Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Wilkie: Good morning everybody and welcome to the General Committee meeting. I declare the meeting open. We begin by acknowledging the traditional owners on whose land we meet and pay our respects to their owners past, present and emerging. Mr. CEO, do we have any apologies? Speaker 8: Yes, we have an apology from the Council for Finzel. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Great. Do we have any presentations, deputations? No, none today. Okay. First item referred from the Planning and Environment Committee is the MCU190117 Development Application for a Material Change of Use for Visitor Accommodation Type 3 at 500 slash 90 Beach Road North Shore. This is the Waipu application and Kerry, some more. Speaker 8: There might be a declaration there. Councillor Wilkie: Oh, I beg your pardon. Yes. Sorry. Councillor Lorentson: That's it. Councillor Wilkie: There is a declaration. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Okay. I declare a perceived conflict of interest in this matter as defined in Section 175D of the Local Government Act due to my personal relationship with the applicant Mark Bain of Tea Tree Property Pty Ltd and the Bain family, who are family friends that have attended social events together and whose children both attended school together and served together as part of the Noosa Board Riders Club.
00:01:00 During the election, I had an election sign at Gympie Terrace petrol station. With the approval of the business owner and Mark Bain, who was the landlord of the property, I believe wholeheartedly that I can consider this item impartially and in the public interest and request you remain in the room to participate in the debate and vote on this matter. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. I just have a question probably for Councillor Lorentson. Did Mr Bain also appear in a video that was circulated during the election campaign?
00:02:00 Councillor Lorentson: I think the best way to answer that, Frank, is to explain what happened. Sure. So we were, my children and his children, and that's how the association is formed. We're friends by virtue of the relationship of our kids who went to school together at St Andrews. I was at a surf comp, the same as I was this weekend, Saturday and Sunday, state surfing comp. And I had a little bit of a hard time. I had just put my hand up to run. I decided then, I think it was six months before the election, that I was going to have a go at this and run for council. At the time at the event, there was, again, another friend, I use the word friend association, who works for Panga Productions, and she said to me I should do a video. So I took the opportunity. There was people from the Noosa Boardwriters Club. Parents from St Andrews, all whose kids surfed and were competing at this comp, I asked them if they could answer some questions in relation to divisional boundaries.
00:03:00 At no stage was I asking for them to vote for me, and I think everyone in this room and everyone in this community would also remember that I stood very proud on my platform of independence, to the point where I took zero financial assistance from everyone. I was 100% self-funded, and my mantra was I had no IOUs. I was not related to any real estate agent. I was not friends, or I wasn't part of a development group, that I stood for community and was voted, because people that know me know that I wouldn't compromise my integrity, my reputation, by betraying community trust.
00:04:00 I think that's unknowing. That was my question. Mayor Stewart: Have you received financial support? Councillor Lorentson: Absolutely zero support, and zero support from anyone during my campaign election, again, no IOUs, and in the first week which I sat in council, I actually stood, and again, I had an association because of school, spent 12 years knowing a, and I won't mention their name, but someone that I stood up in the first, I think it was our first meeting, when I asked for clarification, without any support from anyone during my campaign election, again, no IOUs, and in the first week which I sat in council, I actually stood, and again, I had an So again, I think that's demonstrative, and of my ability to remain totally impartial, and always acting in best interest. That's my reputation. Frank, yeah. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry, can you just bring that down a little bit for us?
00:05:00 Thank you. Question to the CEO, if I may. Yeah. What does the regulation say with regard to close personal associations, with regard to conflicts of interest? Speaker 8: Sure. Look, first of all, I've said this before, but I've been asked questions about conflicts of interest by councillors. It is normal for councillors to have conflicts, because you live in the community. You're members of sporting associations, or you have neighbours or friends, or whatever it might be. So it's quite normal for these types of things to arise. The trick with conflicts of interest is firstly to recognise when they might arise, to declare that they've arisen, and then have a process to deal with them. So that's, again, a fairly normal process. As always, as you've heard me say this before as well, it's almost like a continuum. If I can take an example, it might be how you've got a friend. So you've got someone you met six years ago to barbecue once. That's a one-in. But that's very different to someone who might be the best man at your wedding or a couple of years ago to have a little bit of a blow in the way of the wedding or put them up there. So in that, it's a matter of degree.
00:06:00 Similarly with election support, one in, someone after the election might say, well, I voted for you. Oh, that's interesting. And the other election is, who is your campaign manager? And within that, there's a range of support. Ultimately, the test that the councillors have to determine, and the test you've heard me talk about before is, would someone who's looking at this dispassionately or inherently think that the councillor could look at this issue in the public interest? And then they put the public interest ahead of their own personal association with the person. That's the ultimate test that you need to make. And you make that decision. And you gather the information and get that information through this process. Then they'll be able to make that call. Mayor Stewart: I've got a question. Jo mentioned the words close and personal. Would you say you have a close personal relationship with the applicant? Councillor Lorentson: Okay. I actually wrote this down, and I submitted all this information to Brett before the meeting.
00:07:00 Again, full disclosure. And Frank alerted me also to the video, which I actually hadn't remembered till then. So total full disclosure. I'm not going to risk a fine, misconduct, because someone allowed me to do that. I'm not going to risk a fine, misconduct, because someone allowed me to put a sign up. That's not who I am and what I do. Back to your question, Clare. Am I a close family friend? Over 12 years that I've known the family, and this is because our children are both in the same year and attended the same school for 12 years. I actually asked this question of my husband, who had never been over their house for dinner. Over the 12 years, we've had probably three social events together, and one was recent because both our children shared a birthday party and had the same friends. But we've actually only been to each other's house maximum. I actually struggled to think how many times we've actually had dinner.
00:08:00 But have we met each other on the beach and been at the same school events and surfing events? Absolutely. And so I need you to put that at the table. Also, I have to add that our children have actually changed schools. So in the last 12 months, we pulled our children out of St Andrews, and they now go to Sunshine State High School. And the kids actually don't see each other as often as they do. So this weekend, we just did state surfing titles. And Tim and my son, they surfed together, but we were actually sitting at opposite ends of the pool. So we didn't see each other on the beach. I went over and said, hello, as we do. Like I said, we've got 12 years of school stuff and history together. But the association with my children is actually getting less frequent now that we've changed school. And I think any parent at this table knows that that's often the case. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor, question for Councillor Lorentson.
00:09:00 I know you're an author. You've done a great job here. Full disclosure. Would you be comfortable with us also including prior to the last sentence, which begins with Councillor Lorentson. Will you include Mr. Bain also appeared in one of Councillor Lorentson's videos circulated during the election campaign? Councillor Lorentson: I have 100%. I have no problem with that. I also want to add, just as part of the discussion, that I've actually prepared an alternative month. Councillor Wilkie: We'll just get this. Oh, sorry. We'll say one of Councillor Lorentson's videos. Sorry, videos. Yep. Circulated during the election campaign. Councillor Lorentson: Yep. Councillor Wilkie: One of Councillor Lorentson's videos is circulated during the election campaign. Yep. And we don't need to have the word election after Councillor Lorentson. Yeah. Happy with that. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Can I also add that I have prepared an alternative motion for the council.
00:10:00 I've added a motion to this application and I've added- Councillor Wilkie: Oh, I think we're probably getting off topic. Oh, okay. Sorry. No worries. We'll let the councillors make a decision on them. Mayor Stewart: So if you don't socialise with them regularly, you don't have regular catch ups, phone contact, it would be fair to say that you're not a close personal friend. You may be an acquaintance and be friendly, but you're not a close personal associate, friend. Not a close friend of the applicant. Councillor Lorentson: No. My children are friends. And the phone contact we make is, are you picking up Tim? Are you picking up Ben? Can you bring them over? They drop off in front of our house. We have a chat. They go, that's pretty much about my association. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm happy to move that councillors note perceived conflict of interest declaration of Councillor Lawrence and resolve that this represents a perceived conflict of interest in the matter.
00:11:00 Councillor Lorentson may remain in the meeting room to participate in the debate and vote on this matter. Mayor Stewart: I'll second that motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Seconded Councillor Stewart. I'd like to ask two further questions of Councillor Lorentson and if I may before voting on that. I'll speak to it and then you can. I do so because I think it boils down to that issue of it's best to have as many councillors in this room as possible and that we expect councillors to have strong connections to the community and have kids. I could be in very similar circumstances say with the football club where people I've known for years and that I'm actually going to use one of my son's soccer mates dad's book in later debate. But they're only associates. The kids go out. You might give them a lift here or there. To me that doesn't raise the issue of being a closely associate as would result in a real conflict of interest. I believe that the community has been made aware of the level of that assessment. There's no funding being provided during the campaign and it appears that Mark Vane was
00:12:00 providing his opinion on a policy issue, not actively advocating for any particular candidate on that video. So for me that does suggest that it isn't one that would be necessary for Councillor Lawrence to lead the room. Councillor Jurisevic: And the point that Councillor Stockwell just raised there, in that video Mr Vane was not in the background but actually advocating a policy point that you were raising. Councillor Lorentson: I asked a question whether we should be, whether the new council should reconsider introducing divisional councillors. That was the question. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. And I think the question with regard, I think you can answer that. I think you clarified there with regard to dinners at each other's houses. You don't frequent in the way of socialising in that area. It's just in contact with coming through the social entities that you.
00:13:00 Councillor Lorentson: That's right. And a drink maybe after the comp. But again, Joe, maybe three times. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. That's all I want to clarify from what I do. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Now the councillors wish to speak to the motion. Councillor Wegener: Just a question to the CEO. Speaker 8: Thank you. Can I just confirm that the declaration was made at the planning meeting? Councillor Jurisevic: You were on the planning meeting on Tuesday. No. Councillor Wilkie: Not on the council meeting. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh no. You were on the other committee. Sorry. That's fair. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. I've wrestled with my conscience about this. I value more than almost anything the desire for councillors to work collegially in the best interests of the community and respectfully disagree where necessary.
00:14:00 For me this is one of those occasions. In this case the applicant who has lent their support to a councillor by appearing in an election campaign video has a matter before us which has potentially millions at stake and the potential to significantly change the nature of the North Shore if approved. Mayor Stewart and Councillor Finzel both set a fine example recently when a development applicant they'd known since the start of the election campaign had a matter before us. They declared a perceived conflict of interest and chose to leave the room. If another outcome occurs here this would be the first time in Noosa Council's history, as far as I know, when a councillor with a declared association with a development applicant with a matter before the council would be permitted to stay in the room and vote. There's always been, if in doubt, get out. And I appreciate the consideration given to this but in this case I think it may be overly permissive. I hope councillors will allow me to respectfully dissent on this occasion as I think the course of action chosen by Mayor Stewart and Councillor Finzel in matters involving links to development applicants is what ought to happen here.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 I will respect the majority vote on this but I need to have the record show I did not support this motion. And I'm happy to be the sole dissenter. Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Yeah, I'll have my two cents worth. Councillor Jurisevic: I see the points raised by Councillor Stockwell and I see that we would all fall into the situation of coming across people in our daily lives, in our daily social contacts and all the rest of it. So I have left the room. We're a far closer relationship than that with someone that does some development around the area. Has had an application before us but in this instance I see from that element I'm not challenged by the social context.
00:16:00 I am leaning a little towards the way Councillor Wilkie is, is the fact that an election campaign features comments from this developer. As has been pointed out, the developer was not actually supporting the candidate at the time. They were actually supporting a policy point. It's a moot point but I'm prepared to take that on face value that it wasn't an endorsement of the candidate in this case but only on a policy point. So I'm happy to support the recommendation. Mayor Stewart: I'll speak to the motion too. I don't have a problem with Councillor Lorentson. I appreciate her being so fully frank in her disclosure. Look, I have, clearly there's no personal relationship, there's not a close personal relationship. And if we looked at on merit all the relationships we have with all the parents and all the kids and all the people who pick up our kids and drop them home from school and whatever, there would be a long boat.
00:17:00 And it certainly would probably excuse us from most if not all meetings. In regard to the, I have no problem either in regard to the video because it was purely by circumstance that he was there. It was taken at the beach. It wasn't Councillor Lorentson seeking out the applicant to do the video. It was, hey, we're all here on the beach. The applicant happened to be there. It was a circumstantial. So really, that to me, it could have been Winnie the Pooh standing there. He would have been in the video. It would have been a good video. I'd like to have seen that video. But the point is, it was just circumstantial that he happened to be there, right place, right time. And he was one of many in the video. So for me, the video actually carries a little weight. And I'm happy to support Councillor Lorentson staying in the room. Councillor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: Oh, it's a chilling effect on our job here and what we can do as councillors when circumstances are way before a person hops in.
00:18:00 I think it's really important that you know who is in your video or seem to be with you on a social basis that you've got to have to leave the room. I hope that this council goes to one side of the spectrum where we're not making decisions based on who can leave the room, but we're based on the merits. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell, you wish to close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. And I thank you for your alternate perspective because there's no doubt that this is a perceived conflict of interest and it's a line ball one. In the past, the benchmark has, you know, did they do something like hand out how to vote cards for you? Did they put plies in? So they're endorsing you as a candidate. In this case, it's spelled short of that. And in my opinion, it's better to have councillors in the room with a clear declaration of what their interests are. And it's up to the debate to determine where this matter lies.
00:19:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Put the motion. All those in favour? That's Councillor Stockwell, Stewart, Wegener, and Jurisevic. Those against? Councillor Wilkie. The motion's carried. All right. Now we move on to the first item. Kerry, there's been extra information since Friday. Could you talk us through that, please? Speaker 4: Yes. So Friday, we received additional information from the applicant, from the applicant's engineer, proposing an alternative plan. This is an alternative strategy of how the pool may be initially filled and continue to be topped up to manage those pool water levels. So the applicant now proposes that the pool will be filled over a couple of months during the wet season by directing run-up from the catchment into a temporary dam. And the plan on the screen indicates the catchment area, which is in blue, and the dam, there's a small dam located beside the pool.
00:20:00 The water is intended to be directed to that dam via some buns constructed, 400 metre long buns, on the site to direct water run-off into those dams and to fill the wave pool. So the applicant indicates that may take a couple of months to do so. We've not been able to get the proper guidance from the public. We haven't been able to verify the calculations yet, we've asked our hydrologist to have a look at it, but that's the indication. So they've also indicated they may look to provide a further tank on site to help with ongoing topping up of the dam and to help manage the water levels of that pool. So they've just said may, they haven't indicated that's a definite.
00:21:00 There's no additional details provided on water treatment, how that would occur. And because the concern is the water coming off the catchment could be quite, would certainly be tannum in colour, which I don't think is the ideal for their wave pool. And could contain dirt and the like, so they would need to treat that water coming off that catchment. There's no details on how that would occur. So, whilst that potentially resolves the issue of trucks on, you know, water tankers on the road to fill, fill the pool, it does not resolve the other issues raised by officers in the report. And certainly raises some further clearing that would need to be, need to occur for that bun. 400 metres long, it's likely a 400 metre bun would at least be three metres wide or the area would be disturbed three metres wide to construct it. And it still remains unclear how the water would be treated.
00:22:00 So that's, that's the applicant's proposal that's come in on Friday. As I said, we've got a, a hydrologist reviewing that and I hope to have more information before Thursday's meeting. Just some final comments around whether that's practical, because obviously it raises issues that during heavy rain. I don't know. I don't know. The ground would be quite waterlogged. And how does that work in terms of runoff? We're not quite sure whether that's a reasonable solution as yet. We're still having a look at it. One thing that has come up through this additional information is though that potentially the pool is twice the volume of what we previously understood. So if they were to use tankers, it would not just take potentially up to 40 days to fill. It would be around 77 days.
00:23:00 That's the worst case scenario, obviously, and using one tanker. Councillor Jurisevic: Can I just ask a clarification on what the volume of the pool is supposed to be? Because the videos that I've seen or been shown have been quite a shallow, shallow pool. What sort of depth are we talking over? I mean, it's a very large pool, but what sort of depth are we talking? What's the volume expected? Speaker 4: Yeah. So the volume indicated, what we received on Friday was 5,700 kilolitres. The depth? Speaker 11: It's between half a metre and one and a half metres. So the original estimates that were done by our hydrologists were based on that, and then they provided that additional information on Friday. Which is relatively sharp. Councillor Wilkie: That's 5.7 million litres? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Speaker 2: Can I further question if I may, Mr Chair? Councillor Wilkie: Yeah, of course, Mr Chair. Councillor Jurisevic: With regard to evaporation rates with such a large surface area, have any calculations been done on the sort of evaporation rates and the amount of re-topping that would be expected over the period of a year? Speaker 11: Not specifically for that. There was some calculations done on the original idea of filling it just with natural rainwater
00:24:00 falling into the pool, and our hydrologists did some calculations based on rainfall versus evaporation. It was basically the pool would never fill because of that evaporation. Councillor Jurisevic: Third question, if I may. The nearby Beach Houses Resort has a common community area that houses a swimming pool. Do we have any idea on the volume of water that's housed in that and the chemical treatment of the pool, how that's achieved, but also the discharge of the water from that in comparison to what may happen here? Speaker 4: Yeah. I don't know the size of it, but we could find out for you. It's certainly smaller and less... Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, the depth theory, so it wouldn't be anything near this sort of size, but I mean, the FC Nunavut comparison and how that was approved with regard to water treatment and water discharge.
