Planning & Environment Committee Agenda - 11 November 2025
Date: Tuesday, 11 November 2025 at 9:30AM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 00:46:25
Synopsis: Hotel change: playground, outcome noise, curfew removed, gaming cap deleted, Appeals: defend Arakoon coastal risk under SPP, Confidential legal advice, Mediation first, Seaview referred.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Amelia Lorentson Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Frank Wilkie Non-Committee Members
Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Amelia Lorentson: Referred Item 7.1 (minor change to hotel approval at 118 Poinciana Ave/26 Diyan St, Tewantin) to the General Committee due to significance, foreshadowing amendments to conditions (Item 7.1; 01:44, 08:55). Patrick (Manager Development Assessment): Advised the “minor change” includes a 78 m² outdoor playground in the northern beer garden, revised noise/operational parameters removing the 7pm amplified music cessation, and deletion of gaming machine limits; retention of end‑of‑trip facilities condition is recommended (02:44–08:04). Patrick: Confirmed external acoustic peer review found “imperceptible” change; modelling assumed 30 children (15 ground/15 on equipment), 400 patrons in northern beer garden, 40 in southern, and two speakers oriented south, with conditions to set absolute noise limits rather than “amplified vs acoustic” distinctions (02:44–07:40). Brian Stockwell: Queried mechanism to reflect Council’s policy position on gaming machines given planning cannot cap numbers; staff will add a non‑enforceable advisory note to the decision notice (08:18–09:47). Tom Wegener: Framed playground noise as a “sound of life,” supporting community character considerations alongside acoustic compliance (10:12–10:58). Council: Closed the meeting to the public to discuss legal advice on four court matters under Local Government Regulation 2012 s 254J(3)(e), then reopened and resolved positions (closure/reopen per minutes). Council: Resolved to defend Planning & Environment Court appeals for 6 Arakoon Cres (Appeal 2698/2025), 4 Arakoon Cres (Appeal 2697/2025), and 3 Allambi Rise (Appeal 2420/2025) (Items 7.2, 7.3, 9.1). Council: Referred 58 Seaview Tce, Sunshine Beach (Appeal D92/2025) to the General Committee for further consideration (Item 7.4). Patrick: Explained 6/4 Arakoon applications engage coastal process risks under the Coastal Amenity and Coastal Protection overlay; refusal grounds included unresolved coastal engineering issues and concerns with building scale/bulk (12:12–14:04). Amelia Lorentson: Sought clarity on Ministerial directions linked to Noosa Plan 2020 hazard provisions; staff confirmed assessment must apply State Planning Policy outcomes where local provisions were not incorporated (14:04–15:28). Patrick: Confirmed mediation will be the first step in the appeals (15:28–15:44). Council: Noted September 2025 delegated decisions: 23 approvals, 1 refusal; drop attributed to fewer exemption certificates with the new scheme (Item 8.1; 43:00–43:48). Contentious / Transparency Matters Meeting Closure: Use of s 254J(3)(e) to exclude the public for legal advice on four separate planning appeals was procedurally consolidated, then promptly reported back in open session with clear resolutions (minutes; 16:36–18:03). Gaming Machines: Deletion of the cap condition was justified as outside planning jurisdiction, with an advisory note proposed to transparently state Council’s policy stance without creating an unlawful or unreasonable condition (08:18–09:47). Noise Controls: Shift from activity-type limits (amplified vs acoustic) to outcome-based decibel limits increases clarity and enforceability but may prompt community concern about evening amenity given removal of 7pm cessation (02:44–07:40). Hotel Playground: Acceptance of playground noise via child‑care acoustic benchmarks may be debated by nearby residents who perceive cumulative patron/play noise differently than modelling assumptions (02:44–07:40). Appeal Linkages: Staff noted linkages between Arakoon matters, underscoring consistent handling of coastal risk and bulk/scale grounds across multiple, proximate high‑amenity sites (12:12–14:04). Legal / Risk Minor Change Test: Staff explicitly applied the Planning Act “substantially different development” test, deferring acceptance until external acoustic review supported “imperceptible” change, reducing vulnerability to jurisdictional challenge (02:44–08:04). Noise Conditions: Transition to absolute noise limits aligns with enforceability principles; ensures relevance/necessity under conditioning tests and avoids activity‑type vagueness that can fail in court. Gaming Conditions: Removal of gaming machine cap mitigates risk of conditions being set aside as ultra vires, given regulation occurs under separate legislation; an advisory note avoids enforceability pitfalls while recording Council’s policy view (08:18–09:47). Sunshine Beach Appeals: Defending refusals grounded in unresolved coastal hazard engineering and bulk/scale is consistent with State Planning Policy risk‑avoidance outcomes and the Noosa Plan’s coastal overlays, with scope to amend grounds from SDAP to SPP in the court process (14:37–15:28). Confidentiality: Closure under Local Government Regulation 