Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Wilkie: Okay, good morning everybody. Welcome to the General Committee meeting. I declare the meeting open and begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land on which we will meet, the Kabi Kabi, the Kabi Kabi people and pay our respects to their elders past, present and emerging. We have no apologies. We have no presentations. And the first item is the development application for a material change of use for a retail business type 2 shop and so on and reconfiguration of a boundary realignment at 34 Elm Street, Cooroy. It's been referred due to the significance of the issue and there's been a proposed slight change to the recommendation. Councillors any questions for these staff? Yes, I do have a couple
00:01:00 Councillor Jackson: of questions. The first one is that I understand that there's been a recommendation in this staff report to reduce the gross floor area from 678 to 620 square metres and that's in relationship to having an extra two metre setback at Diamond Lane. But I also gather from the staff report that there have been a number of iterations of this design and I'm wondering if you could just give me a potted history of those iterations and what the gross floor areas were in each of those and perhaps why they've been knocked back and changed. Speaker 5: Prior to the application being submitted we met with the applicant and their consultant.
00:02:00 That was a significantly different layout mainly from an access point of view. There was access from Diamond Lane and also access from Opal Street proposed at that time. At that stage the development was for 620 square metres of retail area and, oh sorry, the pre-lodgement plan. There wasn't an application at that point. It was for 620 square metres of retail area and there was also two dwelling units that were proposed. There were two proposals that were put forward at that meeting and they were both for 620 square metres. When the application was submitted it was a different layout to what we'd seen at the pre-lodgement meeting. I don't have the plans in front of me. I do believe it was for 620 square metres at that time. The layout originally, it was generally similar to what was proposed in terms of the building
00:03:00 layout. There was a second level above shops three to seven also with two dwelling units and then to the east of that building was some car parking and toilet area. So essentially the building extended all the way along the laneway. After some discussions with us, with myself and with Kerry, we decided to move it to the east of that building. We moved it to the east side where we advised we had some concerns with the layout and particularly one of the main issues being the second crossover to Opal Street. The development was changed again and this is the layout that we have at this stage. Yeah. Sorry. The comment you made earlier about the floor area being reduced from 678 to 620 square metres to accommodate the two metres to the laneway. The reason for the reduction is actually in the building area it is in the building area as well. But again,
00:04:00 As part of the recommendation, four car spaces and four scooter spaces in the road reserve to accommodate, and that's five spaces, and then contributions in lieu of three spaces to equate to 31 car spaces being provided at a rate of one car space at 20 square metres, that equals 620 square metres. Councillor Jackson: So the 620 that you referred to in the various iterations always included the toilets in each of those? Speaker 5: The toilets that are included relate to shops one and eight. The toilets to the east of shop three are not included in the 620 square metres because they're public toilets. Councillor Jackson: And that was the case in all of the iterations that you've brought up here? Mayor Wellington: Can I just check something? Sorry to interrupt, Councillor, but iterations suggest that there are some formal applications.
00:05:00 What we're talking about here, correct me if I'm wrong, is... There are pre-application meetings with no formal applications, so it just needs to be made clear we're not talking about earlier proposals that were knocked back or something. Speaker 5: So there was pre-lodgement meetings with different iterations, but then when the application was... What we see in front of us is different to what was submitted from when the application was made originally. Councillor Jackson: So there were two additional ones that were put forward at the lodgement, when it was actually submitted? Speaker 5: There was a pre-lodgement meeting where there was two versions put forward, and then there was a layout that was proposed originally as part of this application, and then this has been changed to what we see in front of us now. Councillor Jackson: And now there are some conditions which will change it again. That is correct. Yeah. And actually, speaking of parking, I've just been there, so I'll just have a photo because I want to understand this. This is Opal Street, and this is, as we know, there is perpendicular parking.
00:06:00 In front of the bowling club, where we can see cars parked perpendicularly, but in front of Opal Street, in front of this particular lot, or lots, there's parallel parking, and there's space there in front of the trees. So can you just explain what is intended through the application for this area? Speaker 5: To the eastern end, towards the white car, where there's a tree, there will be the crossover to provide access from Opal Street. Then between that crossover coming towards us, towards the trees, is, as part of the recommendation, four car spaces. Then we're looking for... Some form of landscaping in that hard-surfaced area, and then to the west, to this side of that landscaping, would be the provision of four scooter spaces.
00:07:00 Councillor Jackson: So the four scooter spaces would be in front of the existing trees that are being kept. Speaker 2: Is that right? Councillor Jackson: That is correct. Speaker 2: And the four parking spaces actually remove that existing curb and go into the grassed area as well. Councillor Jackson: Sure. So it'll be perpendicular like the bowling club area. Yeah. Okay. That's what I wanted to check. And just one more question. I understand that one of the iterations, and you'll have to tell me which one, or some of them had shopfront entrances at Diamond Lane, and that now all the entrances are internally focused. Can you just explain that and why the change? Speaker 5: The previous versions that were part of the application, and I'd just like to make a correction. I advise that the original version was 620 square metres as well. It was actually 640 square metres. Okay. That's the submission.
00:08:00 Councillor Jackson: What was the submission? Speaker 5: The original submission. That's correct. But there were no shopfronts to Diamond Lane as part of that application. Oh, okay. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Speaker 5: Councillor, is there any other questions? Councillor Jackson: Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Jackson just alluded to something that I hadn't picked up originally. Sorry. There are two shops that have internal toilets, and then there's a set of common toilets, public toilets available as well. Why would two of the ... I'm assuming that the two tenancies that do have toilets have got specific uses that they're intending there that require toilets, internal toilets? Speaker 5: The applicants advise that they are providing those toilets in each of those tenancies to have toilets on each of the lots. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, okay. Yeah, okay. So there's a lot there. I think under the building ... They're not available externally? Or they are? Speaker 5: They're only accessible internally. Okay. To the buildings. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: That's all right. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Brian.
00:09:00 I've got a slightly amended motion that I've amended to the recommendation of staff. Councillors, it's on the screen. If I can just read the parts that are amended, and that is in section 2.2 to read that the development to be set back four metres from Diamond Lane. This setback may be reduced in part where it is demonstrated that the amendments to north elevation as required by condition 2.3 have been satisfied. And if you scroll down, please, Carly. Similarly, in 2.6, a minimum of two metre wide landscaping strip within the lot to the Diamond Lane, primarily adjacent to the full length of the building and outside the area to be dedicated. This landscaping must compromise the use of ground covers, shrubs and small trees. This landscaping strip may be reduced in part where it is demonstrated the amendments to the north elevation as required by condition 2.3 have been satisfied. And the last two. The pedestrian path to the east of the public toilets bin room must be increased to width
00:10:00 two metres wide with the reason of suitable separation between the path and the loading bay. For example, that is Bollards. A 2.9, a minimum of 10% of the site excluding the area to be dedicated, must be landscaped. These car overhangs are not included in the calculation of the landscape area. Councillor Wilkie: Seconded by Councillor Wellington. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So if you could just bring up that quick sketch that I did yesterday just to sort of demonstrate the concepts. So, Councillors, the concept that staff had was a condition requiring a straight two metre setback but the design was to try and get a little bit more articulation of the facade along what is Diamond Lane. I've just done in Red Deer some examples of what might be a change in articulation and where landscaping may or may not go in. So for me, things like, you know, I'm more willing to accept variation to car parking requirements
00:11:00 if the design outcome is consistent with what we've sort of identified in our drawings. I think that corner shop would actually, it could address both streets, the Elm Street and Diamond Lane and people coming from the north and the south. I think that there may be good reason to actually have a little bit more setback as you begin that laneway, but I think also that you could move some of the units further back the laneway up closer to the boundary and still have a good outcome if that's going to have a change in the articulation so it's not a big blank wall. I think what is most... most important about this site is not car parking, but the access for locals and the fact in our draft planning scheme, what we're encouraging is people to get to the shops by bike, by walking. And so I think that, you know, the original email to councillors sort of by the applicant
00:12:00 encouraged us to look at the connectivity between this site and the Energex site, which is also subject to development and I've sort of shown that roughly as what could be a very desirable link through for pedestrians. In purple there. The extra condition about the two metre width beside the building is just to make sure that that is not just a skinny, narrow feature that people wouldn't want to use. And that's another reason why we might want to consider a reduction of the two metre setback from that boundary line to offset any losses there. The other things I've shown on that diagram, I suppose, and we've, you know, it's not part of the conditions, but I actually think we should be looking at down the track, you know, making laneways a feature where cars aren't dominant, that people this is, you know, the representations is that this could be a shared space between the two sites where bicycles and pedestrians feel at home and where there's a limited amount of traffic.
00:13:00 And while it's not subject to the conditions in this application, I just think it's something we need to think about that we, when we look at developments backing up to some of these key lanes, that we look at what's the best design outcome to activate them and the minor changes I've made. And I think that's really what I've made to the staff recommendation, is just about trying to give some incentive to look at that and give some flexibility or indication to the applicant that we would be willing to look at that two metre setback if some of the design outcomes that we're trying to achieve in the draft plan are achieved. Councillor Wilkie: Joe, you had a question? Mayor Wellington: Can I ask a question about that? Joe, I just want to ask about this diagram. So do I. Oh, okay, you go ahead then. Councillor Jurisevic: So do I. My first question is to staff. Given that what Councillor Stockwell is proposing there is a reduction in that setback, I'm assuming that setback was allocated to allow for vehicles that will be loading and parking in that loading bay to exit via Diamond Lane and access out to Elm Street. If that setback is reduced, do vehicles still have sufficient width to access?
00:14:00 Speaker 5: There's two metre strips, so to speak, related to this application. The first is a dedication of two metres to allow for future works in the laneway and then the second provision is for the building to be set two metres back from that new boundary line, which is what Councillor Stockwell is and what the condition talks to, able to be varied. Councillor Jurisevic: So the two metre... That secondary setback is the typical two metre setback that we'd have from the boundary line. That first setback is to allow for sufficient width for vehicles or any other engineering works that need to go on in there. Is that how, as I understand it? Speaker 5: Well, yes, the setback for the relevant zone for this site is, for the attached housing zone, is actually six metres.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 The draft planning scheme looks for, or seeks for this site to be included as a local district zone, for which a zero setback would be required for a building, such as is in the business centre. We've sought for that extra two metres to accommodate landscaping because we have concerns with the building design. Councillor Jurisevic: But we've not only gone two metres, we've gone a second two metres, so we've actually gone four metres, not just two metre setback. That's correct. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think your question actually doesn't answer that question. It doesn't relate to the setback, but it relates to the eastern boundary of the site where the purple line is proposed among conditions to go from 1.2 to two metres. And that is a relevant question. With two metres for pedestrians, is there enough room for a truck loading bay to the east of the building? Speaker 5: By going to two metres in width for that path, I'd say it's likely that the landscaping would be impacted in that area, and hence why there's a secondary condition to require that 10 per cent of landscaping be done in that area.
