Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Pardon: Yeah, yeah, I walked around the yard and read a bit, around the yard and read a bit around the yard. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, well, my son's girlfriend lived with us, her, all her grandparents came up, plus her brothers. We might get going, councillors. Speaker 5: Yes, councillors, in the absence of the normal chair of the committee, Councillor Wilkie, who's away at the moment, my role is to be able to open the meeting and to seek a chairperson, so I'll be looking for a nomination for a chair. Councillor Wellington, do you want to? Mayor Wellington: Yes, I'd like to nominate Councillor Jackson as chair. Speaker 5: The move by Councillor Wellington, seconded by Councillor Pardon. Does anyone wish to speak to that motion? Okay, all those in favour? I'll hand it over against Carrie, so I'll declare Councillor Jackson chair of the committee for today and hand over to the chairperson. Councillor Jackson: Thank you very much. Speaker 5: Did we hit the big red button?
00:01:00 It's going. Councillor Jackson: Well, thank you everyone for appointing me as chair today. I'd like to begin by respectfully acknowledging the Kabi Kabi or Kabi Kabi people, the traditional owners of the land on which we meet today, and pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging. And for the people in Newcastle. And the public gallery, I just want to confirm that Newcastle Council has approved videoing and live streaming of general committee meetings and ordinary meetings so people can view them online and the camera is going now, it's on the ceiling over here, but it does not show the public gallery, so only the people at this table are visible. Just a few words about the meeting procedure for people who are watching. The standing orders, which are the meeting procedure of council, specifically say that the meeting generally sticks with the agenda items, so we don't carry out other business at the meeting.
00:02:00 And also, it's interesting to see that once a motion has been moved and seconded, each councillor only has one opportunity to speak, and then the person who moves the motion can then speak. And then have a right of reply. So we do manage that fairly efficiently. There's also an allowance for all councilors to ask questions of the motion. It's important to be aware that the general committee, which is this one, does not make final recommendations or final decisions. This committee refers its motions on to the ordinary meeting which happens on Thursday afternoon. And that's where the local government decisions will be made. So we'll just now proceed to the items that are referred from... Mayor Wellington: I'm sorry. Apologies.
00:03:00 Councillor Jackson: Oh, apologise. I missed that. Oh, right. Apologies and... Speaker 5: Council will receive an apology today. Councillor Jackson: And presentations? Any presentations? Speaker 5: No presentations today. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Now, we can proceed to the items referred from Planning and Environment Committee. The first one is a development application to reconfigure a lot from one to two lots at 20 Mitti Street, Noosa Heads. And, Kerry, I wonder if you could just say a few words about what it's all about. Councillor Glasgow: Chair, I'd like to declare a conflict of interest in this matter. As Red's on the board, I'm close friends with the applicants, Peter and Sarah Luxton. Councillor Jackson: Luxton, I guess that's it. Councillor Glasgow: And I risked you leaving the room in this manner. So the CEO will come get me. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Councillor Jess. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Feel free to cheat in.
00:04:00 Councillor Jurisevic: It's a whole new dimension to it, isn't it? Councillor Jackson: Nothing wrong with watching. Mayor Wellington: We've lost the CEO, too. Councillor Jackson: Yes, we're waiting for the CEO. Thanks, Kerry. I wonder if you could just, in a nutshell, for everyone, explain what this one's all about. Speaker 4: So this is a development application to subdivide a lot into two lots. It's before council because there's significant flooding, stormwater issues through the part. The applicant proposes to create two lots and essentially is a retrospective application in some ways to create a lot around an existing house and also a lot around a building. What was originally proposed as an extension to the house. The application is recommended for refusal to council because it's inconsistent with the NUSA plan and creates flooding issues for future residents of one of the lots.
00:05:00 Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Would people like to ask questions? Mayor Wellington: Yes. With your indulgence, I have a series of questions which serve to sort of set the scene here. Kerry, correct me if I'm wrong, but the building at the rear of the property was approved by the City Council. It was approved by a private building certifier as an extension to the house that already existed at the front of the block. Is that correct? Speaker 4: That's correct. Yes. It's not approved by council. It was approved by a private certifier. Mayor Wellington: And as an extension to the front building, the rear building was supposed to be connected to the front building by a covered walkway. Is that right? Speaker 4: That's right. And I understand it is connected now. Mayor Wellington: But it wasn't for some time. Speaker 4: It wasn't for some time. Mayor Wellington: So the application before us is to create two separate lots which would result in the rear extension becoming a separate house lot with its own residence on its own title. Is that correct?
00:06:00 Speaker 4: That's right. There's actually two self-contained dwelling units on the site now. And they are looking to create a lot over each of them. Mayor Wellington: So certainly in recent time, the two buildings, although they are on one lot at the moment, often are supposed to be one house, have actually been used as separate buildings, I understand, with the rear one being let out at times. Speaker 4: Yes. The applicant, the owner, who is the owner, advises me that they occupy the rear one during weekends and school holidays or holiday times and do have listed the older house, the existing one at the front, on Airbnb for letting. Mayor Wellington: So council's own floodgates. The flood report, which you very briefly referred to, noted that the whole lot is subject to inundation under a 1% AEP event. Is that right? Speaker 4: That's right. 100% of the lot is affected by flooding. That's the rear lot down the back. Mayor Wellington: And council's planning scheme dictates that we shouldn't be creating allotments that are
00:07:00 entirely affected by flooding in such circumstances. Is that right? Speaker 4: Yes. Council's planning scheme, the Lot Reconfig Code, requires that 100% of the floodgates are flood-free. And that's to ensure that people are able to enjoy their lot fully. Mayor Wellington: So if we were to approve this subdivision, we would be creating a lot that is 100% flood-prone. That is, the entire area is flood-prone at a 1% AEP incident, which is contrary to the planning scheme. That would surely set some sort of precedent. Correct me if I'm wrong, but council's been, this council's very successful in setting the planning and environment court at defending its planning scheme because it has been consistent in supporting that scheme. However, this would be quite clearly a significant shift away from support of the scheme, which could have implications. Speaker 4: Mm-hmm.
00:08:00 Council's success in the planning court has been due to a very good and well-thought-through planning scheme, but also the consistent decision-making that council has made in the past. When council makes inconsistent decisions, it's a very consistent decision-making, and those matters are raised in court, and the applicant often tries to rely on those instances to support their proposal. Mayor Wellington: And is it not true that a neighbouring council of ours recently lost a significant decision in the planning and environment court under appeal because the judge specifically noted that they hadn't been consistent in supporting their planning scheme? Are you aware of that? Speaker 4: No, I'm not aware of that case. I know. But I'm aware of other councils that do make inconsistent decisions and have trouble in the court. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor Wellington. Do any other councillors have questions? If I may. Councillor Wellington. Councillor Jurisevic: Following on from the Mayor's questions there, Kerry, prior to the second dwelling being, or the second building being created on that lot, was the site prone to inundation?
00:09:00 Speaker 4: Yes, it has a waterway that traverses the site, or overland flow that runs through the site. Councillor Jurisevic: So how is it that a private certifier was able to certify a second building on this site when the site clearly didn't meet the planning scheme? Speaker 4: Yeah. So council's flood mapping is centred, is focused on river flooding. This is not river flooding, so it's not mapped currently as being flood affected. So this is localised flooding that occurs in the area. And that's mapped, and so therefore not regulated currently by the scheme. Councillor Jackson: You can see it's not mapped. Speaker 4: It's not mapped. Councillor Jurisevic: So as a result of that, if it hadn't gone to a private certifier and came before council, would that have happened? Speaker 4: Well, currently under the planning scheme, all the flood requirements for houses are contained in the detached house code. So it still would not have come to council.
00:10:00 It would have been, still gone to a private certifier, providing they met certain things in the house code. Mayor Wellington: I understand that there's some concern, as noted in the report by staff, that there's some concern that the existing structures and any further development on the site as a separate lot could have impact offsite. In other words, may impact the overland flow in terms of neighbouring properties. Can you just confirm that you have received either information or spoken to at least two neighbouring properties that are already raising concerns about the impact on the overland flow on their properties? Speaker 4: Yes. So the existing development on the site is likely, has the potential to impact on downstream and upstream landowners. So that's the advice that we have received from our flooding consultant. The current report does not address that in any way.
00:11:00 And certainly as of last Friday, we have had phone calls from residents who adjoin the property. Saying to me that since those works have gone in, there has been impacts to their property related to flooding. Sounds interesting. Councillor Jurisevic: So on that basis, is there any conditions that we can put on this development application to deal with those downstream flooding impacts or does the development application at the stand only relate to the impacts upon the property in question? Speaker 4: To date and prior to the planning committee, the report being finished, the applicant was submitting that they do not need to address those impacts because that structure was approved under a private building certifier application. It's only since the report's gone to council that the applicant's indicated they're willing
00:12:00 to address those impacts and have a look at it. We don't know the extent of them or what works, if any, needs to be done, that there needs to be further investigation. So at this point in time, it would be, if council were to wish to approve the application, it would be difficult to frame the condition because we don't know the extent of the problem. Councillor Jurisevic: There was a request from the applicant sent to us via email and with a phone call requesting a deferral of the property. We didn't get a deferral of this so that a subsequent report, an updated report for council's consideration could be provided based on information that they were given, as I'm told, requested by council staff. Now, I've also read in the report that a subsequent report would have no bearing on the decision
00:13:00 by council staff to refuse the application. What was the nature of any further report that was requested of the applicant? Speaker 4: So there's been three reports prepared by the applicant to date, with each of the reports not being sufficient. The last report the applicant provided, our hydrology consultant has raised some issues and suggested that further information could be provided to better demonstrate the impacts on downstream or upstream landowners and a few other matters. But officers haven't responded. They haven't made a request to the applicant to provide further information. And the reason officers haven't done that is because that further information is not likely, wouldn't change officers' recommendation. The facts still remain that the site is flood affected, hazardous, with ponding of water on site placement. So it's not suitable as a lot reconfigured. Councillor Jurisevic: Which doesn't comply with the planning scheme requirements for a little area.
00:14:00 Councillor Jackson: That's all. I'd like to ask a few questions as well. I've been investigating the various hydrologist reports. And I just want to clarify how many there really were. My understanding is that initially in 2016, you know, I'll preface it with, in 2016, that was when the property was under design and development and then there was a build. And I understand if it's under development and then there was a build. Is that correct? Then at that time, there was a hydrologist report prepared. And then in fact, council then stepped in because of complaints in 2016 and asked for further update of the original hydrologist report. Would that be correct, in 2016? Speaker 4: I'm not quite sure of the date, Councillor. But no, it's not quite correct. At the time the house was being constructed, we did receive a number of complaints around
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 it. And it's not quite correct. And from the material we could see that had been lodged with the certifier, the owner and the developer had not addressed stormwater matters for the site, which they're required to do as part of their building application to the certifier. So given the issues raised by neighbours, we requested through the certifier that that be provided to the certifier. An assessment wasn't made by officers of that stormwater report at the time. We had no jurisdiction at that time, it was purely with the building certifier. The application then came in down the track for this lot reconfig, and it's three times during that process where we've had various reports from the applicant. Councillor Jackson: So again, can you explain which ones of those were requested by council and what those three reports are?
00:16:00 Speaker 4: Yes. So there was... The applicant was requested to look at stormwater issues as part of an information request that was provided. That was revised twice by the applicant and reviewed twice by council's initial hydrology consultant. The applicant then... We still had issues with that report in the funding at the time. We didn't believe it addressed the issues that we were concerned about on site. The applicant then chose to engage with the council. We had to engage Dr Trevor Johnson to provide what I'm calling the third report to council. And then we've had that peer reviewed in preparation for this report. Councillor Jackson: By another... Speaker 4: Again, a separate... Councillor Jackson: By a different consultant again for council. In terms of the reports that have been received and there's been... Since I requested it at this planning committee, it has been circulated, the report by Dr Trevor
00:17:00 Yes. Johnson as well as by Newell Collins. There is a list of requests and I do understand that the requests have not been relayed to the applicant and in fact we have, some of us have received a statement, signed statement by Dr Trevor Johnson, the hydrologist, saying that he's never had a request from... About what further information was provided. About what further information was required. And I heard you say that you believe that council staff are still making the same recommendation regardless of what the answers were to those requests. Speaker 4: That's right. I guess as a councillor... Councillor Jackson: Anyway, that's up to you to talk about later. Speaker 4: Yeah. Dr Trevor Johnson only became involved in reports with the last report provider. They used a different hydrologist prior to that. Yeah. And that was only lodged just prior to Christmas.
00:18:00 Right. Yeah. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry. Speaker 4: Do you have a report from Trevor Johnson? Yeah. That's... Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. Let's forward it to all councillors last week. Yeah. Speaker 4: On Friday. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll strike up which one's which. That's all. Councillor Jackson: I do have another question which is off on a slightly different topic here. And that is around the reference to kitchen and laundry in the recommendations and report. And I have taken the opportunity to attend the property. And one of the things that I've noticed is that there's been a lot of discussion about with the assistance of the applicant. What I've cited, in fact have a copy of, is a copy of the certified, or approved certified, the council approved, or certifier approved, plans for the property. And it contains an area called, I guess, a wet bar rather than it's not called a kitchen.
00:19:00 But it has clearly in the... The wet bar. These are all in the design for the dwelling. For the building, the extension, it was considered to be a rumpus room area with a wet bar, and that was approved and got the stamp of what Noosa Council stamped it. Speaker 4: Sorry, just to clarify, Noosa Council hasn't approved the building with some of the certifiers? Councillor Jackson: The certifier has, but eventually got registered with council, but it didn't get approved. Certifier has approved that, so they've got an approval for this. In my walking around, and I'm very meticulous as you can imagine, opened every door and looked under every bed or whatever, I couldn't find a laundry at all. Mayor Wellington: She couldn't find it.
00:20:00 Councillor Jackson: So I'm interested in this, and I also note that there was a complaint, which I believe this is the one we're responding to here. There was a complaint in early 2018 by a neighbour, as a result of which one of the staff members from the planning team made an inspection. And as a result of that inspection, which I had seen an email before that inspection saying that they were the person who was coming to look to see if there was a kitchen. As a result, the person verbally said he didn't think there was any issues. And then a letter came from Noosa Council as a result of that inspection suggesting, this was early, well February last year, suggesting that perhaps the applicant might like to look at reconfiguring the lot, because they knew that it's two loans rather than one.
00:21:00 But there was never any mention there of kitchen or laundry, and nor was any request a year ago to remove those. So the first time this has been in writing has been in the report to Council a year later. And between the fact that there's approval for what is there, and the fact that there's never been any communication. Mayor Wellington: Point of order, are we getting to a question? Because you're doing an awful lot of talking, that sounds like an argument, Madam Chair. Councillor Jackson: That's a good point. I guess my question was to have Kerry comment on these things. Okay. Speaker 5: Sorry, that would be a question, not a comment. Oh, okay, no comment. You need to ask a question. Ask for a staff member to comment on something. Councillor Jackson: Okay, well is it correct that initially a staff member was sent or went to look at whether there was a kitchen? As a result of the complaints. And that the letter in February 2018 made no reference to a kitchen and no request to remove a kitchen.
00:22:00 Speaker 4: We received a complaint about potentially being two dwellings on the property, with one being let out for Airbnb. So that was the complaint that was received. So the officer, the compliance officer, investigated that complaint. They weren't investigating whether there was a second kitchen. They were looking to see whether there were two houses. On the property. Not whether there was two kitchens. So that's essentially what they were looking for. Mayor Wellington: Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're not being asked with this report to make a determination about whether or not that second dwelling is an extension of the original dwelling. The only thing we're being asked to consider is whether or not we should create two lots out of one lot. Which would result in the second dwelling becoming a separate house. So the matter of whether or not there has a kitchen. Would seem to me is not material in deciding whether or not it should be two lots. Would that be correct?
00:23:00 Speaker 4: Well, the report focuses primarily on the two lot subdivision. So that's right. And that's certainly the large part of the recommendation to council. But there is a compliance issue here. And part B of the recommendation does go to that. And it is around how could we make this compliant if there's not a subdivision approved by council. So it does go part way there. Councillor Jackson: So the, as I understand it Kerry, and having read it, the part B actually requests the removal of any kitchen. Yeah, that's right. So it is actually on the agenda. That's right, yes. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So to address both questions. Is it, if we were to, when someone, if they wish to move it, change B to say, and therefore any second kitchen and any second laundry must be removed. It doesn't say there is one. It just says if the, we can then leave the determination of what determines the kitchen to the outside of the planning application to a compliance.
