General Committee - 17 March 2025
Date: Monday, 17 March 2025 at 12:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 04:39:33
Synopsis: Development Approvals: MCU caps shades, on-site waste; Royal Mail acoustics, 5-park deal, Waste: On-site preferred; deferral failed, Carbon: 45,118 tCO2‑e; 18% down.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Brian Stockwell Karen Finzel Amelia Lorentson Jessica Phillips Tom Wegener Frank Wilkie Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini (Via Microsoft Teams) Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Frank Wilkie: Moved approval of MCU24/0074 (203–207 Gympie Tce) with updated conditions; carried unanimously (Item 8.1; 01:12:29). Karen Finzel: Amendment adopted to cap “Tide” shade structures at 5, require shade to a seat, and keep entirely within site boundary; on‑site refuse to meet Cond. 61 (Item 8.1; 01:14:21, 01:23:11). Jessica Phillips: Amendment to reopen waste option for on‑street collection lost (For: Wilson, Phillips; Against: Stockwell, Lorentson, Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener) (Item 8.1; 01:25:57–01:40:48). Frank Wilkie: Moved approval of Royal Mail Hotel extension and related demolition; carried unanimously after deferral attempt for acoustics/safety was lost (Item 8.2; 02:19:54–02:21:29; 02:48:56). Nadine (Officer): Hotel approval includes acoustic barriers, noise limiting, hours; 5-space parking shortfall offset via infrastructure agreement; public thoroughfare easement conditioned (Item 8.2; 02:05:45–02:07:01). Cheyenne/Team: Organisational Carbon Footprint FY23/24 noted; 45,118 tCO2‑e, 18% reduction from 2016; roadmap to net zero to come (Item 8.3; 03:04:27–03:05:16). Michelle (Officer): Pomona Place Plan approved; implementation of short‑term actions and upcoming evaluation endorsed (Item 8.4; 03:45:00–03:50:22). Pauline (Officer): Feb YTD finance report noted; operating rev +$2.3m vs budget; capex behind timing; cash peaks post‑rates; sustainability indicators added (Item 8.5; 03:57:35–04:00:24). Frank Wilkie: ALGA 2025 motions approved (waste/circular economy, wastewater reuse study, road user agreements, senior doctor reserve/registration, end‑of‑waste criteria); Finzel/Lorentson to attend (Item 8.6; 04:14:59–04:24:04). Nicola Wilson: CEO delegated authority to execute retail electricity contracts for streetlights/large sites; unlimited by general financial delegations (Confidential 9.1; minutes). Contentious / Transparency Matters Amelia Lorentson: Pressed on waste safety/amenity; staff showed applicant’s conflicting turn-paths (HRV could exit; smaller side-loader shown as clipping), Council’s checks support on‑site service (Item 8.1; 19:39–28:12). Brian Stockwell: Noted policy preference for on‑site collection; side‑arm curbside poses higher risk to pedestrians/cyclists (32:15–33:36). Jessica Phillips: Sought deferral and later a conditional re‑opener on waste; both attempts failed; statutory deemed-approval timing confirmed (Item 8.1; 01:41:21–01:45:28). Karen Finzel: Shade structure count negotiated; landscaping primacy vs built screens debated; compromise adopted with in‑boundary condition (Item 8.1; 01:10:22–01:18:54; minutes). Royal Mail: Deferral for more acoustic/safety data lost; later officers to explore CCTV along easement and options for crowd-noise monitoring by Ordinary Meeting (Item 8.2; 02:48:56–02:50:27). Chair: Confidential session lawfully closed/reopened under s254J(3)(g) LGR 2012 (Item 9.1; minutes). Legal / Risk Officers: Both development reports provided under Planning Act 2016 s63(5); MCU24/0074 is code-assessable, constraining “extras” like undergrounding power (Item 8.1; 49:46–51:26). Richard MacGillivray: Acceptable Outcomes are deemed-to-comply; tightening Royal Mail hours beyond AO could be difficult to defend on appeal (02:27:55–02:29:06). Patrick Murphy: Easement affords reciprocal access; on‑site waste consistent with planning scheme policy; operational works to settle detailed manoeuvring and line-marking (01:37:56–01:39:17; 24:40–25:43). Committee: Closure under LGR s254J(3)(g); delegation to CEO under LGA s257(1) beyond general financial limits (Item 9.1; minutes). Royal Mail: Heritage character retained via conditioned balustrade/colour scheme; noise limited (70 dBA), amplified music ceased by specified hours; complaints register mandated (Item 8.2; 02:09:21–02:14:33). Finance: FAGs reduction/cash timing risk noted; mitigation via reserves and quarterly tracking (Item 8.5; 04:01:10–04:02:44). Conflicts of Interest Nicola Wilson: Declarable COI (financial interest in neighbouring property) on Royal Mail item; left room during discussion/vote (Item 8.2; 02:01:34; minutes). Amelia Lorentson: Declarable COI (spouse employment at Page Furnishers) on Pomona Place Plan; Council permitted participation under s150ES LGA; did not vote (Item 8.4; 03:42:35–03:44:32; minutes). Short-term Accommodation & Food/Drink – 203–207 Gympie Terrace (MCU24/0074) Andrew Gaffney: 16 STA units, ground-floor tenancies; flood immunity lifts perceived height; setbacks varied; site coverage 53% supported due to articulation/activation (Item 8.1; 02:34–10:36). Officers: Parking: 56 on-site, formalising 6 Albert + 3 Gympie on-street; 10 motorcycle spaces; 7-space shortfall offset by public realm gains (44:24–47:01). Outcome: Landscaping minimum 375 m²; min 1.0 m soft landscape to all frontages; limit to 5 shade structures, no encroachment; on‑site refuse per Cond. 61 (Item 8.1; minutes; 01:12:29–01:23:11). New Hotel Works – Royal Mail, Tewantin (MCU23/0090 & DBW23/0073) Nadine (Officer): Two landscaped beer gardens, internal refurb, 13 units with ensuites; additional 30 car parks; heritage facade treatments conditioned (Item 8.2; 02:02:15–02:10:04). Acoustics: Barriers with min surface mass density 12.5 kg/m²; noise limiting at 70 dBA; amplified/live music limited by time; beer gardens permitted to midnight per AO (Item 8.2; 02:12:52–02:26:18). CCTV/Monitoring: Officers to explore CCTV coverage of public easement and feasibility of crowd‑noise monitoring before Ordinary Meeting (Item 8.2; 02:49:11–02:50:27). Parking: 5-space shortfall via infrastructure agreement; consultant supports based on demand profile (Item 8.2; 02:14:33–02:17:37). Clarification: Erroneous “playground” label on a plan; any future playground requires change application and acoustic reassessment (Item 8.2; 02:22:31–02:23:42; 02:50:27–02:51:55). Environmental & Climate Officers: FY23/24 footprint 45,118 tCO2‑e; landfill 47% (gas capture/flaring key); direct emissions down ~38% ex‑supply chain; solar saves circa $300–375k/yr (Item 8.3; 03:05:12–03:11:25). Correction: Electricity increase since 2021 is ~7% (not 22%) due to typo; roadmap/investment strategy to net zero forthcoming (03:08:17–03:08:36). Councillors: Queried LED streetlighting constraints (Energex ownership), sustainable procurement requirements in tenders, and staff sustainability initiatives (03:13:07–03:21:29). Finance & Procurement Pauline: Operating rev above budget (interest, goods/services, other rev, grants, rates); civil ops materials over due to arborist/drainage/weather; options to constrain spend under review (Item 8.5; 04:00:24–04:06:23). Pauline: FAGs methodology cut (~14%) realized; timing risk if advance unpaid; managed via reserves (04:01:10–04:02:44). Council: CEO delegated to execute electricity retail contracts for streetlights/large sites beyond general financial limits (Item 9.1; minutes). Place Planning – Pomona Michelle: Three engagement rounds; plan adjusted for clarity and quarry truck issues; implementation plan for short‑term actions approved (Item 8.4; 03:45:00–03:50:22). Councillors: Emphasis on crossings, shade/greening, “town team,” and sustained delivery vs earlier 2005 plan aspirations; Men’s Shed to be engaged in implementation (03:49:24–03:55:04). National Advocacy (ALGA Motions) Karen Finzel: Motions on Waste Reduction Act 2020 efficacy and end‑of‑waste criteria review; circular economy focus incl. soil remediation (Item 8.6; minutes). Amelia Lorentson: Motions on EU‑style urban wastewater reuse feasibility; mandated road user agreements for heavy freight cost‑sharing; senior doctor volunteer register/medical reserve (Item 8.6; 04:16:39–04:23:01).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES General Committee Meeting Monday, 17 March 2025 12:30 PM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Committee: Crs Brian Stockwell (Chair), Karen Finzel, Amelia Lorentson, Jessica Phillips, Tom Wegener, Frank Wilkie, Nicola Wilson “Noosa Shire – different by nature” GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 1. DECLARATION OF OPENING The meeting was declared open at 12.30pm. 2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY Noosa Council respectfully acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of the lands and waters of the Noosa area, the Kabi Kabi people, and pays respect to their Elders, past, present and emerging. 3. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Brian Stockwell (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Tom Wegener (via Microsoft Teams) Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini (via Microsoft Teams) Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings APOLOGIES Nil. 4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie The Minutes of the General Committee Meeting held on 17 February 2025 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. 5. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 6. DEPUTATIONS Nil. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 7. ITEMS REFERRED FROM COMMITTEES Nil. 8. REPORTS DIRECT TO GENERAL COMMITTEE 8.1. MCU24/0074 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET AND SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION (16 UNITS) AT 203 & 207 GYMPIE TERRACE, NOOSAVILLE The following material was presented to the meeting in relation to this item: Attachment 1 to the General Committee Minutes 17.03.2025 - Diagram provided by Applicant - Vehicle Turn Paths MCU2 0074 Attachment 2 to the General Committee Minutes 17.03.2025 - Diagram provided by Noosa Council - Vehicle Turn Paths MCU2 0074 Attachment 3 to the General Committee Minutes dated 17 March 2025 Updated Conditions (with errors amended as advised by staff) Motion Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding Application MCU24/0074 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use - Food and Drink outlet and Short-term accommodation (16 Units) situated at 203 and 207 Gympie Terrace Noosaville, and A. Approve the application in accordance with the proposed conditions outlined in Attachment 3 to the General Committee Minutes dated 17 March 2025 Updated Conditions (with errors amended as advised by staff); and B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Item A be amended to read: A. Approve the application in accordance with the proposed conditions outlined in Attachment 1 to the Minutes - Updated Conditions supplied by staff, with the following amendment: 1. That Condition 3, under CD 2.02 be amended to read: CD 2.02 B B Ground Floor Plan 20.02.2025 prepared by Arkos Architects AmendmentsThe plan is to be amended to demonstrate that a minimum of 1.0 metre width of soft landscaping can be provided to all street frontages particularly around proposed urban infrastructure in Albert Street. The plan is to demonstrate a minimum of 375 square metres of landscaping is provided on site excluding outdoor dining and paved areas. Provide an updated calculation which separates all landscaping areas individually to comprise 375 square metres of landscaping. The plan is to amend the number remove all timber landscape elements of ‘Tide’ structures GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 to all a maximum of 5, with each structure to provide shade to a seat frontages and reinstate with landscaping.Carparks 2 - 12 are to be amended to accommodate landscaping infrastructure in accordance with the Landscaping Works conditions of this approval.The ground floor plan is to accommodate on site refuse collection in accordance with the engineering requirements stipulated in condition 61. Carried unanimously. Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Item A, 1 be amended to read: 1. That Condition 3, under CD 2.02 be amended to read: CD 2.02 B B Ground Floor Plan prepared by 20.02.2025 Arkos Architects AmendmentsThe plan is to be amended to demonstrate that a minimum of 1.0 metre width of soft landscaping can be provided to all street frontages particularly around proposed urban infrastructure in Albert Street. The plan is to demonstrate a minimum of 375 square metres of landscaping is provided on site excluding outdoor dining and paved areas. Provide an updated calculation which separates all landscaping areas individually to comprise 375 square metres of landscaping. The plan is to amend the number of ‘Tide’ structures to maximum of 5, with each structure to provide shade to a seat, with the structures to be built within the site boundary. Carparks 2 - 12 are to be amended to accommodate landscaping infrastructure in accordance with the Landscaping Works conditions of this approval. The ground floor plan is to accommodate on site refuse collection in accordance with the engineering requirements stipulated in condition 61. Carried unanimously. Amendment No. 3 Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item A, 2 be added as follows: 2. That Condition 61 be amended to read: 61. Prior to Council issuing a Development Permit for Operational Works, an amended Waste Management Plan must be submitted to council for approval that investigates both on street and on-site waste collection. On-site collection should be provided unless it is demonstrated that it cannot occur to the satisfaction of the Manager – Development Assessment. The amended Waste Management Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified person who is experienced in waste management. For: Crs Wilson and Phillips Against: Crs Stockwell, Lorentson, Wilkie, Finzel and Wegener Lost. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding Application MCU24/0074 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use Food and Drink outlet and Short-term accommodation (16 Units) situated at 203 and 207 Gympie Terrace Noosaville and: A. Approve the application in accordance with the proposed conditions outlined in Attachment 3 to the General Committee Minutes dated 17 March 2025 Updated Conditions (with errors amended as advised by staff), with the following amendment: 1. That Condition 3, under CD 2.02 be amended to read: CD 2.02 B B Ground Floor Plan prepared 20.02.2025 by Arkos Architects Amendments The plan is to be amended to demonstrate that a minimum of 1.0 metre width of soft landscaping can be provided to all street frontages particularly around proposed urban infrastructure in Albert Street. The plan is to demonstrate a minimum of 375 square metres of landscaping is provided on site excluding outdoor dining and paved areas. Provide an updated calculation which separates all landscaping areas individually to comprise 375 square metres of landscaping. The plan is to amend the number of ‘Tide’ structures to maximum of 5, with each structure to provide shade to a seat, with the structures to be built within the site boundary. Carparks 2 - 12 are to be amended to accommodate landscaping infrastructure in accordance with the Landscaping Works conditions of this approval. The ground floor plan is to accommodate on site refuse collection in accordance with the engineering requirements stipulated in condition 61. B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Carried unanimously. 8.2. MCU23/0090 APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – HOTEL (EXTENSION TO EXISTING HOTEL) AND DBW23/0073 - BUILDING WORK (DEMOLITION) AT 118 POINCIANA AVE & 26 DIYAN ST, TEWANTIN In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Wilson provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Wilson, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I have a financial interest in a neighbouring property that may be affected by the outcome of this application. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Wilson left the meeting. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 Motion Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding Application No. MCU23/0090 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use – Hotel (extension to existing Hotel) and DBW23/0073 Development Permit for Building Work Assessable Against the Planning Scheme (Demolition) situated at 118 Poinciana Avenue Tewantin and 26 Diyan Street Tewantin and: A. Approve the application in accordance with the proposed conditions outlined in Attachment 1; and B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the matter be deferred to the Ordinary Meeting dated 20 March 2025 to allow further information around acoustics and safety. Lost unanimously. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding Application No. MCU23/0090 for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use – Hotel (extension to existing Hotel) and DBW23/0073 Development Permit for Building Work Assessable Against the Planning Scheme (Demolition) situated at 118 Poinciana Avenue Tewantin and 26 Diyan Street Tewantin and: A. Approve the application in accordance with the proposed conditions outlined in Attachment 1. B. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Carried unanimously. Cr Wilson returned to the meeting. 8.3. NOOSA COUNCIL ORGANISATIONAL CARBON FOOTPRINT FY23/24 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council A. Note the report by the Sustainability and Climate Change Officer - Carbon Reduction to the General Committee dated 17 March 2025 regarding Noosa Council's Organisational Carbon Footprint; B. Note that the report includes a calculation of the 2023/2024 Carbon Footprint for Noosa Council as an organisation and its progress in emissions reduction; and C. Note that a separate report will be presented to a future Council Meeting on the roadmap and investment strategy to net zero emissions. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 Carried unanimously. 8.4. POMONA PLACE PLAN In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Lorentson provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Lorentson, wish to inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as my husband, Chris Lorentson, is an employee of Page Furnishers Pty Ltd, where he has served as General Manager for the past 32 years. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias as there is no personal gain or loss involved. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Lorentson and determine that in accordance with s150ES of the Local Government Act 2009, and having considered the Councillor's conflict of interest as described, it is decided that Cr Lorentson may participate and vote on this matter relating to the Pomona Place Making Plan as a reasonable person would not have a perception of bias as there is no personal gain or loss involved. Carried unanimously. Cr Lorentson having declared a conflict of interest was not eligible to vote. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council note the report by the Principal Strategic Planner to the General Committee meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding the Pomona Place Plan Pilot; and A. Approve the final Pomona Place Plan in Attachment 1; B. Note the changes to the Draft Pomona Place Plan as a result of submissions in Attachment 2; C. Approve the preparation of an Implementation Plan for actions designated as short term in the Pomona Place Plan; and D. Note an Evaluation report will be provided to Council in the coming months once the Place plan has been endorsed and implementation has commenced with community. Carried unanimously. 8.5. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – FEBRUARY 2025 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 March 2025 outlining the February 2025 year to GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 date financial performance against budget, including changes to the financial performance report with the inclusion of key financial sustainability indicators. Carried unanimously. 8.6. PROPOSED MOTIONS FOR SUBMISSION TO ALGA NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2025 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Chief Executive Officer to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding motions to the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) National General Assembly (NGA) 2025 and: A. Approve the following motion (refer Attachment 1), initiated by Cr Finzel, to be submitted to the Australian Local Government Association: "This National General Assembly calls on the Australian Government to provide a review to improve the efficiency and impact of the Waste Reduction Act 2020 in addressing the current and future circular economy needs, resource recovery and waste challenges to address how the Act operates to inform and take action at local government levels to respond to the needs of developing critical circular economy markets, including the viability of soil remediation within the Circular Economy to address social and environmental best sustainable practice as priority for local solutions to contribute to healthier communities, sustainable development, housing, and responsible resource management. Bioremediation and phytoremediation are both innovative, nature-based solutions for soil decontamination, fostering targets to effectively deliver place-based solutions for environmental and financial sustainability." B. Approve the following motion (refer Attachment 2), initiated by Cr Lorentson, to be submitted to the Australian Local Government Association: "This National General Assembly calls on the Australian Government to Commit to undertaking a feasibility study of implementing a policy similar to the European Union’s Urban Wastewater Treatment and Reuse framework as part of Australia’s efforts to achieve Zero Pollution goals." C. Approve the following motion (refer Attachment 3), initiated by Cr Lorentson, to be submitted to the Australian Local Government Association: "This National General Assembly calls on the Australian Government to collaborate with local governments to mandate road user agreements with industry, ensuring fair cost distribution among road users, including those responsible for increased freight loads that damage local government roads." D. Approve the following motion (refer Attachment 4), initiated by Cr Lorentson, to be submitted to the Australian Local Government Association: "The National General Assembly calls on the Australian Government to support the policy of Australian Medical Association Queensland (AMA, QLD) and the Australian Senior Active Doctors Association (ASADA) by: 1. Amending the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law to establish a new registration category under AHPRA for senior doctors wishing to volunteer before retirement. 2. Waiving or significantly reducing registration fees and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) requirements for this category. 3. Providing indemnity insurance for senior doctor volunteers at minimal cost. 4. Establishing an Australian Medical Reserve to address workforce shortages during emergencies." GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 E. Approve the following motion (refer Attachment 5), initiated by Cr Finzel, to be submitted to the Australian Local Government Association: "This National General Assembly calls on the Australian Government to undertake a comprehensive review into the end of waste criteria for resource recovery products against the specification for materials used in Federal, State and Local Infrastructure projects." F. Approve Cr Lorentson and Cr Finzel to attend and present the motions at the National General Assembly, should they wish to attend. Carried unanimously. 9. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION 9.1. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - CONTRACTS RENEWAL DELEGATION – RETAIL ELECTRICITY FOR STREETLIGHTS AND LARGE SITES CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3)(g) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing Item 9.1 Contracts Renewal Delegation – Retail Electricity for Streetlights and Large Sites. Carried unanimously. RE-OPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the meeting be re-opened to the public. Carried unanimously. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Procurement Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding contract renewal for retail electricity for streetlights and large sites, and A. Pursuant to section 257(1) of the Local Government Act 2009, delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, finalise and execute the following contracts on behalf of Council: 1. Retail electricity for Streetlights; and 2. Retail electricity for Large Sites; and B. Resolve that the delegation in Item A above is not limited by any general financial delegations that apply to exercising the Chief Executive Officer’s powers, and may be exercised to bind Council to a contract sum that exceeds the Chief Executive Officer’s general financial delegation. Carried unanimously. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 MARCH 2025 10. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 5.10pm.