00:16:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Okay, so the 10 per cent then, okay, I think that answers the other question I had, why the 10 per cent? Because normally our, what's our normal requirement for landscaping on a site such as this? Ah, 10 per cent. 10 per cent, yes, that's right. Councillor Jackson: Well, that is normal. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'm just thinking of domestic, I'm thinking in domestic, and I couldn't think of what it was for commercial, so. No, commercial would be 10 per cent. Councillor Jackson: Related to the answer you just gave to Joe, there was in, Condition 2.2 refers to development of a setback of four metres, and then Condition 2.6, a minimum two metre wide landscaping strip, so how come there are four metres and two metres? Speaker 5: Um, so the first two metres is related to future works for, um, what, um, in, sorry, in Diamond Lane. Um. Um, so that would be the new boundary, and then we're seeking the building to be set back two metres from that new boundary, which does mean four metres from the current boundary.
00:17:00 I see, that's what that means. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Ah, Tony. Yeah, a couple of questions. Firstly, ah, my understanding is that the loading area is actually on that end of the large building at the north there, not in the lane. So, are, are we sure that's, that vehicles of sufficient size to deliver goods to the shops can make that left turn into the lane from that area? Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: That was essentially my question. I didn't think it was answered. Thank you. Yes. Yes? Mayor Wellington: Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. Mayor Wellington: Ah, and the other question's for Councillor Stockwell. Um, are we, pay any attention to the red text across hatched areas, and if so, what are they? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Ah, sorry, sorry. That was just a sort of indication of a, what, a two-metre additional setback would look like in some, but not another, so just about articulating the start, so basically just saying the red, ah, you know, you might want to have that, that two-metre setback from the new boundary at the beginning of the lane, but you might be able to vary it going forward.
00:18:00 It was just an indication of, you know, if it's a verandah out to the boundary, is that a problem, if it's, you know, if it's a covered entry. Councillor Wilkie: So there's a footpath under that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do you want me to? Councillor Jurisevic: That's Councillor Stockwell's artistic licence. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You're working with students. Okay, so this is the current boundary. Councillor Jackson: What do you mean by current? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's the current boundary. What we've asked for is, and this is not to mention, is two metres to be widened, and then another two metres come off. Okay? So what I'm suggesting, if we can treat the current boundary as a new boundary that's been, that we say, you know, it's moved two metres, that we might, for example, allow this built to the boundary as a covered walkway around the end of the laneway, and this shop may, you know, still be two metres back, but you've got the covered awning and maybe window there.
00:19:00 You might then want to move, have that extra two metres setback here, but you might be able to push some of these buildings further forward, just to, swings and roundabouts, so you're getting a better facade, better. Councillor Glasgow: Just, we're always talking about this as, you know, trying to engage the cross-pollination of the sites and laneway with pedestrian activity and so forth, just, this is a pretty stupid, simple question. Why did, I'm guessing the, funny, is this purple colour, what do you call that purple colour smoothie line? It's a purple colour smoothie line. Muse. Yeah, Muse. This, whatever it is, that's pedestrians, right? Yep. Yep. Why didn't we not go straight down? Oh, that was me. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, there will be nothing stopping pedestrians going straight down. Councillor Glasgow: I've been meandering down this alleyway, looking at all the shops and coming out of the corridor. You could. Elm Street, is there a reason? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: This is the existing plan in the development, and I suppose if people are coming from one shop to want to go to the next, and these ones are just facing inward, from over there, that way, that's the way you do it. Councillor Jackson: Could Brian stay there, please, Councillor? I'm a little bit confused about which of the things that you've drawn on this picture are actually in your recommendation, and which ones are your additional artistic...
00:20:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: What it says is the pedestrian path here goes from 1.2 to 2, and it talks about we may be able to vary the setback from the boundary if, what the staff recommendation in terms of articulation of this facade, and this is just indicative of what an articulated facade looks like, that's a straight facade, that's an articulated one, it's just indicative of, you know, I think we should have... You're breaking up along the wall, you might move some out to the boundary, some back a metre, some back two metres. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, so more flexibility there. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's all those conditions are trying to get to, to say we're willing to negotiate. Councillor Jackson: I have another question, probably of staff, and that is there are two items here that are new. One is the pedestrian path with the additional two metres wide, and also the minimum 10% site landscapes.
00:21:00 Can we see them? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, can we see? Councillor Jackson: Okay, so further down, I think it is. These two, 2.8 and 2.9. Do 2.8 and 2.9 have any impact on the proposed gross floor area and the buildings as they are in the most recent submission? Speaker 5: The challenge to, if they were to have the current layout and comply with these conditions, is that the path would be into the landscaping area. So they'd need to offset. So they'd need to get a strip of landscaping that would be now a pathway. Councillor Jackson: And how would that happen without reducing gross floor area? Speaker 5: That's possibly one way that they would accommodate it. Councillor Jackson: That's possibly one way, but it could be done other ways?
00:22:00 Speaker 5: There's other paths and other hard surfacing around the site, whether they'd seek to reduce that. It would depend on whether it was practical, I suppose, from a vehicle and engineering point of view. Councillor Jackson: So that's this. So there's some unknowns here about the impact, is that correct? Speaker 2: It is, and that's why we have recommended to Council that for a preliminary approval, which, and so that allows some further discussions and negotiations with the applicant to achieve, you know, the intent of these conditions. It may be, as Brian's proposed in the recommendation, that the two metre landscape setback that officers are asking does become sort of in and out, to just provide that articulation. So it might be possible there to achieve that landscaping there and not affect the rest of the layout. Councillor Jackson: So is it not true, Kerry, that the conditions that staff have put on the agenda already included landscaping of that whole Diamond Lane section? Speaker 2: Yes, and if that was done, they would more than exceed the 10 percent.
00:23:00 Councillor Jackson: I see. So there's no concern about loss of gross floor area or landscape? Speaker 2: No, I don't think it will affect the gross floor area. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: I just want to clarify with regard to the two metre width of the pedestrian path to the east of the public toilets. What are the current widths of the pedestrian paths through the complex? Are they two metres? Speaker 5: Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: So that two metre would be consistent with the other pathway widths within the complex? Speaker 2: Yes. The existing path, except for that pinch point that Councillor Bryan's pointed out, are at least two metres. Yes. At that point adjacent to Loading Bay, it's 1.2 metres. 1.2 metres is not sufficient for people in wheelchairs. So it is appropriate that that be widened. Councillor Jurisevic: And the provision of bollards there would provide adequate separation between pathway and Loading Bay, so as not to create conflict? Speaker 2: That's why the bollards are proposed, to maintain some sort of safety.
00:24:00 That might be achieved by a rail or bollards. Councillor Jurisevic: So we may lose that little bit of landscaping that's there for the additional width with bollards? Yes, that's right. In that indication in the drawing, which may or may not occur? Speaker 2: Yes. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Yes, I think I've got it. Frank. Councillor Pardon: Yes, Mr Chairman. Given this preliminary approval, I was just going to ask the mover, where you've got must be increased in 2.8, is that the word? I know what you're trying to do. You're building flexibility into it. And it's a preliminary approval, so that gives, you know, debating with the applicant here. Opportunity. I'm just wondering about that word. The must? The must. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So have you suggested another one that the mover and the seconder could agree to?
00:25:00 Should be. I think at a preliminary approval, the intent is that it should meet a standard. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Some things would be non-negotiable. I think must is appropriate. That's right. Must is appropriate. Councillor Pardon: If you're happy with that one, just. Yeah. Good question. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: Good question. I think that's it. I did have a question that rose out of Council Pardon's question there. But the access for the toilets there is clearly in front of the vehicles and not off to that side laneway. So that means that wheelchair access to the toilets is two metres, or has two metres of space for a wheelchair to access? That's correct. What's the minimum width for a wheelchair access pathway? Speaker 2: I think it's two metres. 1.2 is certainly adequate, but I think it's two metres of land. Councillor Pardon: It's 1.2 for a disabled toilet.
00:26:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Well, that's what I would have thought. I would have thought two metres was excessive in width. I would have thought 1.2 would accommodate a wheelchair. Oh. Speaker 2: I'm not saying it won't fit. It's just the standard for a wheelchair pathway is two metres. Councillor Jackson: I would just like to ... Well, now that I understand Councillor Stockwell's recommendation and see that it supports the submission and just enhances it, I'm happy to support this motion. In principle, I would like to say that I think this is a very good location for a small convenience shopping centre. Already our strategic planners have indicated in the new new supply that it makes sense for this area to be commercialised. I think it's going to be commercial because right next to it on both sides, Cooroy. Also, having been there twice this weekend to have a look, I've driven around and walked
00:27:00 around and I've seen the nice Queenslander-style houses that are in the area, and I'm comfortable with what I've seen of the drawings here, that there's been an effort made to have the style of Cooroy kind of reflected or mirrored in this proposal. So the parapets in the front, the old-style shops, and also there are bungalow-style roofs, hip roofs. I'm happy with the concept of 10% landscaping. Obviously, it's something that should be supported, and looking at the street, having seen it, I think it's a nice thing to keep those trees on the street. So I'm supportive of this motion. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? We wish to close, Brian. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I will just briefly. I think the issue here is the applicant has gone to a good deal of trouble to try and
00:28:00 reflect some of the vernacular styles of the Cooroy commercial area. Some of the very reflective of what used to be the saddlery, now where you go and buy your grok. It is, you know, I think that the Elm Street and the Elm Street frontage are quite similar. I think, you know, the suggestion that we should be using this to think about the activation of the lane and the connectivity to all the local shops is important. I, you know, one of the pinch points is about gross floor area and car parking contributions. I feel that, you know, a contribution of three spaces can be achieved in the existing Oval Street Corridor. I know that contributions can be put towards pedestrian, bike, and public transport. And so, you know, I'm happy with that. But to me, if the design comes back and it requires another car park, that might be something to consider. But I'm not, I think that will be hard balancing between gross floor area and obviously the
00:29:00 need to get that 10% landscaping up. So to me, I think we just have to indicate that, yeah, it's a good development. A few touches around the edge to actually increase the outcomes for the community. And, you know, I think what councils are saying is that we're willing to be a little bit flexible. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you. Put the motion those in favour? Against? The motion is carried. Thank you. Thank you, Patrick. Next application is the material change of use for detached houses and 12 multiple housing type 4. Conventional and reconfiguration of a lot, one lot into four lots, plus easement at 27 Matunga High. So who's ahead? Some staff. You've had some communication with the applicant in the meantime. Speaker 2: Yeah. So the applicant has lodged a notice with councillor. It's stopping the current period, which is provided for under the Planning Act. So while the period is stopped, council is unable to decide the application. So they've indicated they've stopped the current period in order to make representations to
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 council about the concerns raised in the report. So I would expect at some point shortly, we will meet with the applicant and go through those concerns with them and see if we have any concerns. So I would expect at some point shortly, we will meet with the applicant and go through And I'm sorry, I just want to have you come in and talk about what changes need to be made, whether they're willing to make the changes to the Plan. Councillor Jurisevic: So moved, Mr Chair. Councillor Wilkie: And moved, Councillor Jurisevic, seconded by Councillor Glasgow. Cottons, anyone who wishes to speak to the motion? Councillor Jurisevic: I'm keeping with the applicant's request to halt and further discuss with planning staff. I'm happy to support their request. Councillor Wilkie: Anybody else? Put the motion those in favour? Against? Carried. Next item is the Planning and Environment Court Appeal, the Development Permit for Operational Works for Signage at 2424 Gibson Road, Noosaville and this is the settlement of an appeal and just remind councillors that we've kept micro of comments that may prejudice either the parties terms in the settlement of this appeal and we'll keep our comments related to
00:31:00 the item as that is before us which is the terms of the settlement. Now it's here because of the significance of the issue. Councillors any questions for staff? I'm happy to move it. Tony? I'm happy to move it. Seconded. Seconded council pardon by a whisker. Councilors wish to speak to it? I just you know mediation once again proves its worth and congratulations to staff and our legal team for coming Mayor Wellington: to an agreement on this without having to go to the further expense of court action. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Any other council questions for staff? Arrested or closed? Councilor Wellington? No. I'll put the motion those in favour? Against? Motions carried. Next one is the Noosa Environment Strategy and Implementation Plan, a
00:32:00 motion for on the agenda. Yeah what item was that in the original? Seven. Oh there it is, sorry. Speaker 7: I'm so happy to move it. Can I, councillor just one of the things I think and Craig's highlighted that they're probably going to be some typos and things to fix in the document. Sorry, sorry for pointing that out Craig. We've already found a couple of others but I haven't found that one so. My suggestion would be that you authorise the CA to make any minor or procedural changes in terms of the document. Yes. If you're comfortable with that. Councillor Wilkie: I'm happy to move it. Moved by councillor Stockwell, seconded by councillor Blaster.
