Ordinary Meeting - 20 February 2025
Date: Thursday, 20 February 2025 at 10:00AM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 01:09:26
Synopsis: Meetings: 5pm shift defeated, Planning: meat facility approved, Environment: levy land buy OK, Transport: buses ended; levy excludes ramps, Finance: reports noted.
Meeting Attendees
Councillors
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Amelia Lorentson Jessica Phillips Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Frank Wilkie: Motion to shift Ordinary Meetings to 5:00pm defeated 5–2; daytime schedule retained citing decision quality, staff wellbeing, and online access (22:30–27:54; Item 10.1). Brian Stockwell: Minor-change approval for home-based Meat Processing Facility at 82 Patterson Dr, Tinbeerwah with revised conditions: amend 10, refuse deletion of 21 (but modify), delete 6, strengthen landscaping via amended 19; carried with one dissent (54:18–1:07:52; Item 11.3, 7.1). Planning delegated decisions for Dec 2024 noted, with deletion of NP20MCU 12637DA-59 Kabi Rd, Cootharaba (Item 11.1, 8.1). Confidential authority to negotiate Environment Levy land purchase granted; CEO to pursue acquisition and Nature Refuge status if purchased (Item 11.1, 9.1). Comensura Pty Ltd awarded contingent staff (labour hire) contract CN24861 to Apr 2027, with CEO delegated to extend up to 3 years (Item 11.2, 7.1). Noosa Holiday Parks operations update noted to 31 Dec 2024 (Item 11.2, 8.1). Cemetery fees updated to reflect ATO GST exemption on burial rights and cremation memorials; GST to remain on ancillary items (Item 11.2, 8.2). Capital Works Program Q2 status noted; later used to frame a conflict process (Item 11.2, 8.3). Lease approved: Tenancy A2, Peregian Digital Hub to NextPlay (1-year + 2-year option) (Item 11.3, 8.1). Financial Performance Report for Jan 2025 noted, with sustainability indicators added (Item 11.3, 8.2). Operational Plan 2024–25 Q2 progress and KPIs noted (Item 11.3, 8.3). Shaun Walsh: Go Noosa free weekend/peak buses ceased; Sustainable Transport Levy cannot fund private vehicle/boat trailer parking such as Hilton Esplanade; on-land ramp design slated FY25/26 (15:18–18:41; public Q 8.4). Contentious / Transparency Matters Amelia Lorentson: Argued 5pm start enhances public access; cited business chambers’ letters and meeting duration stats; motion lost (22:57–27:54; 45:40–50:19; Item 10.1). Frank Wilkie: Opposed night meetings; cited century-old practice now superseded by streaming; warned of fatigue after 7-hour meeting; claimed unanimous prior scheduling (27:54–35:08; Item 10.1). Karen Finzel: Raised psychosocial hazard obligations and staff right to disconnect; CEO confirmed risks and staff protections (35:49–38:55; Item 10.1 discussion). Brian Stockwell: Point of order on relevance during debate; later stressed prior review in Nov and lack of fresh evidence for change (33:17; 43:18–45:06; Item 10.1). Craig Vella (read by Councillors/Director): Public challenge to reallocating transport levy to boat ramps after bus cancellations; clarified levy purpose limits (15:18–18:41; public Q 8.4; prior Gen Comm 20 Jan noted in Q). Patricia Spicer: Probed 62 Lake Macdonald Dr spend and rationale for remediation approval pre-tender/grant; response affirmed duty to remediate contamination and future consultation on Lots 2–3 (04:26–09:42; public Q 8.2; links to 23 Jan resolution referenced in Q). Legal / Risk Tinbeerwah decision issued “in accordance with s63(5) Planning Act 2016,” evidencing lawful assessment record (Item 11.3, 7.1). Richard MacGillivray: Confirmed conditions must meet legal tests of reasonableness/relevance; vehicle-movement caps for home-based business not supportable given mixed residential trips (1:02:39–1:04:35; Item 11.3, 7.1 debate). ATO GST determination implemented for cemetery burial rights, reducing tax risk; GST retained on plaques/headstones/services to maintain compliance (Item 11.2, 8.2). Larry Sengstock: Highlighted obligations under QLD psychosocial hazards code and staff right to say no to after-hours, mitigating WHS exposure (36:34–38:55; Item 10.1 debate). Kim Rawlings (via answer): Council frames remediation at 62 Lake Macdonald as duty of care on contaminated land; funding via loans/grants permissible for essential infrastructure under Local Government finance powers (08:20–09:42; public Q 8.2). Shaun Walsh: Noted $2.5m LNP pledge for river ramps not yet confirmed in State budget; Council engaging MSQ pending confirmation; avoids reliance risk (18:57–20:13; public Q 8.5). Conflicts of Interest Jessica Phillips: Declared COI (consultant/coach to Cooroy Gymnastics Club) related to Cooroy Sports Complex tender mentioned in Capital Program; Council, under s150ES LGA 2009, allowed participation and vote; she did not vote on the eligibility motion (51:31–52:23; Item 11.2, 8.3). Cemeteries & Community Services Kerri Contini: Cemeteries Plan in development; trend shift to ashes/memorials/green burials; Pomona buffered 200m from waste site; exploring regional models cautiously (01:50–04:05; public Q 8.1). Kim Rawlings (via CEO): 62 Lake Macdonald Dr investigations ~$380k (mostly 23/24 budget $500k), aided by $178k Fed grant; $3.3m (24/25) mainly for remediation/civil works (05:19–06:10; public Q 8.2). Transport, Boat Ramps & Levy Use Shaun Walsh: Sustainable Transport Levy dedicated to congestion/active/public transport (e.g., PT, park-and-ride, ITS); cannot fund boat/vehicle parking upgrades; Hilton Esplanade on-land design in FY25/26 (16:58–18:41; public Q 8.4). Shaun Walsh: State pre-election $2.5m boat ramp pledge unconfirmed; Council liaising with MSQ and seeking multi-source funding (18:57–20:13; public Q 8.5). Environmental Concerns & Land Management Kim Rawlings (via Director): Johns Landing: 70% Nature Refuge; 2019 bushfires set back targets; restoration plan to be updated; ~$12k/yr refuge works; ~$10k/yr for remainder; Fire Management Plan in place; future uses to follow Strategic Land Activation Policy (20:15–22:19; public Q 8.5). Environment Levy acquisition authority aims to secure high-value conservation land with Nature Refuge overlay post-purchase (Item 11.1, 9.1). Regulation & Community Compliance Richard MacGillivray: Dog registration: 7% late in prior cycle despite reminders; infringement revenue funds regulatory services; 1–3 year registration option needs operational/budget review (13:09–14:21; public Q 8.3). Minutes recorded cemetery GST changes and user-fee clarity, improving compliance and cost transparency (Item 11.2, 8.2).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES Ordinary Meeting Thursday, 20 February 2025 10:00 AM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Cr Frank Wilkie (Chair), Karen Finzel, Amelia Lorentson, Jessica Phillips, Brian Stockwell, Tom Wegener, Nicola Wilson “Noosa Shire – different by nature” ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 1. DECLARATION OF OPENING The meeting was declared open at 10.00 AM 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 COUNCILLORS Cr Frank Wilkie (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt APOLOGIES Nil. 4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 23 January 2025 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. 5. PETITIONS Nil. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 6. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 7. DEPUTATIONS Nil. 8. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 8.1. BRIAN O'CONNOR QUESTION 1 We are told that Noosa Shire is experiencing a housing shortage, but I wonder whether is extends beyond death? The Tewantin Cemetery is not accepting any more prospective guests in repose and the council has given up land set aside for expansion of the Cooroy Cemetery for use as affordable housing for the living instead. At Pomona, the dead are buried beside the rubbish at the adjacent waste disposal facility. Given Noosa Shire's growing and ageing population, what current and future planning is the council undertaking to ensure sufficient land is reserved for burials and for niches containing cremated ashes, or even so-called 'natural' burial sites, now creeping into favour? Answer provided by Kerri Contini Director Community Services Thank-you for your question and interest in the cemetery services Council provides. Council operates three cemeteries at Tewantin, Cooroy and Pomona. To clarify, although I’m sure Mr O’Connor was being tongue-in-cheek, people are not buried beside rubbish at Pomona Cemetery. Our Pomona Cemetery is a beautiful garden sited cemetery surrounded by trees with a 200m vegetation buffer between the cemetery and the waste transfer site. Council officers are currently undertaking the research and analysis stage to develop a Cemeteries’ Plan to guide the future internment needs for Noosa residents. This includes understanding the impacts of changing trends which is broadly seeing a reduction in demand for traditional burials and an increase in requests for ashes internment, memorial plaques and contemporary offerings such as green burials. This Plan will guide requirements for land requirements. QUESTION 2 Noosa and Gympie councils have signed a Memorandum of Understanding that aims to explore efficiencies in waste management and potential cost-sharing arrangements across the two-council area. Would this be a model for cooperation on possible development of a management model for establishing a regional cemetery in the hinterland serving a wider catchment area? ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 Answer provided by Kerri Contini Director Community Services Thank-you for your additional question. Council is researching a range of options for the planning of future cemetery needs. Regional models for service delivery can be very effective in relevant scenarios however we would need to investigate a range of factors such as land availability, community willingness to travel to a regional cemetery and importantly priorities of our neighbouring Council before considering whether that would be appropriate for cemetery services. We do meet with cemeteries’ staff from other Councils in Southeast Qld each month to share knowledge, trends and approaches which supports a strong public cemeteries’ sector. 8.2. PATRICIA SPICER QUESTION 1 How much of the $3.3 million initial budget allocation has been used in the process of investigating, getting reports, subdivision, tree clearing and remediation planning for 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy? Please include when the budget allocation was made and the details of costings for each report and plan that has been done for 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy to date. If investigations/plans/reports were done prior to this budget allocation, what was the cost of these and how was this cost met? Answer provided by Kim Rawlings Director Strategy and Environment Thanks Pat for your questions. None/very little of the $3.3m has been used for the investigations. This allocation is in the 24/25 budget for delivery costs/ remediation and civil works. The budget allocation for site investigations was $500,000 in the 23/24 budget. Most investigation expenditure was completed under this budget year with some carry overs in the first half of current FY. Most of the plans and reports undertaken form part of the civil works package, approvals and remediation package. The total expenditure for the investigations to date is approx. $380,000 . Important to note Council was successful in a $178,00 Federal grant that contributed to these costs. QUESTION 2 Council has in Item C of the resolution from the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting dated 23 January 2025 approved all remediation and subdivision works to create Lots 1, 2 and 3 of the 62 Lake Macdonald site. Council in Part D has seemingly made Part C contingent on a loan or grant. Some at Council have publicly described the resolution "as a once in a generation opportunity for the Shire," (to definitely have 25 social housing units built). Part E uses the word "should". QUESTION: Does council have a rational basis to approve remedial works before even tenders, a loan or a grant has been obtained? What is council's strategy to give credibility that the rate payers of the shire will be given a genuine opportunity to influence the final development of Lots 2 and 3, if it even proceeds - when the only obligation on council is that it "should"? How could a grant be offered to council (or a loan be taken) to remediate Lots 1, 2 and 3 if most of the land becomes public open space parkland... in Noosa shire of all places? Surely the insistence of council to seek loans or grants ties Lot 2 and 3 to housing on a significant scale and casts considerable doubt over Part E of the resolution? There are four aspects of this question; please address each aspect in your answer. