Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Mayor Stewart: Good evening. I declare the meeting open. I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional lands of the Kabi Kabi people and I pay my respects to their elders past, present and emerging. I note that everyone is in attendance. We have three lots of minutes to be ratified today. Can I have a mover for the confirmation of the minutes of the special meeting held on 16th of June? Yes Madam Chair. Thank you Councillor Wilkie. All in favour? Yes. The minutes of the order meeting on the June 17. Thank you Councillor Wilkie. Thank you Councillor Wegener. All in favour? Yes. And lastly can I have a move for the confirmation of the minutes of the special meeting? Yes. All in favour? Yes. There are no mayoral minutes. Item 4. Does anyone have any petitions? I have a petition against impending Little Cove parking restrictions. I do want to point out that subsequent to presenting this petition to council the trial was cancelled. Thank you Councillor Lorentson. I'll second that. All in favour? No. Thank you. It's unanimous. I would like to present a petition signed by 24 people requesting that council install a fenced dog park in Noosa. I table this to be received and refer to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action. Can I have a seconder? No. I'll second that. All in favour? Yes. Thank you. Unanimous. Thank you.
00:01:00 There are no notified motions. There are no presentations. No deputations. That brings us to item 8 on page 4 of the agenda which is the consideration of the committee reports. Firstly the Planning and Environment Committee recommendations. Item 1 was referred to General Committee. Item 2 was referred to General Committee. Item 3 was referred to General Committee. Item 4 was referred to General Committee. Item 5. MCU 19 slash 0114. Planning and Environment Court Appeal Number 970 of 2021. Application for a Seniors Living Community New Cooroy Golf Clubhouse and Facilities Boundary Realignment and Access Easement at 30, 114, 122 and 144 Mile Street, Cooroy. Item 6. Environmental Project and Alliance Grants. Councillor Stockwell. Yes. I wish to inform the meeting that I have a
00:02:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the application by the Noosa District Land Care Group. Due to my long-standing connection with the organisation as one of the inaugural members of the unincorporated group dating back to the 1980s. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias considering the community nature of this relationship. Therefore I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Thank you. I'll move that Mayor Stewart: it is in the public interest that Councillor Stockwell participates and votes on this matter because Councillor believes that a reasonable person would not have a perception of bias considering the community nature of this relationship and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. I'll second it. Thank you. All in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Thank you Councillor Wilkie. Can I have a mover for the recommendations please on page 5. Thank you Councillor Wilkie.
00:03:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just before you do item 7. Item 7. Speaker 3: You've got to deal with item 6 first. Oh so we're meeting with that particular item. You've got to deal with item 6 first because that's what the conflict of interest declaration is. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Wilkie moved. Can I have a second? Thank you Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? Yes. Thank you. Carried unanimously. Item 7. Planning applications decided by delegated authority May 2021. I have a conflict of interest in this matter and so after all conflicts are declared I will hand over the chair to Councillor Wilkie to consider the conflict of interest declarations. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the application by Barry Taylor listed in the report at item 31.
00:04:00 I have attended Mr Taylor's house for lunch and we have socialised together very occasionally. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I believe I do not have a close personal relationship with Mr Taylor. And Council's consideration of this application is not to approve or reject it. It is only for noting of a decision that has already been made by staff. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you Madam Chair. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I, Councillor Lorentson, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the applications by Mr Mark Bain listed in the report at items 32 and 33. As I have a personal relationship with the Bain family. The Bain family are friends of mine and we have attended social events together. Our children attended school together and they served together as part of the Noosa Board Riders Club. During the 2020 election, Mr Bain appeared in one of my campaign videos and agreed to one of my election signs.
00:05:00 Being placed at the petrol station located on Gympie Terrace, of which Mr Bain was the property landlord. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you Councillor Lorentson. Can I have a look at Councillor Stewart's reasons please. Alright, I'll move the... I'll move that it's... I'll move that it's in the public interest that Councillor Stewart participates and votes on this matter because Councillor believes Councillor Stewart does not have a close personal relationship with Mr Taylor and therefore a reasonable person to trust the final decision made in public interest. Signed, Councillor Stockwell. Anybody wish to speak to the motion? All in favour? That's carried. Mayor Stewart: Welcome back Chair. Thank you Mr Councillor Wilkie. Can we... Councillor Wilkie: We just have to move the... I'll move the... The resolution.
00:06:00 The end of motion. Mayor Stewart: I'll second. Alright. All in favour? Councillor Wilkie: Seconder? Mayor Stewart: Seconder, Joe. Councillor Stewart. Councillor Wilkie: Yep. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Unanimous. Thank you, Cat. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll move the committee recommendation. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Seconder, Councillor Jurisevic. Thank you. All in favour? Carried unanimously. Thank you. Thanks, Cat. Next up is the services and organisation committee recommendations. These are on page six of our agenda. Item one. Appointment of 2022 show holiday. Item two. 2021-22 community grants program. Community project grants round one and three year agreements. Item three. 2021-22 community grants program funding. Community project grants round one events.
00:07:00 I have a conflict of interest in this matter, so after the declarations, I will hand over to Councillor Wilkie to take the chair to consider the conflict of interest declarations. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding, recommendations and recommendations of the Nusa District Rugby Union Club. I'm a member, my husband is a member and sponsor, and my son plays for this club. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person who have a perception of bias, although I believe I do not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this funding. Therefore, I would choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stewart. I'll move that it is in the public interest that Councillor Stewart participates in votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person will not have a perception of bias because Councillor Stewart does not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this funding. And therefore, a reasonable person will trust that the final decision is made in the public interest.
00:08:00 Councillor Jurisevic: So seconded. Councillor Wilkie: All in favour? Oh, sorry. Anyone wants to speak to that motion? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I was just going to ask about whether your son actually earns money and provides upkeep to you as a result of his earnings? No, but he should. Councillor Wilkie: Again, now, his age? Mayor Stewart: He's 10. Councillor Wilkie: Not yet. That's a damning indictment of what you expect from your children, Councillor Stewart. All in favour? That's carried. Mayor Stewart: Welcome back. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. We have a mover for the staff recommendation on page 6. So moved. Thank you, Councillor Jurisevic. Seconder? Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? Unanimous. Thank you. Item 4. 2021-22 Community Program Funding, Community Project Grants Round 1, Equipment. Item 5. 2021-22 Community Grants Program Funding, Community Project Grants Round 1, Infrastructure. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. I wish to inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter
00:09:00 in relation to the application by the Korea United Football Club, as I've donated a total of $600 between December 2016 and December 2019 to that club. This was both for a junior bursary and general goodwill. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because of the community nature of this donation. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision in the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in this decision. Thank you, Councillor Stewart. Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: I, Councillor Wegener, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the application by Sunshine Butterflies, as on October 23, 2020, I provided them with a donation of surfboard making equipment valued at approximately $1,200. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I do not have any other association with that organisation and I believe I can make the decision in the public interest. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the room.
00:10:00 However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Mayor Stewart: Would a Councillor without a conflict like to move that Councillor Stockwell stay in the room or leave the room? Councillor Lorentson: I'm happy to move that Councillor Brian Stockwell stay in the room because it's in the public interest that Councillor Stockwell participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that given the community nature of Councillor Stockwell's donation to the club, a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Councillor Wilkie: I have a question. Councillor Stockwell's declaration is far less than 10,000 words and doesn't include every other good deed since time immemorial. This is a complete declaration. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: To answer the question, $500 was for a bursary. The other was I put some money on the bar at the end of the season over the 35s for every wrong decision I made as a referee. Mayor Stewart: Oh, there you go.
00:11:00 All in favour that Councillor Stockwell stay in the room. That's unanimous. I'll move that Councillor Wegener stay in the room. Because I believe it in the public interest that Councillor Wegener participates and votes on this matter. Because Council believes that Councillor Wegener does not have a close association with Sunshine Butterflies and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. I'll second that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Anyone have any questions for Councillor Wegener? All in favour? Councillor Wegener stay in the room. You know. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I vote? No. Can I vote? Speaker 3: You have a conflict on that issue. Can I vote? I've only got a non-conflict. Non-conflict. Councillor Wilkie: I'll move the resolution. Mayor Stewart: Thank you very much. Can I admit it? Thank you very much. Can I have a... Yeah, that's still... Item 5. 5, yes. So, item...
00:12:00 All in favour? Yeah. Carried it out on its leg. Thank you. Item 6. 20... Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. After you. Mayor Stewart: 20, 21, 22, Community Program Funding, Community Project Grants, Round 1 Programs. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Mayor. Though it's neither a declarable or prescribed conflict of interest, I'd like to tell the meeting that in 2016, resident Barry Cottrell, who's the Vice President of the Pritchard Beach Community Association, who I've not recommended for funding, but I mentioned in this report, donated $200 to my election campaign, and my father was the President of 2017. But it's neither a declarable or prescribed, but I'm just sharing that with the meeting. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you for informing us of that, Councillor Wilkie. Very kind of you. Item 7. Community Program Funding, Community Alliance, 21-22. I have a conflict of interest in this matter, so after the declarations are made, I will hand over to Councillor Wilkie to assume the Chair to consider the conflict of interest declarations. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendation to Sunny Kids Inc.
00:13:00 I make regular monthly donations to this charity. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I believe I do not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this funding. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. I'll move that it's in the public interest that Councillor Stewart participates in the base on this matter. Because Councillor believes that a reasonable person will not have a perception of bias because Councillor Stewart does not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this funding, and therefore a reasonable person will trust that the final decision is made in public interest. Any councillors? Councillor Finzel is the seconder. Any questions for Councillor Stewart? I'll put her to the vote. Mayor Stewart: Those in favour? That's carried. Thank you. Thank you Councillor Warwick. So we can have a mover for the staff recommendation for report number 7 on page 7 of the agenda please.