00:33:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So councillors, as the chairman mentioned it is an auspicious case. For me it's probably a key destination in a long journey. So it was October 2016 that councillor Jurisevic and I met with a few key environment NO groups to start a conversation about the issues around potential strategic steps forward. One of their main recommendations from that meeting was an overarching Shire environment policy with collaborative development of strategic policies and priorities. Now at that meeting they first envisioned that there would be ongoing small strategy group of key players and less regular forums for all environment community and NO groups. And this process has been underway for two and a half years leading to this point. And now being formalised in two actions in the new implementation plan. So the implementation plan does say that we're going to have an environment with sustainability round table. To provide mechanisms for local community groups, government stakeholders and experts to have input into development of council policy.
00:34:00 Which is a really good step forward and something that was, as I said, one of the key items on the agenda for all community groups back then. The second also talks about that ongoing support for community environment and sustainable development networks and forums. To build partnerships that drive the implementation of the environment strategy. This environment strategy and the implementation plan will be of little use unless we have those people who are committed to on ground action. Coming with this journey along on this journey with us. But it also had some, in that October 2016, some key actions that they thought should happen. And at that first meeting we now have some of those as new initiatives. So one of the key new initiatives is about developing an integrated water monitoring network for council, community and other agencies. Including event monitoring of sediments, nutrients and litter for Noosa and the Mary catchment. And to develop a baseline report card for the Mary catchment. Let's say we're going to do the whole Shire so we can go ABCD just like we do for the Noosa River. So we can look at all the waterways in the Shire. And similarly in that first meeting that I talked about, they promoted actions which are now a new initiative.
00:35:00 Which is about adopting sustainable agricultural practices. So it's not all about just the green agenda. It is something about the brown agenda as well. And with that we'll be supporting on ground actions with land holders that improve environmental, economic and social outcomes on rural properties throughout the Shire. While contributing to the long term sustainability of rural landscapes. However others, such as a new initiative there about implementing an eastern beach dune rehabilitation program to improve condition, species diversity and stability of dune ecosystems and enhance resilience to climate change, date back even further. So that in fact is an action that I promoted to the last term of council as the Chair of the Environment Sector Board. So it was one of the primary actions coming out of a 2014 forum of all the community groups. Which said it's time to take action on climate change. And the general management program is now putting this implementation as a new initiative. Others emerged through the course of this term of council. Like improving the water quality and biodiversity of the Noosa River by restoring aquatic habitat such as oyster reefs.
00:36:00 So we are, the implementation plan does reflect what has been emerging. You know about best practice solutions to the reversing the decline of benthic biodiversity and primacy. And also about time reduction in the lower Noosa River. So the skill of the report has got some significant early warning signs about what may be happening in the benthic layer at the bottom of the river. That drives the prime reduction, that drives the prawns, and drives the fish production. And also to work with sustainable stakeholders with a view of improving the sustainability of recreational and commercial fishing outcomes in Noosa River. So the aim is to improve the outcomes for all sorts of fishers. Unfortunately councillors, So some of the implementation new initiatives are about 30 years later and as a result of such slow progress being made, not just here but across the globe, it will make the world a much harsher place to live in for our children. In 1990, in this place, the first IPCC report on climate change was released and I removed a motion to say the organisation should look at all sorts of energy efficiency and renewable energy to address the threat of climate change in 1990.
00:37:00 The great ZEN projects we started last year were the first meaningful attempt at that and that's what's happening around the globe. So it really is a time to accelerate our investment and so that's probably the greatest challenge for this implementation plan is to work out as a local council how do we budget to increase the available allocation to do things like the new initiatives on identifying potential areas for carbon sequestration in the Shire, to investigate and implement appropriate solar vault buy schemes for Noosa residents and to look at the renewable energy in our Shire. So councillors, for me it is the end of a long journey. I think it may have been the case we could have written something quickly back in October 2016 but what's been the beauty of this process is that the community groups, councillors and council staff have gone along with it
00:38:00 and we've got to a point where we are all clear on this. We are all in agreement. The environment strategy didn't get a huge outcry because everyone said well we've been involved, part of that, all those ideas have been something that we've been part of and we're happy for council to proceed on that basis. And I believe the new initiatives and the implementation plan will be well received by the community. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Barclay. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, I'm glad, I congratulate Councillor Stockwell and some of his initiatives and other councillors who have worked a lot. I'm glad he went along on this strategy and he mentioned two and a half years. I'm glad he went back a bit further than that from 1990 and you can go back to Dr Arthur Harrold and Kato and a raft of people out there in our community. You can go way back here. So the journey has been long and it will continue on and it will just continue on infinitum.
00:39:00 If the people, if the people, and I believe they already have in this Shire, keep on the journey the way they've been going. And there's enough people in this Shire, I'll say active enough, looking at the big picture, where we should not only be holding a line with the environment but naturally enhancing for the future. And it's fortunate that in the past that some of the studies have been done and that we can bounce off them today and actually look back at history as we've done and just see what was here. Councillor Stockwell mentioned the oysters. We know there was heaps of oysters here. Talk about fish, we go back through history, prawns, all that stuff. We know there was so much biodiversity in the river, et cetera.
00:40:00 And I go to the point in amongst this. I waved to a whale this morning. Not many people can do this. They come into work, surfaced, probably a big female, very close to shore. I didn't get swimming this morning. And I thought, man, how many do that on the way to work? Anyway, we all know the journey in Northam. There's plenty of them at the moment. So, and I hark back to the fish and, you know, I suppose it's like people in the old days who rabbited on about the whales and got the whaling stations at Tangaloomba, et cetera. Closed down. And now we know there's heaps of whales and they continue to breed. Except the ones the Japanese eat, of course. But that's for scientific purposes only, they capture them. But anyway, so fish, that fish study, oyster study. If you related a fish to a whale, and people don't, of course, but I do.
00:41:00 So 100,000 fish for 100 ton quota. It was 100,000 whales they took them a year along here. The outcry would be something else, wouldn't it, for 100,000 dolphins. So yes, we eat fish, but they eat whales as well. So on that particular issue, I'm so happy that we're driving forward with regards to our environment and our strategy with regards to bring back the fish, oysters, et cetera. But that's just a little segment. If I look back through history. And it's in here with regards to land purchase and another report coming. The way we preserve the land and continue to. All fantastic initiatives. So you roll them all into an environment strategy going forward. And I've missed that much stuff that I was talking about. But it's a great document and it's just a great plan and a great way forward for the future.
00:42:00 Tony. Mayor Wellington: Yeah. Just to clarify. Councillor Stockwell's speaking to the motion might lead someone to believe that we only started our zero emissions initiatives a year ago. In fact, we established our zero emissions target three years ago. And we've been actively involved in not just measuring our carbon footprint, but also taking active action towards it for three years now. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you for that clarification. Councillor Jackson: I do have some questions, Mr Chair. Yes, of course. And some of them are questions that residents have been asking and some of them are my own questions. The first one actually is of the strategic manager here, Kim. Back when we were looking at 54 Seaview Terrace and we were discussing things, I think, at the general committee or perhaps the ordinary meeting. You referred to the draft environment strategy as being a reason, being one of the reasons for not supporting, allowing a replacement of a building.
00:43:00 That's already in existence in Sunshine Beach. And I'm just wondering, I'm really having a bit of difficulty, I have been in touch with Craig about this, finding where exactly this is in this environment strategy. I don't really find it there. Speaker 3: Councillor, I don't have recollection of referring to the draft environment strategy as a reason. Speaker 2: The draft planning scheme? Speaker 3: Yeah. Definitely. Sure. But yeah, no recollection. Okay. Councillor Jackson: Perhaps, Craig, you can say a bit more because I did contact Craig about this matter too. You did. Speaker 1: So I don't have the response I provided you in front of me. Okay. It was along the lines of there were a couple of references that very broadly implied that approach, but there was no specific reference to that approach. Okay. That had been in a much earlier draft. Right. We had received feedback that it didn't quite fit and we agreed with that feedback.