Meeting Transcript
Brian Stockwell 00:08.700
So welcome councillors and everyone in the gallery to the General Committee meeting for March 2025. I declare the meeting open. We have all councillors present except Councillor Wegener is attending by teams and will vote electronically. We now move on to the Acknowledgement of Country and today we're going to consider the Pomona Placemaking Plan. So I thought it might be appropriate to use the words of Norman Bond, the Chair and Director of Kabi Kabi Peoples Aboriginal Corporation. And he said, "We acknowledge our ancestors and elders who over thousands of years have cared for country as skilled land shapers and placemakers with deep knowledge and connection Placemakers. With deep knowledge and connection to these landforms, waterways and rainforests. Country is where we connect with each other and our ancestors. It is where we are at peace and find strength and connection with our community. And by working together and embracing community we can protect our shared values and aspirations for a healthy and sustainable future. So, I think that's it. Wonderful sentiments to consider as we move through today's agenda. We next have confirmation of minutes. Would someone like to move? We're moving the minutes of the February General Committee meeting. Frank Wilkie 01:36.028
Happy to second it, Mr Chair. Thank you for being accurate in your... SPEAKER_02 01:39.568
Sorry, who was the mover? Shaun Walsh 01:41.268
I moved Councillor Lorentson, second Councillor Wilkie. Brian Stockwell 01:45.408
And I presume there's no discussion. All those in Yes. That's carried unanimously. There are no presentations nor are there any deputations. There was nothing referred from committee. Therefore, we move straight on to section 8, which is report direct to general committee. And the first item is M2U240074, develop an application for material change of use for food and drink outlet and short term accommodation, 16 units at 203 and 207 Gympie Terrace, Nooseville. And we have the director, the manager and the assessing officer from development control here and I believe Andrew Gaffney will give us an executive summary of the report. Andrew Gaffney 02:34.360
Yes, thank you Chairman. Today we have the consideration a material change of use application for short-term accommodation and food and drink outlet at the property at 203 to 207 Gympie Terrace at Noosaville. The site is a large site, it's one of the sort of catalyst sites within Noosaville being 3,750 square metres in area and being that size has and being that size, has significant frontages to Thomas Street, Gympie Terrace and Albus Street. The existing development at the site includes a single and two-storey. storey commercial developments as on the 203 Gympie Terrace property and a former car wash and fuel station on the 207 Gympie Terrace property. All of that existing... All of that existing development will be removed as part of the redevelopment process for the proposed use. Looking at the proposal, the ground level of the development will include four short-term food and drink outlets located at the corner of Thomas Street and Gympie Terrace, which is in accordance with the local plan. intention to activate that corner of the site. There will also be one short-term accommodation unit on the northeast corner of Albert and Gympie Terrace. The next two levels of the development be comprising the short-term accommodation development across those two levels so as mentioned a total of 16 units ranging in I guess density from one to four I guess density from one to four bedrooms. The development also includes a basement which will accommodate a total of 45 basement car parks and 11 ground level car parks adjacent to the site's southern side boundary. So a total of 56 on-site car parking spaces. The street to Gympie Terrace will be improved by including an additional three car parking spaces complementing the existing three spaces on Gympie Terrace. So a total of six on-street car parking spaces front in Gympie Terrace plus eight motorcycle spaces on Gympie Spaces on Gympie Terrace and then another six spaces on Albert Street which are currently not formalized so it's formalizing both street frontages with on-street car parks so that's the general So that's the general sort of format of the development. The proposed development application requests variations to the planning scheme for a number of different aspects, primarily relating to building heights. heights, the inclusion of rooftop terraces, two rooftop terraces at the upper level of course. Setbacks to all frontages, site coverage. and waste management of the of the development. With regarding to building heights, the proposed maximum building height as outlined under the tourist accommodation design code which this the entire site is entire site is located within the Tourist Accommodation Zone Code and both uses being co-assessable. The building height maximum is required to be a maximum of 12 metres from ground level. The current proposal exceeds that height to a total of... Frank Wilkie 06:43.320
Is it 13.9? SPEAKER_00 06:44.960
13.9 Metres, that's correct, yes, to the top of the actual pergolas on the top of the roof and then decreases to a maximum roof fascia height of 10.2 metres or 11.5 metres above ground level. So when looking at the actual height of the building when compared to either ground level or the raised ground level due Brian Stockwell 07:49.704
Generally done that we don't... Frank Wilkie 07:50.944
It is a relatively informal meeting, but thank you for your latitude, Mr Chair. I just want to clarify the point you made about height. The question about the point you made about height, you're saying because... because that is a flood prone area, the buildings are allowed to be built up an extra 1.5 metres from ground level? SPEAKER_00 08:14.492
The ground level at the moment ranges between approximately 1.5 to 1.7. Which makes Frank Wilkie 08:20.580
High. the total But that is consistent with what's been allowed with all other buildings adjoining and surrounding that particular development? That's right. Thank you Mr Chair, I think it was an important point to clarify. It was. Thank you. SPEAKER_00 08:33.700
The buildings are required to actually meet a minimum floor level of 2.7 RL to be above flood level, which means that the actual basement, car parking, top of slat, is required to be about one metre above ground level at the moment. So that's why the actual the building presents higher as an overall height compared to the maximum height of 12 metres. The next variance to the planning scheme requested by the applicant relates to setbacks. Thank you. The tourist accommodation zone code requires that the general format of setbacks are six for the first and second floor for the first and second floor and eight metres for the third level which is the maximum building height for the for the zone. The way the design works is that the there are a range of setbacks to each frontage so technically the development that will the development does comply with with setbacks because it moves in and out of that sort of range. I think looking at the way on Thomas Street for example the existing development sets to the boundary There has been a bit of flexibility given regarding the closest sort of tendency to the existing development to allow for a decrease setback from the six metres to interface with existing development to the south. So in that circumstance setback ranges from 3.5 to 6 metres at the corner which is in compliance with the setback at ground level. However the tendencies also include substantial setbacks to all to the Gympie Terrace and Thomas Street frontages to allow for that intention of using those ground level spaces for pedestrians. and to allow for that ability to have an interactive space between the full path and the the raised ground level. So generally speaking the the ground level That's level setbacks are considered to be satisfactory to the frontages to Gympie Terrace and Thomas Street. The development also further increases at the second and third level from six to eight metres which is supported. The development also includes a number of contained planters at these levels, which slightly comes into those setbacks, but given that it will be improved with, I guess, elevated container planting. We are supporting up that architectural treatment. The setbacks to Albert Street: five metres, generally five metres to metres, generally five metres to the actual first floor, and then eight metres to the second floor, which is generally, which is supported for that sort of profile of setback from the street. There is a reduced setback at ground level to accommodate a communal open space involving a pool, a small pool and sort of communal recreation space associated with the pool. But again, that would be an expected facility for a short-term accommodation development at ground level, so we are supportive of that setback in this instance as well. The other variation to the scheme that the applicant has sought involves site coverage up to a maximum Up to a maximum of 53%. The current site coverage allowance is 45%. We believe that the increase up to 53% is acceptable in this instance given the fact that the overall outcomes sought under the local plan have been achieved. The building is articulated. It includes a number of building recesses to all street frontages. The site has development is required to deal with approximately 178 lineal metres of street frontages which would be challenging. They have articulated the building. They've broken up the building form and basically the urban design reflects which reflects the sort of form which is supported under the local plan code and the tourist accommodation zone code. So even though there has been a lifting of the site coverage in this instance, we believe that the overall outcome of the development is satisfactorily complies with the local plan outcome and is supported. The final, I guess, variance to the scheme is the issue of waste management. The applicant would like to retain the current, I guess, format of on-street collection. The existing development has progressed over the years, initially approved for development back in 1970. Slide additions and building extensions have allowed to occur over the years. As outlined in the report, which has allowed the continued collection of waste from on-street. This development is a catalyst project. It has three street frontages and we believe has sufficient and space to accommodate a on-site garbage collection, which is in accordance with the planning scheme policy for waste collection. So at the moment we are requiring that the development maintain an arrangement of on-site collection. To push the development to a more contemporary and, you know, a better outcome for the on-street presentation of the development, rather than having bins on-street. Brian Stockwell 14:30.080
I'll start. Shaun Walsh 14:31.100
I'm going to... I've got a simple question. Brian Stockwell 14:33.860
Go ahead, Tom. Go ahead, Councillor Wegener. Shaun Walsh 14:38.320
With the setbacks in relating to sidewalk dining, some of the ground floor... tenants or restaurants, how would that affect... Would the leniency affect the ability of the sidewalk dining to kind of move out into that open space, which is more of a sidewalk or a... SPEAKER_00 15:04.620
Move beyond the site boundary, Councillor, or...? Yeah. Yeah, yeah. The project at the moment does not anticipate, I guess, external dining into the pedestrian area, I suppose. Richard MacGillivray 15:20.640
The challenge too is with the increase in elevation, Councillor, is increase in elevation, Councillor, is a result of the levels required to meet flood immunity, so essentially this development needs to support the commercial uses within the site itself. itself. So you'll note from, I think there's some of the illustrations there, I'm trying to find the best one for you, which probably articulates that in the report. I'm not worried about the actual sidewalk, the sidewalks for pedestrians as well, but on the upper level. Patrick Murphy 15:54.922
So there is a capacity for pedestrian dining in that area. SPEAKER_00 16:00.682
Towards the end of the report you'll see some renders that are looking north on Thomas Street and it shows that there are awnings that are provided which will allow activated outdoor dining and protection from the elements and I think the actual the terrace levels have a very generous setback to the glazing line of about 11 metres on Gympie So it's a substantial outdoor area which can be used for outdoor dining the applicant has designated outdoor dining spaces for each tenancy so you know there there is a you know, there is a mix of outdoor dining as well as, you know, fairly accessible areas for pedestrians to come and go. Shaun Walsh 16:50.952
Okay, just one, yeah, just my concern is that kind of a bistro seat situation where it moves all the way out, maybe even, you know, a little bit further than people anticipated, where the dining keeps getting busier and busier. dining keeps getting busier and busier, taking over more space than where the pedestrians are eating through the tables then. Just, just, just highlighting that. Brian Stockwell 17:14.213
Yes, if we can keep to the questions please rather than the concerns until we're in debate. we're in debate please Councillor Wegener. Patrick Murphy 17:21.505
Can we just sort of add one, a couple points. Andrew, you've prepared an amended recommendation due to some numerical... Andrew Gaffney 17:28.725
That's right, there were some typographic errors in some of the, I guess, building height and some of the car parking numbers, which were picked up at a late stage. I sent an updated report to Cathy this morning just to highlight those spaces... areas, so... Specifically condition six, the internal use area has been increased from 446 square metres to 451 in the condition. Condition nine, it previously referred 9, it previously referred to 2.4 metres, it should actually have referred to 2.2 metres, and Condition 40 referred to 57 car spaces, but it should have referred to 56. Frank Wilkie 18:16.556
Mr Chair, can I just flag that I'm happy to move the motion with these changes, technical changes, attached as part of the initial motion, if that's helpful. Amelia Lorentson 18:33.588
I've got a few questions. Firstly, most of us have met with the applicant and we've received some emails from the applicant in relation to waste and recycling collection. The question I want to ask you is that email received they would like deletion of condition 61 and would like the collection to be on site, sorry, on street, not on site. And their reasons, in a nutshell, that it's neither safe nor operationally efficient for waste and recycling bins to be collected on site. My question is, have we done a detailed risk assessment on the proposed on-site waste collection in relation to the issues that they've raised in terms of pedestrian safety and manoeuvring challenges? Patrick Murphy 19:39.018
It might be time to ask. We can have the Manager of We've got the Manager of Waste, we've also got the Senior Development Engineer who's done some work with our infrastructure area on some manoeuvrability through the site. I might just ask Dan to come up. So through the course of the application when the application was originally submitted the applicant proposed to have on-site waste collection in response to In response to an information request the form of the development is modified. That form of the development is generally consistent with what's before you now and at that time the applicant proposed that the waste collection occur off-site as opposed to on-site. We weren't supportive of that noting the scheme seeks for on-site collection noting it is a greenfield site. is a greenfield site where they're starting again so there's opportunity to for this development to be designed in a manner that accommodates on-site collection and also noting I think it's important to note the site is benefiting from increased site cover but that shouldn't be at the expense of at the expense of providing on-site servicing and and other site servicing and other matters that need to be addressed on site. So you've done some work with our, Dan was involved in the assessment of the application and looked at the plans that were submitted by the applicant, has identified some, I suppose irregularities in terms of some of the information that's been provided but also done, we've our own assessment as well and Dan can probably talk to some of the images that he's provided to Cathy and Kyrone can probably talk to the broader sort of strategic intent. SPEAKER_00 21:29.600
We're seeking to achieve with the waste management in the area so I guess just initially the applicants consulting engineer record provided council with a set of vehicle turning parts for a heavy rigid vehicle paths for a heavy rooted vehicle. Those turn paths demonstrated that the vehicle could safely enter the site from Albert Street, manoeuvre through the site and safely exit onto Thomas Street. Those plans, like I said, were prepared by ReCorp, the project RPEQ. Further down the line in the application process, Council received additional turn paths for the side loader series. which is typical of Council's waste collection vehicle that would be used to manoeuvre on site, to service on site, sorry. You can see on the screen there that the left turn path for the heavy rigid vehicle able to safely manoeuvre through that site and exit onto Thomas Street and we can see on the right that the side loader series which is again typical of the waste collection vehicle is unable to safely exit onto Thomas Street as it takes out the car parks in the median there. I'd like to highlight just the difference between the heavy rigid vehicle and the waste collection vehicle. The heavy rigid vehicle is a larger, less manoeuvrable vehicle than the standard waste collection vehicle, which is shorter in length and objectively more manoeuvrable from engineering's perspective and following our assessment. We believe there's insufficient information to suggest that on-site waste collection isn't possible because a larger vehicle can safely exit onto Thomas Street. In conjunction with the infrastructure services team, we undertook our own turnpath assessment that confirmed that a heavy, rigid vehicle was able to safely manoeuvre through the site. Patrick Murphy 23:31.460
Did you want to talk to that? Brian Stockwell 23:33.520
We'll get the question and I think there'll be a few questions. Jessica Phillips 23:37.960
Just to clarify then, when I'm looking at that image, there's a car park on the adjoining, not adjoining, the property next, the commercial property next to it, which shows when it's coming out, it actually takes out that car park on both images. So when these details are done, is there consideration to a car being parked? Or is there suggestion that that would be a removed car park? Because both of those images shows it'll clip the back of both those car parks. SPEAKER_00 24:16.811
Yep. So it is noted that Yep so it is noted that that carpark is I wouldn't say oversized but larger than what a standard carpark would be for this sort of area. There may be an opportunity as part of an operational works application to revisit the line marking on Thomas Street to potentially avoid the loss of that carpark. Richard MacGillivray 24:40.004
And councillor, can I also just to Dan's point that, so we're obviously at the material change of use stage, so there is the ability through what we call the operational work stage, which is where the detailed design comes in, which is where more of the specific specific analysis and design work is done in terms of can a vehicle safely navigate through there without impacting on existing infrastructure. It might result in sometimes slight modification to other arrangements and layout. To ensure that it can safely navigate through there without any impact on existing infrastructure or line marking so further detailed work can be done but I guess what Dan is showing is that the analysis that's been undertaken can show that generally you can get a an HRV vehicle or large vehicle through the site which is already being serviced. Jessica Phillips 25:43.779
Another question through the Chair. Would that access necessitate going onto the neighbour's property as well on that driveway and could it cause conflict with incoming vehicles? SPEAKER_00 26:02.260
There's an existing easement just over that access driveway which provides the opportunity for both of those lots to use that accessway. In theory there could potentially be some sort of conflict but that could easily be managed internally by the site. Amelia Lorentson 26:22.002
So does an easement require consent from both property owners? SPEAKER_00 26:28.622
That's my So what what happens in the situation when one property owner declines understanding. Amelia Lorentson 26:34.784
Consent? It's an existing easement. It's an existing easement. That's right. Okay. So does not require then consent from the adjoining owner if the vehicle traverses over his property line. SPEAKER_00 26:51.784
So is the easement The easement is currently approximately four metres wide. So it's sufficiently wide enough. Yeah. I think the service vehicle could actually be located entirely within the easement and exit the And I think Dan and I spoke briefly about that issue previously to basically say that you shouldn't necessarily involve moving onto other sites. Frank Wilkie 27:16.678
Just clarifying the question Mr To staff, are you saying that both these diagrams were provided by the applicant? Yes. So the first one shows a heavy rigid vehicle which is a larger vehicle. The applicant showed that it could traverse the site safely and exit onto Thomas Street safely without interfering with any car parks or buildings. But further down the track, the provided this diagram showing a movement of the side loader vehicle, which is smaller than the heavy rigid vehicle. This one is unable to safely traverse. That's correct. Even though it's a smaller vehicle. That is correct. Okay. Patrick Murphy 28:05.284
Yeah. And we did Yeah, and we did a... Frank Wilkie 28:07.408
This is why you're having trouble accepting the veracity of... That is correct the information. Patrick Murphy 28:12.768
That is correct. And further studies that have been done by our own internal engineers... Yes to do sweat path diagrams of the heavy rigid vehicle... Correct, yeah which Cathy also has... Which support the notion that the vehicle can manoeuvre through the site? Frank Wilkie 28:35.340
Follow-up question Mr Chair? Currently waste collection is 240 litre bins daily from the footpath? I believe so. It might have a couple of 1100s but it might just be 240s. I can answer your question. When we're on site there's 1100 per car there's 1100 per car board recycling and 360 and 240 on site. And what's proposed is larger bins which will only involve collections a fewer number of times per week? Well the proposal would be daily collections of 1100. collections of 1,100 size bins, which are a larger entity, from a rear entry truck, which is of the same size that's been proposed as the MRV. rear entry truck is a lower noise truck, so the entry into the vehicle is from a lower height, whereas the side entry truck is from a higher height. So if you have got glass and bottles from a higher height, you'll actually make So the 1100s are a lower noise vehicle. They are also deemed to be a safer type of vehicle for the way they operate, i.e. the driver has to get out of the vehicle and load the bin to the vehicle so that the truck is stationary. And the reason why you're referencing the Noosa planning policy waste management code which requires waste management to occur on site as opposed to on the street is to minimise on neighbours and the street but also you believe the site is sufficiently large to enable on site collection like it is at a range of other businesses across the shoreline. Amelia Lorentson 30:28.165
Thank you. To follow up on that question, so when we talk about amenity impacts or noise impacts, disturbance from visiting the site is actually on site collection will have more amenity issues, noise disturbances than curbside Do you agree that curbside collection would have less noise disturbances to neighbouring residents or Twinkies I think is the resort next They're going to be more impacted if it's onsite Do you think that onsite will create more noise impacts than on street? Larry Sengstock 31:12.463
Well I mean without the actual data to check mean, without the actual data to check that out in terms of the decibel reading, the decibel at the truck from a side entry to a rear entry would be lower from a rear entry than a side entry, i.e. the act of lifting the bin higher will create more noise. The length of travel on this drawing, I haven't got that information, I'd have to come back and take that on notice, but I guess the critical fact is the timing of that collection. If the timing of that collection is at five o 'clock in the morning, then the noise reverberates and travels. We have the ability, as we run the contractor, to change the timing from six, seven, eight o 'clock in the morning. That's a scheduling. Scheduling ability that we have within council and we currently do that and that goes through planning as a condition in terms of when we're allowed to schedule and collect on site. So if planning were to put that on waste as to... when we could collect that could be 7:30, 8 o 'clock, 9 o 'clock and more. Brian Stockwell 32:15.936
If I can just, while we're in the difference between the two approaches, the initial question was about risk mitigation. I think I recall in the report that you suggested the sidearm at the front of premises was a high risk, is that correct? Larry Sengstock 32:29.936
Yeah, in general we, not only from a... an amenity point of view, visual amenity point of view, the sidearm action is a riskier activity due to the nature of the activity itself. The driver is in a truck, he's focusing on an arm that is going out, picking a bin up and lifting it out of the side. We have numerous new misses of that activity currently, and it's across Australia for that activity. Cyclists, pedestrians, any vehicle... Cyclists, pedestrians and even vehicles. A rear lift truck, effectively the driver has to remove himself from the truck. Typically he goes to the bin and loads the bin from where it's stored and locks And locks it onto the back of the vehicle and it loads the truck from the back of the vehicle. So the vehicle is stationary, he's controlling the arm and the bin as it moves in from a position at the back of the truck. And if it's on site, obviously there's less vehicles, public and bicycles in the vicinity of that truck. And if it's on site, obviously there's... Brian Stockwell 33:36.159
One more with the side lift. Putting aside the historic practice, when you put out a wheelie bin, are you allowed to put it on put it on the road itself or does it have to be on footpath? It should be on the road reserve. You're avoiding the question. Okay. If I could just, if I could just add, I mean, we're not, this is a relatively busy area and there's a lot of apartments, and there is an element of noise that's associated with waste collection that's existing in this area. I think our quick look at this was, well, we had a look and I think from the middle of the residence behind, middle of that building to the street in Albert Street, it's about 29 metres, and it's a similar distance. Karen Finzel 35:13.640
A waste containment area in some places throughout the Shire, 5-6 metre high design, that hasn't been recommended for this application. How come we didn't explore that opportunity? come we didn't explore that opportunity to have all the waste on site in one single area? To contain all the bids and everything. SPEAKER_00 35:41.293
The separation of the two areas. two areas for the waste. The left hand side deals with the commercial waste. That's located at the back of tenant C4 there you can see. Then if you move over to the right hand side of the image at the back of the I guess the communal area there is another area of waste collection there for the for the short-term accommodation component. So there is two separate sort of areas. The why that was probably separated probably because one separating the actual function of using commercial sort of spaces and staff versus the short-term accommodation which is purely linked with that component of the building. So I think that was a way of actually just separating the waste areas between the different types of uses proposed from the site. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah, just I need a little bit more clarity on the fact certainly about the easement of the neighbouring property. I just feel a little uncertain how it's sort of on the back of what you had asked. Can you just clarify again, so there's an easement on the neighbouring commercial property and I thought I heard that if there's no consent from them to use then this doesn't work to be, can you just clarify Patrick Murphy 37:18.715
Existing, that we'd have to go back to go back to the terms of the easement to see exactly what it grants, but suffice to say that it's being used by both properties at the moment to allow for vehicles to come in and out of both sites. And that's evidenced by our aerial photography which shows car parks to the Brian Stockwell 37:40.580
And just to follow up, generally the wording of access easements are broad in nature. They give reciprocal rights for anyone to access their site for those required purposes. It's unlikely that a further consent would be required. Is that right? Patrick Murphy 37:56.984
I don't believe further consent would be required and I know we're focusing on waste management at the moment. There are other vehicles that will be moving through this site and that has not been raised by the applicant as being a problem. Jessica Phillips 38:10.969