00:14:00 Sorry that was when I thought of that one. Oh okay. So moved. Thank you Councillor Wilkie. All in favour? Unanimous. Thank you. Item 8. Community funding, program funding. Three year maintenance and management of community halls or centres. 1st of July 2021 to 30 June 2024. Item 9. Community program funding. Three year maintenance of community sports field. I have a conflict of interest in this matter so I will again hand over to Councillor Wilkie to assume the chair to consider the conflict of interest declarations. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable and prescribed conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the proposed funding allocations. I'll beg your pardon, that was Councillor Stockwell. No, you were on top. Oh sorry, beg your pardon. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that, no that's the nurse of Rugby Union. Is that the one we're doing? Oh it's the same one. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I haven't got a husband. Okay.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 You need one. With that haircut, Brian, you never know. Mayor Stewart: Not that there's anything wrong with this. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the funding recommendation to Noosa District Rugby Union Club, Noosa Australian Football Club and Tewantin Noosa Cricket Club. I'm a member, my husband is a member and sponsor and my son plays for the Noosa District Rugby Union Club. My son also plays for the Noosa Australian Football Club and Tewantin Noosa Cricket Club. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person to have a perception of bias because I believe I do not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this funding. Therefore, I would choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Yes, I wish to inform the meeting that I have a declarable and prescribed conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the proposed funding allocations to Cooroora United Football Club and Noosa Lions Football Club. I have donated a total of $600 to Cooroora United Football Club between 2016 and December 2019 for both a junior anniversary and general goodwill.
00:16:00 I am also the current president of Noosa Lions Football Club. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Lorentson: I'll move that it is in the public interest that Councillor Stewart participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person would not have a perception of bias because Councillor Stewart does not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this funding and therefore a reasonable person would trust that in the final decision that it's made in the public interest. Councillor Wilkie: May I have a second to please? Yes, please. Councillor Finzel. Thank you. Any questions for Mayor Stewart? All in favour? That's carried unanimously. We have a mover for the motion. I'll move the motion. Seconded by Councillor Jurisevic.
00:17:00 All in favour? Oh, sorry. You're back now. No, that's all right. You go. Mayor Stewart: You finished. You finish off. No. No. Councillor Wegener: Sorry about that. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Item 10 is community tenure renewals. I again have a conflict of interest in this matter, so after the declarations are made, I will hand over to Councillor Wilkie to take the chair to consider the conflict of interest declarations. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the proposed lease renewal to the Sunshine Coast Sports Aviators. As one of the club members, David Cookman, donated $500 on the 17th of March 2020 to my 2020 election campaign and also put up call flutes for me during this campaign. Mr Cookman is not the applicant for the proposed lease renewal, nor is a renewal being issued to him. As such, there does not appear to be any personal benefit accruing directly to Mr Cookman.
00:18:00 He is simply a member of a community organisation that is receiving a proposed lease renewal from Council. Mr Cookman is not a current community member, though he has been a community member in the past. I understand that he is a life member of the community group. Although I have made a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I believe Mr Cookman does not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this application. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stewart. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lorentson? I, Councillor Lorentson, would inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to the proposed lease renewal for Sunshine Coast Sports Aviators. As one of the club members, David Cookman, approached me after a Meet the Candidates night and asked for some election campaign posters to advertise on his properties. I did not know Mr Cookman or have any relationship with him prior to meeting him that night. Mr Cookman is not a current committee member, although he has been a committee member in the past.
00:19:00 I understand that he is a life member of the community group. As such, there does not appear to be any personal benefit accruing to Mr Cookman as a result of the lease renewal. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I do not consider that I have a close personal relationship with Mr Cookman. And I also believe Mr Cookman does not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this matter. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Councillor Wilkie: And we have someone to move the motion. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Mayor Stewart: Which one? Councillor Wilkie: This is for Councillor Stewart. This is just for Councillor Stewart to stay? Yes. Councillor Finzel: Would you read it out? That I believe it is in the public interest that Councillor Stewart participates and votes on this matter because Councillor believes that a reasonable person would not have a perception of bias because Mr Cookman does not stand to receive a personal benefit
00:20:00 or loss in relation to this tenure renewal, in relation to this funding. And therefore, a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Councillor Wilkie: I have a seconder for that, please. Councillor Wegener, thank you. All in favour? That's carried. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll do the same for Councillor Lorentson. A motion to stay that is in the public interest that Councillor Lorentson participates and votes on this matter because Councillor believes that a reasonable person would not have a perception of bias because Mr Cookman does not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this tenure renewal, in relation to this funding. And therefore, a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. I have seconded. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell? All in favour? That's carried. Welcome back. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Can I have a move for the staff recommendation on page 8 of the agenda, please? Can I move, Madam Chair? Item 10. Thank you, Councillor Walke. I'll second it. Thank you, Councillor Walke. All in favour? Thank you. Carried unanimously.
00:21:00 Thanks, Kath. Item 11 was referred to General Committee. Councillor Wilkie: I'll move the recommendation and I'll second it. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Walke. Thank you, Councillor Rusledge. All in favour? Thank you very much. Now to the General Committee recommendations on page 10 of the agenda. Item 1. Change for development approval to a material change of use for multiple dwelling type 2 duplex and short-term accommodation operational works at 2 Nola Street, Noosaville. This item is the subject of a further report that we will deal with later in the meeting. However, I would like to take this opportunity now to suspend standing orders to allow consideration of a way forward from a policy perspective pertaining to the current housing crisis. So I move that. Sorry, I beg your pardon. I should have strapped that. That the operation of the standing orders or any relevant provision therefore be suspended to allow Council to consider the issue of housing availability for permanent residents in Noosa. I'll second that, Madam Chair. Do I have that? All in favour? Thank you. Unanimous. Thank you. We will now suspend standing orders.
00:22:00 Just for people at home, I think that it's prudent that and I think all of us agree that it is prudent and practical to deal with the strategic planning separate from the DA approvals and specifically what we will now deal with is strategic planning and then we will go back to our original agenda where we would deal with development assessment. There is a motion before us. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lorentson. I'd like to move that. I have a motion. A, request the CEO to urgently provide a report to Council, options available to Council to address the shortage of housing availability for permanent residents in Noosa with the report to include consideration of the following. One, details of what additional data and empirical research is required into the housing situation in Noosa. Two, details of the ministerial condition for the Noosa plan relating to short term accommodation and the timing for Council's response to that condition.
00:23:00 And three, what interim policy responses may be available to the Council in respect of the impact of short term accommodation approvals upon available housing supply. B, note that Council at its ordinary meeting of 18 March 2021 resolved to update the Noosa Council Housing Needs Assessment prepared by Briggs and Morda Pty Ltd in 2017 with regard to the provisions of Noosa Plan 2020 and the local housing situation and trends. And that this review shall address the supply of housing for permanent residents and the impact short term accommodation has on this supply and inform the assessment of future development applications for short term accommodation. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Would you like to speak to that? Councillor Lorentson: I'll second it. Mayor Stewart: Anyone second? Councillor Jurisevic: I'll second it for the sake of. Thank you, Councillor for a switch. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: On Monday, at Monday's general meeting, I criticised Council for making policy on the run and
00:24:00 were not playing fair. What I proposed in Monday's general meeting in my haste to address and acknowledge the current housing crisis was the very thing that I criticised. I made policy on the run without data and without empirical research and without properly considering the implications of my words. Today, I take a deep breath and I put forward this motion that seeks unity and not division. I take a deep breath and remember my duty to maintain the public trust and integrity of Council to play fair and follow due process. If we are to draw a line in the sand, I recommend that we do it together. But let's get our facts first and find out the why and then work out and then work on the how. My motion today is quite clear and self-explanatory.
00:25:00 Let's get our data and empirical research. Let's understand the details of the ministerial condition for the Noosa plan. Do we wait two years or do we bring that review forward? And three, let's consider interim policy responses that are available to Council and also understand that. In August or September this year, we should have completed our housing needs assessment report and this review shall address the supply of housing for permanent residents and the impact short-term accommodation has on the supply and inform the assessment of future development applications for short-term accommodation. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Armstrong. Any questions for Kerry? Or would anyone else like to speak to this? Councillor Wilkie: Just a question, Kerry.
00:26:00 The recommendations that were brought to the Council regarding the short-term accommodation in the medium density zones, what data was that informed on? My understanding was there was data that informed those decisions. Can you tell us what data informed the decisions? Thank you, Councillor Armstrong. Speaker 4: So the data that we have currently is our current supply of permanent housing versus the current number of properties or housing being used for visitor accommodation. So that comes from our DMAP model, which is part of our background information behind the Legit Local Government Infrastructure Plan. So that sits behind that. So that informed us that for the coastal areas, we would need to be able to provide permanent housing for the residents of Tewantin, all the way down Noosaville, Noosa Hadds, down
00:27:00 to Peregian Beach, that 23% of our housing in that area is currently being used for visitor accommodation. So I consider that quite significant in the extent of housing. We also have data from the Regional Movers Index which talks about migration regionally. So from our city areas to our regional areas, which Noosa has included. And that suggests that the increase in migration for Noosa is the highest of any of the regional areas at a 49% increase. So a lot of people are moving to more regional areas, recognising that they can live and work in the same location. And that has obviously occurred because of COVID, something that was unexpected. We also have data on the increase in visitor accommodation that has occurred over the last nearly 12 months. We've obviously been getting applications under the new scheme, which is a limited number.
00:28:00 But we've importantly been considering a lot of applications under our superseded planning scheme request. So we have already 69 applications that have been approved for short-term accommodation under the superseded scheme process. We've still got over 100 to decide, and there's still till the end of July for people to lodge up. So we've got a lot of applications under our superseded planning scheme request. So we have had quite an increase also in visitor accommodation that's occurred. So that was the data that we had. Councillor Wilkie: Just a follow-up question, if I may. So they're very specific numbers that you're talking about in terms of approvals, a 49% increase in migration rate and a 23% saturation of short-term accommodation in the coastal region. You said that's significant data. In planning parlance, is that considered empirical data? Do they consider that empirical, like factual?
00:29:00 Speaker 4: Absolutely. It is factual. The data put together for the DMAT model is work done by council offices, as well as Unity Water in conjunction for that plan. So we do consider empirical data. The Regional Movers Index, I'm less familiar with, to know how that's compiled. But it is a recognised publication that I think we can rely on. Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'm going to move an amendment to Councillor Lorenston's motion, if we could put it up on the board. That item, in regard to item A, number four will be added to read. Commissioning a report by an independent specialist consultant into the housing situation in Noosa. I said at the general meeting, and I'll say. I'm sorry, I've been cut. Councillor Finzel: I'll take the second. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. I said at the General Committee meeting, and I'll say it again, it is absolutely fundamental that we obtain empirical data and analysis moving forward.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 We can't go forward until we are armed, not just armed with two statistics, but armed with information and data from industry experts, from stakeholders, from government partners. We owe it to our community, our small business, our tourism body, and those who have invested in our economy. In regard to the issue before us, we must govern with the next 10, 20 to 30 years in mind. This is too important an issue, not to be well thought out, well versed, and well researched. This is no time to make any policy on the run. We stand here tonight all with good intentions, wanting to help our community in some capacity. What to do? I don't know. We can't assume we have the answers, because we don't. But we know we must try and do something. I certainly know I don't have the answers, but we must find the right person, or the right group who do.
