Ordinary Meeting - June 2024
Date: Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 5:00PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 01:07:43
Synopsis: Short-Term Accommodation refusals, Childcare centre refused for buffer breach, Shark Control policy adopted, Operations insourced and procurement expanded, Park expansion noted, Quarry and river concerns addressed.
Meeting Attendees
Councillors
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Amelia Lorentson Jessica Phillips Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Frank Wilkie: Council unanimously adopted all Audit & Risk Committee recommendations noting QAO and KPMG interim reports, shell financials progress, and Strategic Risk Register updates (18:49; Item 8.1). Frank Wilkie: Two rural Short-Term Accommodation (STA) applications at Kin Kin and Cootharaba were refused unanimously, citing conflict with Strategic Framework, Rural Zone and Visitor Accommodation Codes, amenity, and housing strategy (22:06–29:32; Items 8.4.5.1–5.2). Brian Stockwell: The Cootharaba STA refusal additionally relied on Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code failures (safe egress, unfamiliar occupants, emergency access) (30:05–33:19; Item 8.4.5.2). Brian Stockwell: Childcare centre at 28 Eenie Creek Rd was refused (5–2) for breaching required 10m Hofmann Dr landscape buffer and Noosa Business Centre character outcomes; enforcement action on frontage landscaping requested (34:33–37:01; Item 8.4.5.3). Karen Finzel: Noosa Springs resort/clubhouse minor extension decision deferred at applicant’s request under DA Rules s22 (39:00–40:20; Item 8.4.5.4). Frank Wilkie: Yurol–Ringtail project noted, adding 2,400ha to Tewantin National Park; Transition Committee concluded (40:20–42:00; Item 8.4.6.1). Kim Rawlings: Shark Control Program policy adopted: continue support while advocating lower by-catch alternatives and SharkSmart education; clarify Council roles in strandings and signage (canals) (40:20–42:00; Item 8.4.6.2). Frank Wilkie: 2024–25 Fees & Charges adopted in advance of budget; May financial performance noted with sustainability indicators (40:20–42:00; Items 8.4.6.3–6.4). Jessica Phillips: Services & Organisation: Quamby Place lease renewals approved using s236(1)(c)(iii) tender exception; trade services ROPS refresh endorsed; landfill transfer station operations brought in-house with 3 FTEs (21:40–22:06; Item 8.3 incl. 7.1). Frank Wilkie: RADF grants ($36,700) and Community Program grants (projects, infrastructure, equipment, events; total $131,932.18 + project rounds) approved, subject to budget (42:00–48:06; Items 8.4.6.5–6.11). Frank Wilkie: Confidential awards for Dry/Wet Hire ROPS approved with multi-supplier panels and CEO delegation for extensions through 2030 (48:54–49:40; Items 8.4.7.1–7.2). Tom Wegener: 400+ signature petition for a Cooroy off-leash dog park received and referred to CEO (02:43–03:35; Item 4.1). Contentious / Transparency Matters Nick Cooke: Deputation alleged Council paused Quarry Management Plan (QMP) infringements during litigation, limiting enforcement; sought active monitoring, QMP tightening, and advocacy on unsafe haulage routes (04:51–18:49; Item 7.1 Deputation). Kim Rawlings: Confirmed Conservation Park concept for Noosa River originated with Noosa Parks Association; a draft FAQ was sent to DES for process input amid community confusion but not finalised (50:56–52:43; 59:57–01:02:05; Public Qs 11.1 & 11.3). Larry Sengstock: Responded to MSQ assertion of sole regulatory role by reaffirming Council’s advocacy role on vessel impacts and equitable access; no commitment to striking references from plans (55:52–59:42; Public Q 11.2). Shaun Walsh: Addressed community objections to Noosaville Foreshore draft plan (loss of >100 riverside parks, “fake dunes”), framing as consultation with climate-resilience measures and relocation of parking, not elimination (01:02:19–01:07:20; Public Q 11.4). Frank Wilkie: Clarified October 2023 River Plan consultation was delayed by caretaker and induction timelines; commitment to consider way forward remains (55:52–59:42; Public Q 11.2). Legal / Risk Council: STA refusals grounded in Noosa Plan 2020 Strategic Framework 3.2.6 (Agriculture/Tourism), 3.3.3 (Housing Choice), Rural Zone Code PO/OO, Visitor Accommodation Code PO1/PO2/PO25, and Noosa Housing Strategy 2022 (Items 5.1–5.2). Brian Stockwell: Cootharaba refusal added Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code OOs 2(a),(b),(e); PO1, PO6 for evacuation/ingress deficiencies—reducing disaster response burden is a statutory objective (30:05–33:19; Item 5.2). Council: Childcare refusal cited binding condition from RAL18/0023 requiring 10m Hofmann Dr landscaping; inconsistencies with Noosaville Local Plan Code and Major Centre Zone outcomes; Sustainable Building Design Code non-compliance (Item 5.3; s63(5) Planning Act noted). Council: Quamby Place leases lawfully renewed via Local Government Regulation 2012 s236(1)(c)(iii) tender exception (Item 8.3.5.1). Frank Wilkie: Resort decision deferred per applicant’s DA Rules s22 request—protects procedurally fair assessment (40:20; Item 5.4). Shaun Walsh: Sustainable Transport Levy constraints explained; aligns funding to congestion reduction services; foreshore/boat ramp upgrades better pursued via grants and asset renewal (52:46–55:26; Public Q 11.1). Conflicts of Interest Karen Finzel: Declarable COIs (Noosa Springs item; Peregian SLSC grant) disclosed due to Altum/ McCready associations; Council resolved she could participate; she abstained on the participation motions (39:00–40:20; 42:00–43:28; Items 5.4, 6.6). Jessica Phillips: Declarable COI (former Cooroy Gymnastics president); permitted to participate; abstained on participation motion; then voted on grants (44:25–45:07; Item 6.8). Tom Wegener: Prescribed COI (member, Noosa International Surfilm Festival); left room; Council approved Events grants in his absence (45:51–47:13; Item 6.9). Brian Stockwell: Prescribed COI (President, Noosa Lions FC); left room; Alliance grants extension approved in his absence (48:17–48:54; Item 6.12). Short-Term Accommodation (Rural Hinterland) Tom Wegener: Moved detailed Kin Kin refusal tying STA to loss of rural amenity, proximity to Agricultural Land Conservation Areas, and whole-house STA impacts on housing supply (22:06–28:05; Item 5.1). Brian Stockwell: Emphasised Cootharaba site’s constrained egress through high bushfire hazard, compounding risk with unfamiliar short-stay occupants (33:19–34:30; Item 5.2). Planning Scheme: Noosa Business Centre/Childcare Brian Stockwell: Noted draft scheme may list childcare as acceptable, but current refusal turns on mandatory 10m landscape buffer delivering “park-like” Noosa character; 4m is inadequate (34:33–36:08; Item 5.3). Jessica Phillips: Opposed refusal on essential services grounds, highlighting community need; overruled by majority prioritising scheme integrity (36:13–37:01; Item 5.3). Noosa River Management & Shark Control Kim Rawlings: Stated multi-agency governance requires coordinated models; Conservation Park was one concept for River Plan investigation, not adopted policy (50:56–52:43; 59:57–01:02:05; Public Qs 11.1, 11.3). Larry Sengstock: Reaffirmed Council’s advocacy role with MSQ on safety, access, and environmental values rather than unilateral vessel restrictions (55:52–59:42; Public Q 11.2). Council: Adopted stance to support DAF Shark Control Program while pushing trials that reduce by-catch and expanding education (Item 6.2). Quarry Haulage, Safety, and Community Amenity Nick Cooke: Reported up to 288 daily truck movements, alleged QMP loopholes and insufficient monitoring, and sought Council advocacy for TMR action under Transport Infrastructure Act s46 to limit truck lengths on unsafe curves (04:51–18:49; Deputation). Nick Cooke: Urged stricter NHVR local permit conditions (frequency/duration/mass), review of Key Resource Area, and intervention on proposed clearing affecting MNES/koala habitat tied to quarry expansion (04:51–18:49; Deputation). Procurement, Operations, and Financial Stewardship Council: Expanded ROPS panels for trades and plant (dry/wet) with CEO authority for contract administration and refreshes; mitigates supply risk and supports continuity (Items 8.3.5.3; 8.4.7.1–7.2). Shaun Walsh: Landfill transfer station operations insourced from Cleanaway; CEO delegated to establish 3 FTEs, indicating service continuity and operational control shift (Item 8.3.7.1). Frank Wilkie: Financial oversight strengthened via Audit & Risk processes and inclusion of sustainability indicators in monthly reporting (18:49; Item 6.4).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES Ordinary Meeting Thursday, 20 June 2024 5:00 PM Pomona Memorial School of Arts Hall 6 Reserve St, Pomona Crs Frank Wilkie (Chair), Karen Finzel, Amelia Lorentson, Jessica Phillips, Brian Stockwell, Tom Wegener, Nicola Wilson “Noosa Shire – different by nature” ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 1. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COUNCILLORS Cr Frank Wilkie (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Amelia Lorentson (via Microsoft Teams) Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh APOLOGIES Nil. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That in accordance with Section 254K of the Local Government Regulation, Cr Lorentson is approved to attend the Meeting dated 20 June 2024 via Microsoft Teams. Carried unanimously. 2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 2.1. ORDINARY MEETING 16 MAY 2024 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 16 May 2024 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. 2.2. SPECIAL MEETING 3 JUNE 2024 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel The Minutes of the Special Meeting held on 3 June 2024 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. 3. MAYORAL MINUTES ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Nil. 4. PETITIONS 4.1. PETITION: OFFLEASH AREA Refer to Attachment 1 to the Minutes - Petition - Off Leash Area & Dog Park in Cooroy - Trevor Butler Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That the petition with 400+ signatories submitted by Trevor Butler, requesting that Council install a dog park in the Cooroy area be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action. Carried unanimously. 5. NOTIFIED MOTIONS Nil. 6. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 7. DEPUTATIONS 7.1. APPLICANT: SAVE NOOSA HINTERLAND - NICK COOKE TOPIC: HEAVY VEHICLE HAULAGE IN NOOSA HINTERLAND 8. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS 8.1. AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE REPORT - 31 MAY 2024 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS (External) Timothy Cronin, Chair (External) Member Ian Rushworth ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Cr Tom Wegener Cr Nicola Wilson NON-COMMITTEE MEMBERS/OFFICERS Acting Chief Executive Officer, Larry Sengstock Director Corporate Services, Trent Grauf Executive Officer, Internal Audit & Corporate Performance, Debra Iezzi Governance Manager Diana Stewart Financial Services Manager, Pauline Coles People & Culture Manager, Jacqui Campbell ICT Manager, Ryan Smith KPMG, Thomas Cook KPMG, Erin Neville-Stanley QAO, Chantelle Hanna (Microsoft Teams) COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 1. 2024 AUDIT COMMITTEE BRIEFING PAPER AND INTERIM REPORT - QAO & KPMG That Council note the 2024 the Briefing Paper and Interim Report provided by the Queensland Audit Office (QAO) and KPMG to the Audit & Risk Committee meeting dated 31 May 2024. 2. 2024 INTERIM REPORT - QAO That Council note the 2024 Interim Report provided by the Queensland Audit Office (QAO) to the Audit & Risk Committee meeting dated 31 May 2024. 3. SHELL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND END OF FINANCIAL YEAR UPDATE That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee Meeting dated 31 May 2024 regarding Council’s progress preparing for the 2023/24 financial statements. 4. UPDATE OF COUNCIL'S STRATEGIC RISK REGISTER That Council note the report by the Executive Officer Internal Audit and Corporate Performance to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 31 May 2024 providing an update on the Strategic Risk Register. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the report of the Audit & Risk Committee dated 31 May 2024 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted. Carried unanimously. 8.2. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - 11 JUNE 2024 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Amelia Lorentson (Chair) Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Frank Wilkie NON COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Jessica Phillips ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray APOLOGIES Nil. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 5.1. MCU23/0101 APPLICATION FOR SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 561 GYMPIE KIN KIN ROAD, KIN KIN That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 5.1 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. 5.2. MCU24/0003 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 428 COOTHARABA ROAD COOTHARABA That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 5.2 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. 5.3. MCU22/0094 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A CHILDCARE CENTRE AT 28 EENIE CREEK ROAD, NOOSAVILLE That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 5.3 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. 5.4. MCU16/0070.01 APPLICATION FOR A MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE OF PREMISES - COMMERCIAL BUSINESS TYPE 3 - VETERINARY AT 69 MARY STREET, NOOSAVILLE That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2024 regarding Application No. MCU16/0070.01 to make a minor change to an existing approval for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use of Premises - Commercial Business Type 3 - Veterinary situated at 69 Mary St, Noosaville and: A. Agree to amend condition 2, as outlined in Attachment 1. B. Agree to include additional condition 8, as outlined in Attachment 1. C. Agree to enter into an Infrastructure Agreement with the applicant that provides for contributions in lieu one on site car parking space. D. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. 5.5. FURTHER REPORT - MCU21/0110 - APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - RESORT COMPLEX AND ANCILLARY BAR, FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, OUTDOOR SPORT AND RECREATION, AND CLUB (MINOR EXTENSION TO EXISTING CLUBHOUSE) AT 61 NOOSA SPRINGS DRIVE, NOOSA HEADS That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 5.5 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 That the report of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting dated 11 June 2024 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried unanimously. 