00:25:00 Speaker 4: Yeah. Certainly, waste water for the adjoining Beach Road Holiday Homes is disposed of in the designated effluent disposal area, which this site also has access to, and that area was originally cleared because of the previous camel usage over the site, and is also treated in the tertiary plant on the northern site opposite the other side of the Beach Road Holiday Homes. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. So effluent from homes and all the like is also subject, and I'm imagining there's a number of septic systems on the North Shore as well, but from the Beach House development. Yeah. Given the environmentally sensitive nature of the area on the North Shore, how is all of that effluent treated with regard to homes and resorts and the pub, for example, over there? Speaker 4: Yeah. So both the southern side, this side, this side of Beach Road, all the Beach Road Holiday Homes, and the northern side, are all now treated by a tertiary effluent plant, which
00:26:00 was installed around 2008, approximately, and approved by the state. So it's a tertiary treatment plant that's located on the northern side, so all Beach Road Holiday Homes, the pub, the camping grounds, all go to that plant, and the water is then disposed of potentially on both sides. From the northern side as well as pub back over to this side to dispose in that area that was previously disposed of. Councillor Jurisevic: So the water achieves a certain quality to be disposed of? What about the solids and the waste that come from that today? Speaker 4: That's handled by the treatment plant. So at times, it has to be removed from the plant and cleaned out, but the wastewater is treated to the highest standard that was able to be done at the time. It was quite specific in the approval, the original development approval for the Beach Road Holiday Homes sought to dispose of wastewater in amongst the vegetation, but the environment advice at the time was that would likely kill the vegetation on the North Shore and
00:27:00 on the site, because it's such a low nutrient environment. So the disposal area is quite purposefully identified as being in that area that was cleared of vegetation and previously disposed of. So it would be damaged by the camels that were on the site. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. So effluent becomes nutrient rich, but water from a pool wouldn't necessarily be nutrient rich. It would maybe contain chemicals. That would affect, I imagine, pH of the water to be discharged. Could that be managed? Speaker 4: Good question. We don't have a report on how they're proposing to manage that water and treat the water. I'm not a chemist to advise you fully on that. Nor am I. Councillor Jurisevic: That's why I'm seeking more information. Speaker 4: Yeah. Well, there's no proposal put forward on how they treat it. If they put forward a proposal, then we would have had an external consultant assess it for you. But there's no proposal. Speaker 8: Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Is it correct, Kerry, that the effluent disposal design does not require the connection
00:28:00 to the existing disposal easement that goes with the requirement to clear 2.7 hectares of vegetation on the beach road? Speaker 4: No. The applicant is not proposing to dispose of it in the on-site effluent area, the designated effluent area. Does that answer your question? Mayor Stewart: No. My question was more about the clearing of the effluent. The information here says that it does not require the connection to the existing effluent disposal easement, but goes the requirement to clear 2.7 hectares of vegetation along the beach road, which means that the net benefit of vegetation would be 1.6 hectares. Is that correct? Speaker 4: So that information is coming from the applicant? Yes. Yeah. So certainly the applicant's not proposing to dispose of it to the effluent area. Part of that effluent area... Could you just bring up that map again? It might show us... Part of that effluent area is fully cleared. Other parts remain partly vegetated, but stirred by the camels. That is the effort. Show it in the report.
00:29:00 Speaker 11: It should be shown on one of the plans, yeah. Which page? Actually, I don't know if we included it as an attachment. Speaker 4: This is the effluent area. I don't have it in the report for you. But essentially, this cleared area... Speaker 11: Page 38. It's already cleared. Speaker 4: It's already cleared. Councillor Jurisevic: That's where the pool disposal area... Speaker 4: It's where everything's disposed of currently. They needed to have also a secondary area as a backup plan, which is in this area here, which was previously disturbed by the camels. So there is an easement over this property, over this area, which is the area intended for onsite affluent disposal for the development of this site, as well as sites further west. This proposal doesn't propose to include it in the onsite affluent disposal area. Mayor Stewart: Just looking at that, Kerry, can you confirm how many houses next door? How many beach road houses are there? There's 48 in total. 48, yeah. 48 in total. And that large in the middle, what's that? That's their big... That's their leisure pool area. That's their leisure pool area. Councillor Jurisevic: That's their community area.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 Yeah. Mayor Stewart: I've been there. Yeah. Speaker 4: Councillor Jo asked if there's a pool. Councillor Jurisevic: There's a pool there. You can say it's a pool. There's tennis courts there too. Very different scale. Speaker 4: And tennis courts there as well. Tennis courts. They've got their little barbecue. There's a little building with some meeting rooms there. And it was intended to serve... Communal facility, yeah. ...the development on the southern side. Mayor Stewart: How big are these beach road... I think you referred to them as eco cabins in the... How big are they? Speaker 4: They're the size of a house. So they're between 200 and 300 square metres, generally. Mayor Stewart: And there's 48 of them. Yep. And they're three, four and potentially five bedroom houses. Yes. And they're... How big, sorry? Between 200 and 300 square metres. So how... And they're not... They weren't considered a detached dwelling at the time? Speaker 4: They applied for them as visitor accommodation and there's a condition on the approval that limits it only to visitor accommodation. Mayor Stewart: But in the same size and what we're looking at in regard to the detached dwelling of what's
00:31:00 being proposed to be rebuilt on this site, it's basically exactly the same as 347 square metres. It's basically exactly the same as 48 houses that have been directly built next door, that have been built next door. Speaker 4: Yeah. They're definitely a similar scale and size. They do have... They are different in design in terms of the ones that are already built are built on posts. So they have a very lightweight footprint on the surrounding area. So they're built up on posts. They were carefully sited in amongst vegetation with very limited vegetation cleared to site them. So they were... It was quite a different approach by that developer compared to what we're looking at here. This is a slab on ground construction. It's not up on posts. And they've located that dwelling in order to... It's up on a knoll to try and afford views out to Moosha coastline. Mayor Stewart: I've been there. I drove out and scratched my car in the process. Councillor Jurisevic: I didn't scratch mine.
00:32:00 Mayor Stewart: I've had the opportunity to visit the site. So this is one dwelling. And we've got a problem with it not being considered visitor accommodation because it's considered a detached dwelling because of the size. Speaker 4: No, I haven't read the size. Mayor Stewart: But it's a detached dwelling. You're not considering it a guest house or an eco-cabin or a retreat. Speaker 4: Yeah. Mayor Stewart: But then we have 48 right next door that are sort of detached. Size wise, very similar. So the only thing different is how they're being built. Is that correct? Speaker 4: Yeah. So we're not saying that this proposal is a house because of the size of it. But that's not the statement in the officer's report. What we're saying is this applicant has applied for visitor accommodation type three, which is meant to have an environmental connection with the land. It's about providing cabins and guest retreats on the site. And this is essentially one house on one lot. It's a house. It's not consistent with the definition for visitor accommodation type three.
00:33:00 So nothing to do with the size of it. Yes, I acknowledge they're a similar size. You know, if they had proposed five of these, we wouldn't be raising the issue that it's not consistent with the definition. Mayor Stewart: Could you be fair to say potentially that it could be considered a guest house, which would fall under the definition? Speaker 4: Yeah. This is a house. Under the scheme that they lodged, a house could be used either as short term accommodation or permanent accommodation. So this proposal is just that. It's just a house. Mayor Stewart: But it's a house that's going to be used. And it's a house that's going to be potentially used as a retreat. Yeah. It's effectively a surface retreat if we think about what Whitepool is. Yeah. So it could be considered a guest house or a retreat, located in a rural setting. Speaker 4: Yeah. I mean, think about all the houses in the Shire that are used as a retreat. They're just as a house. They're just short term accommodation. They're a house under the 2006 planning scheme. So this is no different to the many houses in the Shire that are used as visitor accommodation.
00:34:00 Councillor Lorentson: But the primary use of the accommodation, Kerry, is it not to rent out a house? This is a house that is used as a retreat. And so the dominant purpose is a retreat. And the ancillary use is the white pool. The reason people are frequenting or wanting to pay big dollars to use the retreat is because they have access to an exclusive use of this lagoon white pool. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, is there a question there or is that a statement Councillor? Councillor Lorentson: I'm asking, am I correct in what I've just said, that this is a house that was built Speaker 4: So there is a definition in the report of ancillary, and I'll just turn, get the right page, I think it's page 14 of the report of the Planning and Environment Agenda.
00:35:00 I'll just bring your attention to that. So this is the definition that's included in the Noosa Plan 2006, and it says, ancillary means associated with, but incidental and subordinate to. So I would agree there is some association, but I would not say it is incidental or subordinate. This wave park is over a 4,000 square metre area. It has significant impacts on the site that come not because of the visitor accommodation, the house component. It has its own impacts. It's this use that Queensland Parks has raised objection to. So it is not ancillary. It is a separate use because it raises new and different impacts to the visitor accommodation. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell, you had a follow-up question? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I did. From a planning perspective, would it be more accurate to say that this development is a
00:36:00 development of a wave pool with an ancillary dwelling house? Speaker 4: I would more accept that than the way the applicant has proposed this. Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Jurisdict? Without talking to it, it's difficult to turn around. Could ancillary be considered if this is not to be used as a public access facility, but only for access of the people staying at the dwelling, does that therefore not consider it to be an ancillary use? Yes. Does that not consider it to be an ancillary use? Does that not consider it to be an ancillary use? Does that not consider it to be an ancillary use? Speaker 4: No, that alone does not. I do agree that in some respect, on some level, it suggests it may be ancillary because it's only going to be used by people staying in the visitor accommodation. So on some level, I accept that. But I don't on another level, given the scale of it and the potential impacts that this
00:37:00 proposal will have. This is the primary use. This is why people will go to the site. They're not going there for the accommodation. Councillor Jurisevic: I see the point you raise. With regard to it being a dwelling, is it defining it or approving it as short stay accommodation, making it short stay accommodation, it can't be used for any other purpose, and it's therefore got a maximum stay time of three months? Speaker 4: A condition of approval can't change the use. If you can try and clarify it, what officers are trying to say is the applicant has applied for the wrong use in the first place. They should have made application for a house, as well as the entertainment and dining use for the wave park. So a condition doesn't address the fact that the application has been incorrectly made. Councillor Jurisevic: So it's no longer associated with the holiday houses over there, the Noosa holiday houses over there.
00:38:00 It's a separate parcel of land now and has no restriction as the other holiday homes have for short stay accommodation. It could actually be a permanent residence. Is that what you're saying? Speaker 4: No, no, no. Councillor Jurisevic: I said that's what I understood by what you said there. My understanding is that due to the holiday homes there and that being all part of the parcel, any dwell, any residence on this property must be short stay accommodation. That's all that they can apply for. Speaker 4: Yeah. No, people can make, no application is prohibited in terms of the planning scheme. People can make an application for any use. Councillor Jurisevic: Likely to be approved because of the use of the planning scheme uses. Speaker 4: Yeah. This lot is a separate lot and they could apply for visitor accommodation. They could apply for a house on the site. Mayor Stewart: It's true that there was a number of people in 2017 in the Beach Road guest houses who applied to the Planning and Environment Court to have permanent accommodation there and it was rejected, wasn't it? So it's only for short stay next door to Beach Road. That's right. Speaker 4: The next door is limited only to short term visitor accommodation. Mayor Stewart: So you would imagine that this would be the same in this situation as well if it did go
00:39:00 to a court? Or the court just found that for Beach Road that it could only be for short stay? Speaker 4: I think they're a little bit different scenarios. I'm not sure where the comparison is being drawn because next door is approved as visitor accommodation only. Mayor Stewart: Yeah. Speaker 4: The application that went to court applied for 19 of them or I think they reduced it during the court process to less, to be used for a permanent accommodation for, yeah. The court, the council refused that and the court upheld council's decision. So they didn't agree that it was appropriate for permanent accommodation on the site. They supported council's position that it should be maintained for visitor accommodation. So I'm not sure how we can compare the two. Councillor Jurisevic: Where I see the comparison is that what's being applied for here. Is this a comment, Joe, or a question? I'm asking the question. What's being applied for here, and correct me if I'm wrong, is short stay accommodation, not a dwelling house. Is that correct? Speaker 4: The applicant has lodged it for visitor accommodation type three. What officers are advising is that it does not constitute that use.
00:40:00 It does not meet that definition under the Noosa plan and they should have made application for a house. Councillor Jurisevic: So if there were, by what you were saying though, if there were more accommodation residences applied for, short stay accommodation residences applied for, and up to I think six or eight could be mentioned here, that would then facilitate visitor accommodation because of the nature of it rather than one. That's right. It's a shared facilitation for a number of. Speaker 4: Yeah. Okay. That would truly provide visitor accommodation. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. I'm just trying to clarify the difference between one and six. Speaker 4: Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Or one and 48. Councillor Jurisevic: No. No. Under the current planning scheme. Speaker 4: Under the Noosa plan 2006. Yes. You could build up to six. Under the current Noosa plan 2020. Yeah. I think up to 14. Officers though have, there is environmental constraints on this site.
00:41:00 There's state koala habitat mapping. And the new state koala habitat. They would probably only fit six, but that's an exercise that would have to be gone. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm just trying to get the difference between one and six. Councillor Stockwell. So yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You just raised one of the essential aspects of this, and that is the range of environmental values. In the African's Ecological Assessment Report, he does raise a range of species, one of them being the vulnerable Glossy Black Cockatoo, and it's probably to Council's ecologists now. It mentions that if I look at the Glossy Black Cockatoo. The Glossy Black Cockatoo fact sheet, it talks about this species using eucalypts for breeding. As such, nesting sites are mainly in areas containing large old trees. Hollows used for nests are usually between 10 to 20 meters above ground in vertical or near vertical branches, stems, and sprouts. I then looked at the fact sheet from New South Wales on hollows, and it specifically mentions
00:42:00 that. Is there a question? Yeah, there is. It's an important aspect, because I think we can focus on koalas, but people don't have graphs of its importance for the Glossy Black Cockatoo. So that's the point you're making. No, no. I have a question coming out of it. Very definitely. I'm just going to. So the hollow formation is dependent on tree's history, and that the hollow for things like the Glossy Black Cockatoo may be greater than 200 years old, these trees. So the question is, do you believe that the trees on this site that would be cleared for the wave pool are sufficiently old, high, and with sufficient hollows to present habitat for nesting of the Glossy Black Cockatoo, which is vulnerable? Speaker 2: Okay. Two-part answer. There are trees on this site that do represent those values. They've got well-developed hollows, and whether they're in that footprint or not. The information provided by the applicant was a bit appropriate.
00:43:00 It seemed like it was the old information from 2008 that would support the original, even though the time difference is, I'm not sure whether in that footprint, and in terms of the construction of that, whether any trees would be destroyed. So we don't have enough information to quantify that. For sure. For sure. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. The other aspect that probably is a little bit less well-known is also the species of acid frogs and the crayfish. Now, they're more likely to be closer to the wetlands in their habitat, which is just outside the site. The applicant is proposing all around that border to get to the house from the eastern border and up to have access, which is likely to have at least some sort of gravel, some kind of concrete, some sort of concrete bedding with clay content to bind it.