00:31:00 They must have the necessary tools at their disposal to provide that advice. And by tools, I mean methods, cooperation, and reflective practice leading to recommendations. Information as to what is really going on in the housing market here in Noosa. That is why I have made this amendment to this motion. To include an individual, or individuals, to facilitate this activity, in collaboration with our council personnel. So what are the impacts? Where is the evidence, for example, that short-term housing approval in medium and high density have any such impact on available housing supply, as was discussed? And what about the impacts on our community of not having visitors, of depleting our tourism industry through depleting stock? What are those impacts on our small businesses? What does that mean for our work? What impact do they have on our workers? Do they have a job? Does someone still have a business? We know that tourism is driving our industry, and we are all incredibly supportive of it. What impact does this have on them?
00:32:00 If we make any harsh regulations now, we don't have the data. We don't know, but we need to know. We need to look at the impacts on our economy, on our tourism, on our workers, on our small business, and those who have invested, as I said, in our economy. To be clear, Noosa isn't alone in the housing crisis, in this housing shortage. It's happening not just Queensland, but Australia-wide. Just last night, media reports state that Australia has its lowest levels of renting availability in decades. Low interest rates and a desirable market have ensured this for Noosa. We can't point the finger in one direction, and we can't assume it, because we don't know, and we can't make an informed decision if we don't know. Let's secure the fact, consult and work with our industries, our community, and our government partners. Now, the reason for my addition is that we do need an independent consultant to undertake data gathering and analysis. We need to commission a report by an independent specialist into the housing situation in Noosa, and we need to do it now to support an immediate response.
00:33:00 This report will then lead into the ministerial conditions prescribed by the State Government in February 2020, specifically at point 8, which states the Council must monitor the provisions relating to short-term accommodation, tourism, housing supply, and considering the outcomes sought across residential zones. The process shall, at a minimum, include a detailed analysis of the existing situation within Noosa Shire, including numbers and types of short-term accommodation uses. The analysis should include a detailed analysis of the existing situation within Noosa Shire, including numbers and types of short-term accommodation uses. The analysis should include annual comparison data that demonstrates the performance of the relevant scheme provisions. Consider the economic and social benefits of the current situation and forecast the potential long-term impacts of short-term accommodation across the residential zones. Consider the state interests of housing supply and diversity and tourism. Be evidence-driven, comprehensive, and prepared in a detailed manner.
00:34:00 To offset a lengthy process and regrettable delays, we are assisted by the requirement of the State Government to have this information to them within two years. The time to start collating that is now. We can deep dive into all of these areas with the help of an independent report. In support of this process, I would ask fellow Councillors to consider once the data is obtained, the appointment of an advisory group is established and a terms of reference that speak specifically to the situation. This task, while endorsed by Council, could be prepared by the CEO in consultation with our staff. The consideration for an external body is in light of the current workload of our planning staff. We know all too well how stretched our staff are, particularly in this area. There have been nine separations from the development assessment area in the past 12 months, and we have a Director who has been away for nearly 12 months.
00:35:00 We need to look after our staff and recognise that they are working at capacity. The Acting Director has done a wonderful job, 10 out of 10, but we must take some of the heavy lifting from their shoulders. This is not to suggest our people would not be involved in the work. They would be expected to support the process of information gathering and be an integral part of the process. This would be recognised in the terms of reference associated with the report commissioning. We outsource for a traffic report. An expert report on whether or not a road is safe. A legal opinion and so forth. We outsource for all of that. The issue before us is, in my opinion, the largest we will face this term as a Council. The solution is complex and sensitive, and it needs the attention and time of an expert. We can take this proactive and necessary stance now. We can begin the process. We can plan for the next 10, 20, 30 years. And in doing so, provide consistent, fair, strategic and achievable solutions for our community.
00:36:00 This is an issue and strategy I believe we collectively must address. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Just a question for Kerry. With respect to the Mayor, she mentioned that the time to start collating the data about our housing supply situation in Noosa is now. We need to make a start on it. My understanding, didn't the State mandate that staff had to start doing it once we ratified the Noosa Planning Scheme? Have staff been working on this already, please? Speaker 4: Yeah. So, as one of the conditions of approval of our scheme was to monitor the requirements in short-term accommodation. So, we've been keeping some accurate records around short-term accommodation, in terms of complaints, applications lodged, new ones and so on. So, there's a lot of data already that we hold on it.
00:37:00 We've done a research to identify all the properties in the Shire, to identify what's being used in short-term. So, we do have quite a lot of data already. Our strategic planning section has also been working on this housing study since Council made that resolution in March. So, there's quite a bit of work already underway there. Mayor Stewart: Okay, thank you. Kerry, what you said and all that hard work could certainly, I'm not talking about just finding data on short-term accommodation or just, I'm talking about a deep dive into a 360, into a whole range of things. That data certainly could form part of any report, certainly done in conjunction. With respect, no. I will. I'm asking a question. I'm asking, could that data form part of a report if we, in the terms of reference which we wrote, would that be appropriate to use that data for an individual? Speaker 3: More data is the way. No doubt about it. The more data, the better you can make decisions. But whatever data, extra data we can get would be helpful. Councillor Jurisevic: Question for the Chair.
00:38:00 It's for you. I'm finishing a report by an independent specialist consultant into the housing situation in Noosa. First of all, I'm the CEO for our head of planning. Isn't that what the Briggs and Water Housing Needs Assessment is undertaking in Noosa? I understand the Mayor has, in her amendment, has requested consulting the housing situation and has referred to economic matters, which are a by-product of that. How much of that would be covered by the Briggs and Water Housing Needs Assessment as we have done in the past? Speaker 3: The answer to that is the Briggs and Water Housing Needs Assessment report will cover what was asked for. We don't have a staff here tonight who were commissioned that. We can run through the terms of reference and that sort of thing. In terms of whether we have an independent specialist consultant, again, that will be set by whatever terms of reference the council set for that person to look at. What would they be looking at? What's missing? Additional information might be required.
00:39:00 What other policy considerations could be out there? Councillor Jurisevic: So if the request were to go beyond the scope of the housing needs assessment and actually look into economic impact and all the rest of it, those parameters could be set by council? Speaker 3: Like any consultancy you have, it's set by the terms of reference. That's good. What's the information about? What's the addition that we're looking for? That's the terms of reference that determine that scope. Mayor Stewart: Sorry. Just a question. Councillor Wilkie: Maybe a question for you, Mayor Stewart. By this amendment, did you intend the work done by the independent specialist consultant to start from scratch and run in parallel with the work being done by the staff? Or for them to bolster the resources of the staff that are doing that work and build on what they're doing and assist them in their work? Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Because I did actually have a whole paragraph of my speech that I actually missed out on that addresses your answers. And I didn't realise it was still there.
00:40:00 Councillor Lorentson: Why, Cathy? Mayor Stewart: I don't think so. This is very much... The bricks and mortar is there. It's been undertaken and facilitated. It's a build from the base. It's something that we can use. Look, we can use that. We can use the data that Kerry and the staff are providing. We need to talk... But that's not talking to... We need to talk to our federal and state counterparts. We've got a housing action group with Sandy Bolton on it. We've got Brian's report. We've got Tourism Noosa trying to do something. We've got workshops here. We've got council trying to look at things. If we had someone who could bring everything together and collate it, I believe that will provide the way forward. So it's absolutely very much using what we already have and using that as a base and building upon that. For a complete 360 overview, if that answers the question. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: I just have a follow-up question. Sorry, after you, Mr... Speaker 3: Yeah, I might just add one thing also. What the Mayor's recommendation isn't doing... Sorry, the amendment isn't doing is to commission the report now.
00:41:00 What she's saying is that that'll be one of the things that will be included in the report to come back to council. All the options to be able to move this forward. So you've got to read that in the context of requesting the CEO provide a report to council on the options available. And that would include the option of commissioning the report. So this will all have to come back to council to deal with that. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. That clarifies it, yes. Speaker 3: I just gathered from some of the questions that were concerned that we're looking to commission a report now. We're not. What we're doing is looking at that as one of the options that will come back to council Councillor Wilkie: about the commissioning of a report by an independent specialist into a housing situation in this area. Speaker 3: That report would cover items one, two, three, and if the amendment is successful, four. Yeah. Cover all those, those options to come back to consideration. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: And that report by the CEO may also make note of the work that's already being done and the way an independent consultant may assist that work.
00:42:00 That's right. Speaker 3: Well, we'd like to expect that would flow out of the condition, sorry, number one. You know, what information is already there? What else needs to be developed? That would be covered. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: If I can get a further clarifying question, what I'm seeking to avoid is a whole new body of work being done by an independent consultant dubbing up. So this, if we were to approve this, it wouldn't necessarily mean that work. No, it wouldn't. Speaker 3: No. So what does that do to help, you know, what kind of work is being done? Is an independent consultant the best way to do that? That's the option the council can have a look at and say that we're keen on that or not keen on that. But it's got to come back to council. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. I'm going to support the amendment because I think what we've done previously is identify that this is a priority issue. But up until this point, we haven't identified any additional resources to respond to it. And we know in the current market, it's hard to get additional strategic planners, development control planners because a whole lot of council is doing it. So it is likely that an option to get to where we need to be quicker is to have an external
00:43:00 consultant involved. I'm happy with, I was going to raise the point that the CEO raised, that we're just including this in a report to give a broad spectrum of options. And while short stay is one of the drivers for the current review of housing, it's by no means the largest at this stage. And so what might be that we need our expert advice on is in terms of the current trends in the housing market, pricing in relation to wages in terms of the workforce we need, et cetera. It may be a range of more economic analyses of various housing options. It may be a range of more economic analyses of various housing issues that we're encountering to identify both the market segment that may need the most attention and also the potential planning and other responses. So for that reason, I think it's good to have that as an option that staff consider when they report back to us.