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 Answer provided by Kim Rawlings Director Strategy and Environment Council considers that it has a duty of care to clean up contaminated land and make it (the land) available for future uses. Currently no community uses can be undertaken on the land including for cemetery purposes because of the contamination. The remediation work will unlock the land so that it can be used for community needs. A cost estimate of the remediation work was undertaken to gain an understanding of the cost of the work. It is normal process to seek endorsement with a cost estimate and then go to tender. The Council resolution of 23 January 2025 clearly indicates that investigations for proposed Lots 2 and 3 consider a range of land uses and include community consultation. The residents closest to the site have been consulted and their concerns have been taken on board with the revised subdivision layout and going forward will continually be kept up to date on the process to remediation and subdivision work and be consulted on the range of potential uses for the remaining lots. Local Government are able to access loans (subject to meeting certain requirements) to deliver essential infrastructure. There are a range of opportunities that are available to Local Government that may not necessarily tie the proposed future lots to any particular outcome. As per the resolution of Council from January Housing will be part of the consideration for these lots. 8.3. DEBRA WALZ QUESTION 1 At November's Ordinary Meeting last year, I asked Council to consider changing the time-frame of dog registrations due to many community members receiving infringement notices for not renewing their annual dog registration on time. An amount of over $225,000 was collected by Council during the dog renewal/infringement period, despite Council's efforts to advise residents of their responsibility. Whilst Council confirmed lifelong dog registrations will not be considered, the Qld Animal Management (Cats & Dogs) Act 2008, Section 50 Duration of registration states (1) Registration of a dog is for the period of years fixed by resolution of the relevant local government for the dog and (2) However, the period must not exceed more than 3 years. On behalf of Noosa residents who own a dog or dogs will Councillors please consider a resolution to extend the dog renewal period from 1 year to 3 years whilst maintaining the same fee structure that currently exists. That is, Pensioners - free, Entire dogs - $193.50 and Desexed dogs - $48.50. This would be seen as a positive change by Council particularly in assisting with the cost of living crisis as well as acknowledging the value that dog ownership provides to our residents. Answer provided by Richard MacGillivray Director Development and Regulation As mentioned previously registering your dog helps the council provide essential animal management services. These services include managing aggressive and barking dogs, responding to and investigating dog attacks, providing pound services, reuniting lost dogs with their owners, and maintaining off-leash areas, litter bins, and doggie bags where needed. Council is always mindful of minimising any additional costs to ratepayers which is why the current fees and associated revenue reflect the cost of service delivery for our community. Any changes for dog registration from a 1 to 3 year period will require further consideration from both an operational and budgeting perspective and this may take some time. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 QUESTION 2 Can Council confirm how the dog renewal infringement funds will be, or have been spent and whether Council has begun to look into possible reasons for the increase in overdue registrations, as identified last year, as a priority, by Council's Environmental Health Manager? Answer provided by Richard MacGillivray Director Development and Regulation Infringement revenue is used to fund the operational expenses for regulatory functions and services to our community. In terms of animal renewals last year, more than 10,000 dog owners paid their animal registration on time. Around 7% of owners did not pay on time despite multiple reminders being sent and media releases issued. These ratios are not considered high when compared with other Councils. Council continues to encourage payment for animal registration on time through improvement awareness and education as well as exploring opportunities for making it easier for customers to register and update their details with council. 8.4. CRAIG VELLA QUESTION 1 The Go Noosa Interim report prepared by the Infrastructure Manager and tabled at item 8.1 of the General Committee Agenda considered on 20 January 2025:(a) recommended the cessation of both the Free Weekend Bus Services and the Go Noosa Free Bus Service for peak season (Service) in light of 50 cent bus fares implemented by the state government; and (b) identified that the Service was funded to the amount of $900,000 through Council’s Sustainable Transport Levy. That recommendation was unanimously approved by Council and now necessitates a reconsideration and update of Council’s response given to public question 2 on 20 June 2024 given that existing services have now been curtailed* so please now advise: Could the Sustainable Transport Levy which is budgeted to raise $933,000 in the 23/24 draft budget be used to repair and/or reconstruct the 'on land component' of the boat ramp and associated car and trailer parking at Hilton Esplanade or at any other boat ramp in the Noosa Shire? If not, then why? Answer provided by Shaun Walsh Director Infrastructure Services Thank you for your question regarding the Go Noosa program and the potential use of the Sustainable Transport Levy for boat ramp and parking improvements. Firstly, to clarify, while the Sustainable Transport Levy is budgeted to raise approximately $933,000 in the 2023/24 financial year, these funds are allocated to various sustainable transport initiatives as outlined in report. The Free Bus Service, while significant, does not account for the entire levy amount. Following Council’s recent decision to cease the Free Weekend Bus Services, options for the reallocation of these funds will be considered in due course. However, under the existing levy framework, all funded initiatives must align with the primary objectives of sustainable transport management, congestion reduction, and encouraging active and public transport use. The Sustainable Transport Levy is not intended to fund infrastructure improvements for private vehicle and boat trailer parking, including those at Hilton Esplanade or other boat ramps in Noosa Shire. As outlined in Council’s Transport policy, the levy is specifically designed to support initiatives such as public transport services, park-and-ride facilities, intelligent transport systems, and congestion management strategies. Council ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 acknowledges the importance of boat ramp facilities and associated parking for the community and note that the ‘on-land component’ of the Hilton Esplanade boat ramp and parking area has been identified for planning and design work in the 2025-26 Financial Year. Council will also continue to explore funding opportunities for these desired upgrades. We appreciate your engagement on this matter and encourage continued community participation in shaping Noosa’s transport and infrastructure priorities. 8.5. ANDREW MCCARTHY QUESTION 1 When will Council contact the Minister for Transport to access the $2.5 million pledged for boating infrastructure on the Noosa River and further advocate for immediate due diligence to be undertaken to assess the most suitable boat ramp upgrade due to ageing infrastructure in consultation with the Noosa Community which was first canvassed in a Mayoral minute on 17 January 2023 set out below:- Answer provided by Shaun Walsh Director Infrastructure Services Thank you for the question. Firstly, Council acknowledges the importance of boat ramp facilities and associated parking for the community and desires for upgrades. However relevant officers from the Queensland Government have not been able to confirm that the Liberal National Party pre-election pledge of $2.5million to Noosa River boat ramp upgrades has actually been confirmed as a budget commitment for the elected government. Council will continue to await confirmation from the relevant Minister and staff to avail ourselves of any funding opportunities. However, I can confirm that Council officers have been proactively meeting with Maritime Safety Queensland Officers to discuss boat facilities upgrades, and opportunity for funding from all available sources, and will continue to actively progress the matter in a collaborative manner. QUESTION 2 Johns Landing was purchased for $2m in 2017 by the Noosa Council, with a fiveyear plan to complete the rehabilitation and removal of contaminants on site, which should now be completed. Does Noosa Council have any plans for development or use for this site, or is it going to let return to a natural state? Answer provided by Kim Rawlings Director Strategy and Environment In 2017 Council acquired a block of land in Cooroibah known as “Johns Landing” with approximately 70% of the site allocated for nature conservation and 30% earmarked for future consideration of recreational use. The restoration of John's Landing in Noosa represents a significant environmental initiative, with the parcel being purchased through the environment levy and designated as a Nature Refuge across 70% of entire land parcel. An Ecological Restoration Plan was developed and has been diligently followed by Council. However, the 2019 bushfires severely impacted the Nature Refuge section, hindering the previously set restoration targets. Council will likely update this restoration plan soon to better inform restoration efforts. Despite this setback, ongoing efforts continue to focus on rehabilitating the affected areas, with roughly $12,000 per annum spent in the Nature Refuge section. The remaining portion of the site has $10,000 per annum allocated for maintenance of the slashed access tracks and open paddocks, managing hazardous trees and priority weeds. A Fire Management Plan has also been developed for this reserve which Council is managing accordingly. Council acknowledges community interest in the potential use of the Johns Landing site for public and community purposes. Any future consideration of development and ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 use of the site would involve a thorough assessment process, including site evaluations, due diligence and feasibility studies in accordance with Council’s Strategic Land Activation Policy. 