8.3. SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE REPORT - 11 JUNE 2024 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Karen Finzel (Chair) Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson NON-COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Tom Wegener EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer, Larry Sengstock Acting Director Infrastructure Services, Shaun Walsh Director Community Services, Kerri Contini Director Development & Regulation, Richard MacGillivray APOLOGIES Nil COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 5.1 PROPOSED TRUSTEE LEASE RENEWALS - THE SOUND PARK QUAMBY PLACE That Council note the report by the Property Manager, Development and Regulation to the Services and Organisation Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2024 and: A. Agree to enter into a 10 year commercial lease with C & S Webster for Lease A on Lot 32 N21854 in accordance with the terms generally outlined in this report; and B. Agree to enter into a 10 year commercial lease with B A Ogilvie and P A Bacon for Lease Area B on Lot 32 N21854, Lease Area C on Lot 32 N21854, Lease Area D on Lot 32 N21854 and Lease Area E on Lot 32 N21854 in accordance with the terms generally outlined in this report; and C. Apply the exception to the requirement for tendering of each lease under section 236 (1) (c) (iii) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 as the disposals are for the purpose of renewing the leases to the existing tenants of the land; and D. Authorise the CEO to negotiate, make, vary, sign and discharge the leases and any required variations of the lease on Council’s behalf. 5.2. NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL SPECIALISED SUPPLIER LIST That Council A. Note the report by the Arts & Culture Manager to the Services & Organisation Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2024; and B. Add Theatre Technician Services to the Specialised Supplier List for the remaining term of the list’s validity period, being 26 October 2024. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 5.3. CONTRACT NO. T000067 – REGISTER OF PRE-QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS FOR PROVISION OF TRADE SERVICES That Council A. Note the report by the Buildings and Facilities Coordinator to the Services and Organisation Committee dated 11 June 2024; B. Approve the award of Contract No. T000067 for the Register of Prequalified Suppliers for the Provision of Trade Services {Refresh} for a period of two (2) years effective 23 June 2024 to the following suppliers that will be in addition to the existing list of suppliers on this ROPS: Advanced Buildings (Queensland) Pty Ltd Bailey and Dalton Electrical Pty Ltd Bertram and Son Services Pty Ltd Coast Life Painting, Ryan Charles Sawers t/as Coast Smoke Alarms, TTF McGrath Family Trust t/as CVSG Asset Services Pty Ltd D2E Electrical Co. Pty Ltd Ecologic Energy Pty Ltd Energypro Pty Ltd Higgins Coatings Pty Ltd MDL Electrical Contracting Pty Ltd Nicholas Ashton Noosa Decorating, Christopher John McCann t/as Plumbing Bros Sunshine Coast, TTF Sinclair Plumbing Trust t/as Q - Main Pty Ltd Satisfied Plumbing and Gas Services T2 Electrical & Data Pty Ltd Kimini Constructions, TTF Hill Family Trust t/as HSCD, TTF Stower Business Trust t/as Bruff Painting, TTF The Brough Family Trust t/as Whelan Electrical Services Pty Ltd Yeti Services Pty Ltd C. Subject to satisfactory performance of the suppliers, authorise the CEO to approve the option to extend the contract at the expiry of this term for a further one (1) term of up to two (2) years ending on 22 June 2028. 7.1. CONFIDENTIAL: EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD LANDFILL TRANSFER STATION - OPERATION BY NOOSA COUNCIL That Council A. Note the report by the Manager Resource Recovery to the Services and Organisation Meeting dated 11 June 2024 regarding the Eumundi-Noosa Road landfill transfer station; B. Approve the transfer of the operation of the Eumundi-Noosa Road landfill transfer station from the contractor (Cleanaway) to Infrastructure Services, Noosa Council; and C. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to: 1. Negotiate, finalise and execute all relevant documentation to facilitate the transfer of the operation to Infrastructure Services, Noosa Council; and 2. Approve the establishment of three full-time (Level 4 LAWA) resources to manage the operation of the Eumundi-Noosa Road landfill transfer station. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the report of the Services & Organisation Committee meeting dated 11 June 2024 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried unanimously. 8.4. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT - 17 JUNE 2024 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Brian Stockwell (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Tom Wegener Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh APOLOGIES Nil. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 5.1. MCU23/0101 APPLICATION FOR SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 561 GYMPIE KIN KIN ROAD, KIN KIN Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2024 regarding Application No. MCU23/0101 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Shortterm accommodation situated at 561 Gympie Kin Kin Rd, Kin Kin and: A. Refuse the application for the following reasons. 1. The proposal is not consistent with 3.2.6 (Agriculture and Rural Based Activities) of the Strategic Framework as: a. It does not protect agricultural land from encroachment from urban development and would compromise productivity. b. Short-term accommodation is not an ancillary rural industry which supports production, investment, and diversification. 2. The proposal is not consistent with 3.2.6 (Tourism) of the Strategic Framework as: ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 a. It does not provide for high quality nature-based and rural tourism experiences. b. Short-term accommodation is not an ancillary rural industry which supports production, investment, and diversification. 3. The proposal is not consistent with 3.3.3 (Housing Choice) of the Strategic Framework as: a. It does not protect the rural neighbourhood from short term visitor accommodation that would impact on the amenity enjoyed by residents. 4. The proposal does not comply with the Purpose and Overall Outcome (2)(i) of the Rural Zone Code as a. it does not provide for rural uses and/or activities or other uses and activities that are compatible with existing and future rural uses and activities. b. it does not provide for rural uses and/or activities or other uses and activities that are compatible with the character and environmental features of the zone. c. the visitor accommodation in its proposed form does not complement rural uses or promote the sustainable use of rural land. 5. The use of the premises for Short Term Accommodation is not consistent with Overall Outcome (2)(j) and Performance Outcome PO4 of the Rural Zone Code as it not compatible with rural activities and will detract from the rural amenity of adjoining properties. 6. The use of the premises for Short Term Accommodation is not consistent with Performance Outcome PO8 of the Rural Zone Code as the proposed location of the dwelling within 200m of mapped Agricultural Land Conservation Area, is not sufficiently setback to mitigate risks associated with the use of chemicals or air pollutants and/or avoid conflict with current or future rural uses and activities on adjoining properties. 7. The use of the premises for Short Term Accommodation is not consistent with Overall Outcome (2)(g) and Performance Outcome PO1 and PO2 of the Visitor Accommodation Code as: a. The site is within 250 metres of mapped Agricultural Land Conservation Area which is intended for intensive animal industry, intensive horticulture or rural industry uses. b. The site is within 100 metres of mapped Agricultural Land Conservation Area which is intended for agricultural operations. c. It will impact on the ability of rural landowners to carry out agricultural pursuits. d. It will result in conflicts with nearby land uses. e. It will detract from the character and amenity of the local area. 8. The use of the premises for Short Term Accommodation is not consistent with Performance Outcome PO25 of the Visitor Accommodation Code as it will result in an unreasonable loss of residential amenity because of a likely increase in noise to adjoining properties. 9. The use is inconsistent with the Noosa Housing Strategy 2022 - Keep Noosa Home item 7.7: Ensure that short-term accommodation in the hinterland is complementary to housing on site and not at the expense of housing. Whole-house short term rentals should be limited to infrequent letting of the owner’s principal-place of residence. 10. The use is inconsistent with the Noosa Council Short Term Accommodation Monitoring Report November 2022 as: a. Short-term accommodation, without a permanent resident remaining on site, compromises future housing supply for permanent residents. b. Short-term accommodation of an entire dwelling house compromises adequate long term housing stock being available to meet the diverse ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 needs of Noosa Shire’s current and future residents, consistent with Noosa Council’s adopted Housing Strategy 2022. c. Short-term accommodation does not reinforce the purpose and outcomes to be achieved by development within the Rural zone for rural pursuits, particularly agricultural uses and complementary valueadded uses and housing for permanent residents. Carried unanimously. 5.2. MCU24/0003 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 428 COOTHARABA ROAD COOTHARABA Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2024 regarding Application No. MCU24/0003 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use -Short-term accommodation situated at 428 Cootharaba Rd Cootharaba Qld 4565 and: A. Refuse the application for the following reasons 1. The proposal is not consistent with 3.2.6 (Tourism) of the Strategic Framework as: a. It does not provide for high quality nature-based and rural tourism experiences. b. Short-term accommodation is not an ancillary rural industry which supports production, investment, and diversification. 2. The proposal is not consistent with 3.3.3 (Housing Choice) of the Strategic Framework as: a. It does not protect the rural neighbourhood from short term visitor accommodation that would impact on the amenity enjoyed by residents. 3. The proposal does not comply with the Purpose and Overall Outcomes (2)(i) of the Rural Zone Code as a. it does not provide for rural uses and/or activities or other uses and activities that are compatible with existing and future rural uses and activities. b. it does not provide for rural uses and/or activities or other uses and activities that are compatible with the character and environmental features of the zone. c. the visitor accommodation in its proposed form does not complement rural uses or promote the sustainable use of rural land. 4. The use of the premises for Short Term Accommodation is not consistent with Performance Outcome PO4 of the Rural Zone Code as it not compatible with rural activities and will detract from the rural amenity of adjoining properties. 5. The use of the premises for Short Term Accommodation is not consistent with Performance Outcome PO25 of the Visitor Accommodation Code as it will result in an unreasonable loss of residential amenity because of a likely increase in noise to adjoining properties. 6. The proposal does not comply with the Purpose and Overall Outcomes (2)(a), (b) and (e) of the Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code as: a. It does not avoid or mitigate the potential adverse impacts of bushfire on people and property. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 b. It proposes development in an area at risk from bushfire hazard and it is not compatible with the nature of the hazard. c. The risk to people, property and the natural environment from bushfire hazard is not minimised. d. The development unduly burdens disaster management response and recovery capacity and capabilities. 7. The proposal does not comply with Performance Outcome PO1 of the Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code as: a. The development may materially increase the number of people congregating on the premises who are unfamiliar with the locality, and as such increasing risk to the safety of people and property from the adverse impacts of bushfire. 8. The proposal does not comply with Performance Outcome PO6 of the Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code as: a. Safe access and egress to the development for emergency vehicles and personnel has not been demonstrated. b. easy and safe evacuation of residents of premises and access by emergency services has not been demonstrated. 9. The use is inconsistent with the Noosa Housing Strategy 2022 - Keep Noosa Home item 7.7: Ensure that short-term accommodation in the hinterland is complementary to housing on site and not at the expense of housing. Whole-house short term rentals should be limited to infrequent letting of the owners principal-place of residence 10. The use is inconsistent with the Noosa Council Short Term Accommodation Monitoring Report November 2022 as: a. Short-term accommodation, without a permanent resident remaining on site, compromises future housing supply for permanent residents. b. Short-term accommodation of an entire dwelling house compromises adequate long term housing stock being available to meet the diverse needs of Noosa Shire’s current and future residents, consistent with Noosa Council’s adopted Housing Strategy 2022. c. Short-term accommodation does not reinforce the purpose and outcomes to be achieved by development within the Rural zone for rural pursuits, particularly agricultural uses and complimentary value-added uses and housing for permanent residents. Carried unanimously. 5.3. MCU22/0094 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A CHILDCARE CENTRE AT 28 EENIE CREEK ROAD, NOOSAVILLE Council Resolution Moved Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the report by the Coordinator, Planning to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2024 regarding Application No. MCU22/0094 for a Material Change of Use for a Childcare centre, situated at 28 Eenie Creek Rd Noosaville and: A. Refuse the application for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development is not consistent with condition no. 53 of Development Permit to Reconfigure a Lot (1 lot into 23 lots) RAL18/0023 as the proposal does not include the required 10m wide landscaped garden bed to Hofmann Drive. 2. The proposal is not consistent with the Strategic Intent and Strategic Outcomes 3.3.1(o), and 3.3.5 (s)(i) (D) of the Noosa Plan 2020 as the proposal fails to incorporate the 10m wide landscaping required to Hofmann Drive to achieve the ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 parklike, vegetated setting envisaged for the centre which is synonymous with the Noosa style. 3. The proposal is not consistent with acceptable and performance outcomes AO5, PO5, AO7.4, PO7 of the Noosaville Local Plan Code a: a. The development does not retain or propose to enhance the required 10m wide landscaped garden bed to Hofmann Drive which is important to contribute and create the character sought for the Noosa Business Centre. 