00:44:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Now look, likewise, I'm happy as well now that I understand it more fully. Thank you, Mr. CEO. I'm happy to support that because it does give us the options of looking at what work has been undertaken, what work still needs to be undertaken, the housing needs assessment within the proximity of our region, but also what's available outside of our region as well within close proximity that could be considered reasonably affordable and accessible to those in the region, as well as the impact of short stays. And on our housing availability. Thank you. But also what's missing in our housing availability with regard for long stay residents and all renters. Councillor Wilkie: Yep. Thank you, Mayor, CEO and Kerry for clarifying, answering clarifying questions. It has helped clarify for me that what we're not doing is commissioning a body of work that would take us backwards back to square one when there's already a large body of work
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 going on. If this is an opportunity for us to do that, I think it's a good idea. I think it's a good opportunity to provide a specialist consultant who can assist the staff, do the good work with all the taking into account all the work done with stakeholders that the mayor has mentioned. I'm fully in support of that. Thank you. Councillor. Councillor Wegener: Yeah, I'm in support of that as well. I'm happy that we're using a subcontractor and not putting on more permanent staff to do this. We live in a in a fast changing world. And I'm happy about the report, but we also have to make really hard decisions tonight here and stay on top of this to the best of our ability, because that's our job to do. So I just want to make sure that we're not kicking the can down the road, that we're ready to make the big decisions here in this room. Councillor Finzel: Thanks. I just have a question. I don't know. Is this to the CEO? Do you have any idea of approximately the cost to engage the consultant, please?
00:46:00 Speaker 3: No. And obviously, it's not at that decision making point yet, because that will depend on the scope. So if it wasn't to do a lot of work or the expenses, if there's not much missing, you know, who's available? So I just can't give you that. We have to have that when it comes to . Speaker 4: Thank you. Councillor, can you switch up to the news? Oh, sure. Can I? Okay. Councillor Finzel: Look, I support this motion in response to, like, not kicking the can down the road and making the hard decisions. I think we've been making the hard decisions. I think what's happened is we met at an intersection where all these hard decisions came to a head. And unfortunately, it was like a crash. And here tonight, we are making the hard decisions in the methodology that's available to us. So we've suspended orders. We've all spent a lot of time on how we're going to approach this because, you know, these decisions are affecting our entire community.
00:47:00 We've got an impact of COVID. We sat in meetings today with the Business Roundtable, the impacts meeting that community. We've got to look at all these. We've arrived at this place. We're fundamentally changed as a society and a community and globally due to COVID. I think we are making the important decisions tonight. We're prepared to make the hard decisions. I'm grateful that this came forward, that we can discuss the policy issues at this time and try to the best of our ability, meet those needs in a rapid changing environment. Hopefully, this recommendation also supports the staff in the great work that they're doing under duress. And we acknowledge that. And hopefully, these decisions tonight can help support the sector of the staff and this organisation that is also moving in a rapidly changing environment. We understand the Noosa plan and the conditions. We understand the impacts. We've got the recommendation here from Cameron Dick, as the Mayor's already alluded to, that from the date of the ratification of the Noosa plan, that we would begin to be evidence
00:48:00 driven, that would be comprehensive and prepared in a detailed manner. I've questioned this in the past, that it may take longer than two years to collect that data. Simply because of COVID, we have lost a year. So in order to meet the state requirements and get good outcomes, we are going to have to meet them, but it might be just a different way of arriving there. It also affects the strategic plan. Tonight, we've been called to ask us strategically to think about this, because the last thing also that we want to do is blur the boundaries between strategic planning and applicants and decisions made moving forward. So I want to thank the Mayor for bringing this to us tonight and putting the standing orders on hold so that we can have a good discussion around where we've been at this intersection to talk about this. We're going to try and tease it apart a bit and get best outcomes for all the players. Thank you.
00:49:00 Councillor Lorentson: Just in closing, every decision that we make here at Council have short-term, medium-term and long-term implications. I think this final motion that we . . . . Mayor Stewart: It's not really, it's actually reiterating what I said to Council Wilkie, Council Stockwell. So it is, I believe that we need to do a 360 review on this issue. We need to look at other areas. We need to take into account empirical research in regard to other communities facing similar challenges. The report needs consultation with our critical stakeholders. We need engagement with our friends, the federal and state governments.
00:50:00 We need them to provide us with the instruments to go forth with. We may need public-private partnerships. We may need to look at our community housing providers. We have all groups across the community trying to address this issue. The Housing Action Group, the Business Roundtable, Tourism Noosa, workshops here at Council. Council staff are here on this issue. Council has own reports. Brian, you've done a report on this and it's terrific. The Briggs of Morda report will be a significant part of our review and we will build from there. As will all the information that staff have already gathered. It is greatly appreciated and valued. The independable report will include and bring together all of this research, this data. It is fundamental. I say now is the time, but let's be strong. Let's be strategic. Let's be solution-focused and not reactive. Let's find a cure and not treat a symptom. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: That's acceptable. Mayor Stewart: I'll put the amendment to vote all in favour. That's unanimous. Thank you. We'll bring it back to Councillor Lorentson's original motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I wish to make another amendment.
00:51:00 I'd like to move an amendment that the first line below be inserted above item A and that item may be changed to read that Council acknowledges the current housing crisis is a priority issue for Council to address and A, request the CEO to urgently provide a report to Council on the range of short, medium and long-term options available to Council to address the shortage of housing availability for permanent residents in Noosa with report to include consideration of the following and then add items 5, 6 and 7 to be added to read 5, the opportunities and potential impact associated with adopting a new housing policy. A temporary local planning instrument, including to facilitate auxiliary dwelling units in appropriate locations. 6, opportunities and potential impact of brokering community housing and emergency housing options on Council and community land which targets the most affected demographic groups, example hospitality workers and single women over 50. And 7, potential policy positions that advocate for more state and federal government investment in housing in the Shire.
00:52:00 Councillor Wilkie: I'll second that amendment. Thank you, Councillor. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do so. I think it's important that we stand in spending orders and it's a little bit like a notice of urgency in the State Parliament, so I think it's important to outline right at the top why we're doing this and that's acknowledge that we are in a housing crisis. I think also it's important to acknowledge that while we're dealing in a planning context, there's other housing options that might have quicker paybacks, if you like, in terms of response to providing, getting additional housing. And I've identified both planning opportunities, the auxiliary dwelling units is something that the local member Sandy Bolton has gone into bat and to negotiate with the State Government and was recently in the press talking about that, is one that has some merit. The second one in terms of opportunities about brokering community housing and emergency housing on our own land and land owned by community groups and not the profit groups, that's one that we've been investigating for some time now but I think it's important to
00:53:00 say these are the options. That we want to come back as this motion and other places talks about as a matter of urgency. And the last one is we do have to still acknowledge that council getting involved in any form of community or social housing is a new area for us and it does sit in higher levels of government and I don't think we should let them off the hook. Our social economic disadvantage in this Shire is the same as most of the White Bay electorate yet when we see investment in the local government, it's the same as most of the local government. In areas for public housing, they tend to see us only as the demographic from here east, not the demographic elsewhere in the Shire where housing is a large part. So that's why I've moved it. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: I'd just like to add to that the opportunities and potential impact of brokering community houses for our most affected demographic groups. I feel that we've missed off that list the essential workers, especially when it comes
00:54:00 to health care providers. They're one of the most casualised workers in our community and they are essential. Councillor Stockwell, would you like to add to that? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's removed and seconded. Yeah, I pontificated about how many examples I used. I was going to say key workers, but... Councillor Finzel: Key or essential. Mayor Stewart: So we can deal with this and then we can deal with the amendment to the original motion. Would anyone else like to speak to Councillor Stockwell's amendment? Councillor Jurisevic: I concur. I think the most important point that Councillor Stockwell raises there is point seven, potential policy positions that advocate for more state and federal investment in housing in the Shire. I think that's where a significant amount of a let down for the types of housing requirements are. And I concur that advocating the state and the federal government to actually live up to their part of the bargain is an essential part of this puzzle and this big deal.
00:55:00 Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Griswitch. Councillor Lorentson: I support the amendments made by Councillor Stockwell. I just want to reference the Merrill Minute in December 2020. I've actually got a copy of that report in front of me. It highlighted our housing crisis and what planning schemes, changes we can make to achieve housing outcomes. Councillor Wilkie: Teases out on the work that's, and articulates various aspects of the work that's being done by the strategic planning staff in regards to housing. The housing crisis in Noosa and there's nothing inconsistent in this amendment that clashes with what Councillor Lorentson had moved in her original motion about what interim policy responses might be available to the council. This spells it out to the community in black and white, in this case red and white, in this amendment what we intend to be looking at specifically in this sort of work as, and
00:56:00 it's a lot of work that has to be done and needs to be done and is already in the process of being done. Yeah, that's it. Speaker 4: Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Wegener: I think we're in the fortunate position, and we'll see later on, that our financial statements are solid and that we actually can do this and be very confident that we can pay for it and it'll come to pass. So, yeah, I support the amendment. Councillor Finzel: I support the amendment, it'll be good to see some extra additions. I support it, I think it's an opportunity to find hopeful moments of socially transformative possibilities. And I think as we work together and we work together, I think we're going to be able to
00:57:00 We have trusted support in our community that is really hurting. We heard that this afternoon in the business roundtable. All the sectors, you know, the short-term accommodation group feel they're also being, you know, unfairly treated. And people are, you know, judging each other, like whether it's wearing a mask or whether you've got a short-term accommodation or whether you've got your business open or closed. I think tonight what we're doing is we're supporting a united front to say it is all in this together, which came up this afternoon. And we need to demonstrate how are we going to address the issues and the things we need to do to support the fact that we are in this together. We don't want to build it up, us and them, and feed into that. We want possibilities that it is about us and us moving forward to the best of our abilities to support our community, engage our community and show that we are being proactive leaders. That do care about where they are at right now in the midst of this pandemic and the impacts that are affecting their daily lives.
00:58:00 Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I absolutely support this. I think especially as Councillor Jurisevic said, perhaps for me what stands out the most there is advocate for more state and federal government investment. This is not our space technically, but we all acknowledge and we have for a long period of time now that it's a space we need to be in. But it's very much a tripartite approach. It's local, federal and state, and we need to sink from the rooftops for more state and federal government investment in our housing Shire because there is that perception, as Councillor Stockwell said, that we don't need it, well we do, we need it just as much as other people in the Wide Bay area, so I'm very happy to support this, I think it signals that we're serious and that we have a plan and a path going forward, which adds really well to the overall motion. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 4: Councillor Stockwell, would you like to close? Thanks, I can. Mayor Stewart: We'll put the motion to a vote. All in favour? Unanimous. Thank you. That brings us back to the original motion, which Councillor Lorentson is the only one who has spoken to.