9. MAYORAL MINUTES Nil. 10. NOTIFIED MOTIONS 10.1. CHANGE OF ORDINARY MEETING TIME Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council agree to amend the scheduled time for Ordinary Council Meetings from 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM, effective immediately. For: Crs Lorentson and Phillips Against: Crs Wilkie, Stockwell, Wegener, Wilson and Finzel Lost. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 11. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS 11.1. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - 11 FEBRUARY 2025 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Brian Stockwell (Chair) Cr Tom Wegener Cr Amelia Lorentson (via Microsoft Teams) NON COMMITTEE MEMBERS CR Karen Finzel (via Microsoft Teams) EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt APOLOGIES Cr Frank Wilkie COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 7.1. MCU21/0154.02 – APPLICATION FOR A MINOR CHANGE TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR HOME BASED BUSINESS (MEAT PROCESSING FACILITY) AT 82 PATTERSON DRIVE, TINBEERWAH That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 7.1 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. 8.1. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY - DECEMBER 2024 That Council note the report by the Development Assessment Manager to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting 11 February 2025 regarding applications that have been decided by delegated authority for December 2024 as per Attachment 1 to the Report with the deletion of NP20MCU 12637DA-59 Kabi Rd, Cootharaba. 9.1. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - ENVIRONMENT LEVY PROPOSED LAND PURCHASE That Council note the report by the Senior Conservation Partnerships Officer to the Planning and Environment Committee dated February 11 2025 and authorise the CEO to: A. Commence negotiations with the owners or their agent regarding purchase of the property as detailed in the report; B. If purchased by Council, place a Nature Refuge over the property; and C. Manage the property to maintain/enhance its environmental values. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the report of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting dated 11 FEBRUARY 2025 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried unanimously. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 11.2. SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE REPORT - 11 FEBRUARY 2025 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Karen Finzel (Chair) Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Nicola Wilson NON-COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Tom Wegener EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt APOLOGIES Cr Frank Wilkie COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 7.1. CONTRACT RENEWAL - PROVISION OF CONTINGENT STAFF (LABOUR HIRE) That Council: A. Note the report by the Governance Manager to the Services and Organisation Committee meeting dated 11 February 2025 regarding a contract renewal for the provision of contingent staff for Council; B. Award contract CN24861 to Comensura Pty Ltd for the provision of contingent staff (Labour Hire) under a schedule of rates, for the period 1 March 2025 to 30 April 2027; C. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, finalise, execute and do all things necessary to administer the Contract on behalf of Council; D. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer to extend the contract for a period of up to three (3) years from the date of 1 May 2027 at Council's discretion. 8.1. NOOSA HOLIDAY PARKS UPDATE That Council note the report by the Commercial Business Advisor to the Services & Organisation Committee Meeting dated 11 February 2025 providing an update on operations of the Noosa Holiday Park Business Activity to 31 December 2024. 8.2. CEMETERY FEES - GST DETERMINATION That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the Services and Organisation Committee dated 11 February 2025 regarding the ATO GST determination on burial rights in public cemeteries and its implications for Noosa Council's fees and charges; B. Adopt the updated Fees and Charges Schedule in Attachment 1 to reflect the GST exemptions for burial rights, including those for cremation memorials, while ensuring GST continues to apply to ancillary services and items such as plaques, headstones, and ash placements; and C. Authorise the CEO to implement and communicate the new fees and charges in Attachment 1. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 8.3. CAPITAL PROGRAM 2024/2025 DELIVERY STATUS In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Jessica Phillips provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Phillips, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to an upcoming tender for Cooroy Sports Complex and Multipurpose Area (which includes the Cooroy Gymnastics Club) mentioned in the Capital Program Update Report. I have been hired as a consultant by the Cooroy Gymnastics Club to assist in resourcing of their coaching staff and I am currently coaching the senior competitive program on an interim basis. I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because the information in the report is merely noting that a tender is upcoming in the future. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Jessica Phillips and determine that in accordance with s150ES of the Local Government Act 2009 and having considered the Councillor's conflict of interest as described, it is decided that Cr Jessica Phillips may participate and vote on this matter relating to the Capital Works Update Report including mention of the Cooroy Sports Complex and Multipurpose Area (which includes the Cooroy Gymnastics Club). For: Crs Stockwell, Finzel, Wilson, Wilkie, Lorentson and Wegener Against: Nil. Carried. Cr Jessica Phillips, having declared a conflict of interest was not eligible to vote. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Director of Infrastructure Services to the Services & Organisation Committee Meeting dated 11 February 2025, providing an update on the delivery of the 2024/25 Capital Works Program as at 31 December 2024. Carried unanimously. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the report of the Services & Organisation Committee meeting dated 11 February 2025 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried unanimously. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 11.3. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT - 17 FEBRUARY 2025 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Brian Stockwell (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel (via Microsoft Teams) Cr Amelia Lorentson (via Microsoft Teams) Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Tom Wegener Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt APOLOGIES Nil. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 7.1. MCU21/0154.02 – APPLICATION FOR A MINOR CHANGE TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR HOME BASED BUSINESS (MEAT PROCESSING FACILITY) AT 82 PATTERSON DRIVE, TINBEERWAH Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Senior Planner to the Planning and Environment Meeting dated 11 February 2025 regarding Application No. MCU21/0154.02 for a minor change to the development approval for a Homebased business (Meat Processing Facility) situated at 82 Patterson Drive, Tinbeerwah and: A. Approve the application and agree to change condition 10 outlined in Attachment 1. B. Refuse the request to delete Condition 21, instead changing the condition as outlined in Attachment 1. C. Delete condition 6. D. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 Amendment Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Item C be amended to read as follows (and subsequently renumber the original C & D to D &E): C. Amend condition 19 to read: The access handle must be densely landscaped with native plants and shrubs to provide a dense screen of vegetation between the driveway and neighbouring residents. The landscape garden bed along the southern boundary adjacent Lot 61RP886676 pool area must be enhanced with supplementary planting being eight (8), “Syzygium australe” or “Syzygium luehmanii” with a minimum plant stock size of 45 litres at a density of 1 plant per metre. All supplementary planting works must be undertaken 1 month from the date of this approval. Within 1 month of the February 20, 2025, Ordinary Meeting additional planting must be provided to the access handle in accordance with the advice of Council Senior Environment Officer, Development Assessment. D. Delete condition 6. E. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. For: Crs Finzel, Wilson, Wilkie, Phillips, Stockwell and Lorentson Against: Cr Wegener Carried. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Senior Planner to the Planning and Environment Meeting dated 11 February 2025 regarding Application No. MCU21/0154.02 for a minor change to the development approval for a Homebased business (Meat Processing Facility) situated at 82 Patterson Drive, Tinbeerwah and: A. Approve the application and agree to change condition 10 outlined in Attachment 1. B. Refuse the request to delete Condition 21, instead changing the condition as outlined in Attachment 1. C. Amend condition 19 to read: ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 The access handle must be densely landscaped with native plants and shrubs to provide a dense screen of vegetation between the driveway and neighbouring residents. The landscape garden bed along the southern boundary adjacent Lot 61RP886676 pool area must be enhanced with supplementary planting being eight (8), “Syzygium australe” or “Syzygium luehmanii” with a minimum plant stock size of 45 litres at a density of 1 plant per metre. All supplementary planting works must be undertaken 1 month from the date of this approval. Within 1 month of the February 20, 2025, Ordinary Meeting additional planting must be provided to the access handle in accordance with the advice of Council Senior Environment Officer, Development Assessment. D. Delete condition 6. E. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. For: Crs Wilkie, Wegener, Finzel, Wilson, Phillips, Stockwell, Against: Cr Lorentson Carried. 8.1 NEW TENANT - TENANCY A2, PEREGIAN DIGITAL HUB That Council A. Note the report by the Director, Digital Hub & Innovation to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 February 2025 regarding the commercial lease of office space at the Peregian Digital Hub; B. Agree to enter a commercial lease for Tenancy A2 at the Digital Hub, Peregian Beach, to NextPlay for a 1 year term, as generally outlined in the report; and C. Authorise the CEO to award one option of 2 years, subject to the lessee complying with the terms of the lease. 8.2. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – JANUARY 2025 That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 February 2025 outlining the January 2025 year to date financial performance against budget, including changes to the financial performance report with the inclusion of key financial sustainability indicators. 8.3. OPERATIONAL PLAN 2024-25 Q2 QUARTERLY REPORTING That Council note the report by the Executive Officer to the General Committee dated 17 February 2025 regarding the 2024-25 Operational Plan and: A. Note the progress report for Q2 2024-25 Operational Plan to 31 December 2024 provided as Attachment 1; B. Note the comments on the progress of all initiatives provided as Attachment 2; and C. Note the status of Council's Operational Key Performance Indicators provided as Attachment 3. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 20 FEBRUARY 2025 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the report of the General Committee meeting dated 17 February 2025 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried unanimously. 12. ORDINARY MEETING REPORTS Nil. 13. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION Nil. 14. NEXT MEETING The next Ordinary Meeting will be held at Council Chambers, 9 Pelican St, Tewantin on Thursday 20 March 2025 at 10.00am. 15. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 11:09 AM
