General Committee - 12 May 2025
Date: Monday, 12 May 2025 at 12:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 04:21:49
Synopsis: Resort MCU21/0110 approved, Odour limits set, Unitywater no appeal, Zoning review slated, Compliance Policy deferred 2025, Noosa River funding likely, Finances up, Environment endorsed.
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 Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Deputations
AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Juliane Vogler detailed decade-long road maintenance failures on Upper Pinbarren Creek Rd (tilt/camber changes, drainage causing washouts) and requested corrective works and resident input into early-stage maintenance (01:08–13:08; Deputations 6.1). Brian Stockwell moved to approve Noosa Springs resort MCU21/0110 with conditions and to review cadastral zoning/urban boundary in next scheme amendment; debate ensued (59:01; Item 7.1). Jessica Phillips secured an amendment limiting guest/visitor pool hours to 6am–9pm to mitigate odour/noise impacts; carried unanimously (47:09–48:07; Amendment No.1, Item 7.1). Karen Finzel moved to defer MCU21/0110 to the Ordinary Meeting (15 May 2025); carried unanimously (01:14:26–01:31:14; Procedural Motion, Item 7.1). Patrick Murphy (planning officer) outlined the reduced proposal (106 to 69 rooms), odour assessment based on the 2.5 odour unit (OU) contour, increased building setback (302m), biodiversity offsets and tennis court relocations (15:51–27:49; Item 7.1 attachments). Council adopted in-principle an Integrated Compliance & Enforcement Policy, with Jessica Phillips adding clear role delineations for councillors (advocacy for voluntary compliance; no operational involvement) (01:42:58–01:49:55; Item 7.2). Tom Wegener then led a deferral of the Policy to 16 June 2025 to refine amendments; carried 5–2 (For: Wegener, Wilson, Finzel, Phillips, Lorentson; Against: Wilkie, Stockwell) (01:59:57–02:08:10; Procedural Motion, Item 7.2). Shaun Walsh reported progress on Noosa River boating facilities; Council noted report amid advice of likely $2.5m MSQ funding for boating infrastructure (on-land and on-water scope to be clarified) (02:25:13–02:40:27; Item 7.3). Council noted April YTD positive financial performance; operating revenue +$2.2m, expenditures under budget, asset sustainability ratio tracking upward but affected by capital delivery delays (02:52:41–03:05:11; Item 8.1). Environment team tabled 5‑year monitoring of Environment Strategy: 4 completed, 21 on target, 15 progressing; mid-term review endorsed (03:05:36–03:49:20; Item 8.2). Council awarded Cleaning Services Contract CN25031 to CMBM (A,B), Ecovia (C,D,F), David Gillman (E,G); CEO delegated to finalise and manage extensions (Confidential 9.1). Contentious / Transparency Matters Unitywater strongly opposed MCU21/0110 citing “reverse amenity” risk and potential legal/prosecution exposure; however, it made no properly made submission during public notification and provided no technical odour modelling (27:54–47:00; Item 7.1). Amelia Lorentson and Jessica Phillips pressed odour buffer history (400m EIS buffer from 1995) and ratepayer cost exposure if upgrades ensued; staff emphasised reliance on accepted 2.5 OU methodology and lack of Unitywater data (38:23–42:57; Item 7.1). Policy wording for councillor roles drew on‑the‑fly amendments; concerns over rushing led to deferral for a workshop and clarity, ensuring public-facing guidance is “clear and layperson friendly” (01:45:36–02:05:33; Item 7.2). Noosa Woods jetty options and potential commercial use generated sensitivity about protecting low-key recreation; officers to present options for Council decision and community engagement (02:31:34–02:43:27; Item 7.3). Upper Pinbarren Creek Rd deputation alleged inconsistent/unauthorised works (2015), poor quality control, and erosion from altered camber; calls for investigation and resident-inclusive maintenance (01:08–13:08; Deputations 6.1). Legal / Risk Planning Act posture : Staff reliance on accepted odour modelling (2.5 OU at 99.5th percentile) and expert peer review positions Council to defend approval; refusal based on non‑common material (late Unitywater letter) risks vulnerability in P&E Court (40:25–46:38; 01:16:50–01:18:44; Item 7.1). Appeal rights : Unitywater lacked submitter status; cannot appeal decision (46:38–47:06; Item 7.1). Zoning certainty : Motion to review and cadastralise Tourism Accommodation Zone and amend Urban Area Boundary aims to limit future encroachment disputes (59:01; Minutes Item 7.1B). Procurement confidentiality : Meeting closure under s254J(3)(g) LGR 2012 upheld for cleaning services contract discussion; re‑opened and awarded per probity (9.1). Compliance Policy : Clear separation of roles mitigates probity risk; councillors not to participate in investigations, PINs, orders, remedial or prosecution decisions (01:42:58–01:49:55; Item 7.2). Environmental Concerns Odour buffers at Noosa STP central to MCU21/0110; buildings outside 2.5 OU, outdoor areas time‑limited; increased setback to 302m; 120 koala trees offset retained despite reduced works; 38 trees saved by removing pavilion (15:51–27:49; 47:41–48:07; Item 7.1). Noosa River : MSQ funding likely ($2.5m) for boating facilities; Council to clarify scope, co‑contribution, and protect low‑key recreation at Woods; community engagement planned (02:25:13–02:45:56; Item 7.3). Environment Strategy : Mid-term review to address climate change, population pressures, river health, organics diversion, and integrated catchment management; roundtable terms imminent (03:05:36–03:49:20; Item 8.2). Flying-foxes (Kin Kin) : Continued management via vegetation works, subsidies, and adherence to State intents; no significant population spike beyond seasonal flux (03:17:04–03:20:57; Item 8.2). Planning Scheme / Zoning Changes Brian Stockwell sought to cadastralise the Tourism Accommodation Zone boundary and amend the Urban Area Boundary at Noosa Springs to reflect approved plans, reducing ambiguity and future expansion risk (59:01; Item 7.1B). Tom Wegener and others queried consistency of resort use within Recreation & Open Space zoning; staff confirmed impact assessment and conditions mitigate inconsistencies (01:11:56–01:12:22; Item 7.1). Short Term Accommodation / Rates Signals Finance noted reduced rates revenue partly from reclassification of some “transitory accommodation” properties back to other categories; numbers to be provided on notice (02:56:15–02:57:26; Item 8.1).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES General Committee Meeting Monday, 12 May 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 12 MAY 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 Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh 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 14 April 2025 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. 5. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 6. DEPUTATIONS 6.1. DEPUTATION - UPPER PINBARREN CREEK ROAD APPLICANT: JULIANE VOGLER SPEAKERS: JULIANE VOGLER 7. ITEMS REFERRED FROM COMMITTEES GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 12 MAY 2025 7.1. FURTHER REPORT - MCU21/0110 - APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - RESORT COMPLEX AND ANICILLARY BAR, FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, OUTDOOR SPORT AND RECREATION, AND CLUB (MINOR EXTENSION TO EXISTING CLUBHOUSE) AT 61 NOOSA SPRINGS DRIVE, NOOSA HEADS (REFERRED FROM PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE DATED 6 MAY 2025) The following material was presented to the meeting in relation to this item: Refer to Attachment 1 to the Minutes - Images for benchmarking odour provided by staff Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the Further Report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 6 May 2025 regarding Application No. MCU21/0110 for a Development Permit for a Material Change of Use – Resort Complex and ancillary Bar, Food and Drink Outlet, Outdoor Sport and Recreation and Club (minor extension to existing clubhouse) at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Heads and: A. Approve the application subject to conditions in accordance with Attachment 1. B. The Zoning and Strategic Framework Maps covering the site be reviewed as part of the next amendment of the Noosa Planning Scheme to provide a cadastrally based boundary to the Tourism Accommodation Zone and an amended Urban Area Boundary to reflect the approved plans. Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item A be amended to read: Approve the application subject to conditions in accordance with Attachment 1, with an amendment to Condition 11 to read: 11. Use by guests and visitors of the swimming pools is limited to the time period 6am to 12am 9pm only. Carried unanimously. Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the Further Report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 6 May 2025 regarding Application No. MCU21/0110 for a Development Permit for a Material Change of Use – Resort Complex and ancillary Bar, Food and Drink Outlet, Outdoor Sport and Recreation and Club (minor extension to existing clubhouse) at 61 Noosa Springs Drive, Noosa Heads and: A. Approve the application subject to conditions in accordance with Attachment 1, with an amendment to Condition 11 to read: 11. Use by guests and visitors of the swimming pools is limited to the time period 6am to 12am 9pm only. B. The Zoning and Strategic Framework Maps covering the site be reviewed as part of the next amendment of the Noosa Planning Scheme to provide a GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 12 MAY 2025 cadastrally based boundary to the Tourism Accommodation Zone and an amended Urban Area Boundary to reflect the approved plans. Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the matter be deferred to the Ordinary Meeting dated 15 May 2025. Carried unanimously. 7.2. INTEGRATED COMPLIANCE & ENFORCEMENT POLICY (REFERRED FROM SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE DATED 6 MAY 2025) Motion Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council A. Note the report by the Business Improvement & Integration Officer to the Services & Organisation Committee Meeting dated 6 May 2025, and B. Adopt the Integrated Compliance and Enforcement Policy as outlined in Attachment 1 Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That item B, 1, be added to read: 1. That the wording in the draft policy provided at Attachment 1 under "Roles and Responsibilities", "Councillors" be amended to read: "ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Councillors Review and adopt Council’s Integrated Compliance and Enforcement Policy. Maintain procedural fairness and protect the rights of individuals and the integrity of the process. Councillors must not involve themselves in negotiating and resolving outcomes with aggrieved parties nor advocating on behalf of or representing parties. Councillors can assist constituents in raising concerns relating to compliance and enforcement by referring them to the appropriate functional area. Councillors may actively support and promote voluntary compliance through advocacy, education, and community engagement. This includes encouraging understanding of relevant regulations and fostering cooperative relationships between the council and the community. Councillors must not be involved in operational compliance or enforcement actions as outlined in Council’s endorsed Governance Framework. This includes (but is not limited to) participation in investigations, issuance of penalty GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 12 MAY 2025 infringement notices, enforcement orders, remedial actions, or prosecution decisions. These matters are to be managed independently by authorised council officers in accordance with legislative requirements and operational procedures. This separation ensures procedural fairness, protects the integrity of compliance processes, and upholds the principles of good governance. " Carried unanimously. Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell That the wording below be reinstated in the draft policy provided at Attachment 1 under "Roles and Responsibilities", "Councillors" : "Maintain procedural fairness and protect the rights of individuals and the integrity of the process. Councillors must not be involved in negotiating and resolving outcomes with aggrieved parties nor advocating on behalf of or representing parties. Councillors can assist constituents in raising concerns relating to compliance and enforcement by referring them to the appropriate functional area." and Add words in red below, after paragraph 2, as follows: However, councillors must not be involved in operational compliance or enforcement actions as outlined in Council’s endorsed Governance Framework. This includes (but is not limited to) participation in investigations, issuance of penalty infringement notices, enforcement orders, remedial actions, or prosecution decisions. These matters are to be managed independently by authorised council officers in accordance with legislative requirements and operational procedures. Notwithstanding this, Councillors can consider legal and prosecution matters as reported by staff through the established council meeting processes." The Amendment No. 2 lapsed for want of a seconder. Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That the matter be deferred to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025. For: Crs Wegener, Wilson, Finzel, Phillips and Lorentson Against: Crs Wilkie and Stockwell Carried. The meeting adjourned at 2.41pm. The meeting resumed at 2.55pm. 7.3. NOOSA RIVER RECREATIONAL BOATING FACILITIES - UPDATE (REFERRED FROM SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE DATED 6 MAY 2025) Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Director Infrastructure Services to the Services & Organisation Committee dated 6 May 2025 regarding Noosa River Recreational Boating Facilities. Carried unanimously. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 12 MAY 2025 8. REPORTS DIRECT TO GENERAL COMMITTEE 8.1. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – APRIL 2025 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 12 May 2025 outlining the April 2025 year to date financial performance against budget, including changes to the financial performance report with the inclusion of key financial sustainability indicators. Carried unanimously. 8.2. NOOSA ENVIRONMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 5-YEAR MONITORING REPORT Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 12 May 2025 regarding the Noosa Environment Strategy Implementation Plan for the 2023/24 Financial Year, and A. Note the progress against the targets and strategies in the Environment Strategy and the implementation actions in the Noosa Environment Strategy Implementation Plan for the 2023/24 FY; and B. Note the recommendations for the mid-term review and update of the Environment Strategy, at this halfway point into its 10-year implementation. Carried unanimously. 9. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson 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 a contract proposed to be made by Council in Item 9.1 - Contract No: CN25031 - Provision of Cleaning Services for Administration Buildings, Libraries and Other Facilities. Carried unanimously. RE-OPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Wilkie Seconded: Cr Finzel That the meeting be re-opened to the public. Carried unanimously. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 12 MAY 2025 9.1. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - CONTRACT NO: CN25031 - PROVISION OF CLEANING SERVICES FOR ADMINISTRATION BUILDINGS, LIBRARIES AND OTHER FACILITIES. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Wilkie Seconded: Cr Finzel That Council note the report by the Building & Facilities Coordinator (Acting) to the General Committee Meeting dated 12 May 2025 and: A. Award Contract No. CN25031 for Provision of Cleaning Services for Administration Buildings, Libraries and Facilities under a schedule of rates contract, for an initial term of two (2) years commencing 30 June 2025 and expiring on 27 June 2027, to the following contractors: 1. CMBM Facility Services Pty Ltd for Separable Portions A and B; 2. Ecovist Pty Ltd ATF R & R McKindlay Trust t/as Ecovia for Separable Portions C, D and F; and 3. David Gillman for Separable Portions E and G. B. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, finalise, execute and administer the Contract on behalf of Council and, subject to satisfactory performance of the suppliers, approve the options to extend the contract at the expiry of initial term for a further two (2) periods of up to 24 months each. Carried unanimously. 10. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 4.52pm.