2012 s 254J(3)(e) to protect privileged legal advice appears properly invoked and narrowly framed to appeal matters listed (minutes). Mediation: Agreed mediation pathway reduces litigation risk/costs and preserves capacity to refine conditions or accept design amendments consistent with scheme/overlay outcomes (15:28–15:44). Sunshine Beach Council: Will defend refusals at 6 and 4 Arakoon Cres citing unresolved coastal process impacts and concerns about building scale/bulk in a high‑risk, high‑amenity coastal setting (Items 7.2, 7.3; 12:12–14:04). Staff: Clarified, due to Noosa Plan 2020 hazard gaps, State Planning Policy outcomes govern assessment of erosion‑prone/coastal risk for these sites; grounds can be aligned accordingly during litigation (14:37–15:28). Council: Referred 58 Seaview Tce appeal to General Committee for further consideration, indicating potential complexity or need for broader policy alignment before settling a litigation posture (Item 7.4). New Hotel / Noise & Operations (Tewantin) Patrick: Proposed acceptance of a 78 m² playground and revised noise regime, relying on peer‑reviewed modelling and outcome‑based dB limits in lieu of a blanket 7pm amplified music curfew (02:44–07:40). Council: Will retain end‑of‑trip facilities condition as consistent with multi‑modal transport policies in the planning scheme; deletion was not supported (02:44–08:04). Brian Stockwell: Sought to maintain Council’s anti‑harm stance on gaming by advisory note, acknowledging planning cannot regulate machine numbers; staff agreed to include (08:18–09:47). Tom Wegener: Emphasised qualitative community value of “sounds of life” from children, suggesting policy balance between amenity protection and vibrant public spaces (10:12–10:58). Short Stay Letting / Secondary Tourism Uses Patrick: Reported two short‑term accommodation cabins approved at 6375 Mountain Road with the existing dwelling retained, outside biodiversity buffers and assessed under the superseded scheme (44:07–44:26). Amelia Lorentson: Noted data capture will feed into a housing report on affordable/secondary dwellings, expected to Council around February–March (44:26–45:16). Planning Scheme / State Alignment Patrick: Confirmed Noosa Plan 2020’s omission of natural hazard erosion provisions requires defaulting to State Planning Policy for coastal risk outcomes; refusal grounds can be amended from SDAP references to SPP in court (14:37–15:28). Council: Delegated approvals declined from prior months due to fewer exemption certificates with the new scheme, indicating transitional effects in assessment pathways (43:00–43:48).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES Planning & Environment Committee Meeting Tuesday, 11 November 2025 9:30 AM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Committee: Crs Amelia Lorentson (Chair), Brian Stockwell, Frank Wilkie, Tom Wegener “Noosa Shire – different by nature” PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 11 NOVEMBER 2025 1 DECLARATION OF OPENING The meeting was declared open at 9.30 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 COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Amelia Lorentson (Chair) Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Frank Wilkie NON COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Karen Finzel EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray APOLOGIES Nil. 4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4.1 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES DATED 7 OCTOBER 2025 Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener The Minutes of the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting held on 7 October 2025 be received and confirmed. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 11 NOVEMBER 2025 5. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 6. DEPUTATIONS Nil. 7 REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMITTEE 7.1 MCU23/0090.02 - APPLICATION FOR A MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - HOTEL (EXTENSION TO EXISTING HOTEL) AND DBW23/0073.02 BUILDING WORK (DEMOLITION) AT 118 POINCIANA AVENUE AND 26 DIYAN STREET, TEWANTIN Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Planning & Environment Committee Agenda Item 7.1 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3)(e) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing legal advice relating to an appeal in the Planning & Environment Court so that Council’s legal position is protected in relation to Item 7.2 - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 2698 OF 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 6 ARAKOON CRESCENT, SUNSHINE BEACH Item 7.3 - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 2697 OF 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 4 ARAKOON CRESCENT, SUNSHINE BEACH Item 7.4 - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D92 OF 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 58 SEAVIEW TERRACE, SUNSHINE BEACH Item 9.1 - CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 2420 of 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 3 ALLAMBI RISE, NOOSA HEADS Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 11 NOVEMBER 2025 REOPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the meeting be re-opened to the public. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None 7.2 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 2698 OF 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 6 ARAKOON CRESCENT, SUNSHINE BEACH Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 November 2025 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal 2698 of 2025 and agree to defend the appeal. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None 7.3 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 2697 OF 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 4 ARAKOON CRESCENT, SUNSHINE BEACH Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 November 2025 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal 2697 of 2025 and agree to defend the appeal. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 11 NOVEMBER 2025 7.4 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D92 OF 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 58 SEAVIEW TERRACE, SUNSHINE BEACH Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 November 2025 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal D92 of 2025 and refer to the General Committee Meeting dated 17 November 2025 for further consideration. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None 9 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION 9.1 CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 2420 of 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A DWELLING HOUSE 3 ALLAMBI RISE, NOOSA HEADS Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 11 November 2025 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal 2420 of 2025 and agree to defend the appeal. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: None 8 REPORTS FOR NOTING BY THE COMMITTEE 8.1 PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY – SEPTEMBER 2025 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Development Assessment Manager to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting on 11 November 2025 regarding applications that have been decided by delegated authority for September 2025 as provided at Attachment 1 to the Report. Carried. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 11 NOVEMBER 2025 Against: None 10 MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 10.17AM.
Meeting Transcript
Patrick Murphy 01:43.977
So we'll go straight to item 7, reports for consideration of the committee meeting and item 7.1, application for a minor change to a development approval for material change of use, hotel and DBW23/0073.02 building work demolition at 118 Poinciana Avenue and 26 Diyan Street, Tewantin. Before starting, there has been a request to move this matter to the general meeting. I understand there will be some amendments and some discussion over the report, but before... Patrick, welcome to the desk. Patrick, I will ask if you can just give us a review or a summary of the report and what the recommendations are supporting. So the key proposed changes for this minor change application are the addition of a 78 square metre outdoor playground area in the northern beer garden. Amendments to noise conditions and operational parameters that include the requirement for the 7pm cessation of amplified music be removed. And also removal of conditions limiting the number of gaming machines and the requirement for end of trip facilities such as showers and lockers. It's considered that the application is a minor change and this is discussed in the report. When the application was first submitted there was concern that the supporting material didn't adequately demonstrate that this would be a substantially different development which is one of the tests of a minor change. because the acoustic report wasn't sufficient in how it detailed the impacts of the playground from an acoustic point of view and it wasn't able to be determined at that time whether there would be an increase in the known impacts noise so the application was returned there was a further report submitted by the applicant a more detailed report which was reviewed by our consultant before us accepting the application the consultants review identified that there would be an interceptable change in acoustics and accordingly the application was accepted as a minor change so based on our assessment and with the support of the acoustic external acoustic consultant we are seeking to support the changes to include the playground and the amendment to the operational conditions regarding noise amplified and acoustic music the the modelling for the playground is being based on a guideline and accepted guideline around noise from childcare centres and it attributes noise to different age groups of children. The model has used the noisiest child range to apply to their modelling and they've used it for 15 children on the ground level and 15 children on the playground equipment, so 30 children within that area. The modelling includes 400 patrons in the beer garden area and the two live speakers at the northernmost extent of the area. More than most extent of the beer garden but facing south as well as 40 patrons in the southern beer garden facing Poinciana Avenue, so extensive modelling again reviewed by our consultant who's supportive that the acoustic impacts are acceptable. The conditions initially had requirements around amplified music