Just one more question then to follow up because you quoted there was sufficient space for waste collection and I just want to clarify it's sufficient because I don't get a lot of confidence out of that word. That was what you said, sufficient. Larry Sengstock 38:26.509
Sorry, can you just reword? Jessica Phillips 38:27.789
You said, sorry, that there's sufficient space for waste collection. And I just want to have some confidence in the word sufficient. SPEAKER_00 38:35.722
The term pass that we've received and prepared demonstrate that an appropriate sized waste collection vehicle can manoeuvre through the site and stop. Stop, be serviced and exit the site. Brian Stockwell 38:46.318
And I think that may relate to the number of bins etc so the enclosures etc as drawn adequate for the purposes. SPEAKER_00 38:55.518
That's right I mean That's right I mean a typical operation I would assume the vehicle will enter from Albert Street it will stop it will collect the short-term accommodation bin room then proceed out through the southern area and onto Thomas Street the same sort of arrangement would happen a truck would come in collect from the commercial in room and then leave so they don't necessarily have to do any manoeuvreing on site they are travelling in a linear path across the southern boundary so that's a huge advantage for things like this because typically developments need to accommodate turning circles and turning points for vehicle refuse vehicles. refuse vehicle so this is a it's a fairly pretty much as efficient as you can get so far as a traffic refuse vehicle. And to clarify that the operational works plan will not out all the details? Correct. Thank you. Councillor Wilson? Jessica Phillips 39:48.812
Can I clarify as well so will the other businesses on Thomas Street continue to have an on-street pickup and will that still be around 6:00am. and then this will be an additional service that comes after 7:00pm.? Larry Sengstock 39:59.724
We accommodate that now so we have other developments that we have to go after a certain period of time. It's a scheduling element within our gift with Cleanaway and through our contract. Jessica Phillips 40:12.664
But the other businesses on Thomas Street will continue. the other businesses on Thomas Street will continue to be serviced on-site. Larry Sengstock 40:17.957
Sorry, on the street! Not all of them are on the street, so not Kentucky Fried Chicken, Red Rooster, that is on-site servicing now as we speak. So other areas, I guess the further development that happens in and around the area, this is our, I guess our development process and our brief to go forward is to get more and more off, on-site, rather than off-site. For various reasons. Frank Wilkie 40:47.778
Would it be fair to say the practice is, where businesses, where possible, waste collection will be on-site, but it's accepted that some tenancies are so small, on-site collection is just not the preference. With larger sites is on-site. Larry Sengstock 41:07.678
Exactly. And I think there's several. There's several benefits to on-site and some of which I think we've raised, but there are other ones which are critical is visual amenity. we are are very operational businesses waste in terms of we're collecting a lot of bins twenty to twenty five thirty thousand sometimes a day in Noosa alone. If a truck is slightly late and the person who's putting that bin out is a paid individual from a corporate body that person tends to and has in the past left the bin out so typically typically if it's a daily collection the norm can become the bin is left out on the street so the on-site removes one failure mode in the process of collection collecting waste that person is not needed so you're not relying on a taking that bin putting it on the street and then removing it off the street the rear service 1100 comes onto the site the driver gets out and takes the bin from the bin store puts it on the truck and puts it back puts it back one value mode which happens regularly even today is gone so this disruption to the street and the neighbourhood exactly yeah just a follow-up question next to this development month, the code the curve that it will still be on the street so pick up so they'll still be right next to it collection but different service okay the service service decided if they're 240s and 360s or a sidearm different different type of truck having said that if the usements there and they elected to put a 1100 behind their premises they could roll that out Brian Stockwell 43:05.210
Is that a question Mr Sheck? Is that correct? Larry Sengstock 43:11.470
I think you know we have taken this approach with other areas and worked with business businesses to move towards the on-site collection we've done this in the junction and other areas and it works very well we get the bins off the street we improve the health and safety and the visual amenity of the street so it does work So it does work. And working with what you just said in terms of getting businesses to identify the same location to put their bins, they actually end up saving some money because they haven't got a person who's Frank Wilkie 43:46.800
Chair, I'm happy to move. Amelia Lorentson 43:48.340
I have some further questions if that's alright. Thank you. Car parking, I want to talk a little bit about car parking given the importance and value that our community place on car parking spaces, particularly in this precinct. My question is how many parking spaces are being provided within the boundary for accommodation and retail purposes, if I could have that breakdown, and is there a shortfall of parking spaces within the property boundary and SPEAKER_00 44:24.900
Thanks, Councillor. Yes, the site accommodates 56 in total. Of those 56, 29 spaces are required for the short-term accommodation and that leaves 27 available for the food and drink outlets. There's a shortfall of seven spaces in total. However, there are up to 10 on-site motorcycle spaces as well as the creation of an additional formalising of six spaces on Albert Street and three spaces on Gympie Terrace. So, when compared against the performance outcome of the actual code, the development does provide sufficient car parking for the development. Amelia Lorentson 45:16.400
Ormalising of car spaces on Albert Street, so they're not formalised at the moment. No, it's just basically at the moment Albert Street is just a formed road, there's no guttering kerb and channel, and there's no designated sort of line marked car parking spaces. So, are we offsetting car parking onto public land? I'm just wondering does this align with our public land policy? Offsetting car park shortfalls onto public land? Patrick Murphy 45:54.252
You might be suggesting that we would normally say contributions in lieu of car parking. So we have Amelia Lorentson 45:59.012
$72,000 I think for the shortfall, is that correct? Patrick Murphy 46:04.112
If an infrastructure agreement would be required, I'm not sure of the exact dollar value, but in this instance because of the provision of car spaces in the public realm that are being initiated through this development We did not request that we enter into an infrastructure agreement for offsetting. Amelia Lorentson 46:23.164
Is that normal practice? Patrick Murphy 46:26.524
It is not unreasonable to consider the benefit in the public realm for shortfalling car parking. We did it with Hilton Terrace, the development there on Hilton Terrace. There was some car parking that was provided. You may recall at the front of the property. We also looked at it with the development that was occurring out at Elm Street, the initial commercial development which occurred out there. There was going to be an improvement in the number of car spaces that were to be provided in Opal Street and Sedona Street. We did it as well, didn't Yep, Sedona. SPEAKER_00 47:01.592
And I think also with this one, there's a number of existing crossovers on Gympie Terrace which are being closed, which will contribute more car parking on the street, which would not have been able to be provided. Councillor, can I just add to the points raised, so there's a holistic approach to looking at the car parking when we've got particularly multiple sites that are being consolidated, so it's actually an efficiency creation. All those extra crossovers that would have been required are no longer there, so the parking's been looked at holistically. You're right, you can separate what's within the site itself, but overall in terms of the uses proposed, the assessment provided in terms of what the actual demand is, staff are comfortable that on balance there's sufficient parking available for Jessica Phillips 47:53.980
Question, just in relation to infrastructure agreements, was there consideration to that with this applicant? Patrick Murphy 48:00.700
In terms of? Jessica Phillips 48:02.560
What we're talking about, the streetscaping, any type of, you know, enhanced outside the development application itself? I'm thinking foreshore plan, I'm thinking broader community. So when, I think you might be alluding to the undergrounding of power, not sure if that's what you're talking about, but when there was a pre-lodgement meeting on this one, 22 or 23, the then manager of planning addressed, there was conversation at the time about the undergrounding of power and maybe entering into a shared agreement with council on the costs. Sometimes. Patrick Murphy 48:52.780
By the planning consultant for this application seeking a letter that they could provide to the energy provider around whether we would condition the requirement for underground power. Seeking a letter that would That regard, no. So there's been no cost provided. I think that's something that would sit outside of this proposal if Council wants to enter into conversations with the developer and to forecast those works and costs from a budget perspective as well. Richard MacGillivray 49:46.127
Can I just add to Patrick's comments too? It's important just to remember that it's a code important just to remember it's a code assessable development application so it's actually a consistent envisaged use in the planning scheme so our actual assessment is quite controlled I guess in terms of what we can assess. not like other impact assessable applications where we consider other relevant matters and you know broader community benefit arguments so essentially our limitations on our assessment are purely to the codes that are triggered through the assessment process. Codes that are triggered through the assessment process so we we are quite confined around what we can get out of the process as such and we've just got to really assess those performance outcomes and benchmarks as well so that limits the focus and narrowness I Narrowness I guess of our assessment given we don't decide within statutory timeframes can be a deemed approval and then we're only obliged to then provide conditions so hopefully that helps just to address the clarify the comments. Yes just moving away from the issues we've already covered. Just interested in asking some questions about the shade panels or the shelter. The planning scheme does ask for you know shade and and landscaping to soften the built environment. Can you talk to me a bit about, I believe you've requested them to be removed? Yes. Given the community values our amenity opportunity to see for, you know, our elderly. My question is, thank you, why that's been removed? SPEAKER_00 51:26.385
I think when you look at the intention, the development outcomes envisaged under the neighbourhood plan code, under the local plan code, they talk about the corner of Thomas Street and Gympie Terrace a key corner. It's meant to project a subtropical form of architecture, an openness, a sort of a permeable space between public and sort of raised tenancies. I think what we're trying to do there is basically provide that sort of visual openness to the corner. The applicant, as a final amendment to the corner, set the development back six metres on the corner of to also assist with providing sight lines through those spaces from Thomas Street, which is also an outcome intended under the local plan framework and character plan. So the inclusion of so many shade structures along Gympie Terrace and Thomas Street were basically seen as being another sort of, I guess, screening or built form along those sort of streetscapes, which would be preferred to be improved with landscaping, rather than structures or screen elements, which again, provides another sort of visual barrier to the actual site between the upper level and the sort of street level. Karen Finzel 52:47.074
Well, in support of the architects seeking for this element to complement the rest of the building, and given we're looking at a really significant site that is, you know, you said a benchmark. Question? Oh, okay, yes. Is there a Is there a way we can include those elements? Because those elements can be used, like, for example, Noosa Junction, where they're landscaping. Brian Stockwell 53:12.440
Well, keep with that question. Which one? The one you started with. Is there a way to be retained? I think the question was, can the elements be included? Yes. Well, the plans show at least 11. Some plans should show more. Patrick Murphy 53:25.180
Some plans show least 11. All the plans show the ones on Thomas Street as counter-levering over the property boundary, so that wouldn't be suitable. They do occupy areas for which improved landscaping could be provided, in our opinion, and I think that you don't use, in my mind, you don't use built form to soften built form. I think the Noosa principles are around landscaping, built form being within a landscaping environment, but at the end of the day, it's really for councils to debate as to whether you consider it's reasonable to have these structures, the number of them, and what you accept. I think we've made it clear our position on it. think I've sent an email to councillors this morning, which provides some evidence of, you know, the fact that they'll cover approximately 26% of the site's frontage when you take in other areas that are sterilized through the steps and ramps, probably another 20%. So almost half the site is occupied by the structures or these other elements. And it does sit upon a a podium. You've got a retaining wall. So I think landscaping in this environment is very important. Karen Finzel 54:40.679
Yeah, I agree. Question through the chair. Sure. When you assess these applications, do you often recommend shrubs and vegetation at Do you recommend shrubs and vegetation at varying heights to soften the built form, for example, like a retaining wall, or the built environment that's had to be put in to address, say, flooding? Patrick Murphy 55:04.246
Yeah, so the operational works approval will address the specifics of the landscaping that's required. We'll certainly need to see through the material change of use process some concepts around landscaping where it's to be placed that'll be reviewed by our environment officer who will consider whether that's reasonable and he'll do the work at the operational work stage as I said to get that detailed design and those layers of landscaping Jessica Phillips 55:35.520
Question, I just got a bit confused, how many, sorry Patrick, how many cantilever are used? Patrick Murphy 55:44.020
Well there's, the ones on, the ones on Thomas Street, there appears to be five on the plan that I'm looking at, and they all extend over the property boundary, only partially, but notwithstanding, the structure shouldn't be in the, in the public realm. Jessica Phillips 56:04.630
And so to clarify, the condition is to remove the ones that you're, the five? No, the condition is to remove them all. So the ones that face Thomas Street and the ones that face Kimpy Terrace are all to be removed. SPEAKER_00 56:18.620
Guess when you look at the placement of those structures as well they're directly over some of the landscaping beds so I think in preference we would prefer the landscaping to thrive rather than be shaded by a number of built form shading devices which can shade all that sort of space so we want the landscaping to be thriving landscape so we'd like to remove those sort So, we'd like to remove those sort of impediments to the actual, the growth of the landscaping along the frontages. And noting there is awnings that come off the building to provide landscape. That's right. I mean, to provide shape in the podium area. As part of the terraces on Gympie Terrace and Thomas Street, the applicant's proposing a number of pergola structures with retractable awnings that go back and forth. So, there is a degree of coverage at that sort of ground level which can accommodate shade and comfort for people using those spaces. So, there is a degree of coverage. Have there been any discussions with the architect on this? So, just thinking if it could have been something else he could have proposed or just feeling comfortable taking something away from a holistic design. So, has there been any kind of negotiation on how else we could achieve this effect? No. No, not at this stage Councillor because I think it's fairly clear under the local plan code which talks about maintaining clear sight lines between the inside of tenancies and the street. I've got These alternating sort of shade structures which there wasn't a great deal of information provided but I do believe they pivot. In response to the movement of the tides or some sort of inter-relationship between the two. I guess depending on what sort of orientation the shade devices would be at it would create a degree of screening which I thought was in conflict with the actual outcome. Amelia Lorentson 58:14.620
I've got a couple more questions. Parking again, back to parking again. Community have made it really clear. Point of order please there's been a lot of liberty given to other speakers at the table. I've said one sentence and I've already been reprimanded. Frank Wilkie 58:34.760
I also think there's been too much commentary. Brian Stockwell 58:37.135
I'm the Chair of the meeting, and you have been using questioning which has highlighted to me sometimes, so it's my job. Amelia Lorentson 58:49.350
Has there been any parking provided in the plans for commercial vehicle deliveries? And if not, where would commercial vehicles park and offload? SPEAKER_00 59:03.125
Yes, Councillor, there is an MRV space within the southern grand level car parking area on the northern side of that car park. So that is where the intended sort of vehicles will arrive from Albert Street, park in the MRV space and service the back of the food and drink outlets. So that's the That's the intended space. Amelia Lorentson 59:22.792
Designated space. Also in terms of the draft Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan which is hasn't been endorsed at the moment. Do the plans align with community feedback and I'm thinking more in terms of the widening of the footpaths opposite the development and the scooter parks which I think there was some concerns raised during the engagement process have you aligned your decisions or was there any reference made to the community sentiment around that precinct? SPEAKER_00 01:00:00.695
I think when we were doing the initial consultation with applicants engaged consultants it was in the early stages of the foreshore master plan development and like you say it wasn't adopted what was fairly clear was it was meant to be a pedestrian I guess access I guess access way to the north of the corner and we spoke to the applicants design team about maybe meshing in with how that might work and that's why they came up with that sort of broad set of stairs on the corner of Thomas Street and Gympie Terrace to provide a fairly easy transition from the transition from the upper level terraces down to the corner and across to the north so I think from a permeability point of view that was the way in which the sort of applicant team tried to you know future proof the design so that when that sort of final master plan does get adopted it does provide that connection infrastructure that connection infrastructure services have been aware of what's been going on so far as this application is concerned and they have been providing support for the way it's gone so far as the layout goes appreciate thank you question just before we do Cathy there's been a request for one of the latest renderings it wasn't in the report but it was in this morning's email do you have access to those Karen Finzel 01:01:30.325
I don't know if I sent it to you. I'll forward it to you now. Is that the one? Is that different from the one that's in the report that you emailed us this morning? Patrick Murphy 01:01:42.452
The ones with the yellow boxes around? Yeah, I can forward that to Cathy now to make sure it's the right one. Karen Finzel 01:01:50.733
It's the same? Okay, if that's the same, Cathy, it's on page nine. I thought it was just in the report. Patrick Murphy 01:03:06.900
Captioning provided by the Amara Brian Stockwell 01:03:27.400
So do you have any further questions on that? Karen Finzel 01:03:30.180
Yes, I do. Only because for people in the gallery and people at home, and for ourselves, for clarity, when we talk about the structures that needed removing can you please clearly talk us through that image to talk about what's been removed and why? SPEAKER_00 01:03:50.685
The image shows basically a line of landscaping on the left hand side of the image. That's it and that's basically the I guess the Thomas Street property frontage along that sort of landscaping edge. To the right of that landscaping you'll see a gold structure that is within the actual Thomas Street elevation and on top of that you can see a retractable awning device on This morning device which will move in and out and provide some shelter to those external sort of open plaza areas. The two brown structures on the left hand side of the image are the tide actuated pivot shade devices. The columns of which are located I believe on the frontage so the actual operable screening element will pivot between being over the road reserve and I guess partially within the site itself so the request is to remove those structures so that the landscaping area beneath it has an opportunity to accommodate maybe some opportunities for larger planting which might grow up above that sort of height the current planting palette would be limited to the smaller plants which wouldn't interfere with the time structures and wouldn't require I guess wouldn't require I guess ongoing landscaping work on a regular basis to cut them down and to sort of you know ensure that they don't grow up too high. So what's being proposed to be amended is the removal of those structures on the left hand side of the image. Amelia Lorentson 01:05:40.811
So Andrew in front of me I've got acceptable outcome number 14B which states that the development includes detail development includes detailing and articulation for horizontal emphasis including awnings, fascia boards, parapet walls and upper level verandas or balconies. It's not what we're looking at consistently. Andrew Gaffney 01:06:06.690
I would say what's consistent with the outcome is the the incorporation of the retractable awning structure. I think once we start to delve in and sort of toggle between private and public space we're sort of space, we're sort of you know having our cake and eating it too to a degree. I mean I think the development satisfies that by providing that retractable structure and providing shade at that grain level. I just think the the shade structure shade structures provide an unnecessary visual sort of barrier between the private and the public spaces and possibly you know restrict the type of planting that can be achieved along those frontages. Amelia Lorentson 01:06:49.633
Just last question, is it reasonable to request maybe an independent architect to provide some input in this because it's, I don't know, just throwing it at you Andrew, just so that we just get a third party that can give us... idea of whether it's appropriate or whether it compromises the integrity of the book form. Patrick Murphy 01:07:21.027
So the application is code accessible and we had to... I won't say beg, but it was challenging to get it to this meeting. So if it's not decided by the ordinary meeting it will go deemed approved. So there might be some limitations in what we can achieve in that time. We did have an architect that reviewed the original proposal. We might have to go back and have a look at what comments they made around works within the frontage, but it's most unusual for Council to support something right on the boundary of the development. Mr Chair, thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:08:01.567
Is it one of the fundamental principles of planning that development applications, the infrastructure provided, must be within the property boundary? And a follow-up question, how could Noosa look if we started approving started approving development applications that extended beyond the property boundaries? Patrick Murphy 01:08:20.168
Well we certainly wouldn't seek to approve development outside the property boundary. And yeah, it would be dominant built form in a very urban environment. I think my opinion and some of the other perspectives that I provided in my email earlier today, I think those structures are quite dominant when you look at the accumulation of four or five, six of them on one frontage, very, very dominant built form. And no disrespect, but not overly aesthetically pleasing either in my mind in terms of materiality. So just to clarify, it's a fundamental principle that developments must be contained within their property boundaries. That's correct. Brian Stockwell 01:09:09.580
Because it is a quayside, getting the mix of green landscaping versus screaming, looking at trying to reduce the heat of our pavements and all that. If we gave you to Thursday to come up with a condition that gave some flexibility, my view is perhaps the articulation and the fact they moved up and down is creating too many problems, but some form of timber screening as part of the landscaping solution may be, you know, with less it at the operational stage? Patrick Murphy 01:09:51.993
There is There potentially is. There is a draft condition that I've provided councillors themselves. You might like to table that at some point. That's the only question. Brian Stockwell 01:10:02.291
I can hear the arguments on both sides. Richard MacGillivray 01:10:04.991
Yeah, it could be an opportunity to look at that. Opportunity to, yeah, to look at some sort of balanced outcome to improve the landscaping element and maybe reduce or lessen the sort of physical built form, particularly in that frontage area. Thank you. Karen Finzel 01:10:22.189
So, yeah, I do have a question. How would Noosa look if we missed the opportunity on a key site to explore opportunities? Can I get some clarity on how much of this is actually point on the road reserve how if that's the sticky much it's not the sticking point the sticking point is is the number of them that where they're set back and what could be provided from their location but I mean that's like the ground floor plan shows I think it's five that the render that was up before showed I think think four. four so you know what So, you know, we've got plans that are a bit inconsistent with each other, but of those that face Thomas Street, which the ground floor plan, I think, shows five, they partially overhang. So whether it's hundreds of millimetres, it's the extent, three, four hundred millimetres. But notwithstanding, there shouldn't be any encroachment. Okay. I just have a question then. So I do have an amendment to address this, but in terms Brian Stockwell 01:11:47.095
I'll move a motion Mr Chair. I move that the council note the report by the senior development planner to the general committee meeting dated 17 March 2025 regarding this application for a development permit for material change of use food and drink outlet and short-term accommodation nation, 16 units, situated at 203... And I approve the application in accordance with the proposed conditions outlined in the attachment three to the general committee minutes dated 17 March 2025, updated conditions with errors amended as advised by staff, which we ran through previously. And B, note the report is provided in accordance with section 63 in brackets five of the... Section 63 in brackets five of the Planning Act 2016. Karen Finzel 01:12:29.260
And I'd like to move an amendment. How about you second it, please? Brian Stockwell 01:12:32.040
Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:12:34.400
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, those slight changes were technical in nature. There were slight errors in the report. It's a code-assessable application. It's here because of our triggers for delegated... Because it's a significant site, it's a very prominent site, councillors are wanting this application, such as this, to be brought to the general committee or the full council for a decision. It's, as it says, it's in accordance. It is over height, but so are all the adjoining businesses because that is a flood prone area and the site needs to be elevated to get it above the flood level. I think staff and the applicant worked well together to come up with a very attractive design. I'm in favour of the onsite waste collection which occurs at all, plenty, other sites around the Shire and when we have the opportunity to ensure that onsite waste collection does occur to minimise impact on the neighbours and streetscape, we ought to do that. We've conditioned that at Calile, the other areas. Businesses that do this are Noosa Springs, Royal Mail, Noosa Homemaker Centre, Noosa Civic, Coles and Woolworths, Gibsons Road, Showrooms, Sofitel, I believe the Noosa Head Surf Club as well, so it's a well accepted practice. It's a responsible practice. Practice. If there are any amendments about the shave structures, I'll be keen to hear the arguments for and against, but I think it's a well designed development. Designed development and I think it will improve that site greatly. Brian Stockwell 01:14:19.182