Meeting Transcript
Brian Stockwell 00:05.900
Welcome, Councils, to the May General Committee meeting. We'd like to start by paying respects to the Kabi Kabi people. They're elders, past, present and emerging who were custodians and continue to be custodians there's a very long connection. We have all councillors in attendance. We then move on to confirmation of minutes. Would someone like to move the confirmation of minutes from the previous committee? Happy to. Thank you. Moved by Councillor Lorentson and seconded by Councillor Wilkie. Presumably there will be no discussion. I will put it to the vote. Those in favour? And that's carried unanimously. We don't have any presentations but we do have a deputation. The deputation from Juliane Vogler in regard to the Upper Pinbarren Creek Road. So if I can ask the deputy to come to the lectern and address council. Welcome. Juliane Vogler 01:07.235
Day. Thank you for allowing me that I can talk about this long ongoing issue with Upper Pinbarren Creek Road. And I hope that you can take appropriate action after this. I would like to prefer... not to be here, but it is what it is. So I have to go ahead. So my heading is still helping for a positive, sustainable outcome for Upper Pinbarren Creek Road. Upper Pinbarren Creek Road is outside of Pomona with Skinkin, so turn left and I live up the hill in the forest. That's why I'm here in Australia, because I love nature and I care, and that's why I'm here. Upper Pinbarren Creek Road was established around 1912, and the property I live on, it's not always. I'm a little bit in and out, and sometimes overseas. It was a banana farm, the first banana farm in Queensland, and they built that road because they needed to get their bananas on the market. So it was a functional road, over 100 functional road. Over 100 years, it has functioned quite properly. Of course, we have floods, and this is just normal for this region, and then some fords overflown, but it's just a matter of a few days. So my name is Juliane Vogler, I'm a resident, and I do care. Let me outline a little bit of sort of a scenario since when we have been approaching council to appropriately act to save this road. Let me add And to make it a functional road. In 2008, it was the start of the tilt of the road on top of the hill, this is where it has been changed. A young supervisor said, "Nowadays we do it differently, I just learned it fresh from university." This road has not been built with a grader, because the first grader came to the Sunshine Coast obviously in 1935, so 20 years after. Then in 2009, there was the Easter staff came and approached the owner of the property, which is not very well, that's why I'm sort of filling in, asking for being able to take to take material out of the driveway to fix a canyon emergency, fix a canyon on the road. He agreed and said, "Yeah, of course, if that's an emergency for fixing the road, go ahead, just bring it back." Did not happen since then, so that was in 2009.2015, some staff came and started to dig a drench between road and Ronald Yeager approached the police, and police said, "This is a council matter, " so he approached the council, and Tony Bellington-- Tony Bellington at that time sent Bernard an SMS saying staff has determined that work in the road is not being undertaken by council. Question, in 2017 I was here for a few months in Australia and when I told me that this when I told me that this is not coming to a resolvement so I said okay maybe I can try and get in contact with the council. And that was when the first time I got in contact with Frank Wilkie. I rang him and two days later he was up So we discussed the situation with the driveway. Words like tilt and camera come into play because the tilt has been changed. And when tilts of roads are going to be changed that means a redirection of water. And every toddler knows water runs downhill so it has a massive effect what happens. And I consider graded driver as very highly skilled because they have to tune in. few millimeters to make a difference where the water is running towards. So then the maintenance was a little bit on and off and then in 2022 we had this millennium flood so in that region we had 1.5 metres in depth Yeah, it's maybe just And the road survived, quite good, because Bernadiek had the chance to talk to a grade operator, and they agreed, and it was a very highly skilled grade operator, because the water flow was the right way, as it was all the In October 2022, I approached Frank Wilkie again. He came out again with Joe Teresevich, and I brought this ongoing issue, because on and off, so there was still a gully between the driveway and the road, and brought other and brought other problems of the road to their attention. End of '23, there were two new bridges built, millions of dollars, and I think it came out of the budget of catastrophic disaster, you have to tell me how that is called, something. So it was late '23. On the 10th of January 2024, I had a meeting with the manager of maintenance, Alex Neville, on the road, and pointing out there is a problem with a Ford, which is constantly overflowing, creek bed is full. There's a fall entry since 2022, which is acting like a dam. It redirects the water back to the road. And he agreed in We had a very efficient conversation, and on top of the hill, where the driver is, he sort of said, "We don't have to talk about this. I can see this. It's pretty obvious. If you have an eye and the skill for it, you know what's going on." Then in March 2024, there was an incident. It came to a court case. That court case was, in my opinion, totally unnecessary, but however, it was the case. And then, April 24, so that is January, I had a meeting with Alex Neville, and then on the 23rd and 24th of April, staff has done really good work, again, like it was and it worked for 100 years. April was maintenance due. And we were so happy. So the driveway was not repaired, so this material is still not bad. That's what was taken out in 2009. But the road, the till of the road was back to as it used to be and as it worked. But the road, the till... This is what we want. A functional road. 23, 24. And then there was a day, public holiday, Anzac Day. And after Anzac Day, on the 26th, they came back. water. And 26th and 29th. And just recently, we got a text message from the council after Bernard met someone from Telstra that in that time, the landline was What's going on? Why do they come back when the perfect word was done before? This is what needs to be investigated. Who comes and does the work? Who is it? Is it the operator? Is that instructed by the council? Is there a supervisor who instructs what workers do? What happens with the quality control after performed maintenance work? July 24, so a few months after this on-and-off, let's call it on-and-off. First it was good, it was on, and then it was off again. We had for almost eight months stabilisation work on the steep slopes of the road. Eight months, specialist teams, I guess that's millions And at the end, that was February-March, when the top layers of the road were placed and the drainages, which I don't know who was doing this, a contractor or a maintenance crew, I have no idea. However, the maintenance... resulted in severe washouts when we had a little bit more than 300 millilitres in three days on the 26th, 27th and I'm not an engineer and I'm not specialised in roads, whereas I have to tell you I'm learning when you drive this road up and down and I walk this road and I used to go Spending millions of dollars and then the final bit is not done in a way that it facilitates the water flow that we don't promote washouts. I don't understand this way of dealing with repairing this road. I do not understand. It has to be the last bit done accordingly to facilitate water flow. we don't have washouts. The road used to have no washouts before. So there was a very clever system of tilt, cable, drainage, pipes underneath, depending. It's widely steep. How do I run the time? Brian Stockwell 13:02.840
You've got a little over two minutes left. Okay. Juliane Vogler 13:07.980
So I'm asking you, please take action. Because it affects our mental health. In the meantime, my mental health as well. It consumes my life. This is my day off. On Thursday I will be here as well. This is the day I take leave. I would like to go for maybe a beach walk like other people do. So please do not ignore this situation. Please take action. Please stop ongoing erosion. Please look into repair, maintain, and sustain. Noosa has a reserve status. I was very happy when I read the Kabi Kabi commitment, and they invite us to tread lightly on this continent. Yeah? And I ask you to stop this destruction of this old road and to make it a road functioning as it used to do all 100 years before, and I'm asking you to, on the top of the road, to make sure that it's not separating the driveway from the road. And I would be happy if, as a resident, we would be welcome to provide feedback at an early stage to be part of prevention. Sustainable, maintaining the road as it used to be, because at the moment it's really going downhill. I hope this is not a dream, I hope it's coming true. Thank Brian Stockwell 15:00.040
So we then move on to items in section 7, and the first one is a report referred to the Planning Environment Committee. It's a further report on MCU 210. Applications for Material Transmissions, Resilient Complex and Utility Bar, Food and Drink Outlet, Outdoor Sports and Recreation and Club. Minor extensions of existing Clubhouse at 61 Noosa Springs Drive. Noosa ends. And we have the Manager, the Director and the Employment Officer in Development Control here to brief us. And to answer any questions. So Patrick are you doing the overview? I am. Thank you Patrick Murphy 15:45.806
Councillor. I'll take a little bit of your time just to run through the history of this one and probably doing a bit of reading if that's okay. So I'll just go back to the beginning, and the application was lodged in June of 2021 over land that is located within Noosa Springs. So I'll just go back to the beginning. The site is split zoned. Most of the lower part of the site is zoned tourist accommodation, with the remainder of the site zoned recreation and open space. Specifically, the site is approximately 38,055 square metres in area, of which 23 447 is zoned tourist accommodation, with the remaining 14,608 zoned recreation and open space. The site is subject to the following overlays: land subject to acid sulfate soils, biodiversity, waterways and wetlands overlay, bushfire hazard overlay, and the landslide hazard overlay. The Noosa Springs Golf and Spa Resort and most of the associated car parking areas are located within the tourist accommodation zone. Four tennis courts, residual car parking areas are located within the recreation within the recreation and open space zone, with the remaining area being generally vegetated. The site slopes from east to west, with natural topography modified by a series of platforms, each accommodating the existing buildings, car parks and tennis courts. The application is impact-assessable and was subject to notification. 395 properly made submissions were received, all objecting to the application. The application was first considered by Council at the July of... July of 2023 round of meetings, and at that time the officer of report recommended that the application be approved. However, councillors were not supportive of the application and grounds of refusal were prepared, reflecting councillors' concerns. concerns. At that time, the applicant stopped... At that time the applicant stopped the decision-making period which meant the council was not able to finalise a decision on the application. A further report was prepared for the Planning Environment Committee on the 7th November 2023. At that time the applicant had not amended had not amended the layout of the proposed development, however provided several written submissions which included an analysis of the submissions made during the notification period, a letter from a solicitor reviewing the proposed grounds of refusal, and a further letter from the applicant's planning consultant seeking to justify grounds to support the development. On the 13th of November, the applicant made another change to the application to include an extension of the existing clubhouse. The change was another change as it introduced a new land use into the application. This meant that the application reverted to the confirmation stage and no decision was able to be made on the application at the November round of council meetings A report considering the proposal including the other change was prepared for consideration at the Planning and Environment Committee meeting dated 11 June 2024 and at this meeting the matter was referred to the General Committee meeting. At the General Committee meeting it was agreed to defer the matter to a future meeting round as the applicant requested to extend the decision-making period so it could enter into meaningful discussions about changes that might be made to the proposed resort hotel that are reasonable to address any valid planning concerns that councils might also have about the development. On the 27th of February this year the applicant made a minor change to the existing application reducing the proposal from a 106 bedroom resort to a 69 bedroom resort. In a letter supporting amended applicant application the applicant advises amongst other things that the minor change stems from concerns raised by councillors about the scale of the development which unavoidably extends into the recreation and open space and partly to the biodiversity waterways and wetlands overlay towards the east of the site. The change has made to the development at detail below, including Pavilion 5 being removed from the top of the site towards the east with the stair and lift area reconfigured for Pavilion 4. The presidential suite amendment amended from two deluxe rooms to two deluxe rooms with a reduction in terraced areas. Minor increase in the size of the amenities building which will provide wellness facilities that complement the recreations. wellness facilities that complement the recreation zone. Change to the overall design of the open space areas with pathways and small deck areas provided. An increase in the size of one of the tennis courts so that it was an ITF Pro 2 size tennis court and a reduction in the height of structures above the deck car park. The minor change plans form the basis for the current assessment. Noting earlier officers recommendations regarding previous versions of the development and noting the reduced footprint associated with the current minor change, the application is supported subject to reasonable and relevant conditions. The issues that are pertinent to the application are obviously primarily around land use. Being a split zone site, we had development that extends into the recreation and open space area in which the resort is in inconsistent use. has reduced the extent of development within the recreation and open space zone and it's also noted that the pool area has been decreased from 1,157 square metres to 457 square metres in area. In terms of odour, an odour report was submitted with the application which was refined as a result of review by Council's external consultant. The report utilises accepted methodologies and our expert is satisfied that the are satisfied that the use is suitably located within, with the accommodation facilities located beyond the 2.5 odour unit line. Whilst parts of the redesigned pool and outdoor recreation area are within the 2.5 odour unit line, recommended conditions limit of the area so that it is not available for use at times when the 2.5 odour units are predicted to be exceeded. Notably, the buildings were previously 302 metres from the infrastructure within the sewage treatment plant. They're now, sorry, they were previously 270 metres and they are now 302 metres, so an increase of 32 metres from the previous. In terms of traffic and car parking, we have had an engaged traffic consultant who has satisfied that the provision of 250 formalised spaces was appropriate to the initial 106 room proposal. The applicant has not reduced the amount of car parking for the 69 room proposal currently under consideration. There is also an additional 38 overflow car spaces provided 19 into locations. In terms of bushfire, supporting documentation provided by the applicant and subsequent review by Council's consulting bushfire expert and environment officer have in recommendations so that the risk of bushfire from bushfire to the resort was suitably mitigated. An emergency response plan including the evacuation plan was also provided and determined to include appropriate strategies. The current proposal has increased the separation of the built form from the potential bushfire risk. In terms of biodiversity, through the year assessment process, amendments were made to the location of the tennis courts to preserve the map koala habitat vegetation. Officers were supportive of the intrusion into the biodiversity overlay associated with Pervine 5 on the basis of the nature of the vegetation in this location, the rehabilitation to occur throughout the site, and the voluntary offset Limited intrusion associated with pathways and the like. This intrusion has been reduced from 1,562 square metres to 720 square metres. Notably, the rehabilitation and voluntary offsets are to proceed as originally proposed. And the removal of Vivian 5 has provided the retention of 38 trees that were proposed to be removed. In terms of the tennis courts, they were relocated to ensure the protection of the map. the habitat, the tennis courts are situated on a platform above the existing car park, is where they're now proposed to be, and conditions have been recommended limiting the hours of use to mitigate potential odour impacts on users of the tennis courts and the hours of which... And also noting that one of the tennis courts has been increased in size an acoustic review has also been undertaken throughout the process that is placed is placing limitations on when the tennis courts can be used. It states that the tennis courts are limited to two courts between the hours of 6:00pm. to 9:00pm. and no use of the tennis courts after 9:00pm. and 7:00am. that needs to be extracted approximately once every one to two months. There is a grease It's noted that the grease trap will result in noise above the prescribed background level. More than the three decibels. Our acoustic consultant is satisfied that this is reasonable based on the infrequency of the use and he's also proposing that a further acoustic report be provided with recommendations to further limit that impact. Some form of barrier still proposed that waste be taken from that loading dock at the same frequency. That's every day for general waste and twice a week for recycled waste. There will be more waste that will leave the site than what is currently leaving the site. It's means that the truck will be sending more bins when it's there. In terms of site cover and plot ratio, the proposal as a whole is significantly under the amount of allowable plot ratio for the site. The tourist accommodation zone permits 15,240 square metres of plot ratio. The total amount that's proposed is 8,738, 3,000 of which is in the recreation and open space zone. Similarly, the site cover is significantly under the amount that's allowed across the site. 9,378 committed across the whole tourist accommodation zone and 1,460 committed in the recreation and open space zone, which is a total of 10,838.9,660 is proposed and that includes car parks and tennis courts because those items are elevated, they've been included. The original The original proposal had some exceedance in building height. As you'll be aware, the topography is quite steep. For large buildings to come down that slope and to maintain the maximum height is quite challenging. The extent of building height exceedance is the same as what was originally proposed. The amended plans haven't resulted in any frustrations in the maximum building height. I think that covers yes that covers all the issues and as I said previously the officer recommendation is against the support the application. Brian Stockwell 27:49.671
Thank you. Do we have any questions? Amelia Lorentson 27:54.685
I'll start. Unity Water. Why does Unity Water still strongly oppose this development and what specific concerns remain despite the revised proposal? Patrick Murphy 28:11.659
Unity Water have made a number of deputations and written a recent letter to council. Their position hasn't changed throughout. They would like to see a greater separation between the resort and the treatment plant because of Treatment plan because of concerns that an occupier of the resort will make a complaint which will have implications upon how they manage their site and potential cost implications associated with that. Notably the applicant has provided a odour report that has been reviewed by our consulting expert and utilising the 2.5 odour unit line as being the acceptable line to delineate where development Satisfied that the proposal is sufficient. The 2.5 odour unit line being the area beyond which it's been determined that odour won't be exceeded at 2.5 odour units more than 99.5% of the time. So again, our consultants are satisfied and have made recommendations to conditions because some of the outdoor areas is actually do go into, go beyond the 2.5 ODE line, so have sought that the use of those areas be limited to the hours, so that the hours when odor is most likely to be an issue, being in the early morning, noting with 99.5 percentile that the remaining the remaining 0.5% I think equates to 43 hours across the whole year. There would be limited times on a daily or weekly basis where that might occur outside the voter unit line. It's also noted that the separation distance... of the building at 302 metres is larger or greater than some of the residents that are located within the oasis occupied by and standing by permanent residents. So the opportunity for complaints to be made about ODA is in my mind not exacerbated by this proposal with residents already within close proximity. Noting there's also recreation activities that can occur on the golf course and on the existing site. They're in much closer proximity to the sewage treatment plant. The letter from Unity Water talked about 12 complaints over I think the last 28 or 29 years. There's no detail around where they've come from. Specifically and it's unknown whether those 12 complaints were from one event, two events, were they from people that were within walking within proximity to the site and also where that there's men's shed and women's shed located within close proximity to the sewage treatment plant as well closer than the accommodation. That's to be proposed. Brian Stockwell 31:24.106
So just so we can lump issues together, is there anyone else with questions around unity water? Tom Wegener 31:34.416
I was going back to the original plan prior to that 2020 and you had a big development there that was organised and you had all the development. was cut up. So then the 2020 plan, planning scheme, reassessed the area and said we want a five star resort and we want it here where before it was much bigger. But I always can't grapple with the five star development goes on a biodiversity area on public use land and is so close to a treatment plant. This is a treatment plan. And in the back of my mind, I'm always wondering, you know, perhaps, was that a mistake in the 2020 plan to actually allow a five-star resort there? Or what was it more assumed? The, um, Councillor, the question you pose is one, a decision of the Councillor, not a decision of the staff. Brian Stockwell 32:37.009
So there's not a question specifically related to unity of order and other issues. Can you part with me to think if there is something specific you can ask the staff rather than debate it? Frank Wilkie 32:49.771
I have a question, Mr Chair, if I may. The, um, it relates to the odour line. To Could you explain how that relates to the ultimate intended zoning for that parcel of land in relation to because the report says the the tourist accommodation use and the open space recreation uses intended for that property are not cadastral. So could you explain how how the O-line is meant to determine the uses, is pivotal to determine the uses and the open zonings on that site please. So at the time of the list of plans 2020 coming in and implementing the tourist accommodation zone it was intended to have some form of separation from where the tourist accommodation zone would be and where the tourist treatment plan is. Patrick Murphy 33:51.108
That was not defined by a surveyor as a cadastral zone to say the easternmost So a scheme says it's reasonable to have a resort within closer proximity of the sewage treatment plant than what's proposed in the current application. hasn't sought to put built form in form in that area and accommodation in that area and has maintained the suitable separation between the 2.5 over unit line. Frank Wilkie 34:45.111
And you're saying that already there are residential Residential estates as part of Noosa Springs are within close proximity to the Shire's treatment plant. Golfers on the course are often close to the STP and we've also got the men and women's shed in close proximity to the STP than this current resort. Do we know if those complaints are related to anyone from those locations? And if so, how are those complaints handled? Do they result in an upgrade of the STP? Patrick Murphy 35:26.773