00:44:00 Is that a threatening process in terms of those species, in terms of the increased fine particles in a sandy environment that may have an impact on the vulnerable frogs and vulnerable, was it endangered crayfish? Speaker 2: Yeah, endangered crayfish, yes. Yeah, the swamp crayfish is very sensitive to disturbance in both its habitat and finds running into its habitat. So, as much of a buffer as possible to the wetlands is the, it's unquantifiable again, but you've just really got to manage and mitigate the sediment loss coming off of that site. I know that there's only one borehole log in that particular, in the wave pool area. So, I've got no information. I've only got one borehole log about the depth of the inter-rating layer between the two. So, I'm not sure how the excavations for the temporary dam, for the tank, for the walls,
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 the weight of the actual structure, the concrete that they're going to use on it, how that's all going to impact on the wetlands and whether it's going to actually push water out or displace groundwater. So, that's, it'll have this impact on the wetland and the buffer between the wetland and the development site. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I suppose the final one in terms of the potential impact, we talked about the dam being built, and there would be a need to filter it. Quite often, things like avian sulfate is used to take the turbid water and clean it, and that's got a high pH. Is changes to pH a significant threatening process for the dam? Or are there things that are adapted to the acid water environment or aquatic environments like vertrols? Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. So, air water quality is an issue. So, the discharge of the waste waters, it's how you treat the tannins, how you treat the
00:46:00 acidity levels to get it to match the naturally occurring acidic levels that actually permeate through the soils and get the acidity through the, basically, yeah, the wallen and the acidity levels. That's, yeah, that's a key factor in how it's going to impact on threatened species, particularly acid-dependent threatened species. Councillor Jurisevic: So, in your experience and knowledge, is there a means of water treatment that could meet the ecological standards? Is that achieved anywhere else, particularly with acid sulfate soils and pH levels? Speaker 2: Yeah, no, it's, yeah, you basically need to put it through a whole big land filter. That's, yeah, the natural environment is the best filter itself, but then you're going to have those ongoing issues with the, you know, when it's running through that natural environment, that's going to be where the... Councillor Jurisevic: So, reeds and grasses and the like that actually take that nutrient rich...
00:47:00 Yeah, biofilters... Or pH. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Right. I've got a couple more questions. Yeah, Amelia. So, Mary, would you consider the application as being an eyesore? Can you see it from the road, the beach, or from neighbouring properties? Speaker 4: And... Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Yeah. And just other questions, you know, will it be integrated into the landscape? Speaker 4: There's a 20 metre wide buffer to road frontages that was established as part of beach road holiday homes. Yeah. So, from the road itself, you won't see this way far. Councillor Lorentson: You won't. Speaker 4: So, it's a very large site. What might become obvious over time is vegetation diebacks around the lagoon and the on-site affluent area. But again, limited visibility into the site. It's a very large site. Yep. The lagoon is quite a distance from the road.
00:48:00 Councillor Lorentson: Are they operating, are they proposing to operate the wave pool at night time? Speaker 4: They've indicated they may look to have it at night, but we probably, during the day, at the moment... Is there any lighting that's been proposed? Councillor Lorentson: No. Not yet. Can I ask how many... Have the neighbours or the residents of the North Shore, have any of them complained or put in a written objection to the application? Speaker 4: We have the beach road holiday homes who have objected, who are rightly informed. But that's in relation to body corporate issues? That's quite separate to objecting to... That was the primary issue they raised. That's right. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: And those concerns, have they been addressed? Speaker 4: We've determined that the application's properly made and doesn't require body corporate consent. Yep. Councillor Lorentson: So, in relation to the actual size of the wave pool, it's 4,000 square metres. How does that compare to the scale of other dams in the Noosa Shire? The footprint?
00:49:00 Yep. 4,000 square metres. Is that comparable in terms of the size of the other dams in the Noosa Shire? I'm trying to just get an idea of size. Are we talking dam, a standard dam, a dam size? Speaker 4: It would be a very large farm dam, bigger than most farm dams that I've seen in the Shire. So, it's much larger than most farm dams I've seen. Councillor Jurisevic: It's the equivalent of a natural waterway somewhere? Yeah. I mean, a lake versus... It's probably the lake of Cooroy that I could think of off the top of my head. Yeah. That's a natural waterway. Speaker 4: So, it's... Perhaps if you envisage it this way, it's got a 4,000 square metre water surface area. Yep. If you think about a standard house lot, it's 600 square metres. Yep. So, what's that? It's large. Councillor Jurisevic: It's 6.6. About... Speaker 4: Four... Four-quarter-octagon lot. Nearly seven times the standard house lot.
00:50:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Four-quarter-octagon lot. Speaker 4: Yeah. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: My other question is that I understand that the owner is in negotiations at the moment to preserve the vegetation along the frontage of the site and extinguish the easement for overflow. Can... Is that correct? Speaker 4: Not that they've approached council with or offices, no. I'm not aware of any proposal around that. They would need council consent to distinguish the easement for the on-site effluent as well as the adjoining body corporate owner. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. So, I've read in the papers that they're proposing to use an advanced enviro-septic system to get around using the neighbouring effluent disposal unit and to avoid irrigation that was designated on the easement site. Can you explain this system and is it sensitive to the environment and would you...
00:51:00 Would council recommend this type of system in this location? Speaker 4: So, the applicant, through their application material they've lodged with council, has not proposed any system or described how the water will be treated on site. So, we don't have any sort of proposal put forward as part of the application material. Can I interrupt? Sorry. Speaker 11: I think that's just for the house that they're talking about for that as well, not... It's got nothing to do with the wave pool itself. I think it's just... Just for the house. ...septic for the house. Yeah, is my understanding. Councillor Lorentson: And that's what I've understood also. So, the question is, is that type of system sensitive to the environment or is it something we would recommend? Speaker 11: They haven't actually provided the details of what septic they're proposing for the house. They've just stated that it would have its own on-site septic system but no details were provided. Councillor Lorentson: And we've sort of already touched this. Can the owner further expand the site? And we've mentioned six to eight. They can add six to eight more buildings or units on the site or eco units.
00:52:00 Speaker 4: The applicant would always have the option to come back and make another application for more visitor accommodation on the site if they wish. They would just be restricted, particularly by the State Corolla Habitat mapping, which now prohibits development on certain parts of the site. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: And my last question in relation to ancillary, the meaning of ancillary. There was a case, I think, Caravan, but just for the attitude and definition of ancillary, and I just want to know what council's position on it is. So I think the case was Caravan Parks Association of Queensland and Judge Kefford sort of expanded a little bit on the meaning of ancillary as meaning something added or attached for convenience and attractiveness. Can it not be argued that a wave pool is added for attractiveness and makes the visitor accommodation
00:53:00 retreat more attractive because of the wave pool? Speaker 4: Hmm. I would imagine that would be the applicant's position. But I don't agree that this is ancillary in any way. The case you cite was against Rockhampton City Council to have RV parks in the Kershaw Gardens, which is a major gardens in Rockhampton. And the council was suggesting it was ancillary. And the judge found that it wasn't. So yeah, while that case goes to some discussion around ancillary, I don't think it's going to prove that this use is ancillary use. It might add to the attractiveness, but it has significant impacts on the site. Councillor Wilkie: So just to clarify, in that case, the judge didn't accept that definition of ancillary? Speaker 4: No, the judge did have a discussion around what was ancillary, but didn't accept that RVs, parking of overnight accommodation at the Kershaw Gardens, was ancillary.
00:54:00 Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Brian? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'd like to move the staff recommendations with... Councillor Wilkie: Well, time's getting on. You can still ask questions during the debate, councillor. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So the staff recommendation was an additional item, which is C, as read there. It's too long to read the whole... Read the C. I'll read the C, yes. Note, the addition to the staff recommendation is, note, the application was lodged under Noosa Plan 2006, which was superseded by the Noosa Plan 2020, which commenced on the 31st of July 2020. All references to the Noosa Plan or the planning scheme within the assessment report is in reference to the now superseded Noosa Plan 2006. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. I have a second of it. Well, councillor Stewart, you're over to ask questions now. No, you don't. Before the second. Oh, before the second, you're right, yeah. You can ask questions. Speaker 4: Sorry, just through the chair, I need to correct one matter.
00:55:00 Yes. With the information that came in on Friday, there would result in additional clearing than what these reasons indicate, so if I just may suggest reason 6A, that we just delete 1.24 hectares. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. And just leave it as blank. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Councillor Stewart. Mayor Stewart: On page 17, Kerry, on the P&E agenda, the proposal does not achieve the above relevant outcomes of the Noosa North Shore Locality Code. Okay. The inclusion of the 4,000-metre-square logo in Wakepool is not low key. Can you talk to me a little bit about what are the outcomes of the Noosa North Shore Locality Code? What are the achievable desired outcomes for that? Speaker 4: Yeah. So, the Locality Code goes back, has some history. Over time, there's been a lot of historical development applications on the North Shore that sought to put in large-scale resort developments, some with estuaries and the like.
00:56:00 There was a development control plan established in 1995, and the Noosa plan provisions about low key come from that development control plan. And those provisions are around recognising the unique qualities of the North Shore, that this has significant environmental values, conservation values, that it is very much a wilderness-setting. It's almost like the last frontier, when people cross the ferry, they're into a different environment. So, for a long time, subdivision has been not supported on the Noosa North Shore to protect those qualities. There's been key sites, five sites, designated for visitor accommodation, with no other sites supported by the planning scheme or the DCP for visitor accommodation. So, it's really about... It's about very much low key, keeping the extent of development very small scale, and
00:57:00 making sure the conservations are the paramount and the most important on the North Shore. Mayor Stewart: So, how would we justify having a pub over there, with a big jumping thing for kids and a big outdoor playground, and we've got an equestrian centre just down the road and a high ropes course all within a close precinct? How do we justify a pub being low key? Yeah. Speaker 4: Some things we have to live with. The land on the North Shore was subdivided early last century. The pub was, I don't know, developed around the 70s, 80s, maybe? I'm not quite sure. And they were there. And we have to live with them. We can't shut them down. They're lawfully there. Speaker 8: I think the... My recollection of the sort of threshold or the watershed moment was when Councillor Clarence had to take some lawyers. I remember one of the most famous councillors was on Plenty Coast in Queensland, the Learmark Coast, which was many years ago, and it sort of set the benchmark for a lot of planning appeals over the years. So that was the application for golf courses and multi-story hotels and airstrips for airports
00:58:00 over there, and that was the one that probably got the community to think about what's the North Shore going to look like over the next 20, 50 years. And I think that's where the development there was developed, a lot of intense development. And probably from that flowed the developed control plan that Kerry talked about, ultimately the 1997 planning scheme. What was the history in terms of that application actually triggered a debate about whether or not that was land that needed to be developed by the rest of the Sunshine Coast, or should it be kept in a more pristine state and lower levels of development? Councillor Jurisevic: It would be fair to say that those type of developments precede planning schemes and that have pre-existing use rights as a result and have been developed in more modern times as a result of those pre-existing uses. Speaker 4: Yes, it certainly preceded the 1995 DCP, where the community were very concerned about the development proposals that were proposed there, and there were some strong planning provisions put in place to protect it going forward. Mayor Clare?
00:59:00 Mayor Stewart: Sorry, I just had a question. So what year was that pub built? Sorry, Kerry, did you say? Speaker 4: I'm not exactly sure when it was built, but before the development, yeah, maybe the 70s. I can try and find out. Mayor Stewart: And no upgrades since the 70s. Oh, there'd be upgrades. Councillor Jurisevic: There's been upgrades since then. Speaker 4: Oh, certainly there's been more development. This is one of the sites that's identified, this site as well as the pub site, for visitor accommodation on the North Shore. So these are two of five sites identified for visitor accommodation. Mayor Stewart: When I asked about the opportunity cost about this site, because it is obviously only one of five sites, and you said it's a very important piece to maintain for visitor accommodation, and there is the potential to have six cabins, that's not that many. We compare potentially 12 with what's being proposed to six cabins. It's not like we can have 100 visitors on this site, is there? So the opportunity cost is, my question is, it's actually not that much different, is it, if we can only put six cabins on that site versus what's proposed?
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 Speaker 4: Yeah, certainly since the koala habitat mapping changed in February, it's very restrictive on the site. Prior to that, I would have envisaged something like what's happened next door, the 48 cabins to go on this site. So it is very limited. In terms of comparison, is it much different, six families, 12 people, maybe not, they're not that significant in numbers. Mayor Stewart: Or 12 people, two in each cabin. Two in each cabin, that's right. It's by the by. Yeah. Speaker 4: I mean, six cabins, you might have six families, or you might have couples. Yeah. It's not a lot different. There's some differences, but not a lot. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: If councillors are fine, we'll move this along. Can we have a second of the recommendation, please? We have a motion. Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's good because the government control manager and the CEO has started my presentation. Call me. Councillors, this planning scheme is about, this planning application brings into focus
01:01:00 one of the pillars of strategic planning in Noosa for over a generation. What we're talking about here today, it's not just, is this the right thing to do? Is it the right development, but is it the right development in the right location? And the Noosa North Shore Development Control Plan was mentioned, and it took a long time to get adopted because I only have the draft, which was put out to the public in February 1992. And as the CEO mentioned, it was after we had a development furor with 7,000 people, an international airport and a bridge going across, and we said, no, that's not what we want for the North Shore. Councillors, South East Queensland ends just outside that window. Soon as you cross the river, you're in the wilderness of the Great Sandy. And that's what the planning has been since the late 1980s. So what is it that we said?
01:02:00 The aim of that development control plan, as I said, I'm quoting out the draft, is to acknowledge the area's role as the southern entry of the Great Sandy. And the role of the Noosa River as a buffer between the Shire's urban areas and Kooloola National Park. And it had objectives of to control the extent of development of the North Shore by retention of most private freehold land within the rural preservation zone, to provide minimum urban type services as a means of limiting the intensity and impact of development, and to utilise natural assets of the area and its separateness from the balance of the Shire. As a means to broaden the nature based recreation experience of residents and visitors. It also talks about to require the retention of substantial wildlife and floral corridors and not to build a bridge. That's been consistently applied when we get here and Cathy, if you can bring up that point.
01:03:00 Here is the network based on landform, landscape, aesthetic, environment values in Noosa Shire in 1996. So this was the underpinning planning study that led to the now probably planning history of the 1997 strategic planning. Here you see the North Shore is all identified in pink and that suggests that it was core environmental corridor for the Shire. In fact, that corridor is mapped by the state as of state biodiversity significance. Not local. It's in the biodiversity overlay. Not regional, which is the next category up. But state level of significance for the corridor we're talking about. Then we go to 2002 when we did the Noosa North Shore management plan. And what did it say? It talked about no increase in commercial activities beyond current levels and approvals except
01:04:00 for uses that have virtually no impact on the environment. It also went to say that the heath should not be cleared or developed. Also, any proposed developments nearby that could affect quality of the supply of water, the heath should be strictly controlled. And that's why the question I asked before in terms of the road works to access the site and the potential in terms of water quality. Okay. If the further development of the resort and caravan park, low priority, should be the retention of natural areas and provision of low impact activities for the future development such as walking and nature study, rather than development of high impact sports facilities, for example, tennis courts. And finally, it identifies the range of vulnerable and rare flora and fauna that's over there. Councillors, this has been consistent.