00:59:00 Would you like to? Yes. Councillor Finzel: Can I move the addition to add into, I think it was number seven? Mayor Stewart: Six. Six? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Just to add in, e.g. hospitality workers, comma, do you want to call them essential workers or key workers? I just want to capture that, you know, the ones that work in the health industry, that look after our age populations. Essential and key workers. Essential and key workers. Thank you. I'll second. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Would you like to speak to that amendment? Mayor Stewart: No. No, okay. Would anyone like to speak to this amendment? Does anyone have any questions, staff? No? Councillor Lorentson: I will just speak to that. Essential and key workers also include lifeguards, police, our childcare workers, our care supporters, and hospitality and retail staff. And they're called key and essential workers because without them, our town does not function. So, I'm very supportive of this, that recognises their important role in this community.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Arnston. Would anyone else like to speak to this amendment? Put the amendment to a vote. All in favour? Unanimous. Thank you, Kath. That brings us back to the original motion. Speaker 3: Councillor? No, only Councillor Lorentson. Yes. Mayor Stewart: Yes. Would anyone else like to speak to Councillor Lorentson's original motion? Councillor Jurisevic: I just want to clarify, who seconded it? I think it was me. No. Councillor? Councillor Finzel: No, no. The original was Karen. I second. So, you can't. Speaker 3: It was Karen. The original motion was moved by Councillor Lorentson, seconded by Councillor Juriswitch. Thank you. That's what I'm saying. That's what I was alluding to. Yes. So, you can't amend it? No, I can't make an amendment. That's what I was trying to do. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh. Sorry. Mayor Stewart: Would you like to speak to... Would anyone like to speak to this original motion? Councillor Juriswitch. Councillor Jurisevic: Wow. What a body of work we've got before us. I don't envy where the CEO is at with this, trying to bring a report in urgently to us on all the matters before us. Sorry. But I'll acknowledge it.
01:01:00 We do have a housing crisis and we have a part to play and try to identify all of those areas and try to get the right sort of data and research so that we can make intelligent and informed decisions going forward is imperative. So, I support this wholeheartedly. I think the Housing Needs Assessment and the review of the Housing Needs Assessment is critical. The acknowledgement by staff that migration is an important part, you know, is going on into the Noosa region. So is investment. A significant amount of investment into the Noosa region and the impacts that all that stuff is having on our housing needs. So, I think that our housing availability is challenging. It is challenging. Well, I think all of these areas are areas of concern and areas to be considered. I, too, acknowledge the work the staff have done to this point and the two-year timeframe that the State has given us to do reviews on short stays and the planning scheme. And I dare say all of that will play its part into this report going, you know, the potential
01:02:00 for the work that this report may bring going forward. So, I wholeheartedly support this. I acknowledge what the Mayor is trying to achieve by bringing forward these raft of options in her... And Councillor Lopp. Sorry, who moved it? Councillor Orison. Councillor Orison. Sorry. And Councillor Orison. I realise that both had a hand in wanting to break this forward. So, I acknowledge that all the Councillors have wanted to see this progress, wanted to try and identify. My concern is there is no silver point. There is no silver bullet to this situation. We are not alone in this crisis. The entire... The entire country is feeling it. And acknowledging the shortcomings is an important part. And the advocacy role, again, I'll reiterate, the advocacy role for State and Federal Governments in housing, in their role in the housing crisis has to be stated and stated clearly.
01:03:00 Because without there being more pressure on the long-term rental market, without there being no more social needs housing, with a minimum of social needs housing being built, and those people taking up private rental accommodation and the like with government subsidies, all of these things put pressure on the housing market. There are so many elements here at play that we need to clearly identify them and clearly get those entities that have responsibility working towards a solution for not only the Noosa Shire, but for the entire country. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Grusevich. Would anyone else like to speak to the original question? Councillor Wilkie: Look, I'm really pleased with the wording, part one of the wording of the original motion which says, details what additional data and empirical research is required into the housing situation in Noosa. I just want to reassure the community that Noosa Council doesn't make decisions that aren't based on data and empirical research. As we heard from our planning manager, we've got clear data now that's recently, up-to-date data that's come in that says that the housing supply data indicates there's 23% of all properties
01:04:00 in the coastal zones are now given over to short-term accommodation, and that includes Tewantin. So, in the eastern beaches, that's likely to be a higher saturation rate. They're relying on the regional movers index, which is a reputable source of information. This shows that statistics show and facts show that Noosa has the highest migration rate of any local government area, 49% increase, and also the staff are keeping records, they have the details. And the facts and the records about the numbers of properties and approvals given to short-term accommodation in the Shire since the introduction of the Noosa planning scheme, plus they have existing data as well. So, this, I'm in favour of this motion because it's focused on what additional data and empirical research we can gather. I'm also pleased to hear that we're not commissioning a whole new report and starting work now into
01:05:00 the, by hiring an independent specialist consultant. The horse has already bolted. We started this work back when we approved the Noosa Planning Scheme in July 2020. So I'm really glad that's been clarified as well. And I commend all the councillors for their contribution to this motion. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Actually, there's Councillor Finzel's comments in regard to the need to work together on this, which sent me back to what is underlying this. So we've had housing affordability issues in Noosa for a long time. This is not a housing affordability issue. This is a global pandemic issue. And what sent me back is, councillors, remember. When we first started, it was 14th of April last year. We were asked to identify our top five priorities. Remember, I might have done a small PowerPoint presentation.
01:06:00 Councillor Finzel: What's changed? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You know I'm like, I never do small PowerPoint presentations. And I talked about how there's a number of different scenarios about how the world would react. And my view was it was going to be all through strength. So the big countries would try and close their borders and they'd try and make sure their residents were happening. And we see that now that, and I pointed out, one of my top priorities was obviously sustainability. And talking about the availability of housing for a short-term crisis and opportunity for partnerships with housing co-ops on council land using state government funds. While I forecasted there was going to be a housing problem, there was no way in the world that I understood or even had any inkling of what was to follow. Because what's happening in the housing market across Australia is unheralded. Councillor Wilkie: Of course. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: There has never been a period, in my view, in Australia. No. In Australia's history, where the in-migration to regional and coastal areas like we're experiencing now has occurred at such a rate. There's never been the case where our building supplies are in such short supply that you're four months before you can get a roof, regardless of anything else.
01:07:00 There's never been a time where the trade internationally is such that local manufacturers of building products are trying to get ships to turn south. A way between America and China to get their product into our shores. It is a crisis. There's no doubt about it. And while it's not our traditional business to do it, it is a matter of urgency, as highlighted in this report, that we do what we can within the limits without exposing our ratepayers to unnecessary costs, but doing all within our power. So using the position of advocacy we have, by using our land where it's not for the benefit of the people, and by looking at what planning opportunities there are to try and enhance the level of availability of accommodation for those key groups, in my view, is where we should be focusing.
01:08:00 And that is our hospitality, our essential workers, our key workers in the health industry, and those people who would otherwise and are currently moving out of our Shire after a lifetime here. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Finzel: Councillor Quinn, do you want to add to that? Certainly. Certainly. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Bronwyn, for that acknowledgement. I think, yes, this is a great opportunity to show how well we can work as strong individuals that come together in a collegial manner for the best outcomes to our community. It enables a more critical awareness of how decision-making and planning and building our Shire can be evidenced when we come together. In reference back to where we were back in April and where we came, further along from that, in July 2020, I myself moved an amendment to monitor over the next two years from that date the effectiveness of the provisions of the Noosa Plan 2020 in enabling the delivery
01:09:00 of housing choice and affordability to meet the diverse needs of the community, specifically housing for those in our community on low incomes with special needs or identified groups in need of community and affordable housing. So what that says is that... You know, when we first started back and we were sworn in and we had a group of things that we were asked to identify and where our vision laid, it's great to know that that's culminated today and we have remained on track, even though there's been a few bumps along the way. We have pulled together and... What bumps? Mayor Stewart: What bumps? Councillor Finzel: What bumps? Councillor Lorentson: What bumps? Councillor Finzel: And just in closing, you know, when we've been elected to lead, people are looking at us for direction in really times of adversity created through a global pandemic. And, you know, we first came in and we were making decisions, you know, with nothing underneath
01:10:00 us. It felt like we were just, you know, no traction and we were having to make really big decisions. Nothing's really changed. But I'd like to say that a discourse is a set of words that have a material effect. So without doing even nothing further tonight, this conversation around the table is taking effect. We're agreeing on these decisions tonight and we are moving forward. So just as we open the doors and leave out here tonight, we have created a fundamental change. We have indicated to our community that we have them at our heart, that we are concerned what's happening in their daily lives. And I think we have come together and used our words wisely this evening and over the past week to work through a difficult situation where we've had to divide work. We've had to divide policy from, you know, applications. And I think we've done a pretty good job. It's been very challenging for everyone, including the staff. And I acknowledge that. So I am pleased to support this amendment tonight.
01:11:00 So thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. I'm very happy to support this motion. I think the word too, we haven't used it tonight. But when I look at that, I think of the word care. We care. We care about our community. We care about our tourism. We care about our small business. We care about our economy. We care about our residents. We care about the amenity of our residents. And we care about people who can't afford to live here. And we care about our essential workers. And that is what this motion addresses. And it looks at getting more data, building on from the great research and work that has already been undertaken. It looks at culminating and bringing together a myriad of organisations, of bringing together three levels of government, state, federal, local, of working together. It is very much about working together. It's about advocating. It's about getting the data, getting the information. And it's about getting the necessary tools and information and knowledge is power.
01:12:00 And with that tool, we can go forward and make the best decision. And it signals, as all the councillors have said, that we need to be more inclusive. And it signals, as all the councillors have said, that we are serious about this issue. And we have a strategic process in place. And we will find a cure and not treat a symptom. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: I'll close. I'll keep this brief. I just sort of want to add that the toll of our housing crisis is not only on community, but it's also impacting on the community mental health. And it's at its peak. Having the basic stability of having a roof over your head is a basic or a fundamental human right. How does someone hold down a job? How does someone stay in a healthy relationship? How does this town function?