Firstly, you're correct in terms of there being other accommodation and buildings that are used by the men's and women's shed and recreation activities that occur in close proximity. We don't have specific details of the complaints because they appear to have been made to Unity Water and not to Council. But suffice to say there's no upgrades that have occurred that we are aware of as a result of those complaints. And they have not advised us that that is the case in their communication as well. Is it the case that Unity Water have advised us that if there are complaints from this resort that may be obliged to We don't have specific... Frank Wilkie 36:08.742
That's the position that they've taken. And as you say, there's been 12 complaints in the past that haven't resulted in an upgrade to the treatment plan. They have spoken about the there's a treatment plan that required a $38 million upgrade in 2010. Patrick Murphy 36:31.562
That was something that was being referred to in their deputations. That treatment plan is within 70 metres of permanent residence. I've sent you a document. I'm not sure whether you've got it. It might just provide some context and just in terms of the complaints there that stimulated works to that treatment plan. So I might just get up if that's okay. So this is the site required a 38 million dollar upgrade. As you can see there's a, from infrastructure there's a house within 7 metres. This line here is 300 metres. This is the separation that is proposed as part of this application. So in that, I'm just showing you in context the amount of permanent residents that were in proximity of the treatment plant that we are requiring for our separation. If you go to the next page it just shows you the scale of this treatment plant. That's 53,000 square metres of area in which the infrastructure is located. That's 53,000. The next one shows that the treatment plant, if you just go around the infrastructure, is 22,000. So the scale of the infrastructure is much smaller on this site as well. So this is the Noosa STV? This is the Noosa STV, yeah. Richard MacGillivray 37:59.035
The previous was more on the Downs. Patrick Murphy 38:03.804
So just, again, I know you've awarded my deputation, so it's just important to clarify the difference between the two sites that they've been using as a benchmark, I suppose. Frank Wilkie 38:17.264
That's all the questions I have for the meantime. About the ODA, thank you, Mr Chair. Anyone else have an ODA-related one? Amelia Lorentson 38:23.684
I have a couple more questions with the Unity Water concerns. The first one is under the environmental impact statement section 3.10 of the buffer area that was commissioned by Noosa Council in 1995 when the sewage plant was last upgraded. I'm reading this out of the letter that was sent to all the councillors from Unity Water. It actually states that the hotel guests it needs to be a buffer zoning of more than sorry within the 400 metre buffer zone that's required under the EIS. Can you explain or give this a little bit more context? Patrick Murphy 39:13.440
Um, it clearly predates It clearly predates my time and I don't have a copy of that document. I am aware through my review of this application that when Hartford was approved There had previously been a 600 metre buffer, and I believe that might have been in the scheme, and at that time it was determined, based on the upgrade that had occurred to the plant, to go within that buffer down to, I think it was approximately 400 metres. Again, as part of this application we've had technical reports that have been prepared by the applicant, reviewed by our consultant, who are both satisfied, and Unity Water have not put forward any technical reporting, or undertaken any technical reporting through this process. So at the moment, the veracity of data and information that we have certainly sits on the side of what the applicant has provided, and noting that the methodologies that they're undertaking and the principles that they're applying are something that so at the moment... Brian Stockwell 40:24.646
So if I can just follow up, is it likely that those standard methodologies that are accepted by the court would not have existed when the 400 metre buffer was suggested? I would suggest that's the case. Amelia Lorentson 40:41.220
My last question in terms of just our discussion around contour lines. If unity water is correct, who will ultimately bear the costs of infrastructure upgrades if hotel guests do complain about odor issues? Patrick Murphy 41:00.008
I'm not aware of the structure of the unity waters. Yeah, look, Richard MacGillivray 41:03.409
I guess it's a difficult answer to understand because like any complaint that requires an investigation, there's relevant factors and circumstances. that need to be considered. As Patrick's alluded to, they've already received 12 complaints over since 1997, so 28 years. We aren't aware if that's resulted in any changes to their operations, so it doesn't necessarily mean that they'll have to make any amendments. amendments or changes to their operation, I guess, have come down to the nature of the investigation and whether there's a failure from the licensee's perspective. And I guess, again, based based on our position is we've had technical experts review this thoroughly and robustly and we feel comfortable that the scientific assessment that's been undertaken through this process is robust enough to withstand complaint. and if complaints are made through to unity water or through the regulator they'll be able to look at the information that's been presented as part of this topical report and give way to that don't know whether the Chair will allow this question, but we have referenced the $38 million upgrade down in Brisbane. Amelia Lorentson 42:25.032
Who pulled the costs of that? Richard MacGillivray 42:27.112
I'm not aware, but I assume it would be you who would have had to do that upgrade as part of a regulatory action by the State Government, I would assume. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 42:38.272
I have a follow-up question to that then, please. When that upgrade was done, and this might be a question on notice, but was there then an increase to the entire Shire on the unity water costs to residents after that upgrade? Is there any way we can find... But we haven't got that information specifically from anywhere and I guess it's a bit more of a private matter for them in terms of how they passed on those costs but obviously given... given local governments are shareholders of Unity Water they will probably have to rely on some of that. We need to also consider again what the historical circumstances were. Was the plant required for an upgrade? What was decision-making? around the residential location of the proximity to the plant. There's a whole range of different factors and that would have been probably worked through through a thorough investigation very hard to try and draw exact similarities between that site. I think the key takeaways from Patrick's comments is that the circumstances and site in Brisbane was significantly different to this one. That was a distance of 70 metres to where permanent residents were residing. This is proposed for a resort development which involves temporary occupation and is consistent with the land use intents that Council has endorsed for Brian Stockwell 44:09.100
And we exhausted that line of questioning. Is there any other questions that councillors have? Yes, through the chair. In the correspondence we received from CEO this morning, the concerns seems to be that the combination of enforced reverse amenity and the potential increased odour complaints could result in legal action against Unity Water that may lead to prosecution, costly plant modifications and financial loss. resulting from civil cases. I know we've got a process that guests that have been conditioned can go to the hotel and take a complaint. What is the risk to Council through a Richard MacGillivray 44:55.984
My only comment would be is that council has based their assessment under the Planning Act based on the information lodged by the applicant and we've robustly assessed that through an independent qualified expert who would likely be in a situation to support us in making a decision. through a legal process anyway, so we've got a robust assessment undertaken from a qualified expert and that's the normal process you would undertake to evaluate. to evaluate the risk and whether or not the applicant has demonstrated their obligation under the Planning Act to provide technical material to assess the Patrick Murphy 45:44.306
Just to reinforce the point from before, the tourist accommodation zone, again, goes into the photobuffer line. So our scheme has got to... The result is a consistent use in the tourist accommodation zone. And seeking that kind of development in the tourist accommodation zone, we've mapped it so that it actually intrudes into the buffer, but this application doesn't seek to develop the accommodation in that area. It's pulling the buildings away from that area. So, I think it shows that due diligence has been done by the applicant and that they've responded to the reporting that's been undertaken by the consultant and reviewed by our consultant as to the suitable location for the building in terms of odour. Richard MacGillivray 46:31.162
It's also worth pointing out that Unity Water did not make any submissions. Water did not make any submissions during public notification this application. Karen Finzel 46:38.097
That was my next question through the chair. What's the risk because there was not a properly formed submission made by Unity Water? Brian Stockwell 46:49.218
The legal aspect in the Planning Act is that they can't appeal. Amelia Lorentson 46:55.198
They can't be added. They can't become submitters to the appeal. Brian Stockwell 47:08.880
The small one on noise. In the conditions number 13, the noise limit A limit past 10pm where the noise level has to drop. But at the same time, the swimming pool is operating until midnight. Is there a risk there that, first of all, that noise limit wouldn't be... Patrick Murphy 47:48.648
To amend that condition to pull that back to 9:00pm. or 10:00pm. That would make I think it would be logical sense to do that, just to ensure that there's no impact. Nicola Wilson 48:07.768
Keep going. Is it still on noise? Yes. Okay. With the waste issue, if we don't have a waste management plan yet, how can we assess what the noise impact Patrick Murphy 48:24.246
There's been a waste management strategy that's been provided by an expert in that area. That has been able to be reviewed by our acoustic consultant. The hotel will generate waste and that will be brought by a cart, an electric cart, down to the existing Logan Dock within the resort, stored in a... Stored in a bin storage area and then collected on the same frequencies as is currently occurring, so the consultants were satisfied that there was no increase in noise impacts resulting by the same activity occurring. It's acknowledged that they'll be there for marginally a longer period of time. From memory from my recollection, they're plastic bins that are reloaded and that minimises the noise impacts associated with collection of those bins. Nicola Wilson 49:27.348
So the fact that there will be more bins, the evidence is that they might be there for longer but that wouldn't increase the amount of time that... Patrick Murphy 49:38.588
Yeah, I would suggest it's negligible noting not aware of any complaints that are occurring from waste collection at the moment and that these dwellings within proximity to the site are located adjacent to resort drive along which a range of vehicles... And also a garbage collection as well. So it's certainly not a matter of significance exactly, but maybe. Brian Stockwell 50:20.498
Any other millions related questions? Okay, any other topics? Frank Wilkie 50:27.548
A question in the report, you mentioned that there are 120 koala habitat trees to be planted as an offset. But could you explain, there's, this latest version of the application doesn't involve the fairing of koala habitat trees, but there will still be an offset provided. Could you explain how that's come about, please? There's a bit of history here that we might have heard before. In relation to the first application, the first design. In its original form, the application was going to only construct three tennis courts. And they were going to be in an to be in an area that was mapped as coiled habitat area. And the matter was referred to the State for consideration. And the State was satisfied that they'd be removed and that a financial offset be paid. I think it was approximately $15,000. dollars. Patrick Murphy 51:20.586
However it is also in our biodiversity overlay area and we're mindful of the koala habitat values and we were not supportive of the tennis courts being located in that area and hence why the tennis courts have been relocated. There's now four tennis courts in response to submissions that were made and that area is now to be retained and protected through rehabilitation. Through the process, when the VN5 was proposed to be removed and there's vegetation removal that was to occur there, the applicant was proposing some offsets of the koala habitat trees, 120 and then 25 posse black bee trees to be provided in locations on the golf course. They were reviewed, those locations were reviewed also to ensure that there's no enhanced bushfire risk associated with their planning and there's not and so that's, it's a voluntary offset at this stage. Frank Wilkie 52:23.550
Not required because of clearing and growing. Amelia Lorentson 52:36.580
Just in terms of the emergency response plan, again we received emails from residents concerned or not having enough time to adequately provide objectives input into the bushfire management plan. They've raised quite a few concerns in terms of traffic and parking, in particular because they raised this last time the application came to council. They've made a request that should the application be approved the ERP should be reviewed and signed off by the emergency services and there's you know I think two last week. week staff put together an information session and their concerns around bushfire is very real and they would like council to... Yes, so my question is, will there be an opportunity if the application is approved for the ERP to be reviewed and signed off by emergency services. Historically that had been the case that council would condition that reports would need to be approved by the emergency services. They don't undertake that activity anymore. They don't undertake that. Pretty much since my time at council, eight, nine years, they will not do that. Patrick Murphy 54:04.336
We've asked QFES to look at things in the past and they've just extracted themselves in that part of the process. Frank Wilkie 54:11.476
There is opportunity to condition that those reports are submitted to QFES. That's something that we do generally on all applications with a bushfire hazard assessment or evacuation plan. So Council does try to give that opportunity to the third party to have input into Import into those reports and at least have them on hand so they understand what's occurring in the shop. Amelia Lorentson 54:37.424
So that can be conditioned in this report? We have conditioned, already we've conditioned that they be provided to the emergency services. It's already taken. Yeah. A copy of the wood fire hazard assessment report and mitigation plan and evacuation procedure listed within this decision notice must be provided to the nearest fire authority. Jessica Phillips 55:13.460
I have a quick question on that. When was the last time we checked in with QFERS around providing that sort of information? As I understand they... They're coming to a different umbrella now with fire management with QFERS. So I just want to know when the last time we checked that they still wouldn't be involved in assisting reports around this. Patrick Murphy 55:38.040
Who do we have in the last 12 minutes? Shaun Walsh 55:51.720
The State of Arrangements with QPS and QFD are going to stay in flux while they sort out the arrangements. I just wanted to note that they say it will be a couple of years before they actually confirm all the different arrangements, so our advice on lots of other things, the SCS manager and the whole host of questions are in the picture, but I think it will be some time before the future, but I think it will be some time before we can clarify the changes. As yet they haven't changed any of the standard arrangements. I trust that assists. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 56:24.444
Any further questions? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 56:28.284
Again, probably a question that was raised when this application last came to Council. There was a parking survey I think that was carried out in January Has Council or the applicant undertaken any more recent parking surveys? I just know someone who goes to Noosa Springs, it's almost impossible at certain times of day to get parking. Patrick Murphy 56:57.072
The survey was reviewed by our traffic consultant. He is someone who is very experienced in traffic matters and issues in the court and he often questions, and he did in this circumstance, the methodologies that is being used by the applicant. methodologies that is being used by the applicant to determine the suitable amount of car parking. At the end he was satisfied that 246 car spaces would be suitable. The applicant is providing 255 formalised spaces and another 38 overflow spaces. So far exceeding the amount that was recommended and with the reduction in rooms from 160 to 69 bedrooms that car parking is to remain as it currently is proposed. So no reduction in the car parking that was originally proposed and supported for the 106 Question? Amelia Lorentson 57:59.780
Can the developer come back to council at a later stage and put an application for further development on the site? My question is are we actually assessing the 69 room development that has no opportunity for expansion. We're assessing a 69 room development and every approval can be sought to be changed or modified, increased, decreased. Patrick Murphy 58:28.925
It's a right of an approval holder to that. At the moment, the footprint as to where the hotel accommodation can occur is constrained by the existing buildings that are on the site. Should there be application that would come to council, it would be rigorously assessed and all the matters that we've considered around car parking and bushfire ecology would again be considered. Brian Stockwell 59:01.682
I might move the staff recommendation with a small addition please. And the addition B, that the zoning and the strategic framework maps covering the site be reviewed as part of the next amendment of the Noosa planning scheme to provide a cadastrally based boundary to the tourism accommodation zone and an amended urban area boundary to reflect the approved plans. Frank Wilkie 59:30.416
I'll second it. Brian Stockwell 59:31.796
So as we've just been discussing, the addition to the staff recommendation is aimed at reducing the potential for Council having to consider further developments, which was one of the concerns expressed by the submitters to the original application. I don't think I need to talk anymore on that. I do need to explain why I am supporting the development where previously in the initial General Committee meeting I moved for the refusal. And Cathy, if I could have attachment to Figure 1 up and I'll explain why. So what we've seen since this was originally proposed is the removal of the easternmost wing. The easternmost wing is closest to the resort drive and closest to the surrounding residents. We have got advice from staff that staff that the area, you see up there where the orange is the tourist accommodation zone, the green is the open space. If you go down to figure two, the change proposal. So you see that eastern area wing has been removed. In that area we've been advised. area we've been advised that there's 38 trees that will now be retained that weren't retained in the original proposal. That area contains quite a number of quite mature eucalypt trees. I talked about DBH, it's 30 and 40 centimetres. That means the diameter of the tree at breast height. And it also talks And it also talks, as was in the original report, that the environmental consultant didn't rank the area that was either in the original proposal or this one as having high is having high conservation value. I need to say that that is most likely from a biodiversity conservation perspective. There was mention of the Kabi Kabi commitment earlier on and the Kabi Kabi commitment actually starts with the words: Welcome to Noosa, a place of great cultural and spiritual significance. This is a place of shadows from the guardian trees and that stems from the Kabi Kabi word of Noosra being a place of shadows. So when we actually did the commitment I asked one of the come in and I asked one of the native title applicants what the guardian trees meant within the context of Noosa and he said it's the high places with the cypress pines. And there's actually quite a few cypress pines. this hill that will be retained now. It's actually when I went and did a drive around it was one of the values that I saw that there are very few of these areas left around Noosa. In the national park there is clearly that ecosystem. way to look at what the change is actually retains this place of shadows. I know when Park Ridge went ahead there was a bushfire buff around the edge which actually took away some of these mature cypress vines. It was one of my significant concerns at the time. So one of the things is not only system, but it's One of the things is not only is the separation distance greater but also the what is coming back into an area which can be retained with native vegetation there's pathways going through it so some of those concerns about the loss of biodiversity the biodiversity overlay is mapped on the existing view of the vegetation and and we heard in earlier discussion last Tuesday that the impact on that biodiversity overlay has been approximately halved. The other one is the development into the open space zone and if you look at the map there map there. My position for some years, even before this development application came to council, is that it was appropriate to consider, it's been four minutes, oh good, I'm just about to finish, I'm sure the chairman won't give him any extra time today, was that where the initial disturbance on Line at the time of doing the zoning boundary and if we were to look at the best place to put it we probably would have put it where the buildings are now. So I believe that it is a reasonable compromise that the staff advice in regard to the technical aspects of ODA is something that we can't disagree with and that the court is unlikely to disagree with. So hence the change of my position. Who would like to speak next? Nicola Wilson 01:04:55.420
Can I move for a moment please? You may. To 9pm, yes please. Brian Stockwell 01:05:22.320
Do we have a second? Nicola Wilson 01:05:24.400
I'll second. Brian Stockwell 01:05:25.920
Second from Councillor. You should talk to your amendment. Nicola Wilson 01:05:29.320
Just really briefly, it's a minor matter I know, but I just think for noise within the hotel and for surrounding residents it would be prudent to restrict the pool hours. Brian Stockwell 01:05:40.140
I have a question. To be consistent, I know the debate between 9:00 and 10:00pm. occurred with short-tailed letting. The Calile Hotel, did it have a time limit on swimming pools? If you can't recall, is that something we can have available on Thursday? Patrick Murphy 01:05:57.184
I can't recall right now, I'm sorry. Brian Stockwell 01:06:05.664
Anyone else? Frank Wilkie 01:06:07.584
Look, I'm going to support it. It's not only a noise mitigation measure, but my understanding is limiting use of that facility beyond 9pm also limits the likelihood that they may be also exposed to odour. That's my understanding, so I think it's a wise amendment. Nicola Wilson 01:06:42.100
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:06:54.140
Yeah, I'm happy to support it. If it turns out that other approvals have gone to 10, I think we Tom Wegener 01:07:05.980
You said 10, but is that an 8? Brian Stockwell 01:07:07.860
Yeah, no, I'll support this now, but if I, before Thursday, I find that we've said to the Calile I can have to 10, I think we need to be consistent. Frank Wilkie 01:07:17.620
Question for staff. The reason, could you just tell us again the reason why using the courts... the courts restricted to 9:00pm.? Patrick Murphy 01:07:27.199
That was acoustic consultants recommendation. So two courts after 6:00pm. till 9:00pm. and four courts. Yes. Frank Wilkie 01:07:41.359
Does it have any bearing on, does ODA have any bearing on that decision as well or am I off being there? Patrick Murphy 01:07:47.179
Uh, if... Those areas it was after, it was midnight. It was similar to the condition that was proposed. Yeah. Richard MacGillivray 01:07:57.949
And just to confirm on the question from Councillor Stockwell, the Calile Hotel has the use of the pools limited from 6:00am. to 9:00pm. so consistent with Councillor Wilson's recommendation. Brian Stockwell 01:08:14.640
Anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? Well, therefore, would you like to close, Councillor Wilson? No. I'll put the amendment. All those in favour? That's unanimous. We go back to the substantive motion. Anyone else like to? Frank Wilkie 01:08:34.520
