosa does and the great contribution. What they bring to the Shire and they work closely with Council to meet targets and deliver outcomes so yeah we're just grateful that ZEN Inc. Has put forward this application and they're prepared to look at an agreement with us to continue working for us into the future. Brian Stockwell 26:43.265
One was requested to go to general to by Councillor, Tom Wegener 26:45.992
Councillor Lorentson, please. Amelia Lorentson 26:52.492
I don't know whether this is something that should be. Called in the agreement, but conflict of interest course where there's a requirement of firm disclosure if there's any action perceived or potential conflict of interest. So note that 12.3 references. Relationships of others, but it doesn't actually articulate just something I'll throw to you for consideration. Annie Nolan 27:21.767
Yes, thank you for that. In those recommendations, it does actually say that you can actually tweak some of those. Thank you actually. Those changes, there will actually be someone who wants to do so before the execution of that, we can actually make those changes to make that much more stronger. Clare Stewart 27:42.481
Of what we're bringing again, how is this different, or is it similar to the partnership that we've got with the Noosa Shire Council meeting? At the Noosa Chamber of commerce. Are the requirements more stringent, less or about the same? Annie Nolan 27:56.664
It's very similar to the NBRF. We looked at that as a model and updated that a bit, because that's a few years old now, and made it much more relevant to the partnership that we actually have with Zero Emissions Noosa. So it has actually been through those system groups. Tom Wegener 28:18.920
Well, to move it, so. Due to the significance of the issue? Yes, I'll goes to the General Committee. I'd like to. I'm happy to second that. Okay, before we vote, I just would like to speak to the motion, and once again, the gift of zero emissions Noosa to the Noosa and even to the world community is substantial in how incredibly successful they've been and so influential, and the professionalism that they have is worth something to study, know, I would suspect that all organisations who want to change the world, ZEN Inc.. Would be a very good one to study right from the get-go to see how they did it, how their methods are, what they did, because it is phenomenal. And of course you have Ann Kennedy and Vivien Griffin, two monoliths in our community. Thank you for the incredible work, Annie. And anybody else like to speak to the motion? Okay, put it to the vote. All in favour? Yes. Karen, we can see Karen. Yes. Yep, there we go. Thanks, Annie. You. We have three reports that are confidential. The appeals. Okay, so we, they're not. I mean, if we wish to discuss them, I think they are. Okay, Patrick. At the table 5.3, Planning & Environment Court appeal D130 of 2023, application to reconfigure a lot into, one two lots at 39 to 41 picture point, Crescent, Noosa Heads. Patrick Murphy 30:15.206
Decision to refuse the application where it was considered that it, you know, the lot format that wasn't consistent with the character of the area or the intended development that we, the scheme seeks to occur on the site. Recently, this has been a Bill, and as per the report, it's recommended that it's served with Council to defend the area. Tom Wegener 30:39.820
I'm happy to move that way, if I'll second it. Council rufria, what's that's the first? Councillor to speak to the report yeah, the report of motion? Karen Finzel 30:56.994
I don't have anything to say regarding the appeal. I'm just wondering, the report has also noted that there's been, they can't tell us really advice one way or the other how this will go. I'm just, yeah, wondering about estimated costs, what this is going to cost us to go to court. Yeah. Do we have any idea? Patrick Murphy 31:26.137
We don't have prospects at this stage. It's quite premature period for that to occur. And then in terms of court costs, it's also difficult to assess at this point without knowing what's going to, I suppose, how this will play out and the kind of experts that are required to be involved in the amount of time that would be required for it to be heard in court. And we'll have our regular case management booking group to discuss and update around prospects and various issues as that progresses. Tom Wegener 31:55.862
Okay. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson? Clare Stewart 31:58.767
The cost of the banking Bill is my question, so thank you. Tom Wegener 32:04.267
Okay, so the recommendation's been moved. I seconded it. So all in favour? Yes. Unanimous? Thank you. We have report 5.4, Planning & Environment Court appeal D153 of 2023. Application for Material Change of Use, relocatable home park, community and affordable housing, 32 dwellings at 55 and 70 Carpenters Road, Cooroy. And Patrick and Richard, again, would you walk us through it? Patrick Murphy 32:40.850
Yeah, again, a reason. Decision by Council to refuse the application for the relocatable home park, again on range of issues around the character of the area, whilst we did acknowledge the merits of the potential use, but the particular location of the site, some of the constraints on the site was considered that this was not suitable. Again, we consider that it's in order for Council to defend the appeal, again, quite early in the process to be able to determine the costs and the amount of time that would be required for this to be called. Tom Wegener 33:16.130