Yeah, Councillor Finzel, would you like to move the amendment? Karen Finzel 01:14:21.322
Yes, thank you Mr Chair. So Kathy's got some word in there I do believe. The plan is to amend the number of the tied structures to a maximum of five with each structure to provide shade to a seat. Do we have a seconder for that? Brian Stockwell 01:14:41.470
I'm happy to second it. Karen Finzel 01:14:42.690
Thank you Mr Chair. Yeah I just think we have an opportunity here to find a compromise where we can work together to give an outcome on a key site in the Shire to explore those opportunities by which we can bring the two we can bring the two elements together which I know there's different opinions around the table in terms of the environment like growing and plants versus the built environment and I believe those two can be successfully melded together so that we can integrate softening, we can integrate landscape, we can integrate the built environment to come together. to come together as one to provide those elements that our community look for through amenity, shade, seeding. I think this is a really good opportunity. We always say we're different by nature. Let's put that to the test and see are we prepared to look at this element that the architect is seeking to complement the rest of the building and keep the rhythm of the design so it's pleasing to the eye and in my opinion it doesn't obstruct our line of sight. much. Frank Wilkie 01:15:51.674
Question. Yes. With this amendment require an amendment to ensure that these shade structures do not impinge on public land or could that be achieved with the current wording? Patrick Murphy 01:16:05.612
I think it would be sensible to include that they must be located within the property, entirely located within the property boundary. Frank Wilkie 01:16:12.512
Are you happy with that change? you are you happy with that change? Brian Stockwell 01:16:17.537
Leave it to a second amendment. I have a question in relation to that. Majority of the development, old development, obviously has warnings that go across the footpath outside the property boundary which is fairly standard in a commercial precinct. is fairly standard in a commercial precinct. Is the concern here that you've got moving parts and they may be lower than an awning, so there's, what is the concern about that? They're a bit different too. I was going to say, I guess the concerns that we have is that it's fairly clear what the built form is meant to be under the local plan. It's meant to be stepped back and ramped up to a six and eight metre setback profile. So we're wanting to remove the fabric from the street so it's open and it's sort of more sort of subtropical feel. So as Patrick was saying, the inclusion of all these sort of potentially potentially alternating sort of shade structures sort of just adds more fabric in that sort of space which wasn't intended under the scheme given the fact that the applicant's already proposing a retractable awning system on the street. So I think that was the... the main concern about the the tied structures to clarify what you're saying the retractable awning on the street you're talking about within within the property boundaries and when you use the term fabric you're talking of literal fabric or which you're talking about a is a hard material for the retractable awning yes no no oh the tilt oh the tilt um i believe it's going to be some form of uh aluminium or wood sort of um Not a phallus. I thought I heard you say a phallus. Thank you for clarifying I'll support the amendment but I'd probably support the concept of actually making sure that they are totally within the property I think understanding that you know 11 of them may be overkill I actually quite like the concept of of interspersing shaded public seating for people perhaps not sitting eating a little I don't know whether they need to be moving up and down know that sounds fancy before we get tide accuated but I think having some recycled timber structures amongst trees would actually add to the the transparency but that looking through into the the private space to the public space and so Frank Wilkie 01:18:54.180
I'll support the amendment as well and flag that once it becomes part of the motion I like to add to it that the structures be contained within the property boundary I agree that shade is is a welcome addition but also would like to see the landscaping flourish landscaping flourish in those planter boxes around the outside because it will soften, nothing softens the form of a built structure like landscaping and plants rather than man-made structures, so I'll accept that some structures providing shade is a benefit, but also I would like to but also I would like to see the landscaping flourish and that, as we do with all development applications, ensure that they don't impinge on public land. Amelia Lorentson 01:19:51.905
I'm happy to support. I think it's going to be really an iconic bit of architecture and I think given the prominence of the site that... would be great to respect the integrity of the architect and architecture and I also believe it is consistent with our Noosa Plan. Acceptable outcome number 14 I think it is. B that development includes detailing and articulation for her horizontal emphasis including awnings and happy to awnings and happy to capture that it's within boundary and there is no encroachment but I'm looking at the external screen in front of us on page 21 of 36 of the report and tied actuated screens recycled hardwood posts recycled timber battens aluminium frames there is a lot of detail and a lot of work and and a work and a lot of beauty in this design piece and I just think again we need to respect the integrity of the architect. I think he's done an excellent job. Jessica Phillips 01:21:09.757
I'll support very quickly as well similar to everyone else I think it's an opportunity to see some yeah I trust that even just looking at the plans that the materials that are The materials that are going to be used are going to be beautiful. It's not, I think it's a really great opportunity for us as a group to have this position. It's quite an iconic spot there. The fact that we've got an opportunity to have the Western Sun, you know, blocked with tidal awnings, I think I'm quite excited. to see what this development will look like and what it gives our community. So yeah, I'm very happy to support it. Happy to support it too. Again, the architects worked really well to try and come up with something of beauty and practicality that fits in with the plan. he did give his reasoning for for some bringing of these structures that kind of perspective down to the pedestrian level rather than seeing a big built form so I think yeah that's why I wanted to not just remove individual elements of a holistic design that has reason behind it but could also see that there's there's maybe a limit that we need to address there so I'm happy to support this. Brian Stockwell 01:22:24.618
Councillor Wegener, would you like to talk? Do you want me to say no? Tom Wegener 01:22:39.080
I don't need to talk, I support the amendment. Brian Stockwell 01:22:43.840
Okay, would you like to close Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 01:22:45.920
No, I think it's all been said, thank you Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 01:22:47.940
I'll put the amendment, those in favour? Councillor Wegener? Yes. That's unanimous. Councillor Wilkie can't move the amendment so I guess I will try. Larry Sengstock 01:23:03.800
It's written there for you. Brian Stockwell 01:23:05.080
I will move the amendments with the addition of with the structures to be built within the site boundary. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:10.980
Happy to second. Brian Stockwell 01:23:12.660
Seconded Councillor Lorentson. Frank Wilkie 01:23:14.660
I'm sorry, I think he's seconded. Oh, excuse me. We'll change that. Councillor Brian Stockwell 01:23:20.580
Lorentson couldn't second because she seconded the original You good? I don't need to talk to it. Staff are happy that that will give them the appropriate words. Just a question regarding that. For staff then, is that something you will be able to negotiate with the applicant and the architect to make sure you know, that condition... I don't know, the integrity of the site and what the outcomes are going to achieve is retained, given it's code accessible, and like you said, you know, you're also constrained by what you can, you know, bring to the table. Patrick Murphy 01:24:01.763
Well, it's quite prescriptive because it has a maximum number of five, so I think it's quite a piece of dust to So I think it's quite easy for us to work with them. Brian Stockwell 01:24:11.289
Anyone wish to talk to it? No? I'll put the amendment. Those in favour? And Councillor Wegener? Yes. That's unanimous. So the amendment becomes the motion. And at this stage I believe only Councillor Wilkie has talked to it. Jessica Phillips 01:24:27.209
Can I talk to order for a moment? We've had... We've had a fair bit of discussion about waste today. And I know this has been an ongoing issue with this development. My concern is really that given councillors got this information on Thursday afternoon and we've been going back and forth with questions with the applicant and with the team, that I'm not confident... that I'm not confident in imposing such specific conditions at this point. We've got some quite conflicting information that's been circulated, so I guess we'll... I'm also being conscious of the timing with the statutory period to approve this application. Therefore, I'm kind of trying to leave this a little bit open to further negotiation. So I'm proposing that condition 61 be replaced with prior to council issuing a development permit for operational works, an amended waste management plan must be submitted to council for approval that investigates both on-street and on-site waste collection. So I'm proposing that condition... On-site collection should be provided unless it's demonstrated that it cannot occur to the satisfaction of the manager of development assessment. The amended waste management plan must be prepared by a city qualified person who's... Brian Stockwell 01:25:57.740
Do we have a seconder? Seconder, Councillor. Jessica Phillips 01:26:02.560
Sorry, I think I already spoke to that in addressing the motion. So yeah, my reasoning is I think there's too much complete information for us to really nail this down in the short period that we've had available to us. Brian Stockwell 01:26:14.220
So I've got a question. There's a key sentence there is untitled collection should be provided unless demonstrated that it cannot occur to the satisfaction of the managed development system. There's a key sentence there. I thought what I heard is that you had demonstrated with our senior engineering officer and others that it can occur on site so the amendment would be redundant, am I right? Patrick Murphy 01:26:38.525
Yes, we wouldn't, we believe that waste can be collected on site and have pursued that through the engineering methodologies. Karen Finzel 01:26:52.200
Through the Chair, Councillor Wilson, would you like to change that before we present any further? Amelia Lorentson 01:27:05.855
Being moved and seconded. I don't think you can. So we can let this lapse and you can raise another one. It's a different wording. Brian Stockwell 01:27:16.411
I also questioned the wording. Like, I also said... On-site collection should be provided unless it is demonstrated that it cannot occur to the satisfaction of the manager of development assessment. Hasn't there been submissions made by the applicant that it can't occur? it can't occur. You've tested that information and found that it can occur. So you have made the assessment already based on the information provided to you that it can occur on site? That's correct. SPEAKER_02 01:27:51.166
I'll just clarify that. Frank Wilkie 01:27:54.486
And the amended waste management plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified person who is experienced in waste management. But would this be someone engaged by the applicant? Yes. Brian Stockwell 01:28:08.885
Just to clarify, I think that's part of the existing motion as well, isn't it? Yes. The, from memory, the report suggests that the waste management plan submitted wasn't compliant. Yes. And that that requirement, that last sentence was already in the suggested. sentence was already in the suggested conditions. Patrick Murphy 01:28:28.080
With some additional points that you could live with. Yes. Jessica Phillips 01:28:32.260
So you can take up the second sentence and then that would be it. No, Brian Stockwell 01:28:39.380
I've been moved and seconded and I don't think you'll get the support of the Council to change it a bit. Karen Finzel 01:28:45.340
Yes, we can live with it. Brian Stockwell 01:28:50.639
I'll speak against the amendment. I think there has been extensive consideration of these issues by highly qualified staff. Councils don't have to do anything other than listen to the qualified staff advice and come to their own judgement. We saw in the last amendment it was about an issue of book and deal where we did have a slightly different view to planning staff. In this one it is about can the truck move through the site. The answer was yes. Then the advice that I get and what I've read in the report is that on site would be quieter. It would be later in the morning. It would be safer than the sidearm and hence probably less likely to create too many impacts. So to me these issues have been well ventilated and I believe the staff recommendation is the appropriate way ahead. Amelia Lorentson 01:29:51.332
I'll speak to it I won't support it but I do respect the intention of them of the amendment which reflects just some really careful thoughts so thank you for bringing that to us Nicola but I won't support it because I do believe due process has been followed in Jessica Phillips 01:30:15.160
I'll speak to support it in that what I'm hearing is very conflicting. What I'm reading from experts outside of in the reports outside of council contradict the experts in our council. So I am stuck between finding finding the outcome that will give us confidence before I'm happy to vote on, yeah, not. Yeah, not seeing some changes here. So that is why I'll support Councillor Lorentson's amendment because I think what she was trying to achieve is that we get the clarity on Amelia Lorentson 01:31:14.360
Can I ask a question? Development permit for operational works. Can you explain what's involved in getting a permit for operational works? SPEAKER_00 01:31:28.210
Yes, so the development application for operational works will just include a more detailed design that's assessed against the relevant codes for the type of work. Essentially, development needs to comply with those codes before a permit's issued, so it will include a more detailed design. For example, looking at the on-street line marking. And, you know, particular earthworks levels and stormwater design and all that sort of thing, so it's a more rigorous design stage. Amelia Lorentson 01:31:52.459
So at that stage, will you know the logistics, whether or not manoeuvrability, the challenges or the questions that we've been raised around the table, he says, she says, recon versus our engineers, will that get sorted as part of that next process, which is the permit for operational works. So. SPEAKER_00 01:32:15.559
Further, further detail will be provided in that regard. I'd also just like to note recall the consulting engineers provided data suggesting that the heavy rigid vehicle can manoeuvre through the site, and those same engineers tried to disprove that a smaller vehicle, the waste collection vehicle a smaller vehicle, the waste collection vehicle, could it. I just feel like that's just an important note there. But yes, further detail will be provided in that regard for the operational works which might include some fine-tuning car parking areas and landscape areas to accommodate those sorts of. So what happens in the situation that's let's say we've got it wrong and in fact these vehicles can't manoeuvre in the space. Well at this point in time there's no evidence to suggest that the vehicle can't manoeuvre through the site. In any detail it might trigger a change to the high water. But at this stage the detail we've received and prepared doesn't. suggest that the vehicle can't. Patrick Murphy 01:33:15.352
Thank you very much. I think it's important to also point out we're talking about a site that's going to be cleared. There's no constraint so if there needs to be modifications that are made the applicant can make those modifications to provide. those modifications to provide the on-site car parking. Whether that's a slight shifting of the footpath or whatever it might be, notwithstanding, the evidence shows that the vehicle can move through the site. Amelia Lorentson 01:33:38.185
And just one more question. Have we given the applicant enough allowances or flexibility around this development? Patrick Murphy 01:33:51.473
Considering we're allowing a 54% site cover and the car parking that we're accepting on the street, I think those are examples of being accommodated through the process. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 01:34:05.491
Can I ask a clarifying question? That development is being knocked down, but the one next to it that triggers some of these questions, is that going too? So I think my question is that won't this give us clarity about the commercial building next to it and the way it affects that and the landscaping and everything? No, it's not. It's not just the... So if I can help, are you suggesting that there was a a point point made made that that it it may made interfere with the existing awning in the property to the south, is that something we've considered? We've considered the existing items of the road reserve awnings and that sort of thing, there's no stress that there would be be substantially affected. Frank Wilkie 01:34:58.942
Thank you, look, I appreciate the intent. Council's wanting to get clarity, but. Is this a question? No, I'm speaking to you. Which is the clearest, most unequivocal advice we've got on this has been from Council. Council staff who are independent arbiters providing independent advice. They've got no skin in the game here, nothing to gain or lose. The conflicting advice has come from the developer, the development applicants. Consultants who did modelling with a larger vehicle and said it could make it, it could transverse the site onto Thomas Street quite easily. Sometime later they provided modelling based on a smaller vehicle which for some reason shows that it couldn't make it its way through the site out onto Thomas Street without causing conflict with bullies or traffic. That's the conflicting advice from the development applicant's consultant. Council advice: Council advice has been clear, independent and unequivocal throughout this whole process. The other question I have that I'll ask, it's a rhetorical one, is why have Noosa planning scheme policies that seek to minimise the impact on... neighbours, neighbouring properties, in terms of waste collection being on site as opposed to street collection, if we don't seek to abide by that at every opportunity? This is going to be an aesthetically very pleasing development. It can be, it can demonstrate best practice. On site collection, if there's an opportunity for on site collection. The other point I'd like to make is, I can't support this amendment because it gives the applicant false hope and imposes more work on an applicant who is Who is wanting certainty and clarity to be able to move forward as quickly as possible. It's not fair giving false hope because these decisions have already been made and the advice has been very clear so to date. So I do appreciate what the intent is. I don't think this will achieve a good outcome so I can't support this amendment. Karen Finzel 01:37:22.861
I just have a question then to the staff. I believe this is an unresolved issue, is it not, between you and the Aboriginal? SPEAKER_00 01:37:32.661
It's unresolved insofar as we have requested that they deal with on-site collection. We could, the applicant basically still continued to, I guess, request that the bins be collected on the street. So, as Dan has mentioned, we have run the sweat paths independently. the engineering section and believe that it can still occur on-site. I mean, and like we've spoken about, I mean, at this stage we're looking at, you know, lines on a plan, articulating the applicant's envelopes. We've done the sweat paths based those parameters and we still believe it works. So if there is some fine-tuning that needs to be done through an operational works permit, we believe that there's a good deal of certainty that it will work. So at this stage we support the scheme and we support the policy which requires for a scale of this development that the garbage is collected on-site. is collected on site. Karen Finzel 01:38:33.879
I have a question through the Chair then. So I just have a question, and given, you know, Council has raised the amount of time we have to address this, go to the site, look at all sides of the argument. In terms of, like, negotiating reasonable outcomes, especially for motor circuiters around that safety, which vehicle can get in and out, like, it's not really clear, and you've told us that it You've told us that it is an unresolved issue, I've heard that from both sides of the party. Can we delete conditions 3 and 61? How does that work out, providing staff then? With opportunity to go back to the drawing table and find that resolution. Richard MacGillivray 01:39:17.285
Councillor, can I just answer that one there? I mean, so council's role is assessment manager under the role as assessment manager under the Planning Act, particularly for Coordinated Assessable Applications, is to assess and decide applications under the Planning Act. Council staff have undertaken their assessment based on the material provided by the applicant and have made their recommendation based on what the scheme is seeking to achieve. That is their role. They've done that very thoroughly and have put their recommendation to you to consider. They've done that very That is their role. They've completed their assessment. That's done. It's before you with the recommendation as proposed. So that's what staff are recommending. It's up to the council as the decision maker here today to determine whether they agree with that advice or wish to amend that. But the council staff are undertaking a very thorough and rigorous assessment. Brian Stockwell 01:40:10.017
Does Richard MacGillivray 01:40:10.617
Eleanor wish to talk to the amendment? Brian Stockwell 01:40:12.457
No. Do you wish to close, Councillor Wilson? Jessica Phillips 01:40:16.717
No. No, I think all reports have been made. Brian Stockwell 01:40:20.639
I'll put the motion, no, the amendment. Those in favour? Opposed? That's Councillor and Wilson. Those against? Those against? That's Councillor Lorentson and Finzel, Stockwell, Wilkie and? That's Councillor Lorentson. Wegener, yes. Wegener. The motion is lost. Jessica Phillips 01:40:48.959
Can I propose a procedural motion at this point, just for Thursday, and I'll just quickly say why. I've got from the Waste Manager that there's some possible things he has to take on notice, and could send take on notice, but since it's the ordering meeting is Thursday, is there any issues with that, that the decision is made on Thursday? So it gives time for the price manager to collect those two things on notice. Brian Stockwell 01:41:21.404
So you're open to a procedure of motions. has to be seconded, but only the mover gets to talk to us. So it's up to you. If it's moved today, it still can be amended on Thursday. Amelia Lorentson 01:41:44.891
Can I just ask a question through the chair, what are those issues, Councillor? Jessica Phillips 01:41:52.251
I heard a couple of questions around data checks and things that could potentially just give us- Yes, I agree with all of them. confidence in the decision on- I don't know if she was making a decision today. I was asking would there be a time between now and Thursday that we could have some more information on the two things- that were pointed out around data checking? I didn't want the other one down. Data checking of what? Brian Stockwell 01:42:20.071
Attenuation, distance, change in distance, yeah. I don't know if it's reasonable. That's what I'm asking if it's- would we have any chance of getting an acoustic assessment on Thursday? Probably no. Richard MacGillivray 01:42:32.969
Councillor, can I just add to that? There is a condition that's actually proposed that talks about no impact on amenity as a result of the uses in there. I think it's condition number, so obviously, you know, we'll be assessing as part of the operational works in terms of the detailed design of the mechanics servicing to ensure that the use and activities as a result of use don't provide any adverse impact on amenity. Have you got the number of the condition there, Andrew? SPEAKER_00 01:43:00.346
Yes, it is condition 24 and 25. Richard MacGillivray 01:43:03.146
Yeah, it's just, there's already a... And 26 provisions in there about no adverse impact on amenity and we can obviously again look at that in a bit more detail when the operation works. It's lodged for assessment as well. SPEAKER_00 01:43:16.490
Sorry, excuse me, it was condition 20 under amenity. Amelia Lorentson 01:43:18.611
The operation of the approved use must not detrimentally affect the residential amenity including but not limited to noise, amplified music, overlooking, light spill or odour enjoyed by surrounding residents or cause a nuisance in including a noise nuisance. So the onus is on the applicant to comply with that condition. Patrick Murphy 01:43:43.453
There's also an incentive for them to do that internally to the side as Brian Stockwell 01:43:51.507
Okay, so we have a motion in progress. Does anyone wish to talk to it? Shaun Walsh 01:43:57.047
I thought you said no. What about a seconder? Brian Stockwell 01:43:59.207
No, no, we haven't been moved. Shaun Walsh 01:44:00.561
Oh, so we're not doing this for a second? No, the deferral motion's on the move. Oh, I'll think about it. There was a question about if I do defer. Oh, I'll think about it. Karen Finzel 01:44:08.381
Sir, there is a question, if this before the debate, how does that stretch to the date of being refused? Oh, just to clarify, we haven't got a deferral motion in front of us. When I talked about a motion, it's the motion moved by Councillor Wilkie as amended twice. It's now a substantive motion. I thought my question was if there was a procedural motion, would there be an opportunity to get that information and an answer? The Chair, I am seeking clarification. What's the date of the decision? The end of approval. Patrick Murphy 01:44:47.506
The end of approval. The due date of the decision is the 21st of March. The ordinary meeting is on the 20th. So, yeah. Amelia Lorentson 01:44:57.128
So, through the Chair, has the procedural motion been withdrawn? Jessica Phillips 01:45:01.568
It was a question whether I... Thank you, yeah. Not a... I didn't hear the actual... Thank you. No, it's a question to the Chair, So, through the to the Chair please. If there is, if we reach the point of deemed approval, is that including the conditions or not? No. So the applicant can apply for deemed approval and then Council has 10 business days to provide conditions. Brian Stockwell 01:45:28.419
Okay, so I'll talk to Senator Moseley. Other than the two issues that we had a little bit of debate on, I think the building form, design, mix of uses is very certain to the site. I think the rendering suggests a colour palette that will start to establish a riverside theme. You know, there's nothing more nautical than some weathered timber, whether the recycled timber is going to be weathered, I'm not sure, but there's those grey tones. I think the mix of downstairs heating and the commercial component actually reduced from the existing, together with, you know, two storeys of short-term, is compliant with the scheme. I note that the the draft amendments to the scheme did look at changing the zone and therefore the desired use. That may result in even further mixed use on this site, which would be a desirable outcome in my opinion. But in terms of the scheme that was applied under, I think it is going to be an asset to the community and I think I think activate the open areas on site, but also provide some really nice shaded linkages through to the foreshore and with the proposed change crossing in that area, I think we'll start to see a whole new environment in Thomas Street as a result. Amelia Lorentson 01:46:58.482
I have one last I only want to ask this because I think it's significant. The site is more than 2,500 square metres and my understanding that it triggered state referral. The development is required to meet water quality objectives under state policy in council's water quality and drainage code and there's a bioretention basin being proposed and given that given that at the moment any surface runoff or roof water drainage or all the underground pipe network works at the moment they've been discharged directly into Noosa River, just if you can explain how the site's going to be graded or what drainage systems or explain a little bit about the bioretention being proposed because the bioretention being proposed because I think it's significantly important in terms of water quality and how this development is going to contribute to better water quality. SPEAKER_00 01:48:03.020