4. The proposal is not consistent with the overall outcome (3)(f) and (4) acceptable and performance outcomes AO32.4, AO32.5, AO32.6, PO32 and PO33 of the Major Centre Zone as: a. Reducing the width of the landscaped garden beds required to Hofmann Drive, particularly where this approach is continued for the remainder of the lots with frontage to Hofmann Drive, will compromise and impact the ability to achieve a centre which is overall recognisable as having a Noosa style. b. The proposal does not retain, incorporate, or enhance the existing vegetation within the required 10m wide landscaped garden bed to Hofmann Drive, which is important to enhance the visual amenity and natural landscape character of the Noosa Business Centre. c. The proposal disrupts the landscaped streetscape treatment required to Hofmann Drive intended to enhance the amenity and contribute positively to the centre’s character. d. The proposed use is an inconsistent use in the Major Centre Zone Code – Business Park Precinct will not deliver the commercial and employment uses intended for the Precinct such as health and wellbeing, education, research and technology and knowledge-based industries. e. The bio retention basin at the front of the site is located within the required setback area and in front of the proposed carparking area which results in the development being more visible to the road and not located in a park like setting. 5. The proposal is not consistent with overall outcome 2(a), (d) and performance outcome PO8 of the Sustainable Building Design Code as the development does not provide a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.7m. 6. The proposed bicycle parking is not consistent with acceptable outcomes AO6.1 of the Driveways and Parking Code as they are located in an area that impedes access around the site. B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. C. Request staff to undertake action to ensure the landscaping across the frontage of the site is consistent with development approvals RAL18/0023 and OPW20/0145. For: Crs Wilkie, Stockwell, Wegener, Finzel and Wilson Against: Crs Phillips and Lorentson Carried. 5.4. FURTHER REPORT - MCU21/0110 - APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - RESORT COMPLEX AND ANCILLARY BAR, FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, OUTDOOR SPORT AND RECREATION, AND CLUB (MINOR EXTENSION TO EXISTING CLUBHOUSE) AT 61 NOOSA SPRINGS DRIVE, NOOSA HEADS In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Finzel provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I have come to understand that JFP Urban Consultants on behalf of Altum Property Group, who are the Developers of Park Ridge Noosa Springs, ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 made a submission against the Noosa Springs Hotel Development. Since then, the matter has changed give Altum Property Group has withdrawn the submission. Leigh McCready, who is associated with Altum, was involved as a volunteer with my 2020 election campaign with Future Noosa which is no longer an entity. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I believe I do not have a close personal relationship with Leigh & Rob McCready. 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. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Finzel and determine that Cr Finzel participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that Cr Finzel does not have a close personal relationship with Leigh & Rob McCready and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Finzel did not vote on the above motion. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council note the Further Report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 June 2024 regarding Application No. MCU21/0110 for a Development Permit for a Material Change of Use – Resort Complex and ancillary Bar, Food and Drink Outlet, Outdoor Sport and Recreation and Club (minor extension to existing clubhouse) at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Heads and defer this matter to a future meeting round as the applicant has requested to extend the decision-making period pursuant to section 22 of the Development Assessment Rules. Carried unanimously. 6.1. YUROL RINGTAIL CONSERVATION PROJECT That Council A. Note the report by the Director Strategy & Environment to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024 regarding the Yurol Ringtail Environmental Project; B. Note that the Transition Committee established under that project has now completed its role and thank the members of that committee for their stewardship of this important environmental project; and C. Note the final report from the Transition Committee provided at Attachment 1 to the Report, and in particular, note that this project is adding an additional 2,400ha of land to the Tewantin National Park. 6.2. DAF SHARK CONTROL PROGRAM - RECOMMENDED COUNCIL POLICY POSITION That Council A. Note the report by Environmental Services to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024, regarding a recommended Council policy position on the DAF Shark Control Program. B. Adopt the following policy position that: ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 1. Council continues to support the DAF Shark Control Program (SCP) under the Queensland Shark Management Plan, with the vision of the SCP transitioning to lower by-catch potential alternatives in waters adjacent to the Noosa LGA; and 2. Council to work alongside DAF to explore further opportunities to actively support SharkSmart educational programs, and alternative bite mitigation trials where appropriate. C. Note Council’s other shark management responsibilities including; 1. Marine animal stranding response, noting this role requires resourcing for equipment, materials and staff training and the use of contractors to enable Council to effectively respond to stranding events; and 2. Consideration of signage investigation relating to dangerous marine animal warnings across Council managed canal systems only (Noosa Waters). 6.3. 2024-2025 FEES AND CHARGES That Council note the report by the Manager Financial Services to the General Meeting dated 17 June 2024 and pursuant to sections 97, 98 and 262(3)(c) of the Local Government Act 2009, for the 2024-25 financial year the cost-recovery fees and commercial charges provided as Attachment 1 to the report. 6.4. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – MAY 2024 That Council note the report by the Manager Financial Services to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024 outlining May 2024 year to date financial performance against budget, including changes to the financial performance report with the inclusion of key financial sustainability indicators. 6.5. REGIONAL ARTS DEVELOPMENT FUND (RADF) - GRANT RECOMMENDATIONS 2024 That Council A. Note the report by the Arts and Culture Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024 regarding applications to the Regional Arts Development Fund Round 21, 2024/25; and B. Approve the recommendations of the Assessment Committee to fund projects to the value of $36,700 as outlined in Attachment 1 to the report. 6.6. 2024-2025 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING – COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND ONE) – PROGRAM/PROJECTS In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Finzel provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the Peregian Beach Surf Life Saving Club Grant application which is before us today. Leigh McCready has recently been elected as the president of this club. Mr Rob McCready sits in a decision-making capacity on the Peregian Beach Surf Lifesaving Club Sub-Committee. Mr McCready is married to Leigh McCready who worked as a volunteer on the 2020 Future Noosa Election Campaign which is no longer an entity. Mr & Mrs McCready are not related parties, nor are they close associates and therefore I do not believe this COI satisfies the requirements the act as I do not stand to gain a benefit or loss in relation to the matter that is no greater than the benefit or loss of a significant proportion of persons in the local government area stand to gain or ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 lose. However, in the public interest and full transparency I will declare this interest as I believe I am able to make an impartial decision on the matter. 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. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Finzel and determine that Cr Finzel 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 Finzel did not vote on the above motion. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council A. Note the report by the Community Development Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024; and B. Approve Round One 2024-25 Community Project Grants – Program/Projects provided in Attachment 1 to this report, subject to sufficient funds to the value of $42,085 being allocated in the adopted 2024/25 Council budget. Carried unanimously. 6.7. 2024-2025 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND ONE) - INFRASTRUCTURE That Council A. Note the report by the Community Development Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024; and B. Approve Round One 2024-2025 Community Project Grants - Infrastructure provided in Attachment 1 to this report, subject to sufficient funds to the value of $30,000 being allocated in the adopted 2024/25 Council budget. 6.8. 2024-2025 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND ONE) - EQUIPMENT In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Phillips provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Phillips, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I was the president of Cooroy Gymnastics until September 2023, and as my parents were foundation members. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I and my parents are no longer involved in any capacity in the Cooroy ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Gymnastics Club. 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. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Phillips and determine that Cr Phillips participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that Councillor Phillips is no longer involved in any capacity in the Cooroy Gymnastics Club and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Phillips did not vote on the above motion. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Community Development Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024; and B. Approve Round One 2024-25 Community Project Grants – Equipment to the value of $36,647.18 provided in Attachment 1 to this report, subject to sufficient funds being allocated in the adopted 2024/25 Council budget. Carried unanimously. 6.9. 2024-2025 COMMUNITY PROGRAM FUNDING - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND ONE) - EVENTS In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Wegener provided the following declaration to the meeting of a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Wegener, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendation to NOOSA International Surfilm Festival. I am a member of the NOOSA International Surfilm Festival Committee. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Wegener left the meeting. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council A. Note the report by the Community Development Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024; and B. Approve Round One 2024-25 Community Project Grants – Events to the value of $23,200 provided in Attachment 1 to this report, subject to sufficient funds being allocated in the adopted 2024/25 Council budget. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Carried unanimously. Cr Wegener returned to the meeting. 6.10. 2024-2025 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND ONE) - OVERVIEW That Council A. Note the report by the Community Development Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024; and B. Approve Round One 2024-25 Community Project Grants, subject to sufficient funds to the value of $131,932.18 being allocated in the adopted 2024/25 Council budget. 6.11. ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE CHANGE GRANTS - ENVIRONMENT PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND 19), CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS (ROUND 4) That Council A. Note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024 regarding applications for the Environment Project Grants (Round 19) and Climate Change Response Grants (Round 4); B. Approve the recommendations to fund projects totalling the amounts below: i. Environment Project Grants (Attachment 1) - $13,293.00 ii. Climate Change Response Grants (Attachment 2) - $50,000; and C. Authorise the CEO to enter Funding Deeds for the Environment Project grants and Climate Change Response grants with successful organisations, as per the recommended funding amount. 6.12. ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF THREE YEAR ALLIANCE GRANT AGREEMENTS In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Stockwell provided the following declaration to the meeting of a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Stockwell, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the proposed funding allocations to the Noosa Lions Football Club. I am the current President of the Noosa Lions Football Club. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Stockwell left the meeting. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Community Development Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024 and approve a one-year extension to the Sports Field Maintenance and Hall/Community Centre Alliance grants with the new completion date being 30 June 2025, subject to sufficient funds being made available in the adopted 2024/25 budget. Carried unanimously. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Cr Stockwell returned to the meeting. 7.1. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: CONTRACT NO. RP00637 - REGISTER OF PRE-QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS (ROPS) FOR THE HIRE OF PLANT AND EQUIPMENT (COMMONLY KNOWN AS DRY HIRE) That Council note the report by the Civil Work Maintenance Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024 and A. Award Contract No. RP00637 – Register of Pre-Qualified Suppliers (ROPS) for the Hire of Plant and Equipment (commonly known as Dry Hire) for a period of two (2) years commencing on 1 July 2024 to the following suppliers: Ready Industries Pty Ltd (1300TEMPFENCE) ATF Services Pty Ltd (AAA) Abletech Underground Group Pty Ltd Cooloola Mini Hire Pty Ltd (Astro Hire) BDA Infrastructure Pty Ltd Brooks Hire Services Pty Ltd Coates Hire Operations Pty Limited Conplant Pty Ltd Corbet Equipment Hire Pty Ltd Durack Civil Pty Ltd RAM Invest Pty Ltd (Earth Gear) Flexihire Pty Ltd Water Trucks Pty Ltd (H2flow Hire) Hastings Deering (Australia) Limited K2 Plant Hire Pty Ltd Kennards Hire Pty Limited Master Hire Pty Ltd Onsite Rental Group Operations Pty Ltd Porter Hire Pty Ltd Rosmech Sales & Service Pty Ltd RPM Hire Australia Pty Ltd Sherrin Rentals Pty Ltd Shore Hire Pty Ltd The Trustee for Orchard Trust t/as Sniffers Plant Hire Pty Ltd The trustee for the TFH Hire Trust t/as TFH Hire Services Pty Ltd Trafquip Pty Ltd WEZ Group PTY LTD B. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, finalise, execute and do all things necessary to administer the Contract on behalf of Council; C. Subject to satisfactory performance of the suppliers, authorise the CEO to approve the option to extend the contract at the expiry of initial term for a further two (2) terms of up to twenty-four (24) months each ending on 30 June 2030; and D. Authorise the CEO to approve the addition of new suppliers to Contract No. RP00637 – Register of Pre-Qualified Suppliers (ROPS) for the Hire of Plant and Equipment as a result of an advertised refresh at the expiry of the initial term and term extensions. 