Thank you, Patrick. Any questions? And Councillor Finzel, any questions? No, Mr Chair, no happy to move as recommended. Yeah, I'll second it. Okay, before we vote, Councillor Lorentson, any questions? If it's so moved, all in favour? Councillor Finzel? Finzel? Yes. Okay. Thank you very much. We're off to 5. Planning & Environment Court appeal D133 of 2023, application for building works for a dwelling house at 60 Seaview Terrace, Sunshine Beach. Patrick Murphy 33:53.956
Again, Patrick, what was it? So this was, as you say, for a dwelling at 60 Seaview Terrace, Sunshine Beach, that was refused due to our concerns with the building's height, site cover, setbacks, and overlooking associated with the rooftop Terrace. Again, that was not considered in order to look in the report. Tom Wegener 34:22.190
Thank you, Andy. Questions? Councillor Finzel, any questions? Karen Finzel 34:19.170
No questions from me at this stage. Thank you, Mr Chair. Tom Wegener 34:26.910
Councillor Lorentson. Lorentson? There's a recommendation. I'll second. By the Mayor. Okay, I guess we're ready? Yeah. Good to vote. All in favour? Yes. It's unanimous. Okay, we have 6.1, planning applications decided by delegated authority, August 2023. And have, before we ask Patrick, we go through the conflicts of interest, okay. Clare Stewart 35:13.534
Thank you, Councillor Wegener. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to number 28, OPW23/0077. In the list of applications in the report, as I have a close personal friendship with Jane Margaret Blake. As a result of my conflict of interest, I'll now leave the meeting room or the matter is considered invited. And over. Tom Wegener 35:41.260
Okay, any other conflicts of interest? No, Mr Chair. Okay, Patrick, can we walk through each and every one of them? Patrick Murphy 35:57.420
As you're aware, this is the monthly report which provides a summation of those decisions that were made under. Delegation by officers. What we've done in the report is just added in the table this month, which will continue to be going forward just to give a little bit of perspective as to the types of applications that have been decided. And we've also broken it down into those determined under delegation and those that were determined by Council. And what this shows is that. The applications that were decided in August, 97 of those were approved, all of those being under delegation, and that there was one application that was refused, which was a matter by Council, which from memory was the application for the relocated home park at 557 carpenter road. And again, report shows the sort of broad spectrum of applications that the office has assessed, ranging from change applications, material change abuse applications, issuing exemption certificates and operational works as well. Tom Wegener 37:02.001
Thank you. I love the new improvement here, the chart. It's fantastic. Any questions? Councillor Finzel? Ryan? Karen Finzel 37:18.141
There is no questions from me, Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 37:19.874
Thank you. I have one out of interest. I'll just grab it back up. One of the delegated authorities was about a secondary dwelling within a riparian corridor. Perian and those sort of cases, you don't have to know that specific one. Do we tend to be a little bit flexible in that, like I'm presuming they're coming up against the 100 metre buffer and there's a small encroachment and we tend to approve those? Is that? Patrick Murphy 37:44.319
Got sites where the entire site is covered by a riparian buffer and that could be associated with change in mapping with the new scheme and then what you'll find is that they're probably a cluster of buildings within that riparian buffer, ideally as far, situated as far as possible away from then that second revealing would be in close proximity of those existing buildings on the site. Clare Stewart 38:08.877
Okay. Tom Wegener 38:10.897
And a question for number 13. The building works accessible against planning scheme code for 134 that's not the new site there, the woolley site, is it? No. That's just a private. That's correct. Okay, good. Any other questions? Councillor Lorentson, any questions? SPEAKER_00 38:37.162
Oh no, it's okay, we have to start an end of process so I can go to comfort. Tom Wegener 38:41.622
And then the extension to the Sunshine shops, number 25. Did about got that SPEAKER_02_b 38:51.920
Yeah yeah, we we've been talking this the old butcher shop isn't it? Patrick Murphy 38:55.383
That's right, it was an extension to the butcher shop. It was going into the runway essentially. Tom Wegener 39:02.903
Yeah okay, very good. I feel like should we put it Brian Stockwell 39:06.003
To a vote? Oh actually we need to move it first. I think Councillor Finzel should move it just to have. Karen Finzel 39:13.583
I'm happy to move the recommendation. Seconded? Tom Wegener 39:19.228
Anybody to speak to the motion? No? All in favour? No, thank you. Yes, in favour. Well that's it. Thank you very much. Brian Stockwell 39:33.641
It? She'll be back in when she closes it? Clare Stewart 39:35.901
Should I be back in? Tom Wegener 39:36.841
Okay. There's let's no look, yeah there's no confidence emotions there's no um what else did we mention? So we'll close the meeting, then the Mayor comes back into the room. You. We note that Mayor Stewart has re-entered the room. We'd like to close the meeting at 10:14, 10:11, 10 o'clock fast, 10:11. Thank you very much all for coming today. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