ceasing at 7:00pm. and then acoustic music being permitted but also had decibel limits associated with amplified music across a number of conditions. The reviewers determined an acceptable level of noise to be emitted from firstly from the speakers and then secondly from any amplified sorry from you know some playing music and then also from speakers to determine an appropriate acoustic level and then condition accordingly so it's taken away that acoustic amplified music split and just created a noise level that's acceptable and that's reflected in the proposed conditions in the proposed conditions in terms of the end of trip facilities we're not supportive of the deletion of the condition requiring end of trip facilities we've got policies within our planning scheme that talk about providing facilities to enable a range of transport modes to a site and so we consider it important to retain that that condition and condition um and then in terms of the gaming machine limits there's a condition that stipulates that the gaming machine will be limited to 35 across an area of 260 square metres um the 260 square metres was included because that was reflective of the amount of area that was currently being used for gaming machines and that was translated into the most current approval which maintains that 260 square metre area council is not the the decision-maker or the authority in terms of gaming machines we understand that there can there can be concern as to their impact on the community however in light of the fact that there is a separate process separate legislation for the increasing in gaming machines and regulating their use we have recommended that that condition be Amelia Lorentson 08:04.640
Okay thank you Patrick. So I'm not sure whether I'm going to allow questions or whether we just refer this structure in general rather than duplicating the questions. I'll ask consensus. I have a question which may give the staff member opportunity to bring something to the general Sure. You mentioned that the council doesn't have any real authority to limit the number of gaming machines but Noosa Council has a position about gaming machines and is there another Is there another method by which we could still include that statement of intent that is not challengeable in the court appeal? Patrick Murphy 08:46.757
That's a good question. I will be providing as referenced by Um, as, um, referenced by Amelia, um, updated conditions and I could also, um, but there's just some conditions that need some slight tweaking that I've identified. So I'll be circulating that, but I could also include a suggested advisory note. Advisory notes can be added to decision notices. They are, they're not enforceable, but they can advise of a policy position or they can provide of a requirement to meet other legislation. Frank Wilkie 09:19.122
Yeah, so for the benefit of people listening, Noosa Council or any council cannot limit gaming machines through conditions of approval or through the planning scheme. That is correct. We can perhaps have an advisory note that states council's position about gaming machines in relation to this particular application, which is not challengeable in court. Patrick Murphy 09:44.360
That is correct. Frank Wilkie 09:45.260
Whereas a condition may be. Patrick Murphy 09:45.898
That condition is certainly something that could be appealed. A condition is a... And noting that a condition needs to be reasonable and relevant. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 09:57.118
I might hold back on all my questions. I've been going to and fro with amendments on this application. So we might, again, if everyone agrees, defer further discussion. Councillor Tom Wegener. Tom Wegener 10:09.085
To the councillors, and this is often how you'd expect with kids and noise. I always, I always take some, a little offence to kids in a playground being called noisy because it's Just one question today. It's a natural sound. It's like thunder being noisy. It's like cockatoos being noisy. There are things that make noise, but I hate to consider them as sort of an industrial sort of noise that is an aggravation to people. It might be problematic. I don't know if it's actually noise. It's just something that I think of when I think of kids playing in a playground. It sounds, but you don't want to call it noisy. You just want to call it the natural. You hope your kids are laughing and screaming in a playground. Frank Wilkie 10:55.557
It's the sounds of the next generation. The sounds of life. That's right. I say that when we move into a new area that they're going to love feeling like that. They're going to love feeling life with my children. So I agree with your comments, Councillor Wegener. Again, we might just defer full conversation and questions to avoid duplication for the general meetings. I'd like to move that this agenda item 7-1 be referred to the general committee meeting due to the significance of the issue. Can I have a seconder? Thank you. No further discussion. All those in favour? Thank you. So next we're going to move... So next we'll move to item 7.2, which is the Planning and Environment Court Appeal number 2698 of 2025, application for a material change of use for a dwelling house at 6 Arakoon Crescent, Sunshine Beach. Patrick Murphy 12:12.598