00:24:00 Speaker 4: That would be an option. Councillor Jackson: That's right. Does not council have the ability to require compliance without needing council, our, as a council, local government approval to do so? Speaker 4: Yeah. We certainly have delegation to undertake compliance action on matters, and we don't require council approval. But it is our practice to look at the whole matter in its entirety when there's an application before. So that's why the compliance matter has been raised. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Any other questions? Speaker 4: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Did you have a chance to have a look under the draft planning scheme what the property was owned? Speaker 4: Yes. And if, I think I've got the zoning name right, single dwelling unit. So the intent is for detached houses, dual occupancy and the like is not able to be supported on the site. It's not consistent with that.
00:25:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So the fact that all the surrounding areas appear to be multiple units is a result of the prior to the existing planning scheme having a different zoning? Speaker 4: Yeah. And strategic planning have had a look and it sounds like it goes back some time, even prior to the 18th, as to when some of these. Oh, okay. So even the last few schemes, it's always been zoned only for detached houses. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And so under the single dwelling unit, either now or the current zoning or the new zoning, we can have a secondary dwelling up to 65 square metres. Speaker 4: That's right. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And larger than that will be a dual occupancy. Under the new scheme, the definition of a dual occupancy? Speaker 4: So under the new scheme, we can have a secondary dwelling up to 65 square metres. It's only for relatives, not unrelated people. So only related people, sort of a granny flat, if you like. Okay. I didn't actually look at the definition of dual occupancy, sorry. But certainly under the current scheme, this is two self-contained dwelling units.
00:26:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Would you like to add? I think dual occupancy was one of the controversial definitions that we might have had some to-ing and fro-ing with the state government who adopted the narrow definition. I don't know if that's correct. Speaker 3: Yes, we did. Dual occupancy is two dwellings on separate lots, which is not the case here. And it doesn't include residential single unit dwelling, where there's a secondary dwelling, which can't be subdivided. Councillor Jurisevic: Just to clarify, were this subdivision allowed to go ahead, would it qualify as dual occupancy in any way, shape, or form, based on that definition? Speaker 3: If it was able to be subdivided, and in the current scheme and draft scheme, it doesn't meet those requirements or definition. But yes, it was to be subdivided into two separate lots, it could be classed as a dual occupancy. Because, yeah.
00:27:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sorry. Just so I carry on. It would tend to be used where a dual occupancy definition under the new scheme, or new planning act, would be used if there was a old fashioned duplex that might have just subdivided the building under a building format plan. That's right. Yes. Rather than if you just create two separate traditional lots, that would become a single unit house. Councillor Jackson: That's just two separate. That's correct. Thank you. Councillor Stroud. I'll introduce this. Another question. Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: Something you said there, Kerry, posed a query for me. The four 350 metre lots that actually front Mickey Street, you said there'd be no ... They're only fairly recent in their development. Not dating back to the 80s. Yes. Speaker 4: I haven't looked to see when they were developed, but they haven't been developed during the Councillor Jurisevic: life of the new plan. You gave the impression that there'd be no subdivision in that area, or potential for
00:28:00 other type of dwellings in there. But those four dwellings are fairly recent. No. Speaker 4: What I did say is it's been zoned only for detached housing for a long time, going back to prior to the 80s. Councillor Jurisevic: I haven't looked to see ... Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I don't know. I misunderstood what was said there. My apologies. The question that I did have relates to the conditions, the recommendation in the conditions, and that is that number two, condition two, the proposal not demonstrated suitable, safe and appropriate access to lot one. Given that if we do refuse this application today, what can be done to rectify the situation where suitable, safe, and appropriate access to lot one doesn't exist? Speaker 4: Yeah. Well, if we don't approve the subdivision, the second driveway ultimately is not required. But in terms of the works that have occurred, which are potentially impacting on neighbouring
00:29:00 properties, I understand it'd have to be referred through to QCAT to address. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. And the second part of that is the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated the proposal will not cause offsite flooding impacts. That's with regard to the change that they're proposing to make under this, as opposed to the overall development that was undertaken, including the second dwelling, or the second building? Speaker 4: No. That's proposed in relation to those existing works that are on the site now, primarily. There's no major work proposed as part of this lot reconfig. Currently. Councillor Jurisevic: So is there any way under this refusal or approval to ... No. ... to deal with the cause of offsite flooding impacts? Speaker 4: Through compliance, that's really the answer. But council, in this instance, doesn't have the jurisdiction to deal with those offsite
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 impacts, because it's not contravening our NUSA plan in terms of those impacts. I'd have to check. The only qualifier on that is I'm not familiar with the extent of fill that's been placed across the property. That's something we can look into. That's something we could look at to see whether it was compliant with the NUSA plan or not. If it was found to be non-compliant, then we could take some action. Otherwise, stormwater matters between building sites, when approved by a building certifier, council doesn't have the jurisdiction to deal with outside of council. Councillor Jurisevic: So who does? Speaker 4: QCAT. Councillor Jurisevic: So that could all be referred by the other residents to QCAT if they believe they're right? That's right. Okay. That's all. I wanted to clarify for their benefit. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: QCAT. Yeah. Mayor Wellington: I'd like to move the officer recommendation with a slight change of wording to part B afterwards, house code, and therefore delete the and write any second kitchen and or second
00:31:00 laundry. Thank you. QCAT. Second. QCAT. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Mayor Wellington: Yeah, very briefly. Look, I'm actually going to use not my words, but rather words of a neighbour in a submission, well, a letter that was sent to councillors in which they say that they believe it was the property owner's intention to deceive council from the start. That's their opinion. By submitting plans indicating the house would be an extension to an existing house with a covered walkway connecting the two, then changing the plans during the works to make the house a standalone dwelling, scrapping the covered walkway between the properties that was meant to be a corridor connection, which legitimised the extension and thus built a second house complete with bathrooms, laundry, garage, balcony and pool. If they had sought subdivision of the property prior to developing the second house.
00:32:00 And dwelling the application for subdivision would have been rejected by council, then they list a whole lot of reasons which I won't go into other than to say that, of course, the lot has almost 100% of its area subject to 1% AEP flood situation. This property owner is uphill, but says that their property is already directly impacted by the management of water flows on the property in question. Due to clearing of the property and construction of the house the overall flood capacity has already been impacted, resulting in their property being constantly water logged and they say that they hear a transfer pump turning on and off to deal with the water on the property in question. But it really comes down to something very straightforward and that is that we shouldn't be approving developments, in this case a subdivision, that are clearly contrary to
00:33:00 To do so creates, as we've heard, problematic precedents. I'd like to quote a former Byron Shire Mayor, just for the fun of it, who said, in planning, precedent is everything. And that's because as soon as you establish a precedent that conflicts with your planning scheme, you allow opportunities for other would-be developers or applicants to exploit that decision and thus undermine the Council's credibility in the Planning and Environment Court. And that's something I would not like to see happen in this. So I think the only choice we have is to support our planning scheme and refuse the application. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Mr. Wellington. I'd like to move an amendment to the resolution, or motion, and that is basically to delete Clause B. I don't know whether that's a good amendment, but an amendment being to delete Clause B.
00:34:00 Oh, Councillor Cardin will second the motion. Thank you. Of the amendment, yeah. Thank you. I'll just speak briefly to the amendment. I feel that having viewed the property and having seen there is no cooktop, no oven installed in the wet bar area, and having viewed the approved by the certifier, plans under which this property was built, it is clear that what is there was fully approved. I have seen sight of no laundry. I believe Clause B is redundant and unnecessary, and I recommend that we focus on the lot reconfiguration issue, which is what is before Council of an application, and not the concern with removing something that's been approved.
00:35:00 Mayor Wellington: Question, please. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Mayor Wellington: If that clause were to be removed, we would still, as an authorised authority, be able to step in and deal with the house as an individual, as a single house that is, at any stage in the future, subject to a complaint Council could inspect and insist on the removal of a laundry or kitchen. Speaker 4: Correct? Yes. Yes, that's right. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Speaker 4: Any other comments? Yes. Councillor Pardon: Yeah. Yeah. Look, I'll support the amendment. And even in the questions that have been asked of staff here, to me there's two separate matters with regards to this particular application. And the core one is whether there's a subdivision on the property, or not, as far as I'm concerned, as was advised by staff.
00:36:00 Those type of matters, day-to-day matters, staff have the power to police those type of things. So I'm just trying to keep it clear in my head, I'm dealing with the subdivision. Any B that talks about kitchens, et cetera, et cetera, and the discussion will be later with regards to Airbnb's as well. And that's a whole new ball game as well. But for me, I don't have a problem with the removal of B. That can be dealt with by staff at any time. And really, if I dare say, this problem is problematic right across not only the Noosa Shire, but many other Shires. Compliance. Councillor Jackson: Pardon, any on office to speak to the amendment? Councillor Jurisevic: Just to clarify... A question? A question, if I may.
00:37:00 So given that a subdivision is not permitted in this instance, we only have one detached house, the planning scheme mainly allows for one kitchen and one laundry per detached premises, is that correct? Speaker 4: That's right. Councillor Jurisevic: So just following what the council said, but your staff would have the power to request a removal of any second kitchen or laundry. That's all I wanted to just get straight in my head. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: A query about compliance process. It's obvious that we have received complaints about the operation from neighbours in terms of the use. If we don't give this advice, does it add any further steps should we wish to enforce any actions? At a later stage, it is deemed that there is two kitchens. Speaker 5: No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It doesn't add an extra step?
00:38:00 Speaker 5: No. Councillor Jackson: Tiana. Anyone else? Oh, I think everyone's off. No, no, no. Councillor Jurisevic: No? Councillor Jackson: Well, in that case, I'll put... No, I can have a rather brief reply. I don't need to say anything further. I think I'm clear on what I'm supporting and suggesting. So I'll put the motion. All in favour? The amendment. Speaker 5: The amendment. Councillor Jackson: Oh, pardon me. I'll put the amendment. All in favour? All against? Oh, we're all in favour. That's been carried. So we now have the motion as amended. Before us, Councillor Wellington has spoken to it. Do other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Yes, Councillor. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll speak. Look, there was a request from the applicant to request a referral for further information to be supplied. And I had given the applicant the assurance that I would consider that appropriately. But given the information that we've had from staff, that further information will not
00:39:00 likely change the refusal for a lot of reconfirmation. And given that the current configuration does not meet Council's current planning scheme, and is unlikely to, I can't see how I can support that request from the applicant. And I'm happy to support the staff's refusal of this reconfiguration. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Councillor Pyron. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, with the wisdom of Job, I couldn't sort this out, really. You know, you have two dwellings approved, private certifiers, et cetera. And the day private certifiers took over, well, didn't take over, but just about did, from councils across the state of Queensland, was the greatest mistake government's ever made. Because this is where we've been chasing time and again, where private certifiers approve
00:40:00 stuff. When you go after, I asked a question once about private certifiers. And I said, well, I don't know. I'm probably getting off the motion here. But they did put us a fair bit in this dilemma. And I said, how many have been deregistered? This is years ago. And they said none across the state. Now, there may be a few since then. That was a question I posed many years ago. So here we have it. Approved house by a certifier. It's sort of strange in a way when certifiers do this. And then it gets through our system. We have plumbing guys. There's electricians involved. Plumbing. All the different regulators. And yet this managed to get through the system and gets approved totally. So a bit surprising in a way. But it's happened before. The other thing is, with regards to that neighbor upstream, uphill, I've never seen
00:41:00 water flow that way, unless it's pumped, but call me old-fashioned. And the other thing is, with regards to that neighbor upstream, uphill, I've never seen He's no deal. And a couple of dot points in his, puts his professional career on the line. These works cause no change in flood level, either upstream or downstream of the subject site. Another dot point, blockage impacts are minimal because the majority of flow is being carried as shallow overland sheet flow. That is, allowances for culverts and other blockages do not significantly increase flood levels. I mean, this is from an adjunct professor of engineering,
00:42:00 and yet upstream, uphill, a neighbour reckons it's a great problem. So, I'll never sort it out. I'll go with our planning scheme and err on the side of caution, because basically that's all I can do in this case. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor Pyden. And you're off, Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, I might be able to put forward some ideas why upstream may be experiencing more drainage problems. And that is that when I look back at the species that were cleared when we had the original burst of complaints when this site was being developed for an extension, and I think about the place in the landscape, it's very clearly that the second, the extension has been built in a palestrine wetland. It's likely that prior to clearing, it was a groundwater dependent ecosystem. And all those trees that were cleared, were transpiring oodles and oodles of water out through their leaves every day in the sunshine. There's also a chance, like we've had in Sunshine Beach recently,
00:43:00 where by clearing the trees and pulling out roots, you might have also created different avenues for that groundwater to express itself on the surface. So, herein lies the problem. While a little bit of stick's been given to a certifier, I'll get stick to the state government in its green tape reduction removed or reduced, there's a requirement for vegetation within beaches like this to be controlled under Riverine Protection Permitting Underwater Act. Because certainly when I was in charge of that area for this district, I would have never approved the clearing of trees in a palestrine wetland as such occurred on this site. It, like our planning scheme, now only requires those protections through the Veg Management Act where the waterway or wetland is mapped, and very few wetlands of this nature are mapped. And it's actually one of the key ecosystems, service areas for our local ecosystems. It's those areas where we get a lot of nutrient trapping
00:44:00 and also can do great stuff in terms of filtering the water that's passing through and over it. So, therein lies the problem, is we've got a structure that's been built in a wetland, and then we are trying to make a subdivision entirely within the flood-prone area around that wetland. So, with the move of this motion, the most important decision is about precedent, and we can't be seen to be bearing it in this case. We need to ensure that our scheme in relation to reconfiguring the lot does create lots which are usable and which are free from hazards, natural hazards. I did say in the committee that I was reasonably comfortable with the nature of the land use, considering the surroundings. But the difficulty of finding a solution outside of subdivisions to allow two separate residential dwelling units
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 is under the Planning Act, even under the new scheme, is complicated. So, I think that one is also going to be difficult to resolve. So, I think the recommendation to refuse is the only correct way ahead. And I think it's a great lesson that sometimes reducing green tape creates problems, not reduces the problems, for developers. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor. I'd like to also speak. I always, I guess, find it requires special thinking and studying if something involves refusal. And in this case, that is the case. There's a lot of information that needed to be looked at, including some excellent hydrologist reports. I must admit that I, too, feel that it's not totally clear-cut here.
00:46:00 But I do understand that there's quite a difference between certifying an extension in a property which has elements of the lot outside of the inundation area compared to the concept of then subdividing or re-conferring the lot, and having one of those lots fully in an inundation-prone, I'm using the word inundation because this is a flood-mapped-prone area. I note, though, that the building standing on poles has been built especially that way in order to prevent issues in the flooding of the building itself. I also note that right next to this property, downstream from this property, the other buildings, which we know are five 350-square-metre lots, have actually a common tennis court that's been built, no doubt, in ecological wetland.
00:47:00 And it's taking up quite a lot of space there, and I suspect it's been there for a while. And, you know, I wonder what happened to upstream and downstream flooding when it came to building that tennis court. Well, it's there. So I'm not totally feeling that this house, which is on poles, has as much impact as that tennis court. Nevertheless, I understand the issue. I understand the 100-year potential for flooding and the ponding in the property, and I will support the recommendation by staff. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: And now... Councillor Jackson: Point of order. It's not a recommendation by staff anymore. It's a motion. Oh, I apologise. Thank you, Councillor Wellington. I'll support the motion. And I guess we've all spoken to it, so I'll... Right of reply, I'll pretend. OK.
00:48:00 Mayor Wellington: Right of reply. Councillor Jackson: Oh, right of reply. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Yeah, thanks. Look, upstream impacts can occur quite simply through damming effects, and that can result from infrastructure such as house footings, or in this case, potentially a swimming pool or a driveway, et cetera. Whether that's happening here would require further investigation, obviously. But the downstream neighbour has also noted impacts already. And the problem is creating a separate lot could result in further infrastructure, particularly something like fencing. And fencing, it's quite clear, can collect debris in a flood situation, which causes further problems, et cetera. It's already been noted that, yes, the neighbouring properties were developed before the current Noosa plan. Probably under the current Noosa plan, they wouldn't have been developed in the way that they have. But fundamentally, we're not assessing them here. And we have to obviously adhere to our current knowledge.
00:49:00 And our current knowledge is considerably better now about flood events than it was 15 years ago and before that. So it's a bit like... Coastal hazards and climate change, et cetera. We have to work with the most up-to-date knowledge we have and make determinations based on that information. And that's what we're doing here. And I thank my fellow councillors for noting that the precedent does matter in this circumstance, and that the only really appropriate response is a refusal. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Now, we'll put that to a vote. All in favour? Speaker 5: Thank you.