00:44:00 Yeah. And had taken it out. Councillor Jackson: And can I just quote on page 39, it says, for coastal hazards, a hierarchy of coastal management responses has been established for areas vulnerable to coastal erosion and tidal inundation. And then it goes on to talk about avoid, prepare, adapt, accommodate, and retreat. Okay. Now, I'm just confirming that just because it says a hierarchy of coastal management responses, this particular environment strategy is not saying that one of those is a priority. Speaker 3: That's correct. That's correct. That's a hierarchy that's established internationally, really. It's an understood hierarchy about how policy makers and decision makers may use to work through their decisions around how they respond to climate change. But yes, you're absolutely correct. That doesn't... Council have still got some of those decisions to make through the CHAP project.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 Okay. And yes, that hierarchy would inform that, but no, it doesn't say which ones... Thanks. This strategy doesn't. Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Another question. Page 10 of the implementation plan, and which, by the way, is an excellent implementation plan, refers to implementing an environment and sustainability roundtable to provide a mechanism for local community groups, government, stakeholders, and experts to have an input, which is terrific. I'm wondering how you would make sure that such a roundtable is not a limited closed group, but that it actually would allow new groups and new experts and new community members to join at various times. Speaker 1: I think the key element of that is making sure there's an open application process for groups to come to us, and to have a terms of reference, which we haven't yet developed, that allows for new groups to come up. As new issues arise, we should get a whole range out of it. There's a whole range of new groups emerging. Some groups will disappear over time. So it'll come down to the terms of reference, but I would absolutely anticipate it being an open process where we put out an expression of interest for community groups to be involved in that.
00:46:00 Councillor Jackson: That's excellent. Thank you very much. A couple of other things. Under biodiversity in the implementation plan, reduce the threat of priority biosecurity risks, such as pest plants and animals on council land, and support private landholders. I'm wondering how you envision supporting private landholders to help get rid of these pest plants and animals? Speaker 1: Certainly. Well, we do it through two mechanisms already at the moment. Our pest management team already work quite largely with a lot of private properties, recognising, of course, that things like feral pigs, deers, foxes, we can't just control on council land. So we get a lot of customer requests come in around feral animal issues, and our pest management people actually provide traps. And provide support to those private property areas. The second way we do it is through our Land for Wildlife and Voluntary Conservation Agreement programs, where we have ongoing partnerships with specific private landholders that want to be involved in those things.
00:47:00 And we provide advice and support, particularly around the management of pest plants in that case. Councillor Jackson: Perfect. Okay. That's good. And leading on from that then, Craig, I guess is also the question of land for wildlife. And I've certainly had feedback that, yes, that's a good question. Many people felt that it was being under-resourced, and that those people who were participating in Land for Wildlife were not getting the help or funding. And I'm just wondering if you can say a few words about how this environment strategy proposes to go forward with this. Speaker 1: That's certainly the feedback we've received from some of our existing Land for Wildlife holders as well. The environment strategy, I think, makes very clear the role that private land conservation is going to play going into the future. The targets around the percentage of land. We want managed environmental purposes within the Shire can really only be achieved by a lot of engagement with private landholders.
00:48:00 So as you'd be aware, there's a new initiative coming up in this year's budget to hopefully increase resources of the Land for Wildlife program, which have been down over the last few years since de-amalgamation. Councillor Jackson: Excellent. Thank you very much. A couple more questions. One is page 12 of the implementation plan. Develop an integrated water monitoring network for council, community, and other agencies, including event monitoring of sediments, nutrients, and litter for Noosa and Mary catchments, which is good, and a Mary River catchment baseline and report card. Many of us, and I certainly, and I know that other councillors have been also lobbied by people concerned about dioxins and other types of chemicals in the water. So does this particular initiative invest in that? Does it include monitoring that sort of issue? Speaker 1: It wouldn't typically. An issue like dioxin is very much a one-off specific monitoring requirement, not necessarily an ongoing long-term one.
00:49:00 So while you're correct, we don't necessarily have the answers we'd like to that specific issue. That would require a one-off targeted monitoring program, given the fact that it's a historic use and not a current use. The intent of this action is more around bringing together all the current organizations, community group, council, and state that are already doing water quality monitoring, often not communicating with each other in an ad hoc way, monitoring things that aren't necessarily where the data's not being used. So that's the intent of the action. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Thank you. Thanks very much. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Following up from the question there, I thought with regard to weed and pest eradication, council officers do do a lot of education with private landholders as well with regard to the weeds that are on their properties and providing an understanding of the methodologies in how they can deal with those weeds and their responsibilities as private landholders with regard to those weeds that are on their property, do they not? Speaker 1: Yeah, we certainly do. And again, there's those two broad mechanisms. Yeah. Yeah. So the pest management team tend to focus on regulatory weeds.
00:50:00 So weeds are actually listed under state legislation, but our optional is always education first, big stick later. And then we also have our private property land programs where it's more of a focus on environmental weeds, which aren't necessarily listed under state legislation. And of course, we also attend a range of events throughout the year doing education around weed issues and how people can eradicate weeds from their property. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. The reason I went on to that is you talked about land for wildlife farmers, but you didn't actually talk about the other private landholders that weren't necessarily part of that state. I have a question with regard to the implementation plan, strategy 2.1 on page seven. It talks about the Noosa River and Mary River sub-catchments within the Noosa Shire, and then it refers to a baseline report card to be developed for the Mary River sub-catchment. The question I'm asking is why we're only developing one for the Mary River sub-catchment. Is that because one already exists for the Noosa River system and that's what's undertaken in the healthy land and waterways assessment each year?
00:51:00 Speaker 1: That's absolutely correct. Sorry. Councillor Jurisevic: I just want to clarify that that was the case. I thought it was interesting that we were only developing a report card for one when, of course, a report card exists for the other. I'll talk to it if I may. Yeah. Sure. Look, I want to compliment staff. This has been a lot longer than the three years coming. It's been five years coming for me because I've been trying to, since we re-established our council to get the environment strategy and the environment tasks undertaken and to get to this stage is a credit to this council, but also to staff for the time and effort they've put in. I reiterate almost all of the comments of Councillor Stockwell. There's no point reiterating them again. But in particular, I want to mention the stakeholder engagement in this and how well that's been handled. I think that's an exemplar. And I reflect Councillor Stockwell's comments with regard to the broad acceptance of the community in this.
00:52:00 I think having everybody along and engaged through the process has led to a document that everybody can hold up proudly and adhere to. And I look forward to much of the implementation or further elements of the implementation plan being undertaken. But again, a credit to yourself and the staff. I pray and to you, Kim, for the work done in this plan. I think it's a brilliant plan and will hold us proud for many years to come. Councillor Jackson: Yes, I would also like to speak to the environment plan. Developing an environment strategy was a very challenging task because there were so many environment plans and activities already in place, such as the Noosa River Plan and Bushcare Management Plans. And, of course, a range of funded projects. So one of my concerns was that the environment strategy could just end up being kind of a retrofit on top of what already existed and not actually add any value.
00:53:00 But, you know, I have been absolutely very happy and my fears are totally allayed. You have, as a council staff, done a large amount of work, consultation and analysis, and have provided a true overarching framework for the development of an environment strategy. Which then allows for ongoing gap analysis to identify what is and what is not being done. And that includes the things that already are being done. And, in fact, the implementation plan that's now been included as part of this project does just that. It fills in some of the gaps of the things that haven't been addressed by other projects. The environment strategy pleases me also because it's a very logical piece of analysis. Relating to four themes, biodiversity, waterways, wetlands, and coasts, sustainable living, and climate change adaptation.
00:54:00 And I'm very comfortable, and I believe this is a very logical way of proceeding, that it defines clearly principles, goals, strategies, outcomes, targets, performance indicators, and measurement methods. So it all flows together and ends up measuring what is and what is not being done. And I'm very happy with that. Furthermore, I think the environment strategy is full of gems. And if you read it, you find them. And in little surprise spots. In particular, I really like the environment principles because they're not actually just about the environment. They're about the community and about the people of Noosa. And they emphasize that the community together will be building shared values, understanding, and appreciation of Noosa's natural environment. That the community together will be building strong partnerships, whole of community effort
00:55:00 to protect and enhance the environment, to conserve its resources. Again, that it will preserve indigenous cultural heritage as part of our environment, and engage with traditional owners about matters affecting the environment. And finally, also recognizing the interconnections between people and the environment. So I really commend all the staff from the Environment Services area and especially Craig and Kim for this excellent strategy which I believe provides a good blueprint for Noosa's future endeavours. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Other councillors wish to speak? I'd like to say that the strength of these two plans, the strategy and the implementation plan, is the process by which they were put together.
00:56:00 That was capturing the passion and the expertise of community groups that have had a long and genuine engagement with the environment on that level. And that underpins the integrity of these documents combined with the staff's expertise. I'd also like to commend in particular Brian Stockwell for starting off that process of getting those groups together and also Joe has been involved from the start. But the collaborative way that it's proceeded, we've all felt involved in putting it together. But at its core it's got a very strong foundation because it does involve those community groups who have had a long and genuine engagement. So I too would like to reiterate congratulations to staff and also to the community groups who have put it together.
00:57:00 Brian would you like to close? Yeah I will close. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think the unofficial slogan for the environment strategy will forever be, come to Noosa you can wave at the whales. Do they wave back? And I think Councillor Pardon, obviously a great champion for fishing and that is when the environment takes meaning to people in different ways. And for those who like to go and sit on the water, some of them catch fish, some pretend to, that is their most meaningful engagement with nature. It is how they connect and it's really important that we look at, as we have in this strategy, the various ways that people do connect with the environment and we take initiatives. Councillor Jackson rightly identified that the structure of these documents is really professional land. The Monitoring Evaluation Act component, while boarding to most, it sets the targets, it sets the outcomes and there's some ambitious ones.
00:58:00 We will probably be the only council in a developed area on the coast of Queensland that has a target to have 50% of its land protected for environmental conservation purposes. Councillor Jackson: That is a massive target. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We're talking about targets about reducing the time to catch a fish when you're in a boat. That is a great target. And Councillor Pardon also sort of said it's going back a bit further than just two and a half years. Sure, this process of development is two and a half years and we've had, you know, since 1962 when after Harold first formed the Noosa Parks Association, probably locally, is significant in terms of the last minute to midnight in this environment. So there was one I meant to highlight and that is we can't lose sight of the fact that for 13,000, 14,000 years at least on these coastal areas, we've had traditional owners who have been managing this environment and it's really great to see that one of the things emerging in the Implementation Plan
00:59:00 is this commitment to work in partnership with a range of stakeholders, including the Kabi Kabi, to provide on-river presence, deliver a range of environmental and education programs to support compliance and regulation. So I think that's another area where we could really go well. I do take Councillor Wellington's clarification to heart. Actually, looking at my notes, I didn't say one year, I said two, but my mind was going to the fact that it was last year's financial year budget where it was the first really meaningful investment in renewables and energy efficiency jointly. We're doing great work on ZEN in this term of Council. It obviously was not meant to be a criticism of what we had done, but a sad state of affairs for the globe that we wait until it's too late to take action on serious environmental problems. I do acknowledge that Councillor Wellington's leadership on that particular strategy has been exemplary throughout this term.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 I noticed also the question about how new groups get involved, which is a really useful question, and about the environmental round-table. We have great lots of expertise. We've got the ex-head of CSIRO is also the lead scientist. The environment protection agency for Victoria is sitting amongst us. And we might have new, young, enthusiastic people. And that's why we have the proposed two tier structures, is an environment strategic round-table, the people who really like getting involved at the strategic end, and the forums and the networks which we are gradually passing over for the community to lead is where all the new groups can come and learn. And they might have expertise and they might be suitable to go up. So that sort of two-step process to ensure that everyone can feel involved is important. I think Councillor Jurisevic, in terms of his contribution in terms of the weeds and the fact that a lot of the hard work is done at the most basic level, I think that's important to acknowledge that not only do the community do it, but we have staff who are actually out there working with the community as intended to here.