Meeting Transcript
Frank Wilkie 00:00.000
Welcome to the ordinary meeting of Thursday 20th of February 2025. We declare the meeting open at 10am. I'd like to acknowledge that we're meeting on the traditional lands and waters of the Kabi Kabi people and I pay my respects to the elders past, present and emerging. also reiterate their invitation for us to join them as joint custodians respecting and caring for this place we all love, respecting and caring for each other. I note that all councillors are in attendance. Confirmation of the minutes. Can I have a mover and seconder of the minutes for the ordinary meeting held on 23rd of January 2025. Moved by Councillor Lorentson, seconded by Councillor Finzel. All in favour? That's unanimous. There are no petitions, there are no presentations, there are no deputations. The first is an application with two questions from Brian O'Connor. O'Connor. Mr. O'Connor is not in attendance, but has requested the CEO read out his questions, which will be answered by Kerri Contini, Director of Community Services. Mr O'Connor is not in attendance. Mr. CEO. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 01:01.448
Okay, question one. We are told that Noosa Shire is expecting a housing shortage, but I wonder whether it extends beyond death. The Tewantin Cemetery is not accepting any more prospective guests in repose, and the Council has given up land set aside for expansion of the Cooroy Cemetery for use as affordable housing for the living instead. The Tewantin Cemetery is not accepted. At Pomona, the dead are buried beside the rubbish. Containing cremating cremated ashes or even so-called natural burial sites now creeping into favour. Frank Wilkie 01:48.448
Director of Community Services Kerri Contini. Kerri Contini 01:50.948
Thank you and through the chair. Thank you Mr. O'Connor for your question and interest in our cemetery services. Council operates three cemeteries at Tewantin, Cooroy and Pomona. To clarify, although I'm sure Mr. O'Connor was being tongue-in-cheek, people are not buried beside. rubbish at Pomona Cemetery. Our Pomona Cemetery is a beautiful garden-sided cemetery surrounded by trees with a 200 metre vegetation buffer between the cemetery and the waste transfer site. Council officers are currently undertaking a research and analysis stage to develop a cemeteries plan to guide the future internment needs for Noosa residents. This includes understanding the impacts of changing trends, which is broadly seeing a reduction in demand for traditional burials and an increase in requests for ashes internment, memorial plaques and contemporary offerings such as green This plan will guide requirements for land requirements for cemetery purposes. This includes understanding... Larry Sengstock 02:54.455
Thank you. Okay. The second question. Noosa and Gympie Councils have signed a memorandum of understanding that aims to explore efficiency waste management and potential cost-sharing arrangements across the two Council area. Would this be a model for cooperation on possible development of a management model for establishing a regional cemetery in the hinterland serving a wider catchment area? Kerri Contini 03:20.386
Thank you again, Mr Chair. Thank you, Brian, for your additional question. Council is researching question. Council is researching a range of options for the planning of future cemetery needs. Regional models for service delivery can be very effective in relevant scenarios. However, we would need to investigate a range of factors such as land land availability, community willingness to travel to a regional cemetery and importantly the priorities of our neighbouring councils before considering whether that would be appropriate for cemetery services. However, we do meet with cemetery staff from other councils in South East Queensland every month to share knowledge, trends and approaches which supports a locally strong public cemetery sector. Frank Wilkie 04:05.305
Director Contini. The second application with two questions is from Patricia Spicer. Miss Spicer, if you'd like to come to the lectern and deliver your questions and they'll be answered by Kim Rawlings, Director of Strategy and Environment for Red Hat IRC. Patricia Spicer 04:26.920
I noticed that it says in the application to read out your supporting documents. Do you want that? No, just a question, thank you. How much of the 3.3 million initial budget allocation has been used in the process of investigating, getting reports, subdivision, tree clearing and remediation planning? For the 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy. Please include when the budget allocation was made and the details of costings for each report and plan that has that has been done for 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy today. If investigations, plans, reports were done prior to this budget allocation, what was the cost of these and how was this cost met? Larry Sengstock 05:19.720
Thanks Pat for that question. None or very little of the $3.3 million has been used for the investigations. This allocation is in the 24/25 budget for delivery and costs and remediation and civil works. The budget allocation for site investigations was $500,000 in the 23/24 budget. Most investigation Most investigation expenditure was completed under this budget year, with some carryovers in the first half of the current financial year. Most of the plans and reports undertaken form part of the civil works package, approvals and remediation package. total expenditure for the investigations to date is approximately $380,000, but it's important to note Council was successful in a $178,000 federal grant that contributed to these costs. Frank Wilkie 06:10.905
You can have the second question. Patricia Spicer 06:21.500
I'm sorry. Council has an item C, the resolution below, approved all remediation and subdivision works to create lots 1, 2 and 3 at 62 Lake Macdonald's site. Council in part D has seemingly made part C contingent on a loan grant, loan or grant, sorry. Some at Council have publicly described the resolution as a once in a generation opportunity for the Shire to definitely have 25 social housing units built. Part E uses the word should. Does Council have a rational basis to approve remedial works before even tenders, a loan or a grant has been obtained? What is Council's strategy to give credibility that the ratepayers of the Shire will be given a genuine opportunity to influence the final development of lots two and three, if it even proceeds, when the only obligation on Council is that it should? How could a grant be offered to Council or to Council or a loan be taken to remediate lots 1, 2 and 3 if most of the land becomes public open space parkland in Noosa Shire of all places. Or a line be taken. Consistence of Council to seek loans or grants ties lots 2 and 3 to housing on a significant scale and casts considerable doubt over part E of the resolution. There are four aspects to this question. Please address each... Thank you, Pat. Larry Sengstock 08:20.956
Council considers that it has a duty of care to clean up contaminated land and make the land available for future uses. Currently no community uses can be undertaken on the land including for cemetery purposes because of the contamination. The remediation work... a cost estimate and then go to tender. The council resolution of 23 January 2025 clearly indicates that investigations for proposed lots two and three consider a range of land uses and includes and include community consultation. The residents closest the site have been consulted and their concerns have been taken on board with the revised subdivision layout and going forward will continually be kept up to date on the process through remediation. subdivision work and be consulted on the range of potential uses for the remaining lots. Local government are able to access loans subject to meeting certain requirements to deliver essential infrastructure. There are a range of opportunities that are available to local government that may not necessarily tie the proposed future lots to any particular outcome. As per the resolution of council from January, housing will be part of the consideration for these lots. Frank Wilkie 09:42.981
Thank you, Mr Sengstock. The next is an application with two questions from Deborah Walsh. Ms Walsh, welcome. Would you like to come to the lectern and read your questions, which will be answered by Director Richard MacGillivray of Development. Debra Walz 10:02.880
Good morning everyone. My two questions are about dog registration which stem from a deputation last year and under which the council's responsibility with the Queensland Animal Management Cats and Dogs Act 2008 which says to ensure their dog owners have current registration for their dogs. And in regulating that, the Animal Welfare Services Appendix C of the Auditor General's report 6/2021/22, it clearly states that Council need to review its processes, enforcement outcomes and community feedback to ensure its practices are in line with legislation best practice and community expectation. In addition effective regulation of local laws including infringement notices local councils need to ensure minimum prescribed standards are met but also consider risk-based and intelligence-led information for enforcement. So my question with that background is at November's background is, at November's ordinary meeting last year, I asked council to consider changing the timeframe of dog registrations due to many community members receiving infringement notices for not renewing their annual dog registration on time. An amount of over $225,000 was collected by council during the dog renewal infringement period. around about $500,000 for actual renewals of registration. That's over and above... Despite council's efforts to advise residents of their responsibility, I know council did make an effort there, whilst council confirmed lifelong registrations will not be considered, the Queensland annual... not be considered. The Queensland Animal Management Cats and Dogs Act 2008, section 50, duration of registration states, registration of a dog is for the period of years fixed by resolution of the relevant local government for the dog and, however, the period must not the period must not exceed more than three years. On behalf of Noosa residents who own a dog or dogs, will councillors please consider a resolution to extend the dog renewal period from one year to three years whilst maintaining the same fee structure that currently exists. That is pensioners being free, entire dogs... Amen. $193.50 and de-sex dogs $48.50. This would be seen as a positive change by council particularly in assisting with the cost of living crisis as well as acknowledging the value that dog ownership provides to our residents. Frank Wilkie 13:00.244