00:50:00 Mayor Wellington: It's very quiet, isn't it? Speaker 11: Shouldn't have anything to do with that. Councillor Jackson: So, the next... Welcome back, Councillor Glasgow. The next agenda item is development application for material change of use in Carrow Street, Cooroy. However, staff have provided a further report, which will be looked at later in the meeting, so... Speaker 5: We'll do it at the same time when we're considering this item. Councillor Jackson: I thought you emailed me and said to do it later. Speaker 5: So what we're doing is... We're taking these items in the order that they come to the agenda. Yeah. So item two. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Speaker 5: It calls up the report. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Okay. In that case, I'm happy because I prefer that. We will have a look at the further report that relates to this Carrow Street development.
00:51:00 And Patrick, thank you very much, and I wonder if you could just give us a bit of a summary of what's changed from the report given to the Planning and Environment Committee. Thank you. Speaker 8: So the application, when it was originally received, was for 17 dwelling units. It remains an application for 17 dwelling units. And it has changed from being 14 two-bedroom units and three three-bedroom units to now being 15 two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units. The reason for the change was that there was some vegetation within the road reserve in Olivine Street that we were seeking to be retained. That was at the end of the year. And through the course of the application, that was identified to the applicant as vegetation that we were seeking to retain. They didn't propose to change their plans. A report was prepared to Council for a preliminary approval, seeking amended plans that would
00:52:00 include the retention of those trees. So that's, I suppose, the primary change. And what it's involved is access to Olivine Street is now via two crossovers, as opposed to one, which was previously. There was previously two crossovers. There's been a decrease in the number of units which face Olivine Street as a result. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Is there any reason for the need for three crossovers? Speaker 8: Well, I suppose it enables the circulation throughout the site and access to each of the units. Councillor Jurisevic: I was wondering why there were two on one street frontage and one on the other. Isn't one on both street frontages sufficient? Speaker 4: I think because the awkward shape of the site. That's really has a result in that. I don't think there's a need to. Councillor Jurisevic: It improves vehicle access. Speaker 4: It just helps the site layout work better. Councillor Jurisevic: There was one matter that I brought up with regard to condition 28.2, the wording of that. The staff had a chance to review the wording with regard to there must be no net increase
00:53:00 in stormwater runoff from the current undeveloped condition of the site. I don't think that's possible with increased roof structures and concrete. I don't think that's possible with increased roof structures and concrete and driveway passages there. Has Mark had a chance to? Speaker 4: Yeah, he's given me some revised wording which we think addresses the issue you're raising to say must be no net increase in the rate of stormwater runoff. So just in the rate. I think that addresses your issue. Councillor Jurisevic: Nobody has any objections. I'd like to put that small change forward before it's approved. Or before somebody. Are you moving the motion? I'm happy to move the motion with that change. I'm happy to see it. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions there? Another question. How so? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So in page 11, we've got the previous layout and the new layout. And in the truncation at the corner of Olivine and Kauri, in the original layout, there
00:54:00 was a tree shown to be retained. And then in the new layout, it's proposed to be gone. And then at the committee, there was some debate whether that was, there's a large fig that looks like to be planted and there's a small spindly, lengthy fig. And then there's a large terracotta. Do we know which particular tree that is? Speaker 8: Connor has had been asked. Can't speak to that. Speaker 11: Can I? Yes. We've identified in the further conditions on 48.2 to a significant degree. And we've sought to address that issue. There is a blue gum in that corner that we seek to retain. And then we've sought to retain it by inclusion of that condition. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. So the one in red on the new layout is going to go green? Speaker 11: It could be. We want it identified. The one in red could be that macrophylla, the fig. And it's just not shown. So we want that 48.2 specifically addresses that blue gum in that corner.
00:55:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Does that mean that'll be addressed under off works? It will be. Councillor Jackson: Are there any other questions that you'd like to add? Not the wrong thing. Mayor Wellington: Yes. With the change of the layout, we now have a little structure in the middle of the driveway right in the dead centre of the lot. Can you explain what that is, Liz? Speaker 8: They are actually car parking spaces. If you were to zoom in, there's two car parking spaces that are provided there. Oh, okay. There's also a bit of a green space. And it's our intention for a tree to be planted in that location. Mayor Wellington: So there'll be a feature tree with two car spaces beside it, basically. That's correct. Thank you. Except no one has a trailer in this unit. Councillor Jackson: Any other questions? Councillor Jurisevic: I'll ask a silly question. Why are the parking spaces two different colours? So if we try and differentiate what's white and we've got a purple space and a green space, is there some differentiation between the nature of the car parking spaces as a result of the different colours? Looks prettier.
00:56:00 Speaker 8: Well, they're identifying them as a V and an R, one for visitor and one for resident. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. Thank you. So there is a differentiation between the colours. Thank you. Oh, V and R. V. V, visitor. That's all right. Okay. I can't... The drawing doesn't have sufficient detail when zoomed in on to get that, unfortunately. Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Jackson: Is anyone else wanting to ask questions before Councillor Judith speaks to the motion? Okay. Councillor? Councillor Jurisevic: No, I'm happy to go with the staff recommendation. I think they've addressed all the issues as far as I'm concerned at this point in time. Councillor Jackson: Good. Anyone else want to speak to the motion? Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: That's good. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Good. Councillor Jackson: Councillor, stop it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I will. I think overall this is a really good example of the sort of development that we need in this side more generally. It's the majority two bedroom units, smaller, in a location that's close to school shops and that meets the criteria, I believe, for affordable housing.
00:57:00 So in that regard, it's a very welcome development in Cooroy. I also think it's really good to see that some of those large blue gums, which really are, set the character of Holbein Street, have been retained because it will make living there just that little bit nicer compared to coming on a row of off hedged planted lily fillets like Kurt and Risa did out there. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Waddington. Mayor Wellington: Yes, I'd just like to congratulate the staff on negotiating with the applicant on an improved outcome that sees the retention of street trees. I think the staff have done a fantastic job here. Obviously, we've arrived at a win-win situation for the applicant and for council and for the community. I think that's win-win-win, actually. So well done to all involved. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. And, yeah, I'd like to also say that I'm very proud of the work that you've done which really satisfied with the outcome, which has meant that all the required requirements
00:58:00 put by council staff have been met, including retaining eucalyptus trees on Holbein Street, a variation of break-up of the roof form, an increased roof pitch, and articulated façade walls. And I, too, am very happy to see a development that meets some of the needs identified in our council housing needs assessment plan. So I think it's a very good report, which specifically says that the need for small detached dwellings, one or two bedrooms, offer additional housing options for a growing number of small households. So I think this is a very good development and a very responsive applicant plan. Anyone want to speak? No? In that case, I'll put the... Oh. Sorry. I keep forgetting. Councillor Jurisevic: If you're getting the wrong reply... Look, I concur with the comments from my co-leaders. We also get some of the other advantages with the lots being developed, and that's
00:59:00 dealing with stormwater runoff, missing linkages in pathways and the like. So I think there's a benefit to the greater community here with this development being completed. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Now we'll put the motion. All in favor? Thank you. The motion's carried. We now have... Craig. Councillor Jurisevic: Robert Coleson. Craig. Craig. The Environment Grants Policy. Councillor Jackson: We now have the Environment Grants Policy. And again, this was referred to General Committee, particularly because there were some wording changes to be made. Craig, again, could you perhaps give us a little summary of where we're up to now with the Environment Policy? In a nutshell, what's before us? Speaker 9: Certainly. The report as a whole outlines the new Environment Grants Program that Council endorsed during this year's budget. It describes a number of things. There are three different sorts or categories of environmental grants that will apply moving forward with this program.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 The report also includes the criteria and timeframe for the next round of grants in the absence of an adopted environment strategy. And it also includes some minor amendments to the Board of Community Grants Policy. A couple of the changes since the Planning Committee report, we changed the definition or removed the definition around business trust and conflict of interest in both policy documents. And made a small addition to allow for independent qualified experts to be able to provide assessment to the grants. Councillor Jurisevic: Can you explain why you made that, removed that condition with regard to conflict of interest? Speaker 9: We didn't remove it. We relocated it, have we? That's right. It's in the body of the document. The definition was a little bit, was not ideal. It was pointed out to Committee. So the content of the conflict of interest is included in the main part of the policy. Councillor Jurisevic: The definitions are affecting the legislation. Okay. That's cool. I was wondering why that was suddenly removed. I hadn't been aware of that until you just pointed it out.
01:01:00 Councillor Jackson: Any other questions, councillors? Well, I have a question. I'll second it. A little question is around recommendation B, where it refers to relevant strategic outcomes in the biodiversity, waterways, et cetera, of the draft environment strategy. And I wonder why wouldn't you say relevant strategic outcomes in the draft environment strategy? Is there a reason why the word draft isn't there as well? Speaker 9: The draft is preferencing the environment strategy as a whole, but we could have put draft behind the strategic outcomes as well. We referred to the strategic outcomes of the draft strategy. Okay. Councillor Jackson: I have another question. Mm-hmm. In relationship to the set of interim criteria, one of the criteria in the draft environment strategy under biodiversity is B, priority ecosystems, areas, and council
01:02:00 of bushland reserves are enhanced and managed to be responsive to changing environmental conditions. That has not been included in this set of interim criteria, and I wondered why. Speaker 9: The rationale was obviously there's quite a lot of strategic outcomes, so we wanted to have quite a little bit more focus than provide all of them in there. We felt that one was very focused. It was quite council-focused and on council of bushland reserves, so we felt for an external environment grants program, it perhaps wasn't as high a value as some of the others. Okay. That was the rationale behind it. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Thank you. I have another question. Well, I haven't looked at what page is on here. There's a section on ineligible projects, and it says activities that have already commenced prior to the grant application are not eligible. And again, I don't know if that's true. I just wonder about it, because I'm thinking, well, perhaps something really good could be happening where they haven't got the funds to continue.
01:03:00 And why do we not allow that application? Speaker 9: Okay. Look, the intent of that criteria is to not continue to fund projects that are already funded and already ongoing. It probably wasn't put in with the intent to stop further funding of a project, which had been piloted. To me, that would, in my opinion, be a bit too much. I mean, going into a different stage would be a separate new part of a project, if that makes sense. Councillor Jackson: Sure. Yeah. I guess that wasn't really my question. I was thinking that perhaps it could be a project that just needed extra funding, as it was, without any second phase. And why wouldn't they be eligible to apply for that extra funding? Speaker 9: Well, I guess we typically wouldn't consider a project that was halfway through, because we would have expected if the project had been well scoped in the first place, I guess they wouldn't have reached halfway through the project and run out of funds. So if it was for a new element of the project, or a new part of the project, or they wanted to expand it, I don't think the criteria in the policy excludes that, however.
01:04:00 Councillor Jurisevic: That's all I wanted to clarify. Yeah. Because I could imagine a project being undertaken by volunteers and- Excuse me. Councillor Jackson: Is this a question? Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. And getting to the point where they realise that there's a greater scope that could be developed as a result of that initiative. And that's an additional undertaking to allow, to then require something further. So that would then still allow that, a further expansion or another opportunity that arises as a result of that starting to be eligible for? Speaker 9: It would, as you've described it, that would be an expanded project or a different scope of an additional project. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. That's fine by me. Councillor Jackson: I do have another question of you. Thank you. And I'll ask Carly to please put up the wording of the conditions of funding. I don't know if you can hear me.
01:05:00 This wording is in the community, oh, just to say that there's a definition of acquittal in the draft environment grant policy. But it's only a definition and in nowhere in the text does it refer to there having to be acquittal. Okay. So the community grants policy, there's this, this is directly out of the community grant policy. And it specifically refers to all successful applicants who are required to enter into a funding deed of agreement with council and acquit funds within the allocated timeframes. The timeframes and acquittal requirements are outlined in the supporting grant guidelines for a specific funding program. Successful applicants will be required to actively and publicly acknowledge council's support. So that's, that's in the community grant policy. And I'm wondering why something similar, and I'm particularly concerned about acquittals, is not in this environment policy.
01:06:00 Speaker 9: There's no specific reason for that at all, Councillor Jackson. I'll be quite comfortable having that, that's currently in the community grants policy. Also included in the environment grants policy. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Given that, given that acquittals are, are stated under the definitions, it seems odd that there's no inclusion of acquittals within the actual body of the grants policy, the environment grants policy. Speaker 9: It looks very much like an oversight. It's not a deliberate decision. So there's only one conclusion left to make. Councillor Jurisevic: Do we, do we need to correct that here and now before we? Yes. Councillor Jackson: We'll do it. I'm happy to move the motion with a change. And that is to have in A, adopt the grant, environment grants policy. As set out in attachment one to the report, containing the wording about conditions of funding from the community grants policy. Councillor Pardon: Seconded.
01:07:00 I'd just like to get a card here, that wording. Yeah. Speaker 5: Conditions above your acquittal of that. As amended to. No, it's not. It's called the condition capital. Can I suggest we have that containing the same wording regarding. Same wording. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Could we have the words. Yes. Addition. Add. With the addition of. Councillor Jackson: With the addition of. Speaker 3: How about I just copy and paste it in there. Councillor Jackson: With the addition of the following words. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The whole thing. With the addition of the following words. That's a good idea. It's a better one. That's what I was suggesting. You can't copy because it was a. Councillor Jackson: It's a, it's a JV. You can stick it in there. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll take it. Councillor Jackson: Okay. I just guess I'll speak positively about the grant policy, I believe this is an important
01:08:00 thing and it's a new thing because in the previous period before the change of the funding deed for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation, grants money was handed to that foundation to distribute and since the new funding deed there's been a recognition that council needs to have the strategic overview of environment for the Shire and with that a strategic overview of the grant policy which I think is shown in the fact that this motion already has in it clear strategic priorities directly out of the draft environment strategy so that link between the grants and the environment strategy is primary. I think it's a very well structured policy and matches of course in style the other policies
01:09:00 that we have for grants in council and I'm very happy to support it. Councillor Fyfe. Councillor Pardon: Councillor Fyfe Yeah, thank you. Yeah, firstly I'd like to thank staff for all the work to put this policy together. It's kind of funny for me. I'm very happy about this happening, this policy, grants policy opportunity for some of our groups across the Shire, working groups to actually access some money to do some of the good work they do. And what's interesting for me I guess is in all the years as a councillor trying to get some sort of framework where we can get some sort of framework where we can get some sort of policy where people could actually apply and get grants out of our environment levy
01:10:00 funds. And I understand, although it's not written here, my good friend Councillor Stockwell informed me that whilst that was one way of doing it out of the environment levy but also opportunities out of waste levy and other things, but I'll let him talk about that. Councillor Fyfe. Councillor Stockwell. We've purchased so much land over the years and I've proudly been part of much of that. And if you look at the big picture, I've always thought, well, you know, we've got the land, but how the heck do we look after it? And without our volunteers across the Shire, there's no way we could look after all that land. It'd cost a fortune. So the opportunity to give grants to various groups and volunteers is a good thing. The Queensland Government, the Queensland Government, the Queensland Government, the Queensland Government, they've got heaps of land but for now Shire, and if you look at
01:11:00 the difference between over the years where Council has looked after its land through weeds, et cetera, the way we've done it, the government's never going to fund QPWS enough to look after their land at all. And so we can do a far better job and we have done a far better job. And this will just help us. This will just add to our resources and gear our people up to be able to do more to look after the environment, land across the Shire. So I think it's really good and I'm really happy that finally we got there. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Councillor Haynes, do you have anything you want to point to speak about your stop-off? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well, briefly, I think it is great to see this coming on the same meeting as we had the environmental policy, environmental and sustainable living policy. Back in September in 2016, I called a few of our key environment groups together and
01:12:00 Councillor Joe was there as well. And one of the first issues that they said we think this council should address was they didn't think we were getting bang for buck out of our grant system because there was no priorities for our environment grants, no guidelines. And so this policy sets in place how we're going to assess them and the strategy will be saying what we're going to be targeting. So to me, this is a really good thing. This is a really key piece in the puzzle of ensuring both what council does itself, but importantly, how we partner and how we invest in the community to get some of those on-ground outcomes. I think another new aspect of this grant process is in item three in the multi-year environment collaborative project. And to me, that is the way of the future of getting a bang for the buck by working with our partners. In community, and it could be an industry as well, to achieve some of those strategic outcomes that will be put forward by the environment strategy.