01:01:00 And that's where I'd like to finish off. No, it's not. Where I'd like to finish off. I think it's important. We'd like you to finish. I know you would like me to finish, but there is an important point to be made. It's really good that the CEO has been trumped and that we have now got one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, is it? Different roles of council. Good one. And I'd like to highlight the one in terms of an action in there which is not what we're looking down, but we're looking up. And that's about advocacy. Okay? And the advocacy new initiative is about advocating for mandating minimum energy efficiency and renewable energy generation to all new development in the Shire, including domestic residences. And this is one of my biggest regrets about the draft plan that we put out to the community, because the state government are putting regressive dinosaur policy hurdles in the way of us making
01:02:00 the commitment that our community wants us to make. They think building certifiers should tell us how to respond to climate change. And the state government should hang their head in shame by not allowing us to put that out to the draft plan. And I think it's just as important that we really call a spade a spade and say, state government, get your act together. The world needs to take urgent action on climate change. Councillor Wilkie: But we've been very grateful for the help they've given us on that. Yeah. I knew it. We lost our money. Yeah. I put the motion. Those in favour? Against? Carried. Thank you. Well done, Craig. Thanks, Craig. Well done, Craig. Speaker 7: Yeah. Great work. Yeah. That was the easy bit. Councillor Wilkie: Do it. Do it. Do it. Do it. Do it. Do it. Do it. Do it. Do it. No, it's the Environment Levy Land Acquisition Program update, and it's here because there's an additional, there's a change to it which is for all councillors to consider before they finalise it.
01:03:00 Ah, yeah, good. Councillor Jackson: I'd like to move that. Councillor Wilkie: Moved by Councillor Jackson, seconded by Councillor Glasgow. Any questions for the, for Peter, Ingrid? Councillor Jackson: Yes, I do have questions. Peter, I wonder, I've actually had some comments from residents about there being more properties purchased on the coastal end of the world, of the Shire than the Hincheland. I wonder if you could talk a bit about the conservation land guideline which council approved last year, and about what, how that sets some prioritisation for land purchases.
01:04:00 Speaker 6: Sure. Most of our large core protected areas are on the coastal fringe actually. We do have some further west, Wundum and South West Cooroy are also core areas, but the large bulk of it is actually on the coastline. And also when we do the, when we went through that process of the biodiversity assessment report, most of those, the high, highest value or the identified threatened species, most of those occurred in the coastal zone actually. So that's why the conservation land guideline is probably geared more towards that. Councillor Jackson: Did you say core protective areas? Yeah. Can you explain that because I don't think everyone does understand. Okay. Speaker 6: So the major core protected areas are Kooloola National Park, running through to Noosa. Then you've got the Noosa National Park. There's a National Park corridor running right down to, towards Kooloola. And then you've got the, the Tewantin State Forest National Park core protected area.
01:05:00 So that's another bulk sort of area in the centre of the Shire. Councillor Jackson: Whose are these core protected, whose are core protected areas? Speaker 6: They're made up of National Park and State Forest. So that's what that means. Yeah. Okay. Councillor Jackson: Thank you. Speaker 6: And then the Wundum National Park area and South West State Forest. Yeah. Okay. Councillor Jackson: So that implies something for the future about our prioritisation? Speaker 6: Yeah. So the conservation land guideline is, is about building those core protected areas. So expanding, but also linking them up as well with, with corridors. And again, most of those opportunities are actually more focused on the coastal zone. But you know, in saying that, if you look at the Ural Ringtail State Forest, most of that area is actually in the Mary River catchment. Yeah. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: And I think it's a good point to look at the land acquisitions that have actually occurred, I mean there are. Como, Pomona, Pomona, Cooran, Como, I mean there's a number of, Cooroibah, Pomona.
01:06:00 Councillor Wilkie: On that score more than half of them are in the hinterland. That's right. Hinterland acquisitions occurring through there. Mayor Wellington: Depends where you draw the line for hinterland. That's the problem. Is Boren Point hinterland or not, you know, it's tricky. Councillor Jurisevic: And a large number of the acquisitions of late have been in that town. In that area, in the Boree Point area. Councillor Wilkie: So, Euro or Ringtail, you wouldn't classify that as coastal? No. That's hinterland. Speaker 6: Again, it's the definition of what the coast is. So, personally, I'd say that, you know, Pomona, Euro would be hinterland. But when you get down here on Ringtail, down at Caluthin, that's more coastal because you're in your tidal areas. Councillor Pardon: It's right up there at the reaches of Tarangal, the old car farm. Speaker 6: It's right up the north-west of the Shire, yeah, top end of Kalool. Yeah, that's a big chunk of hinterland. Councillor Pardon: For the coast, we're the way to the whales along the beach. That's the hinterland. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think it'd be easier to, rather than talk about hinterland and coast,
01:07:00 talk about the bi-geographic regions, you know, all the catchments. Because, obviously, all the Noosa catchment is a coastal catchment. It's a series of quantum lagoon that's been built largely over, you know, has formed over since the last ice age. Whereas the Mary River catchment has been, around since the Tertiary Times, hundreds of millions of years. So there's actually great change in both the species and the nature of the environments. And, you know, while we think in council terms of coastal hinterland, it really is, it's quite unique sense. And, to me, the important things about the linkage to core protected areas is not, you know, the old days we used to talk about connectivity, which would allow the feral animals a nice, narrow spot to run along and catch all the native animals. What we're looking at is, what are the large chunks, like the ring-tailed urol, where we can start seeing large movements of species as climate changes. Mayor Wellington: Excuse me, Mr. Chair, we're talking to a motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, no, we're not, are we?
01:08:00 Answer to a question. And the question, I think. Councillor Jurisevic: Do you agree? Ingrid has more questions. Okay. Yeah, put the question mark at the end of that statement. Councillor Jackson: I have a couple more questions that I've been asked by residents, and it's relating to the dot points. On page 123, where there are a list of the different types of parcels. And one question is, so some of these clearly have been transferred to National Park and to State Conservation Park, et cetera, but some of them are not. They seem to be just freehold parcels. So are all of these parcels in any way protected from future development or compulsory purchase by other governments? Like, is there some protection on these lands? Speaker 6: Through the planning scheme, mostly. So the smaller parcels of land that have been purchased in the past, they're actually too small to be dedicated as a nature refuge.
01:09:00 So under the Nature Conservation Act, there is no sort of catch there for protection. So we rely on the planning scheme, but we also rely on council resolution, and also we have management plans over those parks, which can also be adopted by council resolution as well. So it's a management agreement about how that land is. Councillor Jurisevic: They become council reserves in the line? Speaker 3: Yeah. So most will be zoned conservation, if not all. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Okay. So that is protected already. Yeah. And there are some management plans in place. Speaker 1: Yeah. Councillor Jackson: Not for all of them. Not for all. Yeah. And another question I had from also a resident was around the last dot point, which is a parcel transferred with water and sewage assets to Unity Water in 2010. And obviously that was when Unity Water took over water management from the council. Can you explain what land that refers to? Speaker 6: Sure. There's a small parcel. It's only 377 square meters.
01:10:00 So it's smaller than a house block, but it's actually right on the point of Boring Point. Oh. Speaker 7: Have a look on page 131 of the agenda. You'll see it's listed there in the second part of Buffalo Park at Boring Point. Councillor Jackson: Oh, okay. Speaker 7: Yep. In the table. In the table. Yeah. So the second one down. Councillor Jackson: Buffalo Park. Speaker 7: Yeah. See there's two lots there. One at 377 and one at 315 meters. Yeah. So on the very right hand column you'll see that's the lot that Unity Water took as part of the transfer of assets in 2010. Councillor Jackson: So that's the second lot there. Yeah. Or both of them. No. Just one of them. One lot. Yeah. And why would they have obtained that? Because it had some sewerage assets on it. Speaker 6: Well, we don't know. No. We think it might have been because when they did that transfer of bulk assets, they would have looked on their maps to see which areas had water and sewerage infrastructure. Right. For some reason they thought that did. They took that. So that's why it went over.
01:11:00 Okay. At that time. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Or was needed for future provisions for water and sewerage infrastructure. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Maybe that was their thinking at the time. Potentially. Yeah. Yeah. We don't know exactly why. At one stage it was going to be an effort scheme. Yeah. That's what I thought. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. Any councillors wish to speak to the motion? I might speak as I think I'm muted. Of course you do. Yeah. Councillor Jackson: Look, I actually want to thank Peter and Kim for presenting this to council. It came about in a funny way because I was asked by a resident about providing all the list of properties that council had previously purchased and Peter was kind enough to deliver that information and I was able to give it to a resident. But then I thought, gee, this would be something that would interest everybody and I'm very pleased that this has been delivered as a report and is trans ... A good thing about
01:12:00 transparency, showing everyone, including myself, who had never seen this list before. I mean, it's been a terrific bit of learning about what is there. So I'm really positively impressed by the transparency of having this available and also being able to see how many of these things have in fact been transferred to park land and various areas that are protected. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Pardon: Frank. Yeah. Mr Chair. Yeah. On page 123 down the bottom, when we had that coastal land acquisition program, the state and the National Heritage Trust from the feds, I must say that to say Noosa Council was active and chasing every dollar from the state and feds we did and to partner with to buy a raft of properties. Yeah. I had the pleasure of working with Raoul Weikart on the Noosa National Heritage Trust.
01:13:00 We bought property that virtually under water at the river mouth, that was freehold property. And when they'd moved the groin or established the groin at the river mouth, a lot of the freehold property on the North Shore actually started to wash into the ocean. But those prices, and I'll go back to the prices, we're talking about 20 grand a block or something in those days along the beachfront. Some of them a bit more expensive. And I know there's interest in some of those properties. There's still one sitting there that we chased and could not get at the time. And it's still sitting there on the North Shore. And I know with interest the sea there. I would have thought that those blocks would have melded into the national park a long time ago. I mean, we sort of had to deal with the state. And it's a bit surprising that we have to go on a journey to get them into national park. But anyway, that's that.