01:13:00 And how do we build community when our residents, some of our residents, don't know where they're going to be sleeping at night? Again, to repeat what's been said at this table, tonight, we stand united with each other as councillors and staff and with community to act and to commit to addressing what is a housing crisis. And also, our commitment to lead with honour and play fair by following due process and understanding that every decision we make at this table have short-term, medium-term, and long-term implications. And I'm encouraged that we all take this role so seriously. And I know, for one, that I'm not alone in saying we've lost a lot of sleepless nights this week. But that's it. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Lorentson.
01:14:00 We'll put the motion to a vote. All in favour? That is unanimous. Thank you. Now, I now move that standing orders be resumed. Thank you, Kerry. I think you're going to remain here for the... Yep. Yep. Yep. You're here. I move that standing orders be resumed. I'll second that. Thank you, Councillor Walke. All in favour? Unanimous. Thank you. We're back to the general committee recommendations on page 11. We're going to deal with number one. That's subject to a further report. So item two is application for a referral agency response for a dwelling house at 11 Church Street, Pomona. Item three is application for material change of use for short-term accommodation at 29 Ferguson Street, Sunshine Beach. This is the subject of a further report, so we'll deal with this item later in the meeting. Item four are the change through development approval for material change of use for a multiple housing type two duplex and short-term accommodation at 139 Duke Street, Sunshine Beach.
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 This is also the subject of a further report later in the meeting, so we'll again deal with this item later in the meeting. Item five. Nurses cycling and walking strategy and implementation plan endorsement. Item six. Application for material change of use, short-term accommodation at 2 Lowry Street, Peregian Beach. I would like to deal with this item separately. I move that this item be approved with the conditions on the screen. I'm happy to second that for the debate. Thank you. Speaker 4: You've got to move some extra conditions at the end. Mayor Stewart: Oh, sorry. I beg your pardon. And there were further conditions in relation to this. Speaker 3: Maybe I'll just explain. This is different, Clare. Yeah. So one of these from Council moves a recommendation for a planning matter that's different from staff approach. Just need to set out the reasons for that. So to assist the Council, staff have prepared what those reasons might be and included these. And that's the debate for the Council.
01:16:00 But if you have a look on the screen there at paragraph C, it sets out what those reasons might be if the Council wants to go against the staff recommendation on the planning matter. Speaker 2: Yeah. Mayor Stewart: So for the following matters relevant to the assessment, sufficient reason to approve the application. The proposed short-term accommodation is consistent with previous approvals granted in Noosaville and Sunshine Beach. The proposed short-term accommodation is identified as a consistent use in a medium density residential zone by the Noosa Plan 2020. Look, Councillors, we went around the block with this on Monday and I wanted to try it again. I do so because of fairness, fair play, being consistent in our decision making. All work. All words which we all support and were endorsed and supported at Monday's general meeting. All words, I believe, we now need to think long and hard about. We have four submissions before us.
01:17:00 Three from the general committee meeting were recommended for approvals with conditions. All for short-term accommodation in medium density zones. All consistent according to the plan. One was deemed refused. This is the one I'm talking about now. This is an application where the property before us is located in the medium density residential zone within the Noosa Plan 2020. The applicant could lodge an application for either a dual occupancy or multiple dwelling, which is code assessable. It could be argued that the short-term accommodation proposed on one dwelling has a lesser impact than two or more permanent dwellings which could occur on site, especially as short-term rentals are often left unoccupied. As we have heard, there were 86 submissions rejecting the application. I relied heavily a bit on this in the first instance. It meant a lot. It actually changed my boat. I've come to know, and I have confirmed by Kerry, or staff of each part of Kerry, that the majority of these, 10 of these properties who put in a complaint or put in a submission
01:18:00 were within 100 metres of the property. So the other 76 properties were further than 100 metres away from the property. So you would have to wonder or argue what impact being more than 100 metres away would potentially have on your property if this was deemed short-term accommodation. The map on page 13 of the agenda from the General Committee looks at, separates, and Kerry correct me if I'm wrong on this, resort holiday homes and holiday lettings. So the resort holiday homes are in yellow and the holiday lettings are in blue. If you could just put up the, now this is looking at the northern end, so this is just dealing with this area here, the yellow part. That's correct, isn't it, Kerry?
01:19:00 Yep. So if I look at this property here, this is the one in question. This is the short-term letting accommodation that we're talking about. So when we look at that and we drive, if you are renting out that property or you're short-term letting that, you're driving into a driving area. So we've got this one driveway here which is directly across from two other short-term accommodation properties. You're not having to deviate or park or go through residential areas. This is all short-term accommodation, the two directly opposite are, and this is a council reserve right here that has no impact for any properties. We're looking at performance outcomes specifically in relation to performance outcomes 14 and This application complies specifically PO 14 states development provides a diversity of types and styles of visitor accommodation to cater for a range of visitor experiences in close proximity to key tourist areas.
01:20:00 A four bedroom house, which this is, aligns with performance outcome PO 14 as all majority of visitor accommodation in the area is resort style and thus it's one, two bedroom apartments or it's motel style. This provides for a range of visitor experiences for a family. This application provides diversity that the PO requires and it complies. As I said, it's suitable for families where others close by potentially are not. If we look at PO 15, visitor accommodation is not to be located in areas which are predominantly residential dwellings. It's clear from the map, as I've said, that the entry and exit to property and locality of dwelling is linked to other STAs within the same locality. One side of the property and a rear boundary connect to other properties that aren't STA. I think it's fair to argue that according to the mapping,
01:21:00 that this visitor accommodation is not within predominant permanent residential dwellings. And I think this demonstrates, in my opinion, this demonstrates that too. You may think otherwise and it's open for interpretation. That's what I would argue. As I said, the target for this property is families. It's the mum and dads who have saved all of you all year. Working hard to come and enjoy with their children a little bit of what we have the privilege of experiencing every day. Peregian. We all thought it was somewhat different because we've had no applications before us. But it is my understanding, and please Kerry, correct me if I'm wrong, that we have three others before Council that aren't in Peregian. Speaker 4: Let me just see if I've got that. Sorry, I don't have the list of current applications on me tonight to advise. But we've certainly got a range of applications close to Shire. All right. Mayor Stewart: In regard to parking, this application has sufficient, or this dwelling,
01:22:00 has sufficient car parking with a double garage and the driveway. And it complies with the driveways and parking code. The property will be professionally managed by a local agent who can deal with any issues. And there are a stringent number of conditions that it must adhere to. To finish, I'd like to use the words of the applicant himself. We signed the contract on our property at 2 Lowry Street, Peregian Beach in mid-July 2020 last year, just prior to the new zoning rules coming into effect. We made the significant investment decision as we fell in love with the property and the area with the intention to utilise property ourselves on some weekends and school holidays. We live locally in Brisbane, so we plan to use the property ourselves with the intention to let the property to guests via a professional local agent for other times in order to supplement our expenses, including mortgage rates and insurance. Our long term goal was to relocate to Noosa and live in the property permanently. We decided to purchase the property to zone for medium density and consistent use in line with the Noosa 2020 plan, which was the primary criteria at the time.
01:23:00 At the time we submitted our application, we believed we had a strong likelihood of our application being approved due to the zoning of the area and the approval of other properties. Council did not announce any change in policy and we followed all of the guidelines in the application process. The areas around our house has a substantial proportion of short term accommodation and holiday resort accommodation. We believed our house being STA would not result in any negative impacts on existing local residents. Our backdoor neighbour even owns and manages an STA property directly across from us at 3 Lowry Street. We are aware of the proposed conditions that the Council will be putting in place for STA and plan to abide by these conditions. We have already engaged with an experienced local STA agent who is also familiar with the Council's new conditions. We cannot help feeling that the goalposts have been moved since we first expressed interest and submitted our application, which is concerning and not aligned with the Council's intention to be open, honest and transparent with ratepayers. We understand that policies are required to be changed from time to time for the benefit of the community.
01:24:00 It appears this sudden change of mind has been performed without the required processes being conducted, including full consultation. We are also disappointed in the backflip and lack of transparency in how the applications were assessed with no form of change to policy, with no consistency compared to those previously approved. We have spent a great deal of time, money and stress on both the property purchase and the application process. We appreciate you taking the time to hear our point of view and we hope that you can take them into account when deciding on this matter. Council, as I come back to those words, fairness, consistency and an even playing field. Is our decision tonight to refuse this application any of those things? I think not. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question, Kerry? Is proximity of submitters to a proposal relevant? I note that six, I think, of the objections were within 100 metres, 10 within 100 metres of the proposal
01:25:00 and the remaining up to 200 metres of the proposal. Speaker 4: With submissions, the primary consideration that officers look at are the reasons that people put down as to why they're supporting a proposal or objecting. But we do consider the location of the submitters. For instance, if somebody lived in Coolum, I think that would be fairly irrelevant in considering these proposals tonight. But having a look at them, the immediate landowners have all objected. The ones either side of the property, the ones across the road have objected as well, including the one shown in blue. There's a number of submitters who have objected there. So I do take it there are some permanents in that area, not all visitor accommodation. And the reasons that submitters have raised, they've raised issues objecting on the basis of noise. Now, I would consider that most relevant to those people in this proximity to the site. People who are 200 metres away, I wouldn't expect noise to be a real problem for them.
01:26:00 But submitters have also raised the issue of having an impact on the fabric of the neighbourhood. And I think that's relevant to all those submitters, all 86. And I would suggest all 86 are also concerned. If Council approves this one today, what happens next door to them? So I think it's something that we should consider relevant for 86 submission in looking at this proposal. Councillor Lorentson: When the applicant purchased the property, was there any guarantee given by Council for an approval of an STA? Speaker 4: No, there's never a guarantee in a development application. And our planning scheme has been online and adopted since the 31st of July last year. So in lodging an application with Council, it's not the end of the story just to say it's consistent use.
01:27:00 A planning application has to demonstrate compliance with the scheme requirements. Now, of all former three applications that we've had before Council, there's been discussion from Councillors as well as submitters about maintaining the area that's used to be the Zoned Residential Medium Density as predominantly for permanents. So it's a clear requirement in the scheme. And I think looking at the mapping that the officer has done for this site, it's very clear that the area that's Zoned Residential Medium Density is no longer predominantly permanent. That's one of the reasons why we've recommended refusal of this application. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just a question. On page 13 of the proposal, it says that the area that's Zoned Residential Medium Density There's the map that identifies the subject site, resort holiday homes, holiday letting and it doesn't show any of the unit complex which I believe according to Google Maps is called Banksia Gardens is holiday accommodation yet Councillor Stewart showed in her blue map I think gave an indication that was holiday letting. If we can bring the blue map back up.