7.2. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: CONTRACT NO. RP00436 - REGISTER OF PRE-QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS (ROPS) FOR THE HIRE OF PLANT AND OPERATOR (COMMONLY KNOWN AS WET HIRE) ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 That Council note the report by the Civil Work Maintenance Coordinator to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 June 2024 and A. Award Contract No. RP00436 – Register of Pre-Qualified Suppliers (ROPS) for the Hire of Plant and Operator (commonly known as Wet Hire) for a period of two (2) years commencing on 1 July 2024 to the following suppliers: o A.F Dixon & B.S Dixon (BS & AF Dixon) o Abletech Underground Group Pty Ltd o Albert and Herbert Pty Ltd o AMAC Cranes Group Pty Ltd o Amanda Alice Sims t/as Amanda Sims Contracting o Asphalt Innovations Pty Ltd o Aussie Hydro-Vac Services Pty Ltd o Australian Civil Solutions Pty Ltd o B.P Blacket & N.M Blacket t/as Jet Vac Excavations o Base Course Management Queensland Pty Ltd o Bebrok Excavations Pty Ltd o BDA Infrastructure Pty Ltd (Black Diamond) o Capital Asphalt QLD Pty Ltd o Clayton's Towing Service Pty Ltd o Cleanaway Industrial Solutions Pty Ltd o Corbet Equipment Hire Pty Ltd o Crejae Excavations Qld o Durack Civil Pty Ltd o Ellis Profiling QLD Pty Ltd o Ensbey Earth Moving ATF The Ensbey Family Trust o EPH Contracts (QLD) PTY LTD o First Nations Civil & Contracting Pty Ltd o Fishys Earthmoving ATF The Fish Family Trust o Fleet Plant Hire Pty Ltd o H2flow Hire (Water Trucks Pty Ltd) o IBS Excavations (Moortop Pty Ltd) o Junction Venture Pty Ltd t/as Cootharaba Earthworx o Luke Allan Burrows o MD Plant Hire Pty Ltd o Pipe Management Australia Pty Ltd o Falcon Earthmoving Pty Ltd t/as Qld Dozer Hire o Roy's Earthmoving and Plant Hire Pty Ltd o Sherrin Rentals Pty Ltd o Sniffers Group o Stabilised Pavements of Australia Pty Ltd o Suttons Cleaning Service Qld Pty Ltd o THD Civil Pty Ltd o The Stabilising Pty Ltd o The Trustee for Kelly Family Trust (Kelly's Earthworks) o The Trustee for Valentine Family Trust t/as Valentine Transport o Wez Group Pty Ltd B. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, finalise, execute and do all things necessary to administer the Contract on behalf of Council. C. Subject to satisfactory performance of the suppliers, authorise the CEO to approve the option to extend the contract at the expiry of initial term for a further two (2) terms of up to twenty-four (24) months each ending on 30 June 2030. D. Authorise the CEO to approve the addition of new suppliers to Contract No. RP00436 – Register of Pre-Qualified Suppliers (ROPS) for the Hire of Plant and Operator as a result of an advertised refresh at the expiry of the initial term and term extensions. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That the report of the General Committee meeting dated 17 June 2024 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried unanimously. 9. ORDINARY MEETING REPORTS Nil. 10. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION Nil. 11. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 11.1. CRAIG VELLA Question 1 Given considerable community concerns with the concept of a Conservation Park over the Noosa River please advise the origins of turning the fish habitat areas of the Noosa River into a Conservation Park. Without supplying an individual name, was it a State Agency, Council Staff, a Councillor, or another person that proposed the concept. Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings One of the complexities of managing the Noosa River system and catchment is that it is governed by a range of agencies, each with different responsibilities and legislative, regulatory, planning and community roles. For catchment management to be effective there needs to be a concerted and coordinated approach across all agencies and stakeholders. For the past 20 years Council has explored a range of mechanisms to achieve integrated management and collaborative arrangements for the Noosa River Catchment. Most river catchments and many other local governments grapple with this and there are a range of models that’s exist. Council has explored many of these and various ideas have come from various sources both within Council and from our community. This most recent idea of a conservation park as another management model to explore or consider was first suggested by Noosa Parks Association. Council officers did some initial investigation, noting like other models previously explored it was worthy of further ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 consideration, officers therefore recommended it be included for investigation and consideration in the River Plan. Question 2 Could the Sustainable Transport Levy which is budgeted to raise $933,000 in the 23/24 draft budget be used to repair and/or reconstruct the 'on land component' of the boat ramp and associated car and trailer parking at Hilton Esplanade or at any other boat ramp in the Noosa Shire? If not then why? Response provided by Acting Director Infrastructure, Shaun Walsh The Sustainable Transport Levy contributes towards the cost associated with a range of transport services and initiatives that have the purpose of reducing traffic congestion and demand on Noosa’s road network. This currently funds Councils “Go Noosa” initiatives including free bus services during peak times, satellite parking areas, carparking studies associated with demand management such as the carparking technology trail implemented by Council in 23/34 Christmas period. The levy is being fully expended at present and funding for new carparking initiatives would either need the levy to rise, or existing services to be curtailed. If levy funding was made available in the future for water transport, the most aligned for use of the Sustainable Transport Levy could be associated with any “on water” public transport including jetties for future public ferries (if that was a desired option), as well as support satellite carparking spaces for patrons of a public ferry, rather than construction of carparking and trailer parking for private use of the boat ramp. It is noted that Council has recently undertaken sealing and line marking of the existing boat ramp carpark at Noosaville as part of its ongoing funding allocations and commitment to asset renewal and maintenance. In terms of upgrades the optimal funding mechanism for boat ramp and associated car and trailer parking is grant funding, underpinned by use of Council asset renewal budget. To be able to seek grant funding Council would ideally have shovel ready projects to meet submission obligations of the state and federal government programs as they arise. Council has commenced Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Masterplan, to assist in having shovel ready plans for the Noosaville Boat Ramp, but note that more planning work needs to be done at other boat ramp and parking locations in the Shire such as Tewantin, and has budget allocations for future years to allow that work to commence. 11.2. ANDREW MCCARTHY Question 1. Having regard to the following commentary made by MSQ General Manager Mr Kell Dillon, appearing in Noosa Today on 10 May 2024: We are the state marine regulator, no one else is, and we intend to regulate the Noosa River through proper zoning and planning, recognising that it is an important resource for the state, and maximising its use for all people, not limiting it. Will the Noosa Council remove all references to vessel restrictions from the draft Noosa River Catchment Management Plan and all other Council plans and documentation that exist both now and in the future? Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings Management of the Noosa River involves a number of stakeholders working collaboratively to address complex issues that surround the environmental, cultural, commercial and recreational elements of the river. The river is a dynamic system where actions and impacts need to be considered in an interrelated manner, rather than in isolation. Examples of this include riparian vegetation impact and bank erosion caused by excessive boat wash, downstream public health issues from illegal waste discharge and altered flood regimes from ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 increased system siltation from the upper catchment. Catchment Management requires collaboration and working together to manage interrelated issues. There are multiple agencies with varying responsibilities across the river, many of which have interrelationships with others both in terms of planning, regulation and management. Noosa Council will continue to have an advocacy, partnering and collaborative role with all key stakeholders to ensure the strategic goals of Council and the community as articulated in key strategies are considered by stakeholders and various agencies when making decisions and reviewing current activities. Council will continue to work closely with and have an advocacy role with MSQ to ensure there is safe and equitable access for all users of the river, whilst ensuring the environmental values of the river and catchment are maintained. Question 2. Mr Sengstock, it's been almost eight months since the October 2023 Draft Noosa River Catchment Management Plan procedural motion requiring the Council to undertake full community and stakeholder consultation and report back with final and fully costed NRCMP in July 2024. We have seen no Community Consultation on the NRCMP. Does that mean the Noosa Council will ignore the October 2023 DNRCMP procedural motion in favour of Cr Stockwell's December 2023 notified motion Accelerated River Action? If so, what is the value of a Council procedural motion? Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings Council have not ignored the motion from Council from October. The motion of October however unfortunately did not adequately take into account the impact of timing as a result of caretaker period, the election and induction of new Council, taking approximately 5-6 months collectively. As previously advised, Council staff have been working with the new Council as part of a comprehensive induction process to bring new Councillors up to speed across a large array of information and projects. The River Plan is but one of these issues amongst many our new Council is seeking to consider and determine a way forward on. 11.3. NICK HLUSZKO Question 1. Conservation Park FAQ: If Noosa Council did not ask the Department of Environment and Science (DES) to indicate support or otherwise (for the Conservation Park) as was reported at the Ordinary Meeting of May 16, 2024, why then had Noosa Council already prepared and submitted a 2 page draft Factsheet titled 'Conservation Park FAQ's' to DES on 27 September 2023 seeking assistance with the content of the factsheet that included the following notation '... such as Local Laws officers supporting Maritime Safety Queensland as registered Shipping Inspectors', in circumstances where Noosa Council had not consulted with Maritime Queensland about the issue nor had disclosed to Noosa ratepayers that Noosa Council would be asking them to pay for Local Laws officers to be registered shipping inspectors particularly during the cost of living crisis. Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings Firstly, let's be clear and accurate about the question asked at the Ordinary Meeting on 16th May – It was "Has the Council contacted the relevant state authorities to see if they would approve a Conservation Park over the Noosa River". As previously stated, the answer was no as this would have been preemptive to the process required to explore and consider a Conservation Park. So in saying that, given the community confusion about the Conservation Park concept at the time and the misinformation that was being shared, Council at the time thought it would be useful to draft a fact sheet on what a Conservation Park is and what process would be required to be undertaken if this idea was to be ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 considered at some stage as part of the overall River Plan. To ensure the Draft Fact sheet accurately reflected the required process, Council of course sought input and advice from the relevant State Government Department on its drafting. As a result of the deferral motion this Draft Fact Sheet was not completed at the time. 11.4. SHIRLEY NOCENTE Question 1. I am an 81-year-old local resident who has lived in Noosa and paid rates since 1969. I enjoy spending time at the Noosaville waterfront every week and many times during the year with my family for picnics and BBQs. Why, as a part of the Noosaville Foreshore Master Plan, does the Noosa Council want to use our own Rates to limit Residents' access to the river by taking away over 100 riverside car parks? Does this action reflect a covert Noosa Council policy to reduce the car park numbers at key locations around our shire, as the Council did at the surf club at Christmas? Response provided by Council has prepared the DRAFT Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master plan for community consultation. Council welcomes diverse views from the community as part of the consultation program for the DRAFT plan to help set the optimal direction for this cherished foreshore and will certainly consider these views as part of its final deliberations. A key consideration is the opportunity to create more green space along the beautiful water edge for community enjoyment, which it can achieve through relocation of carparking spaces from the foreshore, to other nearby locations. The DRAFT Master Plan proposed several locations to relocation of carparking spaces, but it is noted that drop off areas and disabled carparking spaces will need to be provided. In terms of the broader Noosa Council program about carparking management, Council is committed to encouraging all residents and visitors to embrace public and active transport to reduce congestion as part of its endorsed Transportation Strategy, rather than trying to accommodate peak time carparking demand, which would be at the loss of open space and further exacerbate traffic congestion . Council is also committed to ensuring all our foreshores and public spaces are also as attractive as possible as part of our Noosa character and experience which is coveted by residents and visitors. Question 2. I was lucky enough to live opposite the Lions Park in Noosaville during the 1970s, and my family has been fortunate to grow up around our beautiful river during that time and since. Why does the Noosa Council plan to forever ruin the feel and soul of this special place, our beloved Noosaville foreshore, with its overly elaborate plans, including fake sand dunes that will take up valuable picnic areas and separate the grass and river bank spaces, making it impossible for parents to keep an eye of their kids? Doesn't the Council believe that our Noosaville foreshore is beautiful as it is and only requires the lightest touch? Response provided by Council has prepared the DRAFT Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master plan for community consultation. Council welcomes diverse views from the community as part of the consultation program for the DRAFT plan to help set the optimal direction for this cherished foreshore and will certainly consider these views as part of its final deliberations. A key challenge for the foreshore is increasing erosion and tidal inundation arising from climate change. Early feedback from the community sought nature based solutions to enhance the parklands and the DRAFT plan proposes naturalised coastal protection barriers such as low sand mounds and living sea walls to help protect the public areas of the foreshore from ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 JUNE 2024 erosion in the future, where as “do nothing” increases the risk of loss of this valuable community space. Council already undertakes sand nourishment along the foreshore to halt erosion and this is an extension of this program. The DRAFT plan also proposes wide beaches, lookout points and improved graded entries to the beach areas to maximise access. Low planting is proposed on the low sand mounds to maintain visibility and provide resilience to the river’s edge. In terms of foreshore planning, it is noted that the current landscaping, pathways, beach shelters and seating walls, now so valued and accepted by the community, were established by Council 25 years ago as part of an infrastructure planning process. It’s hard to imagine the foreshore now without these facilities. It is timely for Council to plan for the future that help manage coastal and tidal issues, plan for more green space for community use, plan for new and replacement toilets, playgrounds and shelters, as well as locate wider paths that better manage the significant number of residents and visitors now using the foreshore. 12. NEXT MEETING The next Ordinary Meeting will be held at Council Chambers, 9 Pelican St, Tewantin on Thursday 18 July 2024 at 10.00am. 13. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 6.08pm