01:14:00 Thank you. That's part of the deal. And we'll get there. Yeah. And Ingrid, I didn't know if Councillor Jackson had asked about this particular report to come up. But if you go back through the budget wish list, you'll see, Councillor, pardon us, that we can put some money forward with regards to developing some of this land and cutting parcels off to, in fact, enhance some of this land. And I think it's a great thing to do to have a look at the certain blocks that we've bought with little areas on them with little environmental value and potential blocks to sell off. And so I just think, you know, it's a good way forward and it just gives us more opportunity and we've got probably not so much land that we're looking at purchase, although we on
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 that committee, there is a committee that looks at potential purchase, but 100 acres came up recently at Boring Point and there's other opportunities, no doubt. But it's also with regards to that we've changed the policy and what we can do with this funding going forward. So. It's about being smart about it, why wouldn't I develop a piece, a small piece of a large piece if it didn't have great value environmentally to build up a pot of money to actually do a great deal more for the environment and opportunities going forward. So I think this initiative is terrific. Councillor Wilkie: Joel, is that right? That's probably right. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, Ivan got much steak in the Corry Senate.
01:16:00 There's two things I think Councillor Pardon highlighted one of the key parts of the motions that for the first time we are looking at activating the revolving fund policy, which is a new initiative brought in and will allow the environment levy dollars to be driven further to get more protection for each more bang for the buck. And I think there's a couple of blocks there that are proposed. And I think that's the first thing that we've adopted in the policy. Thank you all for your consideration, and that is a way of the future as the price of land goes up, the more innovative we can in the use of the levy funds, the better the outcome will be. I've just got one thing to say is that when you do look at this, and I got the data a year or so ago to do a presentation elsewhere, and what it shows that in 1995 it was introduced, in 23 years we accumulated a state of 1500 hectares, and last year we doubled it. And that's, I suppose, the significance of the partnership approach for the Ringtail Euro and the State Forest Plantations Queensland, and Mr Park's association.
01:17:00 It shows the significance of how, when you work together, with our friends in state government. Gee, what a turnaround. Is it really? Oh, you go hard on the topics that they understand. Anyway, so that's that. And I will say that when I did lecture, I used to have a checklist. I would tell students that we're using this as the highest priority environmental corridor for the Sunshine Coast region, and 95% of the students, 5% of the students came up with the Ringtail Euro area as the highest priority in the Sunshine Coast region. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, mentioning Euro and Ringtail, I'm just looking through the list of the environmental levy land register parcel that you got here. Is it Moe or is it not mentioned? We don't own it, Joe.
01:18:00 That's right, just wondering why it wasn't mentioned there. That was the only question I had. Speaking to it, look, I think this fits right in with the document we just spoke about five minutes ago. This is an essential element of that environment strategy going forward, getting those environmental corridors and trying to attain that 50% of environmental land within our Shire, I think is an enviable target for any council to achieve. I know the Council of the South also has an environment levy and continues to buy up significant environmental parcels. And where our biosphere already exists, they're already talking about going down that path and trying to enhance their environment by also being a biosphere as well. So that lack of understanding about a biosphere may be getting extended further than just our own ensures. But I'm sure everybody can appreciate what's trying to be achieved here and how
01:19:00 we strive to become, reach that goal of 50% of environmental land available for the future generations to appreciate within our Shire. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Are there councillors who wish to speak to the motion? Do you wish to close in? Councillor Jackson: Yes, I will. Well, I guess I'll just support some of the things that have been said, and that is it's important to see that this is an opportunity to start using this concept of a revolving fund, which is all about purchasing land and then looking to see perhaps it can be in some way subdivided or part of it protected or all of it protected and perhaps sold on again, which then allows council to buy more land for protection. Thank you. And I think that's a very clever approach. And I appreciate that the recommendation from staff is that this be done by first coming to council with business cases about particular
01:20:00 lots that might be addressed this way. So I'm looking forward to that. And I think it's also, you know, Councillor Jurisevic sort of pointed to it. It's interesting also to note that Ural ring tail forests will never be a land purchase, and that's why it's not on the list. Thank you. We're simply buying out a plantation licence, and that will then allow for this land to be transferred to National Park. So that's another example of innovative. Oh, I think Councillor CEO is shaking his head. Speaker 7: Yeah, that's not quite right. Not quite right. Just to clarify that. Okay. Under the agreement, we have a right to become trustee of the land for Conservation Park after five years. Councillor Jackson: Okay. Speaker 7: So. Councillor Jackson: For all of it. Speaker 7: Yes. For the plantation licence areas. So essentially the pine areas. Councillor Jackson: So it's state land where we become trustee after five years. So can I then ask if that
01:21:00 land after 10 years for some reason did not all get transferred to National Park, would we still continue being trustee? Speaker 7: No. Under the agreement again, after that ended, so just to clarify, so after five years, council has the right to become trustee of the land. We then do five years remediation if that's needed. And then at the end of that 10-year period, the land becomes National Park. Councillor Jackson: And if by chance, politically, there was changes of government, et cetera, and it never became National Park? Speaker 7: We have no other obligations to maintain after that period. Councillor Jackson: We would not lose the trusteeship or? Speaker 7: We could do. Or we could do it? We don't have a restoration obligation after that five years. Councillor Jackson: But the trusteeship, what would happen to that? Speaker 7: We could surrender that, I assume, with the state. But the obligation under the contract is for them to make that into National Park at the end of 10 years. Councillor Jackson: Excellent. Okay. Thank you for explaining, Boris. No worries. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. I'll put the motion. Those in favour?
01:22:00 Against? Motion's carried. Thank you, Mr. Mill. Thank you. Next up, the Community Satisfaction Survey results referred here. Thank you, Mr. Mill. So that's the significance of the issue. Councillor Jackson: I'll move it. Councillor Wilkie: Moved by Ingrid, seconded by Joe. Councillors, questions or discussion? Councillor Jackson: I'd like to ask a question. And that is actually something close to my heart because councillors will be aware that I am often a bit sceptical about surveys. And I'm particularly concerned to make sure that surveys are statistically valid and not just biased and skewed towards certain things or certain people getting a chance to answer while others don't. So I would like to ask, and I know the CEO today, Brett, is representing Deborah here today,
01:23:00 if you could talk a bit about the statistical validity and the process that this is carried out in. Speaker 7: Sure. And I have to put a rider on that I'm not an expert on this area. Deborah is the expert, but she's on annual leave. So hopefully I can cover off what you're after. Yeah, look, it's actually contained within the report which is on the agenda as well on pages eight and nine. It sets out the methodology that's used to go through this survey. Certainly the way in which we get 400 residents who are aged over 18 is to use the electronic white pages to randomly ring 400 people on... Sorry, to get 400 people. So in doing this, they've eventually spoken to about 2,400 people to say, are you interested in doing a survey? And it's a big commitment to do a survey of this length. So people say yes or no. If they say no, they're also asked about whether they just want to answer one question, you know, how do you rate the council?
01:24:00 But we got through to get those 400 people. And if someone said they were interested, they got given details of the questions, given time to think about it before they then made a time to go through the detailed survey. There's over 40 questions to go through. So we ended up with over that 400. That gives you, with 400 people on a survey, it's always better to have more than less on a survey, but you're plus or minus about 4% in terms of accuracy. The other good thing about this type of survey, which we've done every two years, it's the same survey questions with 400 people. So we've built up, if you like, a bigger pool, and you can see that there's no major variations where you're seeing sort of statistical anomalies that are coming through. So that's a good thing. One of the things we do do is compare to the state average, which is the LGOQ survey. They do a survey of 700 across the state.
01:25:00 So when you drop down to the region one, you probably don't have as much confidence in terms of that comparison at that level. They're going to do their survey again later this year. I think it's August or September or thereabouts. I think we can take some pretty good comfort when we're comparing our scores to the state average, perhaps not quite as much when you're comparing it to the regional averages. But again, when we see their regional averages, when they come out later this year, again, we'll have a couple of years of survey statistics to look at. So I don't know if that covers what you're looking at. Yeah, it does, yeah. That's a good summary of how they went about their methodology. Councillor Wilkie: Thanks. Councillor Glasgow: Thanks. Councillor Wilkie: Just to kick it off. Councillor Jackson: Sure, I will. Well, thank you, Brett, for summarizing that. And I think that is satisfying to me that it is a random survey that people are requested to ask and also that there are the same questions used right across Queensland, which I think allows this to be benchmarked
01:26:00 against other councils in a fair way. And I think this is our second time we're doing it. So that's furthermore, we're going to get some interesting statistics to see. In fact, we are finding some of it is consistent with the previous survey two years ago. And that's actually got a lot of face validity. I'm interested also to see that, well, previously, we benchmarked very highly against other councils. We did very well in terms of all our ratings. And we are about to find out how we rate this year when the other councils do all their rating. It's interesting to me because that sort of aligns a bit with a couple of years ago. We also had the University of Canberra do a rural and regional well-being survey. And it turned out that the people in Noosa Shire feel very good. They rate themselves well on all sorts of dimensions of well-being.
01:27:00 So perhaps it's not surprising that our satisfaction survey, customer satisfaction survey, is also quite positive. This is colloquially known statistically as something called the halo effect. And what happens is when people feel reasonably good about something, they have a tendency to rate higher in general so that it sort of masks some aspects which can be a little bit hidden there. So it's important not to just say, well, you know, where are we compared to other councils, but also to say, where are we rating compared to ourselves and which things are high and which things are low. In particular, I think this survey also does something very good and that is that it asks people first how important they consider something is and then they ask them to rate it. And so you can actually have a look and see amongst the things that are the most important to people,
01:28:00 which ones they then rated high and low. And it's particularly interesting here that amongst the things most highly considered important, that the high performance ratings came to the libraries and other information access, which I assume includes the website, but the library's high importance and getting a high rating and should be congratulated because I think that is something that would be confirmed by all residents. Waste management rates as high importance and also rates really high. And development of tourism is also rated as important and high and disaster management and information services. Also very high are indoor and outdoor staff. High importance and high rating. And then followed by community safety and community services.
01:29:00 So those are all really highlights in Noosa. In contrast, there are also some where people have rated highly important, but have said that they don't feel that the performance is as high. In other words, they've rated lower, low. And this is important to us because this is where we can be learning on where we should focus our efforts. Of interest is that the reports says that these areas that have been rated lower or low, the lowest performers, which are considered important by people, are actually the same ones that happened two years ago. So it's consistent, but it's something that we should be focusing on. So what are the concerns of, what are the ones that are rated lowest and yet considered important? Parking, public transport, economic development, traffic management.