01:28:00 That one. So the, do it here. Your map doesn't show that as holiday accommodation, is that correct? Are we confident our data is right? Speaker 4: Yeah, so if we went to the mapping in the officer report which identifies visitor accommodation, it does show that area is being used as visitor accommodation but it's clear there's a mix there, visitor accommodation and permanents I believe. Yeah. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I don't think on your map it does. Speaker 4: Okay, could be wrong, let's check. Councillor Jurisevic: On the original map there only shows one property on that site as far as I know. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, it's just the house next door.
01:29:00 Mayor Stewart: 13 of general committee. Speaker 3: We should be able to get that up. Speaker 4: Yeah, so it's on page 13 of the general committee agenda, figure 9. But clearly there's submission, so I think it is showing in yellow there but. Oh no. Councillor Jurisevic: It's that yellow squiggle. No, is it? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I saw that each individual one's narrower, no, that's just the same as property. Speaker 4: No, so we haven't picked out individually which units are visitors and which are permanents. But if you went to the submitters map, there's a number of residents who have lodged submissions against this proposal and I would take it that they're owners of the property in that area. Okay. So I would expect there's a mix of visitors and permanents. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. I just want to clarify, because across the road, it's important for my decision, so that's why I want to, across the road the highlighted area for visitor accommodation is quite a thick yellow line, on that site the yellow line appears to me to be the same as the property boundaries which would suggest it's a building unit plan or a strata-titled unit, is, can you just.
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 Speaker 4: Are we able to blow the map up a little bit? They are units. Yeah, they are units, they're definitely units. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, it wasn't clear originally that that was outlined in yellow. Yeah, it's hard to tell. It's hard to differentiate that from the streets. Speaker 4: Yeah, my understanding has been that that has been outlined in yellow because some of the units in there are visitor accommodation. But there are also clearly permanents in there who have adapted to this application. Councillor Jurisevic: Kerry, with regard to the remainder of Bridgian, are there any short-stay accommodations that incorporate three or four visitors? Speaker 4: Yeah, so we look at that same map, Figure 9, if we just scroll up a little bit. You can see all the properties in blue are generally all housing and units, which would be a mix of two and three bedrooms, I would expect, not having a look at each individual one. But similar accommodation offerings to what's proposed by this application.
01:31:00 Mayor Stewart: Kerry, just to, maybe this might assist Councillor Stockwell, I've got the list of submitters here. Would that on the corner be considered Number 1 Lowry Street? Because if it was, then that would show that there is a number of, there's Unit 1, Unit 3, Unit 5 and Unit 11 at Number 1 Lowry Street. I'm just not sure if that would assist in that. Speaker 4: Yeah, perhaps if we go to Figure 10, that identifies all this in the same report. Page 15. And if we just blur that up a little bit, because this has identified all the submissions received. And you can see the property there is shown in pink, and the submitters are in yellow. So there's a number of properties there that are in yellow. Mayor Stewart: But I'm just wondering if that is a unit, as Councillor Stockwell was asking, across the road is Unit 1 Lowry Street. Oh, I'm not sure of the address. Yeah, it is Number 1. Yeah, so that would be, so Councillor Stockwell, this appears to be a unit block from the submitters and the units that they have.
01:32:00 There's at least 4, 1, 2, 3, 4 at Number 1 Lowry Street, if you want to have a look at that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh yeah, and I'm happy to submit this, yeah. I'll talk to them. Because I've been trying to Airbnb book in that unit and I can't come to anything. I've tried the booking.com but I can't find anything. I think it's a, I've looked at it in Google Maps Street View and it looks to me as being a permanent residential. So as I said, on Monday, my view is that this is a permanent residential area. I believe the Council has, the key performance outcome that's going to determine my vote on this matter is Performance Outcome P15 in the Coastal Communities Code. And that talks about not, putting short stay accommodation in localities or areas which are predominantly residential in nature.
01:33:00 I went for a drive there yesterday and I'm convinced that there is a significant difference in the character of Peregian. The holiday area on the, to the east of Davidlow Way is clearly a holiday area. Would I be quite happy to support a short stay accommodation in that area? I don't share staff's concerns about it. It's predominantly been there because that's a balancing act between the various performance outcomes. But in this case, I do believe this is the start of a permanent residential area with very few short stays. There's one across the road and I think one a few hundred metres away on that side of Davidlow Way. It is a permanent residential area and in my opinion, they're the areas we're trying to protect for permanent occupation and from short stay. And for that reason, I won't support the motion. Councillor Jurisevic: Another question. With regard to the short stays that are not on the eastern side of Davidlow Way but on the western side of Davidlow Way,
01:34:00 I know they're in yellow and in blue. Do you have any idea when those would have been approved for short stays, whether it was under the previous planning scheme or dating back further than that, the date of previous use rights? Speaker 4: There'll be a mix in there, Councillor Jo. So there'll be properties that were approved prior to the 2006 scheme, as duplexes or multiple dwellings, which permit interchangeable rights of either visitor accommodation or permanents. There will also be properties that, you know, maybe just a house that commenced using their house for short-term accommodation prior to the 2020 scheme. So we have existing use rights. So there'll be a mix in the area. I don't know the exact details of the breakdown, but there'll be a mix occurring. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you, Kerry. I'll speak to the motion. I won't be supporting Councillor Stewart's motion here. I'll be supporting the staff's view that this is predominantly a residential area. Had those other properties on the western side along the lines of what Councillor Stockwell was alluding to come before us today,
01:35:00 I wouldn't be approving those for short stays either. In my mind, I believe it is a significant and wholly residential area, and to enable the first short stay in that area will then... enable the proliferation beyond that, potentially. I think it's very clear-cut. There's definitely a boundary there that works for me as to where the residential area is, and I'm prepared to support the staff position that this is predominantly a residential area. And as such, should we be accommodating a new short stay? Thank you, Councillor. Mayor Stewart: Anyone else like to speak to this? Councillor Lorentson: I respect the motion, which seeks for fair play and consistency in decision making. However, I can't support it because I do think that this application is very different to the other applications that have been brought before us in Council,
01:36:00 in Nola Street, in Ferguson Street and in Duke Street. There have been no previous decisions made by Council officers recommending approval of a like development. So in this case, and each application's assessed independent, we must assess the application across the whole scheme, and we must make reference to the coastal communities area, which under the Noosa Plan requires that visitor accommodation not be located in areas which are predominantly permanent residential dwellings. So I won't be supporting this application. Motion, sorry. Councillor Wilkie: Oh, look. Mayor Stewart, you make an excellent case. That consistency of planning and compassionate planning and signalling to the industry how the Council intends to assess applications. In this case, I'll be supporting the staff recommendation for two reasons.
01:37:00 One is that even in the medium density zone, it's meant to be predominantly for permanent residents, and you can see it's super saturated with short-term accommodation premises already over. So it looks even more than 50% there. But if you look across the other side of the David Lowe Way, where this application is, it abuts in the joins, and it can be construed in the minds of the people who live there as part of a predominantly permanent residential neighbourhood. Council Finzel said it before, this is a very hard series of decisions that have come before us. New information has come to hand, very credible sourced information that the staff are acting on, and they're thinking the long-term interests of the Shire.
01:38:00 The question we have at the debate is about the process, and we've taken steps with the other motion that we passed tonight to address that moving forward into the future. But on this occasion, I'll be supporting the staff recommendation. Councillor Wegener: I commend the staff recommendation. Clear thinking, good vision. I'll be supporting the staff recommendation. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'll close. Thank you very much for giving me a bit of latitude to bring this again before you. I think it was important. I do think that for me personally, I found this map, looking at this, and we haven't got a definition of predominantly, which is important and we need to look at that. I did think this property was certainly surrounded by holiday accommodation and short-term letting. And I thought being on the corner, that it wouldn't have as much or as great an impact
01:39:00 on the residential neighbours. And it is directly across from a number of short-term accommodation. It's on a main road. It complies in a number of aspects and it is consistent. I do appreciate and understand all the comments that have been made tonight. And I thank you for, as I said, for your warm comments and allowing me to bring this to the table again. The 86 submissions suddenly down to 10 certainly impacted my thought process. I might not like something in Cooroy, but I'm not going to make, if I make an application about it, who cares? It shouldn't be considered. So I would take to heart the 10 applicants who have made submissions and I would disregard, or not disregard, that's the wrong word. I would be very mindful of the 76 who made submissions who weren't in the area and perhaps wouldn't have been directly impacted
01:40:00 by the short-term accommodation. I'm also acutely aware, I have a lot of friends who come up here every Christmas. They come up with their families. They come up with mum and dad, two or three children and a grandparent. And they save all year and both parents work and this is their holiday. And they get to appreciate for one or two weeks what we get to appreciate every day. They get to say, they go, Clare, I can't believe you can live here. How lucky is this? How lucky are you? And they're right. And that is where my thought process is on there. We are taking one less house out of the pool for a family who deserves a holiday. Who deserves to experience for one or two weeks what we get to experience every day. That's my thought process and that's where I was coming from. Thank you. I respect the table and the decision. Speaker 3: I have a question for Carrie. Do you have a question? Once the debate has been closed,
01:41:00 Mayor Stewart: I'll put the motion to a vote in favour. Councillor Stewart, all against. Councillor Wegener, Councillor Wilkie, Councillor Lorentson, Councillor Stockwell, Jurisevic and Councillor Finzel. Thank you. All right. Moves us to I beg your pardon. Sorry. Oh, yes. Would anyone like to move to staff recommendation to repeat? Councillor Wegener: I'll I'll I'll I'll I'll sign it now. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. We'd like to speak to a talk. Councillor Wegener: Yes, the question I was going to ask is, the Mayor said that families want to come up here and enjoy their two weeks, is it, would this house be able to be a short-term rental for the 60 days, four times a year, so that does not block them from, a family from coming up and enjoying the house for the two weeks during the holiday period?
01:42:00 Speaker 4: Good point. That is a good point, because our planning scheme does allow that, of housing, you know, in either the residential low density or the res medium, you can get people to use their house four times a year up to 60 days for short-term accommodation, providing that it's their principal place of residence. So our scheme does allow that opportunity, so in theory the house could be rented out over Christmas to families, such as the maids general. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak to this motion? So this is for refusal, yes refusal, thank you. Yes, all in favour? Councillors Wegener, Wilkie, Lorentson, Stockwell, Jurisevic and Finzel against Councillor Stewart.