01:13:00 And I also think another bit of innovation in this policy is the fact that while the small grants will go through a grant process, the multi-year environmental collaborative project will be through an open application or expression of interest process. And this allows what I would hope is multiple groups working out how they can work together and with council if necessary, and potentially attracting other levels of government funds as well to achieve some of the strategic outcomes we'd like for the community. So I think it's a good body of work, and it's one which will set the direction for how we invest in the community into the future well. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Jurisevic? Councillor Jurisevic: It's one word Councillor Parton used, and it's one I'm going to state right now. Finally! Finally. Finally. I mean, five years in the making that I've heard from our environment groups. Council has at best had an ad hoc approach towards supporting the works that our community
01:14:00 groups do with regard to environmental restoration works and the opportunities that exist, the opportunities to leverage and enhance on state and federal funding that they get, and to get adequate support from council in the works that they do. And they do do a lot of great work at no cost to council. With many, many hours of voluntary time and effort put into it, so I'm really pleased that we finally have, as Councillor Stockwell alluded, an environment strategy going forward, an environment policy coming towards us in the next item, and for this environment grants policy to finally be finalised and ready for the future of community environmental projects to come forward and get assistance with funding. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Not at all. Yeah. Mayor Wellington: Look, this is a very important step that we're taking, and there's a further step to be taken, of course, when we approve the environment policy and sustainable living policy to go
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 out for public consultation. I just want to unpick a little bit a couple of the comments made by Councillor Jurisevic. I don't believe our approach previously was ad hoc, and nor do I believe that the work that our bush carers and other volunteers do is at zero cost to council, because we actually facilitate that work, provide equipment, and provide staff to help oversee and work with our volunteers. So let's not paint a picture of there being no support for our bush care volunteers previously, and suddenly we're going to be providing support. That's not the case. However, what this does do is it clearly delineates what funds are going towards environmental works in the Shire, because previously those funds were being channelled through our much broader scope community grants policy.
01:16:00 I will not accept the fact that that policy was ad hoc. It had very specific guidelines, et cetera. I think that this council has a long and proud history of supporting environment groups and volunteers in working on our local environment, and we will continue to do so. This policy, however, does provide more focus. I want to acknowledge that, in particular, Councillor Stockwell has been pushing us towards this particular juncture, as he has towards the development of an overarching environment policy, and that is itself an important piece of work. And it's worth pointing out, too, that the council's only been operating five years. We have to get to each stage of our development when we have time to do so. We are very fortunate now to have Craig Doolin as the manager of environment, and he has brought a significant amount of expertise to this.
01:17:00 And in fact, I just want to note that the environment grants policy and the overarching environment policy have been well handled. And Craig, in particular, who's done a fantastic job. And yes, it has been somewhat long awaited, but we do have to do things in their time and make sure that we have the capacity and resourcing to be able to carry out those policy decisions. And finally, we've reached that point here. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor Wellington. I guess I've got the right of reply as I move it, and I'm thinking of some of the things that come to Stockwell said. I guess what I'm also very satisfied with is the approach you've taken, that this policy takes, in that it recognises that what is being put forward as priorities are interim, given that we have a draft environment strategy about to be approved for the formal public
01:18:00 consultation phase. And so there's no kind of pre-emptive move here. It's simply recognition that we work with what we have now due to timing. But we're uncertainly looking forward to feedback from the community about all these things. And you know, for all we know, they may change. So yeah, thank you. And now I'll put the motion to vote. All in favor? Thank you. Thank you very much. Speaker 4: Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 11: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you.
01:19:00 Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It's appreciated if you could give us a little summary of what this is all about, just in a nutshell, before we start. Speaker 10: Morning, councillors. We've submitted a report which provides council with a review of the first six months of digital hub operations. Overall, we're tracking well. Our financials, as at the end of December, are largely on track. And we're looking to expand our co-working membership through more active marketing and promotion. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thanks. I'd like to invite councillors to ask questions. And I appreciate that most councillors are very respectfully asking questions through the chair. And I'd appreciate if all councillors would do it that way. Thank you. Speaker 4: Has anyone got any questions? Councillor Jackson: Wow.
01:20:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, in a nutshell, the model you've put to us would have been a year and nearly now. Are we happy that we are progressing along the predicted financial, but also in terms of the nature of the business that's being conducted and the people who are being attracted? Are we on track both from a financial and from a program perspective in economic development? Speaker 10: I would say, I would say we are, I think we've learned a lot over this period. I think directionally, the decisions that were taken were pretty accurate. Although, you know, obviously the devil's in the details when it comes down to things like how many technology startups are there truly,
01:21:00 that we can get into the digital hub versus maybe less mature companies or less mature, less sort of pure startup companies. So, you know, there's probably a little bit of detail around that. But directionally, you know, I think we're evolving into getting to the point where we feel like we can sustainably deliver a world class public service that fosters a digital, a really strong digital sector that ultimately contributes to the growth of the digital sector. And I think that contributes to that diversification objective in our, you know, local economic plan. Councillor Jackson: I've got a question. Councillor Wellington first, and then Councillor Lassen. Mayor Wellington: Yeah, look, in viewing the report, I agreeably, I'm agreeably impressed by the number of programs that have operated out of the hub focused on young people, students and youth. The talent development program, the mentoring girls in STEM, the flying innovator, the holiday camps, etc.
01:22:00 There's a lot of lovely photographs of happy children here. Given that wasn't really a core part of the intention of the digital hub, which was more aimed at encouraging and flourishing new businesses, small businesses, startups, etc. Can you talk a little bit about the expansion into this area and the relationship that you and the hub now have with local schools, please, Chris? Speaker 10: Certainly. I think there's the program certainly haven't been exclusively for young people that be in programs for our members programs for the broader community programs for influencers and programs for kids, but certainly that, as you say, wasn't necessarily a major focus up front. I think it's an acknowledgement that, you know, we're, we're, we're taking a long term view of the, of the challenge that we have.
01:23:00 And time flies, you know, you work with young people at primary school level, just five years later, they're graduating from high school. And if you've assisted them with the kind of inspiration and skills that they need, they're at a point where they can start to do meaningful things with their futures. Which is just a few years after that. So, you know, I think part of it is the long-term view of how do we build a world-class talent base here. You know, sooner do you attract fantastic entrepreneurs and startups and they need to hire people. And having a really strong talent base that are equipped to provide the sorts of knowledge, work and innovation, invention, etc. Is... Is... Is a key part of what we need to do. It's not the only thing we need to do, but it is a key thing that we need to do so that, you know, we can achieve the job growth objectives that we have.
01:24:00 And the relationship with schools? The relationship with schools is, you know, I think a very strong one so far. A great appetite to collaborate with the hub and with our members and our network in that what we can do. We can offer our extension opportunities that are just not possible within the school framework. Opportunities for kids that are super keen or super curious to get exposure to some of these opportunities that they're just not able to have delivered for them within the confines of the school curriculum or the school hours or whatever it might be. So, in that sense, really strong supports and exciting things ahead. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Speaker 1: Can I add to that? I guess that it's a good question and if anything the report shows that all the pretty pictures and all the different school-based development but also networking events. I guess what I'd like to think is that we've achieved the tenet of the hub and the engagement with the business community and the start-up and the entrepreneur community plus all the programs that are
01:25:00 my understanding and you know we we talk about this a lot is what we're trying to do is create the value to then attract the the talent that around the business growth and the sponsorship so we could actually build that sustainable hub that is not only connected to the school so I think what what you're seeing there is we believe that we've got that core base of value which in hindsight maybe there's a bit more of a story behind some of the tenants and that's building very quickly and it's only really being since we official launch September I guess first of July really we kicked into some into the full tenancy so we're up into about eight month eight so I think the core business is there the next six months already this I think in this start of the year we've taken on five five more six more tenants and Chris is you know I guess setting up a whole series of
01:26:00 tech groups over the next 12 months who meet monthly that will build that that awareness and actually really I think impact the tenancy so in summary to that is what you're seeing in the report is a real reflection of the additional on top of core would be certainly what I'd like to think you're seeing there which the schools program has been fantastic and it's probably only two or three years away from a lot of those those individuals Councillor Glasgow: actually being part of our business community part of job creation around taking a diversification my couples with Tony's question quite well about the fact that you know reports very colorful it's great it's got little training elements to it you know you had lots of training going with various different I think even director Sun was there at one stage right as the drone building elements of things and it's common knowledge is really struggling to get
01:27:00 the young entrepreneurial people and the young professionals out of the cities and into the nursery Shire in this industry to try and kick start these exact incubators now they're struggling down in in a new CBD then a merger and so forth and these are the people coming here in the future that there's really not there's no city life for them here and I can't understand why they wouldn't come how are we going to draw these people here in the future which we basically can't get we all know we've got the Ben Duncan and so forth but we're not getting you know those a handful of mid 30 startup guys who you know Melbourne Sydney base who why would they move to Noosa for a 54,000 people lifestyle Sean I've got great beaches and restaurants but in the future that
01:28:00 they're not getting what are you how are you gonna get those people here in the future to exactly train these kids that we're going at the moment to work in his industries and it's pretty common knowledge that it's gonna get them here in the future well what's what's the situation
01:29:00 Speaker 10: I think what you see in that report is really a series of experiments over the last six months because it's a brand new business it's a brand new endeavor and most of which have actually had some success but what you see is really a holistic approach the reason that you see stuff with kids and you see stuff with entrepreneurs and you see stuff with famous speakers coming here and so forth is you need to actually do all of those things to cultivate a strong digital ecosystem that is attractive for people and Councillor Glasgow in answer to your question I would say we we potentially have we're not there yet but we potentially have a really really unique proposition that we can build we already know that Noosa from a lifestyle perspective offers you know incredible opportunities for people we are seeing more and more people popping into the hub young families that have transitioned from various places around Australia and are sitting here that are starting to realize that actually you can run a business from somewhere like Noosa the business infrastructure has improved the connectivity is improved and and places becoming more well known for being able to host and support companies like that so I think you know the combination of providing
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 fantastic business infrastructure incredible lifestyle opportunity and an amazing place to raise families is a triple whammy that very very few other places in the world can compete with so I think it's about telling that story and I think it's about continuing to improve the business infrastructure proposition that we can offer and you know we're focusing a lot on the kids story here but if you think about it you know one of the things that people think about before they move to a place like Noosa is is it going to be a place where my kids are going to find the kind of opportunities that they would otherwise be finding in the cities and to know that your kids can be involved in these sorts of programs I think is a major major win for people who are kind of assessing whether this would be a good move for their family so in totality I think that can be a very strong proposition in the years ahead
01:31:00 Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Any other questions? I do have a question. I'm sorry councillor I have a question. I'll do that first. I've got two questions. The first one actually is there's mention of a number of different types of grants that are being applied for and I wonder if you could you know we're talking money here can you give us a bit of an update on how many grants have been applied for and where we're up to and how you know where are they? Speaker 10: Sure so we've applied for one grant at this stage is a regional hub support grant offered by Advanced Queensland which is specifically being conceived to assist regional incubators hubs and organizations that are trying to do the kind of work that we're trying to do it is not a matched funding grant so it is a grant that is
01:32:00 is very attractive in that sense even though in the in the application that we've put in we've demonstrated that you know we are ourselves making a major investment in in the hub and the programs that we're running and so forth so we haven't yet received an update as to whether we've been successful with that I hope to get an update in the in the next couple of months but that grant really is about providing some additional support resource that would allow us to run these sorts of programs in a more sustainable manner at the moment the programs have I would say been incremental to the day-to-day activities of running the hub and we'd like to be able to do that on a more sustainable basis through through
01:33:00 some additional operations and administrative support and that's the purpose of that grant the second grant which we haven't yet applied for but which we intend to apply for is it addresses the one of the two key challenges that we see the first challenge which I think goes to Councillor Glasgow points is about how do we expand the entrepreneurial base here in Noosa we're still a very early stage ecosystem and in that sense we just don't have the numbers of true technology startup companies that could end up being major employers in the future we've got a lot of work to do to expand that base and one of the ways you do that is by running accelerator and incubator programs that help companies who have good product and service ideas figure out how they can take those to what
01:34:00 enough 1.5 billion consumers around the world and this is a pretty well worn and established way of of growing the entrepreneurial base in any place and has been very successful for probably 25 years as a model in all different parts of the world we haven't yet applied for it but our intention is to that would allow us to run acceleration programs which are sort of multi-month intensive entrepreneurial programs for companies that are wanting to evolve their business models of their products or services and tap into this opportunity by using technology the first one is advanced Queensland the second one is industry Councillor Jackson: yeah under the KPIs there's a reference to the 2.2 million dollars for the next stage of Rufus Street I think that maybe I'm misunderstanding something but I think we have buildings and the Rufus Street master plan and that's all progressing but we also have in a sense equivalent of a business
01:35:00 Speaker 1: called the Digital Hub and I'm wondering why the Rufus Street grant is put into a report which is about what I consider the business of the Digital Hub yeah it's put in there in in the context or the next stage of the Digital Hub and I guess this is under investment regional investment in the measure value of investment attracted by by a grant so I see Robin sitting in the audience there as well I guess it's in there saying that the next stage of the Digital Hub so in what we have achieved at the Digital Hub in my opinion certainly has impacted our ability to attract the next stage of Rufus Street which includes an element of the Hub so I think the value of the Hub creation has influenced and the success of that grant okay great thanks for explaining that well I do have another one and Carly's got something for me to share
01:36:00 Councillor Jackson: I'm just in my reading your very interesting update also went back to the motion that council has decided on in December last year and in that original staff
01:37:00 report that we were shown in December we were shown this high case and then you know we succeeded in making lots of money for the Digital Hub and in the first year which is the one we're in right now we We were told that in the low case there would be a deficit of 70,000 expected, 800, and that in fact year two, year three, year four, year five, there might be a little surplus. This time in February, and I might add that I've also checked an update that we were given informally within council workshop, which was similar to, it actually suggested a loss of 90,000, a deficit of 90,000 in the first year. This time we're receiving this and we see a deficit of 172,000 in the first year, and I'm just wondering about the discrepancy.
01:38:00 Speaker 1: The first, I guess, the apples and pears is the depreciation and amortization. So, certainly the, my understanding is that the top, top table is excluding depreciation and, and amortization. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Speaker 1: Yeah, so that's number one, that's certainly. Councillor Jackson: That's why there's a difference. Speaker 1: That's, that's the primary difference. And then, yeah, so that would have brought us back to pretty much that, that original number of, you know, minus 70 or minus 90, which is what I think you had in the last update. Councillor Jackson: 90 was their update. Speaker 1: And that would match with our budget. That should be our budget. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Thank you for explaining that. Good. I'll just see if I, oh, I do have some other questions. I just have to look them up. I'm also interested to know, does this budget for 2018-19 include the fit out and equipment cost in the setup of the digital hub?
01:39:00 Speaker 1: There would be a small amount of operational in there. If we were, the, the, the rest of the setup cost was in the capital. Councillor Jackson: Right. Speaker 1: So it's not here. No. It's not in there. No. Councillor Jackson: Because originally there was talk of 350,000 for fit out. Speaker 1: No. So we have, I think we ended up with the capital number. We need to double check with that. And that was all, all of it. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Yes. Um. Oh, I guess the other question I would have, given that originally we were looking at potentially, well, what was shown in the surplus. What is the, um, intent for the next year's budget? Assumedly you've been doing some work on planning that. Yes. Can you indicate what you envision as being a surplus or a deficit next year and what therefore the council may or may not have to budget for? Speaker 1: I can start.
01:40:00 Chris can maybe, yeah. Um, yes. We've done a lot of work on, on that. And, um, it must be, uh, you'll be, I guess, considering that detail very soon. Um. So without recalling every figure, um, looking at that second year number up there of 7,000 surplus or 6,981 surplus, um, we've certainly been looking at those numbers and we expect, um, a significant jump in our revenues because we've, because the co-workers is, is, is, um, still probably about 50 to 60% upstairs. We've got some more capacity. So revenue will increase quite significantly. Um, you'll see the final numbers, but that's a, probably a 20 to 30% increase from this year's revenues to next year when we've got a full year of, of co-work occupancy, plus we are budgeting a bit more sponsorship, et cetera. So that number, I see a revenue number of two, three, five.