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 Gee, these sound familiar. Road maintenance, footpaths, curbing and guttering, road construction, responding to the community, and consulting with the community. Then town planning and drainage and flood mitigation. So some of these things we're so aware of and we are working on, but we are also aware that they still haven't been fully delivered. And this is the feedback we're getting. I think this is making this survey a very valid, a face valid one, because it fits with the things we consider priorities. So, you know, I commend the work that's been done to carry out the survey. And I commend this council for doing this in order to get this kind of feedback and continue progressing. Mayor Wellington: Tony. Yes, Councillor Jackson refers to the halo effect, which of course then leads to a cause and effect. Argument. In other words,
01:31:00 are our residents ranking their council highly because they're happy with their community and happy with their place in the community? Or are they ranking us highly because we are in fact providing them with that in part happiness with regard to their sense of confidence about their community? In other words, to what extent is council influencing their wellbeing and thus their rating council reasonably well in terms of its performance? And it's not an easy answer. You know, you would have to do an awful lot of delving and analysing to come up with the answer. Councillor Jackson referred to the high performing areas. And I do want to credit council staff, because basically a lot of the high performing areas do identify staff in terms of libraries, customer service and the quality of our staff. If you go then to the areas for improvement, which Councillor Jackson read out, in actual fact, they're inevitable, some of them. No one will ever be satisfied with the amount of parking
01:32:00 that any council provides anywhere. So it's inevitable that parking is going to come up. Public transport's not even a council issue. It is in that we work with the transport provider, but we don't actually have core responsibility for public transport. Yet we're being judged in terms of our performance on public transport. But if you look at those areas for improvement and Councillor Jackson read out consulting with the community and responding to the community, if you go to page 73 of the actual report, you will find that we have already improved our performance on the last survey in both those areas. In consulting with the community on a scale of five, we went from 3.48 to 3.61 in the current year. In terms of responding, that's consulting, in terms of responding to the community, we went from 3.49 to 3.59. So obviously things are improving. You have to take with a grain of salt sometimes the areas for improvement, because the graph there is different to the areas under high performance and average performance.
01:33:00 In fact, the graph in the report, the table and the bar graph are about the gap, as Councillor Jackson correctly pointed out, between what customers think is important and where they tend to rank their council. But as I say, in a lot of those areas there's always going to be a gap. I can't imagine a time ever when issues like parking and traffic management there isn't going to be a gap between what people would idealise and what council can in fact deliver. But I just do want to go back to this, the table on page 73 of the report, which is about how we are ranked in performance in terms of customer service and communication. And on every single identified question, we are ranked higher now in 2019 than we were in 2017. That includes customer service information, information services, informing the community, a very important one where we've gone up, consulting the community, responding to the community,
01:34:00 and providing leadership and advocacy on all of those we have gone up since 2017. And I think that's a credit to the entire council and the councillor team. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Pardon and Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, I'd just like to endorse those comments from the Mayor. Look, it's no good us patting ourselves on the back. Our staff have worked that hard continuously since demodulation, and I can't thank them enough. They make us look good. Pretty hard to make me look good, but they do their best. And, you know, but the thing is, as the Mayor said, we'll always have gaps and weaknesses, and we'll just keep working and working hard to improve on those weaknesses. And I'm not surprised with regards to libraries and the surveys. When you think what the State Library thinks of our library,
01:35:00 I mean, we're top of the poll. We're right up there in that regard, not only local but statewide. And that's why we get so many grants and things like that. And that's just so much credit to the staff. The library, everyone knows, I don't think I've ever read a book in my life. I read all the council reports. That teaches me a lot of information. But yeah, you just, I just can't say enough about the staff right across the board. And we'll just keep working away as we do. We have a job to do and continue to do it. And work for the 20 odd percent of what is out there. You know, 74, 75 percent are satisfied or very satisfied. We'll just keep working for the 25 percent or 20 percent who aren't so satisfied. That's all I can say about it. But the staff, I just can't say enough about.
01:36:00 Thank you, our staff. Speaker 7: Yeah. Councillor, I'll just jump in. One of the things I'll do once this goes through council is put out information to all the staff about the results of the survey. So I'll probably put that out early next week. But a CEO would be remiss of me if I didn't also echo the comments today about the staff. You know, the people who get up at 5.30 in the morning and put the lane ropes out of the pool or, you know, working, fixing roads, parks, whatever it might be. We've got awesome staff here. And we really need to take this moment to acknowledge them because these results are incredible when you compare them to other councils. Other CEOs would die for these results. They're fantastic. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Brian. Yes, and that ends where I was going to start, is that our lowest scores are the 10-year stretch targets for many councils. OK, that's where they'd like to be. I think the interesting conversation about the impact of wellbeing
01:37:00 and the link back to our previous discussion with the environment is lots of research that shows that people's connection to nature, having nature close to where they live, having been able to get out and just once a week walk in nature, has a huge... Mayor Wellington: Positive. The new research says you need to do it twice a week for genuine health benefits. It came out last week. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, well, much more than that. But the thing is that that's what contributes to wellbeing. And what we're seeing is it's an upward spiral, that the more you look after the place where people live, the happier they are, the more satisfied they are, the more people come to work and perform well. So that's, you know, our staff aren't less part of this community than we are. So it's all about creating where you want to live. It's also a great place to work. I did want to highlight just one thing because at Councillor Jackson's suggestion, this time we included an open-ended question at the end about what people thought
01:38:00 were the greatest challenges in the next few years. And that's interesting and it was a question that I also asked in the Hinterland survey. And so in the blue there, you have the results of, I think, 120 from memory, obviously how many I had, responses last year to the whole Shire survey this time. And you see that roughly the priority order is about the same, that concerns about population growth and the impact of population growth is still the highest concern in terms of what they think the greatest challenge is. When you look at combining both Hinterland and Coast, you see that the concerns about traffic congestion, about parking and public transport, is what's missed off there, is a little bit higher. You get over to the number six there, where it's a lot higher, which is about meeting development and infrastructure needs. And that was a lot of the people saying, you know, that infrastructure will, you know, the greatest challenge will be having infrastructure that keeps up with population growth. So there's a lot more of that sort of comment here.
01:39:00 Balancing environment and nature, that's interesting, the Hinterland and the Coast. The other one... Hang on, please. Mayor Wellington: It's not Hinterland and Coast, it's Hinterland and Shire as a whole. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Hinterland and Shire, sorry. So it could be half the people in the green are Hinterland. That's true. Yes, true. Yes. No, I'm saying it's interesting when you look at, if there is any difference when you look at the whole Shire versus just Hinterland. Let's not say Hinterland versus Coast. I know, we don't want to perpetuate that. Thank you. We are one. We are many. We are one. That's a beautiful comment. Thank you. But when you consider the whole Shire, the concept of the impact of tourism and the growth in day trippers and over tourism was much, you know, almost double in the survey results this time. And that's quite an interesting result. And that's certainly on the street is what I'm hearing a lot more of too. So it's interesting to see that the comparison
01:40:00 that down here there is that feeling that is going to be a continuing challenge to this community. That's all I have to say. Councillor Jurisevic: Jack, would you agree you're mincing with one word? Yes. I am, you are, we are, we are Australia. Look, I'm glad, glad to see, glad to see the results of surveys like this. Surveys, as a number of the councillors have said, have got to be taken with a grain of salt. I mean, we've got 400 people out of the Shire of 53,000 to give an indication that have the time and the resources to sit down and respond. And look, I thank those people for taking the time to compare apples with apples necessarily. I mean, if you ask 400 people today how they felt when you ask the different 400 people how they felt you get 800 different responses. So, surveys are indicative only,
01:41:00 but the indications here are that we're, you know, we seem to be doing a reasonable job but one, one that's accepted. Of course, a lot of the, the responses in those areas are improvement, park facility, public transport. Some are in our, in our control, some aren't and some are, you know, budget dependent. We may not, we never please all the people all the time but hopefully we please most of the people most of the time and that's what I think we aim for is trying to, trying to achieve at least a modicum of success with, with the budgetary restraints and so on. So, look, I think it's a credit for staff and the way that they, they handle themselves. Often difficult tasks and, and in difficult circumstances that they are, they're trying to, trying to deal with the public at, at times. So it's, it's always a challenge. Again, you never know if you've got a person on a good day or a bad day when they're doing a survey where they've just got a parking ticket or, or they've just had a pothole filled out in front of their place. So, I mean,
01:42:00 you know, what, what sort of an impact that has. But the indications are we're doing a fairly reasonable job. We're doing better than other councils and, and I think we, you know, staff and, and the councils can take, take credit for the results but never rest on your laurels. That's right. Always look for ways of improving and enhancing the opportunities of dealing with our community and, and meeting their needs for the future. Yes. Councillor Glasgow: Yeah, I'm a bit disillusioned with my friend here to my right, you know, with all these, not thinking about apples and apples and surveys. The bottom line is that the statistics say we are doing really, really well and all of us come from very different, diverse backgrounds of the community and we all agree that our people and constituents are really, really happy. You can only go on the local Facebook pages these days and see, you know, all the uproars and all the ins and outs and Brian, I, I will notice that you did mention that eco-tourism thing but you just did get schooled by the time on Facebook and I was wondering if you remember about that
01:43:00 because you, you wrote about tourism and nursing functions so it was obviously very convenient but our constituents are very happy and I don't sometimes agree with the fact that it is for wine and people and the statistics do say and I want to make it known that 70, 73% of something is better than 73% of nothing so. Councillor Jurisevic: It depends on whether it's a good thing or a bad thing. Councillor Wilkie: It's, we're not, we're not a shire without challenges or a council without challenges. It's a small shire with a limited budget and determined, we're charged with the stewardship of a very beautiful part of the world and dedicated to providing quality services and facilities within a limited budget and it's been said before that the staff are to be credited with a lot of these, the, the resources
01:44:00 and the results here that, you know, 75, around 75% of people rate council services and facilities as good or very good and it's the frontline staff that are there and are to be credited with helping us achieve that, that result. And the heartening thing is when you look at all the Noosa Council's ratings when compared to the state averages especially the average and the, the area for improvement and we do have areas for improvement and we will keep working at it and we're still looking pretty good compared to what other councils have to contend with. We're very gratifying and thank the residents for their support. Brian. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I don't know if I'm super indulged but I want to move an amendment. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, what's the amendment? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: To add a, a second clause which the council places on record
105 minutes in ¶
01:45:00 it's formal, no, Kate, help me, it's formal thanks for the efforts of Noosa Council staff in achieving, in achieving the continued improvement and significant positive results. I'll second it. We're all seconding it. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. And if anyone wants to look at that word. I'm just trying to get your name on the. Yeah, no, it's, it's, Councillor Wilkie: You've missed out so far. I have. I'm not here. Speaker 7: You'll need to deal with the amendment. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. So you're supposed to speak to the amendment or has it all been said? It is. Would any councillor like to speak to the amendment? I think you've all said it. Okay, I put the amendment. Those in favour? Members, it becomes part of the motion. And I'm just going to go to the point. Would you like to exercise your right of the point?