01:05:00 There has been nothing changed in the way the planning scheme of Noosa and this council has worked. It has approached the North Shore. So in this, the strategic framework document that came out 25 years later, 27 years later, it talks about on the North Shore, no further subdivision is permitted. The area is largely dedicated for conservation, limited visitor accommodation and services are provided in the tourist accommodation and the recreation and open space zone. And it goes on. Well, wait, two. Noosa Council has consistently taken a long-term planning approach to sustainable planning. It is the long-term approach that has ensured that the community's values and principles are not diminished by unintended development decisions. The approach is also to show its economic strengths. It has created a consistent and well-recognised Noosa brand that provides a unique advantage
01:06:00 at a natural point of distance. I believe the new Noosa plan is just the latest iteration of over 20 years. As I said, the state identifies the site itself as State Significance Biodiversity Habit for an Endangered or Vulnerable Species. It's adjacent to a very high level of aquatic conservation significance. And it's... We're over here. Councilors, some of the debate in the community has been about the importance that it might relate to the surfing culture of Noosa, so I thought about this and I thought I haven't surfed seriously or much at all since the 70s and I thought well wonder if Phil Jarrett in his book on the Cup of Tea with God has any indication and in that he goes to great lengths to say that the battle to save the headland and coastal national park was just one of the many fights that this community's had to protect which is now in this case a national surfing reserve but the now international surfing reserve and that's part of the culture but I knew there was something else and I remembered as I said one of my son's soccer mates father wrote a book and he talked to me about one of the themes I went looking at I got out of the library it's called Noosa who's what's your point a place in the history of surfing and maybe the
01:07:00 next picture might give a historic perspective because on the page that said why Noosa the whole surfing world wants to live surfing Noosa we have a nice little black and white photo of a legend of the local Noosa surfing but what this highlights is that it says even though after 50 years surfers won't stop at any time soon it's a magical place despite being loved to death I'm many days weekends or not it is difficult at times impossible to get a park within the QE the surf has can be overcrowded there's anywhere but still they come you see the natural environment is simply stunning the development has mostly been handled well and the waves are memorable sorry council I just stopped you the council's that's just a little bit over five minutes are you happy for all councils to speak longer than five minutes today I'm willing I'm happy to indulge
01:08:00 naturally as surfers the waves are a major reason for our love of the place but most surfers are involved with a strong connection to the environment that goes with their waves Noosa has it all and finally a big shout out has to go to the local government agencies plus all the volunteers and residents who have helped preserve much of what makes Noosa special so councils from a surfing culture perspective this is a special place I don't believe it's the right development in the right place I believe that significant conservation with being a wildlife habitat for endangered and vulnerable adjacent to that high aquatic evasion value and within the biodiversity corridor means we have to stick to what has been
01:09:00 Councillor Wegener: planned for this place for over a generation Councillor Stockwell now the councillors will speak the motion Councillor Wegener can I stand up to talk I've been working on this for a long time I think I owe it to the community and the councillors to explain why I have been supportive of this site in some ways and it's because I've been travelling for 45 years looking for great surf destinations and I know a bit about it and I can and I can see why why the surfers and some people get very excited about this and it's because when you come to Noosa very often the surf is not real good it's about half the time it's onshore can we have problems and this is up on the North Shore and the ultimate goal of going to this place is a surfing destination
01:10:00 up to the double island point and score that place which is an unbelievable world-class dream wave that breaks really good maybe one out of a hundred days rideable maybe one out of 20 days that way where it's okay it's it's not it's a great surfing destination but it's very very fickle and when when this project comes I looked at it I said well what what a great vacation place for surfers because they're gonna score you know that you're gonna come to Noosa with this going to this particular spot and you know you're gonna score because you you have a wave board and then you go off and you you know go do other other things go to Hastings Street go up to double island point you try to score the points you get a feel for it but at least you have a basis and you know that you have your bases covered when you go to a place like this and it's the only one in the world so it would be an absolute world leader in this way with a new thought of surfing where you go with your base you know you're gonna score you
01:11:00 not really spend it and and maybe in a way it's a little bit like having an electric motor on your bicycle because you know you're gonna have a good time you know you're gonna get to that road and you're gonna say oh man okay so you know you it gives the safety net so it actually has a realistic function to it and I and I went down that so I spent a week working on this reading going through the reports talking to everybody and as I I try to explain my my ideas of support and really getting into it and then say well look you know it fits in with the Noosa plan in a way because in the Noosa plan it says we want to we do not want to extract value from our natural resources we want to leverage off of our natural resources and that the goal overall economic plan of the Noosa of the Noosa plan is exactly that leveraging off our natural
01:12:00 resources and I thought that this wave pool house is ancillary to the overall experience in Noosa and as I voice my opinions and of this and really understand the plan and read through it a million times that's when I that's when the cracks appeared to me in the reasoning of this because because first of all when you say it's not it's not extracting value from you so well it actually is because you're concreting over you know over an acre of land in the middle of a declared habitat koala habitat so you are extracting that and then if you're going to go against kind of staff reports you have to think well does it have a really benefit to the people and then I think well the definition in my definition of my philosophy that I went to the campaign with the definition of good governance in Noosa is based around raising the standard of living for the
01:13:00 residents and that is the magic the incredibleness of what everybody has done here over the years is raise our standard of living and of course in this case does this particular wave pool raise the standard of living for us residents probably not because I don't suspect any of us are actually going to make it into this wave pool to surface the way it is on the paper right now so I think that there's there's definitely two sides to that and I want to do it to bring it to express my attention to you to a lot of Councillor Lorentson: people that have been watching me on this and and do that thank you fellow councillors. Thank you Councillor Wegener. Any councillors wish to speak to this motion? I'll speak to it. Councillor Lorentson. Okay a development applications being made for a large two-bedroom guest retreat and a wave pool on Noosa's North Shore the applicants not proposing to open a retreat and wave pool up to the public
01:14:00 it will not be used for commercial purposes it is not wet and wild it is not Kelly Slater wave pool it is not the wave pool in Yipoon or the wave garden in Tullamarine Airport it is a retreat and pool that will be built to scale it will be built into the existing environment and it will have the smallest physical footprint the retreat does not rely on excessive visitor numbers which means there'll be minimal adverse environmental impacts from overuse it's a 4,000 square meter wave pool that's similar in scale to dams that are found in the Noosa Shire it'd be used solely for the by the owner and his family for three consecutive months of the year and rented out to private individuals maximum 12 at a time who are wanting to stay at the house and have exclusive use of the pool the pool is integrated into the site it's not visible from the beach it's not visible by
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 from the road or by joining neighbors it's it's proposed to operate only during the day only four people at a time can use the lagoon wave pool the pumps and the blowers are to be located within a concrete structure under the hill slope and the noise must comply with relevant acoustic standards now let's talk tourism and economy to start this is a world first and will attract media attention and media coverage and big names in surfing and celebrities who love to serve an exclusive getaway retreat that accommodates 12 people wanting an enhanced adventure destination and a world-class visitor experience and who are prepared to pay big dollars for that experience in fact up to $20,000 a night for that experience did you know that make peace island has a 500,000 liter pool a 15 person spa gym and a tennis court did you know that
01:16:00 make peace island rates for peak season are listed at eighteen thousand dollars a night for exclusive use rising to nineteen thousand eight hundred a night in peak season guests who spend twenty thousand dollars a night to stay to retreat with a private lagoon wave pool are our high-end visitors they eat at our restaurants they drink at our bars and they shop locally they've proven to be consistent repeat users they also tell their friends who like them spend big this is what our tourism noosa strategy refers to when they talk value over volume tourism product less people who spend big and help drive our economy we have in front of us an opportunity to attract these value over volume tourists surfing is a billion dollar global industry everyone wants to try surfing and people are prepared to pay for the experience
01:17:00 I'm going to end by quoting Phil Jarrett who recently wrote an article about the retreat and pool in the noosa today he said that he contacted his friend in France to ask about the wave pool located in Basque which is comparative in scale and design to the North Shore proposal this is what his friend said quote you drive into the facility on a winding road through the Basque foothills when you catch your first glimpse of the pool through the trees from above it looks like a pristine lake or lagoon surrounded by lush green hills with an incredibly preacher-esque farmhouse perched on a small hill right above it it's as idyllic as you can get as for the experience itself it's awesome it reminded me of a great head high day in the Maldives as for the noise maybe just a slight humming or swoosh as the waves get pushed out in the corner unquote this retreat and pool will be built to scale it will be built into the existing and
01:18:00 environment and it will have the smallest physical footprint with the correct and appropriate conditions of approval we can address the red flags that were raised with this morning for example lodgement of a vegetation plan that addresses the site's natural vegetation management values and identifies measures to minimize impacts during construction and operation on these values another condition preparation of a water cycle management plan that addresses harvesting wastewater treatment and disposal to minimize impacts in the site's vegetation habitat and adjacent wetland installation of noise mitigation measures to ensure any potential noise impacts from the operation of the pool are appropriately managed and the amenity of the surrounding area is maintained we have here an opportunity to support an application for a developer to underdevelop his property we have an opportunity to be a
01:19:00 world first and offer a world first class experience this is our chance to help a man build his dream and deliver the unforgettable this is our chance to attract our value over volume customer for a development proposal I don't think it gets better than this Mayor Stewart: Councilor Morrison, Councillor Stewart. Is Councillor Morrison moving motion to those conditions? Speaker 8: I think she is. If the motion was lost she would be moving it on term of.. If the motion was lost I miss.. Mayor Stewart: I'll fix the motion. I've had the opportunity to visit this site I'm very pleased I did besides getting to scratch the car.
01:20:00 It gave me additional insight into the area, the size and the scale of the project. I will agree that there are significant factors which Council Lorenton has highlighted and there should be further and significant conditions put on this proposal, specifically in regard to the noise, the clarification of the water treatment, the clarification of the exact measures which will be used to fill and if we use any trucks, impact upon those trucks. Also, the hydrologist report should be made available and obtained. I would suggest that this does fall under Visit Accommodation Type 3 Rural under the Noosa New Plan and so it is consistent. The use of premises for short-term accommodation where accommodation has direct connection to the rural production, environmental or scenic values of the premises. The use includes a cabin park, guest house, retreat located in a rural setting and host farm offering rural experiences. I think this is a good example of a guest house and it certainly would be deemed a certain
01:21:00 service retreat. The proposed house is a two bedroom house which will be able to sleep up to 12 people at once. It could be argued that the proposed bill could fall under the category of a guest house and indeed the word retreat would also lend itself to what is being discussed today. As I said, effectively we are looking at a service retreat. The application in regard to visitor usage and residential usage is consistent with the zoning and I believe that the experience provided will in fact provide a direct connection with the environment and scenic factors surrounding it and thus would adhere to the definition. In a meeting last week I asked about the opportunity cost and I spoke again about that today. The opportunity cost is six cabins. It is hardly providing for a huge supply of visitor accommodation or being able to maximise the site to its full potential. In this aspect I don't think the opportunity cost is significant as we are currently looking at an alternative option of only six cabins versus 12 people. Page 17 refers to the fact that this proposal does not achieve the relevant outcomes of the Noosa North Shore Locality Guide because inclusion of a 4,000 square
01:22:00 metre pool is not low key. The site is 14.85 hectares. The pool would take up 2.7% of the site. It cannot be seen from the road. It is a long drive in and it is completely hidden. It is large but it is not unobtrusive, but it is unobtrusive in every sense of the word. I would consider it in light of these facts low key. In regard to the Locality Guide of the North Shore, within hundreds of metres away we have a pub, an equestrian centre, high ropes course and we have 48 houses directly next door which are as big or bigger than the one dwelling that is being proposed today. No one wants to build a bridge to the North Shore but there is infrastructure and the infrastructure we are looking at here today is small in comparison to what else is currently there. In regard to the noise, I think we need further information about the pumps and I would like to obtain further information about the exact noise levels. We don't have that available today but there will be an absolute maximum of 12 people at
01:23:00 this resort at one time, four in the pool at one time, all surfing. Across the road as I said we have a pub with a giant jumping pillow and playground for children. If you want to talk about noise we need to go no further than that as that is a benchmark for noise in the area. Without knowing the full impact of the noise associated with the pumps, I would suggest that a pool 200 metres or 250 metres from its closest neighbour, a fair drive in from the road and hidden among the bushland would by all accounts be far less noisy than the pub with a focus on outdoor activities for children. I received an email today that said and I think we all received it by a member of our community. You have all been elected to... And it said. You have all been elected to protect our area and this would be such a betrayal of your positions. What would be a betrayal of my position would be that if I listen to only specific groups with a certain mind, who are of a certain mind, rather than the whole of the Shire.
01:24:00 I need to look at the community benefit as a whole, the impact on our community. It can be argued that this is a private retreat, it's not open to the public but then so too is Makepeace Island as Councillor Lorentson has adhered to and the community had no problem approving that. In fact it is spoken of highly. What is being proposed today is nowhere near the infrastructure, the impact or the development of Makepeace Island. It too is a private resort. I need to think about the jobs that this will bring, the tourism it will create, the money it will put into our local economy through tourism, the jobs associated with the projects. Not just the builders but the labourers, the electricians, the cooks, the caterers, the cleaners and the gardeners and the landscapers. These jobs will be ongoing. This proposal will inject millions into our local economy at a time when our Shire needs it more than ever before. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you Councillor Stewart. Councillors at the risk of keeping everyone in suspension, I need to call a short adjournment.
01:28:00 Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Councillor. We're back. Councillor Wilkie: Meetings open again and... Cr Frank smile. ... So far we've had Councillor Stockwell, fueganer, councillors dy���, councillors
01:29:00 isode. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Lorentson and Councillor Stewart have spoken to the motion. Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Jurisevic: Look, I appreciate the passion with which all councillors are speaking towards this waitful proposal. I too see value in this. I think it's the type of tourism facility that we could house here in Noosa. High value, low volume, tourism experience in keeping with what tourism Noosa is trying to achieve. Yes, it could generate some real dollars and yes, there will be the type of entities across the world that would come here to seek an experience in a private estate to have that function. Councillor Stockwell alluded to the surfing culture, but Councillor Wegener clarified that.
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 I mean, surfers will go anywhere for an ideal wave and if an ideal wave is being produced by any means, they'll relish the opportunity. So, for a first class facility that a world class surfer would have a unique experience for an Olympic sport, I can see why councillors are excited at the prospect of something like this being in our local region. Councillor Stockwell alluded to a tennis court as being a high impact sports facility that wouldn't be allowed on the North Shore. But I don't know that a tennis court in itself would be a high impact sports facility, so I thought that was a little bit of a stretch there, particularly when there are already two tennis courts and other facilities over there, so I don't think the impacts are there. And the prospect of no further subdivisions, well, this isn't a further subdivision, this is a subdivision that's already been approved and allowed. So some of the challenging quotes there. But, and of course, Councillor Stewart alluded to the pub, the high ropes, et cetera, and
01:31:00 the impact that's already over there. But as Councillor Stockwell alluded to, the plan going forward is to limit that. We've had the desire for resorts and airports and high impact activities over there, and it's all been scaled back over the years by the desire of this community to see that area maintained and kept pristine. We've heard some more information, some new information today about how the pool may be filled with, you know, with buttons being put on site and with regard to whether the trees are glossy black habitats and nobody actually clear on how many trees within the footprint of the pool may be impacted and what's there. So based on what's before us today, I can't approve this. There's no way that the environment is going to improve. The environmental impact is well enough understood by the information that's being supplied
01:32:00 today. That's it. I see great value. And I think a facility like this somewhere else in the Shire would certainly be something that we would be able to approve because it would fit in with that. But given the environmental constraints on this site and given the report from staff with regard to the challenges those environmental constraints have on this site, I can't support the application as it stands. And with the information before us. But I said, I credit an opportunity like this within our Shire somewhere for the experience of all surfers that would come here and relish their opportunity as a high value, low volume tourist experience. Councillor Wilkie: If I could just follow on from that, I too do see the value of this as a high value, low volume tourism experience. It is consistent with what the Noosa Council and Tourism Noosa have been trying to achieve. The question for me is whether this is the appropriate approach. I think it is the appropriate approach for this site for such a facility.
01:33:00 High value and over volume tourism is the mantra, but not at the expense of environmental values. In this case, there seems to be too high a price to pay. I also believe it would be, I'm reluctant to support a 4,000 square metre wave pool in this location when there are so few design details available for assessment as yet. I think it would be imprudent to approve this application when we know so little about how Thank you very much. Again, we don't know what process is going to be involved
01:34:00 and whether there's going to be any flow-on effects to the surrounding environment. We also... What we're also being asked to do is place a wave pool, a mechanical wave pool, on land which we know is 1.3 hectares, or, sorry, at least a hectare or more of threatened species habitat in an area we now know is declared as koala priority and habitat area, in a precinct which, for many decades, has been strategically preserved for nature-based recreational experiences. It's fair to say 98% of all development applications are approved by Noosa Council. In this case, there appears to be no overwhelming public benefit that would justify approving this application in this location, despite the many conflicts with the superseded and even the current planning scheme. Perhaps in the future, there may be an application
01:35:00 on a more appropriate site that we could consider. But as things stand, with the lack of information and what the cost would be in terms of environment, I cannot in all conscience support this application. I support the motion. Councillor Stockwell, do you wish to close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do. I think there's been a range of very valuable insights into this development. And I actually changed my mind. I actually thought it was the wrong development for the Shire to start with. But for the reasons that Councillor Lorentson outlined, I do think it is probably a potential to be the right development. We have got a local homegrown developer who has developed a very boutique resort concept. And as Councillor Wegener pointed out, it's new technology, just like electric bikes. It's a new way to experience surfing. And the scale and technology is such that, you know, a boutique resort may work somewhere
01:36:00 in the Shire. But as I think the heart of the argument is, it has to be the right development in the right location. We have to have, to me, the issues about how it operates is secondary to making that decision. And to me, I can't get to that point where I believe this is the right location. It is a high cost. It is a conservation value area. And it isn't consistent with the long-term planning objectives. I do think that we, when considering this application, our role in development control is a statutory role. And I have to draw attention that Councillor Stewart may have an opinion of what a definition is. But we must be guided by a professional staff about what the planning definition of the application in front of us. It's clearly, one aspect is a dwelling house.
01:37:00 It clearly, the other, is an amusement of some scale or activity. Amusement and recreation, whatever it's called. It is not up for us, the councillors, to redefine to suit our argument. It's up to us to apply the planning scheme, to take on professional advice, and to assess that advice in accordance with that planning scheme. And on that basis, there is only one. One right way to vote, in my opinion, and that is to approve the motion in front of us. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. I'll put the motion notice in favour. Councillor Wegener, Stockwell, Jurisevic and Wilkie against. Councillor Stewart and Councillor Lorentson. Thank you, Kerry. Thank you, Tara. Thank you, Connor. We move on to the next item, which is item two, the climate change response plan. Welcome, Chair. And welcome, Ken. Speaker 8: I'll just ask Ken, at the very beginning, just to outline.