01:41:00 We certainly, um, will be heading towards that number and you'll see that in the budget. I wouldn't like to give the exact, but I, cause we've done all the background work on that, but there's a significant increase from this year's number to next year, close to that two, three, five. Um, the expenses I think we're forecasting are a little higher than we anticipated, but nothing significant. So my understanding, Chris, is that we're not quite at a positive $7,000 as it says up there, um, that we estimated a year ago, but we're, uh, not too far away from that number. Hmm. Councillor Jackson: So you're expecting a surplus. You're not expecting. Not a surplus. No. Speaker 1: Not a surplus. Councillor Jackson: That was a surplus. That was a surplus. In the high case. No, in the low case. In the low case. Speaker 10: Yeah. Getting close to breaking. Councillor Jackson: Chair, no minus there. Councillor Pardon: If, if I may. Chair? Yeah. The, the reports from the 1st of July to the 31st of December, um, now we're, we're discussing the budget for the future year too, I, I just think we're running off the rails
01:42:00 a bit here. That's what the report says. So, I mean, these will come out in the budget discussions, et cetera, but I'll just point out that the report, to be fair to staff, um, is to the 31st of December. Councillor Jackson: Fair enough. Okay. Well, I won't ask you any more about the budget, but I guess I, the reason I was asking is because if this is a report on the performance of the hub, and budget is part of the performance, and, and, um, I think that's an important element to be considering. Um, does anyone have any other questions? Tom from Jersey. Councillor Jurisevic: I was actually, based on those views, we seem to be running fairly, fairly right on track as to somewhere between the low, above the low, and towards the, towards the high, certainly for income. Expenses seem to be, and operational expenditure seems to be a little bit higher. Have we incorporated any of the, the, the fit-out costs in that operational expenditure, or, um? Speaker 1: Through you, through you, Chair, and thank you, Michael, yes, it's all, all been capital
01:43:00 and dealt with in the capital works process. Councillor Jurisevic: All right, so there hasn't been any crossover between the capital and the operational, that's all right? No. Just, just clarifying, because I know there were some, uh, additional, um, requests for, uh, um, items with, uh, with regard to the fit-out and some of the, the, the minor additions on, uh, on there through the, through the, through the period. Speaker 1: All through capital works. Yes. Um. Councillor Jurisevic: My, my question relates a little bit around what Councillor Jackson, uh, was alluding to there. Uh, look, I, I think the performance to date has been quite outstanding for the first six months. I, I think that's, that, that, that's, uh, that's to be said, I think it's, uh, it's keeping on track. The, the question with regards to the second stage of works now, with regards to, uh, the community house being redeveloped and then having a, a second stage of the hub, do we think that, uh, uh, that we're going to, one, fill the, uh, the space that we've got now, which, uh, you seem to allude to as, uh, as looking very positive and that, that second
01:44:00 space will, uh, with, with foresight, do you think that second space will get utilised quite readily? Speaker 1: Yeah. I, I, my, my answer would be. Do you feel positive? Yes, I do. And I, and I guess a couple of, um, parts to my answer there that, um, thank you for your, your positive comments and, um, I think the history of, of, of this particular project is, um, um, where we are now is a very good place. Um, it hasn't been easy, um, and we still need to balance the books and make sure, um, but I am personally proud, I guess, of where we're at and, and certainly what Chris has achieved and, um, it's been hard and I, and I guess that, you know, sharing that what you're seeing in front of there and I do see it's, it's, it's core plus because I know Chris is in there nights and weekends, um, most of these events you see there are actually weekend events and, um, I, I, I know all the rest of the, the core stuff is do it done in business hours and the rest is done on top and that's, that's a reality of it because of the passion behind it. So, um, yes, I'm very confident that all the work that's been done to build the value,
105 minutes in ¶
01:45:00 to build the core, to build the programs, um, the, the fact that we've got a, um, a sponsorship from a large company, uh, with, with Michael's support, um, around tech one is just the start off where I think it's really exciting who's going to be knocking on our door to be part of it. So I'm confident that our revenues will be very strong in the second year, um, and, and manage costs with that. Um, and then the impact on, on that diversification agenda, um, yeah, I, I think we should all be really proud. I really do. Speaker 3: Further, further to that, I, I would also add that, um, second all of Anthony's comments about the journey so far and really where we're at, um, and how positive, um, that has been and, and, and really, um, and when we talk about talent attraction, we couldn't have, we really wouldn't have been where we are without someone like Chris Bowden. Absolutely. So, um, it, it really has been a gift to have him, um, as part of this business and
01:46:00 driving this business. Um, look, the, the benefit I think in terms of where we are now and what Chris is doing in terms of the learnings is really starting to influence the next stage. You know, we probably had an idea about what stage two of the hub might be. That's evolving based on now what, what we know. Councillor Jurisevic: You've got that forward thinking, you've got that, the, the concept of what's developing from this going forward as to what that can, what that space could develop into. Speaker 3: Exactly. And what sort of unique proposition it might be to give it, you know, that, what might make it even more successful than probably what we, we thought. Councillor Jurisevic: Of course, also, Andrew, the, the income statement. It's really about learning what works and what doesn't. Yeah. The six problems. Look, and that, that's it. I've, I've, I've, I've full credit to the programs that you've been working with, the schools and the rest of it. I mean. Councillor Jackson: Any more questions, Joe? Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm heading to it now. From an incubation space. You did say you sort of see as a problem of being an incub, of an incubation space, but incubating those relationships with the schools, do you think that that gives you the potential
01:47:00 to then create the opportunities for incubation startups with those younger people coming through? Speaker 10: Thank you, Councillor Jurisevic. Yeah. Look, I, like I say, I think it has to be, it has to be a holistic approach. I think often there's a little bit of a fetishization about the startup companies and, and, and so forth. And, and you can kind of focus a little too much on that and not perhaps on, on some of the more grassroots activity, which is equally, if not more valuable. So, you know, I think there's this sort of hierarchy of needs that we have to, to get to our objective. And we're trying to address all of those things. We need to be cognizant of the early stage of our maturity, really, in terms of, of, of, of the number of sort of technology startups. But I think we'll get there. And I think we'll get there through talent attraction. We'll get there through leveraging our own and, and, and, and enabling and supporting
01:48:00 existing talent. And we'll get there by identifying, you know, young prodigies that have, have super high potential that we can assist. But also, you know. Ultimately, you know, we're, we're providing, I think, an amazing public service, and that's all the stuff that we're talking about here about the commercials are, how do you do that in a sustainable fashion? How do you deliver an absolutely amazing public service that lifts the whole community up in terms of its, its outlook and its opportunity and perspective, but do that in a sustainable fashion? And I think in that sense, we've got an amazing opportunity to deliver on that. Councillor Jurisevic: Do you think it'd be fair to say that you've understood a little bit more about what you are doing in the, in the tech sphere so far in the coming through those programs? Speaker 10: Yeah, we, we certainly have. Both at the, both at the, you know, all the way through the, through the age spectrum. I mean, there are, there are some phenomenal talents that have been identified, I guess,
01:49:00 that existed, but some of them have been identified. Others, I think, have been trusted and mentored. And, and, you know, we're five or six months into this. It's still very, very early days, but there's a lot of exciting stuff ahead. Councillor Jurisevic: So good cross-pollination happening across the, the, the, the spectrum too with the people. Yeah. Absolutely. Good to hear. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Would someone like to make a motion? Councillor Pardon: Yeah. I'll second it. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Councillor Cronin, would you like to speak to the motion? Councillor Pardon: Oh, absolutely, I would. Not, I ever. With regards to the hub. First of all, I'd like to acknowledge the sheer talent I have at the table, and there's three people across there. And of course, Chris, with his focus on the hub, fantastic job. Just to take a building and a blank sheet of paper, basically, and go forward in such a short time, be where we are now, is brilliant.
01:50:00 To answer Councillor Glasgow question with how we bring them here, Chris's answer was spot on. We'll not only bring some here, because some will come anyway, because what a hell of a place to live, finest beaches in the world, don't talk about the surf break when the cyclone hits. You've got the waves running three metres around Noosa National Park, et cetera. And just climatic conditions as well, where Noosa sits in the equator, and its natural environments around it, rivers, et cetera. Beautiful place. Why wouldn't you want to live here? Why does Councillor Glasgow stay here? Why didn't he move off as a young dude? Because he realised what a great place it is to live. That's a given. If people come, they'll come. If people come, they'll come. For all those reasons.
01:51:00 But back to the kids, my vision's always been with the young people. Because if you don't nurture your own, that's what's being talked about in this Council for 20 years. It's about all the kids leaving. No work here. Absolutely. So they leave. And so what we talked about for years was how do we keep the kids here? How do we give them work opportunities? And this is though, a small step forward in a shock. It's sort of a big step. Why didn't the planning scheme when former councillors, and we have one up the back, Councillor Green, signed off on the 1997 plan with regards to digital hubs or precincts being formed in the Stockwell Precinct, the Noosa Civic, because way back then the future was... Point of order. ..to actually... The Noosa Business Centre. This was what it was about. But for all the reasons, and there's a number of them,
01:52:00 why that hasn't been taken up, economics being one, I should imagine. But when there's a young fella, Eamon, Eamon, I don't know how to say his name, his kids, who's about 17 now. He was 16 when I met him. He had his own ABN then, and he was measuring... Now, with drones, properties, et cetera, because he had this skill. And I see his name in this report again. Also, I've had a request recently, two days ago, about a company that wants to do the measuring for Noosa Shire from the air and that type of... Don't ask me about technology. I'm hopeless. But Eamon's already doing this stuff. His company that he set up, this 16-year-old boy, who's now 17. So what I was already going to see, Phil Parkman, to say,
01:53:00 well, look, if there's outside companies, I mean, I've got emails from one. How about, you know, Eamon? He better get on our preferred suppliers list. I'll cut to the chase. Because why would I go out there when I've got this talent right here and be networking in our digital hub? In fact, teaching other kids about drone technology. And drone technology, my God, have a look at it and the way it's going. The flying car that the Chinese have got now, took it off the Americans. The Americans tested it first, and now the Chinese have bought their technology. I mean, this is the way of the future. Grants. I mean, over 2,000 from the federal government, over a million from the state government. And as Chris said, more possible grants ongoing. I mean, you know, where we're going here, and if it spills over, it all becomes too big for Peregian.
01:54:00 Hopefully one day it will. Then it'll spill into the civic and other areas and other opportunities. We've already partnered with Bendigo Bank up here in Tewantin. They're expanding as an off-site digital area for our community. So the sky's the limit. And look, I just congratulate Chris' staff so far and the kids that are getting it. I mean, they'll talk to their mates. And, yeah, that's just brilliant as far as I'm concerned. Look forward to the next report. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Tony. Would other people like to speak? Councillor George. Councillor Jurisevic: Look, I too congratulate you. I think this is an outstanding report for the first six months. It's on key financially. It's doing what we're set to do. It's ticked that many boxes already. Apparently. Already has five sources of revenue. Rental from anchor tenants, co-memberships, payments of ad hoc use of facilities, sponsorship
01:55:00 from corporates, grant funding opportunities coming in. You're doing the right thing. You're bringing in the kids and these are the future. These are the people at that space. You're forging that relationship between those entities that are already established within that space and the future generation of employment coming through. You're also working with those schools to look at collaborative approaches to the type of curriculum activities that they're doing. That will foster the type of opportunities for work in the digital space for the future. So I think that's brilliant. I think seeing those kids and seeing that space utilised in such a variety of ways and spaces only adds to a really positive potential outcome for the future of this space and that second stage as it goes on. Tech events. GovHack. Look at what the GovHack brought. We've actually utilised an outcome of that in our own transport strategy going forward. Not just in the digital space, but in the digital space as well. And that's being developed into an app for the future. So we've already had some major wins on the boards from some of the activities that have
01:56:00 come out of this. And I congratulate you on that. Not only that, we've also got a new social enterprise in there delivering copies as well. Brilliant. Brilliant use of the space. I mean, I can't praise this first six-month report enough. I think you've done an amazing job and an amazing outcome for six months in, raising awareness. I mean, this is what it's all about. Raising awareness of the digital opportunities within our community. All the type of events that you're hosting there are bringing people in from outside to go, wow, look at what's happening in Noosa. It's awesome. Absolutely incredible. And I said, I can't praise you enough on the report, the type of people that you've brought there, the likes of Steve Baxter and Ian Mason, the version for Andrew McAfee. I actually attended that one. And the, yeah, the current state Queensland chief entrepreneur, Leah Kent, fantastic. We've also had the ministers that have been responsible for assisting with some of the
01:57:00 funding opportunities there, coming in, seeing the space, and being wowed by it. So the name of this digital hub will be sounded loud and proud around the state. And I'm sure that we'll have people not only knocking on our doors, but unlike council at Glasgow. I don't want them knocking on our doors. I want to be, as Councillor Pardon alluded to, fostering our resources. Our own talent, our own opportunities, and getting people excited about staying here with those employment opportunities and developing those businesses over time within our own digital hub. Congratulations, guys. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor. Can we have this person on the stage? I'm actually going to move an amendment to the motion. I'm going to add something. So assuming that my amendment would go, the first section, no report, would be like A, and the second section would be like B. And then I'm adding a B, which is, would be, request that an update on the activities
01:58:00 and performance of the Peregian Digital Hub for the period 1st of July 2018 to 30th of June 2019. Okay. Be brought to a round of council meetings before or by September 2019. Or by September 2019. Mayor Wellington: Last question please. Would this be happening as a matter of course anyway, Kim Rawlings? Speaker 3: Yes, through the Chair, yes it would be. Council already has a resolution, a decision on the books to say that we report to council every six months. Six months, that's right. So we generally do that two months after that six month period, gives us an opportunity to analyse all the information.
01:59:00 So yes, it's normal, we're normal business. Councillor Jackson: Oh okay, I'm happy to hear that. The only thing I found when I looked through our documentation was an 18 month report. And so I had somehow not found it. But there was also a commitment to a six month. Yes, there is already. Okay, well I guess this is redundant and I can withdraw from all of it. Yeah. It hasn't been limited yet. Okay, so I think, has everyone spoken that wanted to speak? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think I should say something quick. I'm surprised you're here, Chris. I would expect the whole graphic going through our camera. Very good. But other than that. In the next six months. I concur. And I suppose while there has been focus on the development and the industry development coming from a young age in the centre, what always impresses me is when I talk to people
120 minutes in ¶
02:00:00 who come out from the building or in the building, they're always really practical. You know, you think of tech being some illusory thing, that they're engineers doing stuff a little bit differently and that people are educating, you know, producing resources that are more engaging. So it's really practical stuff that's happening in the centre. It's not just about some illusory, you know, silicon beach or whatever. People are just, people using technology to do meaningful things, both for their business but also for the communities they serve. Well done. Councillor Glasgow: I will just clear my name because. Councillor Jackson: Have you spoken? Councillor Glasgow: I haven't spoken. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Councillor Glasgow: I didn't say. No, actually I did move away, Frank, for three years in that, in England. I don't remember the exact, in exactly that situation to gain the experience I did to work in the UAE, to come back to Australia, to get better employment. But I was more making the assumption that I have absolutely full faith you will.
02:01:00 The bottom line of this establishment is to put bums on seats to pay the rent. And I was just more saying in the future we can get those businesses in those locations. The bottom line is to pay the rent, so it's not a cost burden to rate pay. That's all. And I just wanted to say that. All that was really getting to the nuts and bolts at the moment. It was a little bit hard to get those people, but you are not, Chris has got many people knocking on the door. I'm already talking about stage two at the moment, so that's so exciting. And then the bottom line is I just hope in the future we can keep those bums in seats. You know, I met that guy that works at Lizard Bridge in Springs and he's moved up from the, he's an online CAD guy, the geeky guy with the glasses. Moved up here from that, he's an online CAD guy, exactly that. And they're the people that should be in there in the stage one and two, because we've got to make sure this thing pays the rent for now and for the strategic future. And all the others, these younger people will come along and work in there in the 10 and 20 year time frames, hopefully. So I have full faith in you, Chris and Anthony, that there will be absolutely no spare seats from now to the end of the time when this thing finishes.
02:02:00 No pressure. No pressure. We're getting there. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor Glasgow. Anyone else wish to speak? I might say a few words too. Well, I'm also amazed at what's been done in six months. I would consider this early days and certainly at this point we can't be expecting the KPIs to be delivered in such a short time frame. Of course in the future we'll be interested in the KPIs. I mean, I've just been looking at what was in the last December, the vision for the pre-generation. The Digital Hub will be a curated space primarily focusing on established and emerging technology enterprises with an emphasis on accelerating business and employment growth and I guess ultimately it's still part of our local economic plan that this is all about and I mean I think
02:03:00 you've done an amazing amount of work to start this happening to gain you know to get this um not just the tenancies but the amount of networking and the amount of events that have been happening and the learning that people have been doing that is fantastic I think I think we've still got time into the future to get it to actually start being something that's growing the emerging technology enterprises and accelerating business and employment growth but that's actually the purpose um I'm certainly very supportive of what you're doing and I'm looking forward to ongoing reports on you know this fantastic work yeah thank you and Mayor Wellington: uh thanks look um in fact the concept and uh and beginnings of this project occurred on the initial post de-amalgamation council and I think it's appropriate uh to just acknowledge
02:04:00 that uh it was very much supported by councillors Bob Abbott, Sandy Bolton and then Mayor Noel Playford. They were part of that council and it was very much their vision as well as the other councillors on that council who are sitting around the table today. Thanks. Councillor Jackson: Councillor Cartman would you like to? Councillor Pardon: Yeah um yeah well I'd like to say I might have left a lot of support to those councillors and um indeed took people to at-mail um to try and keep them here uh with regards to Bernadette Cotman for example who I introduced to the CEO um and had a talk to Chris a couple of years ago about a digital hub. And um so pleased that uh he actually um applied and got the job so uh I do have a bit of um history with regards to all this um so uh just councillor Glasgow yes I'll let you off with a light warning.