Director MacGillivray. Thank you. Richard MacGillivray 13:09.520
As mentioned previously registering your dog helps council provide essential and animal management services. These services include managing aggressive and barking dogs, responding to and investigating dog attacks, providing pound services, Debra Walz 14:07.214
Noosa, Tewantin, Cooroy, Doonan, Kabi Kabi, Councillor. and where the council has begun. to look into possible reasons for the increase in overdue registrations as identified last year as a priority by council's environmental health manager. Richard MacGillivray 14:21.034
Thank you again Deb. Our infringement revenue is used to fund the operational expenses for regulatory functions and services to our community. In terms of animal renewals last year we had more than 10,000 dog owners paid their animal registrations on time. Around 7% of time. Around 7% of owners did not pay on time despite multiple reminders being sent and media releases being issued to our community. These ratios are not considered high when compared with other local governments, as in where similar local governments nearby had up to 25% that didn't pay on time. Council continues to encourage payment for animal registration on time through improving awareness and education, as well as exploring opportunities to make it easier for customers to register and update their details with Council. Thank you very much. Frank Wilkie 15:09.775
Thank you, Ms. Walsh. Next is a question from Craig Vela. Mr. Vela is not in attendance. Amelia Lorentson 15:18.335
I first requested Councillor Lorentson read out his question, which will be answered by Shaun Walsh, Director of Infrastructure A question, the Go Noosa interim report prepared by the infrastructure manager and tabled at item 8.1 of the general committee agenda can that on the 20th of January 2025 reads I recommended the cessation of both the free weekend of bus services and the Go Noosa free bus service for peak season in light of 50 cent bus peak season in light of 50 cent bus fares implemented by the State government and B, identified that the service was funded to the amount of $900,000 through Council's sustainable transport levy. Recommendation was unanimously approved by Council and now necessitates Necessitates a reconsideration and update of Council's response given to public question two on the 20th of June, 2024, given that existing services have now been curtailed. So please now advise, could the sustainable transport levy, which is budgeted to raise... $933,000 In the 23-24 draft budget, be used to repair and /or reconstruct the on-land component of the boat ramp and associated car and trailer parking at Hilton Esplanade or at any other boat ramp in the Noosa Shire? If not, then why? Shaun Walsh 16:58.180
Good morning. Thank you for your question regarding the Go Noosa program and the potential use of the sustainable transport levy for boat ramp and parking improvements. Firstly, to clarify, whilst the sustainable transport levy Transport Levy is budgeted to raise approximately $933,000 in the 2023-2024 financial year. These funds are allocated to various sustainable transport initiatives including free weekend bus services, congestion reduction. and the like. The free bus service, while significant, does not account for the entire levy amount. Following Council's recent decision to cease the free weekend bus services, options will be considered in due course. However, under the existing levy, all funded initiatives must align with the primary objective of sustainable transport management, congestion reduction and encouraging active and public transport use. The sustainable transport levy is not intended to fund infrastructure improvements for private vehicle and boat trailer parking, including those at Hilton Esplanade or other boat ramps in Noosa Shire. As outlined in Council's transport policy, the levy is specifically designed to support initiatives such as public transport, park and ride facilities, intelligent transport systems and congestion reduction. Council acknowledges the importance of boat ramp facilities and associated parking for the community and note that the on-land component of the Hilton Esplanade boat ramp and parking area has been identified for design work in the '25-26 financial year. Council will continue to also explore funding opportunities for these desired upgrades. We appreciate your engagement on this matter and encourage continued community participation in shaping Noosa transport Thank you, Director Walsh. Frank Wilkie 18:41.744
The next is an application with two questions from Andrew McCarthy. Mr McCarthy is not in attendance, but has requested Councillor read out his question, which we again answered Shaun Walsh, Director of Infrastructure Services. Thank you, good morning. Jessica Phillips 18:57.788
When will Council contact the Minister for Transport to access the $2.5 million pledge for boating infrastructure on the Noosa River and further advocate for... Shaun Walsh 19:24.544
Thank you for the question. Firstly, Council acknowledges the importance of boat ramp facilities and associated parking for the community and the desire for upgrades. However, relevant from the Queensland Government have not been able to confirm that the Liberal National Party pre-election pledge of $2.5 million to Noosa River boat ramp upgrades has actually been confirmed as a budget commitment for the elected Government. officers Council will continue to await confirmation from the relevant Minister and staff to avail ourselves of any funding opportunities. However, I can confirm that Council officers have been proactively meeting with Maritime Safety Queensland officers to discuss boat facilities upgrades and the opportunity for funding from all available sources and will continue to actively progress the matter in a collaborative manner. Frank Wilkie 20:13.648
Next question please. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 20:15.948
John's Landing was purchased for $2 million. Landing was purchased for $2 million in 2017 by the Noosa Council with a five-year plan to complete the rehabilitation and removal of contaminants on site, which should now be completed. Does Noosa Council have any plans for development? these plans for development or use for this site, or is it going to be let return to an actual state? Shaun Walsh 20:41.852
I'm answering this on behalf of Kim Rawlings, Director of Strategy and Environment, who's on leave at the moment. In 2017, Council acquired a block of land in Cooroibah, known as John's Landing, with approximately 70% of the site allocated for nature conservation and 30% earmarked for future consideration of recreational use. The restoration of John's Landing and Noosa represents a significant environmental initiative, with the parcel being purchased through the Environment Levy and designated as a nature refuge across 70% of the entire land parcel. An ecological restoration plan was developed, and has been diligently followed by Council. However, the 2019 bushfires severely impacted the nature refuge section, council will likely update this restoration plan soon to better inform restoration efforts. Despite this setback, ongoing efforts continue to focus on rehabilitating the affected areas, with roughly $12 spent in the nature refuge section. The remaining portion of the site has $10,000 per annum allocated for the maintenance of the slash access tracks and open paddocks, managing hazardous weeds and priority weeds. A fire management plan has also been developed for this reserve, which council is managing accordingly. Council acknowledges the community interest in the potential use of John's Landing for public and community purposes. Council acknowledges managing accordingly. Any future consideration of development and use of the site would involve a thorough assessment process including site evaluations, due diligence and feasibility studies in accordance with Council's strategic land activation policy. Frank Wilkie 22:19.544
Thank you Director Walsh. There are no Mayoral minutes and we have one notified motion from Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson would you like to move your motion please. Amelia Lorentson 22:30.000
I will. Thank you. Motion is that council agree to amend the scheduled time for ordinary council meetings from 10:00am. to 5:00pm. effective immediately. Is anyone willing to second that notified motion? Frank Wilkie 22:49.912
I'll second. Councillor Jessica Phillips will second that. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 22:57.332
The decision to change the meeting time to 10:00am. was introduced this term to help balance work life commitments for staff and councillors. However community feedback However, community feedback has highlighted concerns that this change has made it difficult for residents, working residents, to attend and participate in council meetings, particularly as we've just seen during public question time. As most residents are engaged in work or other commitments during the morning hours the accessibility of meetings has been significantly reduced. While work-life balance for staff and councillors is important, council has a fundamental commitment to community engagement and transparency given that ordinary meetings occur only once a month it's reasonable and appropriate to revert that to the 5pm time slot to ensure that residents Residents can be involved in the decision-making process. Adjusting the meeting time will help address the concerns raised by the community and reinforce our commitment to an open and participatory local government. Can't you speak a little bit more on it? The question I think I'm simply asking today is what time best allows our 27,000 plus working residents to attend our ordinary meetings, 10 o 'clock or 5pm. I've moved this motion today because I've been approached by residents and business chambers across the Shire and I'm talking from the Shire and I'm talking from Pomona to Noosa Heads to Noosaville business chambers and I've circulated letters to all the councillors who believe that the current 10am. Meeting time creates a barrier for working. people. It limits their ability to observe and sit in the public gallery, it limits their ability to ask questions or participate in person during public question time and deputations. As a council we've committed to public access, engagement and participatory local government, yet it seems that our schedule excludes many from having that opportunity. Right now we hold three meetings, a planning and environment meeting at 9:30am. We hold our services and organisation meeting at 1:30pm. And our ordinary meetings, a tradition that tradition that was held since 2014 it was always at 5:00pm. this term we've changed that to 10:00am. And again I reiterate this is only once a month. The reality is that these daytime meetings force working residents to submit questions by proxy rather than attending in person. Again we witnessed that today. argued is that that's not real community engagement it can be seen by some as community exclusion. Again from 2014 we held ordinary meetings at 5pm and it worked. That changed this turn to accommodate the councillors and staff work-life balance which I fully acknowledge and fully respect but I don't it is too much of an ask for just one evening meeting per month to commence at 5pm to allow again, if I quote our stats, say that 27... 27,536 residents are employed in the Shire. So I've also done a quick review of our last 12 ordinary meetings to understand how long we actually sit at the ordinary meetings. ordinary meetings. Over the 12 last ordinary meetings, we had six that lasted an hour or less, which meant that finished in less than an hour. Over the 12 last... Three of the 12 that were under two and a half hours. And only three out of the 12 that exceeded three hours. And I do note one was extraordinarily long. And in Nights at 5pm. Or community forums at 5pm to include our working members. Why can't we? They're volunteers and they don't get paid. We are paid and we're here paid to serve the community. So I ask again that you support the notified motion in front of And revert back to a practice that commenced in 2014 to hold ordinary meetings at 5pm that served our 27,536 employed residents and community well. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 27:54.300