01:38:00 We were planning on having a couple of other reports just around the beginning of this month about the climate chat, coastal hazards adaption plan, and other issues associated with the plans. Can you maybe just outline where we're up to, how this particular report deals with the overall climate change response, and how those issues fit in, and where the others are coming from? Speaker 3: Yep. Thanks, Frank. Thanks, Sarah. Councillor, as you know, we've spent the last couple of months briefing you on the range of projects we're doing around in response to climate change. The report you have in front of you today is one of three reports that we've got over the next couple of months. So today's report provides you with a project brief and scope for the development of a climate response plan and associated community engagement plan. So it's the start of a process. What we're doing is asking you to consider the brief, the scope, the process, and how we'll go about developing that plan, which is a shire-wide response plan to all the issues
01:39:00 and impacts of climate change for our shire across a whole range of settings, sectors, and environments. So that's today's report. As you know, we are also working on the coastal hazards adaptation plan. Which is specifically looking at the hazards associated with our coastal environments and the increase of the effects of those on our environment, both in terms of storm tide, inundation, storm surge, sea level rise. So in our coastal environments. That chat we've been working on now for a couple of years, and we're coming to the finalisation of that for the purposes of community engagement, and we hope that'll come to you next month. Associated with that, as you know, the Minister for Planning put a condition on the sign-off of the Noosa Plan, which related to completing the CHAP, so the Coastal Hazards Plan, which
01:40:00 we'll get next month. Completing that so that then we could do associated amendments to the scheme to those environments. So looking at sort of development controls and regulation around those environments that might be impacted by coastal hazards. And importantly, that the CHAP. That would provide the evidence base for us to integrate the state planning policy related to natural hazards. So that you'll also get a report around associated planning scheme amendment from the CHAP next month. So today's simply about, not simply, very importantly, but it is about a project scope and plan and process of associated proposed community engagement process to protect coastal Councillor Wilkie: The Council's also been working on a climate change adaptation plan for some time now. Could you explain the difference between a climate change response plan and a climate change adaptation plan and why we need this response plan?
01:41:00 Speaker 3: So this plan takes into account the climate change adaptation plan. So what we're doing is bringing together both climate change adaptation planning and also climate mitigation planning. So we've got a ZEN organisation strategy which looks to mitigate emissions associated with our own organisation. We've also got an environment strategy now that puts in place a target to help the community mitigate their emissions. So this response plan looks at both mitigation and adaptation. Around climate change. So it's an integrated process which draws together all of those things under sort of one umbrella. Councillor Wilkie: So the adaptation plan is less all encompassing than the response plan? Speaker 3: That's correct. And the adaptation plan will now form part of the response plan. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you.
01:42:00 Other questions? I've got a question. Mayor Stewart: Thank you Mr Chair. Just to keep on the Planning and Environment Committee meeting agenda, page 53, project assumptions. The plan will be prepared in-house with some assistance from specialist consultants where needed and where budget allows. Do we know who those specialist consultants are yet? Speaker 3: No. Mayor Stewart: We don't. Alright. Speaker 3: That's a good question. No, we don't. So, you know, like I said... Could it be more clear? We are... Annie, feel free to jump in here. But, you know, this is the start of the process. So we are in the stage of sort of identifying all the issues and starting to connect with stakeholders. So as those things come out, we need to delve deeper into a few issues. That's when we might need to draw on specialist consultants around particular issues, whether it might be waste or landfill or... Be quite targeted. Quite targeted issues. Oh, thank you.
01:43:00 Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: On page 51. Kim? Yes. There's just reference being made to the 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and regional climate projections published by the IPCC in 2013. Are we relying on any more current data? Has the IPCC released anything more current than 2018 and 2013? Speaker 8: I... Councillor Lorentson: That's my first question. So, yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Speaker 9: No. They... The IPCC specifically hasn't released its standard reports. The last one was that 2018. They have actually done some other interim reports looking at specific issues, but they are the ones that we've been mainly relying on. And they're currently working on the next report, which I believe is 2021, 22. Councillor Lorentson: It's 2021.
01:44:00 It's the... Yeah, 2021. Yeah. Six assessment report. AR6. That's correct. And should we not wait for completion of that report so we have more relevant or more up-to-date information to base our projections on? Speaker 9: The IPCC report will look at pretty much the... Oh, they do. They'll look at the global situation. Yeah. There has been continual reports coming out from the World Meteorological Organisation, from the Australian Meteorological Organisation. And what the IPCC does... Yeah. It takes a whole lot of reports and basically synthesises them. So it's not as though there hasn't been any research or any further studies that has... Since that last IPCC report, all of the reports that are coming out from all of those various organisations are still basically saying that the trajectory for greenhouse gas emissions and for the impacts of climate change are still going in the direction that we knew
105 minutes in ¶
01:45:00 from this report. And in fact getting the greenhouse gases are increasing and we are seeing more and more impacts of climate change throughout. So what this report that is to you today is really to develop Noosa's plan to respond to all of the information that we know going ahead from previous reports and also still to keep watching, to take into account all the scientific information that is coming out, which will continue to come out. Yeah. So I think it's very, very timely that Noosa is actually putting together its own climate response plan that is looking at both mitigation and adaptation because of all the information that we all currently already know is going forward. Councillor Lorentson: There's also a reference on page 51 that states, by the year 2017, will Council be doing projections
01:46:00 and planning for greenhouse gas emissions? Can you give me an idea of the climate change adaptation and mitigation for what period of time in the future? Can you give me an idea of timelines? Are our projections 2030, 2040, 2050, 2060, 2070? Can you answer that question? Speaker 9: In terms of the adaptation and modelling? Speaker 3: Yeah. So at the moment we're doing our timeframes at 2040, 2070 and 2100. That's what I'm looking at. That's what part of our modelling is based on. But like Amy said, there's numerous reports that inform the work we do. We have an overarching policy, a climate change response policy that the organisation's adopted, Council's adopted, that says when there's any change in that data or new reports from the IPCC, that we will review our planning.
01:47:00 So there's some triggers in our governance already to review our planning. So if, for instance, new data came out and that report said something quite different, it would trigger a review of our planning. Councillor Jurisevic: That would be the basis of it. That's right. If it's significantly different from the information going forward, we'd then have to take stock of where we sit. Speaker 3: Yes. That's in our overarching policy that governs this approach. Councillor Jurisevic: I remember us putting it in there. Speaker 3: Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: I've got a few more questions. Are we going to employ the same interventions on residents who are directly impacted in bushfire zones and flood zones as we're going to be imposing on residents impacted in coastal erosion zones? Speaker 8: I think when we get down to that level, that will be the third chapter. No, when we get down to the individual site. This one is more overarching in a policy sense in terms of how we're going to respond to the climate change. So wait. Yeah. Okay. That's my advice from that one. People wait until we get down to that next one. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: On page 62.
01:48:00 So looking at the stakeholder consultation groups. This is just a suggestion. I think it's worthwhile to add maybe a high impact group. So we need to recognise or separate stakeholders with high levels of influence or interest, like coastal community groups, and then we need to recognise or separate stakeholders with private property owners. And I think, and this again, just a suggestion, is that they will require more communication and collaboration as opposed to consultant form than stakeholders with lower levels of interest. Again, just a recommendation. Do you agree with that? Yeah. Speaker 3: Sure. Councillor Stewart made a similar comment at the planning committee. Okay. So this community engagement plan is not supposed to be fixed in the planning committee. Okay. It's a plan to guide the process. Right.
01:49:00 But yeah, it is somewhat dynamic. And our intention is that both those who are impact, high impact, high interest, as many people as we can and key stakeholders can be engaged in this process. So that's... Councillor Lorentson: And the engagement will take the form of a collaboration with these high impacted residents as opposed to those with lower levels? Are we going to change that level of engagement, Kim? Speaker 3: Yeah. There'll be various levels of engagement depending on the nature of the stakeholder and the nature of the issue, absolutely, across the whole spectrum. Yep. So yeah, I think there's room to take on board that suggestion, absolutely, Councillor Lawrence. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I just follow up on that one? Yeah, sure. So when I look at the engagement, I read on page 61, I look at the CCRP and its community engagement outcomes we'll seek to. And I see it falling quite short in terms of when we look at our IAP2 spectrum, the outcomes
01:50:00 don't go to collaboration nor to empowerment of the community. So is that deliberate or is that just something in the drafting of this document that I've missed the right section? Councillor Wilkie: By empowerment, what do you mean? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well, the IAP2... Councillor Wilkie: Responding to climate change. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. Well, the IAP2 spectrum, which is the... Sorry, I should... Is the way... I can see that. I can see involved. I can't see the collaborate, to partner with the public in each aspect of the decision, including the development of alternatives and the identification of the preferred solution. And I can't see in those outcomes anything to do with empower, which is to place upon decision making in the hands of the public. I think in my view, a climate change response plan that doesn't collaborate and empower the community to take action and be involved in the decision won't be that effective. Councillor Wilkie: Well, we might be in the realm of debate here, Councillor, because, I mean, the decision to build a rock wall or not is not one of the...
01:51:00 It will ultimately rest with the council. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So my question was... So I was just clarifying there. My question was, are those... Have I... By honing in on the outcomes, have I missed out other places where you have gone into detail of how we're going to collaborate in an endeavour to empower? Or is that something that the project plan needs to have a think about? Speaker 9: Yes, certainly in terms of the overall project plan, I mean, it very much is in that development stage at the moment. So this is very much that plan to continue the plan, I guess. And so what is before you is to outline sort of the processes that we would do in consultation and involvement with the community to develop that plan, and then the next ongoing steps, which are going to be much more granular and specific about particular outcomes, would obviously go through to that level. Speaker 3: So what will come out of this is an overarching plan that council would endorse and then an action plan, potentially a five-year action plan, that could have a range of actions that
01:52:00 are absolutely about collaborating, empowering. It's going to have to. This is a community-based council partnership plan. I guess where it's going to require a whole lot of community action and empowerment. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, require understanding by the community, the impacts across the range of community impacts. And so, you know, someone that what, as I think Amelia alluded to earlier, not just coastal impact, but river flooding, fire impact, and all of those, so the potential for impact across the Shires. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. So bearing in mind what Councillor Stockwell has just said, and what you've just said, and what's been acknowledged, is there scope to amend that wording on page 61 to include the words empowers? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I might have to think about it for Thursday night. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Yeah, sure. Okay. And on page 62, Kim, again, can we perhaps add, under stakeholder engagement, identify
01:53:00 negotiable and non-negotiable elements? I think it's important. I think it's important that we actually specify what aspects can be influenced by stakeholders and what can't. So that, again, there's no false expectation. If we're going to engage in genuine, meaningful community engagement, I think that's got to be decided right from the onset, what's negotiable, what's not, let's not waste anyone's time. Sure. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Any further questions, Councillors? Anyone care to move the recommendation? Councillor Tom? Councillor Wegener: No, I'll move the recommendation. Councillor Wilkie: I'll move Councillor Wegener, seconded by Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wegener, you wish to speak to the motion? No. Okay. Any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Stewart.
01:54:00 Mayor Stewart: I note in this meeting we are approving a plan, and that plan very clearly outlines community and stakeholder engagement. Specifically, on page 66, and we talked about this on the P&E agenda, the people who are deemed high impact, high level of interest include property owners in coastal hazard areas. As I alluded to in the P&E meeting, they had not been noted or written down as key stakeholders for targeted consultation under households and communities on page 62 of the agenda. I have, however, been assured by staff in the Planning and Environment Committee meeting that these people will be included as key stakeholders targeted for community consultation, and this is very much a moving document. Similarly, I also raised the necessity to include all surf clubs affected, which would include the Peregian Beach Surf Club, the Sunshine Beach Surf Club, and the Noosa Head Surf Club, as part of the key stakeholders providing consultation and feedback. Again, I was assured that anyone who needs to be consulted will be, so I acknowledge that I am satisfied with Council staff support and engagement. All those who need to be engaged will in fact be, and this will no doubt include the groups
01:55:00 that I have just made mention of. It is critical that those most affected have an opportunity to engage, provide feedback, and to have their voices heard. And as I think Councilor Stockwell mentioned in the P&E meeting, and Councilor Lorentson today, that includes the bushfire, people affected by bushfires, floods, things like that. So I'm satisfied with the inclusion of these groups, and I support staff's recommendation and community stakeholder engagement. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councilor Stewart. Councilor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I hope that we don't overstep our role and responsibility in planning and preparing for the impacts of climate change. I understand our immediate threats of bushfires, drought, and flooding, and no one needs to be reminded that nearly 12 months ago, nearly all of Peregian disappeared because of bushfires that scientists said was caused by climate change. In these situations, we must respond. And I think we need to respond. We've got time to plan and determine appropriate interventions to build resilience and mitigate risk. But future threats such as coastal erosion, I believe we must respond to differently.
01:56:00 We've got time to develop plans with directly impacted residents and communities. We've got time to budget, and we've got time to explore solutions. We've built rock walls in the past, so who knows what technology is going to be available in 30 or 40, 50 years' time to stop us from losing our beaches and some of us from losing our homes. It's for this reason that I'd like to put on record that Council should only be addressing climate change impacts that have a high probability of occurring in the foreseeable future. Any projections beyond 10 years, in my opinion, should be the concern of future Councils as these threats become more foreseeable. A priority list of threats based on recent events should be made. The top of the list is bushfire zones, then flood zones. All based on recent events, all based on the most up-to-date data. If we're serious about climate change, then this is what I believe this Council must do.
01:57:00 We can't stop the occurrence of natural events, but we can adapt and mitigate the risk by taking appropriate action to climate change impacts that have a high probability of occurring in the foreseeable future. Bushfires, droughts, and the real threat of climate change are the threats that we're Councillor Wilkie: Question, is this plan intended to take into account impacts in the short, medium and long term? Speaker 9: The current plan, what's on the table today is to actually develop that plan. So what will come out of that plan is what the community and the consultation comes out from the community. So we will come back to council with a full plan that has been developed in consultation with the community. Which will, I can't say what's actually in there, but I would imagine that it would take into consideration short term, medium and long term considerations.
01:58:00 Councillor Jurisevic: I'll add an element of a question to that if I may to follow up from that. I mean it's, and taking in Amelia's comments there, the likelihood and the level of impact are likely to change over time. So those impacts are likely to be far more. Recognisable and greater understood the closer they are likely to occur. So I mean, the plan will be, will obviously have to be a movie feast to some degree to adapt as the hazards worsen over time if they, in fact that is what occurs. Speaker 9: And part of the background work actually has been to look at risk assessments, to actually do risk assessments based on those time frames and consider the modelling that is actually directing what those likely outcomes and impacts will be. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: There was an interesting proposition.
01:59:00 And yes, we should be focusing on the highly probable. But definitely not should we be taking a short term view. Twelve years ago Professor Ross Garno put down on the information available to him that the summer of 2020, 1920 was the first time that the climate change models were suggesting that we had extreme bushfire risk across eastern Australia. Twelve years ago it was predicted. Yeah. 2010 emergency services were talking in the first climate action workshop that we held in Pomona and they said that the biggest threat that they can see is the increased bushfire risk, not down the coast but on the strongly steeply sloping hills in the hinterland. What's that supposed to mean? This issue is only as severe and has only reached crisis point because politicians at every level failed to understand what's going on and what's going to happen in the future. It is an ultimate failure of the western democratic system that we are in a crisis that has resulted in the current impacts.
120 minutes in ¶
02:00:00 The current impacts include significantly increased mental health issues for our teenagers and young people as a result of their inability to perceive a prosperous future for themselves in the current global context. And I don't believe that's the only thing. The health and wellbeing aspects which are honest now. The fact is that we've got a great deal of risk on the planet and the number of deaths across the globe. The increased number of deaths from heatwaves and with our ageing population that's a significant adaptation issue. Now some of the solutions to that are simple things like making our urban environments and places go more shady. It takes more than ten years for a tree to get up and provide that shade, so all those issues have to be considered in the long term. It's about vector borne diseases which are in council control. Yeah. The health and wellbeing has clearly said that with the increased storms, increased temperatures, that our vectors like mozzies on the salt plains or the vectors that lead to Ross River fever are likely to get worse and therefore we're going to have more public health issues to consider.