01:46:00 Councillor Jackson: I would simply thank Councillor Stockwell for adding that amendment. That's an excellent thing and well deserved. Thank you very much to staff. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, I put the motion. Those in favour? Against? Motions carried. Okay. We go up to item 7, which is the Planning and Environment Court Appeal No. 2881 of 2018 Enforcement Notice Issue which in this airfield, Lake Wyver Drive and Eany Creek Road, Noosaville. Moved by Councillor Jurisdict, seconded by Councillor Wellington. Any questions of staff? Councillor Jurisevic: Any councillors wish to speak to it? Just a question. Is there a time frame for cleaning up of the areas in question? Speaker 2: Yes, it's part of the mediation agreement. So within 90 days of the mediation agreement, they were required to remove the... contaminated fill material from the site and then they're required from the day of council agreement to settle 90 days to submit the rehab plan and for when we approve the rehab plan, 90 days to complete the works.
01:47:00 So we have already received a rehabilitation plan, so it won't be too far away. Councillor Jurisevic: Very good. So when is the 90 days? Speaker 2: For the rehabilitation, from the day we approve their rehabilitation plan. Councillor Jurisevic: And the... The clean-up? Speaker 2: The clean-up of the fill was 90 days from the mediation agreement, which was April 23rd or something. Councillor Jurisevic: So that should pretty much have been completed by now. Speaker 2: Well, I think that, well, May, June, they've got probably a little bit longer. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, not that long. Speaker 2: Alright. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And just to clarify, in the report, the mediation agreement doesn't go to the land use issues, it only goes to the bridge? Speaker 2: Correct. That's right. So the land use issue hasn't been addressed.
01:48:00 It's a separate matter. We'll have to proceed. And we've been getting more complaints about the use of the airfield, too. And that's it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is it going to be the only place that gets helicopters with a plane improvement? In that area? Are there any commercial flights going to other facilities? But I wouldn't... Are you speaking to a coach in the line? I'm speaking out of turn. Nearby. Councillor Wilkie: Nearby. That's unusual. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Councillor Wilkie: Any councillors wish to speak to the motion? No, I'm fine. Okay. I'll put the motion in favour. Okay. Motion is carried. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you, Kerry. Thank you, Kerry. Councillor Wilkie: We now come to the last item, which has been my national report for May. Direct to the committee on page 11. Have we got Crib? Speaker 7: It's on its way. Kyle's just getting in.
01:49:00 Councillor Pardon: I can't work out where the hell I'm on the ground. How do we get so much money on 2.6? Speaker 4: There he is. Thank you, Trent. Councillor Wilkie: Questions for Trent. Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: Trent, statement of financial position, attachment 2. Looking at current and non-current assets and actual year to date, this is as of 31st of May. We've got a month to go until the end of financial year. I'm looking at the variation between cash and cash equivalents in the current assets and the investments and property plant and equipment in the non-current assets. There's quite a difference between them. We're going to, is there anything going to happen in the last month that's going to bring
01:50:00 them close to the current budget or, we're talking in cash and cash equivalents, we're talking what? 15 mil? Yes. Or 14 and a half mil? Correct. And in investments, we're talking 13? Yes. And in property plant and equipment, we're talking something like $24 million difference between the actual and current. Can you explain the, so you're giving a variation, see? Speaker 4: Through the Chair, Councillor, the cash and cash equivalents difference will be due to the two items. One will be the forecast early loan repayment that will happen on the 30th of June, $10 million. So that'll be 10 out of that? Yes. And the remainder will be the timing of the capital works program in terms of potential carryovers or savings at end of financial year in terms of where we're tracking as at the end of May. Councillor Jurisevic: With regards to property plant and equipment? Speaker 4: In terms of the cash. So obviously the timing of our spend for our capital program. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. That's in the current assets. What about the non-current assets? Speaker 4: The non-current assets.
01:51:00 Those three categories. So with the property plant and equipment, part of that is obviously the timing of when we actually physically capitalise that capital works as well as taking up any revaluations of the assets at end of financial year through the end of year statement. So we do revaluation. Councillor Jurisevic: So capital works that aren't complete won't be capitalised. So they'll be, they'll be, they'll be. Okay. Yep. Investments, $13 million? Investments. I thought we were pretty much on target. Speaker 4: Investments, Councillor, are in relation to we separate our assets into investment properties and PP&Es. So for example, Sunrise Beach Shops is valued annually at $13 million. So that would be based on its future return yield. So that would be reassessed against there. The other component of the investments is our share in Unity Water. Councillor Jurisevic: So it's still to be realised in the last. Speaker 4: So it's just, it's just a timing issue in terms of the capital. Councillor Wilkie: Before the end of financial year. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Sorry if I missed, if this was included in Joe's question.
01:52:00 Yes. But the difference between the current budget Tewantin cash and cash equivalent into the actual. Yes. So the current budget Tewantin cash is. Is timing of capital wage. Speaker 4: Correct. Timing of the. And the 10 million repayment. 10 million repayment. 10 million repayment. Councillor Jurisevic: 10 million repayment is a significant payment. Speaker 4: That's the first of the payment. Councillor Wilkie: We'll go up 30 June. Speaker 4: Correct. So if we look at our current. Councillor Wilkie: That's still to be included in the current budget. Speaker 4: Because we, we have, we're forecasting a closing balance of $53 million. Our current balance is $68 million of cash. By the time we get to 30 June, we'll have $10 million come out, which will bring us back to 58. And then there's the difference between our five mil potentially of, of understanding in our capital works program. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: The other question I have is just looking at the total community equity at the end of 2018, it was 998 million. We're predicting over 1 billion at the end of 2018. Is this the first time we've broken the 1 billion?
01:53:00 I thought I've seen, we've been more than 1 billion before. How is this? Yeah. Yes. Speaker 4: So. Councillor Wilkie: Is this the, the asset re-evaluation? Yeah. I can answer that councillor. Speaker 4: So last, last financial year we, we began, began the asset data improvement project of actually working through the value of our assets and reaffirming and doing a stock take. Obviously quite a large job. The first tab off the rank was our sealed roads. So before we had started this exercise, we were, we were tipping the scales just over a billion dollars. When we actually did the stock take, it brought the, the value of property, plant, plant and equipment down. So it then in turn brought community equity just slightly back under that billion dollar mark. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. Thank you. Councillor, does anyone have a question? Ingrid. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. You have been referring to the 10 million that we were voting for. And I'm wondering when, given that the reserve bank has just dropped interest rates, when will we review whether we should be paying off some more of that, given that we have reserves, given that we're paying 6% on that loan and could be changing that later to a lower percentage loan?
01:54:00 Speaker 4: We will, it is our intention to review at least annually. So as we come into the budget process again in November, December, once we know our cash position, following things like successful grants for Hinterland Playground, we'll be able to at least reassess annually what that surplus looks like long term. And at that point we'll be able to be in a position whether we look at paying some more of that off. So at this point in time, there'll be no change for at least December. Councillor Jackson: Why would we continue carrying a loan at this point? Because we're going to be paying that 6% when theoretically you could pay it off and then get a loan at a lower rate. Speaker 4: Because every time, we also consider that every time we make a repayment, depending on
01:55:00 the term remaining on the loan, we make a market adjustment. So it means that we have to pay that up front. Councillor Jackson: It's like a fee. Speaker 4: That's right. It's a fee. Unless we have the surplus available in our P&L, our profit in the current year to pay that fee up front, then the current year will actually go into deficit, and that breaches our financial sustainability policy. So if we reassess in December how much surplus cash we have, plus also how our operating surplus is tracking, and we're likely to be in a position by the 30th of June next year where we have enough surplus to pay up front again, then if combined we can make that assessment. Speaker 3: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: The Councillor's wish to speak to the report. Councillor Pardon: Oh, just... Yeah, I'd just like to thank Trent and staff. We need a mover and a seconder. Sorry, I'll move it. You're good, I think. Just a seconder. Oh, my God. Sorry, about my fault.
01:56:00 He means no. Councillor Glasgow: It's Jim. Councillor Pardon: Sorry. Yeah, I'd just like to thank our staff once again, finance staff, for their report. The report's self-explanatory. It shows we're tracking very well. Yes, capital works expenditure. We're a bit behind. It'd be interesting to see where we end up as of the 1st of July or the end of June. We've got a lot of, you know, it's timing issues. We've got a lot of work in train out there, and in timing when invoices come in, et cetera. Often we don't know till the end of July where we're actually at until we pay those invoices for that work. But in the big picture, 2.6 reduction. In terms of return, we continue to punch above our weight, you know. Bloomberg, whoever they are, some of them internationally, 2%. They set a benchmark. It's a worldwide benchmark. And so staff's investing policies, they're actually tracking above that, which gives
01:57:00 us a great return on investment. And some of the questions with regards to the 10 million, yes, 6.2%. Why wouldn't we pay less? Why wouldn't we pay off the 10 million? We have a $20 million surplus. The other 10 million, as we've discussed, is a bit of a buffer zone as well. Heaven help us, get hit by cyclones, some unforeseen thing smacks the Shire. We have this reserve of money instantly, rather than having to go through a process of borrowing, et cetera. But Councillor Jackson's question, very pertinent there. I personally, we all hate debt. If we can pay it off, we do. And maybe, as Trent has already said, we can have a look in the future. We continue to put on surpluses and pay an upfront fee. And I think it was something like $1.2 million or something, all the figures.
01:58:00 I'm close. That was the price we had to pay to the penalty. It's like any loan you take out. If you don't have a loan, you don't have to pay it. You can pay it off early. If it's a fixed loan in the contract, you will incur a penalty. And that's what's happened here. But we've worked out, over time, it's worth about $300,000, something like that, annually, that this council can spend going forward. I'll tell you what, any future council that comes along here is elected. Council is elected in the future. Man, wouldn't I like to be part of this council? You know, it's tough. I think we're down to about $29 million or something then, and thus still carrying $10 million possibly to pay off, which would bring it down to $19 million, and then you'd have your repayment through the Treasury at probably 2.9% or 3% of interest rates, as Ingrid pointed out, as Jack pointed out, that'd be incurred again.
01:59:00 So what a powerful position. That money that you normally pay back can go into more services. It's just brilliant. So I'd just congratulate staff for all their work financially, and councillors for their prudence. And I guess I wasn't one who's prudent, I'm always trying to spend it, but that's me. But no, terrific. I'm with you, Frank, I'm with you. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, councillors for your attendance. Thank you to our viewers at home.