I'll say a few words. The tradition of having a meeting start at 5pm didn't begin at 2:14, it goes way back to, could be 1910, well over a century ago when councillors were part-time or worked and most of It Now our most engaged demographic are in the retirement bracket and many have told me that they don't like driving at night. So it's in recognition of the changing demographic, also it's in recognition that times have changed. There's a good reason why no other council in Queensland has night time meetings. No other council in Queensland. It's because technology allows anyone interested in council decision making processes to log on anywhere in the world and watch live or watch a recording over and over as many times as they like of that meeting. There is no, absolutely no reason why anyone would need to be here. the numbers that general committee meeting where all the robust debate takes place haven't suffered as a result of date they've been traditionally held in the day and this gallery has been full on many occasions during that. The other question raised was about the ability for people to be present and ask their questions. Now that's puzzling because today we had People in person. The other thing that's happened in this term is the very real considerate factor of council fatigue during daytime meetings which must be respected and last month's ordinary meeting took the best part of seven hours so have we started that at 5:00pm. we will be finishing close to midnight and the goal close to midnight and the goal of the meeting structure is the best decisions on behalf of the community. So councillors need to be sharp and healthy and that's why daytime meetings, another reason why daytime meetings are a better option. We unanimously approved the meeting schedule for the 10am. meeting schedule for the 10am ordinary meeting in May with a review to happen towards the end of last year. We did that in November when we approved the 2025 schedule with the 10am start. Again, unanimously approved. I talked to a lot of people and not one has mentioned wanting to go back to the time that was instituted last century given the availability of technology now and the ability for anyone unanimously watch a live council meeting over and over at their leisure anytime anywhere in the world as many times as they want so I think we need to also do more than just say we support staff health and well-being we need to demonstrate that through our actions and decisions so although council alone So although Councillor Lorentson is doing an excellent job representing what people are telling her, people are telling me opposite and I think there are very good reasons for being in step with all of the councillors in Queensland. And given the advent of new technology and our commitment to a good life work balance. So for those reasons I want to support you as no-fault motion. Amelia Lorentson 32:05.709
Could I ask some questions please? In terms of the other councils in Queensland, Councillor Mayor Wilkie mentioned that no other councillors have night time meetings. I've got in front of me the benchmarks and I note that Barkildine Council hold their general meeting at 8:30am. Blackwell Tambu, 8:30am. Hitchinbrook Council hold their general meeting at 8:30am. McKinley hold their ordinary meeting at 8:30am. Richmond hold their meetings at 8:30am and Winton 8:00am. So they may not be, so question through the chair. I take what you stated which was that there were no night time meetings. I argue that 8:18 starts are the equivalent of starting the meeting at 5:00pm. and that's not a question. Point of order, there's large areas of data there was argument being that saying I'm arguing it's clearly not a question. clearly not a question. Frank Wilkie 33:23.552
Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wilson, could you ask a quick question? Sure. Amelia Lorentson 33:31.032
Mayor Wilkie, can you explain why there are so many councils across Queensland that have 8 o 'clock meetings and 8.30 Frank Wilkie 33:41.740
Well, that would be a decision for them. I guess it's about working during daylight hours and having a good healthy work life balance. And the point we're arguing here is moving from daylight meetings to night time meetings. I'm arguing against night time meetings. And I've cited that data there as in support of daytime meetings. And I can only assume that all these other councils have opted for daytime meetings for the reasons of the reasons I've cited. The advent of live technology, recordings, healthy work-life balance for their staff, council fatigue, having to avoid council fatigue, all those reasons. Amelia Lorentson 34:26.264
In my other question, in reference to the 6/7 hour meeting that we had just recently, again, I've never experienced that before. If we had a 5 o 'clock meeting in the afternoon, and the meeting did go on long, can council move a procedural motion to adjourn the meeting? Or to move the meeting to another time to allow councillors time to refocus and rethink? Or is there an opportunity in those instances when there is a lot of community or public interest in the matter, that we actually move it to a special meeting? Frank Wilkie 35:08.420
You're absolutely right, councillors could opt to adjourn a meeting, a night time meeting, to another date, but then again that's, in my opinion, that's not very effective decision making. slow down the decision making process, it costs, the rate pays a lot more to reconvene another meeting when the purpose of a daytime meeting is you can get the business done there and then in that one meeting. It's all part of effective decision Which is what we unanimously endorse this meeting schedule to do and ensure that we can deliver the best outcomes for the Shire in terms of our decision making processes. Councillor Finzel. Kerri Contini 35:49.260
Thank you. This is a question for the CEO through the Chair. the Chair, the Queensland psychosocial hazards in the workplace legislation was taken effect on the 1st of April 2023. Karen Finzel 36:07.440
This Council at the time was actively engaged to ensuring that this workplace meets Code of Conduct and the new requirements. I'm seeking your opinion in terms of the risk and meeting our requirements under legislation around psychosocial hazards and how we'll manage them especially around meeting times after hours. Larry Sengstock 36:34.536
Thank you Councillor. I mean it's a very broad question, very difficult to answer I suppose but technically from a staffing point of view for our senior management staff, particularly our directors, we have a new contract that we're making ourselves available. a new year contract that we're making ourselves available for various times of day and night for meetings and work commitments. For other staff, particularly in the below manager level, then it becomes more of an issue in terms of expecting them to be available outside of regular work hours. And they do, in the new legislation, they do have the right to say no. So we're conscious of that as well, and we are conscious of workloads in this environment, so that was part of the whole initial discussion around having meetings during the day, and that still stands. But it's up to you to make that decision, but all I can say is yes, that we do have obligations to our staff to ensure that they aren't overworking outside of hours that's not appropriate, not acceptable for Just a question, please, to the CEO. Just in relation, because we're hearing all of the different points of view, when we recently did the workplace survey, did anything come up around thank you, Councillor. Yeah, absolutely. There's absolutely questions and discussions around work-life balance, and that's something that we're very conscious of, and I'll be sure that that is available to all of our It's a real concern, this day and age, and we want to make sure that we provide that as best we can. This is obviously just a small part of it, the council meetings monthly, but certainly, in general, it's all about looking after our staff and making sure that they aren't put in a situation where they don't have a choice, or they are expected to do something that puts pressure on them in their Just a quick question then, thank you. Jessica Phillips 38:38.056
So in the directors contracts, the hours can vary, but if there is a staff that is required, what if this was to proceed? What considerations will council take for the staff that may say I don't want to attend or what will happen? Larry Sengstock 38:55.400
Well generally it would be, sorry through the chair, generally it would be that the directors would take control of that and they would be the ones who would be to answer questions or provide the feedback. In terms of we do have opportunity because we have staff working different hours so we have we have flex time, we have overtime, we have things like that that we can draw upon for. our staff, for that very reason, we want to force on them and put them under undue stress. Jessica Phillips 39:27.440
One more question, and it will get to a question, but I want to make a statement. First, because in my previous role in the police, we used to have social events, which were after, you know, a big day at work, it was a really good time to sit down around the station and kind of take off the police hat and, and really build some trust around the group. Because I'm been here nearly a year, I think I had one evening session, which was good for after to speak to staff and councillors. My question is, potentially is an observation now around the table and the elephant in the room, maybe that there isn't quite that same level of group camaraderie? Question. Question is, could potentially, going back to the evenings, give us the ability to do some more team group, I won't call it team, group. Dinners. Dinners and bonding I guess. Larry Sengstock 40:33.920
Well I guess that's really a question for you as a group as well. To do it during the day doesn't mean we can't do lunches as opposed to evenings and dinners or gatherings or just, you I mean, it was a-- A tradition or a useful thing that we did in the past, but it's not to say we can't do it again, it's just up to councillors to do that and pick a time to do it. You're saying we could do it at lunch after? Well, it could be done any time. Again, that's for you to discuss. Frank Wilkie 41:16.544
Can the councillor switch? Councillor Wilson. Jessica Phillips 41:19.584