02:01:00 So it's not just the big ticket issues about houses falling into the beach or more frequent flooding, it's about the pervasive impacts across our community that this plan has to address. And to me, it is already 20 years too late. And so I urge councils to not consider this something that we can just knock down the road a bit. I know there's a lot of controversy about declaring the emergency, but for someone who's studied this since the late 1980s, it is crunch time. What follows next, if we have inaction at the three levels of government, is not something any of us would like to see for our children. So we should be bold and we should work through this plan and be honest and be authentic in our discussions and make sure that we do what we can in our area to achieve an outcome that's better than if we had no plan at all.
02:02:00 Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Jurisdict. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I concur with the thoughts of Councillor Stockwell there. It's not just manmade structure that we've got to consider. I mean, the impacts here could be not only of floods and of fires, but floods are usually the result of storms. And if the changes that are occurring are to be believed, we'll have increased cyclone activity here. That could have a decimating effect on forests and the like with white bass. We've seen it to the north where forests have been decimated, which has an effect on all of our ecology and all of the native flora and fauna that we hold so dear. The changes of temperature rise could completely change the ecology of the area. The trees that we see now and the bushland that we see now may actually transition and change to a different style, which we have already spoken about as a result of the impacts of the Peregian fires.
02:03:00 So, yeah, there's a lot to consider here and a lot to get your head around. But without proper planning, without forethought and forethought into the long term, the short term future, and the medium and long term future needs to be at the forefront of our thinking and our planning. So, you know, I see that we need to look at the entire effect and the entire impact going forward. And I think this plan is a great start. It's the next stepping stone in the process of going through this whole ordeal that we face. So, that's it. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Look, I'd like to flag that. I wouldn't hate to see anything that would limit this sort of planning to the short term. I think it has to take into account the short, medium and long term impacts of climate change to ensure that our community is well placed not only now, but well into the future to be more resilient socially, economically and environmentally in the face of inevitable climate change,
02:04:00 which is already well underway. And perhaps we're taking steps too late. In one sense, we're already playing catch up in many senses. And I think it's a great plan. I appreciate what you're seeking to do here is pull together all the many different aspects of the work that the Noosa Council has already done in this space. And those steps include ensuring future flood and fire hazard risks were recognised via amendments to the former Noosa Plan and in the new Noosa Plan through more robust development requirements, committing in 2016 to taking meaningful action towards more environmentally and financially responsible future by setting a zero emissions target for council operations. In 2017, becoming the first in Queensland, among the first in Queensland funded by the state to develop climate change adaptation plan and the coastal hazards adaptation plan. 2017 being the first in Queensland to endorse the zero emissions Noosa strategy with actions
02:05:00 to achieve net zero emissions for council operations by 2026. 2017, joining the city's power partnership, which shares knowledge to help communities join the global shift towards a more financially and environmentally viable future. And December 2017, endorsing a climate change response policy, which guides council decision making and ongoing capacity building and climate response. And in June 2019, after extensive community consultation, adopting the environment strategy with actions to help the broader Noosa Shire achieve zero emissions targets. It's a very ambitious project and I commend you for it. Thank you. Council, would you wish to close? Okay. Yeah. Councillor Wegener: A part of our identity as Noosians, people that live in Noosa, is the confidence that we are going forward and addressing climate change problems now. We address problems in the distant past, which we are enjoying today.
02:06:00 It's far more than 10 years ago, back in the 60s. And we are addressing problems in the future. The problems that they confronted with sand mining, so forth, National Park. We are enjoying the benefits of the forethought that they had back then, and that has become a part of our culture. And I'm hoping that with the kids and with the work that Dahlia is doing with the E-Hub, we can instill a sense of peace of mind to our kids that we actually are doing something. We're not helpless in this world. And as residents of Noosa, we are far from helpless. We actually are leading the world and engender that and reestablish that culture within our community from the little kids all the way up. And then we make evidence-based decisions, and that's really important that we step back, get the information that we want to do, do the research that we do, that we do very well. For example, to bring back the fish, it's going to be 10 years, at least 10 years before you begin to get the results of what is going on now, but that's what the planning is for.
02:07:00 And I think it goes back to our community, our identity, our community involvement. So I commend what you're doing with this plan because it fits so nicely in with why I wanted to run for Noosa Council in the first place. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Wynne. Put the motion to those in favour. That's unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We now have got Item 4, referred from the Services and Organisation Committee, the Operational Plan Progress Report. Can that be the appeal point? I beg your pardon, I'm sorry. Item 3, Planning and Environment Court Appeal Number D-102 of 220, Refusal of Ancillary Dwelling Unit 133, Gateway Drive, Noosaville, referred for further consideration. Councillor Kerry, questions for Kerry? Keri, Councillor Lorentson, you wanted to stand and repeat, didn't you? Councillor Lorentson: No, I'd requested some further information on the matter which I received and I'm happy to move on. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Right, can we have another one?
02:08:00 Move Councillor Stockwell, seconded by Councillor Jurisevic. Any councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to it. Thank you for moving the matter to the general meeting. I requested the further information which I received. I will support the recommendation to defend the appeal so that both parties can begin the mediation process and hopefully reach a negotiated agreement. It's my opinion that there does exist an opportunity for the applicant to review his proposal and resubmit for council approval. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you, Keri. Now, item four. Sorry, operational plan progress report. Third court. Fourth court. Councillor Jurisevic: There's nine and ten on the original agenda, wasn't there? Councillor Wilkie: Yes, there was item nine on page 73 of the Services and Organisations Committee agenda. I've referred this because in the past
02:09:00 this is often at the general committee. It's often a report directed to the general committee and it involves KPIs across the whole of the organisation that should be of interest to other councillors. Councillor Jurisevic: I see that. I see you're ahead of... I see you're ahead of the time frame. Yes. Well, it used to happen that the report was done Speaker 8: when I was on holiday, isn't it? Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. That's why it was done on time. The more efficient CEO is always saying Mr. Senior. I guess. Speaker 8: Both of these next two reports, the operational report and the end of the report, she wanted to get it for me while I was away and she did a great job. Yeah. Do you want to take any questions or make any comments? Mayor Stewart: I have a question. Just looking at the quarter 4, 8th quarter of June 2020, we're behind schedule on seven initiatives and on track for eight. Comparing that to all the other quarters where we're doing so well and we're so much more on track and behind schedule, can you just talk me through that this quarter?
02:10:00 Speaker 8: Sure. So the ones, I've listed just below that table actually in the report is seven that we've behind. Two of those were on track earlier this year and they are the Fridgham Beach Community Council and the next stage of the Digital Hub. Okay. Both of those now being delayed due to the contract going to liquidation. Okay. So that pushed those two. Similarly, the Noosa River Management Plan was on track a little last year when we came to tracking that. I don't think we got out of community consultation as well as we could have as we went through that Christmas period. So rather than trying to push that through prior to the election, we pulled that one back and we're better off being a bit late and right than early and wrong. So those are the main two. The other one is the placemaking team. Similarly, that was always intended to only be looked at once the planning scheme was adopted and because they're going to be the same staff and the same staff working on that. And we didn't get the planning scheme adopted until last month.
02:11:00 So again, that one's been pushed back a bit. They're the main ones. Thank you. Speaker 4: Thank you, too. Speaker 8: Oh, sorry. There was one more. The other one's the revenue diversification project. Oh, what's going to go there? This is one that is a direct result of the team we've been working at, looking at how we can, as the name suggests, diversify revenue, getting revenue from commercial or finding commercial-type avenues that will take pressure off our rates. We've got a team that's been working on it for one year doing that. And they're the same people who have been heading the road of having to deal with the budget implications of COVID and what that means and how we have to mull up all our different future scenarios. So that basically hasn't been a priority for that group until we get through all the COVID stuff. And once that's a bit more under control, they'll come back and start working on that again. That's the direct impact. Councillor Wilkie: Mr. CEO, can I ask you about an item on page 81, which is the development of community sustainability indicators? They're a bit behind schedule. Double-barrel question.
02:12:00 Could you sort of flesh out what these community sustainability... an example of what a community sustainability indicator is? And also, you've mentioned it would take... it'd be part of the development of a community plan. We normally operate under a corporate plan. Could you just flesh out a bit about the difference between a community plan and a corporate plan? What sort of opportunities that might provide? Speaker 8: Sure. Maybe I'll talk a bit about what a community sustainability indicator is first. We have organisational KPIs, you know, from workplace health and safety to financial. That's about our sort of plans for a community sustainability indicator is really what is a way of measuring how our community is going. Do we have some in place at the moment? But not in an integrated way. Do we have some around, you know, a particular environment? You know, it might be what's the ratings of the river? Is it an A-rated river or which way is that going? We might have some around the economy, you know, what's our employment rate compared to state average and how that's going. We might have some around our community codes, you know, what's the level of community engagement
02:13:00 in terms of participation in the volunteer groups and what's our volunteer rate? Is it above in-state average or what's the trend over time? We don't have those in any coordinated way at the moment. So have a look at the holistic view about how our community is tracking over time. And that's what this piece of work is designed to do. To look at, compared to five years ago, ten years ago, what are our long-term trends about how we're going with the community? We've actually put that on hold because in the cycle of where we are with the election cycle, it always makes sense to look at where are we going over the next five years, ten years, twenty years? Feeling soon after election, we've got a new council come on board and what's the process to do that? We've currently been using the corporate plan process, the council's plan for the community. I'll be coming to you sometime in the next few weeks or months when I get to it, looking at going down a community plan process. The community plan process is what's the community plan for the community? Subtle difference.
02:14:00 And it was originally a statutory requirement for a council in Queensland to have a community plan and that was going maybe from around about 2008 or 9 up until about 2012 or 13. Every council had to have a community plan or work with the community to develop that. But they changed the legislation. What I'll be seeing from the council is I think, even though it's not a legislative requirement, that's actually a pretty good way of looking at things. How do you go through a process to develop a long-term vision for Noosa, involving the community on that journey so it's the community's plan for the community, not the council's plan for the community? And then how would you track how you're going on that process? So in five years' time, how would we know if we're on track to where we want to get to? What's an integrated set of sustainability indicators that will tell us whether we'll find a place to do that around the triple bottom line of community, economy, environment? So that's probably a long answer to a short question, but it's a way in which I'll be coming back to give some council advice about how I think we'll get to that next stage
135 minutes in ¶
02:15:00 of the fun part of being a council, which is looking at the long-term vision and having a good question about it. Thank you. Tom? Councillor Wegener: Well, it actually sounds like the Bhutan and the economics of happiness, what we're looking at here. So we might already have a framework to begin with. Speaker 7: How happy is everyone? Councillor Wegener: Yeah, well, that's really important, you know. Speaker 8: Before I'm eating it up, I'll have a 10-day silent meditation retreat. Great, I like that. Speaker 4: That's challenging. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Normally it's challenging when you're where we live and who owns the quarters. Mayor Stewart: I was like, I need competition. If there's no more questions, I'll... Councillor Wilkie: Clare's moving the motion. We have a seconder, please, Councillor Jurisevic. Any councillors to speak to the motion? I'll just... Mayor Stewart: I just want to commend staff. Look, there are 32 initiatives in the 2019-20 operational plan. Suffice to say, there's a lot going on. And council staff should be commended on this.
02:16:00 On top of this, we have 43 projects underway across the Shire, which are infrastructure projects, largely due to the grants we've received from the federal and state governments. So this is a significant workload for many of our departments, along with the operational plans. So I just want to commend staff on all the hard work they're doing, and thank you, sir. Councillor Wilkie: I just have one more question. On page 84, the KPI graph for number of planning applications decided within statutory timeframe, the graph on the top right-hand of that page, does that indicate a blowout in times? And is that related in any way to a surge in applications prior to the introduction of the new paper scheme? Speaker 8: Now, the other big graph with the blue elements are those that are a bit behind, or not decided in time, and green ones are fine. The main areas that are causing a little bit of grief at the moment are material change in use. Part of the reason that they... And they have been traditionally a little bit behind, is that they're the more complex applications. Often, they don't meet the same theme, need more information, bounce back and forward,
02:17:00 and get a bit more... The one that's a bit unusual, it's not normally in this space for the applications, is the operational work vegetation. So they're normally one pretty fast. They're a little bit behind at the moment. So that's why that blue line in the total is a lot higher than it normally would be. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Sorry, Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll just... As the Mayor has stated, I'll commend the staff on their work to date and through the challenging environment to achieve what we've achieved through the fourth quarter. It's lovely to hear the new councillors on board and acknowledging the work of the previous councillor and the staff in heading forward in achieving our progress. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? If the motion goes in favour, that's unanimous. Thank you. Next item up is the Year in Review, also referred for the significance of the issue. Councillor Jurisevic: Should that be the Year in Review?
02:18:00 Councillor Wilkie: That's page 87 of the Services and Organisations Committee Agenda. Speaker 8: I wouldn't mind maybe just echoing the words from the Mayor who visited our previous report. You get tired reading this report. There's so much that's going on. And it had a big year with fires and elections and COVID. It's been an unusual year. And I really can't speak more highly of the staff in our organisation for what they have done. Every one of them. Above and beyond the way I've described in the report. But to get where we've had to in such trying circumstances over the last few months has been an awesome effort. And, yeah, we're very privileged to have such good staff here. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell, you referred this item for consideration and understanding. I did. Did you wish to speak to it? Councillor Jurisevic: No, it hasn't moved yet. I'll move it then. I'll second it. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second it. Councillor Stewart. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Look, I think it's important to be here because it is important after a full year's of activity
02:19:00 to step back and say what has been achieved. Councillor Wilkie: What just happened. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. And for the first nine months it was extremely busy. And then it got busier. But we still have, you know, when you look at the top ten highlights of 2019 and 20, we can still say to our community, look, these are all significant issues that have been resolved in a year. Whether it's from, you know, the Noosa North Shore Beach Campground where we've, you know, significant upgrade. We've had relationships with Landcare where they've gone and used their trainees to go and revegetate and take out the weeds and to make it a far more sustainable holiday destination. To the success of the loot bus during Christmas time around, going round and round, the first time we've been able to achieve that.
02:20:00 Right the way through to the COVID response, which, you know, we heard that our business round table, we had the Queensland Small Business Commissioner sitting in because it's a model that the state says is really valuable to get that real time information up to the highest levels of government to ensure that the response is as effective and as quick as possible. So as the CEO has said, we have a lot to thank for a highly motivated, highly committed and reasonably tired start at the moment. And so I suppose that's the other thing is we also as councils have to realise that while after a new election, we've got lots of great ideas that we have to be mindful that the long term success of this organisation is about maintaining the productivity of our staff and make sure that they do have time to relax and do have time to go on holidays and that we head off in a new direction,
02:21:00 refreshed and invigorated. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Tom. Councillor Wegener: Just a thought, obviously on Thursday night, this will be the last thing on the agenda. And, you know, perhaps, you know, at the end of the year in review, you know, pop a bottle. And, but also, you know... What a wait for a year. But, you know, obviously, like we're saying, that the staff is a bit of a problem. And if there's any way, you know, through the week to echo what we're saying, we were talking amongst ourselves here, but to get that word out to the staff. Councillor Jurisevic: And, you know, it's not only for one year, but when I see things like, I'm heartened to be reminded that the water rebates that we give to community organisations of 87, you know, 86, nearly $87,000 and more
02:22:00 continues to get highlighted in the fact that we, you know, we spend $170,000 on our sports fields and the like. The water rebates are of particular interest to me because it's one that I brought to Council and I'm glad to see that we continue to support our community groups with things like year in, year out, not just in one year, as has been in the past. But also the achievements of, you know, of where our economic grants program goes to and the volunteer organisations that we support, the outcomes of the plan and all the other areas of Council. I mean, there are so many and such a vast array of elements that are underway. You know, even looking down to, you know, the visitor numbers within the library, the physical items that have been done, the number of bin collections and the level of street sweeping, the number of development applications that go through and the level of achievement of approvals of 94%, you know, only 30 refusals in the last year. A reminder that, you know,
02:23:00 there's 10,724 kilometres worth of roads being swept by the street sweeper in a year. I think some of these statistics are wonderful to see and really to realise the level of service and the length of effort that Council goes to to deliver for our community. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Stewart. It has been a challenging year. As our CEO said when we first came in, major bushfires, completion of the planning scheme, an election, COVID and a new Council and the transition of a new Council. I'd like to congratulate the CEO and Council staff. It has been no doubt a challenge. It has been a year like no other. I'd also like to acknowledge and congratulate the former Council because many of these initiatives were obviously done before the new Council came in. And as we move from reviving to thrive as part of our COVID economic recovery, I'd just like to acknowledge that we as a Council will continue to do all we can to support our community going forward. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion?