Here, Mr Chair. I'll support the amended motion. This application's come a long way since we first saw it. I'm particularly-- In favour of the reduction in scale. Also the fact that the applicant has listened and has seen fit to amend plans to no longer include any infrastructure in an area of 120 koala habitat trees planted as a result of this application, but there will be no clearing of koala habitat. It's been a tricky application for me because... Normally you're used to seeing very clearly delineated zone markings on planning maps, but the intent of this was that that site was to be... The zoning of that site was to be determined after where the contour line, Fleoda, has been determined. determined. So I'm pleased that as a result of this application, the amendment of the planning scheme will reflect the intention of the zoning. So I'm pleased that... Also note that there are already residential, permanent residential homes within close proximity to the STP in the surroundings and the conditions basically have gone a long way to ensuring that there will be no odour within, inside the rooms. And also use of the outdoor facilities will be limited to drastically reduce the likelihood that anyone would encounter odour while using those facilities on the 43 hours. the year when it's it potentially could occur. I also note that there have been 12 odour complaints since 1997 we don't know whether it's from the residential areas that are already closer to the STP or golfers using the course which is also close to the STP than this resort or the men and women's shed which is also close to the STP than this resort. I think we've taken all reasonable precautions. taken all reasonable precautions in regard to odour. That said it still has been quite an unusual and complicated and protracted process and decision and I will support it at this stage. Karen Finzel 01:11:27.050
I just have a question around what was triggered by the Mayor's comment around clearly defined zoning. Frank Wilkie 01:11:27.907
Thank you. Karen Finzel 01:11:38.690
Just a question through the Chair to the staff. When it came to the assessment, can you tell me, it was the hotel application, was it then assessed against open space... space recreation or the Tourism Visitor Accommodation Zone? Patrick Murphy 01:11:56.145
It's been assessed against, broadly assessed against the scheme, including those zones. As an impact assess swipe occasion. Just to make sure. Nicola Wilson 01:12:09.485
And just far away, you said earlier that it's inconsistent use of new recreation open space. That's Amelia Lorentson 01:12:21.880
I'll speak to the motion. I am not going to support the application. I simply can't go past the letter that we received by the CEO, Anna Jackson, of Unity Water, which highlighted unacceptable levels of risk. Unity Water is a major infrastructure provider and a key partner in our region's sustainable development. When an organisation of this size and credibility delivers three formal deputations to council and then follows up with a direct letter from its CEO to all councillors, I for one am going to listen. My question why would they oppose this project so strongly unless they truly believe that the impacts are both foreseeable and significant for that reason I can't support the development it's not a decision or a risk that Karen Finzel 01:13:36.460
It's a bit conflicting, I don't know how to impose it, because we've been told by staff that there was no proper form of submission. Can we, well I feel then based on that, can we get this referred to the next meeting to give us time to find out off unity water, like if they're so strongly opposed to it, I fail to understand why they didn't make a properly made submission. I think given the complexities and the high importance of this application, perhaps I'd put forward the idea that we move this to the ordinary meeting to get some further information for clarity. Brian Stockwell 01:14:23.811
So are you moving back? Karen Finzel 01:14:26.331
Can I? I'll just, through the chair, have to hear from the staff. Patrick Murphy 01:14:30.171
When the, so Unity Water, whilst in proximity to the site, are not adjoining the site, so they did not automatically receive letters that an adjoining landowner would have received. So notification went out, we had a lot of people within proximity to the site make a submission. whether it was an error on their behalf, I'm not sure, but we can't go back, they haven't made a submission so they don't have appeal rights. Certainly we tried to engage with them through the process, we saw the significance of the odour on the development and sought to engage with them. Certainly we tried to engage with them. Initially I had prepared a report. a report to bring to council but we delayed that report coming to council because the then CEO actually wanted me to pursue further conversations with Unity Water. They expressed that they wanted to have meetings prior to that point in time. But they never got organised. We put the request out there. They never got organised to attend or organise someone to attend that meeting. We had better traction with them after the request from our CEO at the time, Scott Watters. and they got a consultant to review. And you'll find that's in my report. Their consultant reviewed the report. They didn't do any technical reporting and have since made deputations and written a letter with similar substance throughout, again, not undertaking any technical reporting themselves. Can I have some questions, Frank Wilkie 01:16:10.880
Chair? You may. When you say haven't provided any technical reporting, that's in support reporting, that's in support of their position. That's correct. What would a technical report, what sort of detail and data would a technical report typically include? It would... Their own item modelling? Their own item Patrick Murphy 01:16:28.877
From their site, which the applicant's undertaken. modelling. From their site, which the applicant's undertaken. So yeah, to determine what is the odour that's actually emanating from their site at the moment and what might they consider as a benchmark or suitable level. So would it be fair to to say, through you Mr Chair, that it's Unity Water, so far, to provide the assertions, not backed by data? say, through you Mr Chair... And it might also, Richard, you might want to validate this, but the letter from Unity Water is not part of the common material of the application. So, the material was provided as part of the application, it's been publicly available, it's informed people's submission. The letter to councillors is, the applicants haven't had an opportunity to respond to that. This issue is, I suppose it's not a new issue, we've covered this ground before, but again I don't believe it forms part of the common material for which the application should be determined by. Richard MacGillivray 01:17:31.016
And in that regard, just adding to Patrick's comments, there's obviously when we look at risks from a unity water perspective, there's also risks for council in terms of making a decision based on the information it has before it in terms of the assessment of that and risks of a challenge through a legal process as well. So risk is something I guess when we make decisions we evaluate that through the context of what we're assessing against under the legislation that we're required to assess so that's a relevant factor for us to consider and councils to consider as part of a decision. Frank Wilkie 01:18:05.193
Just through you Mr Chair, Mr Chair, to clarify what the director is saying, you're saying if we perhaps refuse this application on the basis of a letter which is not part of the submitted material that is then subject to, highly open to challenge in a planning environment could. Richard MacGillivray 01:18:26.632
I wouldn't say that the letter itself I guess ultimately is the decision in terms of what we're deciding upon is a sound and basis and then our ability to defend the decision or seek to ratify that through a process. Thank you for help clarifying. Jessica Phillips 01:18:44.291
Can I ask another question? Sure. Thank you. Would you be able to tell me if any Water have ever done deputations about an application prior to this? Because they did do the two deputations. I'm just wanting to know, similar to Councillor Lorentson, about the weight that they not necessarily the letter this morning but for me around that they are a major stakeholder and they have in my opinion it would be a is it rare that they would go as far as doing a deputation and the fact that they have so have they done that before for an application? Brian Stockwell 01:19:20.820
I might answer that because others haven't been here. Deputations are a relatively recent inclusion into the standing orders and no they haven't Karen Finzel 01:19:32.579
Through the chair I'd just like to seek clarification on that. I think deputations have always been the standing orders. I think that we've adjusted and agreed to the times, giving people longer terms. Brian Stockwell 01:19:47.758
We can check, yeah, but I believe in the time that the legislation was amended, it might have been in the 2016, 2020 where deputations were included. Nicola Wilson 01:20:01.598
Can I just ask the question too, that might be the case that they haven't made a deputation to Noosa Council before, but I think the question was broader about do they generally do that, and I don't believe you know the answer, but I think this statement was more about it seems a big deal for a unity order to go and make a deputation to any council. Amelia Lorentson 01:20:26.248
Can I ask a question to Richard? With the correct process given that the email was received very early today, would the correct process be move a procedural motion, defer the decision to ordinary to allow maybe the applicant an opportunity to review the contents of the letter? Richard MacGillivray 01:20:45.238
Is that so just in response to your concerns in terms of legal implications what is the correct process through the chair so that is one opportunity to do that is to is to defer I guess what I would say though is that the the material put forward by unity water in this recent letter as nothing different Going back again on the technical elements, there's been plenty of plenty of opportunities for UNB to provide technical analysis and modelling, just like the applicant and council's experts have robustly evaluated. To date, we, you know, four years down the track since this application was lodged, we haven't received a technical evaluation. Unity Water. So my personal view is that deferral, further deferrals, just further time for the applicant when there's been plenty of time available for Unity Water to provide the technical robustness. assessment for the applicant to evaluate and that hasn't happened to date. Amelia Lorentson 01:22:24.069
So I don't believe that it would assist at all any further to give the applicant more time because of the view that their responses So to clarify there's nothing in the letter that's been sent to us that hasn't been previously stated by Unity Water through their deputations and many meetings with councillors through emails and in person. Richard MacGillivray 01:22:55.932
Yeah correct there's general objection to the proposed development. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:00.254
And the concerns in terms of WISC. Karen Finzel 01:23:03.314
Yes. Thank you I'd still, well if you want to ask a question because I'm about to move like I think for the significance of the matter including you know the motion that's been raised. been raised by Councillor Stockwell today and what's before us. I'm just thinking I have a bit more time for me to even go through this and I don't know about other councils. Can we move the motion? Not a procedural, just to move it because of the significance of the matter. Brian Stockwell 01:23:35.217
No, at an ordinary meeting you need to move a procedural. Karen Finzel 01:23:45.340
I'll partner for a minute on our council. Brian Stockwell 01:23:47.640
Just be aware that the matter can be raised again at an ordinary meeting. It doesn't preclude further debate but if we have... have heard all council's views around the table it may assist Thursday night or Thursday afternoon to be more efficient. Tom Wegener 01:24:08.840
I'll speak to the motion. speak to the motion. I'll approve it. I'll approve it. But it's very difficult. I feel as though we're pressured by lawsuits from either decision we make. They're both very... approve it, we run into complaints from odor. We run into a potential quarry situation where we wish we didn't do it in the future because it costs a lot and we wind up with a... wind up with a very expensive situation on our hands with the improvement in unity water. If we refuse it, then we will have experts that will have the applicants fighting us in court and we'll be using our own experts concerning odor against us, which is a very tenuous situation. So we're between a rock situation, so we're between a rock and a hard place, but I will all back it because of that situation. I think that a lawsuit is absolutely imminent. They've come so far, they really have, with the koala habitat, with making it much smaller than before, it's a very weak position to actually refuse that. Jessica Phillips 01:25:27.800
I'll speak very quickly for the same reasons as Councillor Wegener. I'm going to vote against it, given that I just, I can't help but think of long-term risks. I can't help but think big picture about the potential of Unity Water having to do an upgrade. Do an upgrade and pass it on to our residents through a different means, and I understand that that may not be exactly my lane, but I do feel a real responsibility to hear. I've really came in today to hear everyone around the table. So I could make a very informed decision and I feel like I have to still say I'm not prepared because of the risk that I feel is still doesn't sit well with me, but I do appreciate where they have come and I appreciate what staff have put into the report Nicola Wilson 01:26:28.618
I appreciate that the applicant has made some inroads in reducing the amount of built up for that will be in the Recreation and Opening. It's an open space zone, but it's still inconsistent use to have a resort in the zone. We talk about defending the Noosa Plan, therefore I want to keep strong on the zoning there and to be able to consider the relevant matters of residential utility. Brian Stockwell 01:27:05.960
I think there's you know risk of location on on either side of the argument. I personally would like to have more time to digest Digest. I don't know has anyone got any appetite I suppose I can put it the procedural motion to the vote to see if there's any appetite to to do that. Amelia Lorentson 01:27:34.720
A procedural motion through the chair doesn't need to be seconded under our standing orders. Karen Finzel 01:27:43.040
Is there a debate over that? We'll refer that to the CEO. We'll just wait for Brian Stockwell 01:28:04.680
The CA to confirm it. Karen Finzel 01:28:08.860
I just think it's a really significant number. Meeting I believe so yes yeah I just think given the discussion around the table you know I personally you know I personally I feel there's still a bit of further consideration to be I feel there's still a bit of further consideration to be I feel there's still a bit of further consideration to be made so just in terms of the significance of made so just in terms of the significance of made so just in terms of the significance of the matter before us and the you know, to also reflect the work that the applicant has put in to work hard to address the issues raised. I would like to defer it to the ordinary meeting. Question to the staff then, does this pose any risk by moving it to the date of 15 May in terms of the applicant? Richard MacGillivray 01:29:40.500
No, no, still the ordinary meeting is the decision date at this stage, so it could be deferred. I guess I would say that grounds would be needed to be required if councillors have an alternate view to the recommendation, so that would need to be put together as well. After that meeting. Karen Finzel 01:30:05.866
If that's the case, is that enough time for the staff to put that together? Yes, based on feedback from councillors on their views, we're happy to work with those parties on that basis. No further questions, Mr Chair? Brian Stockwell 01:30:24.760
Sure. Councillor Wilkie? Frank Wilkie 01:30:28.880
The question is, this is going to the ordinary meeting anyway? Question? Yeah, obvious. And following up question to the Director's comment. If an alternative, if this is refused, grounds for refusal have to be provided that could stand Brian Stockwell 01:30:57.920
I'm just looking, I believe in this motion only the mover can speak to it, so we'll put the motion. Those against? Okay. Amelia Lorentson 01:31:14.080
That is carried unanimously. Thank you Mr Chair. And apologies to the Chair, it does need to be Brian Stockwell 01:31:30.380
Our next item for debate is the integrated compliance and enforcement policy. It's referred food from service and organisation committee Richard MacGillivray 01:31:59.580
We're doing another duo, that's okay. So councillors, as mentioned at the services and organisation committee, today we've got a report put forward for council's adoption of the integrated compliance and enforcement policy. As previously outlined, the policy aims to enhance governance and provide a clear framework for council to its regulatory functions in a safe, fair, unbiased, balanced, consistent and transparent manner. Noosa Council is currently responsible for administering a range of laws and regulations, as set out in the local including a local laws and federal and state legislation, which is principally designed around community safety and well-being of our community, and also that harm, including environmental harm, is prevented. The policy seeks to establish the best practice compliance approaches by applying the following nine principles to its regulatory activities: decision-making, enforcement actions, which is outlined in the policy; the policy follows a tiered compliance model, with enforcement action escalating based on relevant factors to ensure a fair and just process, while maintaining discretion for officers to respond appropriately on each case. appropriately on each case when determining appropriate action Council considers factors such as risk level, nature and severity of the breach, likelihood of compliance, public interest and community impact and legal consideration. The policy was developed in collaboration with our governance branch, our branch managers and representatives of our internal compliance reference group. It's worth noting that similar It's worth noting that similar policies exist with other local and state government authorities that undertake compliance and regulatory activities. As previously mentioned, the policy also addresses an existing policy gap we have and aims to improve governance and community awareness and address risks relating to consistency in decision making and transparency in compliance enforcement matters. matters. I think it's worthwhile also I think it's worthwhile also noting too just based on some comments based at the last meeting that some key changes to the previous Sunshine Coast Regional Council policy from 2009 in terms of what's changed since that previous policy which wasn't endorsed by Noosa Council but was obviously carried through in terms of an awareness for staff. The policy obviously The policy obviously is more modernised, concise and clear. It provides and introduces new guiding principles and a tech compliance model compared with the old policy. It clearly outlines key factors now. factors now considered by staff in making enforcement decisions, whereas the previous policy didn't. There's some refinement around the scope and purpose, expanding and updating the relevant legislative requirements. requirements, also reflecting Human Rights Act which came in in 2019 and it's aligned with all of our updated policy documents. Also, So if there's any further questions from councillors. Amelia Lorentson 01:35:03.839
The Human Rights Act. Can you explain the process of review? My understanding is that the Act provides a framework, the Human Rights Act provides a framework for challenging decisions that may infringe on human rights. So if a resident feels that This is my understanding and what I'm seeking clarification. How do they raise their concerns or seek review under Human Rights Act processes? Yes, correct. Richard MacGillivray 01:35:45.045
So just in the policy itself, so it actually requires what's called Human Rights Capability Statement. So it's talking about the policy is drafted, has gone through a that's been evaluated against people's human human rights and so we work with our governance team, do a lot of that work when we prepare a report or material that needs to be evaluated under the human rights requirements. If there's a separate matter and an allegation that human rights have been breached, there's a separate process for people to follow. This is just in reference to the policies factored in human rights when it was being drafted. Jessica Phillips 01:36:24.253
I know this sort of document, we talked about the standing operating procedures, the SOPs that are coming that sort of sit underneath this policy. I see you reference it in there, but when the road hits the rubber and it's online, can community access... sometimes I look at, I put my community hat on and just go how easy it is to like access how things link, will this document sit with like a reference and a URL or something that just makes it easy for people to go this, because we reference it, standing operating procedures and like how that underpins it? Richard MacGillivray 01:37:04.182
Yeah, so... look, standard operating procedures are internal documents and they go, they sit under this as essentially an umbrella and they are more specific and relevant, particularly the functions that staff undertake. The important thing will be is those standard operating procedures will need to adhere to this overarching policy, so it can't conflict with it. Administering their functions particularly for pieces of legislation they're very clear around what steps must be undertaken for council to discharge its statutory duties but they're not externalized at all they're just very much sort of operating instructions and procedures that staff follow so this is the public guiding document I guess that that staff will need to follow and gives administering their functions, particularly for Staff will need to follow and gives our community certainty around how we'll approach our decision making. Jessica Phillips 01:38:10.665
That makes sense. Follow up question, soon I'll talk about the roles and responsibilities for councillors. Prior to this document, is there any changes to the way our role as councillors steps? Where we stay away from operational matters? Can you just talk me through that there isn't changes to the way we do business as well and how that works? Richard MacGillivray 01:38:37.696
Yeah, correct. So councillors might be aware that there's an existing governance framework that was endorsed by council, I think in 2022, which essentially sets out the And it does a range of things, but it also sets out the role of councillors, as I mentioned, a service organisation committee who are involved in strategic decision making and that operational related matters are generally left to the organisations under the CEO to administer. So it's really clear that the So it's really clear that the roles are separate between the councillors and this policy. The policy doesn't seek to take away any current functions that councillors or staff undertake there it's just designed to be really clear around their roles and responsibilities because as we know to the community and they see us all as council and sometimes they us all as council and sometimes that line can get a bit blurry and so what we've designed to do with the policies just make it really really clear and explicit it's already sort of referencing existing policies and procedures that are already in place but it just provides some greater clarity for the community so that they're not confused when maybe thinking who can undertake what action or what's an operational decision versus what's maybe an advocacy or strategic decision of council. Jessica Phillips 01:39:54.043
I have an amendment to come but I think I'll leave it for more questions at this stage. Amelia Lorentson 01:40:00.072
In terms of roles and responsibilities Richard is there opportunity maybe to add maybe an extra sentence in there because I think the distinction needs to be made in terms of needs to be made in terms of our roles that we're here to represent the community but that doesn't mean stepping into enforcement decisions. What I'd like is for the community to understand my question is okay I'm going to pose this as a question what are the potential consequences legal or reputational of councillors exceeding their prescribed roles in compliance matters? Richard MacGillivray 01:40:38.859