Sure, so the site's provided with soil water quality treatment devices in the form of a bioretention basin. There are some secondary treatment devices as well within the site that that captures smaller cataracts of the development. The stormwater management plan provided by the applicant addresses the State planning policy outcomes for stormwater quality treatment and achieves all of those load reduction targets. Additionally the the site doesn't increase the impervious area of the existing site, so there is not going to be further stormwater runoff exiting the site post-development. So, as far as engineering is concerned, the development ticks all those boxes in terms of its stormwater quality and quantity targets. Amelia Lorentson 01:48:52.620
I just have a question. I know it's just popped up. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. A question through the Chair of the CEO. We recently, I think, undertook a review of bioretention vacancies across the Shire. When we're looking at the addition of another system like this in this development, where are we placed in terms of ongoing costs and placed in terms of ongoing costs and budgets around managing the infrastructure of bioretention bases now and into the future? Larry Sengstock 01:49:22.371
I'll refer that to the experts here, the engineers, but the bioretention base, in my understanding, is on site for this actual development. It's not the bioretention base that we're talking about that you were referring to. Our larger ones that are out in the field are formed for overflowing and for the base point of it. Oh, Yeah, that's a great tip. This is specific to this particular development. So does the cost go back to the applicant? Oh, the development, yeah. Oh, thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:49:56.560
No? So, Councillor Wilkie, would you like to close it? Thank you, Frank Wilkie 01:50:01.020
Mr Chair. I think it's all been said, so I'll waive my right to speak. Brian Stockwell 01:50:04.660
Okay, so I've put the motion. Those in favour? Yes. So that's carried unanimously. Councillors, we've nearly been going for two hours. Is it time to have a respite and take a short? Application to material change of used hotels, extension to existing hotels, Digby W23 0073. Building work demolition at 118 Poinciana Avenue and 26 Diyan Street, Tewantin and we have Nadine joining us as the assessment officer but first we have a declaration from Councillor Wilson. Thank you. Nicola Wilson 02:01:34.163
I, Councillor Wilson, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I have a financial interest in a neighbouring property that may be affected by the outcome of this application. As As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Larry Sengstock 02:01:51.566
Thank you, Councillor. SPEAKER_02 02:01:58.689
I'll go for a five. I'm comfortable. I'm going for a five. Sorry. SPEAKER_08 02:02:08.929
2-0. Brian Stockwell 02:02:11.009
It was good. If you could give us an executive summary... All right. SPEAKER_05 02:02:15.420
Afternoon, Councillors. This application that we're dealing... We're dealing with two applications this afternoon. The first deals with the DVW, which relates to demolition of the premises, as we know, is Demolition of the premises as we know is the Royal Mail. The demolition comes to council because it's building works accessible against the planning scheme because of the heritage, the local heritage character of the site. The second part of the application a material change of use for extension to the existing hotel. The demolition proposed on the site involves demolition of the liquor land premises out the rear of the site, the front toilets on the corner, on the south eastern corner of the site, some internal renovations, as well as external, some external renovations mainly to the Poinciana frontage. The material change of use component relates to the extension to extension to the existing hotel in the form of two new beer gardens. There's the northern beer garden which will go down Deanne Street and Blakesley Street and then there is a new southern beer garden which is where the current toilets are and the Dosser smoking area is. The smoking area is on Poinciana Avenue. The beer gardens are have quite open pergolas in a landscaped area with paths and there is a new bar there as well plus keg rooms. Renovations to the internal renovation so there's a range of internal renovations plus the existing 13 units are going to be renovated. At present they don't have they have a shared toilet. present they don't have, they have a shared toilet. Each of those is going to be given their own ensuite. The renovations to the development and the extensions include, as I said, the new beer garden. We've required a two metre landscape setback around there. There is also a new car parking area in the corner site of, with an additional 30 spaces to be accessed through the existing car parking area. There was a note on one of the which has been picked up about a playground. That was an error on one of the plans and I have actually confirmed with the applicant today that there is no playground proposed and they're fully aware that their acoustic report does not address a playground and so they know if they want to put a playground in at a later date it'll require a change to the application. The proposal has been reviewed against the planning scheme and generally complies with the relevant assessment benchmarks. I do know we've included a number of conditions relating to noise we had the proposal has been reviewed by our acoustic consultant who has given us a number of noise conditions relating to decibels including hours of operation and also hours relating also hours relating to when waste management can occur on site. The beer garden also includes a new acoustic screen along the back of the beer garden and also then up the western side. There is one door that faces the north which is only for emergency access only. The back of the beer garden also is covered to address noise as well. There is additional car parking provided as I said there's an additional 30 spaces on the corner lot. The development has also been reviewed against our planning scheme and we had an external consultant review the proposal initially because the original application was so short in terms of car parking. We're now five car parking short. Our external consultant has reviewed it and is happy with that shortfall, noting that we have received a signed infrastructure agreement from the applicant agreeable to the payment of a contribution in lieu of provision of car parking for five spaces. In terms of in terms of, in terms of that five spaces shortfall, our consultant also as I said was quite happy. There is significant community benefit from this proposal in terms of we've conditioned a public thoroughfare easement to go from Blakesley Street which will allow access to lot to 96 points. The owner which is currently it's out its car parking has to go through the wrong mail so the applicant is willing to agree to a public thoroughfare easement so that will enable them to always access their car parking also will enable pedestrians to pedestrians to continue to go through the site in that north-south orientation. There will be future, there are conditions about, as I've said, noise, acoustic, hours of operation, as well as future operational works applications relating to landscaping and external works. Frank Wilkie 02:07:01.980
Thank you. Do we have questions? Questions. Submissions, Nadine. Yes. Could you summarise the key issues in the submissions? Mainly, and then how they will be mitigated in these? Addressed, I should say. SPEAKER_05 02:07:20.005
Yes, yes. Most of the conditions, there were several conditions received. We did receive a number of conditions, I think, in the report. number of submissions in support of the proposal. It indicates that we received... We did receive nine objections to the proposal. Most of them talked about the potential concerns relating to... Car parking and access from the site. A few of them suggested taking access off De Yarn Street. Basically, the planning scheme talks about trying to minimise the number of access points. We're currently going to utilise the existing... currently going to utilise the existing in-out system of the existing Blakesley Street car parking, which therefore minimises potential conflicts between traffic and pedestrians leaving the site. We only have one. The initial... initial application that was advertised was significantly short and there were concerns that there wouldn't be sufficient car parking. The provision of the additional 30 spaces now addresses those aspects. There were concerns raised about noise and we've got noise from the operations of the beer garden but we've also got noise about traffic leaving the site. Again, we have an existing car park car park, we have an existing hotel. We will be requiring, I think we've got some conditions about fencing and landscaping to the external parts of the site to try and minimise those aspects. We've also noted that there will be a complaints management register that will establish a clear process if people do have complaints that we'll be able to look at and they'll be able to deal with complaints from residents. So they were the main issues, noise and car parking. A couple of them were raising concerns about the loss of the character and making sure we wanted to address the maintenance of the Royal Mail. to address the maintenance of the Royal Mail character as well, which we've included conditions. Frank Wilkie 02:09:16.855
Can you talk about how the heritage look and feel of the building will be in Noosa? SPEAKER_05 02:09:21.895
So most of the, we've included conditions requiring a colour scheme to be provided. We've included a condition requiring reinstatement of a more horizontal balustrade to the front of the building. In the report you can see the comparison what was there and they've put in vertical slats. We did ask them as part of the information request to ask them to change it. They weren't very keen, however we have conditioned that approval on the basis of our heritage officer had suggested that that was a key component and more fitting in with the art deco feel of the building. Jessica Phillips 02:10:04.078
Question please, just in relation to public safety, the closed circuit television equipment must be installed within the property and along all frontages of the site. Can you just confirm if that would be in the easement as well? All frontages, would that include that? SPEAKER_05 02:10:39.200
No, the easement is internal to the site, so the frontages is Poinciana, Dianne and Blakesley. So we wouldn't be, we haven't got any, the condition doesn't read to reflect that easement. It could be amended to include that easement or the internal car parking layout. Richard MacGillivray 02:11:00.620
It's likely that applicant will have their own measures and secures, you know, CCTV of their car and their car park area as well, which is not uncommon for establishments of this sort of nature, but we have specifically conditioned around the public-private interface on those key street areas, which is part of what's been conditioned. Jessica Phillips 02:11:23.287
Would it be acceptable acceptable to to condition condition CCTV any easement as well? We could, yes. I don't think there's any... Yeah, I don't think there would be any major objection. We could maybe even consult with... with the applicant in that regard, noting that, yeah, you'll have the public, general public, potentially accessing that private land but still through an easement. SPEAKER_05 02:11:52.706
I'd have to check the privacy side of that because my understanding is in the public realm. understanding is in the public realm so I think that's okay it should be fine it should be fine that would be my only thing I don't yeah that's that's the only thing I don't know that side of thing yeah we did yeah it does allow it does allow okay Larry Sengstock 02:12:15.777
So if you're getting rid of this, just make it. Amelia Lorentson 02:12:19.237
A bit of independence there, yeah. we have received an email from residents that live in Blakeslee Street requesting opening hours of the beer gardens on Fridays and Saturdays to not go beyond 10:00pm. In terms of the beer garden, I ask what was the reasoning that we've extended the opening hours to 12 o 'clock but to midnight and is it consistent with other beer gardens or other development applications or is this I've never seen a I've never seen a beer garden open till midnight. SPEAKER_05 02:12:52.527
This is consistent with what our planning scheme says. So for the entertainment and activities code, we've pulled those, there's an AO that talks about those operating hours. So when you have a look at the continue, at the condition, condition 21, we talk about the hours of operation of the beer garden areas. So we've got the actual operating hours. Then we've got the acoustic barriers. And then if you go down to condition 26, and it's talking about, sorry, the noise limiting. Yeah, it talks about the noise limiting system. So that's talks about the 70 DBA. And then condition 27 talks about amplified live music must cease to operate in the northern and southern beer gardens by 7pm. So any acoustic music has to stop by 7pm. But yes, people could still be out in the in the beer garden till later. And then condition 28 also includes provision of acoustic live music to the northern beer garden shall be operated such that it does does not exceed the condition 22. Acoustic live music must not operate after 9pm. Sunday to Thursday and 10pm. Friday and Saturday. So we've limited the musical side of things and we put a 70 dBA on it as well but yes the beer garden can operate till a later time in accordance with our bench Amelia Lorentson 02:14:33.120
Question in terms of car parking. So there is a shortfall of five and there has been an infrastructure agreement entered into and I think the shortfall or the infrastructure agreement is $74,000.72, yeah. 72, 74,000. Again, probably similar question to what I just asked before in the meeting beforehand is the value that this community places on car parking. My question is what's the cumulative impact of car parking shortfalls within the Tewantin precinct? and have we actually assessed that number and are these considerations factored into approval planning of this application in front of us and is there any requirement that requirement that we need to ensure that the area, the precinct, parking infrastructure meets current and future needs? I just keep thinking what's the cumulative impact? How many infrastructure agreements have we granted? many infrastructure agreements have we granted across the whole business precinct? And I always think of Peregian Beach. I'm a bit off topic. Okay, so let's stick to the questions. So when they first launched the application? application, they were quite significantly below Council's requirements. The application was referred to our expert traffic consultant that we use. And he came back and indicated to us that it was way under and that we couldn't accept it. We required several more reports from them which were still unsatisfactory and then earlier this year basically it got to the point where again our consultant spoke to them and said it is not enough car parking and so when he's looking at it he's looking at the use, he's looking at the surrounding uses, he's looking at the... intensity of the use when the peaks are going to be the types of people using it so basically we came back and said his comment to us was it needs to comply with the planning scheme requirements when they came back and they were fired space short I checked with him and said are you okay with this and he said yes noting that there will be a lot of people who will be coming from the surrounding area and our planning scheme is based on a use area which means everything is counted so keg rooms, store rooms, the bar rooms, kitchens all those areas are included in our calculations and he said considering that it's located the type of people who are going to be going to it he considered and looking at our surrounding area he was satisfied that the car parking rate that we're proposing under the planning scheme less those five was appropriate SPEAKER_00 02:17:37.360
So people Thank you. for the report I just have a question because we all got the email today about amenity of noise issues which is on everyone's agenda and rightly so I noticed noticed that we're conditioning a amenity complaints management procedure an attachment for item number 29 29. so can you just tell So can you just tell us a little bit, you've got a record of all complaints and investigation results including corrective actions must be maintained and made available for inspection at any time upon request by Council. Who's going to be of regulating that and making sure that the complaint process is, you know, followed through and we get the results that community feels that, you know, they have actually been listened to, they have followed the due process and who's sort of... who's like the regulator in that space to ensure that this condition is taken into? SPEAKER_05 02:18:40.652
It will be the planning department, so once we place this condition on the applicant as part of the DA, it becomes, yeah, it's a condition that must be complied with, so if there is a complaint it...go to our compliance section and they will have to investigate and then we'll be able to look into it. Richard MacGillivray 02:18:59.032
In addition, also noting that the type of use on this particular site will be subject to other... approvals and licenses as well, particularly around liquor licensing, and they have a range of obligations usually attached to their requirements as well, so this sort of multi-layered approach and obviously part of this would... notify us if there's a matter that liquor licensing have dealt with and we would be aware of that that's been actioned by liquor licensing particularly, so this is about keeping an overarching database, I guess, of those matters, what's being done, how they've been So that council at any point in time receives concerns from our community can seek to view this document and ensure that they've taken all reasonable steps to address and respond to any issues being raised from Frank Wilkie 02:19:54.020
Mr Chairman, I'm happy to move it. Larry Sengstock 02:19:56.880
I'll second it. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:19:59.400
Thank you for the report. I think this project is, and not to use the term that was used in the last application, a catalytic project. It will revitalise the Tewantin CBD. It's been a topic It's been a topic of conversation for years, what's happening in the Royal Mail, when is it going to get a facelift, when is it going to be upgraded. It's a welcome application and it has regard to the Art Deco heritage look and feel of the existing premise. It's had regard to the fact that it is on a well-serviced transport route. People will be arriving and leaving by public transport. Peaks, peak usage times of the hotel will perhaps be night time when there are gaps in public car parking and the rest of the CBD. I appreciate the work that's been done to ensure that there is adequate car parking on the site. I accept the consultant's report that there is. And I think that there is and I think it's a welcome and long-awaited and much-needed place to a pivotal hotel and part of Tewantin's heritage, so thank you for the report and I hope it goes ahead as Brian Stockwell 02:21:29.200
Let's talk to the motion. Karen Finzel 02:21:31.080
I just have one more question. Just with reference to the email received over the weekend from residents, just a clarification. Brian Stockwell 02:21:41.280
Sorry, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Finzel is in the middle of a question. I'll get to you next. Karen Finzel 02:21:46.480
In relation to the car parking on the land deemed not to be owned by the hotel, I'm just seeking clarification. I'm just seeking clarification, I'm not quite sure what they, they were referring to a public meeting that was in this area and were told at that time it was out of the remit of the hotel and owned by another entity. SPEAKER_05 02:22:04.140
I'm assuming that's the northern lot, which is to the north of the bottle shop. It's the same owner as the hotel now, so I'm wondering back, it might have been a while back in a...ownership, but it is now under the same ownership, as part of the same hotel ownership. Frank Wilkie 02:22:25.100
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:22:27.360
Okay, Councillor Wegener was next. Yes, Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 02:22:31.902
With the children's play area, it came up in some letters that that's not a requirement, it's not a part of the permit, rather it's something that the hotel plans to do. And if they don't do it, they can't ever turn back on council and say, "Well, council didn't allow us to do this by any stretch." That's not a possibility. SPEAKER_05 02:22:58.164
It seems to be a mistake on one of the plans. The overall site plan, the lower floor plan, shows it as being beer garden, and then there's close up on the figure five in the report, and it shows seating and then they've left the text on saying playground. And I believe it might have been way back when the application was originally proposed, I think there was talk there was talk on Facebook about it being a playground, but I spoke with the applicant this morning and there's no intention at this stage for a playground and they're fully aware that if they do want to put in a playground, they'll need to amend the application and definitely noise will need to be considered as Shaun Walsh 02:23:42.160
And then, second, the time frame for the northern beer garden closing at midnight, what would 10 o 'clock, it just seems to me 10 o 'clock is far more reasonable for that area, has council considered that? Brian Stockwell 02:24:06.001
Did staff consider an earlier closing time? SPEAKER_05 02:24:12.301
Tom, the condition has been imposed in accordance with the acceptable outcome that's detailed in the entertainment and activities code for this zoning so we've utilised that those requirements under that code. Patrick Murphy 02:24:28.863
And been reviewed by our acoustic consultant? SPEAKER_05 02:24:31.446
And being reviewed our acoustic consultant also agrees with the conditions that we have imposed as part of the recommendation. Brian Stockwell 02:24:40.426
And if I can have a subsequent one after 10 o 'clock at night and likely to be conditioned by the legal licensing the EPA noise does have a high restrictions on above and beyond background noise etc. So our acoustic consultant would have taken in the higher requirements. SPEAKER_05 02:25:03.075
He says the 70 dBA is pretty, yeah, pretty pretty limiting. Brian Stockwell 02:25:08.793
And into a 70 dBA after team? Shaun Walsh 02:25:14.114
Yeah. Could I just test an amendment to limit the opening hours? limit the opening hours till 10pm.? Brian Stockwell 02:25:24.812
So, Councillor Wegener, have you provided an amendment to the staff yet? Because I believe another council may have one that's already typed up and ready to go. Shaun Walsh 02:25:36.292
Okay, well, that's fine. I'll let the other councillor present that then. Patrick Murphy 02:25:41.492
Councillor Stockwell, just to clarify your 70 dBA, that was in relation to acoustic. I'm sorry, yes. Which is conditioned to cease by 10pm. 10pm. Yeah, I would have thought it would be something like five decibels or ten decibels over the background. over the background noise which is probably close to the 50s. Yeah. So 10pm. Friday, Saturday and 9pm. Sunday to Thursday. Frank Wilkie 02:26:04.044
Just clarifying question, it also refers to a 70 dBA limit for amplified sound as well. That's correct. SPEAKER_05 02:26:09.834
Yes, that is correct. Okay. 70 dBA is what our consultant has said should be the maximum. Thank you. Karen Finzel 02:26:18.114
And that's under a lot key, isn't it? Yes, under a lot key, that's right. Yes. Amelia Lorentson 02:26:24.354
So as just an analogy, what does 70 decibel sound, what does that equate to? equate to? You didn't tell me. You didn't tell me. Did you bring your guitar? That's alright. Sorry, I just thought you might know. From what I understand... Me playing my guitar here and you being there. I believe so. SPEAKER_05 02:26:45.603
I don't believe... I think it will be very hard. hard to get any amplified music at 70 dBA. So it's more acoustic and talking is what you would get. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 02:26:58.333
Quick question to follow up. I'll work out how to make this a question. this a question, but I just did the quickest look up Facebook on the 10th of February, there was a comment, and I know that Facebook hasn't been peer reviewed yet, but it says we're thrilled to bring the Tewantin community a brand new bistro, sports bar, gaming bar, complete with a kids playground. But I just did the quickest... SPEAKER_05 02:27:20.204
I spoke to the applicant this morning and they've said no, it's not, there's playground. Does that mean Facebook is sometimes misleading? We can condition something, we can include a condition if you want to change something to state that. Brian Stockwell 02:27:41.584
I just did a quick search. 70 decibels is normal conversations between 60 and 70. Open office noise 65 to 75, alarm clock 70 to 80, washing machine 70, dish washer 70. Open office noise... Richard MacGillivray 02:27:55.038
It's not very loud. It's pretty quiet. And Councillor, just on that point around the noise, it's important to highlight too, the noise specified as condition is actually an acceptable outcome in the code, so what that So what that means is essentially it's a deemed to comply provision. So once you meet that, generally when you assess against the planning scheme, if you meet an acceptable outcome, you're deemed to comply with the performance outcome. So just giving you a bit of context of how we've come up with the thresholds that are prescriptive in the acceptable outcome of the scheme, which is a deemed to comply. Amelia Lorentson 02:28:31.451
So does that mean that if legally challenged, that given that it does comply with the Noosa Plan acceptable outcomes, we might be in a difficult situation to support an amendment? Is that correct, Richard? Richard MacGillivray 02:28:50.585
That would be my advice. Once they meet a deemed to comply provision, you're deemed to automatically meet the accepted performance outcome. Amelia Lorentson 02:29:06.300
Okay. Brian Stockwell 02:29:09.040
So Councillor, did you still wish to test your potential amendment? Jessica Phillips 02:29:14.700
I'm just working out how to get some clarity around it after that, thanks. Frank Wilkie 02:29:23.260
I have a question in the meantime. Thank you. Okay. How would those sound limits compare to sound limits possibly imposed by OLGR? SPEAKER_05 02:29:35.541
I think the ones I've looked at for the junction are 75 dBA. I looked at one recently. Frank Wilkie 02:29:43.240
Yeah. And just a process question, why wasn't OLGR involved in providing advice? SPEAKER_05 02:29:48.621
Because this is a planning application. So they will, as part of the liquor licensing, they will come to us and request our comments about this proposal. And then we'll have to say whether it's got approval. So we will give them a plan of what's been approved in the areas. But then we'll also give them our conditions of hours of operation. Sometimes they, it'll be an interesting one because sometimes they agree with us and sometimes they don't. Frank Wilkie 02:30:14.574
So it's possible they may say oh it's too restrictive. Yeah, but then we've got, but our conditions will still apply because they're going to be conditions of approval. So they can't, they really shouldn't give anything other than what we set as part of our conditions of approval. Okay thank you. Jessica Phillips 02:30:32.431
Okay, question. So the decibels is in relation to music. When we're talking about an outdoor beer garden and we've got voices that can be louder than 70 decibels Circling back to the later night, which will introduce my amendment, I have concerns that it's not necessarily the music because they've they've complied with the 70 decibels but how we improve or maintain amenity for the residents around when the garden potentially could have very necessarily SPEAKER_05 02:31:19.433
Loud voices I suppose we've had it as it reviewed by our noise consultant and in terms of the use the zoning again this is a consistent use in the zone we do have an existing hotel there he was satisfied in He was satisfied in terms of the legislation and the requirements that these conditions and these requirements were sufficient to protect amenity. There's the noise mapping which shows how the noise fades and again it's showing that it is fading as we leave the site before it gets to Blakesley Street. So he was specifically asked noise sources and the impacts on the surrounding residents and he's satisfied that it complies with relevant legislation and data that he can deal with. From the beer garden or from inside. From the beer garden. You have the acoustic barriers? And that's right. We do have the acoustic barriers remember that go all along the back and they go along the back and they've got the lid on top of on the back side and have the one that goes along the west as well. Patrick Murphy 02:32:34.292
And one on the east portion? Yeah there's a low one across. I actually even asked him about the potential impacts on the people on the North Shore and he was not worried at all about that. I thought there might be some concerns about the noise travelling but he said it complies with complies with the legislative regulations. Amelia Lorentson 02:32:55.244
So the noise limiting speakers, can you explain Nadine how they work? So I know that Four Pines have a similar system and that's and I think they're always pretty much compliant but we have had issues and I think a lot of the councillors have spoken to residents in Noosa ahead. spoken to residents in Noosa Heads that are impacted by again not necessarily music but by people and beer gardens are very noisy and people speak very loudly so does a noise limiting speaker does it will it pick up if conversations pick up if conversations exceed 70 decibels? SPEAKER_05 02:33:41.694