02:05:00 The um I thought your question was how do we attract people but I must have got that wrong. Um uh with regards to uh money. Um I think that's a good question. Um people always talk about the money and the money rate payers have invested not only the rate payers federal and state governments have invested in these particular projects across the nation and in particular our project uh so um for me there's another type of capital that isn't necessarily money. It's about social capital. I've said it heaps of times and we've talked about um environmental strategies today etc. Well I've said in past campaigns that it's about social capital. I've said in past councils and I say in this council if you if your economy's not strong then your environment won't be either. Because without a strong economy if you look around the world um the environment gets destroyed around you. So you must have a strong economy if you want to have a strong environment.
02:06:00 And with the triple bottom line approach also um your social capital builds on your wealth of your um community. So I think that's a good point. I think going forward um budget's very important because it's uh rate payers money. But I don't particularly focus on those issues especially when you're blue sky in it. And that's what we're doing here. This is a blue sky experiment if you want to really look at it. That so far has been tremendously successful and I believe will be in the future. Um but if you don't speculate you're never going to accumulate um and as for coming here I'm glad Chris came here. He's a great guy. He's a typical example why he came here at his own business in uh IT I understand and very smart. But he chose Noosa because it's a great place to live. So there may be other people I'm sure there will be choosing Noosa in the future. But thank you folks. Councillor Jackson: Thank you.
02:07:00 Um so we'll put the vote on the table. That's carried. Thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks Chris. Thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you. Councillor Jackson: I think we've now reached noon and perhaps what we need is a five minute break if people prefer that. Would you like a break? Yes please. Yes. Okay. So we'll just make a five minute break. So quarter past. It's ten past on that clock over there.
135 minutes in ¶
02:16:00 Speaker 6: Thank you. This paper is arising from just a local phenomenon that's happening in the industry at the moment regarding online booking accommodation providers and the implications it's having on local government and the number of issues that local governments face. So over the last 12 months there's been, the Mayor's been quite heavily involved at the advocacy level in terms of representing Noosa along with other coastal councils and how do government and councils start to address these issues that are arising. There's a number of issues, planning, social, economic, that need to be addressed.
02:17:00 So the Mayor requested the CEO to ask myself to look at... Look, can we get an issues paper together to try and pull together a number of these issues to document them and also then arising from those issues a number of actions that we can start looking at moving forward to address some of these challenges. Hence the publishing of the paper today and the report. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you very much. Councillor, is there any questions to ask? Councillor Jurisevic: I think you've alluded to it there, but the intent of where this paper will go? Is it the State Government for legislative changes and the like or...? Mayor Wellington: I can answer that. The document was presented to inform councillors in our community about the situation, the pros and cons, if you like, of this relatively new factor in our local economy and also in terms of its impact on our community.
02:18:00 I have sent this document to the LGAQ and also to Damien. Damien Walker, the Director General for the Minister for Tourism. So they are already aware of this document. Councillor Jurisevic: So the LGAQ can utilise that as a support of the motion that was brought before them at the annual conference? Mayor Wellington: Yeah, the LGAQ are working on that. In fact, they wrote to the Premier only in the last couple of weeks and received a reply. The Government, of course, is at the moment very much caught up in dealing with issues relating to flooding in North Queensland. Mm. And also they have some budget issues which have taken precedence. However, they have confirmed that this matter will still be dealt with by the Government when Cabinet can get around to it. Councillor Jackson: Other questions? Mayor Wellington: I'll move it then if there's nothing else happening. I'll second it, Ingrid. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Would you like to speak? Mayor Wellington: Yeah, unless there are other questions? No?
02:19:00 Look, I want to congratulate Robyn on a fantastic report. It certainly is a very complete and thorough investigation of the issue, bringing into play not only what's happening across Australia and in Noosa, of course, but also what's going on around the world. As Michael has mentioned, Noosa Council has played a very strong role in bringing this matter to the attention of the State Government and also the LGAQ. At the 2017 Conference, of course, we brought a motion to the LGAQ seeking that the LGAQ lobby the State Government to improve the situation for local governments, in particular by having online platforms provide data sharing, in other words, information about properties to local government. The LGAQ have taken that up.
02:20:00 Luke Hannan in the LGAQ has been very responsive and proactive on this front. More importantly, at last year's conference, and I have to say, 2017, there was a good deal of debate around that motion. But on the 2018 Conference last October, the matters relating to short-term letting actually became policy. The motion before the conference included... That the local government supports the State Government in developing a code of conduct, in obtaining agreement of online accommodation and booking services to provide details regarding location of properties and establishing a statewide data sharing system. This time round, the vote at the conference was 202 in favour and only 6 against. What's happened is that having raised the issue, a lot of local governments are now beginning to see that it's not as simple as they originally thought and that there are some problems associated with it.
02:21:00 And therefore, they are generally in favour of the position which Noosa Council originally took to the LGAQ a year and a half ago. I think what will happen in the coming weeks is that the focus will be on this issue largely as a result of the new planning scheme. Of course, the new planning scheme seeks to address some of the negative aspects of short-term letting. It does this by acknowledging that principal places of residence can let out a room or a couple of rooms and become a home-based business. Whereas entire properties, which Deloitte's and others note are around about 70% of all properties being listed in this fashion, are entire properties. They will be classified as short-term accommodation and the new planning scheme we can now talk to has short-stay area maps that identify where that's co-designed. And this is about very much dealing with some of the negative impacts that are occurring.
02:22:00 And I have to say I'm receiving weekly emails from residents concerned about those impacts. And they relate not just to practical things like parking and rubbish collection, etc. But also noise and amenity issues and the general feeling of unease people have when suddenly they're surrounded by lots of other things. Itinerant people coming and going and they lose that sense of confidence they have when they're familiar with their neighbours and the workings of their street. There are a lot of issues here. I'm particularly pleased to see that Robyn included the form letter that Airbnb has sent to its contacts to try and lobby the state government to actually cruel, if you like, the LGAQ's intentions and Noosa Council's intentions in having a more transparent sector operate. This is going on across the world too. In fact, in New York, Airbnb are taking legal action against New York State as a result of New York State's attempts to try and manage the situation.
02:23:00 So it is an industry that's in flux. It's not going to disappear. We must acknowledge that this is now a part of the offerings available to residents and to visitors of the Shire. However, we do need to contain some of the, and ameliorate some of the more damaging impacts. And in particular, I'm very pleased to note that the new planning scheme has dedicated the entire of the Shire a party house restriction area. In other words, we will not allow party houses to occur anywhere in the Shire. There's a lot more to say on this and there'll be a lot more said, I'm sure, in the media and elsewhere. I note that the local candidate for, the LNP has set up a public forum which I'll be speaking at and Steve McFarlane, CEO from Tourism Noosa, is speaking at in a couple of weeks on this specific issue.
02:24:00 He is interested in having his party try and handle the issue, get their heads around it. And I assume that this public forum is part of that process. But we now wait with bated breath. If you recall, the Minister Kate Jones, after the last peer-to-peer reference group, the short-term leading industry reference group meeting which I attended, put out a media release saying that they would be working towards a code of conduct and looking at having entire properties that are let have that information available to government so that local government could understand where these properties are. That came out in a media release last June or July. It's been a long time since then. We were expecting there might be some state, beginnings of state legislation before Christmas. But it seems that other factors intervened. Some of those factors might be lobbying from the industry itself.
02:25:00 Anyway, I would also like to point out that Tasmania is one step ahead because when I was at a conference down there recently, the Minister for Housing in Tasmania has acknowledged that they are introducing legislation that will insist that all properties short-term let online through Airbnb stays and other such portals have to make all the information available to government which will be shared with local government. And many local governments down there now are registering these sort of properties. So where to from here for Noosa Council? I think we need to let the information in the planning scheme play out for a little while. Let the debate bubble away. I would be thinking that if the state government doesn't make a move soon, we need to start making some of the moves that are suggested in the document. And I would think that the first might be having a voluntary registration system as a starting point
02:26:00 so that people who have got these sort of properties can begin to register if they choose to. And we will work out where we go from there in terms of local laws. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Ingrid, I just have a quick question. A question from Councillor Glasgow. Councillor Glasgow: Tony just triggered my memory on something. I was reading it when it was page 37 under complaint mechanisms. There was making any excessive noise. 96 hours after the direction is given. Why choose that number of 96 if someone's made, because I live in Noosa Head. It's probably the most resort party street Airbnb house in Noosa. Why use that figure of 96? Was that something from your findings or your studies or something you spoke with directly with Airbnb or the state? Speaker 2: No, it's the police advice on their website. Yeah. Councillor Glasgow: So it is, that is an actual figure of 96 hours after given the warning of 26. So you can take legal action. Speaker 2: That information was derived from the police website, yeah. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So what that says, Jess, is if the police give them a warning, they can't, if they re-offend
02:27:00 within 96 hours, then they're in bigger trouble. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Councillor Glasgow: Yeah. So you can basically, they can call and they can act on it and then 96 hours later, if they're still doing it, there's action. No, no, no. Speaker 5: Any time within those next 96 hours. Yeah. If they start up again within 96 hours. Okay. I get it. Yeah. They're in bigger trouble. Councillor Jackson: I'd also like to ask a question. I think it's probably of Tim and Michael. This is a motion that says note the report and note the short-term accommodation online platform issues paper. Does that in any way imply that council is endorsing or adopting this paper? Speaker 6: No, it's not. It's just an issues paper for noting. I think, as what Tony was alluding to, this is very fluid, this whole activity at the moment. I'm expecting there'll be, there's things in here regarding monitoring, monitoring
02:28:00 what the state government's going to do in terms of its reference group it has in place. So there could be actions coming in there that would lead to drivers for us to then come back with further initiatives on how we deal with certain things. That's, there's... As the Mayor mentioned, there are actions we can probably start to look at, which decision making there will come through probably the budget process, because there'll be resources required. So there's no particular, I don't think there are any particular actions or decisions needed from council. Councillor Jackson: Well, I'd actually like to move a slight amendment, and that is to, at the end of the motion wording, add, comma, on the understanding that this is not an endorsement.
02:29:00 Mayor Wellington: Are we adopting the paper for noting? That's correct. Councillor Jackson: Adopting? Mayor Wellington: It becomes part of Council's minutes. Councillor Jackson: Well, in my case, I've got to remove the adoption. Speaker 5: So what you're doing is noting the report by the staff and noting the short-term accommodation online platform issues paper. Well, in my case, it is not. So what you're not doing is adopting recommendations or options that are sitting within that paper. You're simply adopting, or sorry, noting the paper. Councillor Jackson: Noting the paper. So rather than what I've written, if it said this is not, I'm in the understanding that this is not adopting the recommendations in the paper. Is that what you're saying? Speaker 5: Yeah, well, it's not doing that. The recommendation isn't doing that anyway. What's the recommendation from the staff in the report?
150 minutes in ¶
02:30:00 Councillor Jackson: Well, when I get to speak to the motion, I will explain my thinking. Unless I, because I currently can't explain, I'm not able to speak to my motion at the moment. But I mean, it puts it on the understanding that there's not an, I don't know, I don't know. Mayor Wellington: But it is. That's a direct contravention of the previous. I'm sorry, but I think my understanding is that's a direct contravention and therefore it can't be an amendment. Speaker 5: What is being, what you're doing is noting the paper. As I said before, what you're not doing is adopting any actions that come out of that paper. So, for example, in section eight of the paper, it says for a range of options, but by noting the paper, you are not adopting any of those options. Okay. So, you're not saying that you're going to take option A or B or C or whatever it might be. Councillor Jackson: So, I'm going to amend my wording to only understanding this is not, this is not an
02:31:00 adoption of any of the recommendations in the paper. That way you're, that seems to me what you're saying is what it's not doing. Speaker 5: Correct. Well, to some extent, the report, sorry, that the report, the issued paper doesn't make any sense. It simply identifies options. Councillor Jackson: Oh, I see. So, we have to say options. It's not an adoption of the options in the paper. Councillor Glasgow: Brett, can you just dumb this down for me a little bit? This is a paper that we're potentially lobbying, yeah, lobbying hopefully in the future in the state. We're not actually adopting any of the policies out of it. Mayor Wellington: It's not a lobbying document as such. Speaker 5: It's an information document that counts. Yeah, counts. That's it. Councillor Glasgow: There's not one thing in there that the council is going to take action on, it's just a paper.
02:32:00 No, it's nothing we have to do. It's just a report. Councillor Jurisevic: Note the report. Councillor Glasgow: Note the report, that's us. That's it. Yeah. Councillor Jackson: So yeah, so I'm wanting to make that explicit. I'm not changing the noting, but I'm making it explicit what that means. Councillor Glasgow: What do you mean? Councillor Jackson: So that people understand what the noting means. Councillor Glasgow: Well it's written in the title. It's already explicit. It's explicit, isn't it? Councillor Jurisevic: So it's not a matter of debating the issue, the amendment before the amendment. Councillor Jackson: Well I haven't had a chance to speak to it because I haven't had a second year, so. Could I call for a second year please? Councillor Glasgow: I don't agree with what you're doing. Look I'll second it for argument's sake, what the heck. Councillor Jackson: So I would like to, I'm suggesting we make it explicit that we are not adopting these options, in particular because we've just released the draft NUSA plan for public consultation. My commitment, and I'm sure everybody's commitment, is that public consultation means that
02:33:00 things may still change, and that we're very much open to public comment. And in general terms, whatever's written in this paper would be the same as well. I think it is important to be explicit that at this point there's no commitment to the things that are in the paper, and in particular the things that are in the paper itself. The things that are in the draft NUSA plan, but in general. So that people understand this is for interest, for information, the council has not yet adopted these things. So that's the rationale, and I think it's pretty important, given that we're in a very important period in the draft NUSA plan. Speaker 4: Yes? Councillor Jackson: Oh, the councillor's brought up this. Mayor Wellington: In my view the amendment is redundant because it's just saying what the NUSA plan is. The original motion actually implies anyway. You have raised, councillor Jackson, the issue of the new NUSA plan.
02:34:00 There's nothing in this issue's paper that conflicts in any way with the draft new NUSA plan, therefore I can't see how it is going to necessarily have an impact on the plan because the plan is already written. What it does is provide some context for people who may be considering what's in the new NUSA plan, but in doing so it does not dictate any change, make any recommendations for change to the draft plan. Furthermore, none of the options are presented in the document as being options that council necessarily has to take up, and nor does it even prioritise the various options that the paper recommends, or goes to, not recommends, it doesn't actually recommend. So I'm... Sorry. I'm struggling to see the purpose of the amendment. I don't believe we have to make explicit something that's already explicit in the original motion
02:35:00 because the motion says that it is simply a document for noting. Councillor Jackson: Yes, councillor, pardon me. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, I endorse those comments. I'll just read page 38, paragraph 2 in the document. It says, well, it can be easy to get caught up in the complexities of the issues. Examining the responses of governments and councils elsewhere and attempting to populate a variety of stakeholders with varying vested interests and goals. It is critical that council creates and implements actions that are appropriate for this Shire. So in other words, these are just a variety of ways, you might go local laws, and there's a variety of things that council might ultimately do. So they're many and varied throughout the document. It's a great document. It gives you... There's not much that's missed, I'd have to say.
02:36:00 And it gives all councils, if they have this document, an opportunity to see which way they might fit it to their particular circumstances in the Shire. But... And we will have a look down the track and see what's appropriate, as it says, for this Shire. So thank you very much. So it's just noting a report here. So, you know, I think, yeah, I think it's redundant, your amendment too, personally. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Just one comment. Speaker 6: Just from, at the officer level, I think the paper's important to put some bit of context and put framework around this whole issue, whole set of issues. Because at the moment, we've been very, you know, we've been very, you know, we've been very concerned about the planning issues. I wasn't aware of the planning issues. Kim probably wasn't aware of some of the issues we're having with, you know, capturing properties for the tourism levy, which we've discussed a number of times.
02:37:00 And my reading of the response actions, there's some of those that are operational where we'll just continue to move along with what we're currently doing, i.e. capturing, working with B&B Guard in how they use technology to capture properties for levy purposes. Looking at... Sorry, what was the other one? There was a couple of others. Yeah, clarifying PPR and owner-optified. So, how we do that. So, probably more clarity around how we define PPR and non-PPR. I think that's important. The other sort of ones that will potentially be a bit more meaty will, from my perspective, there won't be any action on that. They'll have to come through another council process. Things like registration. Tony mentioned potentially a registration process for properties, local laws, all those type of things. They will need further deliberation, discussion here.