Yeah, through the chair so look there's there's a range of different elements there and obviously with with having an endorsed governance framework in place that's really clear around splitting the roles for councillors between operation There are risks, and I'll say this from a community perspective, of the role of councillors and operational staff if these mixed messages are sent to the community members. They might be a bit confused and unsure of what the process is. There could be some legal consequences as a result of that, noting that we're all part of the one organisation, and if we take an action and there's been conflicting messaging or advice provided, that that can can have ramifications and prevent potential outcomes being explored is look potentially conduct related matters given these roles and responsibilities are pretty pretty clearly outlined as well in terms of code code of of conduct conduct and and how how officers officers and and councillors conduct themselves but I would say principally the biggest one would be around reputation and confusion and clarity for for our community to understand who is the lead sort of area I guess to undertake those actions particular and activities around investigations and then compliance activity so just for consideration maybe again just one sentence or two sentence that we can add to the report that actually explicitly explicitly states states that that there there are are legal reputational consequences of a councillor exceeding or stepping into enforcement actions and so that community can watch the channel oh sorry I'm sorry oh I'm like amendments okay I might just think about it as an amendment thank you appreciate it thank you so would you like thank you now you haven't got a motion so you can move straight into yours as the originating motion if you look to avoid any confusion mr. Mr Chair I'll move this motion move staff recommendation councillor Wilkie do we have a seconder for that councillor Finzel I want my right to speak mr. this was covered extensively last week would you like to move an amendment thank you thanks for clarifying I just like to move an amendment that item B to be added to read that the wording in the draft policy provided at attachment one under roles and responsibilities councillors be amended to read Review and adopt Council's Integrated Compliance and Enforcement Policy. Councillors may actively support and promote voluntary compliance through advocacy, education and community engagement. This includes encouraging understanding of relevant regulations and fostering cooperative relationships between the Council and the community. However, and just for clear, Councillors must not be involved in operational compliance or enforcement actions as outlined in Council's endorsed Governance Framework. Jessica Phillips 01:43:58.607
This includes but is not limited to participation in investigations, I might take the word out. Investigations, insurances insurance of penalty infringement notices, enforcement orders, remedial actions or prosecution decisions. These matters are to be managed independently by authorised Council officers in accordance with legislation sorry, legislative requirements and operational procedures. This separation ensures procedural fairness protects the integrity of compliance processes and upholds the principles of good governance. I'll keep this fairly brief, mate, because there's been discussion enough around it. What I'm trying to achieve is real clarity around our roles so that... community don't get confused with when we can't be involved, but also I believe that there should be... part of this document is is our role in advocating for voluntary compliance. We're out in community every day and I believe that we we Every day and I believe that we we do have a role in that community engagement and understanding there's this system that we can use to refer on which we use I think around the table we use a lot to hand those matters into the right the right channels and so what I'm hoping to achieve is just a real clear delineation between what when and we can Nicola Wilson 01:45:37.320
Thank you does anyone wish to talk to the amendment I'll support this I think it's it's really good clarity in layman's terms that when a member of the public receives a compliance sorry enforcement notice that councillors can't override that notice or get involved on their behalf can I ask a question maybe to Jess or Richard do we need to do we need to delete what's already been written? Amelia Lorentson 01:46:06.768
Can we have the amendment as an addition to what's already in the report? Is there duplication? Because I love the clarity. the clarity of Councillor Phillips's amendment and I do think it's in layman terms and when you go back to the purpose it states it needs to be clear but I don't know whether it should be in addition to instead of... Richard MacGillivray 01:46:31.893
Addition to instead of deleting the clause and we'd love your recommendation or advice yeah through the chair look yeah the the amendment was slightly worded differently than what was originally proposed I guess does a good job of clarifying and as councillor Wilson mentioned and clear lay person's terms I guess probably the previous wording was more technical I guess makes it really clear of what the role of councils can do in terms of promoting the work that the organisation does more broadly and steering the public into the right directions where they've got questions or concerns concerns, as opposed to getting involved in making decisions and dealing with the particular elements of an investigation or compliance proceeding. So I think the amendment has sort of distinguished the two roles. amendment has sort of distinguished the two roles really clearly of being involved in advocacy and education, but not being involved in operational related matters, which is dealt with by the staff. Frank Wilkie 01:47:36.317
Question, the way it was originally written doesn't it make it explicit that councillors should not be involved in advocating on behalf of representing parties, whereas the second one says we can advocate on behalf of compliance, but doesn't say make it specific that councillors must not advocate on behalf or represent Look I'll speak to it. Brian Stockwell 01:48:11.430
Is that accurate, the question to councillor? Richard MacGillivray 01:48:15.670
I'm just having a look through that now in terms of what's changed. The councillors may actively support and promote voluntary compliance so it's support and promote voluntary compliance for advocacy so really the the revision is only supporting advocacy for where there's promotion of voluntary compliance as opposed to compliance and enforcement matters but but in contrast with the original wording with the original wording which basically stipulates that there should be no, must not involve themselves in any advocacy on behalf of a particular party, so yeah. Frank Wilkie 01:48:53.670
I think that's an important distinction. So I'll speak to the amendment. I, I appreciate the addition if that's what it could ultimately end up being. I, we all think differently and I there's also benefit in the straight talking that's involved in what was there originally because it spells out councillors must not involve themselves in negotiating and resolving with the grief parties or advocating on behalf of representing parties and also councillors can assist blah blah and the second part moved by Councillor expands on that and puts it in the more I think they complement each other very outcomes. so if this is approved I would support a second amendment that allows the original wording to also be included because I think together Together, it's very complete and clear. Jessica Phillips 01:49:56.815
Can I ask a question? Could we have a five minute break and I let that fall and come up with wording that everyone's happy with? Or is that I hear everyone's point. Since now I've read it Brian Stockwell 01:50:10.099
I think I think we can let it fall What question Mr Chair? Frank Wilkie 01:50:19.239
If the mover of the amendment is in favour, we can just allow that to be included. I think it's more major than the standing orders. I think it's either way. Amelia Lorentson 01:50:37.160
We can just chat. Brian Stockwell 01:50:40.640
I've got a further addition to the concepts in one of Councillor Phillips's paragraphs anyway. I suggest we put this in if councillors want to put the staff recommendation back Councils want to put the staff recommendation back in. We'll do that as a second amendment. Frank Wilkie 01:50:59.497
So what's your preferred outcome? Jessica Phillips 01:51:05.712
Out loud there and then I was the bit that probably I would have liked now I've seen it is also about the appropriate functional area so there is a couple of things that potentially now I've heard everyone's want point I it definitely to be clear that was my the point so let's not um okay they've answered the question yeah and anyone else wish to speak to the amendment I'm happy to spot the amendment and foreshadow that the others coming yeah um likewise I I go back to the purpose of the report is to clear guidelines and I think that you've done that but I would also like to see reinstated the original wording which I think was actually contained different information and was actually quite clear and I think important information that the community needs to understand because our role is not in advocacy in matters that are operational. And I think that distinction needs to be made clear. So happy to support understanding there will be further amendments. Karen Finzel 01:52:25.841
Yeah, I'm happy to support with the view we probably put some other wording in. Just like Therese, we had a discussion at the SNL round that we talked about understanding the community in terms of referring on. So I think part of was to get clarification around, yeah, we can do advocacy, we can support that education, but delineating that idea of where there comes a point where councillors have to refer on. So I'm supportive of the wording before us, but I think maybe a little bit more clarification will be perfect. Brian Stockwell 01:53:07.440
Okay, I think everyone, you said you didn't want to talk to the amendment. I'll hand it back to Councillor to close. To close quickly, Jessica Phillips 01:53:14.740
I just want to highlight that it says support and promote voluntary compliance through advocacy. So, that bit is really important. The voluntary bit is when we're out in community saying, no, this is our understanding because we know the intricacies. So, it's about the voluntary compliance, which we spoke about in that. voluntary compliance, which we spoke about in that report, being the most important thing we want from our community, and then there's those other steps. So that was kind of what I was aiming at, but I have nothing else to say. Thanks. Brian Stockwell 01:53:43.894
Okay, I'll put those in favour. That's unanimous. Cathy, if you can bring up that little change. So I'll move the amendment that reinstates the staff recommendations in terms of the clauses below the previous amendment. So I think it's good to start off with the positive, as Council could do, and then put the staff wording below it. And adds the words after paragraph 2 as follows, and this is the, I'll read it out, "However councils must not be involved in operational compliance or enforcement as outlined in Council's endorsed governance framework. This includes, but is not limited to, participation in investigations, issuers of penalty and infringement notices, enforcement orders, remedial infringement notices, enforcement orders, remedial actions or prosecution decisions. These matters are managed independently by authorised Council officers in accordance with legislative requirements and operational procedures. Notwithstanding this, Councils can consider legal and prosecution matters as reported by staff through established Council meeting processes. Congratulations. Frank Wilkie 01:55:11.680
What do you mean by that? When I read Councillor Brian Stockwell 01:55:14.780
Phillips outlining the positives of what we can do, one role we do have is when matters, I was thinking in the context of planning matters specifically that can go to two different courts, it's frequent that Council does get involved in the enforcement by making the decision to So go it's just outlining that if staff think a Council decision is needed to progress enforcement action, then that is a role. Jessica Phillips 01:55:41.051
Question to staff, does that come into this enforcement policy? I feel like that's not, the planning matters isn't what this document is set out to achieve. Richard MacGillivray 01:55:51.331
No, it's all matters. I guess it's just highlighting that there are instances, and not very many, but instances where staff may report and often it'll be through a confidential report on particular compliance related matters that have legal ramifications. and cost ramifications so it's not very common but this would just reflect that there may be times where councillors may be involved in making a decision around potential legal or prosecution So it's just not it's not without it there it's it's sort of absent I guess and and people might ask the question of what that is so this probably helps just to clarify in that legal context where certain matters might require a confidential report to council for it More information. Jessica Phillips 01:56:50.120
Just seeking further clarification. I'm looking at all the legislation that this refers to. I just can't quite work out when that would come up in the 86 odd pieces of legislation you're dealing with. This wouldn't come into planning. Brian Stockwell 01:57:03.120
Why doesn't the planning act be covered by this policy? So there was a planning act. Richard MacGillivray 01:57:08.760
Yes, all legislation that we administer, including the planning act, yes. The policy doesn't list every item of legislation that we regulate, as I mentioned in the report. There's more than 60 pieces of legislation that we regulate. And again, the policy is designed to cover all of those different pieces of legislation. This is just merely, yeah, a merely highlighted that there are some small instances where there might be reports and council may need to make a decision or at least receive a briefing for noting as well. Nicola Wilson 01:57:47.772
Can I just question the wording too? I'm just grammatically challenged with councillors. Councilors must not involve themselves and also just from a community point of view it's not necessarily that councilors would involve themselves but they might be requested to get involved as well rather than just taking it upon ourselves to get involved. Richard MacGillivray 01:58:16.620
Would it be are unable to be involved? Karen Finzel 01:58:20.680
I think that's where the other day we were talking at the SNR about referring on so that there's a point where we do advocate we can do this but at this point our role then we refer on. I don't know. Is that helps anyone with trying to get some wording? Brian Stockwell 01:58:37.612
So Councillor Wilson I think it's a valid grammatical correction and hasn't been taken it yet anyway. Anyway, so is that your answer to your query? Okay, I'm happy to include that. Do we have a seconder for this version of the amendment? Probably should have separated the two bits, but it includes the previous staff recommendation Juliane Vogler 01:59:14.020
And we can assist myself. Nicola Wilson 01:59:17.940
Yeah, I think we've got a CD overall. Thank you very much. Brian Stockwell 01:59:33.820
So just to move things on, I'll try another one. Tom Wegener 01:59:39.480
If I may, do you have a question to the Chair? You know that I would like to bring a deferral motion here. And I feel as though we're kind of sliding into this space that we get into at times where we're on the fly right now. Can I bring my deferral motion now? You can move it, proceed to a motion, any time you like. Brian Stockwell 02:00:06.100
I would like to defer the decision on this matter until a month from today for the next general meeting. And the reason is, these are really important matters that really... Excuse me, Kathy, it goes to the general committee rather than the ordinary meeting. These are really important matters that really, really do affect us. And when we start doing this... I'm sorry, we need a seconder for this. I'm just looking at the word general committee meeting. And we'll stop. Are we happy that leads to standing orders? That's okay. Do we have a seconder? Tom Wegener 02:01:08.340
I think staff and most of the councillors are surprised at how once you start looking into this, it becomes really quite controversial. And we've cleared the immediate, but it's actually a really muddy water situation. I would like to actually work we have a workshop with this between now and then and then Richard mentioned that this was in response to an omniscience report and as As of a Saturday morning, we received a year-long Obamacare report concerning the bus stop espresso, but within the order, yes, there's nothing to do with this one, so I would like... Brian Stockwell 02:01:52.817
You have been been you advised have been advised that that you aren't to release confidential information in the public meeting. Please retract the statement. I'll retract the statement. My apologies. Within this report... report that I would like to offer it on the record. Amelia Lorentson 02:02:11.837
Point of order. Point of order please. That's confidential material and I think he's acting outside the jurisdiction of this breach of our standing orders. Brian Stockwell 02:02:18.474
So the matter before us is a policy, not an individual matter before the opportunity. Yeah, and so if you... And the procedural motion, you could really only talk to the process of deferring it. Tom Wegener 02:02:42.450
Well I'd still like to make the procedural motion to defer it for a month because I believe that we're kind of running on the floor here. And I think with this is really important and I would like further time to consider it. Amelia Lorentson 02:02:56.086
And I'll speak to it also. Can we all speak to procedural motions? Brian Stockwell 02:03:00.826
Yeah well I was wrong, that's what I was reading before. It's only a dissent from the Chairman's ruling that doesn't get... Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 02:03:07.715
I agree I'm feeling a little bit... I don't support decisions made around this table without considered information and time to digest the information. We're talking there are ethical risk and legal risk and implications that we need to understand. I'm concerned with just particular... with just just particular words 'must' and 'we should' etc but I would concur with Councillor Wegener. I would like a workshop to have some further discussion. This is an important piece of work and I... I think there's still quite a bit of feedback and input around this table, and I don't think this is the correct forum to be having these actual discussions and information sessions. Jessica Phillips 02:03:58.387
I'll speak to it. I've gone through it with a fine-tooth comb and highlighters to make sure that today I'm ready to make a decision. However, if I was in Councillor Wegener's shoes, then I would hope that I'm supported in having some more time. So for that purpose, I'm definitely going to happily have a workshop and you can always learn more about legislation, I guess. Brian Stockwell 02:04:23.340
I have a question. Considering we haven't had a policy since 2014, is an extra month making any significant difference? There's no time deadlines we're trying to meet here? Richard MacGillivray 02:04:32.780
No, no it won't. What I would say though is we did have a workshop about this and this document was circulated for more than a month. No comments were received and obviously this has been recirculated with councillors so I just would say that we have had a workshop and sought input from councillors on this particular report but you know it's been 15 years since we haven't or 10 years since we haven't had a policy so one more month is not. one more month is not necessarily a problem if councillors wish to extend. Amelia Lorentson 02:05:06.587
So a question to Richard. I concur we have had this report for us a month ago but the amendments that have been made around this table have just been made around this table and that's what I think the discussion today is, consideration of those amendments. Just the the amendments that have been put in front of us Richard, have you seen those amendments before? Richard MacGillivray 02:05:34.669
Just recently over the last few days so obviously Councillor Phillips's amendments and Councillor Brian spoke to me about some suggested amendments as well. Thank you. Karen Finzel 02:05:47.449
Okay. Oh, can I just ask a You may. Through the chair of the staff, they're not withstanding this. Council is considered illegal in prosecution matters as reported by staff through the established council in the meeting process. Do you consider, what's the value of having that included Brian Stockwell 02:06:04.864
In the... Councillor, that's a result to an amendment that had lapsed, so we're now just talking about the motion to defer. Karen Finzel 02:06:11.693
Yeah, but in terms of that is that something that we're going to discuss around the table, like... Yeah, but in Brian Stockwell 02:06:18.553
Well, if the motion to defer is successful then that's something we can discuss between now and the next meeting. Frank Wilkie 02:06:27.998
I'll speak to the motion. As stated, we did have a workshop on this. We've had the material for a month. We've had the report since it came out ten days ago. We are discussing... I'll..amendments to that. That's the only thing that would seem to be contentious, and the council is struggling to understand the wording of parts of it, and that's good, doing due diligence. But I don't see why we need a whole month to get our heads around the wordings on the screen. get our hands around the wordings on the screen before us, I think councillors can work, that meet, would like to, can work hard between now and Thursday night to understand the wording that's before us. I don't think a whole month is necessary. I would encourage councillors to use time between now and Thursday to understand what's been put forward by Councillor. I don't think this is policy on the fly. These are quite, from my perspective, they look like very clear amendments. So, I won't be supporting it. I hope we revisit this again at the ordinary meeting on Thursday this week because we have had it for a good deal of time already and as we heard there was no feedback during that month and the amendments are just the new material that's come into our possession, well, come into our sphere. Brian Stockwell 02:08:19.195
Tewantin, Cooroy, Noosa, Tewantin, Cooroy, Noosa, Tewantin, Cooroy, to consider. I also understand Councillor at the workshops, et cetera, and has turned it into the positive, which led me to believe, you know, think about, well, we're going to say what we can do rather than what we can't do. What else hasn't been listed? listed? But whether that red goes in or not, it's not germane to the policy, but I think I won't support it on the basis that I believe there is sufficient time between now and Thursday to get Anyone, no one else? Councillor? Jessica Phillips 02:09:08.400
Have I spoken to the procedural motion? You might have only asked the question. I did speak to it. Okay. Tom Wegener 02:09:16.460
This is our job that we're talking about. This is what we do. And I'm feeling chilled by it. I did when I first read it on the Council of Responsibilities, I was very, very chilled, chilling the definition of unlawful, and I'm glad that that's been dropped out. But I think that there's a lot of unpacking to do. And I think we actually need to actually brainstorm around the table to think about this, because I think that we might be limiting ourselves. And I won't go into any examples, but I think that we are potentially limiting ourselves. I would just love to think that this is, and of course we have an Ombudsman's report. I don't know if it's confidential, I don't believe it's confidential, but in the report itself it mentions that there's lots of things to discuss in the findings that came about over the last year, and we haven't discussed them. And we haven't discussed them. And I'm a little bit hesitant on supporting a plan when this has not been impacted. And I don't think we can impact it by Thursday. I don't see us getting together, having a meeting, having these brilliant minds around the table, hashing through our job description. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:10:35.260
Can I ask a question? So he's closed the debate, so now all we can do is vote on it. Those in favour of the deferral motion for one month, that's Councillor Wilson, Finzel, Lorentson, Phillips and Wegener. Those against, I think it might be, would be in Stockwell. The deferral motion is carried. I think we've been going for long enough that we need... Okay, welcome back. Before we proceed to the next item, I do wish to just clarify an item, an element that came up in the last debate when it inquired about whether the Director had seen the amendments. He did mention director had seen the amendments. He did mention that he had seen the one from me, but it wasn't to infer that other councils had seen it. It was something that I had put to him and it was only one minute before the meeting when I realised that it hadn't been circulated. That was just because of timing We move on to item 3 in section 7 and that's the Noosa River recreational boating facilities update and we have the director of the infrastructure, Shaun Walsh here to give us an overview. Shaun Walsh 02:25:13.440
Good afternoon councillors. This report provides an update on the progress of recreational boating facilities in Noosa River in response to the Maritime Safety Queensland recreational boating facilities demand forecast starting from 2022. Progress, although limited, has been made under defining scope at three facilities including the Noosa Woods Jetty, the Noosa River Boat Ramp and the Hilton Esplanade, Tewantin and Denalla Bridge Boat Ramp. In addition, Council has been advised that funding is likely to be made available by Maritime Safety Queensland for recreational boating facilities safety Queensland for recreational bathing facilities on the Noosa River in the near future and I'd like to actually throw to the CEO for an update on recent conversations with the general manager for Maritime Safety Queensland on the status of that funding. Larry Sengstock 02:25:56.490