It's just really controlling the noise coming out of the speakers. It's not a noise reader, it's not a metre. not a metre that's picking up what the levels are and that would be something different. I can check with our consultant to see and I'll have another look at his report. Amelia Lorentson 02:34:02.511
Is there opportunity to include a condition that have to include a condition that we have some sort of noise monitoring device in the beer garden that allows us, you know, if there's a complaint made by a neighbour, we can check it against data. Is that a possibility? Richard MacGillivray 02:34:26.816
There's challenges around some of that. I guess when we've got a scheme that allows particular uses to occur and obviously both parties, the applicant's consultant and our independent noise consultant, have evaluated the proposal. In terms of what's the use and the nature of noise that's likely to emanate and have considered that the mitigations proposed in terms of acoustic fencing and barriers around it, obviously the hours of operation that the buffers to residential properties to be considered appropriate so I guess from an expert perspective we've sought advice that it's it's reasonable and sufficient mitigation has been put in place to manage that. Take your point is there is there an ability to control or have an intervention of- Just a monitoring, a noise monitoring system outside that just the to ensure acoustic barriers are doing what they're supposed to do which is mitigate any noise impacts. Can we investigate that maybe? That would be excellent. Thank you. you. We did a similar condition for Bounce, I recall. Amelia Lorentson 02:35:32.662
They have, they have. With the manager. Richard MacGillivray 02:35:37.822
We'll make some inquiries. I would appreciate that, thank you Nadine. Amelia Lorentson 02:35:42.307
Just a question. Brian Stockwell 02:35:44.607
Talking to the owner, manager of Bounce. SPEAKER_05 02:35:48.847
It's actually, when you actually go to Bounce and you walk around the back of the units, it is actually quite amazing. The actual building just stops all the sound. I'm too old. Karen Finzel 02:36:01.447
Yeah. Yeah. I just have a question. Yeah, thank you. Just following And we're referring back to that email received from residents as well. We're talking about mitigating noise and meeting legislation within the beer garden and the barriers. Questions have been raised around, you know, the noise outside of the venue. So, you know, headlights, cars starting up, intoxicated people leaving the venue. How is that mitigated moving forward? We haven't, you know, how does legislation cover that or? SPEAKER_05 02:36:38.124
So we've required landscaping and fencing to the car park. So at the moment we've got limited landscaping that even goes along the existing car park. Along to Blakesley Street. So we've required additional dense landscaping to be provided there. So that should help mitigate in terms of the lights. They're all going to be coming out utilising the existing in and out system as well. The noise, again, The noise again a lot of this I suppose anti-social behaviour I think there's this crossover that we have to be careful with liquor licensing. Liquor licensing has their own requirements where they have to under their legislation they have to provide a safe environment for patrons and staff. If we get and staff if we get too involved in that my understanding is liquor licensing will flick a lot of if they can flick anything over to us they will so I think those sort of things we're dealing with the land use and the management so we've looked at the lighting we've looked at the the screening of it would be yes I take your point about if we provide security cameras where complaints register you know trying to get again the hotel to take more responsibility than trying to legislate for that activity and there's different layers as well as Nadine said around liquor licensing obviously around responsible service of you know liquor and around responsible service of you know liquor and there's certain I guess processes and requirements in place but there's also a role too for the police to intervene particularly in the public realm if there's instances that occur with antisocial behaviour and anything expels outside of the site itself that could and can be addressed but tricky from a land use perspective to manage that in advance I We're dealing with the land use component as opposed to those behavioural elements. Karen Finzel 02:38:35.721
So just a question through the Chair following on from that. Mr Chair. SPEAKER_00 02:38:40.981
Oh sorry, yes. Karen Finzel 02:38:43.861
Following on from that a question through the CEO. In our corporate plan on page 47 we support strategies and plans around the Noosa, Noosa social strategy, social justice charter and community strategy through to the CEO. Where are we placed at the moment around developing that strategy or getting budget to get that strategy up and running because I think you know rightly so the staff have said Because I think, you know, rightly so, the staff have said this is a planning issue, but to mitigate those... Point of order. This is not relevant to what we're doing at the moment. I thought we were addressing the social impacts that aren't covered by the planning scheme. Brian Stockwell 02:39:24.990
Yes, we are. Dealing with... Deception of social impacts, but we're dealing with a specific application rather than looking at the future and revising a strategic document. Karen Finzel 02:39:35.863
Thank you, Mr Chair, for bringing that to my attention. I'll raise it at the budget meetings. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 02:39:40.223
I have a question in terms of disability access and thank you for your response. I've sent you a few questions. I would personally, and the question I'm asking is, we haven't got any condition or any statement. We've got a human rights compatibility statement with our development report. There's been no mention There's been no mention in the report in terms of compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act in terms of any work whether it's footpaths, car parks, building works need to comply with Disability Discrimination Act given that it's an important priority of council I believe it's important that we make a statement that all a statement that all applications, development applications should comply with Disability Discrimination Act, my question is DDA, where will DDA be assessed and is there opportunity to opportunity to include it as a standard statement in every development application to equitable access for all people. access for all people is very important I sent you that response we have an advisory note that we include with all permits that goes on at the end of it which indicates that we haven't assessed I remember we're dealing with the land use concept so the next stage is when they do the further detailed design is when they do their building they'll do their building works they get get their their building building approval, approval that's that's when when they they really really get get into into the the nitty nitty-gritty. They do their engineering, they go to those working drawings that next stage, they do their operational works, so we haven't assessed it for disability compliance. In terms of car parking side of things that'll addressed at the operational work stage. Toilet facilities, disabled access, that's what the building certifier is required to do under his legislation, therefore that's why it's under an advisory note that goes out with all applications. And that advisory note, can it be included as part of the reports that we received in council? SPEAKER_05 02:41:59.548
I think, again, it's outlining that we haven't assessed it for these requirements and that further application, they must consider it by law. That's what the certifier has to do. He has to make sure it's compliant and he has to make sure that the number of toilets and that the disabled access the ramps all comply and there's legislation changes. So ramps changes, there's you know all different requirements, widths of doors, that's a constantly changing sort of requirement. So at this stage we've been put in as advisory notes that appear to be quite difficult to put in as a condition. Not as a condition, more as a statement. Oh as a statement, in the report? In the report, in the report, oh sorry. In the human rights compatibility statement, it would be great to have some reference to disability discrimination. Act, given the importance that we as a community and as a council place on equitable access. Yeah, in the report. Fair and equitable access. Yes, because as Richard MacGillivray 02:43:03.978
Nadine said, that will be included in any decision notice and advice note to that effect. So it is a key point that needs to be addressed through the process. Thank you very much, I just think it's important, thank you Nadine. Brian Stockwell 02:43:16.286
Yeah, that's right, no that's fine, thank you Nadine. I believe the flip side is true, we can't condition anything that's a building act matter. SPEAKER_05 02:43:24.726
But we can put in the report, yes, noted. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:43:28.095
Okay, I think Councillor Wilkie is still the only one to talk to the--- Is it a question through the chair? Should a procedural motion be moved so that Nadine, you can find out whether a noise monitoring system is reasonable to-- reasonable to condition on the applicant for the beer garden. Okay, I'd like to move a procedural motion and just wait for the information provided by planning. So you're making a be specific procedural motion if you're going to defer it. Amelia Lorentson 02:44:05.443
Can I ask a question about that? Brian Stockwell 02:44:07.003
I'll give my address further. Amelia Lorentson 02:44:08.843
Just move a procedural motion seeking further... further information to be brought to the... to be brought to the ordinary meeting. Brian Stockwell 02:44:19.072
That isn't in the wording that's acceptable understanding orders. So a deferral motion has to have a specific thing. If you're deferring consideration here it has to have the date and that you say we defer this motion. Amelia Lorentson 02:44:31.172
That's great, thank you. I'll leave that to... Brian Stockwell 02:44:40.160
Okay so that's been moved. Councillor Lorentson, is there a seconder? Jessica Phillips 02:44:43.900
I'll second. Brian Stockwell 02:44:45.780
Okay, so Councillor Lorentson? I just have a question. Councillor Lorentson you can talk to the motion. Amelia Lorentson 02:44:55.500
Just I think that we need to give further consideration to the concerns of the people that are going to be directly impacted by this development and they're the residents that live behind in Blakesley Street and if there's opportunity for us to do better then do better then we should explore that opportunity so I'm just requesting deferment due to the significance of the application in front of us that we just seek some further information to help provide an informed decision and possibly an opportunity to make Brian Stockwell 02:45:48.628
Council can ask a question at any time, so I'm going to say, okay, that doesn't rule out questions as long as they are questions. It is a question. Do you want to go first? Jessica Phillips 02:45:59.128
Yes, please. Just to clarify, we're getting the noise. It will be for voices, not for voices. Brian Stockwell 02:46:09.120
You may answer through the chair. SPEAKER_05 02:46:13.740
My understanding is to get a comment about the noise from the patrons, whether it was considered in terms of the conditions in considered in terms of the conditions in the DBA, whether it's appropriate to put a noise metre on site, and potentially would council like the matter of the privacy cameras through the easement to be considered as well? For backup part two, yeah. Brian Stockwell 02:46:38.748
Councillor Wilkie. Frank Wilkie 02:46:43.740
Instances of where crowd noise is measured in a beer garden that result in an actual regulation of crowd noise in a beer garden. Like to what end would it be? Richard MacGillivray 02:47:04.860
My understanding would have to be on the outside of the acoustic fence to obviously understand whether the barrier is essentially doing what it's designed to do, which is to attenuate noise, but I'm not aware of many cases where that's been done for crowd noise as such, possibly festivals and things like that, but that's more around the amplified music side of things. Brian Stockwell 02:47:27.552
I shouldn't have allowed that question because we're dealing with a procedural motion about deferral. I shouldn't have allowed that question. Councillor Phillips's question is about what we deferred for, not about the content. Frank Wilkie 02:47:42.548
Would that be provided by the ordinary meeting anyway? Amelia Lorentson 02:47:46.148
Yes, without a deferral. I'm happy to withdraw the procedural motion. It's already been said. No worries. And does a procedural motion essentially gag further debate and questioning on this issue today? Yes. Brian Stockwell 02:48:04.184
So I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Amelia Lorentson 02:48:09.864
Yes. Brian Stockwell 02:48:19.372
Thank you for interrupting. The reason was to get further information around acoustics and safety... And can I get Amanda to repeat? Amelia Lorentson 02:48:38.300
Sorry. Excuse me. Brian Stockwell 02:48:44.300
Those against? Yes. So that's unanimously opposed. So we go back to the State of Motion. Frank Wilkie 02:48:56.100
I have a question Mr Chair. Sure. It's about the interesting topic of CCTV. What was the information that would be sought about CCTV by first line? SPEAKER_05 02:49:11.564
It was just whether it could be put internally to view down the easement. We've got the public easement going through the car park at the rear. So the condition reads the CCTV is to be on the external boundaries of the site. So this was a suggestion whether it can go through the car park. Frank Wilkie 02:49:28.648
And you'd have sufficient time between now and per se to talk to the applicant about that? SPEAKER_05 02:49:28.664
And you'd have sufficient to go through the car park. Frank Wilkie 02:49:32.208
Yes. And the other one would be about time for you to investigate whether crowd noise limiting technology is available. Yes. Brian Stockwell 02:49:43.828
Just real time noise sensors. Yeah. And feeding back into the. Frank Wilkie 02:49:49.068
And noise smoothing. And it would lead to another condition. it lead to another condition, Councillor? That's right. To what end would it? Amelia Lorentson 02:49:58.516
Maybe it forms part of the complaints management process that there's, that it's That it's data driven, that any complaints correlate to real life information. Thank you. And can we include one there to have a face recognition of all Council staff on a Friday afternoon? Have we got any other questions or discussion on... Frank Wilkie 02:50:27.240
Just clarity around the playground again. And what would need to happen before a playground would be included in... As Councillor pointed out, it has been signalled to the community on Facebook that that's happening. Jessica Phillips 02:50:43.562
Yep, it's ID too, not just, it was on their Facebook, not just the red. SPEAKER_05 02:50:51.244
Yes, from a credible source. I understand when it was originally, I think, mooted that there was talk about putting in a playground, but since then they're... acoustic reports that they've submitted haven't addressed it at all and their plans haven't put it on and I think it's a more of a leftover. So confirmation from the applicant this morning was that they have no... they're not proposing a playground and they're fully aware that they would need to update their acoustic report to address that and they would need to put a change application back to council to to get a playground on the site yes and condition three Conditions three, list the plans approved. That's correct. Is the playground indicated in any of those plans? It would have to amend, I think it's annotate, it just needs one of the plans to be annotated. We could have it suggest a condition for Thursday. Yes. Frank Wilkie 02:51:55.104
Just some advice about your knowledge of these acoustic barriers. It's talked about having a minimum surface mass density of 12.5 kilograms per square metre. that sounds like it's quite dense. Is that an industry standard that they're referring to there? SPEAKER_05 02:52:16.042
That condition was set by our acoustic consultant who's indicated that is the minimum that has to be provided. Brian Stockwell 02:52:28.540
Are there questions or people wish to just talk to the motion? speak to the motion. Councillor Wilkie, you have the floor on the airwaves. Thank you. I think it's a fantastic development. Shaun Walsh 02:52:42.320
I'm looking forward to having a beer at the new Royal Mail. However, I still hold reservations about the northerly beer garden. and I look at the amenity of the river and the hill overlooking the river and it is one of the few, if not the only place where there's a clear, clear hill overlooking the river and the the serenity that I've enjoyed there walking past there at night is very nice. It's a romantic place where young people could be. I worry that the midnight opening of northern beer garden with loud voices even may disrupt that utterly amazing amenity and it's almost a spiritual site. opening I mean that was the place where the Kabi Kabi lived. It's where they buried what I understand Kabi Kabi. It is a very significant place so I am I'm very hesitant about doing something that is very hard to take away. I would rather go until 10 o 'clock. would rather go until 10 o 'clock and say oh you know there is the amenity that that I was worried about is not a problem okay let it go until 12 but the opposite of going till 12 and pulling it back till 10 I think would be very difficult so I just I think of just the amenity of the beauty of the serenity and the quiet of the river in the very famous Lisa Bend in the river. there's another councillor that would that would put forward you know I would support that amendment. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:54:29.732
If we're going to get more conditions relating to noise would it be more appropriate to do it as a bulk change on Thursday night? I think so. I think if noise is one of the issues we are going to talk about it's probably good to encapsulate it into one change. Jessica Phillips 02:54:48.077
I'm happy with that. Brian Stockwell 02:54:49.337
Sorry, did you hear that Councillor Wegener? What I said is because we are predicting or forecasting we will have some more information about potential for a change to the noise related acoustic conditions that it would be probably better to conditions, then it'd be probably better to lump all that consideration into one discussion rather than having part of it now as by way of an amendment. Okay, fine, thank you. Karen Finzel 02:55:19.894
Just coming off the back of Councillor Tom's comment around the sacredness of the place and that amenity, I do notice we've got... I do notice we've got Cheyenne in the room. Are we allowed to ask questions about how the Kabi Kabi, given we've got an agreement with them, have been brought along this journey as part of this conversation? Brian Stockwell 02:55:41.779
We certainly can ask the question whether there has been any engagement on a specific development application. And I think you would probably, yeah. Karen Finzel 02:55:52.359
From my understanding there hasn't been any engagement with Kabi Kabi on this development. Brian Stockwell 02:56:03.100
I'll talk to the side. Obviously where we sit is also quite significant in terms of PhD work around here shows that anywhere where there's a high hill above hill above water with gum trees is where the the semi-sedentary camps were because that's where the the mosquitoes were left and down in the low country so but we do have the the heritage of the the burial tree just down the road that's what I want to talk about is that it is a quite significant local heritage site and when I first started reading about you know vertical versus horizontal handrails I thought oh we're going over the top then I saw the 1941 picture and realised how strong that horizontal theme was down low and that there's you know theirs is dark which actually brings out the art deco better than you know the light as it currently is always proposed um it'd be great if we could get that 1941 car back out front as well um but it has got a lot of heritage so actually it's just both for for indigenous but you know the the first commercial fishing fishing that happened here i believe was during the sawmill strike when the workers were running out of money they decided to go in and throw the net down the back and take it up to Gympie and i know from all the I know from all the old Tewantin residents when they met last year there was one of the researchers do a bit of local history on the site and it has got a fascinating story and has been a key to this community so it's important to get it right and it's important to also understand the concerns of the neighbouring people who live there but also acknowledge that it has been a site zone for these purposes for many years and living near a centre has many Living near a centre has many benefits and one of the side downsides is it's noisier than living in a quiet suburb, so it is a balancing act and I think the key point that's made is if we put a condition that's in excess of what is an acceptable solution, our opportunity to defend that should it be challenged is. Jessica Phillips 02:58:17.540
I'm just going to speak really quickly about one of my favourite sites. I, nearly 40 years ago, would start walking from Ward Street with my family every Saturday night to have a meal at the Royal Mail. So I have a long, long history of memories at the Royal Mail with my late mum and my family. And it was one of those opportunities where it felt like everyone got together and shared a meal, so since everyone's touched on the softer part of the heritage, yeah, it's a really special time to watch the the existing Royal Mail have a facelift that I think is really timely, maybe overdue, and yeah, I'm looking forward to being able to share more meals with my kids there now into the future once we have some clarity around, yeah, the amenity part as well. Amelia Lorentson 02:59:18.000
Just to add, and I won't repeat what's already been said around the table, but this is also an excellent opportunity to activate the precinct we're talking about. Reviving the Royal Mail, but we're also talking about activating this untapped diamond we call Tewantin. So I think it's going to have like a domino That it'll inspire other businesses to invest more or to redevelop and it's one of the best of the best precincts in the Shire so I'm really excited that this development application is going through and thank the applicant for, you know, this is significant investment and I also hope between now and Thursday maybe there is some opportunity to address some real amenity issues. I think we have a responsibility to our community to do all that we can to ensure that we mitigate through triggers like conditions on development applications to just minimise any impacts in terms of noise, big gardens. of noise, beer gardens are noisy. They're really noisy. I've spent a lot of years in beer gardens. So again, we must give consideration to residents. They too should be ensured their rights of quiet enjoyment. Brian Stockwell 03:00:57.540
I've never been noisy in a beer garden. Karen Finzel 03:01:05.328
Just a question, given we're talking amenity and opportunity to, you know, embrace further our story, our connection to each other and our place. We've got the public art infrastructure policy coming before us. Policy coming before us. Has anything been raised around public art within this site or externally? No. Is there opportunity for any such thing? such thing? Patrick Murphy 03:01:34.808
The policy relates to the public places is my... not to the... I thought it was also a percentage of the infrastructure through... It's a public place. What we're saying is there's no... What we're saying is there's no trigger in our planning scheme to require public art, public art. Karen Finzel 03:01:54.680
No. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:01:59.640
Okay. Anyone else wish to talk? I think we've all... I know you haven't talked yet. Karen Finzel 03:02:05.340
Look, I just think it's a great opportunity for our community to activate the space. think it's good for our community to activate the space, continue that story and our history that brings us enjoyment with our families now and into the future. I think it's good to activate the business community and people can... can come here with confidence knowing that we're supporting, you know, relevant businesses into our Shire to support both our local economy through tourism and our visitors to the region as well So the other afternoon I was out in the hinterland and people were already talking about this development. They knew all about it. It was heritage, they knew about the Tewantin males. So I think it's a great opportunity to give it a facelift and support the growth in our area. Brian Stockwell 03:02:59.272
Okay councillor Wilkie would you like to reply. Frank Wilkie 03:03:03.432
I think councillors have covered the key issues really well it's about this development will transform and uplift and energise Tewantin significantly but we also having strong regard to resident amenity. Brian Stockwell 03:03:20.156
Thank you I put it to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor, yes, so that's unanimous noting that Councillor Wilson wasn't in the room and we can now invite Councillor Wilson back into the room please. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:03:39.928
Next item is Noosa Brian Stockwell 03:03:41.008
Council's Organisational Carbon Footprint, financial year 23-24 and we have Cheyenne and Emma. Eva. Let's just wait for Councillor Wilson to return, and also Manager of Strategic Planning. Welcome back. So who was going to give us an executive summary? SPEAKER_02 03:04:27.400
I think that honour falls to me. So this report is the Council's organisational carbon footprint. And it's recommended for public noting. It's part of the footprint includes Council's expenditure data to date, and also looks up, sorry, the last financial year, and also includes emissions from our supply chain. The footprint was calculated in accordance with climate active methodology, and was completed by our third party auditor. So for the last financial year, the footprint was determined to be 45,118 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, which is given in tonnes of CO2 equivalent. came from the landfill at 47%. The majority of emissions Calculate. Next was professional services at 14%, which does include engineering services, and then construction materials and services at 13%. So Council started measuring its footprint since 2016, so that's taken as the baseline year. we've seen a total reduction of 18%, starting at 55,843 tonnes in 2016, so we have achieved the 18% reduction. We have seen an increase in utility rate related emissions, but this has been offset by the significant reductions in emissions at the landfill, and this is largely the gas capture and flaring that occurs there. If we exclude some of the emissions from our supply chain, which are out of our direct control, we've achieved closer to a 38 to a 38% reduction in emissions since 2016, which is similar to other LGAs like the Sunshine Coast, who's sitting at about 40% in direct emissions reduction. So the sustainability and climate change team has just begun working on a comprehensive roadmap and investment strategy to net zero emissions and we will present this to council later in the year and it will include priority areas. action and our emissions reduction further to deal with our residual emissions that are sitting at about 45,000 tonnes thank you do we have questions oh well I'll kick off there's some interesting stuff in terms of electricity which most people think is the most important in our case it's only a small component and we are saving the equivalent of estimated around $375,000 a year by our solar installations however we've gone up by 22% since 2021 is that real consumption or is that because it's based on how much we spend on electricity it's very difficult to say with the data that we've got the savings that that we've we've estimated estimated are based on as of now, so as if we have 750 kilowatts of solar now and it's all utilised. But looking at historical stuff it's very hard to say when the solar was installed. Ian, Brian Stockwell 03:07:49.991
I'm just talking about the table that compares towards the end and electricity has actually gone up 22% since 2021. So is that because we have been less focused on our energy efficiency or is it because we are opening up new offices or is it just because the formulas worked on how much we spend on The formula's worked on how much we spend on... SPEAKER_02 03:08:11.591
So it's not based on expenditure data, that. It's based on consumption data. So there has been an increase. Shaun Walsh 03:08:17.871
So, to clarify, Councillor, that we found that that is a typo in the report. That percentage, it should be seven percent, if you look at the difference between the numbers. So that is the one typo we found just before this. It should be seven percent, so apologies for that. Brian Stockwell 03:08:36.655
And obviously the good news story is, I think the biggest reduction is waste to landfill as a result of the capturing of the gas. Seventy-one percent. Frank Wilkie 03:08:49.015