Meeting Transcript
Frank Wilkie 00:00.000
Where motions are finalised as decisions of the local government. There's opportunity for us all to meet and discuss issues and questions you may have after formal proceedings of September. I'd like to thank the staff who went to considerable effort. a venue that was available at this time, acquire the technology to ensure internet connection and live streaming capacity and organise the consultation material and make themselves available. So thank you staff. We hope to continue bringing these meetings to the community and venues across the Shire and we'll learn a lot from how things go tonight. We hope to continue The matters on the agenda tonight were debated and approved at the Planning and Environment Committee, Service and Organisation Committee last week. the General Committee meeting on Monday. And only have the weight of recommendations until they are passed at tonight's statutory meeting. These lead up committee meetings are generally where all the main discussion and debate takes place. Ordinary meeting structure allows for public participation in the form of deputations and we have one of those tonight and formal questions which were submitted and will be answered by staff. The Noosa community is familiar with and have always respected formal meeting procedures and we're grateful for your attendance tonight. First item is attendance and apologies and I note that all councillors attending but we do have Councillor Lorentson who is on leave in North Queensland and is attending by teams. Councillor Lorentson can you hear us? I can hear you loud and clear. Tom Wegener 01:29.276
Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:30.256
Now we need to have a motion that will allow Councillor Lorentson to attend by teams. It's up on the screen there. I can't quite read that print from this distance. from this, from this distance. It says, I move that in accordance with section 254 of the local government regulation, Councillor Lorentson is approved to attend the meeting dated June 20, 2024 by Microsoft Teams. Can I have a seconder for that please? Seconder. Seconder, Councillor. All in favour? It's carried unanimously. Can Can I I have have a a mover mover and and a seconder of the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on the 16th of May? Moved Councillor Finzel. Seconded. Councillor Stockwell. All in favour? In favour. Carried unanimously. Can I have a mover and a seconder for the minutes of the special meeting held on the 16th of May? meeting held on 3rd of June, moved by Councillor Wilson, seconded by Councillor Finzel. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. There are no Mayoral minutes. Are there any petitions? Councillor Wegener, do you have a petition? Tom Wegener 02:43.500
We have a petition for an off-leash fenced dog area in Cooroy. Frank Wilkie 02:59.390
Usually we have the paper copy, but today we have a petition with 400 plus signatures submitted by Trevor Butler requesting requesting that that Council install a dollar park in the Cooroy area to be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine the appropriate action. May I have a seconder for that please? Seconded by Councillor Stockwell. Any discussion? Tom Wegener 03:28.187
It's a very, very popular thing and we're looking at land and places to put it. Frank Wilkie 03:35.613
That's carried unanimously. Councillor Lorentson, you're in favour of that? Yes. We have no notified motions. We have no presentations. We have one deputation from Mr. Nick Cook. Mr. Cook, would you like to come to the podium and present your deputation please? We've got 15 minutes for you. Nick Cooke 04:07.505
Good evening, my name is Nick Cook and I'm the Vice President of Safer Cities Land. We're a community nonprofit organisation. organisation that was formed in 2020 to advocate for and represent the community in regards to the impacts, the significant impacts of the community quarry and the heavy haulage that comes through our communities. You need to be confused. Frank Wilkie 04:28.200
Just bring that here. He needs a new microphone. SPEAKER_05 04:35.634
Alright, I'll try and yell Kabi out. Larry Sengstock 04:43.314
Alright, let's start again. Okay. Nick Cooke 04:51.270
Good evening, my name is Nick Cook and I'm the Vice President of Save Noosa Hinterland. We're a community nonprofit organisation that was incorporated in 2020 to advocate for and represent the community in regards to the Kiki Quarry and the chemical wallage that comes through our town. Tonight I'm here to outline some issues relating to the quarry operations and the chemical wallage and the... impacts as well as bring to the attention of some issues to council and some tangible solutions that can be impacted immediately. Essentially this is a call for action across the board but also a call for advocacy at other I think it's the perfect time to make this invitation because we have a new council, a new mayor and I'd like to make sure that everyone knows what we've been doing in this space and what we would like council to do in this space. So let's start with a quick outline of the quarry. It was approved in 1987, which many may know, but it doesn't all go back to that approval date. There's been several amendments to the approval of the QMP since that time, some of which we want reviewed. Corpus Resources took over this quarry in 2020 and since that date we've had a significant increase in operations and impacts to our towns. The operations are 6 days a week, 6-6 Monday to Friday and Saturday 7-5. Also they can blast from 9-3 as per the QMP quarry management plan with no limits on blasting. up to 288 quarry trucks moving today at capacity through our towns and there has been days where we have reached this capacity already and with the expansion currently proposed this is something we're going to get into the rules quite quickly. This quarry is located 22 kilometers it will take from the highway unlike other quarries that are located fairly close. If you look a bit much you'll see that mostly within one to five k's this one is 22 k's over a through multiple towns. As I said there's 288 quarry truck movements a day that space five minutes apart from the quarry. So that number doesn't include trucks travelling to the quarry. So our capacity, we can actually have a quarry truck every few minutes. That's trucks going to and from, and we all know, a lot of, most of us are from around here, we've experienced this. And I just wanted to say that this impacts more than just Kin Kin, which you'll often see from media releases. In fact, if you guys walk past this whole little bit of standing, it impacts our kitchens, our schools, our school buses, our skateparks, our parks, our walking trails, our Noosa trails. It impacts seven of the eight Noosa trails that at some point traverse the whole neighbourhood. It also impacts a a lot of businesses on the boulevard, including here in town. So starting to look at some of the things we want to Council, and that is active enforcement of the Quarry Management Plan. The Quarry Management Plan is a document, a very long document, that regulates the use of the quarry. Unfortunately, in the last few years, Council have made the decision not to issue infringements of the Quarry Management Plan during the Council's court case against the operator. This is something that we want to see reversed immediately, because the Quarry Management Plan is the only document, really, at Council's disposal to protect us and to protect our health, safety and amenity. We also need Council to actively monitor the quarry, more so than what they've been doing. A lot of the burden community to do that, and that's something that we want to see change. We also want to see loopholes in the QMP amended, and there's many of them. In fact, there was a change in 2016, which was actually passed by Council resolution that diluted the definition definition of the quarry management plan by putting it in a clause that says that the operator should operate it generally in accordance with the QMP and so we need to tighten those things up so that council can adequately protect the community. There's a whole bunch of other things that we need to do to make sure that council can adequately protect the community. There's a whole bunch of other things that we need to do to make sure that council can adequately protect the community. There's a That should maintain a 16-metre distance on the other roads. There's a whole bunch of QMP stipulations. Stockpile heights, dust, dust mitigation. These are the levers council can pull to regulate this quarry and in the beginning we were told the strategy to deal with this quarry, or one of them, was to make it unviable. And the only way to make it unviable is to enforce the QMP and issue infringements. So as I said, Council made the decision not to issue infringements during the court case, so essentially for the last few years there's been no infringements issued, with the exception recently of an approved structure that we raised So we're continually pushed back on this decision and we've even tried to seek a statement of reasons under the Judicial Review Act to seek the specifics of this decision and the material fact on which the decision was based because essentially the reason was the reasoning was we don't want to bear to the discretion of the judge who is unbiased. We have also received the advice that we believe that this is not an appropriate action and that it would not compromise the council's court case. Unfortunately, to my request for a statement of reasons, I have received the substandard response saying that my decision that quoted, that is not to enforce the QMP during the court case, didn't exist, despite the fact that I have statements from council confirming this from staff, that I have no standing, I'm not an appropriate party, and you won't be dealing with me anymore. This is the problem, and it's why I'm raising it out, so that this new council can address it and move forward from it, because we can't keep having blockades that prevent us being able to advocate and protect our community. said, approximately a year later, the council did end up enforcing a correction of QMP, an unapproved structure, which is currently in court. So obviously the legal advice has been thrown out. The monitoring of the quarry. would like staff or a dedicated staff member to have to regulate the quarry and monitor the quarry so the burden isn't on us to be attending every blast, to be capturing breaches of the QMP through town. A lot of the evidence was submitted of the evidence that was submitted to the forum on behalf of the council is actually for residents, affidavits as well, and I think that what needs to happen is take the burden off us and ensure that someone is there, just like you've got with SGA's. regulate this one business because of the impacts. I wanted to move on to an advocacy role Noosa Council can take, particularly in regards to Pomona Hickin Road and the deficiencies that have just come out of the Pomona Hickin Road road review. It's actually quite damning. It's actually quite damning. Of the 95 kerbs on Pomona Community Road, 35 are insufficient to accommodate the length of the truck, so we're talking 19 metres plus. Many councillors may not know about this, in fact the community might know about this. It should actually be front page News article. So what do they mean by they can't stand in their own lane? TMR say that it means that there are no clearance envelopes maintained, the 19 metres semi-trailers cannot negotiate the movement without physically the movement without physically running off the stilt pavement, running into oncoming lanes, or coming into contact with a fixed object such as a kerb, cobweb or sign. So we need council to advocate to the State government to use their powers... section 46 of the Transport Infrastructure Act to limit truck movements by length because of these dangers to... can do, but it's an advocacy role we can take. Also what something is in council's remit is... national heavy vehicle regulated guidelines issuing permits. This is something we brought up in council before we brought up our response. Basically, local roads require a permit issued by council in collaboration with the road manager in collaboration with the National Community Coordination and Guidelines. The National Community Labour Law requires road managers and road authorities to have regard to these guidelines and they have no regard because they wouldn't be given out. Consistently, all road roads have impacts. Some of the risks that are identified in the criteria are damage to the road infrastructure, which we obviously have, adverse impacts on the community arising from noise, emissions, traffic congestion and other matters, poses a significant risk to public safety. We tick all of the criteria that the local criteria, the local permits are continually issued, so some of the local roads are Sheppartons Lane, so if you could limit trucks on that road and then limit them across the rest of the haulage route. Also some road in Pomona, which we have a lot of members which regularly impact on their roads, so the road the school's on, and Pioneer Road. Some of the levers that you can pull, you can impose conditions, restrict permit duration, I believe it's about 12 months at the moment, you can restrict the frequency of permit trips, and you can also