02:38:00 So, there'll be no action on those unless there's a council decision. It can't be. Yeah. Councillor Jackson: Anybody else wish to speak? Yeah. Councillor Jones. Councillor Jurisevic: Look, I'll agree with the comments that have been made. I think the amendment is superfluous. It's... Yeah. It's trying to apply... Trying to suggest there's nothing in the implication of noting a report. There are no options identified or adoption of those. It's just a report for noting, I think. We get many, many reports of this nature from staff as they go out to progress reports on activities and all the rest of it. It advises us of the actions that we're currently underway, as Michael's just alluded to, and gives us further information, things to consider. So, I think that's important. I don't see the amendment as having any relevance whatsoever. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Well, I guess I have the right of reply. I think, perhaps, there's been a misunderstanding of my intent, but it's not to do with, as Councillor
02:39:00 Wellington just thought, that I would see this report as being, in some way, trying to change the draft in the new supply. What I fear, and I think it's important, is that it's not going to be the same as if it's taken to be an endorsement by Council, then it's preempting the consultation process that is actually just begun for the draft new supply. And there are quite a, well, there are specific things listed here that are in the draft new supply, and that are still open for consultation, and may or may not end up being accepted by the community. And quite possibly for you as well. So, the reason I would like to make that clear to everyone, by having it explicit, is because most people don't know what noting means, or whether it means adopting, or doesn't
02:40:00 mean adopting. A lot of people will automatically think that means Council has already endorsed this, and I think it is preempting the new supply consultation, and I'm also hearing from Councillor Wellington how he's already distributed it. To senior political figures and other executives. And again, this is coming from Noosa Council. I haven't seen the letters that go with it, but, you know, we seem to be distributing this as a Council. And yet, we are saying we're simply noting, and not endorsing or adopting. So, I believe it would be useful and right, and more clear for our community, if we were to make that explicit through this amendment. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Given that you've raised a question about what went with the documents that I sent to LGAQ and to the Minister's Office, it was simply that this is an item for noting coming
02:41:00 up at the current round of Council meetings for their information, that's all. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. Questions? Yeah. Councillor Glasgow: Yes. How many of these papers have you actually done for Councils? Is this your first? Have you done several? Oh, just common thread. Speaker 2: No, this is my first time at the Council meetings. No, this is probably in terms of an issue paper for this Council. This is the first one I've written that has this level of complexity and comprehensiveness. Councillor Jurisevic: Can we just go down the amendment? Can we put a motion? I've just got one more question relating to it. Have we not, given that we have made a presentation to the LGAQ and the rest of it, haven't the Council actually given some form of endorsement to the issues with regard to short-term accommodation and the thoughts and feelings of Council, I can't think of the word I was
02:42:00 trying to use, the thoughts and feelings of Council with regard to this matter going forward? Mayor Wellington: Well, we've done that previously. That's what I mean. In terms of our motion to the LGAQ conference. Councillor Jurisevic: So haven't we clearly given an endorsement? An undertaking or understanding of where we sit in relation to this matter? Mayor Wellington: I think politically we have, by bringing a motion to the LGAQ conference, that Council would like to see some lobbying occur of the State Government to have them develop some policy settings, yes. Councillor Jackson: Councillor Stockwell, were you going to ask that? No, I asked for the motion to be put. Oh. Yeah. Well, I think we're ready. So can we, I'll put the amendment and all in favour. Oh, I'll have to. Yes, that's right. Mayor Wellington: Voting on the amendment. Voting on the amendment. Voting on the amendment. Councillor Jackson: Yes. And I'll ask for a division, as I do. And all in favour of the amendment. Please. Speaker 3: Yeah.
02:43:00 Councillor Jackson: I guess. Speaker 3: Anybody else? Councillor Jackson: Okay. Thank you very much. It's lost. And we'll now ask for putting the... Speaker 5: I would like to speak to the original motion. Councillor Jackson: If you haven't... I'd like to speak to the original motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So councillors, it is a good paper. There is a lot of detail. And as the Director of Finance pointed out, the reference to principal place of residence, I think it was a small council to the south of us might have done some good work there. However, this is primarily a land use issue. It's Land Use Planning 101 that you separate incompatible land uses. And land use planning is blind to how you book your visitor accommodation.
02:44:00 So it's not an attack on modern platforms of online booking. It's an attack on inappropriate land use in residential suburbs. And I think it has to be a fairly overt mission on behalf of this council. I think that what's really clear out of our community that the problem does not lie in people sharing one or two bedrooms of their home. We've heard that over and over again. We had the Noosa Residence and Ratepayers Forum where it was clearly made that the people who are doing it as a traditional bed and breakfast who happen to be getting their customers from an online source are providing a service and an amenity that isn't disrupting their neighbours. It's adding to the visitor experience. And it's something we encourage. It is the new business model of people buying one, two, three, four, five separate houses and having them permanently visited in a residential neighbour that's the problem.
165 minutes in ¶
02:45:00 It is what is being facilitated by online platforms themselves. Now, I note that we don't have to worry a lot about the form in that the report mentions that it's a service. It's on page 15. The proportion of households who offer rooms to tourists remains small, less than 1% in the majority of the case study communities. So it's clear that's not what we have to look at. So what do we do in the planning setting? Councillor Wellington mentioned the short stay overlay. And I think that's the key thing for this community to get their head around. We've got an overlay that says, this is the area we think where the majority of visitor accommodation should be. Therefore, it's easier for you to have a house. It's permanently short-term left. And that's where I think we want to get the feedback from the community. Have we got that right? Have we got the settings for your more traditional B&Bs and where people are just letting out one or two rooms?
02:46:00 Right. But there is a lack of transparency. And I must admit, on page 31, when I read the letter from Airbnb, where it says, we also know that powerful, special, in-house accommodation is required. There's only one powerful interest in trying to use their influence to restrict home sharing. What a load of bunkum. There's only one powerful interest in this debate, and that's the likes of Airbnb. They tend to portray themselves as a new technology that's a sharing economy. But we know that it's actually more typical is it's a siphoning economy, that those who are benefiting by just creating the platform are taking 10% off the top, channelling it to some other multinational company overseas that don't pay tax and, in fact, not pay tax at all. So it's their responsibility to realise there's a social licence to operate in this community.
02:47:00 And this community has got a very powerful, special interest. That's about retaining the lifestyles and the amenity for our residents. So councillors, I think it's really important that we do refine where we're and make it clear what we're against. We're against people. We're against people who are buying residential properties built and ideally located for people to live in and converting them full time to act as pseudo motels. I think that's where we have to focus our attention. And I think, as the Mayor mentioned, the party house setting in the draft scheme is another thing I think we should be really keen to see if the community supports that level of restriction. But to me, the essence is, have we got the short stay overlay right? And have we got the settings for people wanting to share one or two bedrooms right?
02:48:00 Councillor Pardon: Councillor Stockwell summed it up better than I ever could. But basically, for me, it's about the social issues, it's about liveability, all of those things. So on the one hand, you've got the battlers out there who might rather ruin the two out. And that's not a bad thing. On the other hand, as Councillor Stockwell said, we've got people that just push the system way too far and too hard. And the social issues of mum and dad, the battlers, I'll say, trying to get a quid. Well, as I say, that's a good thing if they can get a quid letting out a room, Airbnb, or whatever platform they choose. So that's a good thing. That builds their social capital and helps them get along. The knock-on effects when you take it wide across the Shire to individual houses is an
02:49:00 anti-social effect. It's the effect on the liveability of those people. So thus, one way or other, that's the problem in a nutshell. I think we're grappling with. But I agree that we should let things bubble along for a while. Whether we have a voluntary code or not, it might be a good place to start. But even mum and dads that have one or two bedrooms, I think they have an obligation to at least own up to some effect so that we know where these properties are. And in the big picture, people will say, oh, well, council only chasing a dollar. Well, in a way, you could say that. But there's a lot of people in tourism, a lot of investment, who put their hard earned up to actually make this one of the premium tourist destinations in Australia and a world-class
02:50:00 destination. So it's about fairness and equity across the board. And I think that's what we're all looking for here. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, it can be argued that the concept of Airbnb was well-intentioned and well-learned and a great opportunity to do what it intended to do and make use of that spare capacity within most people's houses. But as with most disruptive technologies, something along with Uber and the like that have come along. People see opportunities and advantages in these sort of systems and take advantage of them. And the impacts of those sort of advantages become disadvantages to other areas, long-term accommodation being one of those. Many long-term renters are now saying they can't find three-month, six-month, 12-month
02:51:00 rental and the opportunity to stay. We've got a lot of people that are working within our, I was going to say accommodation, hospitality industry, saying that they have to move further and further afield and drive from further and further afield as a result. And this is the impact of this sort of short-term accommodation that has opened up and the opportunity to make short-term gains for long-term pain in some instances, although with many long-term gain. And there are questions as to whether everybody's actually rightly declaring their incomes coming out of this and not just taking advantage of the fact that so much of this is an online platform, as we've found, trying to obtain information about where these properties are. So the platform issues paper I think is a great piece of information. I think it's a great informative paper for those looking at the planning scheme going forward and the challenges that short-term accommodation presents within our planning
02:52:00 scheme and our planning scheme going forward. The way that we've chosen to try and deal with that issue with regard to the planning scheme and the opportunities that it presents for us, sorry, the opportunity it presents for us to deal with that problem for the future. But it also outlines that we're not alone in this. It's not a situation that Noosa is alone in dealing with, Byron Bay, other cities, other areas. In fact, plenty of places overseas, as Councillor Wellington alluded to. So this isn't something that's going to go away in the short-term or the long-term. This is something that's here to stay. And how we manage and deal with that going forward will be the challenge for all levels of governance to consider going forward. Councillor Jackson: I think that's some good research. Anyone else want to speak? No.
02:53:00 Speaker 4: I might say a few words as well. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Well, I think there's no doubt that short-term accommodation online platforms are a paradigm shift and that that needs to be managed. And I think the paper is very useful in exploring issues and potential solutions. Fortunately, Council has already begun taking steps to address some of this and has taken some stance on putting forward a new plan for a consultation that is going to take some time. I'm positively impressed that the issues paper recommends Council's response should have a strong foundation in information and data gathering and that is useful and meaningful. This is a quote. But at the same time, I've been a bit disappointed. The paper itself makes assertions that are not evidence-based and sometimes without any citations. So I'm very keen to see evidence-based information.
02:54:00 Thank you. I've also been disappointed that the issue paper devotes a whole section to negative effects and implications of short-term letting without counterbalancing this with a section on positive benefits and indeed opportunities that could be harnessed. A normal SWOT analysis usually looks not only at threats but also at leveraging opportunities. And this is something we as a Council can be also thinking about. I very much appreciate all the range of recommendations provided. One of the many inputs to Council's considerations. I think Council needs to be treading carefully when putting in place strategies to manage the issues here in order to – because we wish to protect resident amenity, but we don't want to disadvantage residents who are seeking to earn additional income in a Shire that offers limited employment opportunities. And we don't want to undermine the benefits to SLUSA's economy of having those benefits
02:55:00 for visitors enjoying a stay. But nevertheless, I appreciate the paper and I appreciate what's in it. And I'm happy to note the paper, which does not mean I endorse or adopt the paper. And I look forward to input from Noosa people, including through their submissions to the draft new Noosa plan. Thank you. Now, there's a right of reply. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. I'm pleased to see that there are no objections. I'm pleased that Councillor Pardon and Councillor Jurisevic noted the impact on rental properties in the Shire, because this is quite significant. There is no doubt as a result of the research I'm seeing coming from overseas now that this new form of housing for short term online accommodation is putting upward pressure on rental fees and also reducing availability of permanent rental stock.
02:56:00 And that makes it increasingly difficult for workers in a place like Noosa Shire to find somewhere to live. Indeed, I've spoken to a number of Council staff who've been unable to find affordable rental properties in the Shire who are forced to drive in from other Shires, particularly Gympie Shire now, because they just cannot find appropriate rental stock here in Noosa Shire. And this Council has previously professed to being concerned about housing affordability. And I don't think you can look at housing affordability without looking at housing affordability without considering the impacts of this market sector. So I think it's very appropriate that this Council, if it's serious about housing affordability, take a very close look at the impact that online short term rental property is having on that sector. I'd just like to conclude by congratulating Robyn for a very thorough report. She's done a fantastic job, massive amount of research, and it's beautifully put together. It does mention some of the positives as well as the negatives.
02:57:00 And the positives are obviously that it does increase opportunities and availability of different sorts of housing for visitors when they come. It offers a range of price points for visitors, and it obviously has a positive impact on the financial status of our tourism sector. But we always have to weigh up positives and negatives, and I believe that our new Noosa Plan finds that balance by noting that there are areas where this sort of accommodation is appropriate and other areas where it's perhaps less appropriate. And I also want to thank Michael Shave for his support in engaging Robyn and for taking on this issue as a significant issue that this Council is absolutely at the forefront in Queensland of dealing with. And we have other comrades at arms, if you like, like Byron Bay and Mornington and Margaret River, who I've been in close contact with at various times.
02:58:00 In other states who are also dealing with these same sort of issues. And together hopefully we'll come to some sort of approach, learning from each other. And perhaps if our new Noosa Plan goes ahead as it is currently drafted, that will provide a learning opportunity for other Councils too. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Councillor. We will now put this to a vote. All in favour? And that's it. It's carried. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks, Robyn. Thanks, Robyn. Thank you. Thanks, guys. Speaker 5: Thank you. Oh, there's a question I have to come up with. Craig. No, Craig. Councillor Jackson: It's Environment Strategy. Speaker 5: Back again. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. I've been waiting very patiently. Councillor Jackson: It's a long day. Thanks, Craig.
02:59:00 As you're introducing the Environment Strategy to Council, could you give us a little nutshell summary? Speaker 9: Certainly. I'm really pleased to be presenting the Environment Strategy and Sustainable Living Policy to Council. The Environment Strategy and Policy are designed to be the overarching guiding documents for the environment in Noosa Shire. They're to sit alongside the social strategy and the local economic plan to illustrate that triple bottom line that Noosa Council's committed to. We're here today seeking the adoption of the Environment and Sustainable Living Policy and to be able to go to public consultation on the Environment Strategy. The report notes significant community consultation that's already been undertaken through both documents, and we're now ready to present to the community a final graph version for their comment and feedback. Councillor Jackson: Thank you very much. Councillors, any questions of Craig? No. No. I'm happy to move the motion.
180 minutes in ¶
03:00:00 I'm happy to second it. Councillor Brown, would you like to speak to the motion? I will. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think there's a couple of headlines in this. I think the Strategy 1.2 target that by 2030, half of all land in the Noosa Shire is managed for its environmental values. And I think what we're saying is we want to be the first coastal council in this proximity to a major capital city that's going to have half of its whole area be managed for its environmental values. And that's a great target to have. There won't be many places around the world that could achieve that, and we're one of them. I think it's also another great target there is in terms of by 2030, the Noosa River and Mary River sub-catchments within Noosa Shire achieve an A rating or equivalent for their environmental health. And that's the first time that we've done that, that we've brought together both the Noosa, where we are at A, with the Mary.
03:01:00 And there's work being done as a part of a grant project to try and work out how we do that A rating, A, B, C, D rating in the Mary catchment. So that's another real headline, that we're going to treat all the waterways in the Shire and try and get them all up to the same class. I notice in between those two targets, there's one about threatened indicator species and to remain viable, population remain viable. And I note one of the dot points is iconic value. And so the kookaburra came today to press their case to be considered. Oh. Sorry. But I think it has been a long meeting, so I'm going to do this really quickly. To me, the document and the draft policy in Australia in front of us are really important milestones. But I also think that the journey to get here has been as important.
03:02:00 So I mentioned earlier on in September 2016, we first got some groups together, and their first recommendation was collaborative development of overarching Shire environmental policy setting strategic policy and priorities. The next one's about a Shire-wide river wetland and waterways action plan. They recommended we pursue an emissions reduction policy, which the following month, the Mayor introduced to us. They introduced the zero emissions organisational strategy. And they also suggested that we bring in the local economic plan and environmental outcomes from sustainable river production. All those things are in the draft. So by December that year, we had a forum which said that the community wanted to... The community groups, natural resource management groups, environment groups, and sustainable development groups all wanted to work together on this. And we started to look at, you know, why is this happening? What were some of the key things that we want to work together? How do we open up communication?
03:03:00 And how do we get a better understanding of the grants that are available? By March the following year, we'd already commenced working in partnership with Noosa Landcare and the Mayor River Catchment Committee to develop a Shire Waterways Aquatic and Biodiversity Assessment. So underpinning getting some of that evidence base to look at where we're going. And Landcare was working on a catchment bypass strategy. In June that year, we sat down and asked the community about what's some potential guiding principles for the environment policy? What's some of the potential natural resource targets for the strategy? The following July 2017, we had a camp with the Kabi Kabi group and looked at their... Started to have that conversation. And then later that year, one of the traditional owners came and talked to the forum to talk about what their interests are in terms of the environmental strategy. And... We've... Staff, in the start of the process, came with a workshop and ran it with all the NRM
03:04:00 and environment groups about what are the challenges and what are the trends and principles that should be underpinning. By December, we... The staff have taken over and we're working with the groups to look at what are the key issues for both the environment and sustainable living issues. To me, this process of participation is... Has led to a really good... To me, this process of participation is... Has led to a really good strategy. In a way, we had a... At the beginning, we had a whole lot of different action plans without the overarching policy and strategy. And what we've done now, together with the environmental grants policy, is a really clear line of struts... Sight. From policy down to pack. So that once we've got... Come through this consultation period, we're open to the broader community, which we've done once before. We're going to have the ability for people sitting down there saying, what can I do at my place, or in my local bush care group, and how does that link to the priorities of council? And we can look all the way up.