I'll speak to the motion. I do fully respect the engagement of our working community and their desire to attend meetings in person. But I do want to point out that not all workers are available at 5pm either. Many people work beyond 5 o 'clock and certainly shift workers, hospitality workers, all of those people also in our community are working at 5 o 'clock. Young families, parents wouldn't be able to attend at 5pm either. So I do feel like this discussion is kind of favouring one type of worker over another to be assuming that they would be available at 5pm. And so it's one of those situations. I do also consider our own staff. They, by legislation, have the right to disconnect after work. They also have the right to have hobbies, to have sporting commitments, volunteer commitments, any night of the week, and we can't ask them to stop doing that once a month. We do have community We do have community meetings. We have committed to having community meetings at least three times a year. So that's three or four times a year where we're already asking staff to extend their working hours. And I think that actually represents quite a good compromise. For those people who can attend at five versus at ten. I also want to consider councillors decision-making as well as Mayor Wilkie already stated. If we've had a, we and staff have had a long day working all day and then start had a long day working all day and then start decision-making and discussion at 5:00pm. I don't know if that leads to the best outcomes. Our schedule is available ahead of time online. Workers who would really want to attend for a particular meeting could potentially make themselves available if they can and obviously can watch the meeting afterwards. Frank Wilkie 43:12.732
Do the councillors wish to speak? Councillor Lorentson, do you wish to close? No, no. Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 43:18.812
Yes. A range of contexts where moving a notice of motion is quite useful. This is not one of them. We decided to go down this path at the beginning of this term and we all agreed that we'd review it after six months, which we did, and in the appropriate format. With input from all councillors, not in a debate at the serial position, we decided to continue having considered all the relevant matters. It was only a few months ago and the problem with bringing these sort of issues to a notice of motion is we haven't got substantive reports upon upon which to base our decisions. So we've heard a emotional plea about 27,000 workers being benefited. But as Councillor Wilson highlighted, not all workers are available during the day. In fact, our biggest two, well two of our three biggest employees sectors are health and also in hospitality. hospitality accommodation where it's equally likely they're working at night. And you add to that nearly 20% of our working population that works from home, which is likely that they have a high degree of flexibility in their hours. And then you add on top of that over 25% of our population who are retirement age. And quickly, it's quite easy to put the reverse argument that the majority of our residents I'm not going to repeat all the other internal considerations. All I'm going to say is this was a decision by us as colleagues in consultation with the staff only a few months ago. It's appropriately decided in the manner we did. It's appropriately decided in the manner we did. And there was no need for this motion. Amelia Lorentson 45:06.850
Just a question through the Chair. I can't recall that six month review. Can I get some idea... Can I get some idea of when that happened? Frank Wilkie 45:17.235
There was a report to Council in November where we discussed the schedule and we ratified the schedule which had the times, meeting times and dates for all of 2025. I do. Amelia Lorentson 45:40.620
The question today is about, it goes beyond just 5pm, it goes into public access and community engagement and allowing our community access to any forum, any community forum, any part of this local government decision making. I'm sitting here in a little bit little bit sort of confused with some of the conversation. What I'm asking is once a month, once a month we allow community access to our ordinary meetings to our... You know, again I sit back and go let's understand what this role demands and I'm talking as a councillor and also as staff and we have excellent staff and I see the working on Saturdays. Saturdays and I see them working on Sundays and I see them this morning. I was emailing one of our excellent staff at 7 o 'clock in the morning. That's part of our role. It's not a 9 to 5 job. It's working late into the night. I was working until 10 o 'clock two nights ago. Last week, myself and Councillor Wegener, we were at a function until almost 11 o 'clock at night. This Friday, I'm at a meeting at 7 o 'clock. I go to community forums at 5 o 'clock, at 6 o 'clock at night. Working late into the night is part of our job. It's about weekend commitments. We go to conferences. This is the responsibility we, as councillors, councillors, and also as local government employees, accept. That's what we've signed up for, we would take on this job. We've all been through an election period. There were a lot of people who put their hand up for this position, understanding fully. this position takes, because a lot of them have been volunteers that work seven o 'clock in the morning, conduct network meetings at five and six o 'clock in the morning. Again, I go back to the original question that I asked today is In comparison that's been made today with other councils, to me important but not relevant. We are different by nature. We serve our community. We don't align our interests to the community values of other councils. We align our interests to what's important to this community. Again, I've circulated quite a few emails from residents across from Cooroy to Pomona to Noosa Heads to Noosaville to business chambers, again asking that we revert back once and once a month to our 5pm. meetings and in the instance that it impedes on it on a staff members social life or extracurriculum activity or it's or they're just carrying too much weight at the moment they have the option weight at the moment they have the option to say no they have that option and to the councillors who have other commitments they also have the option of attending online that option is available but again it as our commitment to public access participatory participatory local government, we need to put our communities' access to these forums before, in my opinion, before the interests of councillors. And staff, not, and I'm not dismissing work-life balance, but, you know, again, I go to the last 12 ordinary meetings. Six meetings lasted just over an hour, which means we would have finished at six o 'clock at night. Three meetings out of 12 finished under two and a half hours, which means we could be home at 7:30. And three meetings, which went over three hours. Again, one in exceptional circumstances. And again, we the opportunity to adjourn those meetings or move them to a special meeting to allow, again, work-life balance. But working until 6:00, until 7:30 at night, it's part of our role counselling. at night, it's part of our role, councillors, so I ask that you support the amendment and notified motion in front of us. Frank Wilkie 50:19.217
Thank you, Councillor Wilson. Those in favour of the motion? Councillor and Councillor Lorentson. Those against? Councillor Wegener, Wilson, Finzel, Stockwell and Wilkie. Motion is lost. We now move on to... consideration of committee reports. Planning Environment Committee report was referred to the General Committee meeting. 7.1.8.1. Planning applications decided by delegated authority December 2024.9 9.1 is a confidential not-for-public-release environment levy proposed land purchase. I have a mover and a seconder for the Planning and Environment Committee. Moved. Moved by Councillor Stockwell, seconded by Councillor Wegener. All those in favour? That's unanimous. Now move on to Services and Organisation Committee reports. 7.1 is contract renewal, provision of contingent staff labour hire, 8.1. Noosa Holiday Parks update, 8.2..2, cemetery fees, GST determination, 8.3, capital program 2024-2025 delivery status. We've got some declaration here, Councillor. Jessica Phillips 51:31.812
I, Councillor, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to an upcoming tender for the Cooroy Sports Complex multi-purpose area, which includes the Cooroy Gymnastics Club, mentioned in the capital program update report. I've been hired as a consultant by the Cooroy Gymnastics Club to assist in resourcing of their coaching staff. Resourcing of their coaching staff and I'm currently coaching the senior competitive program on an interim basis. I do not believe a reasonable person would have a perception of bias because the information in the report is merely for noting. That a tender is upcoming in the future therefore I will choose to remain in the meeting room however I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 52:23.024
I'm happy to move that the standard resolution that Council note the comparable conflict of interest by Councillor Jessica Phillips and determine that in accordance with one section, 150ES, one the Local Government Act 2009, and having considered the Council's conflict of interest as described, I decide that Councillor Jessica Phillips may participate and vote on this matter to the Capital Works Update Report, including mentioning the Cooroy Sports Complex and multi-purpose area, which includes the Cooroy Gymnastics Club. Okay, all in favour? That is unanimous, noting that Councillor did not vote on that. Now, we have, this item had to be, the capital program item was pulled out, so we need a mover for the capital program delivery status item. And moved by Councillor... Second. Seconded by Councillor Stockwell. All in favour? That's unanimous. And now, we're going to have a mover and a seconder for the Services and Organisation Committee reports. Happy to. Happy to second. Seconded by Councillor Finzel. All in favour? They are now come to the General Committee report. The first one is MC... 210154.02 which is an application for a minor change to development approval for home-based business meat processing facility at 82 Patterson Drive, Tinbeerwah. Councillor Lorentson would like to move an amendment for this but for that to occur she has requested that someone move and second the original motion please. Brian Stockwell 54:18.333
Councillor Stockwell. I'm happy to move as per the general committee resolution Frank Wilkie 54:22.513
Councillor Stockwell. Seconded by Councillor. Brian Stockwell 54:28.973
I'll waive my right to speak at this stage. Frank Wilkie 54:32.613
Thank you. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 54:35.893
First amendment I would like to move. Yes, please. So it's C, amend condition 10 to read the access hand... access handle must be densely landscaped with native plants and shrubs to provide a dense screen of vegetation between the driveway and neighbouring residents. The landscape garden bed along the southern boundary adjacent to the lot area must be enhanced with supplementary planting being eight particular types of plants with a minimum plant stock size of 45 litres at a density of one plant per metre. All supplementary planting works must be undertaken one month from the date of this approval. I'd like to add of this approval. I'd like to add the addition within a month of the February 2026-25 ordinary meeting, additional planting must be provided to the access handle in accordance with the advice of council senior environment officer and development assessment. Patricia Spicer 55:50.496