02:24:00 Wish to close by? I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Next item is report direct to the General Committee, the Budget Review BR1 for the 2021 financial year. Welcome, Trent. Mayor Stewart: Hi, Trent. Speaker 8: Good afternoon. Councillor Jurisevic: The annual ceremony of carryovers continues. Love your light, Trent, we promise. Mayor Stewart: I know. Speaker 6: I see you all every month. Councillor Wilkie: So Trent, for the benefit of those watching from home, do you want to just give a brief overview of what's the budget review in terms? Speaker 6: Obviously, Council only adopted its 2021 budget a few weeks ago, but as tends to be the case, a lot of projects and programs don't always fall within the timings of a financial year of 1 July to 3 June. So at the end of each financial year, we review all the operational and capital projects that are underway and we put forward a submission
02:25:00 for carryover of those operational capital projects, in particular where the capital project is underway or there's a contractual commitment to undertake those works or its essential works. So what you find in front of you here is a summary of those works and the implications it has on our 2021 budget. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question, Trent? Sure. Again, this is for the benefit of the people listening today. Can you give us an update regarding the budget community engagement platform that we're delivering to the community as promised earlier this year? Speaker 8: No, that's not actually part of the budget review process. Oh, okay. I'll have to give you some information on that. So we're just working through that at the moment in terms of getting questions sorted out to people for the under the notice component and also asking them for feedback on how the budget community engagement process works. Okay. I imagine that will be out in two or three weeks.
02:26:00 Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. So we promised before October that's going to be delivered. Yeah. Excellent. Mayor Stewart: I've got a question. Again, I think it's more for the benefit of the people from home so you'll know the answer to this. Sure. Just in regard, and I think it will give some comfort to those watching, in regard to our cash reserves, we spoke about this before the rates came out and if they were worse than, you know, if it really does get worse than we think, we still have a good amount of money in cash reserves that we can draw upon if necessary that we haven't had to dip into along the way for this. Speaker 6: Sure. So obviously as part of this BR process we do evaluate the cash again following obviously the extensive work we did during the budget process to ensure that we've retained a sustainable level of cash balance for Council. Now, all the works that come through the budget review process for BR1 for carryover, they're works that are already committed so we had already allowed for those in our original cash forecast. So there's nothing in here that will unduly
02:27:00 or negatively affect the cash balances that we forecast to keep Noosa Council sustainable and actually a lot of them are externally funded, the capital ones in particular, through some new emerging grants that came through from the Feds and State Government. So no, the outcomes of the BR1 won't negatively affect the cash balances. Councillor Jurisevic: So yeah, I'll do the other dollars for Dickson. We've already talked about carryovers but in this we talk about emergent items and there's a significant amount of emergent items, $3,225,000 worth listed here. Can you explain where those emergent works have arisen from and how we funded them? Speaker 6: Sure. So we adopted our base budget in the first week in July and subsequent to us finalising the budget process there was announced an additional grant for what's called the Unite and Recover Grant Program, $2 million, which doesn't require any co-funding from Council. It's $2 million that we can spend on a range of agreed capital works by 30th June.
02:28:00 So that's come in as an emergent work so that increases our capital program by $2 million. There's another $600,000 for Beckmans Road Design Works which again is fully funded through Grant. And the others are all as well other minor grant applications as well as an extra $310,000 for the Netball Courts upgrade. Councillor Jurisevic: Probably not in yours for you to explain that one but with regard to the $600,000, Beckmans Road we know is a state road and a state responsibility. Mr CEO, you might like to explain why we've got $600,000 towards the design of a state road. Speaker 8: The state, it is a state obligation to design and build the upgrade to Beckmans Road under the de-mining agreement which was signed many years ago. They have been happy to effectively subcontract the design of that to Council. And what we're talking about here is the design of the Croy Noosa Road intersection
02:29:00 with Beckmans Road, that roundabout area there. And so they are going to pay up to undertake that design work for them, $600,000. Councillor Jurisevic: That's just for the roundabout area, not the entire road, just for the roundabout, that's right. Just clarifying that so that people understand the scale and the cost of Beckmans Road upgrade. Speaker 8: There is additional alignment in terms of where that intersection would be, services, issues around tenure and so on. Does that bit of work actually get that design done or detailed or something like that? We can bank the bypass if it's necessary. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Any questions? Councillor Lorentson: I was just going to ask, have we got the capability and manpower to deliver on all these shovel ready projects that we've received state and federal funding for? I understand that time is of the essence and these projects have got to be delivered by a certain time. Speaker 8: That's a good question. I certainly hope so at the end.
150 minutes in ¶
02:30:00 We'll be doing everything we can to make sure. Absolutely. And I spoke to the infrastructure team and they assured me that that is the case. But the thing about delivering projects is that it's not just the value, it's the number of projects. A lot of small projects are actually more difficult to deliver than big projects. But the good thing is that most of these projects are generally shoveling and designs are in place or it's, you know, quasi maintenance type work, fixing up electrical walls and organising roof repairs and things like that. So they're a bit simpler in terms of not having to go through a major tender process. It's often panels and things like that who go out and do it. I've also made it pretty clear to the team that we need to deliver these and part of that reason is that if we want to be able to get into future funding as well, we've got to be able to prove that, say, we can deliver it. Otherwise, if we don't, we'll go back next year and say, well, we think we should, you know, give us more money and they're going to go, well, why would we do that because we haven't delivered it. Councillor Lorentson: And someone else
02:31:00 has missed out on that opportunity. Correct. Speaker 8: Yeah, so there's a bit of pressure on the team to be able to deliver those 43 projects that we need to deliver. Councillor Jurisevic: And with regards to that funding, CEO, I mean, those emergent works, you talk about our capacity to deliver, but the idea of that economic stimulus is to deliver, you know, to provide opportunities within the community. I mean, those works are being subcontra-adapted. Correct. Speaker 8: And one of those, we actually framed our program on that on the Deliberate Play. The easiest way the Council has done it is they would have been a couple million dollar project, big tender, and potentially have a town contractor within that scale. Whereas having a lot of smaller contracts means it's more likely to be local contractors. Of course, mum and dad type businesses will do a $50,000 job here or a $20,000 job there or in some cases $8,000. It means more time consuming for us
02:32:00 to manage those projects, but more effective in getting that funding onto the ground locally and quicker. Councillor Wegener: It seems that there's a rush to get it done in a way because you don't know what the weather's going to throw at us. And so, I would suspect that there is some incentive to get going now as soon as you possibly can up until Christmas even before, you know, we don't really know what's going to happen. Speaker 8: But we're actually already completed one or two. So the pressure's on. Yeah. And every month through the capital work executive which is like the management level throughout through the project we're really up to speed. We're drilling it down. Are there any things that are stopping us delivering these that we need to get these over on? Absolutely. Yeah. I'm happy to move the recommendation. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll second it. Councillor Lorentson: No, you're right. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I second it, Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Jurisdict. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do want to highlight one sentence. And that sentence is, capital grant revenue has increased by 4.1 million and the revised capital expenditure program has increased by 8.2 million to $35.3 million. That is a record
02:33:00 capital expenditure for this Shire in its history. It is, as the Chief Executive Officer just pointed out, it is the most sound local economic development initiative we can take in the current environment. When the free market goes into recession, public expenditure needs to go up as much as we can afford to drive more jobs in our local community and we've just heard the explanation how we've tried to do that. I think that's really important. It is ambitious but it is what is needed and it is, I think, Councillor Wegener mentioned some of the things he went to stand in front of the community to go as a council. One of the ones I said was exactly that, that we would try and bring forward future capital works and we're very fortunate that we've been in the right position with state and federal funding that that's allowed us still to only have a fairly modest budget deficit. It's been slightly increased as a result of the budget review but it's still quite modest
02:34:00 in the current conditions and I would far prefer that and trying to get as many dollars as possible circulating in the local economy. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Now the councillors will speak to the motion. If the motion goes in favour, that's unanimous. Thank you. Now, Speaker 8: item seven, Councillor Wilkie: financial performance report. Page 19 of the same agenda. By far so good. Looking good, looking healthy. Speaker 6: Early stage of the financial year obviously, so. Mayor Stewart: I've got a couple of questions. Sure. Again, this is more for the people at home. We were worried about rates. We made a conscious effort not to increase our rates. Can you tell me how the rates are coming in? What they're looking like? What's the trend? Are people paying them? Are they, have we projected how our projections are like? Are we going better than we thought or worse than we thought? Are we on part of what we expected? Speaker 6: Sure. Okay now,
02:35:00 there's two components there. Obviously in terms of what we forecast our revenue would be for the year our revenue is roughly, is generally in line with what we forecast. So our estimates were on part. So the total revenue is, is in line with expectations. No budget risk there. The other side of the coin is actually whether the cash comes in. So we've been tracking the cash so far for the first three weeks of rates issue. Now obviously we've got a longer discount period this time with what we adopted in the rates to support the community to pay. But we're still seeing that the actual cash coming in the door is pretty much on par at three weeks than it was this time last year. So we're not seeing any decline. Obviously that may just be simply at this stage indicative of those that can pay are paying early. So we will see
02:36:00 is still there and the rates are still coming in. Mayor Stewart: So we've gone from 30 days to pay to 60 days. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Questions, councillors? If we could move Councillor Stewart. Second. Second Councillor Lawrenceon. Councillors to speak to the motion. All those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you Trent. Thank you. Now we have to yeah of course we have a request for another adjournment. Comfort stop. Comfort stop. It is a very long
02:42:00 Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It's in the process of being reviewed, with a view to bringing it to Council in the next few months and looking at and forming fire management for 2021 and beyond. Is that correct?
02:43:00 Speaker 7: Yeah, that's correct. So we've been operating by our 2015 plan after some time. So it's been guiding our fire management actions for some years. So we've been in the process of reviewing this one for the better part of 12 months, but obviously we're really stepping up now, particularly with community concerns moving into this season. And that new fire management plan will have more detail than the previous one did, that hopefully reflects the increased level of interest and making it a lot clearer on what our fire break standards are, where and how they're applied, and also how we prioritise our burn program. Mayor Stewart: And have we been working in conjunction with any other agencies in regards to that plan? Speaker 7: The plan I'm referring to is specifically around how we manage Council bushland reserves. So while we certainly work with QFES around standards related to fire access trials and fuel reduction zones, it's primarily around Council bushland and the way we manage our land. So the way we work with other agencies like Queensland Parks and Wildlife, we have other forums for that. So we work with them in other ways. Mayor Stewart: Right. I know that we've increased our cool-fly burns from three or four to seven.
02:44:00 That's correct. Yep. How are we? I know we've had rain. Where are we in regards to the cool-fly burns? Speaker 7: Well, our intent is to get seven done this financial year. So we completed the first in early May. We've had another one scheduled, which has been cancelled, but we're still hoping to get done this month, and that's the landfill site, so it's been scheduled twice, I believe, and both times it's not been able to be undertaken, but we've still got contractors going out there every few days, basically checking the site to check that it's available, and we may get a third one in. Our initial third likely site for the burn was the Woolooey Creek area. That's unlikely, given how narrow our window is getting out. It's a very complicated burn, so we've identified a few other burns that we can bring forward if we get suitable weather. Mayor Stewart: Okay, great. And we've increased fire trails for about six kilometres or more? Speaker 7: We have, as well as our ongoing maintenance of about over 60 kilometres of fire trails. We've also looked at some significant new ones and fuel reduction zones, as well, particularly around Heritage Park, which is one of the actions from the Parklands Management Plan from some years ago, and down at Peregian Beach, as well.
165 minutes in ¶
02:45:00 Mayor Stewart: Great. And are they on track? Speaker 7: They are, yep, yep. They're on track. They're being contracted out as we speak. The community letters will probably go out in the next couple of weeks. Terrific. There'll be a lot of interest in the community at those two sites. A lot of people live there, and some people have different points of view, but they will certainly occur. Councillor Lorentson: Right, thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: An example of how fickle the situation is, the planned burn for Daintree Estate today has now been cancelled. Councillor Lorentson: Have we had any requests from residents to remove vegetation on Council land, Craig? Speaker 7: If you'd asked me two weeks ago, the answer would have been no, but yes, it's moving up very quickly. So that's our biggest challenge, quite frankly, is dealing with the community requests and the community's perception of risk around bushfire. And the biggest challenge is my team will face over the next month or two will be making decisions on areas where people are wanting vegetation removed.
02:46:00 We'll certainly try and meet the community as much as we can. We're not going to go in and do wholesale vegetation removal where all the mapping says that it's not a really high-risk area. But at the same time, if there's small things we can do to keep the community comfortable without actually providing environmental harm, then we'll try and meet the community where we can. Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. John? Councillor Wegener: Does the state regulations have changed concerning burning around people's property and what they can chop down and sort of, you know, maintain their safety? How is that going? You know, people doing that, do they know about the regulations? And would this be something that would go into the double-page spread that we saw? Do you think the council flipped into the paper once a month, just information on that level? Speaker 7: It could do. The state regulations around clearing for fire management changed last December quite quickly. They allow significantly more clearing than was previously able. It's not something that's probably really broadly known. It's not something we as a council have promoted or advertised.
02:47:00 It certainly presents some challenges to us as far as people being able to clear vegetation. It's certainly true that most of the contractors out there doing this sort of work are certainly very well aware of it, though, and are promoting it within the local community where it's relevant. Councillor Lorentson: And it's based on, it's not an objective sort of test, from my understanding, but regulation. If you have a concern or a fear that you may be impacted by a fire, then you can make the clearing. Is that right, Craig? Speaker 7: You can. Look, I'm probably not as good as Connor now. He's about the only staff member I don't have here today related to fire. Councillor Lorentson: I'm just trying to remember the wording, but I remember when I read it, it was quite subjective. Speaker 4: There are some measurements in the regulation around what can be cleared. Up to 20 metres or one and a half times the height of the trees is the maximum. But the wording in the regulation is about what's necessary.
02:48:00 So it's not just if you feel fear, you've actually got to show that it is necessary. So I advise people that they should attain some advice from a fire expert to work out what's necessary for their property, how they can best manage it. Councillor Wilkie: And this is just what they can do on their property, not on the surrounding reserves? Speaker 4: Certainly. They can't go onto surrounding reserves, yep. Councillor Wilkie: On the question of reserves, do all the court notes that Noosa Council is responsible for 4% of the land mass that's in the area covered by the bushland reserves? Speaker 7: It's actually about 3.6 to 3.7. It changes quite quickly, so I thought it was safer to say under 4%. So yeah, so basically under 4% of the land in Noosa is council managed area with bushland on it. Councillor Wilkie: You mentioned a range of methods for mitigating fires. Can you just run through them, Craig, and perhaps explain a bit about when you would apply each of those? Fuel reduction, fire access trials, etc. Speaker 7: Fire access trials are the ones that most people are most familiar with. Commonly known as fire breaks.
02:49:00 We prefer not to use the terminology fire break because it's not now nor has it ever been the intent to then provide a physical break between fire. And we saw that in some of our fires last year. We had fires spotting 500, 800, even a kilometre ahead. You would need a kilometre break to get a true break in those areas. They're primarily designed to get vehicle access in to protect home and property. So there's a lot of examples around the Shire where, depending on the size of the vehicle and the access they've got, it depends on how wide the trail is to allow fire services to get in. We have a controlled burn program where we go in and do fuel reduction burns through the bushland areas. There's all sorts of challenges with controlled burning, not only in community concerns over burning, but just the sheer weather. The real challenges in getting it done. And fuel reduction zones are mostly used where those other two can't be used very successfully. There's a whole range of reasons where it may not be safe or may not be physically possible to put a fire access trail in. For example, a coastal dune with a steep slope is not a spot where you can go in and provide a five metre break or something like that because it would just erode away.