trips and you can also flat out put a maths restriction on the road, which is something that will be political for some time. Consider alternate routes. If you cannot mitigate these risks, you can take them off the roads and ultimately evaluate the feasibility and basically the road manager and council can decide not to give consent to these permits at all. Which is probably where this needs to go. Now this is very important, especially considering the plans for Cooroy to expand and the impacts it's going to have on the community. There's currently an EBCI referral for approximately 9.35 hectares of matter clearing of matters... Matters of national environmental significance. This is EPP's unlisted protected habitat. Habitat listed as critical to the survival of koala. Now this expansion was envisioned in the original agreement by Council, so they've allowed, they've approved this. However... I'll go through the QMP in detail, and I think that there could be some legal levers that Council could pull to re-evaluate whether this extraction can go ahead. The QMP says... says that the quarry management plan has generally reflected the original 1991 plan where appropriate. However, the '91 plan was schematic. It did not address how to access the resources and was based on... That's directly from the QMP. people. If anybody wants to say activities carried out within this area will be subject to statutory processes for change to approvals having regards to the extent of the change proposed. And it then goes on and on the map which shows where they want to extract from. It says this area is subject to additional assessment and change allocation. So if it is required, essentially this could be huge. This could open up the approval and potentially shut down the quarry altogether. So far, the Council have, after we've raised and found out about this clearing, the Council took an advocacy role and wrote to the Federal Environment Assembly, which I absolutely love them, but we believe there could be more that could be done to actually stop the expansion altogether. together. And as I said, the expansion, just to show, 2021 was 380,000 tonne extraction, 2022,433,000 tonnes, and 2023 we're at 620,000 tonnes. Now the limit's at 1 million tonnes a year, so we're very close to capacity. And once we are at capacity, we will, like I said, have a drug review in a few minutes. Somebody I'll have Mr Rawlings Council can take is review the Key Resource Area Designation of the login question, which may come up for review in the State Government. That would potentially remove the industry, the key, you know, resource industry and what allows it to be mined. Limits on State Road, as I said, section 46. Advocacy to the State for crossings and traffic coming... coming measures on TMR roads in the hinterland. This road, Factory Street, this is something we've been pushing for for some time and we'd like to see advocacy to the State for this so it can be implemented immediately. Advocacy to DES to regulate the dust, the corroboration on site and the environmental impact. site and the environmental impacts. In fact, this clearing may also require some state government approval. So if the council can step in and make sure that that actually gets to the State government, that would be good. And how does this lead to South East Queensland border? Because the Lake Macdonald Dam upgrade is going ahead and there is the potential that all resources could get in this contract and we could face increased borrower operations. for our town for the next four to five years for this one project. This is where I think council need to advocate on behalf of the community and say to South East Queensland border, you need to not allow this. Look at the deficiencies of the Monacan Cane Cane Road, look at the impact it's already having the community and also bring Hoosing hinterland in as a key stakeholder, something that I think needs to happen. And in conclusion, round tables. Mayor Clare Stewart chaired a round table which several key stakeholders which several key stakeholders started, including us, we were the main stakeholder with 150 members who were representing, we were virtually called for those round tables to reconvene under a new mayor, Frank Wilkie, and we asked for the round tables to be given terms of reference, and a reference group set up to actually action the concerns that we raised in these round tables. Because all too often, we were bringing these concerns to the round table, and nothing happened. So, let's tighten that process and bring all the players to the table so that we can have some genuine and tangible outcomes. So, in conclusion, we hope council take on this message and immediately work to mitigate the impacts of the King Inquiry beyond the current court case. Thank Frank Wilkie 18:49.100
That brings us to item eight, consideration of committee reports. The first Audit and Risk Committee report. The Audit and Risk Committee is a subcommittee consisting of staff, two councillors councillors and external and independent board members who oversee finance, governance, risk, asset management and other internal matters. Committee recommendations pertain to item one, Audit and Committee briefing paper and interim report. Queensland Audit Office and KPMG. Item two, 2024 interim report from the Queensland Audit Office. Item three, shell financial statements and end of financial year update. Item four, update of Council's strategic risk register. Can I have a mover and a seconder for the Audit and Risk Committee recommendations to be adopted please? I'll move it. Moved by Councillor Wilson, seconded by Councillor Finzel. All in favour? Carried unanimously. Now come to Planning and Environment Committee reports. Committee recommendations item 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 were all referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the Item 5.4, application for a minor change to a development approval for a material change of use of premises, commercial business type 3, veterinary surgery at 69 Mary Street, Noosaville was approved. Item 5.5 was referred to the General Committee due to significance of the issue. Can I have a move and a second for the Planning and Environment Committee recommendations. Moved Councillor Stockwell, seconded by Councillor Finzel again. discussion? All in favour? That's carried unanimously. Come to the Services and Organisation Committee. turns. Councillor Lorentson, we'll just leave it to you to speak up when we ask for the vote. You comfortable doing that? No worries. Thank you Councillor Lorentson. 8.3 Services and Organisation Committee reports. one, proposed trustee lease renewals. The Sound Park, Quamby Place, which is about the renewal of areas for outside dining, is approved. Item 5.2, Noosa Shire Council Specialised Supplier List, which is an updated List, which is an updated list of external suppliers for specialised services. Item 5.3, Contract No. T, Trip Quadruple 067, which is a register of pre-qualified suppliers for provision of trade services. Again, this is an updated list of external suppliers of trade services to Council. Item 7.1 was a confidential item, Eumundi Noosa Road landfill transfer station operation by Noosa Council, which related to the management of the resource recovery centre. Can I have a mover and Can I have a mover and a seconder for the Services and Organisation Committee recommendation to be adopted? Thank you, Councillor. Seconded, Councillor Wegener. Are we all in favour? In favour. That's unanimous, thank you. We now come to the General Committee reports. First one is MCU23/0101, which is an application for short-term accommodation at 561 Gympie Road, Kin Kin, which was recommended for refusal by councillors on amenity and other reasons, other grounds. We have Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 22:06.418
I'd like to move an amended motion for refusal. Yes. Go over there and read it off the screen. that has just been recently amended. Shaun Walsh 22:16.098
Okay, then I'm gonna sit with Dr. Tom Wegener 22:19.958
I said that's good. And it's gonna be mixed to hard act to follow, I suspect. I move that council note to report, I don't have to read that. Yes, I move that council note to report by senior development planner to the Planning and Environment Committee, David. Committee, dated 11th of June, 2024, regarding application number MCU23/0101 for a development permit for material change of use, short-term accommodation, situated at 561 Gympie Kin Kin Road, Kin-Kin, and A, refuse the application for the following reasons. One, the proposal is not consistent with 3.2.6, agriculture and 6: Agriculture and Rural-Based Activities of the Strategic Framework as: A. It does not protect agricultural land and movement from urban development and complex productivity. B. Short-term accommodation is not an ancillary rural industry which supports production, investment, and diversification. 2. The proposal is not consistent with Proposal 3.2.6: Tourism, of the Strategic Framework as it does not provide for high-quality nature-based and rural tourism experiences; B. Short-term accommodation is not an ancillary rural industry which supports production, investment, and diversification. C. The proposal is not consistent with 3.3.3 housing choice of the strategic framework as it does not protect the rural neighbourhood from short-term visitor accommodation that would impact on the amenity enjoyed by residents. 4. The proposal does not comply with the purpose and overall outcome 2.i of the rural zone code as a. it does not provide for rural uses or activities or other uses and activities that are compatible with existing and future rural uses and activities. b. it does not provide for rural uses and or activities or other uses and activities that are compatible that are compatible with the character and environmental features of the zone. The visitor accommodation in its proposed form does not complement rural uses or promote the sustainable use of rural land. The use of the premises for short-term accommodation is not consistent with the overall outcome. 2J and performance outcome P04 of the rural zoning vote as it is not compatible with rural activities and will detract from the rural amenity of the adjoining property. The use of the premises... premises for short-term accommodation is not consistent with the performance outcome P08 of the rural zone code as the proposed location of the dwelling within 200 metres of mapped agricultural land conservation area is not sufficiently... Site is within 250 metres of mapped agricultural land conservation area, which is intended for intensive animal industry, intensive horticulture, or rural industry uses. The site is within 100 metres of mapped agricultural land conservation area, which is intended for agricultural operations. It will make impact on the ability of rural landowners to carry out agricultural pursuits. It will result in conflicts with nearby land uses. It will detract from the character and amenity of the local area. The use of premises for short-term accommodation is not consistent with the to perform an out-frammed P.O. of the Visitor Accommodation Code as it will result in an unreasonable loss of residential amenity because of likely increases in noise to adjoining properties. 25. The use is inconsistent with the Noosa Housing Strategy 2022. Keep Noosa Homes, item 7.7. Ensure that short-term accommodation in the hinterland is complementary to housing onsite and not at the expense of housing. Full house short-term-term rentals should be limited to infrequent lending of the owner's principal place of residence. The use is inconsistent with the Noosa Council Short-Term Accommodation Monitoring Report 2022 as a short accommodation without a permanent resident remaining on-site compromises future housing supply for permanent residents. short-term accommodation of an entire dwelling house compromises adequate long-term housing stock being available to meet the diverse needs of council of Noosa Shire's current and future residents consistent with Noosa Council's adopted housing strategy 2022. And C: Short-term accommodation does not reinforce the purpose and outcomes to be achieved by the development within the rural zone for rural pursuits, particularly agriculture uses and complementary value-add uses. housing for permanent residents. Frank Wilkie 28:05.261
Thank you. Can we have a, yes, can we have a seconder for that, please? Councillor Stockwell will second that. Councillor Wegener, do you need to speak to the motion? Tom Wegener 28:16.910
I'd like to just say something really quick. One code we didn't mention was the Noosa climate change response plan and one of the key themes is resilient and adaptive communities and built environments. this, I believe, climate change response has to do with community. And we think of the Murray River Country Harvest up here that comes and brings vegetables in every Saturday morning and sells to the markets there. And you have Elaine Bradley. so they're growing locally produced food. And over COVID, they had to shut down, of course. And they realised that a lot of the people that bought the foods, well, they had to bring them to the properties. They found that they were very isolated. So the growers Elaine Bradley growers started a phone tree where they would call up every person would in the group would call 10 people who called 10 people and really canvassed the whole area to make sure that everybody was still, you know, around and feeling connected with community and that is community and I think that by refusing STAs in the Hincheland in these two cases, we continue to build on the concept of community in the Hincheland in other places. Frank Wilkie 29:32.749
Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Okay, I'll put, you wish to close again? No. No. Put it to the vote, those in favour? That's carried unanimously. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson, yes. Item 5.2 is another development application for material material change of use for short-term accommodation at 428 Cootharaba Road. Cootharaba also refused on the grounds of impact on amenity and other grounds. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 30:05.904
Yeah, to save Councillor Wegener's voice, I'm going to move this one. Just to explain The Treaty Framework for those reasons which we previously heard. Number two, the is not consistent with 3.3.3 housing choice of the strategic framework for the reason outlined as we previously heard. The proposal does not comply with the purpose overall outcomes of the rural zone code and there's three items there which Councillor Wegener previously read out in his refusal motion. Number four, the use of premises for short term accommodation is not consistent with performance outcome PO4 of Rural Zone Code for the reasons previously stated. Number five, the use of the premises for short term accommodation is not consistent with performance outcome PO25 of the Visitor Accommodation Code as it would result in an unreasonable loss of residential amenity. Number six, and this is a new one so I will read it out, this block Number six says the proposal does not comply with the purpose and overall outcomes 2A, B and E of the Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code as it does not avoid or mitigate the potential adverse impacts of bushfire on people and property, B it proposes development in an area at risk from bushfire hazard and it is not compatible... hazard and it is not compatible with the nature of the hazard, C the risk to people, property and the natural environment from bushfire hazard is not minimised, D the development unduly burdens disaster management response and recovery capacity and capabilities. Proposal does not comply with performance outcome PO1 of the bushfire hazard overlay code. A. The development may materially increase the number of people congregating on the premises who are unfamiliar with the locality and, as such, increasing risk development for emergency vehicles and personnel has not been demonstrated. Easy and safe evacuation of residents and premises and access by emergency services has not been demonstrated. Go on to number nine, which is the same reason... regarding it's inconsistent with the housing strategy 2022. Number 10, for the same reason as outlined by Councillor Wegener, is inconsistent with Noosa Council short-term accommodation monitoring report. Frank Wilkie 33:14.463