We've got a number of items to talk about today in relation to appeals. There's an element of, there's some that are linked to some degree. This property at 6 Arakoon is part of a property that has two lots. 6 Arakoon has a swimming pool on it. 4 Arakoon has a dwelling and we'll talk about that one shortly. There's an application over both lots for a new dwelling. As part of the process, we need to consider the impact of coastal processes. It's an area that's identified as being in an erosion prone area, subject to the coastal amenity and coastal projections in amenity overlay. And through our assessment of the application, this element This element wasn't completed and it wasn't due to the officers not doing that. The applicants were essentially for the assessment of the application to be put on hold whilst another application with similar issues was being assessed. It wasn't keen for the applicant to be reviewed by our external consultant that looked at the geotechnical reports. And accordingly the issues around the impact of development or how the development could be constructed in light of coastal processes wasn't finalised. The applicant thought that a decision had been made on the application. The application the application was refused. There were also some issues in terms of the scale and the bulk of the building which officers had issued with. They formed part of the grounds of refusal. So an appeal has been lodged and it's reasonable for council to Amelia Lorentson 14:10.760
Council to take action. I'm wondering whether I should go into a confidential session to ask just a few further questions, Patrick. Before hand, I just want to raise, can you just explain what was required by the minister under the ministerial conditions issued in 2020 in terms of assessment? And does that have any implications to the current application? Patrick Murphy 14:37.007
What I think you're referring to is at the time that Noosa Plan 2020 came into effect that it was determined that the natural hazards risk and resilience for erosion-prone areas hadn't been incorporated into the planning scheme. That's correct. That means that we default to the State planning policies as part of our assessment. You will see in this report that the grounds of refusal do refer to SDAP provisions that we shouldn't have gone to we shouldn't have gone to the SDAP provisions but notwithstanding the State planning policy requires similar outcomes or the same outcomes so our grounds of refusal can be modified through the court process to incorporate the State planning policy Amelia Lorentson 15:27.820
So in terms of next steps, is there a mediation process involved as part of the first stages of the appeal? Patrick Murphy 15:37.280
Yes, there is a mediation as proposed. Amelia Lorentson 15:44.060
I will ask if we can move into confidential session. Can I please, I'm happy to move, can I have a seconder please? Yep, that the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3)(e) of the local government regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing legal advice relating to an appeal in the Planning and Environment Court so that Council's legal position is protected in relation to item 7.2 Planning and Environment Court appeal number 2698 of of 2025 application for a material change of use for a dwelling house 6 Arakoon Crescent Sunshine Beach. Happy to move. Seconder, Councillor Frank Wilkie. All in favour? I just have a question. Oh, sure. Kathy 16:37.016
Are we only needing to discuss this item if there are two similar items that follow and if there are questions should they be included in the motion? We can add those in if you want to move that. We can make it into one motion for all three if you would like. It'll just take us a few minutes to get it but we can do it after if you want to move the three items. That would be great. If you're generally happy to say for the three items. Amelia Lorentson 17:03.092
For the three items and if you can work on the wording that would be excellent. Yes. Thank you Kathy. Are you happy with that? Yeah. Everyone happy with that? Thank you. Yeah. Thanks. Kathy 17:14.232
Actually there's a confidential item at the end of that so you want to do it for all four? We don't have to move items. Yes. All four items? So we can open the statement. So these three and then we can go. That would be great. Alright. Amelia Lorentson 17:28.172
Thank you very much. I'm sorry I'm going to ask those in the public gallery we're just going to close this session just probably for five minutes while we discuss the item. Frank Wilkie 17:39.960
We're going to discuss four items. Amelia Lorentson 17:42.260
Discuss, oh we're going to discuss four items. May take a little bit longer than five minutes. And we're not allowed to listen? No, not in confidential. Kathy 17:51.500
Thank you. sir. Frank Wilkie 18:02.180
Am I here for the confidential items? Amelia Lorentson 18:04.780
No, no, no, no. What are you talking confidential? I don't know. I thought I was here for the... Thank you. Kathy 37:26.340
No, I'll do them separately. I'll do them separately. Let me just stick with the words. This is what it looks like on the screen. How does my screen sound? Amelia Lorentson 38:15.780