03:05:00 And I think that's a really desirable place to be, because it makes it clear for us as councillors, we're interested in the top level. Staff are probably implementing the middle level of that hierarchy, and the community is saying, how do we work with council? How do we get the funds to enable us to do a better job of managing what's on the ground? So I recommend it to councillors. I thank all the staff. The part that I didn't touch on, which I think is equally as important as the community stuff, was... I think it was January 2017, we started a restructuring process. And that was driven by the acknowledgement that this council wanted to place a great emphasis on environmental management and planning. And so, halfway through the year, we got the... The new director of environment and sustainable development. And he was a bit slower to come along, but Craig came in by December. And I think that whole refocus of the organisation to make sure that there were people who had, as part of their position description, the responsibility for driving initiatives like
03:06:00 this, I think is equally as important. So... Councillor Jackson: Thank you very much. Well done, staff. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Well, for the current powerful time... Yeah. Councillor Pardon: I'd just like to thank... The Mayor Tony said with regards to the five years and the amount of work we've done and the setup and finally we've got to this point today and it's due to fresh energy. Brian coming on board council and others here and we probably needed fresh energy because you know we'd covered a lot of ground I'd have to say. So pretty exhausted along the way but that fresh energy helped us deliver along with Craig and staff this report today and so yeah we
03:07:00 we continue on the journey. Terrific. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you, Council President. Anyone else? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'm pleased to finally have the opportunity to endorse this policy going forward. It's been a long time coming and I don't mean that in a negative way but we have been waiting for that. Finally! Oh! Not only Brian has been driving this, we've been working really hard to try and listening to the voice in our community telling us that we've got to get to this point and we appreciate the fact that we've got some very experienced staff that have helped to get us and drive us to this point. I particularly like point six in Nurse Council and working with the community too. Take an integrated approach to protecting native flora and fauna as well as aquatic ecosystems, not that we never have but there's quite, you know, every now and again there's evidence that we, that we don't and we still need to work further to enhance that opportunity between all levels of Council and make sure, and community, to make sure that we're all working towards the ultimate goal of looking after our environment and as Council Stockwell alluded to, you know, the ambitious goal of making sure 50% of our environment is protected, I think would be a, would be a first on Council to turn around and have that goal and that approach in our environment policy. And I dare say that's no surprise.
03:08:00 We're different by nature. That's one of the reasons people come here and one of the reasons that we are such a sought after location because we do value and treasure that environment so strongly that, that we, you know, go to this point of, of driving their homes as a goal and an achievement for our community for the future. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So I'll just say that I'm also satisfied with the policy and strategy, and particularly it's exciting that it's an overarching strategy for the whole of the Shire and for the whole of the biosphere.
03:09:00 And, you know, I do love your work, Craig, and I love the way this whole document is so well analysed. It goes from principles to themes to goals to strategies to targets and strategic outcomes, KPI. So, I mean, I have this sense of logic in the document, which I find particularly pleasing. I'm really looking forward to feedback from the community on the draft strategy, but I'm certainly happy to endorse that for this purpose. Thank you. And now, anyone else? Speaker 9: If I may, just through the chair, there's a spelling mistake in recommending. It says draft instead of draught, just before we adopt it. Councillor Jurisevic: How did we miss that? Speaker 9: I had no idea. Mayor Wellington: Could you just fix that, Kylie? No, no. Councillor Pardon: It's not coming up.
03:10:00 How did we miss it? Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Speaker 4: Good. Councillor Jackson: Okay, so somebody wants to move on. No. Okay. So, we'll now vote on that on paper. Thank you very much, Terry. Speaker 4: Thank you, Craig. Speaker 5: Thank you, Frank. Thank you very much. Frank. Councillor Jackson: And, um, you. Speaker 5: Quite a lot. Lucky last. Councillor Jackson: Lucky last. Okay. Councillor Pardon: Hi, Frank. Councillor Jackson: Thank you very much. Councillor Pardon: It's been so much light reading lately. Councillor Jackson: You might just, I'm asking everyone to give a little snapshot of what's going on. What it's all about. Just for, because we started to live stream, so people understand, what is this? What is it you're presenting to us? Speaker 7: Each month, finance presents the monthly update, financial position of council. January is often the healthiest month for council, given that we've just levied our
03:11:00 second rates run for the year, which obviously funds the rest of our operations between now through to 30th of June. It's the second month of the year. Summary position, the report outlines financial performance, key variances, and where our cash flow is at present. Councillor Jackson: Thank you very much. Thank you. Councillors, questions? Oh. Councillor Clarke? Councillor Pardon: Yeah, I need the boss here with regards to, I'll wrap it on about Sunshine Beach shops. I understand there's some, there's negotiations taking place, and they're looking at possible some relief for the area. Can you talk a little bit about the other tenants while we're in the negotiating stage, to get a tenant for the Sunshine, a major tenant for the Sunshine Beach shops? But it's not fair to ask Trent that one. I was thinking of Michael being here. That's all. He's more abreast of it.
03:12:00 The, oh, just on the charges here, to our, you might know anyway, Trent. The, oh, just on the charges here, to our, you might know anyway, Trent. I'll pass you my thing. Yes. Yeah, I'm just trying to find it here. The, we charge in-house for dumping fees. Oh, here it is. Page 52, down the bottom. Waste management internal recoveries for landfill disposal, 42k above year-to-date budget, or 53k of 20k budget . So was it, the budget was M- We've earned $20k and we've earned $42k above the budget. So this is internal recovery. So from my understanding, and I could be wrong, is if we're out on the roads and we're doing works, we take it to the tip, we might be doing...
03:13:00 Resource recovery centres. Yeah, sorry. Sorry. Okay. The recourse. The tip. The local dump, yeah. We charge internally to our works department over there. So I'm just wondering, because we've shut the quarry, I'm just wondering if this is some sort of complex... Maybe we could take that on. I can look at it for another round. There's a reason, just recently, in the last day or so. Speaker 5: Okay. For example, if we have concrete stuff, which is taken... The reason I looked at it is whether or not the pending levy is going to apply to this sort of stuff. Councillor Pardon: Oh yeah. Speaker 5: So short answer is no. If we take concrete that's coming out of our construction stuff that goes to the depot, because it doesn't go into the landfill, we recycle, then that is not going to be subject to levy. But we would pay the fee in terms of what you get across the weighbridge.
03:14:00 But for scraping, for if we've done a reseal... Yeah. That still goes to . Oh, it's still storing. Yeah. Okay. Gitto for obviously parks and gardens who create the mulch. Yeah. The tree crew the other day, that goes up. doesn't go across the weighbridge. Okay. But any other things that we do, in terms of creating waste from our own operations, when it goes across the landfill, we pay. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: Just seeing such a spike. Well, you've highlighted one that I was going to ask. I was going to ask as well, Frank, because it does seem odd that we seem to be charging ourselves well above what we intended to for the landfill. Speaker 7: That's what I was going to ask. Through the Chair. There's a couple of things here. One is there is a marginal impact, obviously, from the closure of Ringtail Forest, and you'll see some of that come through with the BR3 budget adjustment. It won't drive most of that. What you'll find is when we do our budget at the start of the year, we make an estimate as to what those volumes will be. If we have a major renewal project, Park Road Boardwalk, for example, where we are disposing
195 minutes in ¶
03:15:00 of product through construction, that's where you'll see the big spike. I think this year you'll find that's what's driving that. Councillor Jurisevic: My concern is that this wasn't, because items aren't going to Ringtail that were actually going over the weighbridge, even though they're recyclable, i.e. green waste and the like. Is this a question about climate? Yes, it is. It's directly related to this item. Okay. Items such as green waste, because they're going over the weighbridge, we're now incurring a fee for the resource, which is what Chair Parnes alluded to, instead of going at the Ringtail where they could have been mulched at Ringtail or the like. Is that what this is? That's what that suggests to me. I'm looking at the same way Frank is. Through the Chair. That's what we've incurred that as a result. Speaker 7: Through the Chair. Part of the cost in there will be yes, or through the additional cost incurred of going
03:16:00 through the landfill and through over the weighbridge. We did an assessment, or Council did an assessment during the process reviewing the operations of Ringtail Quarry, where it actually assessed what was the least cost option for Council, and what was the most beneficial outcome for Council in terms of the cost of taking material to the quarry and returning that. So, and that was, it was found that actually using the landfill for that function was actually the most efficient option for Council. Councillor Jurisevic: Well that's, within seven months, we've, that's six grand a month, 42k above a year today's budget. That's six grand a month we're off, we're going at at the moment. Councillor Jackson: Okay, that's my question. Councillor Jurisevic: Is that, is that on average, is that on average, or has it been any, you mentioned, you mentioned the boardwalk. Is the boardwalk a specific fee that we've incurred as a result of that? Speaker 7: All material that comes through from Council operations, it goes through the landfill and incur that charge. So that includes concrete, timber, green waste, metals.
03:17:00 So all those costs that would otherwise be incurred through a private citizen or a commercial entity going over the landfill, that charge is then charged internally. So it's not just timber and materials that are then held on site, that have otherwise been held on site at Ringtail Quarry. It's through all activities year on year. And those activities, the volume of that can change year on year, depending on what construction work or what renewal activity you do at one point in time. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, just a supplementary question on that. My understanding of internal revenue charges is that they're purely book entries that do affect the budgets between different business units, but have absolutely no effect on the impact on the rate payer. Speaker 7: Correct. So what we have here is a case of cost that would have been otherwise incurred chipping and mulching timber at Ringtail. That cost is now being incurred at the landfill, and we've just got internal circular charge
03:18:00 to recognise that. Councillor Jurisevic: So we should see a relevant decrease in the charge that would have been at Ringtail, for example. Correct. Which is what you're saying in the BR3. Which you'll see coming up. I'll be looking for that figure. Speaker 5: Probably just a follow up. Just a follow up. I'd like to probably answer Frank's question before about what else is going out to Ringtail alone. So, you know, like the big logs that might not otherwise be dumped out there or being stored out there as well. . Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Pardon: No, that's good. That's good. Yeah. Because I can't afford this pay. Councillor Glasgow: Connolly, if you just go to 53, one page down, please. Just an indulgence to our audience, as we do have an audience now all the time. This subsidies and grants, it says we've spent 56% of our $3 million, and then it's got that line operating grants are in line. How do you get grants in line? How do you predict the grants are in line with our budget at this stage? Grants are very arbitrary up and down, aren't they? Speaker 7: Isn't it?
03:19:00 Councillor, the majority of our grants is actually our financial assistance grant that comes through from the government each year. We know in advance, before we even start the financial year, what that amount will be. And in terms of our operating grant, it probably constitutes about 80% to 90% of the grant. The only other items that's in that are smaller operational grants for programs or projects that the library or the art gallery might be undertaking, but in terms of materiality, they're quite low. So we know well in advance what our position will be for the year for the grant budget. Councillor Glasgow: Is that a good figure to be 56 at this February? Yes, sir. Normal. Yeah. Normal. Okay. That's it for me. Councillor Jackson: Are there questions? No. Councillor Jurisevic: You're the one for the CEO. I'm pleased to see staff training is catching up. But 62K committed is only just catching up to the 64K year-to-date underspend at this point in time. So clearly we've still got some work to do then. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That 2K's worth of work.
03:20:00 Councillor Jurisevic: No, no. Because you haven't taken in the next five months. The end of January. So February, March, April, May, June. So 62K, is that to cover the next five months or is that to cover... Sorry, where are you looking? What page? Speaker 5: 653. 653. Councillor Jurisevic: Staff training underspend of 64K is here to date, noting that further 62K is committed to supplies for further training. Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 5: So I spoke to Willow HR Manager about this the other day. He is very confident now, probably more so than in December when we last spoke about this, that we will get a full expenditure of our training budget by the end of June. And you'll see how we've caught up in that transition. So I'm looking forward to seeing that. Councillor Jackson: Other questions? Councillor Jurisevic: The maintenance of Council lease properties. Councillor Carden was alluding to Sunrise Beach Shops. I'm assuming that that 89K belay budget is directly attributable to Sunrise Beach Shops?
03:21:00 Speaker 7: Portional. The remainder of it is timing in terms of our scheduled timing for maintenance. And availability contracts and timings. That's obviously not just Sunrise Beach Shops. That is all the other community facilities we have around the Shire as well. So at this stage, we're not envisaging that to be a variance year end. It's just a timing issue. Councillor Jurisevic: I said that seems a significant underspend at this time of year. The street lighting. Councillor Jackson: Public utilities. Can you just tell us where you are? Same page. Councillor Jurisevic: 53. 50, 54. 54. It's working down the IT. Public utility management. Street lighting. 47K below year to date budget. Are we not replacing the lights when they're blown? Or we just haven't had as many outages? Or why are we down there? I would have expected that would have been under contract to regular maintenance.
03:22:00 Speaker 7: It is under contract. I'd have to take it on notice as to what's the underpinning driver on that. Whether it's actually just less reactive work or whether it's actually timing of the request. Councillor Jurisevic: Could I put that question on the notice? Sure. Can you get back to me on that one, please? That's an odd one. That's the first time I've seen street lighting actually prop up. So that's an anomaly to me. And it's the first time we've had a variance year end. Because of the contract obligations there. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: What page are you on there? That was on 54. Can I add one on 54 then? Mayor Wellington: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So we've got the second dot point from the top talking about features and details, contract maintenance services 94K below, which is fairly sizeable. Is that just because we have to get them up at a particular time of year and it was not the right time of year or? Speaker 7: A combination of timing as well as beach management pumping services as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So does that cover the river as well as the works we're doing on the river? Because I know I've had complaints about promises being made about sand being replenished
03:23:00 from not being done. Correct. Speaker 7: So it's the beach. It's the beach. Canals and waterways. Yeah. Red Beach. Red Beach. Sand recycling. Sand recycling. Yeah. Okay. So that's the entire section's activity. And I think we might have to pump some more down. Councillor Pardon: Yeah. I was just going to at the end of it say about that. Councillor Jackson: Any other questions? Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll pose a similar question with regards to parks and gardens and maintenance being 57K below. That'd be weather, wouldn't it? Well, weather's been fine. I can't imagine it being weather related. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: They don't have so many weeds because they're all dead. Councillor Jurisevic: Again, contractual obligations being met there. Mowing. Is that internal? Speaker 7: Primarily weather. With mowing. Timing of mowing contracts. Councillor Jurisevic: So we haven't had weather. We're not getting as much of it. Not as much as what we'd otherwise expect for this time of year. Speaker 5: That's right.
03:24:00 It's just a matter of time before we can have it. Because your roads don't break down as much. The parks don't need mowing as much. And the water consumption goes up which means you make more money. Councillor Jurisevic: So it's always a good question to ask to make sure that that is the rhyme and reason behind it happening and there's not something that you're just assuming is so. Councillor Glasgow: I'll move it. I haven't moved on today, so. Councillor Jackson: You'd like to move it, but people haven't finished asking questions. Oh, okay. Councillor Glasgow: So I'd like to hear if there are still questions. Can't you still ask questions after the meeting? Councillor Jackson: Sure. But I think we may as well finish asking questions. Oh, okay. Yeah. I've got a question, so I'll ask it. And that is the one that's at the beginning. Below budget capital expenditure by 11%. Can you say something about that? Speaker 7: I know that Manager of Infrastructure, Planning, Design and Delivery and Asset Management will obviously have their report coming through shortly. Well, thank you. Speaker 5: It's actually on this round. It's in the Service and Organisation Committee. Where we had the three-monthly update. Oh, it's in there. Yeah. Page 61 on the Services and Organisation Committee agenda.
03:25:00 We had the three-monthly update from Brian O'Connor. The detail of all that . Councillor Jackson: Okay. That's fine. Thank you. Next question. Speaker 4: Yeah. Any others? Councillor Jurisevic: No, but I'll second it. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Jess, will Councillor Drew sort of second it? Anyone else want to speak to the motion? No. Councillor Pardon: Just go up. Thanks, Trent. Councillor Jackson: Right of reply. Councillor Glasgow: I'll just say thanks, Trent. Great financial modelling you're doing there. Keeping our business up there and keep it up. Councillor Jackson: Okay. All in favour? Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.