So councillors I've had a coach up with the general manager Kel Dhillon as late as this morning about this so his understanding his understanding is that the $2.5 million is a commitment by the government, so is now to become available to us. We've agreed that we'll sit He's got a few family issues at the moment, so we've agreed that he'll come up to Noosa and we'll sit down and work through what that means, what it looks like, but it does look like it's going to be available. It's going to be available on land as well as in water, so it's something that we can work towards in terms of... He's also certainly very cognisant of members of the community who... who have desires to have a particular area, a vanilla area, as the prioritised landing area or ramp, and that's...that we'll work through with him. But the money is available. How it's used, how it's utilised, the management of that is something that we'll work through when he comes up here in a couple of weeks' time. Shaun Walsh 02:27:17.303
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:27:18.123
Thank you. I welcome questions, Councillor. So, we've got any questions? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 02:27:23.485
My first question is, the report in front of us, was that a direct response to a Notified Motion that was ratified in Council in October 2024? Shaun Walsh 02:27:35.425
The report was brought forward as a forward as a response to that Notified Motion, but work was ongoing from the report presented to Council in 2023. For instance, prior to that Notified Motion in October 2024, the brief for the Noosa Woods Jetty had been released with a consultant. We're working actively on the Noosa Amelia Lorentson 02:28:11.501
Other actions that were identified in the notified report that weren't identified in the report in front of us. Can I ask, will there be later reports that will look at including some of the aspects that were omitted in the notified motion in future reports? Shaun Walsh 02:28:34.681
I don't consider reports: I don't consider the report actually omits those matters it doesn't address it in detail but for instance if we look at the notified motion from October 2024 it references the Thomas Street Nooseville parking improvements and walkway repositioning. That's actually being considered in the Nooseville foreshore infrastructure master plan which will be coming to council. At next month's meeting which has already been subject to significant debate. In regard to item B the Tewantin Lake Street parking enhancement installation of the new floating walkway. That's referenced under the heading of Lake Street boat ramp and noting the need for significant... for a significant master plan to reconcile all the competing issues in that area and that can certainly be considered as part of that master plan. In regard to the Hilton Esplanade Tewantin construction of a new two-lane facility, that's referenced again in the report on Hilton Esplanade. again in the report on Hilton Esplanade, Tewantin boat ramp and the thought process that we have actually made an allocation for a forward planning and design budget allocation to advance design concepts and that certainly will require further consideration by council and the community. The Noosa Woods replacement of the jetty with the pontoon, that again is referenced under the Noosa Woods heading as being a commission that's been underway the moment and that will be considered in that consultancy's work. Amelia Lorentson 02:29:51.680
And then in regard to shortfalls and trailer parking, that's actually referenced in regard to Noosaville and that'll be coming up to council as part of the parking management plan and council's already had two workshops concerning the parking management plan and the next iteration of those workshops is about the local area parking plans which includes recommendations on trailer parking at Noosaville thank you I was referring specifically to a from the notified motion that the report focuses on high priority recommendations made by the State in the 2022 Noosa Shire recreational boating facilities demand forecasting study and I just and this is this is a conversation I'm not pulling you up or anything but I just note in the report in front of us that is that we haven't considered like the top three or we haven't considered bits and pieces of the priority actions that were in the in the 2022 forecasting demand- Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, No worries, I'll let everyone speak and I'll just come back to you with a couple of questions. If Shaun Walsh 02:31:05.849
I could clarify, that's why in the report it also includes Council's resolution with respect to June 2023 and that under 5.4 as as well well on on that that page page of of the the report report outlines outlines Council's resolutions with respect to the findings of the Maritime Safety Queensland recreational and the report responds to that so if you like I'm actually responding to the previous Council resolution and the previous Council Council resolution- gave direction to staff about what facilities to focus on. Amelia Lorentson 02:31:33.032
No worries, thank you very much. Brian Stockwell 02:31:34.452
Can I follow up on that one because it might be one that I've missed. In that resolution did we talk about the existing jetty A being converted to a pontoon and B being open to commercial and public jetty type uses? Shaun Walsh 02:31:49.933
The Maritime Safety Recreation Facility Study merely focused on the ability for deep draft vessels to actually pull into a jetty and or pontoon at Noosa Woods. It did not reference whether it was used for commercial or public or other uses. It was more about recreational boating and the desire or the need for facilities which allow vessels with deep holes. So if I get the MSQ report recommended a site where the old surf life savings shed used to be which is something that's been a concept that's been around for decades or more. Brian Stockwell 02:32:23.478
In our options study are we looking we looking at a range of options or are we just looking at the existing GIDI which is generally used for recreational and fishing? Shaun Walsh 02:32:33.527
So our council actually scheduled a session tomorrow at its discussion forum to give an update on where we're at with that draft study and it actually looks at three sites. Question, Frank Wilkie 02:32:43.316
Mr Chair. The Hilton Esplanade, you mentioned there's a funding allocation in the budget coming up for design. Probably a question to the CEO. The $2.5 million allocation announced by the Transport Minister, Brent Mickelberg, for on-land and also waterside. Is it on-land and waterside? How will we see things? Currently it says, this is verbatim, it says from the letter that I haven't witnessed, but this is my understanding, is $2.5 million is boating infrastructure. infrastructure on Noosa River. So if we wished we could use it for the design of the Donella Street boat ramp, if we chose to, and perhaps even part of the construction. Larry Sengstock 02:33:33.862
My understanding is that MSQA would have done a concept of that particular site. The Press: And I don't know in what detail in what detail or what it actually includes. And they're quite aware that they haven't considered all of the environmental and eco issues that may be outside. Brian Stockwell 02:33:52.071
Just to clarify, Councillor Wilkie was talking about if we choose. Is it my understanding that we may be consulted but the decision In terms of where the funding is used? Larry Sengstock 02:34:06.860
Not at this point in time. Again, it just talks to boating infrastructure. Brian Stockwell 02:34:10.860
It's not. Frank Wilkie 02:34:12.640
Is it an allocation to Noosa Council to use as they see fit for boating infrastructure? Again, until I deal with it. Larry Sengstock 02:34:19.226
So can I ask a question? There was quite a bit of advocacy from the Noosa Boating Fishing Alliance and also former state candidate and our former mayor, Claire Stewart. Can I ask how much weight does that advocacy, because they were quite specific about where the $2.5 million funding was to be allocated towards. Is that relevant or is it not? So they actually broke down. The $2.5 wasn't just plucked out of the air, it was actually put down. $1.2 million for landside works, $1.3 million for waterside works, and then they actually broke that down in terms of location and works. provided a cost breakdown to the Liberal Party. Does that carry any weight? Shaun Walsh 02:35:17.636
So, Council staff weren't involved in any of those submissions and those costings, so I can't verify the accuracy or other of those costings. I will note that in representations made by those parties, Council staff were also making representations to MSQ about onshore funding and that's consistent with Council's resolution from June 2023 where there's actually a specific item C about Council staff seeking discussions of increased funding from MSQ to fund onshore components of the program facilities because as outlined in that report program facilities because as outlined in that report MSQ traditionally only fund over water components on these type of facilities so council staff are also advocating for the MSQ to fund over shore so if you like I think it's a combination of both you know political advocacy in the lead up to the State campaign, advocacy by particular community groups as well as representations by staff to actually get a piece of the funding puzzle. So council staff haven't been involved in any prioritisation of any site and I think that still requires a further council discussion and decision exactly about where council perceives the priority for that investment is. Amelia Lorentson 02:36:25.549
And will that involve community consultation with key stakeholders? Shaun Walsh 02:36:31.209
We can again you know we're still trying to get our head around the scope of the funding. What we can use it for. I'm still critically concerned for any co-contribution that council needs to make in terms of staffing and co-contribution for design and infrastructure costs. We're running a very lean budget. There's no funding allocated for co-contribution. So that's why I'm sort of you know hedging my horses if you like. I don't want to get too excited by this announcement until I'm around the scope and the terms because it's usual that the State government would have terms around planning the agreement such as co-contribution and being very specific about what we can spend the money on. In terms of the duty I think on 20th of June 2024 at public question time a question was put to council in terms of whether the nine hundred and nine hundred and thirty three thousand I've got much better clarity. Amelia Lorentson 02:37:20.150
Weather: the $933,000 raised in our sustainable transport levy could be used towards the Noosa woods jetty. Can it be used towards the Noosa woods jetty? And I'm just trying to reference again the response given to... Nicola Wilson 02:37:44.552
I don't know whether that was answered at the meeting. And we're talking about operational expenses versus capital. Brian Stockwell 02:37:50.534
Think it is it is directly relevant I think in terms of is it we're talking about... talking about progress. It relates to the progress whether there'd be an option and it did relate to statements by the director in regard to budgetary limitations so I think I'll accept it. Shaun Walsh 02:38:18.537
Consistent is the sustainable transport levy is meant for public transport and reduction of road congestion so and I suspect that that public question was might have been focused more about commercial jetties and I think I might have been concerned or maybe I said that use of the transport levy can't be used for commercial businesses and commercial purposes though you know we could certainly look at exploring this useful public transport as a congestion reduction and we have to remember that the Noosa River Ferry kindly which runs a fantastic service is a commercial operator rather than a recognised TransLink public transport operator subsidised by the Queensland ratepayer or taxpayer so the circumstances are a little bit unusual in the Noosa River. I note that council actually have a structured a scheduled council actually have a structured, a scheduled workshop in coming weeks about use of the sustainable transport levy and projects to focus on in the next two years and that would be a very good topic to discuss further at that workshop. Amelia Lorentson 02:39:13.900
So just to clarify with two and a half million dollars... pledge by the LNP was or wasn't specifically for boating infrastructure. Does it exclude commercial or tourism related projects? Shaun Walsh 02:39:27.525
Again we haven't been involved in the specific advocacy to the State. I can't say what it I can't say what it does include or not include at this point. I look forward to having formal correspondence from the State government to confirm the funding arrangements. Brian Stockwell 02:39:42.351
You mentioned that in the near future we're receiving a briefing on the current status of the options report around the woods jetty. Is there a decision timeline in terms of what options council may or may not go with and are you proposing to come to a future council meeting with those options? Shaun Walsh 02:40:04.850
There will need to be both some further broader community engagement about the steps as well as a formal council decision. about which option you may wish to pursue and then that would require possibly funding allocation as well which would require budget deliberations as well. One option could be do nothing as well, we have to remember that! can meet our KPIs on that one for you. Tom Wegener 02:40:31.214
Council Wegener. Looking very long term down the track, maybe we should change our walking cycling strategy to a walking cycling and... boat pedaling, or paddling, or you know, river transport strategy. And then when I look at getting on the ferry down there to Sofitel, how restricted... the question is, are we limited to the three... we limited to the three places that we've decided where we're looking at having a commercial vehicle floor? Shaun Walsh 02:41:03.889
No, but it was always thought that this particular study for that study area between the Sofitel, you know, the old surfboard boat ramp and the public jetty would provide a good catalyst and understanding for how you could apply the... principles of public transport, public recreational boating and commercial usage in other locations in the whole of the Noosa River, so rather than undertaking a study that embraces everything, you know, we had some funding allocation to look at one site and get a better understanding of all the implications and then we could make a decision about how do we then start applying that to other sites along the Noosa River. Tom Wegener 02:41:34.980
I'm just looking, I'm just wondering if it's a consideration how small a consideration how small the Sofitel is and the boat rail, how tight that is to get in and out of there to a U-turn. Shaun Walsh 02:41:47.868
So firstly we just want to clarify that we have engaged with Noosa Commercial Marine Operators which operate the number of vessels in that location so that's their body. That is a very valuable facility and they can make the manoeuvring work so we need to be really clear about what their expectations But in terms of the future you know there are challenges and there could be the opportunity to expand it and that's also why we've selected a specific shoreline marine consulting consultant who has actually designed and overseen building of jetties across the eastern seaboard so that we actually have an expert because in our team we don't have a jetty expert who knows how to operate boats and how to build jetties and the like. Brian Stockwell 02:42:32.700
Pointed question I suppose is, my recollection is councilors haven't been involved in any policy decisions about the broad impact of potential enlarged commercial public jetties etc in that area. In terms of the scope of the consultant would he or she or they have been given any indication about the desired been given any indication about the desire to maintain the low-key recreational use currently made in the Woods Bay area from the park to the existing jetty? Shaun Walsh 02:43:02.280
So we've given them various documents and information and one of the stakeholders for they also engage with Noosa Parks Association who were instrumental in achieving the Noosa Woods open space and its conversion from Caravan Park so so they've been given that information that their brief is to look at all options and pros and cons so very neutral objective perspective to inform a council decision moving forward. Jessica Phillips 02:43:27.816
I have a question please. I think it was mentioned at SNO when I asked for the deferral to hear and I think you mentioned something along the lines of it's very uncommon or that MSQ would give on land and on water so that's why we waited for some confirmation today and now given we have more assurity that that is covering When I look at this report and it's looking at progress, at what point is there a pause to say, well now we have that information, is there anything that is progressing? That is probably taking allocated funds when you talk about co-contribution. My question is, at what point could we pause and go, we've got this funding coming in, we might have to divert to make sure that we can actually see this through? Because I don't think these opportunities come up very often, is what I'm thinking. Shaun Walsh 02:44:29.424
Getting back to your first observation, it is a different approach of MSQ to fund onshore. And if you look at their website, there's actually a link which specifies that the practice is for local government to fund the onshore component. So that's their practice across the State. So this is fairly unusual. In the event that the funding is fully released, we get to use it. As we do with our program constantly, we will re-evaluate where our priorities are. And noting that this also coincides with your deliberation of the capital works program, there's a workshop on Friday to deliberate that, so I think the timing is really good for us to re-evaluate where we're at, what funding allocations we've got, and if we need to, you know, direct funds to that source, we can. And in the event that the funding, $2.5 million or so funds design costs, well, I can re-allocate the money we've allocated in I can reallocate the money we've allocated in the forward design budget to other projects as well, so won't be needlessly spending money, our own money that we don't need to. Amelia Lorentson 02:45:23.864
Can I ask what amount have we sort of set aside for the forward planning and design budget to advance the design concept? Shaun Walsh 02:45:33.124
My recollection is $50,000 and you have to remember that because our design work is capitalised, that covers staff time as well as any external concerns. So it's an allocation to allow staff to work on it and any support consultants. Amelia Lorentson 02:45:48.996
So a funding allocation has been made and will that be presented? presented to us as part of our budget deliberations? Shaun Walsh 02:45:56.922
Yes, so what happens in the budget deliberations is that you're presented with an allocation that varies between $400,000 and $600,000 for a forward design budget and allows flexibility to staff to apply some design work, you know, to emergent tasks as issues arise. That forward design budget is monitored through the capital works executive of which there are council meetings. Amelia Lorentson 02:46:20.654
Councillors and the CEO who are in representative that executive and the design concept is for Hilton, Esplanade, Tewantin, Dunello, Boatramp. Shaun Walsh 02:46:32.654
That's what we've currently allocated and that's for 2526. Amelia Lorentson 02:46:41.640
I'm happy to move the recommendation. I'll just speak briefly to the report. Funding has always been cited as the main obstacle to us improving Noosa programs and trailer parking. I'm excited that we now have excited that we now have confirmed two and a half million dollars and what a great opportunity for us to start progressing improvements in terms of boat ramps and trailer parking. I do want to acknowledge the work of the staff as well as our work of the staff as well as our boating community and also the former state candidate who campaigned tirelessly to secure the two and a half million dollar investment specifically for boating infrastructure and not for commercial tourism projects. It was secured to deliver real outcomes for local boaties, more trailer parks, safer ramps, swash down areas and better facilities. I probably just want to highlight, now that we've got the funding, we're making a commitment to put some allocation towards the design concepts for the Hilton Esplanade Tewantin Dunella boat ramp. I want to highlight that we have an we have an essential boating infrastructure challenge. There are 36 trailer parking spaces for nearly 5,000 registered trailer boats. And trailer parking in residential streets is not a sustainable solution. And I think this is a really good positive step in the right direction. So I'm excited. We've got the funding, we've got a site. And in my opinion, we've also got a community mandate or at least a preferred location site, which is the Hilton Esplanade, Tewantin, Dunello boat ramp. So again, excited to Frank Wilkie 02:48:53.660
Yeah, look, we've been very fortunate in Noosa Shire since the election. We've had a Deputy Premier and the Transport Minister have great regard for the needs of this and this community. Looking very much forward to discussion around the design concepts for the Hilton Terrace Donella boat ramp, what may be possible there, and also getting an understanding of how the funding from the Minister for Transport and MSQ may be used to provide better infrastructure. Brian Stockwell 02:49:40.700
I'll talk. There's been a couple of different elements of community debate. One of the elements which my questioning would suggest that I'm interested in is actually that the options down these woods and as we're my yearning was to actually identify a council position on that now but if the report is imminent I think it's best to wait and seek a further report in the near future. I don't think I recall putting in the capital works budget in terms of design down here. I don't think councils have had the opportunity to talk about priorities around that Noosa woods area and I think that's important once we have consultant's information because I for one agree with the views that the existing jetty location and the beach around there probably should be protected for residents to enjoy low key recreational pursuits. I think I know when my kids were young... there were lots of parties and lots of teaching how to fish and not catching anything down there and I just think that's an important thing to lock in and obviously in the community there's a range of different options available. So I think we stick with this one as a noting report but subject to where the consultants come up with a net briefing in the near future it may be something we request another report from the near future to try and identify what the council's position Anyone else wish to talk? Jessica Phillips 02:51:17.100
I'll just say I'm just excited when we think of anything where our assets can be maintained or upgraded in every aspect really to hear that we've got two and a half million to go to an asset that whether you use it or not is to me just on the broader scale it looks like it gives council a great standard of you know it's our reputation around the things we own and the things or the assets that our community and so I'm just excited that there's potential that that we see an upgrade to something that has been from the long life I've lived here community have asked for some some upgrade to something they use and love and yes I look forward to seeing the future and where we have this this Brian Stockwell 02:52:08.560
No one else wish to speak? I'll cancel that line since you wish to close. No, all set, thank you. Okay I'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you. Thank And move on to the next item which is reports direct to the General Committee and we have the monthly financial performance report. We have Pauline here to give us an executive summary and answer all our hard questions. Pauline 02:52:41.460