May we have a seconder for that, please? Seconder, Councillor Wegener. Councillor Stockwell, are you used to speak? Brian Stockwell 33:19.683
I will briefly. Yes, much similar grounds for refusal on this one. It is a slightly different location, so the significance... the significant focus on the rural productive nature of the Kin Kin Road block here is slightly less and more focused on the fact that it is a house in the middle of a high bushfire hazard area with the only access and ingress through a small farm track out to the main road through, once again, high bushfire hazard. So that becomes a more significant issue in terms of the reason why you Frank Wilkie 34:30.936
Settlement. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 34:33.596
Yes, I am So we did have this debate on Monday. This is a site that under the current planning scheme has a childcare centre. It's an inconsistent use but as we heard on Monday, the draft amendments are proposing that a childcare centre would be an acceptable There is a number of grounds of refusal that were outlined, the most predominant one of which is when we did the overall precinct plan and which is proposed to be set within the draft amendments to the planning scheme, we clearly showed a 10-metre landscape buffer on this lot and the two adjoining lots. The proposal as it sits only provides for a 4-metre buffer. The overall development intent for the Noosa Shire Business Centre, which most people know as Noosa Civic, is for it to be a park-like environment so when you go along Walterhay Drive or any creek, you don't realise the scale of development behind it. That's what we're trying to maintain throughout this development. This particular site, while the childcare centre itself is a small scale building, the Zane does allow immediately behind it quite considerable buildings of scale and bulk which a full 10 metre buffer would be achieved. The desired outcome where a four metre one would not. So for those reasons I propose that the recommendation from the General Committee was the right one. Frank Wilkie 36:08.278
Now that people wish to speak to the motion, Councillor. Jessica Phillips 36:13.098
I promised the community I would apply common sense to my position. And so I'd like to speak on this matter because I see a need for a childcare facility in this area. That is because my whole career has been based in essential services, the community that elected me. of which have spoken about their support of the common sense approach I take. And although I hear the grounds for refusal, I cannot overlook the essential needs. for a child care facility in this area. And so, I'm not going to ramble on because my point is made that I don't support refusing this application. Frank Wilkie 37:01.965
Do the councillors wish to speak to motion? I will close. Certainly planning need is one of the considerations for any development application. But what we've learnt over many years in Noosa Shire is developers will put in applications which they try and wind back the Noosa Plan over and over again and they'll try and get away with something. Generally if you stand up for what the plan says developers will realise that they can't just push over council to get a development that doesn't meet the required standards. There is plenty of opportunity to locate a childcare centre on this need to locate a childcare centre on this block that meets the planning scheme. Every developer tries to push the yield from any block and will try and cut corners. It's up to us as a council to stand up for that plan which was put out to the community, voted on by the community. was a considerable issue for many of us who were elected to stand up for that plan. Phillips and Councillor Lorentson. That's carried. Thank you. Item 5.4 is a further report, MCU application for material change of use, resort complex and ancillary bar, food and drink outlet, outdoor sport, recreation and club at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Heads. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 39:00.580
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I provide the following declaration to the meeting of declarable conflict of interest in this matter. I, Councillor Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter, as I have come to understand that JFP Urban Consultants, on behalf of Altum Property Group, who are the developers of Park Ridge Noosa Springs, made a submission against the Noosa Springs Hotel development. Since then, the matter has changed, given Altum Property Group has withdrawn the submission. Lee McCready, who is associated with Altum, was involved as a volunteer with the 2020 election campaign Future Noosa, which is no longer an entity. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias, because I believe I do not have a close personal relationship with Lee and Rob McCready. 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. Frank Wilkie 40:12.621
Thank you for your declarable conflict of interest declaration. Brian Stockwell 40:15.501
I'm happy to move the standard motion of the Councillor Finzel be allowed to stay in the meeting and vote on the matter. Frank Wilkie 40:20.094
We have a seconder, Councillor Wilson. Councillor Stockwell used to speak to the motion. Okay, anyone wish to speak to the motion? Put it to the vote. All in favour? that's unanimous. That's unanimous. Please note that Councillor Finzel did not vote. Councillor Finzel may remain in the room. Thank you. Now we have a motion. I'm happy to move to the same motion that was moved in General Committee. That is to defer. We have a seconder for the deferral motion please. Councillor Wilson, thank you. Any discussion? Put it to the vote. All in favour? That's unanimous. Item 6.1 is a Yurol Ringtail conservation project. This is in regards to the project that has delivered an additional 2,400 hectares to National Park, part of a larger network connecting Kulin to Kalula National Parks. is the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries' shark control program. Recommended Council policy position is that we support the Department in their ongoing trials of alternative technologies and strategies to minimise bycatch in shark bites. Item 6.3:2024-25 fees and charges which are required to be adopted ahead of the June 28 budget to allow businesses to forward plan ahead of the new financial year. 6.4 is the financial performance report for the month of May. 6.5 the regional arts development fund RADF grant recommendations for 2024.6.6, 2024-5, community program funding, community project grants. Councillor Finzel, did you have a declaration? Yes. Karen Finzel 42:00.375
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I, Councillor Finzel, provide the Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to Peregian Beach Surf Life Saving Club grant application, which is before us tonight. Lee McCready has recently been elected as the president of this club. Mr. Rob McCready sits in a decision-making capacity on the Peregian Beach Surf Life Saving Club subcommittee. Mr. McCready Mr. McCready is married to Lee McCready who worked as a volunteer in the 2020 future Noosa election campaign which is no longer an entity. Mr. and Mrs. McCready are not related parties nor are they close associates and therefore I do not believe this COI satisfies the requirements of the Act as I do not stand to gain benefit or loss in relation to the matter that is no greater than the benefit or loss of a significant proportion of persons in the local government area stand to gain or lose. However, in the public interest and full transparency, I will declare this interest as I believe I am able to make an impartial decision on the matter. Therefore, 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. Frank Wilkie 43:28.973
Thank you I'm happy to move to a standard motion regarding to allow Councillor Finzel to stay and vote on the matter. We have a seconder for that motion please. Thank you Councillor. No need to talk. We'll put it to the vote. That's unanimous. That's Councillor Finzel did not vote. Now we have a mover and seconder for the committee recommendation please. Councillor Wilson, seconded by Councillor. Any discussion? Will those grants be approved? All in favour? Against? That's carried unanimously. We didn't hear Councillor Lorentson again. Sorry? We didn't hear Councillor Lorentson again. Yes. Yeah, Thank you, Amelia. 6.7, community funding program, community project grants, round one infrastructure. Item 6.8, years 2024 to 2025, community program funding... community project grants round one equipment. Councillor Phillips. Yes. Jessica Phillips 44:25.387
I also would like to in accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I, Councillor inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I was the president of Cooroy Gymnastics Club until September 2023 and as my parents were also foundation members. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I and my parents are no longer involved in any capacity in the Cooroy Gymnastics Club and therefore I will choose to remain in the meeting room however I respect the decision of the meeting on whether can remain and participate in the decisions. Frank Wilkie 45:07.907
Can we have a move for a motion please? Councillor Finzel and seconded by Councillor Wilson, by a shade, Councillor Finzel. Any discussion? All in favour? Councillor may remain in the room and Councillor did not vote. Can we have a move for a seconder for the committee recommendation about these grants? Moved by Councillor Finzel, seconded by Councillor Wegener. Thank you. Any discussion? No. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. Sorry Amelia, we didn't hear you. In favour? Thank you Amelia. 6.9/20/24/25 community program funding community project grants round one events. Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 45:51.999
I have a conflict of In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act of 2009, Councillor Wegener provided the following declaration at the meeting with a declarable conflict of interest in this matter. I, Councillor Councillor Wegener, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendation to Noosa International Surfilm Festival. I am a member of the Noosa International Surfilm Festival committee and as a result committee and as a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room as the matter is considered and voted on. Brian Stockwell 46:28.834
Just a query, Councillor Wegener, before you go. You have it as a declarable conflict of interest although you're on the committee. Are you in an executive and decision-making role in that committee? Tom Wegener 46:40.555
No, not just a committee member. Brian Stockwell 46:43.475
Does it make decisions? So I would suggest that the declaration be changed to describe conflict of interest. Yes. So I would suggest that the declaration be changed to describe conflict of interest. Frank Wilkie 46:59.237
Thank you, Tom. We didn't want to leave you out in the cold too long. Outside. Thank you. Councillor Wegener has left the hall. Brian Stockwell 47:11.859
Councillor Stockwell: Happy to move the recommendation. Frank Wilkie 47:13.539
Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Seconder, please. Seconder, Councillor Jessica Phillips. Thank you. Any discussion? All in favour? Thank you. That's carried. Councillor Wegener can be invited back in from the cold to rejoin the meeting. Thank you. going to move and second the committee recommendation. Community Grants Program, Community Project Grants Round 1 Overview 6-11, Environment and Climate Change Grants, Environment Project Grants Round 19, Climate Change Response Grants Round 4, Councillor Stockwell. No, I don't need to redo that. Tom Wegener 48:02.162
Okay. Well, just to note on the minutes. Yep. Frank Wilkie 48:06.922
Okay. It's been noted. Item 6-12, One Year Extension of Three Year Alliance Grant Agreements. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 48:17.492
Yes. I'm sure you all know the position of the act that I'm now declaring under, which is that in this meeting I wish to inform you that I've prescribed conflict of interest as a reliance of the proposed funding allocations to the Noosa Lions Football Club. I'm the current president of the Noosa Lions Football Club. As a result of my conflict, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Frank Wilkie 48:54.160
Okay. Can I have a move or a seconder for the motion please? Moved by Councillor Wegener, seconded by Councillor. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. Please invite Councillor Stockwell back to the meeting. Okay. For item 7.1, which was a confidential item, which is not for public release, contract number RP00637, register of pre-qualified suppliers for the hire of plant and equipment commonly known as dry hire. Item 7.2 was confidential, not for public release, contract number RP00436, register of pre Register of pre-qualified suppliers for the hire of plant and operator, commonly known as wet hire. Can I have a mover and a seconder for the general committee recommendations to be adopted, accepted, dealt with separately. I'll move it, just to prove I was here and get on the record. May I have a seconder please, Councillor Wilson. All in favour? That's carried. Amelia? Not carried unanimously. We have no reports direct of the ordinary meeting, we have no confidential items. That brings us to public question We have four formal submissions to public question time. Item 11.1 is from Mr Craig Vella, Mr Veller is not here tonight, so I ask our Director of Strategy and Environment, Kim Rawlings, to read his question. Rawlings, to read his question. Item 12.1 is from Mr Craig Vella, Mr Veller is not here tonight, so I ask our Director of Strategy and Environment, Kim Rawlings, to read his question. Item 12.1 is from Mr Craig Vella, Mr Veller is not here tonight, so I ask our Director of Strategy and Environment, Kim Rawlings, to read his question. Item 12.1 is from Mr Craig Vella, Mr Veller is not here tonight, so I ask our Director of Strategy and Environment, Kim Rawlings, Can you project? Sure. Okay. Kim Rawlings 50:56.255