02:50:00 So in those areas we can go through and actually reduce understory vegetation, usually perhaps up to 10 metres, possibly 15 depending on the risk. So there are three main mechanisms that we use. And they're usually based on the topography of the site and the actual risk to the site itself. Councillor Jurisevic: Craig, you mentioned less than 4% council control. Do we know how much QPWS controls? Speaker 7: It's in the low to mid 20s. Michael, do you know? I think it's about 22% off the top of my head. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: 22.35. Speaker 7: There you go. Thank you, Council. 22.35 is my expert advice. Very impressive. Councillor Jurisevic: It's in the low 20s. I've seen this figure. Speaker 7: I can't recall exactly what it is, though, Joe. And there's also significant bush land on Fiverr land as well. We work really closely with QPWS. Our officers meet with their officers from both regions, usually about February or March
02:51:00 each year. And we sit around a table for a few hours and go through every possible burn that both parties might be able to do, how we can combine them, where we can share some resources. And then we come together as part of the broader area fire management group, which also has things like Department of Transport and Main Roads, Natural Resources, SEQ Water. So other land managers, but not quite the stake that QPWS have. Councillor Jurisevic: Anthony, Craig's doing all the talking. Can't let him get away without asking you a question. How's all the technological advancements and future solutions looking at present? Thanks, Joe. Speaker 1: You'll get a full report from the hub in next month's round. But yeah, FireTech Connect is going very well. So we've got about a quarter of a million. So just to explain that budget, we've got initial 100,000 from the feds for that was from the innovation and the industry fund. And that really primarily is around what we're doing right now, which is a program, an acceleration
02:52:00 program. So the accelerator program is taking local technology companies and national and international and trying to bring them to market and bring them into effect quicker than they would normally be able to do. So we help them commercialize quicker, pilot quicker, access capital quicker. So that's kind of where the first 100's gone. So that's federal funding. There's another 50,000, which is a state grant, which is mainly around marketing and actually tourism related. And that was another bushfire response. And then we've been successful, probably about three, four weeks ago, we got the another 100,000. And with the 27, you've heard 127 is the number. So that's 100,000 from federal bushfire recovery grant, the 27 referred to actually, that's because it's for an international event, there's actually some ticket in and some membership
02:53:00 and sponsorship money coming in. So that's the other 27. So that adds up to over 250, 270,000. So really, the outcomes of that are really to, for Noosa to become really the headquarters for fire technology excellence, digital fire technology, obviously, we're looking to focus on the local community first in its application, and we are looking to pilot an opportunity. So it's great that we're now working with local community first in its application. Craig and James. So we've got disaster response, recovery, coordination, and natural areas and environmental services. So we're now, I think, starting to go across council in this activity. But it's kind of just the start. Right now, we've, we've, we've got a, as it says in the report, we've got a world class mentoring panel, working with 14 high tech businesses. So about four or five are local.
02:54:00 But obviously, other parts of the country are local. Another part of this is investment attraction. So it's, it's actually looking at attracting more talent here, the best research here. We are partnering with CSIRO as well in this. So it's kind of evolving, but that's, that's where it's at. But we'll, we'll give you some more in depth kind of update on the program in the September's year end digital hub report. Councillor Jurisevic: Good to see CSIRO with a figure in this as well. Speaker 1: Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Some of this technology involves early detection of fires. Is it satellite technology they use? Anthony, can you talk a bit about the sort of technologies involved? Speaker 1: Yeah. So one of the tenants of the hub is Fireball International. So their technology is a mixture of on ground sensors, cameras, and then satellite. So I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that basically this technology is, identifies the fire within seconds rather than minutes and longer. So it really, and it really aids the signaling of the scale location and the, and the intensity
02:55:00 of fires in remote areas using that combination of satellite and on ground sensors and cameras. So it does involve an investment in the actual infrastructure, cameras, sensors, the satellites are already up there doing their thing. So the software integrates that whole, that whole communication. To then pass to the, to the responders as, as accurately and as quickly as possible. Councillor Wilkie: So we're about a month away from time last year when bridging the supply fires. Is there any opportunity for this sort of technology to be operative by the start of the fire season? Speaker 1: Yeah. We are in conversations, I guess, around that and state government are looking to support us. So there is the opportunity for Noosa to be involved in a, in a rollout of that pilot. So, so I think that in the next few weeks we'll be putting that proposition on the table. Councillor Wegener: Does it need to be funded by us? I think, is it a financial decision that we'll be making to get to be a part of it or are
02:56:00 we already a part of it? Speaker 1: Separate from the fire connect program. So fire ball, I've put a proposal, well, I guess we're in discussions around a proposal of joint funding. And I guess this links back to a $1.2 million fed, federal funding that council adopted back in, oh gosh, back in July now, I think, June, July. So council, I think the, the proposition is that there's a, it's about two to $300,000 per year to roll out that kind of sensor and technology. So yes, there would be, there would be a funding ask, but I, I believe that there would be a three-way kind of contribution to that state, local and, and private. Councillor Wilkie: Would it involve councillors to our north and south as well, take a regional approach to fire management? Speaker 1: Yeah, there certainly has been discussions with Sunshine Coast Council on that.
02:57:00 I don't think we've engaged Gidby yet, but yeah, ideally it would be an LGAQ, I think eventually. It would look at how you actually engage the whole state in, in that pilot. I'm sure it's for a sensor on the Rattler. Yeah. Mayor Stewart: This is, this is, this is Fireball. That's a fire sale. Technology's been used in California, isn't it? The fire's there. Speaker 1: Yeah, so the question is, yeah, so the, this particular, I guess, local technology has already partnered with Cal Fire, which is California Fire. So that, Fireball International at the hub, I think they started with about five or six. They're already up to, I think, 15 or 16 between here, California and Vancouver. So, pretty exciting developments. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Who would have thought we would have had an astrophysicist working on fire management in Bridget? Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Seriously. Speaker 6: Doesn't surprise me.
02:58:00 You're Bridget. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Come to our speech. Conflict of interest. Craig, a question. Speaker 8: Craig, I'll show you after this before we get it up. We've got a fire season. Does anything keep you awake at night in terms of our preparedness, in, in the land that we're in trouble? Speaker 7: Not from our preparedness. Um, what keeps me awake at night to be honest is the impact on my staff of the community expectations around fire, to be honest. Um. That's where it is. I mean, a lot of the community focuses on the bushland at the house and the national park. The unfortunate thing is, if we get the same weather as we had last year and people go around lighting fires, we will have bushfires again. Nothing we or anyone can do to stop that. And that's why I think it's really important. Our messaging keeps going out to the community that we will do what we can, but the community needs to fix up your yard, clean up your roofs, make sure your yard's in good shape. And we had feedback from some of the residents at Noosa Banks, who have been somewhat critical in some areas with our fire response,
02:59:00 that they were told that the only reason they survived the fire last year was because they maintained their yard so well. And I said, that's exactly right. They did a fantastic job maintaining their yard. They have that within their realm of control. So I'd suggest that for all the community. It's a really key message. Speaker 8: It's a difference in expectation between what's a fire break and a fire access. Speaker 7: It is, yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: That's interesting you point that out. I mean, the result of the fire has been manmade and the opportunities to turn around and heed the warnings and when they say don't use equipment that could spark a fire such as grinders and welders and that, that we have to take heed of that and don't use that equipment, because that's exactly what started one of the fires last year. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, sorry, question in regard to the community education and the last time we had a conversation about this, I highlighted the initiative of the QFS equivalent in Tasmania, rolling out a series of extension officers. Have we had any more forward movement from Queensland Fire Services as a more proactive community education preparing for the fire season?
180 minutes in ¶
03:00:00 Speaker 7: I'll pass that one on to, I think, James Ellison. Speaker 10: I think we've got, so we're meeting with, Speaker 8: You'll need to come down the table, mate. Thank you. Speaker 10: Thanks. Yes, we're meeting with Queensland Fire and Emergency Services next week to look at our high-risk areas, and they're going to be looking at a targeted campaign to address those communities and allay their fears and also work with them around resilience, so for next week. Councillor Jurisevic: Ideal time to roll out a campaign when the community is vigilant and after last year's. That's right. Councillor Wilkie: So QFS will be communicating fire readiness messages, for example? Speaker 10: That's right. Yeah, they've already released their program and their communication messages for this year. They were released last week, and so they've got a campaign that they're going to go out with, and we'll be supporting that. Councillor Wilkie: Does it involve leaflet drops door-to-door, or is it an online campaign?
03:01:00 Speaker 10: It's online. Well, both. They have online campaigns. They also have materials that they distribute as well. Mayor Stewart: Will you be sharing that on our council page? Speaker 10: Yeah, definitely. We do link from our disaster dashboard as well to the rural fire brigade, and then that information is available there. Councillor Jurisevic: The SES facilitates that with a message about storm season and all of that approaching as well, and we get magnets and stickers and messaging that goes out in that regard as well. Speaker 10: Yeah, that's right. We met with Get Ready last week, and they'll be releasing their campaign early September, and then we'll Get Ready week in October, and we'll be part of that. Councillor Wilkie: All good? I'll move it. Moved by Councillor Jurisevic, seconded by Councillor Stewart. Joe, you wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Jurisevic: I think all the questions and the information that I want to extract have been done. I'd like to compliment the guys on the efforts that they've done since the fires and the work that we're doing to advance technology in the region to try and manage this situation as we go forward.
03:02:00 Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Wright? Councillor Lorentson: I'd just like to just probably reinforce our social responsibility to make sure that we're vigilant, and I also want to sort of... I've been drawn to a couple of incidences at Noosa Woods and Peregian Beach where just youth have been lighting fires, and between our police, who I can't speak highly enough of, and local law officers, they're on to us. I think we all understand what could happen. So again, just love to reinforce our social and community responsibility. Mayor Stewart: I'd like to thank Craig and his team. We have significantly increased our fire management practices. We've increased our cool fire burns from four to seven. We've increased our access trails by about an extra six kilometres.
03:03:00 And similarly, in the 2021 budget, we have almost doubled our budget on fire trail building and maintenance. And there's been a 71% increase in budget for controlled burns on council land. I'd like to acknowledge and thank Craig and his team. The fire mitigation and fire management has increased significantly. It's an incredibly emotive topic in our community based on the experiences this community went through in regards to last year's fire season. And it's terrific to see these increased resources and additional measures being put into practice. And I'd also like to commend staff on the... And very supportive of the initiative, the Get Ready Week in October, and also the great initiative that our community development team is working with our council disaster management officer, James, and our local QFES officer with community groups, such as like Tharabah, Residence Association, on their disaster management plans, because it's very important that people do take responsibility for their own works. I think that the fire tech program, the $270,000 that we've received in funding is absolutely terrific. And I think we will be a world first.
03:04:00 And it's a brilliant way to ensure that Noosa gets... Council gets access to the most advanced and innovative technologies available to assist in fire prevention and fire management. It's exciting that James and the disaster management team will be working closely for HUD's Fire Tech Connect team, programmed to trial those promising mitigation technologies. And it's wonderful to see a cross-council collaborative approach. This, along with increased fire mitigation and increased burns and breaks, won't prevent fires. As you said, Craig, we can't prevent it, but we can certainly mitigate our losses and help protect the community as best we can. So I thank you and all the staff for this cross-collaboration and working together. Councillor Wilkie: While we're here, I'd just like to ask the staff, they were talking about a commemorative event planned in September at Peregian Beach. Could you just perhaps give us, for the benefit of people listening, why we're doing that and what it involves and who it involves, what will happen on the day?
03:05:00 Speaker 5: Cheryl Patterson. Councillor Wilkie: Come up close, Cheryl. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 5: Yeah. So we're doing three commemorative events, the first one being at Peregian Beach Beach Community House. So that's on the 12th of September. And it involves QFES and a component of education, community education, around fires and also all hazards. So there'll be QFES there, fire engines. There's an exhibition for the local artist who's taking pictures of the regeneration. So that's happening. Cooroibah and North Shore, they're having an exhibition. So that's happening in November. Yeah. So it's about getting community together, discuss recovery in their terms, how they feel about that, an opportunity to connect. Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 11: Thank you very much. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Speaker 5: Cheryl's just been appointed as the community recovery officer in the team for their category C funding. Councillor Wilkie: No. Speaker 5: Congratulations. Working on resilience as well. Yeah. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Bye. Thank you. The social responsibility and preparedness we're looking at it from the landowner perspective and saying the work in QFS and the one that's come to my mind is that quite frequently ignition is in line with school holidays and I actually think that maybe even before Thursday or certainly conversation needs to be had about can we develop some champions within our youth or a program that relates to youth that actually
03:06:00 gets the consequences of tool hardiness really understood in that demographic now it's it's not a new problem but it is one that perhaps what might have not been such a significant hazard to life limb and property in the past will be that it could be and I just think that maybe that is the local government opportunity for us to play a role of bringing together a response to actually engage the youth in their high school students about what what a responsible approach to this is and just making sure that people understand that it might seem funny or a bit of fun just to throw a match or have a fire in the wrong time or whatever but what those consequences are and try and build something but I just think it's something we should think about. QFS deliver a community education program schools education programs specifically I mean Cheryl or James maybe talk more specifically about the elements of that.
03:07:00 Speaker 5: So we have been engaging with Dahlia from the environmental education hub yes yeah on a schools program for high schools she actually did a pilot at Good Shepherd which went really really well and with that in fact like you were saying with us the education the peer the peers stuff around lighting fires and the damage that can actually be done then she's got a bit more information. Speaker 10: Yeah so she pretty much described the project to us we got some really good output from the program it was really engaging program and that actually did the students that came out of it they had some really great projects they were very engaged by it it was something that we thought it was quite a positive thing we're just currently looking at what processes we could go through at the moment to look at further engaging around that and how that could be sort of disseminated around the rest of the region as well through the school but it was year nine.
03:08:00 Speaker 5: Yeah year nine that target group around 14-15 year olds and yeah and also looking at funding possible funding to roll that out through the schools in this region yeah but the outcomes from the first pilot were really well received and it is part of the curriculum for grade five get ready is so there's also a little bit of the education there in grade five however not so much the target group in regards to dangerous behavior. Speaker 10: No specifically around fire yeah it used to be the target audience to really. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah and that was for other councillors that pilot project from the environment lead up was what led to the request for a junior council and that built leadership and that's I suppose what they're trying to do that old folkies can go and talk to a parade and people go to sleep or but if their peers are trying to engage them in a in a conversation that's probably more effective.
03:09:00 Councillor Wegener: Yeah what Dolly is doing is absolutely amazing I've heard so many many growing reports from her but also when you say talk about you know your peers doing it the Peregian Hub I went down there there's a 12 year old kid who was giving a class on robotics at one time and that is your peers you know talking with each other that just works so well yeah yeah and just in regards to the youth council they are putting a funding application in to start the new council in this region so we hope then we can put disaster preparedness in. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah and it could be something even just simpler like Jake what he's doing in the water in our waterways at Noosa River where you get a local law officer that actually just every now and then randomly walks through the woods and talks not you know we just talks at the same level as the children and engages with the kids Jake the kids love Jake and I can't see why kids that hang out and gather in Noosa Woods and Peregian can't like our local law officer.
03:10:00 Speaker 5: I think that relationship needs to be nurtured yeah and I think the children are going to develop their own how to reach other children as well and so that peer model and and how to connect with the youth that aren't engaged so they're going to work on that as well yeah and it's led by them like what they want to learn about I guess and what's a danger to them that's what that theme was but hopefully we can get that off the ground soon I'd like to start that next term. Councillor Jurisevic: Well I was able to speak out well and good. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thanks James. Councillor Wilkie: Look I'll speak. Fire management plans are always important. It depends who you work in that space Craig. I was one of many last September who saw house for the first time ever saw houses, fences, backyards, cars, bushland at Peregian on fire for the first time and there are a lot of shop places pouring into the J at Peregian.
03:11:00 Yeah. Yeah. So I'm hoping that they'll be watching with interest about what Noosa Council is doing in terms of managing its fire risk in the lead up to this season. Hoping that we've learned the lessons and improving on the practices which all the indications are that you are and also how we work how the council is working with all the other landholders such as QPWS and Department of Environment and Resource Management to manage their land holdings as well. I think we can be your caveat that no matter what you do if someone's going to start be lighting matches in the bush if the weather conditions are similar to what they were last year there's going to be fires but I think they can be well assured that the Noosa Council is doing all it can to manage its risk.
03:12:00 I think that's all I have to say though. Thank you. This is the most important thing, like if they're physically under threat and their property is under threat of burning, nothing else the council does, no matter how ambitious or worthy it matters, this is the most important thing and I commend the work you've done in this regard. Thank you. We now have a confidential matter. That requires closing the meeting to the public.
03:13:00 Councillor Jurisevic: I'll move the motion if we go into confidential session. Councillor Wilkie: I'll move Councillor Jurisevic, seconded by Councillor Lorentson. I'll read it. The motion is that the meeting be closed to the public, pursuant to section... 2-7-5-1-F-G of the Local Government Regulation 2-12. The purpose of discussion, legal advice relating to an appeal in the Planning and Environment Court so that council's legal position is protected in relation to General Committee Agenda Item 9-RAL-17-0504 Planning and Environment Court Appeal Number D-6-1 of 2-18. Refusal of application to reconfigure a lot, one into four lots at 1-3-5. Lakewood. Lakewood Drive, Noosaville. All those in favour?
195 minutes in ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
210 minutes in ¶
03:30:00 Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Stewart, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Jurisevic, Councillor Lorentson and Councillor Wilkie. And again, Councillor Stockwell, Councilors, that's the end of the agenda, the end of the meeting. I declare the meeting closed and thank you all for your patience.