Thanks councillors. Good afternoon councillors. So the financial performance for the month of April continues to be positive with operating revenues outperforming forecasts and operating expenditures continuing to be below budget at this stage of the financial year. Operating revenue is $2.2 million above budget and is being driven predominantly through interest revenue of $2.1 $500,000 from sales of goods and services. $458,000 from other revenue and $146,000 from grant programs. This has been offset by a lower than forecast rates revenue of $174,000 and fees and charges of $728,000. Operating expenditures $293,000 under budget with employee costs $654,000 under budget due to staff vacancies, savings in work cover premiums and the forecast salary increase that was to commence in March this financial year. Still not yet taking effect due to the ongoing negotiations of council certified agreement. Once that's finalised that back pay will be funded through those underspends and so that council won't necessarily require an additional budget for won't necessarily require an additional budget for that. Materials and services is $605,000 over budget, with $760,000 of that relating to civil operations. $234,000 relating to holiday parks, which obviously has associated with revenue with that, and street lighting for $161,000. Finance costs are $225,000 under budget, and that's due to the deferral of the waste capital works program to next year. Overall Council's year-to-date operating position at April 2025 is $2.5 million above budget, and this will be used to fund emergent expenditure through to June 2025. Capital revenue is $9.7 million above budget...due to the timing of receiving of QA disaster funding and SEQ CSP funding in advance. Capital expenditure is behind budget $48.7 million year-to-date, with $15.8 million relating to our base capital program, and $32.9 relating to the disaster projects which are funded by QRA, with the majority of this... relating to the timing and scheduling of project delivery. Council is currently... holding $114 million with $25.5.5 million in cash. However, this will diminish through to 30 June, as business as usual operations occur, and the capital program is delivered. Overall Council's financial performance remains on track, subject to any emergent issues that might arise between now Brian Stockwell 02:55:19.220
Questions, Councillor Wilkie? Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 02:55:23.200
Pauline, my favourite question that I ask every time, about the interest that were made, that $1.2 million in interest from QRA funding that's in the bank account right now, but surely that's got to be drained out soon, with Black Mountain Road being finished and finalised, and I would suspect there would be a payment going to that. Pauline 02:55:44.133
So yeah, there is an element of QRA funding, but not all of it is QRA funding. There's a large component that relates to the capital program that's yet to be delivered, so we hold funds to deliver our base capital program. We also hold funds for unspent levies and other grants grants that we have, as well as some internally restricted subsidies that we have for waste, which is multiple years. So yes, there is an element of QRA, but there are other elements in our cash holdings besides QRA. Yes, so what we have seen come through is that councils will have noted that several years ago had quite some significant increases in our UCV values through the valuation from the Valuer General's Office. We have had some amendments to those valuations coming through, as well as some changes to some classifications for transit-free properties, which classifications for transit free properties which has flowed through and therefore our budget our actual revenue for rates is actually down so we'll be looking at that to correct that through the next rating cycle. Frank Wilkie 02:56:45.472
Just a follow-up question you mentioned there's some change in transitory accommodation categories does that mean transferring from transitory accommodation back to non-principal places? Correct, so there's a change in use of some of the properties when we've done the assessment. Are we able to quantify how many properties are no longer operating as STAs from this data? Pauline 02:57:06.522
I'd have to take it on note and see if I could get that. I don't have that available at the moment. And a clarifying question, there's a breakout section about tourism. economic development investment summary where it talks about employee costs. Is that talking about Council's economic development staff? Correct, that would be what that represents. Frank Wilkie 02:57:26.301
Okay, thank you. Amelia Lorentson 02:57:27.419
Longton. I note very start of the report and the asset sustainability ratio is behind budget. A few questions. What factors have contributed to the asset sustainability ratio dropping to 66.3% instead of a target of about 90% and does a lower ratio indicate under investment in our critical infrastructure or asset maintenance so in just in context of that what that ratio represents it is essentially where council is required to or is preferable that council commits at least 80% of our depreciation to commits at least 80% of our depreciation to renewal projects. Pauline 02:58:14.851
As you'll see it accumulates over the years so as we deliver that program it will go up. We're currently sitting at 66 with our target being 80%. With the delay in our capital program that obviously has slowed that down so depending on the remaining delivery of this financial year we will likely get financial year we will likely get much closer to that I will note that we have not included any of the QRA spend in that so we haven't skewed the numbers but depending on the remaining delivery of that program or whether we hit that 80%. Amelia Lorentson 02:58:42.432
So you mentioned delays in capital expenditure affecting the ratio which projects are being impacted? Pauline 02:58:50.372
There's a variety of different projects that are renewal across the board I couldn't necessarily specifically pick one particular that's driving it but I think if I refer back to where I mentioned the capital program I think we're 15 million dollars behind that at the moment where we would like to be and a large majority of that is our renewal projects we pretty much dedicate the majority of our program to renewal. Amelia Lorentson 02:59:14.751
My last question is the industrial action dispute. Pauline 02:59:14.769
My last question of our program to renew. Amelia Lorentson 02:59:19.291
Has that impacted on delivering some of these projects? Pauline 02:59:25.511
I couldn't comment on the delivery of capital. of the capital program, there may be some element of that. I'm not sure if Shaun's aware of the capital program at all. And obviously civil operations is different. Shaun Walsh 02:59:35.850
Through the Chair, most of the protected action has affected, you know, routine operation and day-to-day maintenance rather than the program. It's more staffing and resourcing has affected delivery of things like a beach access renewal program and various others. It's more staffing and resources. And also just project delays associated with things like the Nella Bridge project renewal, which is quite a significant sum, it's millions of dollars on that alone. So the previous report to the SMO committee for reference to the updated capital works program, there was discussion about resourcing moving forward to try and resolve that. You know, carryover and underspend. And that'll be a matter for consideration in Council's budget for 2021/26. Thank you. Thanks, Pauline. Jessica Phillips 03:00:15.598
I have a question about the rates in arrears compared to other years. Is it... Compared to other years, is there more in arrears at this point in the year, or...? Pauline 03:00:31.589
It's slightly higher, probably about the same as last year. We haven't seen a huge uptick in that. We have a couple of debtors that we're chasing, more rates debtors that we're chasing at the moment. But as a general rule, no, it's not higher than it Amelia Lorentson 03:00:54.500
Certified agreement, negotiations and wage increases. The report notes that there's 2.1 million underspend in wages due to vacancies. Can you explain, there's an indication in the report that that may help offset some of the costs that may be incurred. In terms of the 2.1 million, there is also offsetting because there is obviously labour hire staff that are filling that hole for some of the vacancies. So the net amount of those two is about $600,000, $650,000, which is the year-to-date shortfall on our employee costs. And that would be what's utilised to fund the increase that's negotiated. Larry Sengstock 03:01:33.577
So we've already budgeted that. that. Councillor. Okay. The whole process is still in negotiations, so I prefer not to discuss it. Brian Stockwell 03:01:41.634
No worries. Okay, thank you. Okay. Does someone wish to move the motion? I move it. Councillor Wegener. Have we got a seconder? Seconder. Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 03:01:55.154
Thank you again for your very, very clear reports. Reports. It sounds like we are doing very nice, very well, but I'm worried a little bit about what's coming down the track for us, as we all are, and so just please keep up the great work. It sounds like... Amelia Lorentson 03:02:17.451
I'd just like to just say, just in closing, thank you, Pauline. Your reports are always really well presented, clear, and easy to read for not just us, but any resident who picks up the report will say the same. Question I forgot to ask, which I ask every meeting, is what keeps you up at night? And I'm going to answer that question myself. Lots at the moment. So I think when you work in local government, you actually start understanding the enormity of the business. And risk. And how important it is to be future thinking. And how important it is to have cash reserves. And how important it is to have the right staff in the right jobs performing. And to council's credit, you know, we do lots of things really well, and thank you again, but lots is keeping me up at night answering your question. Yes. Frank Wilkie 03:03:24.590
Yeah, thank you, Mr Chair. There's a very good reason why Noosa Council remains one of 20 out of 77 local governments to be, to run surplus budgets. It's because of its adherence to sustainable financial practices. to sustainable financial practices, good, clean reporting, and responsible budgeting. Note the asset sustainability ratio, which is about our spending, budgeted spending for Capital Works is, we've budgeted to spend 116.6% on our assets. We're at 66 at the moment. There's a target of 80. It's a couple of months to go. There have been some weather events. But what this report doesn't also show is the work that is done on managing 130 million external Capital Works program that's funded by external funding from the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, even though it's been managed by contractors. Noosa Council is, for the first time that I can remember for the last couple of years, been responsible responsible for two very significant capital works programs at the same time, so that's not in the report, but it's a sign that the organisation is, again, highly ambitious, punching well above its weight for a very small organisation, and weathering the challenges in a financially responsible way. So thank you, your reporting is key Tom Wegener 03:04:57.100
I'll throw my hat into it, keeping me awake at night, but I'm very happy that we're committed to a surplus budget. Thank you very much. Brian Stockwell 03:05:11.432
I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you, Pauline, Manager of Finance. We now ask the Manager of Environmental Services to come up to discuss the five-year review of the Environment Strategy. Welcome, Ben. Thank you, Chair. Oh, and Kim will head the Rector of Environment and Sustainability. Ben 03:05:36.400
So we had our annual review of our Environment Strategy, which has got 14 actions embedded in, and we've given a potted summary of how we're tracking against each of those actions. Of the 42, we've got one scheduled for which is fish biomass sitting within Noosa River, which has been a component of the Noosa River Plan. So as that develops, we'll start to get some metrics around there. There's two that need attention relating to agriculture, and they were always intended to agriculture and they're always intended to be further on in the environment strategy as we're starting to develop plans through economic development, strategic planning and environment that will incorporate some of our metrics in there. Of the remaining 39 actions, we've got four that have been completed, 21 are on target and 15 are progressing and we've given a progressing rating for actions where they're moving in the right direction but have been delayed for particular reasons and happy to take questions around those. Considering we've also got some four enabling, overarching enabling actions. And we've given a part of summaries to how we're progressing on those. Implementation of the environment grants program to support community projects and programs that lead to implementation of the environment strategy is on target and we've provided a summary of the reporting year for our environmental grants and climate change and sustainability grants. Enabling action number two, implementation of sustainability an environment roundtable to provide a mechanism for local groups, local community groups, government stakeholders and experts to have an input into development of council policy is progressing and I'll provide a note to say that terms of reference and a project plan for that will be presented to council probably at the next council meeting, not the one on Thursday but the one coming up, the one after that. We're just working through terms of reference of that at the moment. Enabling, the third enabling action supporting community environmental sustainable development networks and forums to build partnerships to drive the implementation of the environment strategy is considered to be progressing and again that is attached Progressing and again that is attached to the environment sustainability roundtable which is coming up and the final one which is undertake monitoring programs are required for evaluating and reporting on the success of the implementation of the environment strategy is also progressing and so that's monitoring programs are always a work in progress as things change and more Work in progress as things change and more data becomes available to us. So we've provided a potted summary on how we're progressing for each of the enabling actions, gone into a little bit more detail about all the other actions which are very council driven and council resourced. We've also provided an attachment for a summary of environmental grants and climate change and sustainability. There's two recommendations that we've put forward. One is relating to this report and the contents in there and the second one is proposing a mid-term review of the environment strategy given that it's a ten year strategy and it's still good. Certain things have changed. Certain things have changed in the last five years and a strategy that spans ten years there will always be changes along the way which is incorporating new technology. It might be a better way to be able to measure, track, implement different networks that we might be using at an it and emerging trends which may have emerged over the last five years as well so in relation to that we're not proposing a full-on rebuild of it but it's a review of the existing actions and whether any of those need amending and whether there's any emerging items that need to be considered. Frank Wilkie 03:09:34.960
Thank you very much for the report Ben. There's a lot going on. There's 42 actions... Is this a question? SPEAKER_13 03:09:45.320
With Frank Wilkie 03:09:45.960
4 Completed and 21 on target, to me that looks like halfway through a 10-year program you're 60% are either on track or completed. But can you Can you tell us, are there any programs that in your mind require the most attention for a recalibration? Is there any one or two that come to mind that will lead to some sort of adjustment? Richard MacGillivray 03:10:18.085
Look, the ones that are off track or haven't progressed probably, which are relating to agriculture and what was the other one? Agriculture and fishing. Yeah, the ones that we we haven't haven't quite got a concept around as to what's Council's level of influence, what can we do to be able to promote better metrics that we can measure that can say we're progressing and they're reasonably new areas for Council to be able to step into as well. in the right way for those. Probably the one that has our most attention at the moment is issues relating to the river. And particularly the transition that we've got in between developing the Noosa River Management Plan on its own and incorporating that into the Resilient Rivers Catchment Action Plan program, which is just at that transition period at the Program which is just at that transition period at the moment where we're resourcing up the staff and getting frameworks together so there's quite a few actions that are sitting within there within that sphere that will be delivered as a component of that and I think we're on the right track for it it's just a difficult period to be able to go through. Frank Wilkie 03:11:33.719
And with MSQ stepping up for a lot of the on-water responsibility that's that's taken a large element out of the Noosa River plan or Noosa Council's interest in the Noosa Plan. Richard MacGillivray 03:11:49.488
Can I respond to that? Frank Wilkie 03:11:51.007
I think we have an advocacy role but we're not looking at monitoring on-water activities. Kim Rawlings 03:11:57.427
Yeah no but what I would say Councillor Wilkie is that we are currently recruiting for that role and we are finalising the the approach. with the State government through resilient rivers about what that catchment action management plan will include and I would suggest that's probably better to a separate conversation with council which we have planned once that's in place rather than at this point saying what's in and what's out but that would that will absolutely take into account what's occurred. What's occurred in the last three or four years and what shifted from what our original aspirations were around the river and whose roles what? It will absolutely be contemporary in that sense. Well, I guess I'm saying with MSQ stepping up it has changed the game significantly. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:12:43.534
Question please, just around unspent grant funds, please. Are they reallocated or what happens to those grant unspent funds? Ben 03:12:57.835
So there's two elements to that. One is the environmental grants which are funded through environment levy. We haven't got unspent monies in those. There was a reallocation of $50,000 from the project into alliance grants and so the book sort of balance. I think there's about a $50 excess for $150,000 odd of multi-year. $150,000 odd of multi-year environment grants so if there's an underspend in environment levy grants that just transfers back into the environment levy pool and so they're used for you know all the things in the environment levy. It might be land purchases, it might be environmental initiatives or follow the subsequent grant rounds. The climate change and sustainability grants are general revenue and so we did have an underspend in that with one particular project predominantly contributing the most of that which they We realised that they couldn't put solar panels on a community building because the got a fair way down the structure couldn't take it so those monies went back into general revenue. It was too late in the piece to reissue those funds on that grant round and I don't think we had a suitable candidate to be able to reissue those. So two different answers to the two different mining streams. Jessica Phillips 03:14:11.619
Thank you, that really clarifies it. And my last question is around the plastic free Noosa. This probably comes off the last week's special meeting, which I won't bring up. Okay, so just to clarify please, how is the Tourism Noosa Fund is the Tourism Noosa funding arrangement separate to the Plastic Free Noosa? Richard MacGillivray 03:14:40.138
I can answer that from a project point of view. So we assess the Plastic Free Noosa application separately without consideration of the Tourism Noosa funding body. There was nothing in our guidelines and policy which precluded Tourism Noosa from applying for those program funds. So we assessed assessed it it and and it it matched matched very very favourably favourably with some of the objectives that sat within the environment strategy, so they got the money. Kim Rawlings 03:15:06.407
I'll just add to that, any organisation that's eligible under our grants guidelines can apply for grant funding. That's community community organisations, tourism organisations, depending on which grant program. So Plastic Free program is funded through our multi-year environment grants, which are a three-year program. They are in their final year They are in the final year of that three years. So our multi-year environment grants will come up again next year for consideration. Jessica Phillips 03:15:33.792
So how will potentially the roadmap from the year of Tourism Noosa now align? it align at all or will we see that somehow... It is quite separate. It's a grant, separate program and it's assessed separately. It's governed under our grants policy and our grants guidelines. its own acquittal process as it is with any organisation, sporting organisation, community organisation, anyone. lines It's governed through the community. grants program you know it should council be looking at the sorts of programs that tourism Noosa might be doing in the future through the road map it could be considered in that context but I wouldn't want to conflate those context, but I wouldn't want to conflate those issues. They are quite separate, the funding agreement and the roadmap and then the grant, which is project specific and has very specific deliverables in its own timeframe. We need to, you know, just make sure that there's There's clear, clear air between those two things because they are governed and under different processes. Great, thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:16:51.624
Sorry, Councillor Wilson first. Nicola Wilson 03:16:55.284
We have lots of references to keep and get in Kingpin projects, but do we have a plan for getting out of Kingpin for the flying foxes, please? Richard MacGillivray 03:17:05.511
Through the chair, yep. Look, flying foxes have always been contentious within the community and all the roosts do create conflict. The one in Kingpin is somewhat unique where in Kin Kin is somewhat unique where the majority of the habitat and the roost is in private land there's only a small section of council managed land being the riparian area as the population increases it does spill into larger areas of council look council officers really appreciate the challenge of living next to a flying fox roost you know hence the development Ben 03:18:01.845
And education. aren't happening in and around the roost to disturb the roost. We've got a range of longer term actions that we do implement through there as well in terms of vegetation management and weed management. Richard MacGillivray 03:18:29.328
This year the population in Kin Kin for flying foxes has has not changed markedly outside of the annual fluctuations that we'd expect so there has been some increases in population through summer and autumn as we expect for most of the populations but it's not something which is markedly more worse we feel than what than what it was five years ago in terms of the population. With the what population with the what we can do for residents as I said we're doing stage two which is better vegetation management through there making sure that we're still managing our in accordance with the statement management intent and we've also lifted our individual subsidies from $1,500 to $2,000 and it's quite prescriptive as to what each round of prescriptive as to what each round of those we can apply, the activities that we can apply for. So if there's different activities that need rectification through advocacy from the community, then we can seek funds to be able to make sure that we've got grants that align to that as well. So the grants at this point have been water filtration units and cleaning. yeah, I'm not sure that it's got colours. I think it's cleaning and vegetation removal. So given most of the habitat is in private land, Council has got a policy written in the statement of management intent that we will not go into someone's private land and do vegetation cleaning, but we'll provide subsidies so that people can engage contractors to be able to do that safely. Yeah. So there's look up and I appreciate that flying foxes in the community is a it's a contentious issue when when you know properties properties back on. They're protected species. They've got levels of protection. There's certain management actions that we went through when we developed the SOMI that we can and can't do. Dispersal is one that was debated. I did. with some vigour and Noosa Council generally doesn't support dispersion. It's expensive. It's seen as a potentially short term because the roosts have demonstrated throughout Australia to. She's there or somewhere else. Yeah. Okay. Amelia Lorentson 03:20:58.032
The Burgess Creek catchment management plan. There was another pledge by the LNP and they committed $100,000 for a critical study. Have we received any official confirmation from LNP regarding this funding? Richard MacGillivray 03:21:15.332
We do. We have. We've been liaising with the department. We've had email clarification or email confirmation that we'll receive that funding. We're working with the department at the moment to be able to put some specifics around what the delivery will be. and so they're looking for, what's going to suit our needs, what we've got the capacity to be able to do for $100,000. Given it's quite a small attachment, we still need to incorporate community engagement. We've got to be able to measure off environmental management. measure off environmental management, weed management, water quality and infrastructure requirements as well, so there's quite a lot of elements to be able to cover off for $100,000 and we're just working through the department at the moment just to be able to make sure that we've got the funding data agreement set. Amelia Lorentson 03:21:58.769