Thanks Councillor Wilkie. So Craig Vella's question is, given considerable community concerns with the concept of a conservation park over the Noosa River, please advise the origins of turning the fish habitat areas of the Noosa River into a conservation park without supplying an individual name. Was it a state agency, council staff, a councillor or another person that proposed the concept? So thank you So thank you Mr Vela for that question. The response is: one of the complexities of managing the Noosa river system and catchment is that it is governed by a range of agencies, each with different responsibilities and Regulatory, planning and community roles. For catchment management to be effective, there needs to be a concerted and coordinated approach across all agencies and stakeholders. For the past 20 years, Council has explored a range of mechanisms to achieve integrated management and collaborative arrangements for the Noosa River catchment. other local governments grapple with this and there are a range of models that exist. Council has explored many of these models and various ideas have come from various sources, both within Council and from our community. The most recent idea of a conservation park as another management model to explore or consider was first suggested by the Noosa Parks Association. Council officers did some initial investigation noting that like previously explored, it was worthy of further consideration. Council officers therefore then recommended it be included for investigation and consideration in the River Plan. Frank Wilkie 52:43.133
Thank you. Kim. Kim? Mr Walsh. Shaun Walsh 52:46.881
Question 2, also from Craig Vella. The question is: Could the sustainable transport levy, which is budgeted to raise $933,000 for the 2023-24 draft budget, be used to repair and /or reconstruct the on-land component of the boat ramp and associated car ramp and associated car and trailer parking at Hilton Esplanade or at any other boat ramp in the Noosa Shire. If not, then why? the response is the sustainable transport levy contributes towards the cost associated with the range of transport services and initiatives that have the purpose of reducing traffic congestion and demand on Noosa road network. This levy currently funds Council's Go Noosa initiatives including free bus services during peak times, satellite parking areas, car parking studies associated with demand management such as the car parking technology trial implemented in the 23-24 Christmas period. The levy has been fully expended at the present and funding for any new car parking initiatives would either need the levy to rise or existing services to be curtailed. If levy funding was made available in the future for water transport, the most aligned use of the sustainable transport levy would be associated with on-water public transport, including jetties for future public ferries Incidentally, it is noted that Council has recently undertaken sealing and line marking of the existing boat ramp car park at Noosaville as part of its ongoing funding allocations and commitment to asset renewal and maintenance. In terms of future upgrades, the optimal funding mechanism for boat ramp and associated car and trailer parking is grant funding, underpinned by the use of Council's asset renewal budget. To be able to seek grant funding, Council would ideally have shovel-ready projects to meet submission obligations of the State and Federal Government as they arise. Council has recently commenced the Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan to assist in having shovel-ready plans for the Noosaville boat ramp. But note that more planning work needs to be done at other boat ramp and parking locations in the Shire, such as Tewantin. Tewantin and has budget allocations for future years to allow that work to commence. and has budget Frank Wilkie 55:26.738
Thank you, Shaun. Next question is from Mr Andrew McCarthy. Mr McCarthy is not here in person tonight, so I ask our Director of Strategy and Environment, Kim Rawlings, to read his questions and provide Council's response. Thank you, Kim. Thank you. So this is our Acting CEO, Mr Larry Sengstock. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 55:52.120
Having regard to the following commentary made by MSQ General Manager, Mr Kel Dillon, appearing in Noosa today on the 10th of May 2024, where are the State Marine Regulator? No one else is, and we are the State Marine Regulator. No one else is, and we intend to is and we intend to regulate the Noosa River through proper zoning and planning, recognising that it is an important resource for the State and maximising its use for all people, not limiting it. Will Noosa Council remove all references to vessel restrictions from the draft Noosa River catchment management plan and all other Council plans and documentation that exist both now and in the future? The response to Mr. McCarthy: Management of the Noosa River involves a number of stakeholders working collaboratively to address complex issues that surround the environmental, cultural, commercial and recreational elements of the river. The river is a dynamic system where actions and impacts need to be considered in an interrelated manner rather than in isolation. Examples Examples of this include riparian vegetation impact and bank erosion caused by excessive boat wash, downstream public health issues from illegal waste discharge and altered flood regimes from increased systems siltation from the upper catchment. Catchment management requires collaboration and working together to manage interrelated issues. There are multiple agencies with varying responsibilities across the river many of which have interrelationships with others both in terms of planning, regulation and management. Noosa Council will continue to have an advocacy, partnering and collaborative role with all ies across the river many of which have interrelationships with others both in terms of planning, regulation and management. Noosa Council will continue to have an advocacy, partnering and collaborative role with all key stakeholders to ensure the strategic goals of Council and the community as articulated in key strategies are considered by stakeholders by stakeholders and various agencies when making decisions. reviewing current activities. Council will continue to work closely with and have an advocacy role with MSQ to ensure there is safe and equitable access for all users of the river whilst ensuring the environmental values of the river and catchment are maintained thank you next question from Nick Hluszko no this is Andrew McCarthy oh sorry another from Andrew McCarthy Mr McCarthy's second question yes thank you through the chair thank you Mr Sengstock it's been almost eight months since the October 2023 draft Noosa River Catchment Management Plan: Procedural motion requiring the Council to undertake full community and stakeholder consultation and report back with final and fully-costed NRCMP in July 2024. We have seen no community consultation on this plan. Does that mean the Noosa Council will ignore the October 2023 procedural motion in favour of Councillor Stockwell's December 2023 Notified Motion Accelerated River Action? If so, what is the value of a Council procedural motion? The response: Council have not ignored the motion from from Council from October. The motion of October however unfortunately did not adequately take into account the impact of timing as a result of caretaker period, the election and induction of new Council taking approximately five to six As previously advised, Council staff have been working with the new Council as part of a comprehensive induction process to bring new Councillors up to speed across a large array of information and projects. but one of these issues amongst many our new Council is seeking to consider and determine a way forward on. The River Plan is: Frank Wilkie 59:42.428
Thank you. We have a question from Mr Nick Hluszko. Mr Hluszko is not here in person tonight, so I'll ask our Director of Strategy and Environment, Kim Rawlings, to read his question and provide Council's response. Thank you, Kim. Kim Rawlings 59:57.008
Thanks, Nick, for your question. The question is: It's around the conservation park. If Noosa Council did not ask the Department of Environment and Science to indicate support or otherwise for the conservation park, as was reported at the ordinary meeting of May 16, 2024, why then had Noosa Council already prepared and submitted a two-page draft fact sheet titled 'Conservation Park FAQs' to the Department the Department of Environmental Science on 27 September 2023, seeking assistance with the content of the fact sheet that included the following notation, such as local laws officers supporting maritime safety Queensland as registered shipping inspectors. In circumstances where Noosa Council had not consulted with MSQ about the issue nor had disclosed to Noosa ratepayers that Noosa Council would be asking them to pay for local laws officers to be shipping inspectors, particularly during the current cost of living crisis. So in response to that question, I think firstly, we need to be clear and accurate about the question asked at the orderly meeting on the 16th of May. It was, has Council contacted the relevant state authorities to see if they would approve a conservation park over the Noosa River? And as previously answered to that question, the answer was no, as this would have been pre-emptive to the process required to explore and consider a conservation park. So in saying that, given there was community confusion about the conservation park concept at the time, and the misinformation that was being shared, Council thought Council thought it would be useful to draft a fact sheet on what a conservation park is and what process would be required to be undertaken if this idea was to be considered at some stage as part of the overall river plan. To ensure that draft fact sheet accurately reflected the required state government process, Council of course contacted the department and sought their input and advice from the relevant state government department on its drafting. As a result of the As a result of the deferral motion of last year the draft fact sheet was not completed at the time. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:02:05.940
Next item is a question from Mrs. Shirley Nocente. Mrs. Nocente is not here tonight. I'll ask Acting Director of Infrastructure Shaun Walsh to read the question and provide the response please. Shaun Walsh 01:02:19.640
Thanks for the question Shirley. The first question is I am an 81 year old local resident who has lived in Noosa and paid rates since 1969. I enjoy spending time at the Noosaville waterfront every week and many times during the year with my family for picnics and Why, as part of the Noosaville foreshore master plan, does the Noosa Council want to use our own rates to limit residents' access to the river by taking away over 100 riverside car parks? Does this action reflect a covert Noosa Council policy to reduce the car park numbers at key locations around our Shire, as Council did at the Surf Club at Christmas? So, thank you for the question, Shirley. So, the answer is as follows: Council has prepared the draft Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan for community consultation. Council welcomes... Council welcomes diverse views from the community as part of the consultation program for the draft plan to help set the optimal direction for this cherished foreshore and we'll certainly consider these views as part of its final deliberations. A key consideration for the community and council is the opportunity to create more green space along this beautiful water edge for community enjoyment, which it can achieve through relocation of car parking spaces from the foreshore The draft master plan proposes several locations for the relocation of car parking spaces, but it is noted that drop off areas and disabled car parking spaces will need to be provided. terms of the broader Noosa Council program about car parking management, Council is committed to encouraging all residents and visitors to embrace public and active transport to reduce congestion as part of its indoors transportation strategy rather than trying accommodate peak time car parking demand which would be at the loss of open space and further exasperate traffic congestion. Council is also committed to ensuring all our foreshores and public spaces are as attractive as possible as part of our Noosa character and experience which is coveted by residents and visitors. The second question by Shirley is as follows: I was lucky enough to live opposite the Lions Park in Noosaville during the 1970s and my family has been fortunate to grow up around a beautiful river during that time and since. Why does the Noosa Council plan to forever ruin the feel and soul of the special place, our beloved Noosaville foreshore, with its overly its overly elaborate plans, including fake sand dunes that will take up valuable picnic areas and separate the grass and riverbank spaces, making it impossible for parents to keep an eye on their kids, doesn't Council believe that our Noosaville foreshore is beautiful as it is and only requires the lightest touch? Frank Wilkie 01:05:16.584
So um thank you Shirley for that question so um so the answer is draft um council Noosaville has prepared foreshore infrastructure master plan for community consultation and welcomes diverse views from the community as part of the program for the draft plan to help set optimal direction for this cherished foreshore and will certainly consider these views as part of its final deliberations. A key challenge for the foreshore is increasing erosion and tidal inundation arising from climate change. Early feedback community sought nature-based solutions to enhance the parklands and the draft plan proposes naturalised coastal protection barriers such as low sand mounds and living sea walls to help protect the public areas of the foreshore from the future whereas do nothing increases the risk of loss of this valuable community space. Council already undertakes sand nourishment along the foreshore to halt erosion and this is an extension of that program. The draft also proposes wide beaches, lookout points and improved graded entries to the beach areas to maximise access. Low planting is proposed on the low sand mounds to maintain visibility and provide resilience to the river's edge. In terms of foreshore planning it is noted that the current landscaping, pathways, beach shelters and seating walls now so valued and accepted by the community were established by Council twenty-five years ago as part of an infrastructure planning process. It is hard to imagine the foreshore now without those facilities. It is time for Council to plan for the future that help manage coastal and tidal issues, plan for more green space space for community use, plan for new and replacement toilets, playgrounds and shelters as well as locate wider paths that better manage the significant number of residents and visitors now using the foreshore. Ordinary meeting will be held at 5pm on Thursday 18th July 2024 at Council Chambers in Tewantin. I deeply appreciate you all coming out here tonight, it's been fantastic having you here with us. We hope to do it again and again. I declare the meeting closed at 6:08pm. Please join us for discussion and refreshment. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