So, we've got in front of us item 7.2. Can I have that council note the report by the manager development assessment to the planning and environment committee dated 11 November 2025 regarding planning and environment regarding planning and environment court appeal 2698 of 2025 and agreed to defend the appeal. Can I have a mover and a seconder? Thank you. And seconder? Thank you, Mayor Wilkie. All in favour? No discussion? Thanks. Thank you. This way. Thank you. Kathy 39:27.200
Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 39:28.660
Next we have item 7.2 or 3? 7.3.7.3. But council note the report by the manager development assessment of the plan. Sorry. Environment Committee dated 11 November 2025 regarding planning and environment court appeal 2697 of 2025 and agreed to defend the appeal. A mover? Thank you. Councillor Stockwell? Councillor Wegener? Second. No discussion? All in favour? And I'm happy to move. I'm happy to move item 7.4 that council note the report by the manager development assessment to the planning and environment committee meeting dated 11 November 2025 regarding planning and environment court appeal D92 of 2025 and referred to the general committee meeting dated 17th November for further discussion. Can I have a seconder please? Thank you Mayor Wilkie. No discussion. All in favour? Thank you. Frank Wilkie 41:12.760
Just correction that is discussion rather than consideration. Kathy 41:17.160
We only have three things we can refer for. There's three new items. Signature of issue for further consideration or for a further report. We only have three items we can refer. Frank Wilkie 41:28.460
Chair are you happy to change the wording? Further consideration? Amelia Lorentson 41:32.320
For further consideration as it aligns with standing orders. So happy to just keep the wording. And anyone online it's just for further discussion. Thank you. So that brings us to item 9.1 as well. Item 9.1 that council note the report by the manager development assessment of a planning environment committee meeting dated 11 November 2025 regarding planning and environment court appeal 2420 of 2025 and agreed to defend the appeal. Can I have a mover and a seconder? Mayor Wilkie seconded Councillor Wegener. No discussion. All in favour? Thank you. So that leaves us with with reports been made by the committee. Item 8.1, planning applications decided by delegated authority. And again, Patrick, over to you if you could give us an overview of what overview of what applications have been decided and those refused by delegated authority. Patrick Murphy 43:00.124
Thank you. The report before you details those decisions under delegated authority for the month of September 2025. A bit of a quieter month. Discussed in previous months what the numbers were quite high. It's dropped back to... 23 approvals and one refusal. In part that would be because our exemption certificate numbers have dropped off significantly with the new scheme coming in and with certain provisions there might be a requirements for a number of exemptions certificates to be issued going forward and the operation at works is a little bit quieter. I think I spoke to that in the previous month and it really lifted their numbers so just a bit of a quieter month there but the team are still... Amelia Lorentson 43:48.980
Questions are in the table. Brian Stockwell 43:51.840
Council, what do you have? The very first one, 637 Black Mountain Road, there's two short-term accommodation So that there are cabins on the property where there's a person living there. Yes, so this was assessed under the super-servant scheme, but notwithstanding, there is an existing dwelling on the site that's been retained, and these were two fairly small cabins located on the site out of biodiversity and riparian buffer areas. Amelia Lorentson 44:27.980
Fantastic. And just a question in terms of our housing report, which is going to collect all this information in terms of how many affordable housing schemes are in dwellings, and maybe a snapshot of STA approvals that is coming to Council. Patrick, I'll throw it to you. Richard, when can we expect that report to come to Council? Richard MacGillivray 44:53.944
Yeah, thanks Mayor. So that report, I understand, is intended to come to Council around February of next year, so that it will be presented by our strategy branch. So yeah, that's the intended date to have that report to Council, and sort of get information around how it works. Fantastic. Amelia Lorentson 45:17.464
Further questions? Yeah, Frank Wilkie 45:19.428
Patrick, just the one on the refusal for a GSTRIP. That's right, that was a GMAX. Yeah, that was a GFA. Patrick Murphy 45:29.808
A scale. Yeah, a significant scale of GFA. They have appealed that one too, so I'll need to bring a future report about that appeal. Okay, thank you. Amelia Lorentson 45:42.868
Thanks. Any further questions around the table or online? No? Time to actually leave the report in front of us. I'm just thinking you have a mover, so I'm happy to second that. And if there's no further discussion, all in favour? Fantastic. And I think that's the close of today's meeting. Yep, so I'll watch and clear the meeting. Closed at 10:16, I think, for the mayor and councillors and those online and staff, of course, and those in the gallery, I hope. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