Just also on the, landfill is the biggest contribution to greenhouse gases. Since 2016 there's been a reduction from 36,000 to about 21,000. Could you talk about, congratulations. you talk about the key pieces of work that have been done to get that result that impressive result? SPEAKER_02 03:09:10.087
So from what we know the most, the gas capturing, so the capturing the methane gas and flaring it to CO2 has the largest contribution to that emissions reduction of the landfill. There are other initiatives which the waste team would be better to speak to but such as the green green waste that kind of thing which would reduce it. The way green waste is categorized differently when you calculate emissions. Frank Wilkie 03:09:37.059
So just on the green waste which came in 2017 I think we were the first to introduce it. Karen Finzel 03:09:46.874
Yes I think that's right. So that organic matter no longer goes to landfill. If it had gone to landfill it would create methane. So now it's not. So that's could you talk about how significant the reduction in methane production is from not having organic matter going into landfill? SPEAKER_02 03:10:05.314
So I don't we don't have the numbers for that at the moment. It's something that we can take a notice and see if we can work that out. Frank Wilkie 03:10:08.674
It's something that at the moment. And just for people who may be listening, could you explain why flaring methane, which produces carbon dioxide, is actually a reduction in greenhouse gas even though it's creating a gas? SPEAKER_02 03:10:24.854
Sure, so methane has a higher global warming potential than carbon dioxide essentially, so the equivalent amount of methane would produce more harmful. Global warming than the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide so and I think it's about 28 times so it's significant. Yes. So that's why we convert methane to CO2 as a preference and just the methane. Frank Wilkie 03:10:45.904
A lot of work's been done on moving towards non-polluting technologies on council operations. Were you able to quantify the amount of savings, for example, that has meant for ratepayers over the years because of the installation of solar, for example? SPEAKER_02 03:10:58.022
Is difficult to quantify, and based on the 750 kilowatts of solar that we do have installed across council, that's when if you work out the direct savings, that could equate to about $300,000 of savings a year. There are a lot of assumptions that have to go into that, but yeah, it does Sorry. That have to go into that. But yeah, it does show that that could be the potential savings from solar. Shaun Walsh 03:11:25.418
And that's just one element. It should be more than that. There's a lot of variables so it makes it difficult to quantify. Frank Wilkie 03:11:31.978
You mentioned the difficulty in actually calculating. Emissions and other things. Can you talk about the methodology that you use which is based on expenditure? To help you explain why professional services seem, which we understood were lawyers and accountants initially before you educated us. just to explain the methodology. So emissions basically are categorised into scope one, scope two and scope three. Scope one are our direct emissions which for us is basically our landfill. Scope two is predominantly our purchased electricity and scope three is our basically the emissions from our supply chain. So that's the best So that's the best or the only way currently we can estimate that is by using the expenditure data so we take a general ledger and look where we spent our money. Climate active give us emissions factors they're called so it's a way it's a rate of us conferred converting dollars to carbon dioxide oxide tons equivalent and this active give us emissions factors they're called so it's a way it's a rate of us conferred converting dollars to carbon dioxide oxide tons equivalent and this it depends on the sector that the expenditure is in so it could be on construction materials could be concreting could be IT services it could be cloud storage as part of our IT each our expenditure items are categorized into the different categories and then an emissions factor tailored to emissions factor tailored to those categories is applied and then you get your carbon dioxide equivalent out from that. Jessica Phillips 03:13:07.957
Just to further clarify, so you could have the same level of activity and the same amount of materials and services that you're purchasing but because prices have gone up it would convert you to greater emissions? Although the emissions factors are changed or reviewed periodically. review periodically, so the assumptions that the increased cost of things be factored into that admissions factor, yeah. But there would be a lag, essentially, as well, so. Questions, please. Thank you. I don't know if this might be more of an infrastructure question, so. Apologies if it is, but the street lighting with the rates one and two, and then the rate three separate, my understanding is that the rate three are more network-owned, council-operated. rates one and two are not, or maybe it's the other way around. But my question is, when we're considering our street lighting, how many need to go into LED or to continue that they LED or to continue this reduction. I don't know if you can try and work out my explanation there or my question through that. Yes, I think I know. It seems to be that we could do more in this space in street lighting. There is more that can be done in the street lighting. We, Council, only owns and operates a very small percentage of the street lights. So it wouldn't make, whilst it's something, yes, we could absolutely do, it wouldn't make a material difference in our reduction. But it is something that's being looked at. Other councils that sought to take over the street lighting, so they can enhance the implementation of LED lighting. Yeah, 'cause we can't really sit on an Energex street light and use their, is this the right way to? the right way to- street lighting so yeah and then if we had our own we could not only reduce this but we can have more control over the LED and our electricity is that- yeah I- Street lighting, so yeah. mean Energex have committed to rolling out LEDs okay and there is a lot of advocacy going on in that space um so but yeah yeah, and it's that is definitely definitely something something that that we can look at. Right, follow-up question, let me just, there was, sorry, let me, if anyone wants to jump in. Brian Stockwell 03:15:36.873
Okay, I'll do one for each. It was a bit of a surprise, and it's only expenditure base, but some actions that I thought led to sequestering carbon in the soil have given us This is 309 tons, which is parks and garden care. Mulch from the soil, preparation and planting. Is that purely something about getting all the people there, or is that just you put it into the system and that sort of spits out? Amelia Lorentson 03:16:01.240
Essentially Brian Stockwell 03:16:01.980
Yes. because it doesn't make sense when you compare it to, say, concrete products. I mean, we do rely on the climate act of having the accurate, as accurate as it can be. It needs to be stuff to increase sequestration, but it's got a reasonable signature. Jessica Phillips 03:16:19.520
I found that increased expenditure on suppliers such as Hazel Brothers, CMC Civil, KG in the construction of materials, when we go to fuelment, is that a consideration to put back on those companies that we use to buy in? To buy into our reduction, is that? Yes. Yes, definitely. Sustainable procurement is definitely something that we are looking into to address that, yeah. Part of like tendering process, essentially. They say, well if we want a job here, this is our... Larry Sengstock 03:17:02.642
It's one of the criteria we have and it's becoming larger or being investigated at Being investigated at the moment in terms of how we do address that further. But some of the larger companies recognise that that's part of what they need to do. Other smaller companies would love to do it, I'm sure, but they don't have the ability yet. Amelia Lorentson 03:17:23.928
I have a couple of questions. Hi. In terms of costs, lots and lots of data collection and account auditing. The level of detail, what's the cost to Council and who pays and who does this work? Is it done internally or are we externally outsourcing the accounting or the auditing? SPEAKER_02 03:17:55.052
So for last financial year, the one that I've just reported on, that was done by an external, it does require in-house resourcing to provide the data. Prior to that, the two previous years were done in-house. I believe it was two, and then the one before that was done again by an external. It is going to be, it's a decision we've got to make as to what the next one, how the next one is produced, and that's internal and external. Amelia Lorentson 03:18:30.079
Do we have an idea of cost, actual costs, or can you take that on notice and just send us the information? It's around $20,000, 000, okay, so it's not significant. No, okay. Other question, we're in the process at the moment, I believe, negotiating or finalising employee bargaining agreements. Have we taken the opportunity to align the agreements? Brian Stockwell 03:19:00.633
Don't think we can talk about it. Talking about an active negotiation on staff contracts. Amelia Lorentson 03:19:09.633
Okay, through the Chair. Okay, sorry, I can't ask the question. That's all right. Brian Stockwell 03:19:14.333
I think I know where you're going. And I had a similar idea in my head. But I think it's because of the sensitivity of the confidential negotiations. Amelia Lorentson 03:19:33.840
Okay. I think I understand what you're saying, Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 03:19:38.840
If you like, the CEO can put what he, his vision would be on the question. I'm not sure what the question's going to be. Amelia Lorentson 03:19:45.860
The question, maybe, maybe, yes, I ask the question. It's very sensitive at the moment, Councillor. I just, I think, unless it's really relevant, I it's really relevant. I'll throw the question first and then you can let me know if it's in or out. Just opportunities. Is there opportunity to align the agreements with Council's broader mission strategy or sustainability goals? Have we considered incentivising staff to catch public transport, to walk, to cycle, to not provide car allowance? question that I was asking, whether we're using whatever opportunities we have to, for Council to walk the talk, basically. Larry Sengstock 03:20:39.654
It's not something that's been captured, necessarily. It's not something we can, and we don't. To be honest, we don't provide a lot of vehicles anyway, or allowances, so those sorts of things haven't necessarily been part of the negotiation to this point. Shaun Walsh 03:20:55.012
I can speak to embedding. In our operational plan and in our corporate plan, we do have an action in there to embed climate risk management and sustainability throughout the organisation, and so that would include incentive programs and would include incentive programs and working with teams to upskill, to build capacity and capability, to incentivise things like coming to work through active transport and looking at electric vehicles and the cost reductions available there. So we're looking at all of that definitely as part of our embedding roadmap. Thank you. Karen Finzel 03:21:29.120
We've just run a program, Shay, around electricity usage at home across the organisation. Shaun Walsh 03:21:37.684
That's a program run by Sian and Jordan from the Economic Development Team. It's called an Energy Flex program and it helps council staff understand how they can reduce their electricity bills and greenhouse gases from their electricity at home. And so programs like that we're hoping to roll out en masse in different ways. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:22:00.000
My last question which was just in the finance part of the report, Noosa's council's capital works program also includes an annual four hundred thousand K budget allocation for emissions reduction projects. Would you be able to tell me more about that? SPEAKER_02 03:22:17.480
So yeah So yeah in the past we've had a four hundred thousand dollar annual allowance for emissions reduction capital work so that's that's allowed us to do that a lot of our solar installations um a lot of led rollouts um lighting upgrades air conditioning upgrades capital upgrades to all of our buildings to reduce emissions and is that 400 so Subtitles Shaun Walsh 03:22:42.120
And is that 400 so it says for the financial year 25 it'll be the last year next year next financial year it will be the last year that that 400k allocation is yeah Yeah. Brian Stockwell 03:22:58.594
If I could have a subsequent question are we going to spend it this year? We have a number of projects identified which we're working on Karen Finzel 03:23:11.468
Thank you for the report it was yeah it's an interesting reading in there some things are unexpected and other things were quite surprising in terms of where we thought like the emissions would be or you know things like that I would like to talk about you've asked us to note this report with a future report coming up to us with a roadmap an investment and strategy to net zero emissions and that is noticing also in the report the reputational litigation financial investment risk strategic and operational risks I was surprised it wasn't mentioned this report but hopefully it's coming to us you know the elephant in the room I think is the 2026 target just wondering where we're travelling along with actually reaching that to mitigate the risks mentioned in this report with that snapshot that was provided through the Griffith University can we be expecting some type of idea if we're going to be looking at perhaps changing that 2026 target So if we can put the question that in looking at a roadmap will councillors be asked whether they want to retain or change the target of 2026? Council we are bringing forward to you an investment roadmap to try and continue to reduce our emissions and yes as part of that you will be asked to consider a number of things around you can see in the report how we're tracking and there's a very short time frame. Correct. To 2026 so yes you will be asked around a number of things to consider on how we achieve the outcome that the council have been trying to achieve for a number of years. And will this help us address the necessary, I don't know, what we've got to reach through our requirements for the Local Government Act? Government Act? How at risk are we at not aligning with that in terms of our targets for zero emission? What specifically is the Local Government Act? Well, you have mentioned it in your report under risks and opportunity, the Local Government Act. And the agreed roles and responsibilities for climate change adaption in Australia. So that refers to our duty of care as a local government to address general risks for our community at the strategic level. Climate change is one of our major risks so it sits at that level there there is no so there are there are strategic risks around this and the and the cost if we don't continue to to reduce our emissions becomes greater to the society over time so we are working towards to manage and mitigate those risks the target that we have said is is a local government set target it's not it's not a legislative target it's something that Noosa Council has said itself. Jessica Phillips 03:26:34.174
Thank you, Tom? Councillor Wegener. Brian Stockwell 03:26:40.234
Yes, thank you. Unknown 03:26:43.374
As a part of the roadmap towards zero emissions Shaun Walsh 03:26:50.440
Sequestration of carbon through biochar and through our composting because I believe that we could really sink a lot of carbon that way. Are you investigating that as a part of our roadmap? Brian Stockwell 03:27:06.800
So you've answered your own question in that you're asking a question about a roadmap that we haven't got in front of us. We've got a report about last year's emissions emissions and and being being a a councillor councillor I'm sure that they will be considered because you'll be there saying we have to consider them Mr Frank Wilkie 03:27:22.720
Chair because I'd like to leave Before we leave before midnight, I'd like to move the recommendation. Brian Stockwell 03:27:35.540
Councillor Finzel. So move Councillor Wegener. Wilkie, sorry, I'll get to you. Councillor Finzel. And I'll just explain, Councillor Wegener, I move that your question was out of order. Shaun Walsh 03:27:50.680
Okay. Okay. Frank Wilkie 03:27:51.940
Thank you. for the report. It is a very difficult task to quantify these emissions. These are missions. You've showed us how we're tracking by according to the best methodology and that's the best advice you can give at this time. It makes it clear we've got a lot of work to do. We're not going to meet that 2026 target so let's be clear about that. I'm looking forward to the you're doing and giving us some options to consider whether it's pushing out the time frame or how we pay for offsets. I know councils that don't have landfills have a much easier time at reaching net zero. We're not trying to divest ourselves of that responsibility by selling off our landfill. We're going to be taking some going to be taking some initiatives that will reduce our landfill emissions and not only this move toward non-polluting technologies and practices will reduce our impact on the environment and our responsibilities for climate change, it's also a discipline that it imposes on this organisation to be more efficient and there are great savings for ratepayers as well. So thank you for the work and I look forward to your future report. Brian Stockwell 03:29:03.720
I'll talk to it. There is some really good improvement in areas that we have an ability to fix within current budgetary constraints. I did have a look and I noticed we referred to the carbon reduction officer doing previous assessments and I thought that's an out-of-date concept. We should be a carbon reduction where every officer thinks part of their job description is carbon reduction. And we had a bit of a talk about that. Like some of the good areas, those things, the efficiency and thinking You know, fleet fuel has gone up, but there's a lot in here that's gone a result of the increased capital works. So we have this concept. So to me, it's about the ability to make decisions that make the best cost outcomes for carbon reduction. And I think one of the upcoming agenda items on this meeting Amelia Lorentson 03:30:23.680
I'm just going to add just something. Trying to say this nicely. Start with the four P's: people, planet, profit, purpose. And I think that sometimes in our language and reporting, so carbon reports for the ordinary person on the street, carbon footprints, may not mean a lot. Prince may not mean a lot and I just think we need to, and Mayor Wilkie explained it really great, it's about efficiencies, it's about cleaner air, it's about the future we want to leave to our children and it's about doing what's right, it's about not wasting, it's not sustainable for us to keep going the way we are. So probably what I like is how doing green good stuff means better business, better efficiency and on a community level how that impacts on lower rates and that we as a council Spend money in core business where it's needed, on our roads. And these efficiencies give us the opportunity to do good by the environment, but also the community benefits in terms of better roads, cleaner air, cleaner waterways. And thank you for the report. Shaun Walsh 03:31:58.800
I'd like to speak. Brian Stockwell 03:32:02.140
You have the floor, Councillor Wegener. Shaun Walsh 03:32:06.540
Well, considering that the world's biggest economy has abandoned climate change and the goals, sometimes you think that the world is going to end and it's all low. then I reflect on the Stoic philosophy and reflect on Socrates and in his trial he said when Spartans, when the Spartans had sacked Athens, people walked around like the world was ending in all remorse remorse and Socrates kept his head up high and he never changed the way he acted because he has absolute values that transgressed or on the other side of actions and local occurrences. Such as we're facing with climate change and so he has absolute value. We have an absolute value here in Noosa and that is our absolute value is we have to give the next generation a Noosa that is the same or better than the Noosa that we inherited and that's an absolute. So I really an absolute. So I really believe that what you're doing, what Cheyenne and the team there is doing with this is very, very important. And we do need to just stick to our goals and stick to our climate change emergency because it's the right thing to do. It's the absolutely correct thing to do. I would like to also just mention that I would love to see the economic development team really get on with this because I think that we have enormous opportunities through the TIPP, through sequestration, I mean the resource recovery centre. Here, this is our advantage, economic advantage that I believe could be utilised a lot more thoroughly. Thank you to the team for wonderful job and I look forward to the roadmap coming up. Richard MacGillivray 03:34:01.748
Thank you, Councillor. Karen Finzel 03:34:02.908
Can I just say the economic development team are on board this. That's right. Very much. Brian Stockwell 03:34:10.068
Anyone else? Councillor Wilkie. Frank Wilkie 03:34:12.288
No, thank you. I think it's all been said. Brian Stockwell 03:34:13.804
I put the motion. Those in favour? Yes. That's unanimous. Thank you. Richard MacGillivray 03:34:25.504
We need a short break. Tom Wegener 03:41:59.740
We're at the pump. We're going to be finished by 4.30. Brian Stockwell 03:42:07.960
We're on to item 8.5, which is a financial... No, we're not. 8.4, which is the Pomona placemaking plan. Amelia Lorentson 03:42:35.818
Husband, Chris Lorentson is an employee of Page Furnishes Pty Ltd where he has served as general manager for the past 32 years. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias as there is no personal gain or loss involved. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room as a result of my conflict of interest. Oh, sorry, that's okay. However... That's it. Okay, thank you. Okay, good. I'll move. Brian Stockwell 03:43:14.726
I'll second. Are we moving... Stay the the motion to stay. And it's been moved by Councillor and seconded by Councillor Wilkie. Jessica Phillips 03:43:28.480
That in accordance with section 150 ES of the Local Government Act 2009, and having considered the Council's conflict of interest as described, it is decided that Councillor Lorentson may participate and vote on this Frank Wilkie 03:43:55.234
And you need a clause in relation to that a reasonable person would consider that she could vote on the matter in the public interest. Jessica Phillips 03:44:07.314
I'll just put this here. Because I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias as there is no personal gain or loss involved. Brian Stockwell 03:44:32.960
Are we happy with that? Do you need to talk to it? Anyone wish to talk or ask questions? If there's no one wish to talk, I'll put the matter to a vote. Those in favour? So that was unanimous, noting that Councillor Lorentson didn't vote. Okay, now we can proceed to Michelle. Excellent. To give us an overview. SPEAKER_08 03:45:00.580
Of you um counselors today I'd like to present to you the Pomona plan the final plan for endorsement the Pomona place program commenced in June 2023 after Pomona was endorsed by council for the location for the placemaking pilot in February in 2023 this report presents the final Pomona plan for endorsement by council the Pomona place plan has been prepared in partnership with the Pomona community and is the result The first round of engagement was undertaken in August till October in 2023 to determine the visions and values of the Pomona community as well as asking the community what made Pomona a great place to live. And how we could make it even better. Over 500 people participated in the engagement through a range of activities with 250 people completing the community survey identifying a diverse range of ideas for potential actions in the plan. We had community organisations and we participated in a walk on country with the Kabi Kabi Peoples Aboriginal Corporation. We also had two workshops. The Pomona Placeband engagement summary report was endorsed by Council at its meeting in December 27. The second round of community engagement was undertaken in May to June of 2023, sorry 2024. Where the committee were asked to prioritise actions from round one engagement and to confirm the vision statement for the plan. We received over 240 survey responses with approximately 60 participants attending pop-ups and separate workshops were also held with community organisations and the Kabi Kabi Peoples Aboriginal Corporation. This then allowed us to prepare the final and draft plan which was then underwent a third round of committee. engagement from October 18th to November 17th in 2024. The purpose of this round was really to present the draft motor place plan to the community to confirm the visions and actions Actions reflected their aspirations and to enable community members to nominate to be involved in specific community led actions. Council received 40 online submissions to the place plan as well as some submissions via email. We also held a workshop with community organisations to discuss implementation. The final permanent place plan has been developed based on the community input and responses from all three rounds of community consultation. It has been amended considering those submissions from the most recent round. The majority of changes really focused around providing further clarity, further detail around some actions, some functionality and readability of the document and strengthening the issue. the document and strengthening the issue of quarry trucks moving through the village. Brian Stockwell 03:47:38.598
Thank you. Do we have questions? Amelia Lorentson 03:47:41.138
Through the Chair, were there questions that you were going to ask on behalf of a resident or not? Brian Stockwell 03:47:51.158
Not that I can recall. No, okay. Amelia Lorentson 03:47:56.208
That's all right. I will tell you I wasn't up there, but I can't recall that I was up there. Okay. Frank Wilkie 03:48:01.228
I believe there may be some questions coming to the ordinary meeting. Is that what you're referring to? Are there questions coming? Yes. Oh Amelia Lorentson 03:48:06.708
Okay. Thank you very much. Public questions. Sorry. Public questions. Fantastic. I have a couple of questions. First in terms of costs. What are the costs for the Costs for the Pomona placemaking project in terms of external consultancies, what were the costs of each round of consultation and what in terms of value for money and reach of engagement has that been assessed? SPEAKER_08 03:48:39.735
The project has come in under its budget through council. The consultation, the engagement of the consultants to run all the consultation sessions as well as prepare the document and do the, I guess the preparation was around $130 Amelia Lorentson 03:49:01.800
Fantastic. Okay, other questions? Pomona Men's Shed. I met up with some of the members of the Pomona Men's Shed just recently, a couple of days ago. They, and I could be wrong, so my question is where they engaged in as part of this process? SPEAKER_08 03:49:24.140
They were certainly invited to all the community organisational workshops and did attend the last workshop we had while we had one representative from the Pomona Men's Shed, but I guess this is the development of the plan. The process now is implementation and we're going to be going back out and engaging around the actions in the plan with community groups, so we would love to chat to them. Fantastic. Amelia Lorentson 03:49:45.177
There has been some change in committee members. So that would be excellent. booze yes They've reached out and would really love to partake and more so they would also like the Men's Shire just to be identified as a important social infrastructure in the community. They provide a lot in the space of health and well-being for men within the Shire and also within the community of Pomona. Frank Wilkie 03:50:22.040
I think it's an enormous amount of work that's gone into this I really appreciate how the plan has already delivered some quick wins on the ground in the Pomona community you've outlined them in the report the short-term goals in the next one to two years which are already on some of them already underway and looking and it's it I do appreciate it it is budget dependent on how some of the long-term goals do proceed and that's the correct procedure thank you for your work it's a wonderful template and I'm looking forward to it reaching the community seeing and they already are seeing results. seen, and they already are seeing results coming from this process. It's still a big mystery what township will benefit next, but we'll watch that space. Amelia Lorentson 03:51:13.120
At the end and very tired, but I do want to raise tree planting program. So in 2023-2024 council committed to a proactive tree planting program. I've gone through the new plan. I've gone through planning program. Has it been explicitly, I know we've got native trees and there's all mentions of great vegetation and programs. Has that tree planning program been explicit? included in the new plan? SPEAKER_08 03:51:43.188
Not explicitly, I guess it falls under that streetscape upgrade action which is quite broad and I appreciate you know we can't delve down into everything but I have been working with that department within council with that department within council about if there's any opportunity to bring forward those things we'd be going to do a greening master plan which we might be able to get some additional provided we get funding for we can we can potentially move that forward as well but very cognizant of keeping all opportunities open to bring some of these actions forward. Brian Stockwell 03:52:24.780