I'm happy to second. Amelia Lorentson 55:51.816
Seconded by Councillor Finzel. The request for additional screening and planting in certain locations along the driveway is so that it complies with condition 19 and 20 of the approval which states that the access handle must be densely landscaped with native plants and shrubs to provide a dense ground of vegetation between the driveway and neighbouring residents and I And I think all the councillors were all given just a photograph of the current vegetation and it was identified by a planning staff that the spot switch should be densely aligned. So this helps protect amenity for the neighbouring resident. It also allows compliance with condition 19 and condition 20. Any questions, councillors? Councillor Wilson. Jessica Phillips 56:54.216
Yeah, question to the Chair. Given that the application that we're looking at was a request for a minor change to conditions around staff attending on site and the frequency of the review process, I just question whether this is relevant to those conditions. Frank Wilkie 57:12.336
Thank you, Director MacGillivray. Richard MacGillivray 57:14.598
Yes, thank you, Councillor, through the Chair. This seeks to a minor modification to an existing condition to allow some further landscaping to be undertaken, which should be considered in context of the change, which includes two extra employees operating. So, reviewing some details. There are some areas where there may be some viewpoints from one property to the other, so the condition would support some further enhancements to the viewing screening to allow more of a visual buffer between properties. Does that answer your question fully, or would you like some more clarification? Jessica Phillips 58:01.602
By having two employees attending on-site, requires any visual changes? Frank Wilkie 58:09.462
Is it more of a, that's a question. Richard MacGillivray 58:12.382
Through the Chair, yeah, it's really just to help with further buffering the vegetation screening between subject properties. Tom Wegener 58:23.380
Councillor Wegener. So then, how long is the driveway that would require one plant per metre? Richard MacGillivray 58:35.060
Through the Chair, so the existing condition actually has already been met, the substantive, so offices have been out there, that vegetation has been planted and is growing and maturing as we speak. There's a further addition There's a further addition where there's a small area towards the front as vehicles enter the site which we've identified there's some small gaps where there's a visual inability to visually see vehicles coming to from the site so this amendment would further restrict I guess the visibility of access to and from the property as a result of the changes being proposed. Brian Stockwell 59:11.862
I'll talk to the motion to the I'll talk to the motion. The way I understand it from the advice of staff is this addition would allow a few other smaller shrub plantings to just block the lower understory below some taller shrubs. I don't think it's a large request. It's probably something we can approve. Frank Wilkie 59:29.577
Anyone else wants to speak to the amendment? Well, Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 59:36.177
I don't, I'm not familiar with the names of the plants. I'm not, I don't see names of the plants. I'm not, I don't see, it just sounds very haphazard. What are we actually talking about? How many plants that are 45 litres are we talking about? It's so nebulous. I just see this as arguments erupting, even if it's done to some extent. I don't see this as an actual amendment. It doesn't mean anything to me, saying that at some places there has to be some plants planted because there appears to be a gap. And the type of plant here, nobody's told me exactly what sort of plant this is, why we're imposing this type of plant on Amelia Lorentson 01:00:41.424
Condition 19 already reads, that's the existing permit Councillor Wegener, I'm unsure, can I ask Richard to actually explain that the amendment is within one month over 2025, additional planting must planting must be provided. The condition 19 is already existing that specifies the type of plant and plant stock that needs to be planted and that's already been adhered to in in the most. Richard MacGillivray 01:01:08.962
Through the chair yes you are correct councillor so the all the wording that's not in bold is essentially already as per the existing permit and has actually been fulfilled. What we're seeking due to the fact is there's further people employees coming to the site we've had a close look at some of the images of the site and there's a couple of areas where possibly a handful of shrubs could be planted to create a further buffer to one small section. Brian Stockwell 01:01:49.420
Can I just ask a question just for Councillor Wegener? I think Councillor Wegener was talking about cystisium australii and luminae there. Is it correct that they're both lily-pillies, the bush cherry has a red berry and the luminae has a bluish one, but those advanced trees have already been planted? what we're looking at here is actually just being a little more specific in terms of the first sentence about provide a dead screen of vegetation of native shrubs and plants so they could be smaller. Is that correct? That's correct, Councillor, yes. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:02:20.792
Councillor Lorentson, did you wish to close? No. Okay, we'll put it to the vote, those in favour? favour? Councillor Lorentson, Wilson, Finzel, Stockwell, Phillips and Wilkie. Councillor Lorentson? Against? Councillor Wegener? The amendment's carried and becomes part of the original motion. Do you wish to contest another amendment, Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 01:02:39.924
I'll start by asking the question, can we condition vehicle movements in Richard MacGillivray 01:02:52.400
The area? Through the Chair, it's a broad question. In terms of the home-based business code provisions, we have to be mindful that any condition we apply has to meet the legal tests tests around being reasonable and relevant the the lawfulness around whether on any application you can apply those will depend on the facts and circumstances of each application whether it is considered reasonable and relevant obviously you're requesting relation to this particular application can we control the number of vehicles moving in my view I don't believe we can put a restriction on vehicles because it'll be linked to the number of the activity the scale of activity that we actually approve under the planning scheme and and so in this particular case we're talking about numbers of employees and the difficulty is is like all businesses they might have to come and go to or from at a certain time and there might be things that happen in the day and they might need to go and then come back again so it's very difficult for us to probably manage those things for us to probably manage those things in reality, particularly with employees, so the challenge is, I think it's a difficult thing to put numbers around vehicle movements to and from a property, given there may be residential elements to this as well, where people, friends, family, guests might be coming to and from, so how do you distinguish between workers to a home-based business versus... Amelia Lorentson 01:04:35.040
I just want to ask a couple more questions and I asked this question at the general meeting and just want to sort of ask a couple more. Condition 21, I think it is, talks about the permit lapses on the 17th of December unless written consent is provided by council to extend the approval. In assessing and extend the approval in assessing an extension council will have regard to any complaints received from nearby residents concerning breaches of the development approval conditions and any other relevant matters and I want to really just ask a couple of questions about other relevant matters. Understanding this is not an impact assessment so relevant matters has a different meaning. relevant matters has a different meaning in this context. Excuse me, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Lorentson, ask the question through the chair if that's alright. Oh, okay, excuse me. My question is can you explain what other relevant matters... What's captured under other relevant matters? Richard MacGillivray 01:05:39.598
Through the chair. I know this exact point was discussed at the general committee because their planning manager answered that as well. described in the condition doesn't refer to the other relevant matters which is described in the Planning Act which is a lot of a more broader consideration. So other relevant matters... I understand and again the context was that a broader consideration for staff when evaluating compliance with 21 would consider in terms of the types of impacts and for example I would consider the previous amendment which we've just discussed is where we might require further buffers to prevent visibility of activity happening so that's I would in other relevant matters whereas it's not just about the visual of the this the noise or the light impacts it's actually about other things such as being aware of activities happening and can we put in measures that might we put in measures that might assist to alleviate any of those impacts on amenity at all, which could include visual, the presence of the use happening at all? Amelia Lorentson 01:06:57.070
Does other relevant matters, so my question is do other relevant matters capture psychological or mental health effects and are economic impacts also captured under other relevant Richard MacGillivray 01:07:21.980
Difficult to answer that specifically because it's not defined at all and I would say generally no, planning matters are relevant to planning grounds and planning matters and obviously we have the planning scheme which provides our benchmarks which we must assess against. So my answer would be no it wouldn't include other matters such as that it needs to look at materials of planning impacts because obviously that's the role of the planning schemes to assess those particular impacts. Frank Wilkie 01:07:52.205
So we have made an amended motion now we have a motion before us which has been amended and councillors moved by councillor Stockwell he's waived his right to speak first. Any other councillors wish to speak for motion Councillor Stockwell, do you wish to close? I'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? That is Councillor Wegener, Wilson, Finzel, Stockwell, Phillips and Wilkie. Against? Councillor Councillor Lorentson. The motion is carried. And now we the next item is the new 8.1 new tenant Tenancy A2 to the Peregian Digital Hub 8.2. Thank you Richard. Thank you. Financial performance report January 2025, 8.3 operational plan 2024-25. Quarterly reporting for second quarter. May I have a mover and a seconder for the general committee recommendations. Councillor Wilson like a rocket. Followed very closely by Councillor Finzel. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. Ordinary meeting reports. There's no reports direct of the ordinary meeting. There are no confidential items on today's agenda. The next ordinary meeting will be at Noosa Council Chambers on Thursday 20th of March 2025 at 10:00am. I declare the meeting closed at 11:09 and I thank everybody for their attendance today. Thank you councillors. Thank you gallery. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