Probably similar question than we asked with the pledge with the two and a half million dollars with the boating infrastructure. Who determines how the funds are used? Again, there was context around that $100,000 how it was going to be used. Is that now irrelevant and do discussions, as you mentioned Ben, does council lead the narrative now that the funding's committed or does that get led by state? Kim Rawlings 03:22:31.238
I'll respond to that and then you can add if you like Ben. Like Ben said, we are working with the department on scope is. So they've been allocated the funding but there are particular outcomes they want to achieve from that funding. Our original costings of the integrated water management plan were greater than $100,000. That's Amelia Lorentson 03:22:52.067
$750,000 I think two years ago. Kim Rawlings 03:22:54.807
So we do need to therefore re-look at scope to see what this $100,000 can actually deliver. There's a collaboration happening around that at the moment to say, well, these are the things we think are the priority. Can they fit within the scope? What can we manage? So yes, there is a scoping down of what that project can be, given it's $100,000, not hundreds of thousands of dollars. Richard MacGillivray 03:23:24.262
Yeah, and look, in terms of the outcome and the detail that it goes into, that's probably where those decisions will be made, rather than something which is very detailed. has detailed responses to what the risks and opportunities are in that integrated plan that might make statements at a higher level, and it might direct strategic directions into particular areas for infrastructure failure, as an example of more investigation needs to be done around these areas to ensure that infrastructure, you know, remains viable. remains viable. Amelia Lorentson 03:23:54.790
We have funded, just trying to think, 23, Kim, 2023-24, the University of Sunshine Coast. We funded a report on looking... On looking at erosion movements around the mouth of Burgess Creek, two questions. Will that report help guide the scope? Because there's already been some investigatory work done in the space. And two, has that report ever been... released to public? I haven't I haven't seen it. Kim Rawlings 03:24:28.803
I'll have to take that on notice about that report. I know we did do a status update on that report back to Council maybe, I'd have to check the date, maybe mid last year or early last year. But the actual report, I don't think we ever had access to that. No, I'll have to take that on notice and follow up about the status of that report, whether it's been released, I'm not But yeah there has been a lot of work done in that catchment over the last couple of years as you know so all of those things will be key inputs into what the scope of the water catchment management plan is now and really needs to focus on where the gaps are because we have we have got a lot more information now and there has been a lot of work done in the last couple of years so you know the best use of that use of that investment will be in what are the gaps, what don't we know, and what we need to do going forward. Amelia Lorentson 03:25:19.774
And my last question, integrated water catchment plan. So again, going back a couple of years ago, there was appetite to fund that. We haven't, and I'm anticipating that cost has exacerbated over the last couple of years. How do we progress that? Will the environment, Ben will you come to us as part of our budget deliberations and put that as an initiative for us to consider? I can move on. Look we haven't, we've got a working group on it which is incorporating environment and infrastructure. So we're getting technical officer input into what the elements that we need to it need to address. That will come to council prior to being signed off. It's a significant government grant so we need to make sure the council is updated. Richard MacGillivray 03:26:18.080
We haven't considered making a budget bid to increase what we consider to be that amount. Phrase. We're grateful that we've got $100,000 where we didn't have $100,000 a few months ago. So we're working with what we've got. Amelia Lorentson 03:26:32.240
Thank you very much. Tom Wegener 03:26:41.679
Looking at the roundtable coming up and working with community groups, how do you see that I would love to see them actually bringing a monetary value to what they're doing and to be more and more included in the actual running of the environment machine. And like for example, NICA, you know, they go off and they do the water monitoring and they bring that back and they're not staffed, but they do a fantastic job. And is there other groups that Groups that we can really, both as a bush care group and things like that, how can we expand with, you know, our support for the groups doing stuff to help us out? Ben 03:27:27.191
Yeah, we've got a, we're engaged with our network. We're probably not engaged on the formal sense in terms of a roundtable, and so roundtable, which is intended to be every six months for interested parties, will provide us with a kind of a strategic guidance on where we're headed. Probably to be able to engage properly with those groups is a lot more organic and day-to-day. So, you know, prior to coming in here, I was supposed to be in a NICA meeting, and it's just that, you be a NICA meeting and it's just that you know ongoing touch points of all of our officers you know regularly engaging with those community groups to make sure they've got the support they need to keep going. If there's a group that is facing some challenges and council is aware of it we certainly certainly offer offer our our support support so so that they can move through those times and still deliver what their members want them to deliver. So we're regularly engaged. I can appreciate needing a formal network so that we can report on it and recognise it and celebrate it. Yeah, probably on a day-to-day basis. That's something which is kind of the nuts and bolts of work. Tom Wegener 03:28:41.598
Leading on from that then, the destination management plan and the concept of being a regenerative, community community, regenerative tourist area. And I think that the community groups will be the ones to lead that, the charge, to lead the... informing of the public. Is that right? Are you looking at them as a conduit for your concept of a destination management, regenerative destination management plan to take hold in the community find its roots? Kim Rawlings 03:29:14.013
I think, Councillor Wegener, there's still some further discussion to be had around the destination management plan with Council, but like any key strategy that Council does, fundamental to the delivery of our strategies, environment strategy, housing strategy, our community partnerships, they're embedded in our strategy. We couldn't achieve the things that we are achieving at the moment and this report with with its 60 page attachment, demonstrates how significant a community contribution our community organisations make. So I would think absolutely, you know, partnership arrangements and having our key community organisations involved and aligned with where we're heading across all of our This is actually fundamental. And, you know, I think in many areas, our community organisations do a lot of heavy lifting in terms of helping council achieve the objectives that we set in strategies. Tom Wegener 03:30:36.528
Nets. And, you know, we have a lot of discussion of our shark nets. But could we have a no net Noosa? No net biosphere? Brian Stockwell 03:30:46.748
Just throwing it out there. I don't think that's one of the stuff. Karen Finzel 03:30:55.560
Thank you, Mr Chair. Through the chair and the staff, firstly, thank you for the report. It is a big body of work. I'm out to review against the contemporary. contemporarily. threats and challenges moving forward. I know one of the threats I think about is our organic waste landfill, which is really important given we're looking at being a sustainable, you know, environment and tourism destination. Two things. Firstly, I'd like to hear what maybe your top two things that you consider are threats at the moment that are contemporary, but secondly, how does this environmental strategy going to play into and inform a strategy associated with DA conditions for organic waste as we develop our capacity to accept the Kim Rawlings 03:31:52.660
So I think the second the response to the second question is is the it's a combination of environment strategy and waste strategy and legislative requirements and it's kind of changing around waste and organics and things so I you know I it's probably needs broader discussion Councillor Finzel to be honest to answer that question you know it'd be good to have Cairo in the room and actually sort of thrash Cairo in the room and actually sort of thrash that out about what is it, what are the targets we're going to set, what are the parameters, what are the expectations and how we then flow that through our strategies. into our regulatory conditioning, into DA processes and you know what sort of expectations we have. I think there's a fair bit of water to go under the bridge around that at the moment. We definitely have aspirations and objectives around that but we you know that whole kind of pipeline of how that then lands on the ground really probably needs a bit more consideration and a bit more conversation. Karen Finzel 03:32:57.051
And then in terms of what you think are some of those, maybe the top two threats that you consider. Yeah and Councillor Finzel it's probably and Richard MacGillivray 03:33:07.158
Subjective to my view, so somebody might give you a different answer. Look I think with the time that I've spent working in the environment field, which is close to three decades without question, climate change and population pressures on our biodiversity areas and our compromising our environmental values without question, and particularly in South East Queensland, they are the big two that require careful and strategic attention to and protection of the long-term protection of our conservation estate and the expansion of our conservation estate to make sure that we're operating sustainably from a biodiversity, carbon and water perspective, which is something that we haven't picked up or we haven't quantified. haven't picked up or we haven't quantified in the current environment strategy we've got a target for conservation which is fairly rudimentary in terms of how that was chosen but there's science out there now that says these are the targets that you should be hitting in these particular bioregions which we can anchor some science to to say Noosa within our boundaries we've got sustainability not Not for for the the next next few few decades decades until the planning scheme eventually you know pushes right up into up into Noosa and we have to change but you know if we protect it right then for centuries and generations and generations to come for sustainability for genuinely what it is rather than something that we can do for a short period of time because that's that's sometimes how we think. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:34:38.819
One last question Mr Chair. The eastern beaches foreshore reserves management there's a number of actions there if the wording says progress and implementing the plan includes there's a range of actions. Does this mean progress has been made? Progress has been made in each of those actions? Yes okay yeah that's correct and not always are we seeing a lot of action it might be development of background material it might be communication with community members down there as a first point as to we need to get that particular action moving. The eastern beaches foreshore reserves management plan is a implementation actions that come out of that there's probably 70 or 80 of them so it's a big body of work as well to be able to work through a prioritisation. Yeah, there's five key overarching actions there that you're making The fencing signage and assisting natural regeneration for recovery sites, meaning the dunes, to improve natural foreshore resilience, that's probably the resilience. That's probably a highly visible aspect of the plan that the plan seeks to address. How are we going in terms of resourcing for that action? Richard MacGillivray 03:35:54.105
Yes, that's very much embedded in the beach access infrastructure manual. So signage will be addressed there as well as... Drill fencing? Yeah, and making sure that the best available access to the beach is the most appropriate one as well. Ben 03:36:11.672
So currently we've got some beach accesses which is where, you know, everyone's coming onto the beach at those points and so they're the ones that people make decisions. So I wonder if I can get the dunes or do I go down to the beach line? Getting those right is seen Amelia Lorentson 03:37:01.974
Strategies towards these targets is unable to be assessed due to insufficient monitoring data. A couple of questions. How we're currently progressing on meeting the Noosa food waste reduction targets is 2030. Shaun Walsh 03:37:23.900
Sorry. Is Amelia Lorentson 03:37:24.960
2030 Target attainable? Shaun Walsh 03:37:28.080
Sorry, Chair. I really think that's a matter for funding from the State government through a redistribution of the State waste levy. You know, we collect a lot of money on behalf of the State and the committee has to get that money back. We're in the picture in terms of funding submissions. But, you know, that level of technology, waste separation, composting or whatever, is no joke. But, you know, that level of funding submissions. It's expensive. And we're looking to the State for their assistance to help lead that project and achieve that goal. So it is achievable. I'm comfortable with that goal being in there. It's achievable. achievable with the right funding. I'm going to move the motion. Amelia Lorentson 03:38:00.454
Sorry, I have another question. Brian Stockwell 03:38:02.694
Okay. You can have a question any time. Thank you. Just a follow-up. No, no, I haven't moved it in a second. So you can do it after the talk. The report highlights a great lot of activity that had done over the five years. The report... There's been a significant body of work done both by staff and it was highlighted. Most of the stuff that gets done on the ground there is a partnership a partnership with council and the community and it's been done and we're fortunate to have hundreds if not thousands of people working across the various elements of the environment strategy at a community level helping us to achieve the targets. I think the concept of having a five-year midterm review is good and you outlined in the report a range of different triggers that would warrant that. I actually think there's one more and it relates to one of the reds. The red 414 was enhanced integrated cash management of the Noosa River and Mary River sub-captains with a view of improving land use, wetland and rock area management practices through landholder engagement on ground rehabilitation. Integrated cash management is a way of operating. It's a much broader kind of concept than what we have embodied recently. It's about a holistic, it's about bottom up, it's about stakeholder driven and it's I think something we have to think about whether it's council's role to do. In management Mayoral catchment they have had an integrated catchment management body since 1994, so it's probably still the longest running and biggest one in Queensland and they've got multi-million dollar budget. In Noosa we haven't we haven't got the same momentum and NICA has opted through their own reviews to go a different direction. I think the concept of how we get integrated natural resource and environment management is one we have to think a lot about and I one we have to think a lot about and I don't think we'll get to the target in section 2.1 which is about maintaining and improving the health of our waterways, wetlands and capitals if we don't do something about it and I'd say that because it's a multi-stakeholder approach and it's an approach that gets stakeholders around the table so that you can manage conflict whereas at the moment and previously the Noosa River in particular is a source of conflict. And they come and... Noosa, Tewantin, Cooroy, Doonan, Kabi Kabi, Councillor. Council have an agenda, we might want to talk to them about one or two things but they would also lay their own agenda and they'd work how they'd like to work together so we had great projects like the eastern beaches bush care groups come together. We've sort of lost that since COVID and I think and just before COVID there was this thing where before COVID there was this thing where council was trying to say we think the community should run it and the community was trying to say no we want council to keep on leading it. I think we have to decide about who does and I think it's germane to an achievement of not just that 2.1 but it's also around the zen and waste. It's about how do we get integrated environmental solutions to achieve our waste targets and our emissions reduction which require a lot of work. in the community to achieve behaviour change and to me that whole integrated and engaged and more collaborative approach on holistic options. is something we can think more about you know we do good job in a project by project sector by sector but we're not doing that well in my opinion on the integrated but as I said we're achieving great things I won't be too negative but I just think it's part of that review we won't be too negative, but I just think as part of that review, we have to think about how we operate. Now, Councillor Lorentson, you wouldn't want to ask a question. Amelia Lorentson 03:42:15.542
Thank you, Councillor Stockwell, and I appreciate how nicely you just asked me that question. In terms of progress, Noosa signed an MOU with Gympie on regional waste management. I just want to know what specific initiatives have resulted from the partnership. Kim Rawlings 03:42:40.571
Noosa signed the MOU with Gympie Regional Council about waste. Is there any update on progress on that? Shaun Walsh 03:42:48.571
When we've been having discussions with the region, we've included Gympie as part of it. It's a bit, you know, challenging because Gympie is not playing the same instrument as any regional organisation. But there are particular attributes they have in terms of space and particular waste streams that we can bring into the forum, so I suppose we've taken a position that we're advocating for waste outcomes that Gympie can be involved in as part of regional solutions. And also note that some of the airway suppliers such as Corvettes, we have a number of commercial contracts with, so we're actually using Gympie suppliers. So I'd say it's a healthy relationship, but yet to, you know, have proper yet to have proper fruition in terms of its outcomes. Amelia Lorentson 03:43:27.886
Another question, how often do we meet with Gympie Mayor? Shaun Walsh 03:43:32.746
I don't personally meet with the Gympie Mayor. Or just with their waste staff? Kim Rawlings 03:43:38.846
Yeah, we have a quarterly forum with Gympie Sunshine Coast Council. Council and us as an executive, so all three CEOs and all three executives, and waste is a regular topic on that. They're all strategic regional topics that are part of that agenda, and one quarter we meet at Gympie, one quarter we meet here, and one quarter we meet at Sunshine Coast. So that has been a continuous topic of conversation. Brian Stockwell 03:44:10.940
Let's talk to the next one. I'll speak to the next one. Yes. Brian, that was probably your most inspirational speech, thank you. And it's visionary, and you know, you're saying that we actually need a central glue to pull all these groups together. And I think Waste is doing it, they're incredible, but perhaps in the there was groups, probably the MTA, that had the vision that Noosa followed, and I think that we do need that integration amongst the groups. For example, I think their site is carbon sequence, key sequestration, and biodiversity offsets. That individuals can do. And that's something that groups can do. They can be outside of council, but for goodness sake, we don't need to squash them when they're trying to do things, which can happen. I actually throw another great idea out there, and that is almost a PR firm as the central body to talk about what the groups are doing. And instead of council doing it, because council can't actually blow our That's not what we're good at. But if we work with other groups, but actually maybe perhaps, maybe Tourism Noosa becomes the cheerleader for pulling all the groups and then sharing this vision because of where we lack right now. right now, I believe, is our lack of shared vision for a regenerative future in Noosa. And I just love what you're doing, by the way. Great work. The environment team is fantastic and I think that, as Frank pointed out, the amount of success on the ledger board there, if you go through all 42 actions, it's phenomenal. I probably want to talk about the review period. So we are at the halfway mark of the ten-year implementation and I agree with you, Ben, we've got to assess progress, adapt to emerging environmental challenges and ensure that our approach is effective and relevant etc. Probably a critical time to ask you know I think Councillor Finzel asked you what your biggest challenges or future threats. Amelia Lorentson 03:46:17.220
Probably a etc. I think the questions that I'm sort of asking is and maybe part of the review is we should start really of the review is we should start really really thinking hard about how green we are as a council today compared to say five years ago or compared to 10 years ago and how green does our future does our future look? You know, biggest risk to me is landfill. Our landfill emissions account for 63% of Noosa Council's total emissions. a clock ticking in terms of the landfill. It's close to reaching capacity, so that keeps me up at night. And the other big risk is plastics and microplastics and these emerging contaminants, and we saw that just recently with Cyclone Alfred. There's serious threats, and the only way we change behaviour is we start walking the talk, and that goes back to my original question. The question that we should be considering as part of the review is how green are we today, and how green must we be if we're going to sing under the mantra of different Brian Stockwell 03:47:51.500
People? Okay, I will close because there's one thing. I think Councillor Wegener might be onto something, and that's in terms of my thinking and his thinking. Combining under the concept of, do we integrate around the concept of what is the regenerative future? Because I do think, you know, back prior to COVID, the conversation was, shouldn't we have tourism? Noosa in the room. And it's probably quite clear that is now a big part of what the future involves. Um, and having people both from those who see the regenerative future as something that's happening in terms of weeds and bushes along the coast. I think while not every environment decision can be done in a fashion with all stakeholders, it is a good way to get change in the community. And I'll say that the rejection of the Traverson Dam was as a result of all the relationships done in the formation and delivery of the Meri Integrated Cashflow Management, both the local, national and international networks that all came out telling the I think that might be it, is it? I know we've got a confidential. So I'll have a motion to move in the confidential session. If someone wants to move what is on the board. Councillor Lorentson is moving. Amelia Lorentson 03:49:36.900
I'm happy to move that the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254 J3J. of the local government regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing a contract proposed to be made by council in item 9.1 contract number CN25031 Provision of cleaning services for administration buildings, libraries and other facilities. Brian Stockwell 03:50:01.951
Seconded by Councillor WILSON, there's no need for discussion. I think all in favour? That is carried. SPEAKER_13 04:19:53.570
I think they're still outside too, waiting to come back in. Karen Finzel 04:19:56.450
Are they? I don't know. They're going out the door, I think. I can hear them. No, I don't think they're streaming. I'll go and have a look. Larry Sengstock 04:20:02.050
It's on. They're waiting to hear one. It's on. Karen Finzel 04:20:10.450
Thank you very much. It's on. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 04:20:15.250
We're on? Okay, so welcome back to the council meeting. Okay. So. We have a recommendation in front of us in terms of a confidential item. Frank Wilkie 04:20:27.551
I can't see the recommendation. I can't see the recommendation. Okay. Brian Stockwell 04:20:33.611
So Cathy, if you could just bring up the recommendation, please. Frank Wilkie 04:21:03.740
So I can read all of it. Brian Stockwell 04:21:20.520
Okay. Would someone like to move the staff recommendation? I'm happy to move it. Councillor Wilkie, seconder Councillor Finzel. Do you wish to talk to it? I do not. Anyone wish to discuss? I put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. And that brings us to the end of the meeting. The meeting closes at 4:52pm. Thank you councillors. Thank you staff. Thank you Mr Chair. Karen Finzel 04:21:41.260
Thank you Mr CEO and staff. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