Anyone else wish to talk to the motion? Karen Finzel 03:52:27.460
No I think everyone's done really well I've waived my right to speak as a long-term resident of Pomona I love reading the report it's a really good reflection of the community I've tried to step back a little bit so I don't be you know have too big of a conflict but I think it's fantastic the community's eagerly awaiting you know several things that we've reached there especially you know going back and readdressing the quarry trucks you know they're walking the crossings those things that are high up on you know people's front of high up on people's front of their minds every day as they look at our community. So I'm looking forward to seeing this progress and reach its full potential. And especially the bit about the, what was it called, you know the team, where you get the town team together. So yeah, there's already some generated conversations around that and people are enthusiastically waiting to participate in part of that. So yeah, I think it's been a great, you know, way of showing how we can do this, how we can do this better, and like Frank said, who's going to be the next, you know, one that comes out of the hat to go, let's great work throughout the Shire. So thank you to everyone involved. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 03:53:45.044
I'm just going to reference, in 2005, there was a Pomona Town Centre precinct plan. Precinct Plan. What was interesting when I read that was that same priorities then are relevant today. In 2005 they wanted more shade trees, they wanted more cycleways, they wanted improved public transport, upgraded sports facility and a swimming pool. That was 20 years ago. those same priorities are still very relevant today. It seems like What was interesting when I So I am placing my confidence in this plan that unlike the 2005 plan where not much progress has been made to date, that we progress those priority actions for Pomona and I think it's important that we do because it will give us the confidence and give the community the confidence that we can actually duplicate these programs in other precincts and achieve deliverables. I think the community want outcomes so I think, you know, the pressure is on us and the town team to deliver and I'm confident we will. I've enjoyed the process. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:55:04.052
Thank you if I'll be brief the the project was a pilot and we are getting a separate report but when I read the the plan I do because I lived in Pomona for a couple years you really feel that it has captured the essence of both the town but also of what the you know what we hear as councillors about what the town wants to be in the future about how what What they want to retain and what we can work together to achieve it and that's the essence of place planning is you refine it to a point where locals can understand that this is what our place is and we're going to work with the council or we're going to work with our community groups to achieve it. I think the process has worked and I think there's good learnings To me the best part that I was involved with was just going along to the markets and seeing all the community suggestions up there and everyone walking past and putting where their priorities it was so clear what was important and what wasn't so important and it was that engagement at that level and I think one of your learnings was conduct your consultation where people already at you know you'll get much bigger buy-in and that's something we learn but it on from the you know when you read the vision statement I think most people in the final will say yeah that is what we want to achieve and the the actions listed under that also go towards achieving it Karen Finzel 03:56:34.640
Oh, can I just make a comment? You just prompted me to come in. No, you can't, you were exposed. Oh, question. Brian Stockwell 03:56:41.020
Anyone else want to talk? I'll wave my right. Wave your right. Sorry. Councillor Wegener? Yes. That's unanimous. Thank you. Karen Finzel 03:57:02.440
Now we move on to 8.5, which is the financial performance report. Oh, this is the most important one. Thank you, Paul. SPEAKER_02 03:57:17.440
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:57:26.480
We have the manager of funds and the director of corporate services, actually the director. And Pauline, would you like to give us an overview please? SPEAKER_08 03:57:35.520
Sure. Good afternoon, councillors. So financial performance for the month of February continues to be positive with operating revenues continuing to outperform forecast and operating expenditure under budget at this Operating expenditure under budget at this stage of the financial year. Operating revenue is $2.3 million above budget and this is being driven by $1.3 million in interest revenue, $400,000 from sales of goods and services, almost $300,000 from other revenue sources, $200,000 from grant programs and $190,000 from rates and utility charges. This has been offset, however, by lower than forecast fees and charges of $200,000. Operating expenditure is $116,000 under budget, with employee costs showing as almost break-even and that's due to the recruitment of the vacancy savings dividend adopted as part of the budget. Materials and services are $109,000 over budget. This is driven predominantly from civil operations, which is $430,000 over budget year-to-date, and holiday parks, which is $109,000 over It should be noted, though, that holiday parks has offsetting revenue streams to fund that overspend. As we generate more revenue, we also generate additional costs associated with it. We have offsetting those overspends and underspend in waste of $170,000 and $150,000 underspend in arts and culture, $100,000 underspend.., 000 under spending canals and waterways and $100,000 in development assessment. Finance costs are $165,000 under budget and that's due to the deferral of some capital works that were flagged to be loan funded during the year. Overall Council's year-to-date operating position at February is $2.4 million of budget which will be utilised to fund emergent expenditure through to the end of the year. Capital revenues: $8.6 million our budget and that's due to the timing of receipts from QRA funding and SEQ CSP funding. Capital expenditures behind: $32.2 million year-to-date with $12 million relating to Sorry, I've written that wrong. $12 million relating to Council's base capital program and $20 million relating to disaster projects. Council is currently holding $135.6 million with the second biannual rates run occurring in February. We are at the second peak for the year in our cash reserves and this will diminish through to June. This peak has resulted in Council's investment return showing slightly under target but this is expected to return to target range as these funds are utilised for operations through to June. Council's financial performance remains on track as subject to any emergent issues that arise between now and the end of the financial year Thank you. Brian Stockwell 04:00:24.623
Thank you. Questions? Yes. Karen Finzel 04:00:28.123
Thank you for the report. Good reading as always. Watch them when those figures rise and fall. in on page four of the report council has received notification of the approved 2024-25 financial assistant grant allocation is less than budgeted. As such there's a potential for this to impact 2024-25 operating position if payment of the future years allocations are not paid in the preceding year. My question is what steps be undertaken to ensure the risk of potential impacts on the 2024-25 operating position are identified and mitigated? SPEAKER_08 04:01:10.073
Okay so in terms of the financial assistance grant, the government had previously taken the position to advance pay those amounts. In last financial year they missed the payment deadline and didn't pay in June, they paid in July. So we received that amount in this financial year. However the amount that we budgeted for was less, about $400,000 and it was flagged I think back in 2022 when they did a review of the methodology around the financial assistance grant that council would receive approximately 14% less than its existing grant allocation. So we have eventually seen that occur. In terms of able to mitigate that risk, we don't actually have a lot of control over the amounts that we get allocated. Noosa is the smallest allocation of financial assistance grants in Queensland and there's lots of factors that go into determining that, whether that's remoteness, our population, our our grant funding, those sorts of things all play into it. We are a smaller council in an urban area, so we do get an allocation that's less. So in terms of that $400,000 reduction, in terms of this year's current financial position, if we are to receive the advance payment that we would normally receive in If that payment was again delayed like it was this year, we would see a half a million dollars down. Overall, it is a cash flow thing, so it's just a tiny issue. The issue really is the reduction amount of $400,000 and that would need to be absorbed by Council's reserves. Brian Stockwell 04:02:44.880
I have a question. So our capital works is behind what we forecast, but our civil operations materials is over budget and we've made some changes. some changes in BR2 in regard to a range of things with diversity of operations, but is the materials and services because we're doing more than we expected or is there some other reason? SPEAKER_08 04:03:08.713
So in terms, I don't know if Sean wants to comment, but I can talk. Sure, no worries. So in terms of the overspending in terms of materials and services versus capital, obviously materials and services operational, capital is completely separate. Materials and services currently being driven by I suppose some programs that may have been not necessarily planned for as well and we've had We've had additional costs in arborists which were higher than we had originally intended. We also had cut back the budget again last year to find savings which hadn't necessarily eventuated at this stage of the year in terms of civ ops. Brian Stockwell 04:03:45.035
We adjust some of that in the BR2? SPEAKER_08 04:03:46.855
We didn't adjust that much in BR2 for them there was an anticipation that potentially it was a timing issue and that it would come back in line and depending on the management of that through to the end of the year it still could occur but at this stage it's showing. Shaun Walsh 04:04:02.956
There was actually an $870,000 reduction in the civil assets and operation budget last financial year and the expectation that we could peg down some costs, hopefully we're having a drier year. Unfortunately that hasn't that hasn't eventuated. We've had significant, you know, vegetation costs and also drainage costs across the Shire and it's been very challenging. I'll be working, now that's budget overrun year to date. You know, we have an opportunity to curtail, you know, operations to actually bring it in on budget or alternatively you know, work with the finance team to see what costs we do need to, you know, deliver services adequately. So Brian O 'Connor has been in the lead for the last three weeks, the relevant manager. So I look forward to working with him to get a much clearer perspective on what we need to actually finish the year. Karen Finzel 04:04:48.301
Just a follow-up question on that. Thank you, Shaun. This has been raised before. Especially around with, you know, more weather events and we've got trees coming down and all of that. So it's a question through the Chair and the CEO. At what level through the organisation will we address that about, you know I think this is going to be ongoing so rather than addressing like where we fall short how do we be more forward planning is that going to be through the budget or how are we going to like do that to help these guys out like stay ahead of that because it comes up. It comes up repeatedly. It's a budget issue and as Shaun said last year we reduced the budget because we thought we might have a clear year we hope we have a clear year some of those things haven't eventuated so that's a decision we take as a budget measure each year and we can't predict necessarily. But we're always driving for efficiencies and better ways of doing things but you know those things take time as well and sometimes they cost money to make money if you like sometimes to make savings so we're in that process as well. But it's one of those things that will come up as a budget discussion absolutely for 25-26. Shaun Walsh 04:06:00.070
If I can add to that, it's been a fair bit of time in the budget preparation for 25-26 to better articulate some of these costs such as vegetation. management, traffic control and line marking which are really hitting our budget line really quite significantly at the moment. To actually have a better discourse with finance and the organisation about these costs which are... which are effectively reducing the capacity of the overall product area. Brian Stockwell 04:06:23.476
So line marking is internal? Some parts of it are externalised, but we do have some. One of the considerations we've got is to try and build out internal delivery. Like in terms of arborists, they can be, I know we did at some stage have someone who had a bit of the, a few of the costs but we thought about this. We do have some internal resources that are apply a number of resources that apply to Harper's tasks in terms of assessing the tasks and actually doing the work and it's really good that you always maintain a baseline to be able to do reactive work but when you look at the significant fluctuations of work that occurs and then also combined with the proactive scheduled vegetation reduction on the air traffic routes and the like it's something that's highly fluctuating and there's also economies of scale by contracting it out so the model is a mixture of both. Karen Finzel 04:07:11.026
Sorry what was that the model? Oh the model is a mixture of both you've got key expertise you know internally to actually lead the program and to guide it but then you're actually contracting the vast majority of the work out. Amelia Lorentson 04:07:24.167
Cash expense cover targets more than three months and we've got 14.1 months of cash at the bank. Question and probably question that's coming out of community a lot in terms of our cash reserves. What's the primary reason behind the surpluses and how does council determine what is the appropriate level of cash reserves needed for contingencies or future projects? It just seems it keeps going up and up and up and up so you know a couple of other questions thrown in with that one is are we underestimating annual revenue? Are we overestimating annual expenditure? Overestimating annual expenditure and should we be looking at maybe reviewing our budget forecasting methodologies? SPEAKER_08 04:08:19.830
So in terms of right now and what's been reported we are at the peak of the peak of the cycle, so we've just collected six months' worth of rates, so we're at a high in the cycle, so it will come down as we go into June and July. In terms of the cover, at the moment that is currently calculated based on our entire cash... Now in our cash holdings we contain restricted cash reserves for all our unspent levy funds, our unspent grant funds, our undelivered capital programs, so if we're behind in capital programs we're holding funds to pay for If that's not delivered in this year we carry it to next year when we're going to deliver those funds. So without some of that surplus cash we wouldn't be able to deliver those programs. We've also, in terms of what's an appropriate amount of cash to be holding in surplus, it is recommended as part and Surplus. It is recommended as part of our financial sustainability guidelines that we hold a minimum of three months cash cover above our restricted. So take out your restricted components and I think you'll recall it hasn't happened for a little bit but we do a quarterly update on what cash reserves... reserves are being held by council and that breaks it down. It's not included in this report but it will be included in the March quarter report in terms of what makes up our cash balances and why we hold them. Brian Stockwell 04:09:32.325
Is it a difficult task? I'm just thinking we could have three colours. I'm just thinking this it is. It's a little bit more in terms of you've got to go through and reconcile all of the different programs and see where they're at and allocate those out so they're capturing. Otherwise I'm giving you a ballpark. So we do put quite a bit of effort into making sure that it is accommodating everything that we're aware of at that moment in time. Frank Wilkie 04:09:56.082
I'll move the report. I'll second it. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 04:10:06.140
I will just, in the space of continuous improvement, Pauline, and not a criticism, I love your reports and I love the clarity and simplicity, just a thought, it would be great to have the report, maybe what I would like to see, I'll start from what I would like to see is maybe when we're looking at employee expenses, a comparison Expenses. A comparative chart. I'd like to see have we increased our employee cost over a period of the year? What are we spending today compared to last year and the year before and the reasons? I don't know whether that's a audit and risk deep dive exercise or whether it's a financial reporting but I would love to see maybe, I don't know, some I don't know, some analysis of some of the information, not on each section but just a commentary on how does this fare with costs this time last year and what are the circumstances or why? Why have we seen an increase in employee costs? SPEAKER_08 04:11:17.709
We can certainly look at what we can pull together for you. We can can certainly certainly potentially potentially include include a a last last year's column so you can see the year to date last year, but we just need to update some of the reports that we've got for that. Thank you very much. Brian Stockwell 04:11:33.136
It's interesting and I'm sure it's only a coincidence the first time we've got Nathan directed that. It's the first time the report's dipped into red in the investment returns sector. SPEAKER_08 04:11:43.643
It's not quite true, it did happen in February 2022. Brian Stockwell 04:11:48.303
Just a question, like the bond rate, are we seeing that the bond rate and the market has a more pessimistic view of the future than what the bond rate reflects? Yeah, in terms of common interest in terms of that dip down, it's actually because of the way the formula calculates. It's using in theory it's projecting we should be higher okay but we are we are generally okay but we are we are generally around four point eight to five percent which I'm with you. Definitely not. Karen Finzel 04:12:29.531
Yeah, I'm glad you were attracted Frank Wilkie 04:12:35.800
Mr Chair are we going to close that debate? Yeah just like so I don't mean to sound flippant about just saying the report is excellent because it is the reasons why it's excellent is there is so much information in there I commend it to anyone who's interested in council's financial position to read it. Councillor Nicola who's a forensic accountant Nicola, who's a forensic accountant. She has no questions, so if she's happy, it's a good sign if you're a rate payer. But questions about cash at bank is, like, 14 months is... a very good one. As the report shows, there's really only... Predicting a surplus of 2.4 million. Not the... It's not that much cash that's spared. It's constrained cash that's being responsibly And as you say, it's been collected because we're at the height of the rate cycle. All the information is there. You've got the overs, the unders, the reasons why there's some... Each individual department is over, why each individual department is under. So I commend you for the work you put into every monthly report, and also for the way you take on board suggestions from councillors, such as the ones that come forward in this meeting. So... The collective sum of all councillors' requests are reflected graphics and the information provided in these reports. So that's why I said the report was excellent, and I commend any ratepayer to read it. Brian Stockwell 04:14:05.785
Thank you. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Yes. That's unanimous. Amelia Lorentson 04:14:12.385
Thank you, Pauline. Thank you, Mark. Brian Stockwell 04:14:13.865
Thank you, Pauline. Thank you. Well done. And we move on to item 8. I'll move it, Mr Chair. Thank you, Mr Chair. I don't think much needs to be said about this. I think if there's anything, a councillor may want to change some wording of the motion. That can be done on Thursday night. on Thursday night. They're all there for the residents to read if they're interested and I commend the councillors that have put in some of the work into getting these motions up. They're all there for... Jessica Phillips 04:14:59.367
Can we just clarify that it's Thursday morning? Frank Wilkie 04:15:02.167
Thursday. Thursday morning. Oh thank you councillor. I tried Frank. you. Brian Stockwell 04:15:10.242
Does anyone else wish to talk? Yes I actually do and I understand people on time restraints but I think it is respectful to give opportunity for people that wish to say given the volume of work undertaken by Councillor Lorentson and myself to deliver these within a time frame and get them in a report. Councillor Frank, I'd just like to say that the reports that I'm putting out to the National Assembly, I believe, you know, important, not only in our local Shire, but they come at the forefront of the National Assembly as well, especially when we're talking about circular economy, recycling, you know, road specifications. I won't hold you up for long. Karen Finzel 04:15:57.968
All the things that we've talked about throughout the meeting today, I believe, are addressed in some of the motions that I myself will put up and Councillor Lorentson. So thank you for listening, everybody. I'm looking forward to the the recommendations coming before us. I believe they'll be moving along to help address your timeframes due to your wording. I respect that. So thank you everybody for listening and let's hope we get some really good hope we get some really good support at the National General Assembly for the work that councillors and staff, including the CEO, have supported us in raising these motions. Thank you for your time. Amelia Lorentson 04:16:39.867
Thank you. I will speak to the report. Firstly, it's important to note that these motions have no financial impact on council. If approved, the costs for a council attending the conference will be covered by the council's mandatory representation funding. Also important to note that these motions don't extend council beyond its core responsibilities. Our community... has made it clear that they expect council to concentrate on its core businesses, roads, rubbish, rates and residents and as Councillor Finzel mentioned these motions do align with council's core mandate and more importantly they require no additional... resources or cost. The motions simply allow us as a council to lend our voice and influence to state and federal matters of local significance. I'm going to run through just really really quickly the three that I put together. First is wastewater and... And what I'm asking the National General Assembly is to commit to undertaking a feasibility study on implementing the policy similar to the European Union's urban wastewater treatment and reuse framework. Basically, and I'll sum this up really quickly, is that the European Union have a goal to remove micropollutants from urban wastewater by 2045. And I'm going to reference what's been happening down along Sydney's northern beaches over the last couple of years. Over the last week, there's been nine beaches that have been closed along the Sydney northern beaches. And it's a stark reminder of why treating wastewater to the absolute highest standards is absolutely essential. Part of the coastline down in New South Wales, for those who aren't aware, have been closed because there's been a bunch of debris, including what's called tar balls, that have been washed ashore, and they're surmising that it might be combinations of diesel and sewage. in terms of the European Union, I will give you again a quick summation of their ambitious So, goals and the motion that I said is, you know, can we just look at what they're doing and is there something we can learn from their Zero Pollution Action Plan. So, by 2045, in Europe, urban wastewater treatment plants will be required to what's called Caterinary Treatment to remove all micropollutants, such as those from pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. This is in addition to existing requirements for removal. opt for removing biodegradable organic matter and nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus. Producers of pharmaceuticals and cosmetics will also contribute to the costs of advanced treatment under a polluted pay principle. So the measure aims to improve water quality, protect ecosystem and support European Union's water sustainability and climate neutrality objectives. Again, what I'm asking is we just assess whether similar policy can apply here in Australia and whether we can learn anything from what's happening over in Europe. Second motion I have is, again, I start from a local perspective. What we need here in Noosa and then see if it's any got got any application on a federal level. In response to local issues and the local issue in this motion is damaged roads that are caused by heavy vehicles including but not limited to say quarry trucks. My motion My motion is a request to the National General Assembly to work with local governments to mandate what's called road user agreements with industry and the purpose is to simply ensure fair cost distribution among road users including those responsible for increased freight loads that damage local government roads. The third motion is in response to meetings that I've had with local doctors here in Noosa and basically what they've asked is if council can lend their voice in supporting their advocacy and what they're advocating is that with that the federal government amend its national health law to allow doctors doctors retiring doctors to establish an Australian Medical Reserve and also to have like a sub register categories that before you retire you can volunteer and part of that is just reduced you know barriers for retired doctors For retired doctors is stuff like registration and ongoing ongoing fees so this is the This motion is simply again allowing us to support or lend our voice to help support a group of really great doctors advocating for really positive changes in national health Again it's an opportunity and a privilege for us as councillors to advocate on either a state or federal level and I jump on the opportunity every single year. It's part of our job and it's part of our responsibility as councillors to lend our voice to know, lend our voice to any matter that has local relevance and also anything that has national or state. Thank you very much. Karen Finzel 04:23:01.767
You for the opportunity. I see we've got seven minutes. So can I please just give a little added summary. When we're talking about... We have got another item, and depending on what you're saying about your thoughts, that's a bit of information that we're worried Brian Stockwell 04:23:26.640
Sorry. So that... We'll put that motion... Oh, well, Councillor... Any other councillors wish to talk? Jessica Phillips 04:23:33.200
I won't, if I write. I'm happy to give the councillor the end of all my time if possible. I mean... Brian Stockwell 04:23:38.380
The standing order's done. It's a standing order. Thank you, though. It's OK. So, councillor, will Frank Wilkie 04:23:44.680
We... Yeah, thank you. I'd just like to make the point that in promptly moving and seconding a motion, it's not precluding any councillor from speaking to it. I hope that impression is correctly received. And you can tell by the way the two councillors spoke about their motions how passionate they are about it, and it's commendable. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 04:24:04.596
Question through the chair. Brian Stockwell 04:24:07.576
Good. So I put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. So that is the last item in open session. The next item is The next item is in confidential session, so we will ask that there's no one in the audience, but if we can cease the recording. We do need to move the motion that's up on the board. I move, Frank Wilkie 04:24:38.916
Mr Chair, that the meeting be closed to the public, pursuant to section 254J3, List Alpha Reference. List Alpha Reference of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing Item 9.1, Contracts Renewal Delegation, Retail Electricity for Street Lights and Large Sites. Brian Stockwell 04:25:07.304
Any discussion? All those in favour? Shaun Walsh 04:38:53.608
We can turn the cameras back on. Karen Finzel 04:38:56.548
Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 04:38:59.708
Thanks, Maggie. Brian Stockwell 04:39:00.928
Okay, so we are considering the staff recommendation for item 9.1. Do we have a mover of the motion? Jessica Phillips 04:39:09.868
I'll move it. Brian Stockwell 04:39:09.916
Move, Councillor Wilson, seconded by Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 04:39:10.428
Moved. Brian Stockwell 04:39:11.349
Moved, Councillor Wilson. Seconded. Do we wish to talk to the motion? No, thank you Mr Chair. I'll then put the motion. Those in favour? Frank Wilkie 04:39:23.216
Yes. Brian Stockwell 04:39:23.876
And that's carried unanimously. That brings us to the end of the meeting at 5:09pm. Thank you councillors. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