01:43:00 Thank you. Item 7. Tewantin Bypass, Stage 1. Now, would anyone like a break for five minutes, or we have a scale? Okay, yeah, we have a break for five minutes.
105 minutes in ¶
01:48:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you, thank you. Item 7, Tewantin Bypass Stage 1, Water Main Relocation. Item 8, Tourism Funding Agreement Review Process. We're going to have a move and a second for the adoption. Thank you, Councillor Driscoll. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. All in favour? Thank you. It's passed unanimously. Thank you, Kat. That brings us to item 9 on page 17 of the agenda. Reports directly to the ordinary meeting. Item 1, further report MCU 19 slash 0119 slash 0.02.
01:49:00 Other change through development approval for material change of use for multiple housing, type 2 duplex and short-term accommodation and operational works. Drainage works, stormwater, earthworks, landscaping, car parking and access to Nola Street, Noosaville. This is the further report requested and the item deferred earlier from the general committee meeting recommendations. Kerry is here for the report. Does anyone have any questions for Kerry? Councillor Lorentson: Kerry, in reference to condition 14, does the condition go far enough by... Sorry. Can we request that neighbours are provided with contact details, including after-hour numbers, or is that covered under condition 14?
01:50:00 Speaker 4: I would suggest that it is covered by condition 14, because that requires a sign out of the front of the property with those contact details, including the phone number, which I would expect is an after-hours number. So I think that condition 14 covers it all. Correct. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Anyone else have any questions, or would they like to... Anyone have a question? Councillor Lorentson: Oh, one more question, sorry. In regards to condition 7, party house. Councillor Wilkie: Page 19. Councillor Lorentson: Page 19. Mayor Stewart: So... Councillor Lorentson: Can we extend the definition of party house to include residential homes used for commercial purposes, or again, is that... Already intended by the wording of the condition.
01:51:00 Speaker 4: Okay. So party house is defined by the planning scheme, and also by state legislation. Sorry, sorry, if we don't go up, 13 or 14, is it? Councillor Finzel: 13 or 14. Speaker 4: No, a little bit further. Sorry, which one? No, 6 or 7, I think. 7. 7. So it is defined by our planning scheme. So I think it's clear that people can't hold events and functions there, which is what a party house is, regular functions. You know, they go to a premises, they can obviously rent a property, they can obviously hold a dinner and a barbecue, but they can't hold sort of events like... A wedding. A wedding. So I think that's fairly clear. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Speaker 4: It's a separate use. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. I'll move the requested motion for approval, as noted in the body of the report on page 18 of the agenda.
01:52:00 But with that, items C and D, and with a small change to item A, adding the word additional, which, and Kerry, would you explain the addition of that word, additional, please? Speaker 4: Yeah, sorry, I've just included the word additional because this application is actually an application for another change. So they're changing the current approval for a duplex. So we need to maintain the conditions for the duplex as part of the approval. So just recommending that these would be additional conditions added to that approval. Specifically for short stays, I was just saying. Yeah, so the approval would be for short-term accommodation and a duplex. And so we have conditions already for the duplex. These are additional for the short-term accommodation. Speaker 3: Thank you for clarifying. Councillor, similar to the advice I gave earlier about where council is looking to adopt the recommendation, which is different to the staff, sorry, adopt the motion, which is different to the staff recommendation. We need to set out the reasons for that, and we've included the reasons in the proposed motion,
01:53:00 which is on the screen, which is, that's all read out. So find the following matters relevant to the assessment and sufficient reasons to approve the application. Number one, proposed short-term accommodation is consistent with previous approvals granted in the building of Sunshine Beach. And two, proposed short-term accommodations identified as a consistent use, in the median density residential zone, by the move to plan 2020. So that gives you the explanation, which is one of the statutory requirements, that if we are adopting a recommendation, that it's different to staff. Thank you, sir. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I've got a question of the mover. In your suggestion, condition 16, you suggested that we shouldn't allow arguing. I was wondering whether you were prohibiting families bringing the Monopoly board with them. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. In the condition of the short-term letting, you can't go if you argue. That certainly rules out our family. So I'm not sure about anyone else around the table, but we won't be going anywhere anytime soon.
01:54:00 Do you want to strike? No. Councillor Lorentson: So can we... Mayor Stewart: Just a seconder for the approval. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second it. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. We debated this with vigour on Monday, so I don't think there's anything more to say. I think it's pretty self-explanatory. It is a request for further information for an approval. And I think with very stringent conditions, one being no arguing, as already mentioned. But it clearly complies. It's consistent and you're happy that I think we came to the right decision. Thank you. Councillor Wegener: Question. Question. Are we voting on the approval right now? Mayor Stewart: Approving it, Tom. Yeah. Okay. So the motion before is to approve. Yeah. So I've moved it and Brian's seconded it.
01:55:00 But you can speak at any time to this motion. Yes. Would anyone like to speak to this motion? Councillor Wegener: Mr. Chairman, please. Yeah, I'm going to. You're ready. We're... We're... We're... We're asking to approve this short-term stay and one of the reasons, I know that we're asking for the approval is it's the consistency because we've already have a precedence of other ones in similar circumstances. However, staff have recommended to refuse this for very, very good reason and we have the town plan. We've worked with our principals in the town plan where we support a Medicaid, we support a diverse and resilient economy. Part of this diverse and resilient economy is actually having people that have come in here and support our economy.
01:56:00 People that would work for council, people that work for the digital hub. We have... It's not necessarily on the lower end. It's actually on the higher end as well. I mean, how many... A lot of our staff do not live in Noosa. We would love them if they lived in Noosa, but it's very hard to get a place here, so refusing this what would have been a home to turn into a business is inconsistent with the principles above coming down and so I think that the amenity of the neighborhood of the Noosa Shire represented by here supports a refusal of the continuing growth of short-term stay. Okay. This beautiful area. We talk about, last week, or on Monday, we spoke lots about the precedent being set and saying this is the last time we're going to do this.
01:57:00 But it's actually not. If we approve this, the precedent is not only set, it's set in steel. It's set deep into the ground. That precedent is not going to change. So, we're talking about drawing a line in the sand with asking for reports and supporting the staff, but at the same time, we're doing exactly the opposite. And if you try to explain what we're doing to a five-year-old, the kid wouldn't get it. You would say, you're trying to stop the spread of short-term stays, and you're worried about precedents, and at the same time, you're setting to approve? Another one, in a medium density. It just doesn't make sense. I think that there's a comment that, oh, the developers and the consultants are laughing at us because if we refuse this, they'll take us to court.
01:58:00 They're not laughing because they think they're going to take us to court. They're laughing at us because if we approve it, they're laughing their way to the bank. Because they are, there's no stop in the short-term spread by precedent, and that's what they're arguing, and we are just, we're contributing to a precedent that we all don't want around the table. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you, Councillor. Can I ask a question, Kerry? August, September is when I've been told that the update in the Housing Needs Assessment Report is going to be complete. Can we rely on that document as an endorsed policy position, and can that document help us, or help inform any future applications in development applications for STAs? Speaker 3: I can probably answer that. The answer is hopefully yes, but we don't know what that report is going to say yet, so it really depends on what comes out of that in terms of content.
01:59:00 But that would hopefully be it. That would probably be a very good piece of data for Council to take into consideration, and could accept in future assessment of that application. But until we see it, we don't know what's in it. Sure. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, no one else is going to talk? I'm going to talk. I appreciate where Councillor Wegener is coming from, and I also appreciate very much where the staff's coming from, and it's very, very challenging considering the discussion around the table this evening, and the elements of what we've just discussed with the property in Peregian Beach. I've struggled with this. I've got to be honest. I've struggled with this. The reasons for refusal that the staff gave had merit. The challenge for me is when that decision was made through the approval process, and that's the only element here.
120 minutes in ¶
02:00:00 The other element here is the predominance of residential compared to short stays in the area. This area is an area that I would consider would be one of those areas that, and I think it was in the original intent of the planning scheme, one of those areas that was met for provision of short stays and acceptance of short stays. So on that basis, and on the basis that it does, consistent with other previous approvals granted in Noosaville and Sunshine Beach areas, and that is a consistent use in the emergency residential zone by Nursing Plan 2020, and it is fairly well saturated with other short stays around it, I'm prepared to accept the recommendation before us, or the motion before us.
02:01:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Similarly, the planning scheme on this one and on all the ones is capable of being interpreted in a number of ways. And it's about what you put your weight on. And both cases, to me, are very finely balanced. There's no doubt about it. For me, it's an easy decision. Because for me, while it's only apparent within the previous provision I identified, which was the performance outcome P15, which talks about not going into the predominantly residential areas in the Coastal Communities Code, that really reflects what I understand to be why we made it consistent in the medium-density residential zone. And that was that, we acknowledge that historically there's been a lot of holiday accommodation in the medium-density residential zone.
02:02:00 The debate and the question is, is there now enough? And that's what the previous motion that we did when we suspended standing orders sought to give. It sought to say, give us the information to see whether, A, have we got enough short stay accommodation to meet our economic needs, and B, is there such competition between short stay holiday accommodation and residential uses that it's causing an impact on the ability of people to live here. Until we have that information, my view is that I will be consistent with what I've argued since 2017. And that is that short stay accommodation in medium-density residential zones, should be approved in areas where traditionally there was holiday accommodation, and as the mapping in this location shows, this is an area.
02:03:00 I think going forward there is another option that we need to look at, is if we do want to keep the zone more purely for current residents, then we also look at, is there a need to look at amendments of where we map in the tourist accommodation zone, to reflect some of those historic areas which may also help to clarify the situation. Nothing we can do now. But in my mind, based on what I understand to be the policy intent of councillors, and when we adopted the consistency, this is consistent with that and I'll support the motion. Councillor Wegener: We've got a bit of a question for Brian. So Brian, you know, we've just spent time with the saying that we want to be steady, and we want to bring them forward because it's an urgent situation, the housing crisis is an urgent situation. We want the steady to come forward. This is to make an urgent situation. Yet at the same time, we have a very finely balanced question here.
02:04:00 Should this be a short-term accommodation or should it be a home for residents? And if it's such a fine line, are you sure you want to make it a short-term accommodation when it never comes back? It's a one-way street. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The great difficulty of trying to make development control decisions which create a policy environment is that you can't do that. It's a cumulative issue that you have to consider. And the best way to consider cumulative issues is in looking at your scheme and your planning provisions in there. And that's the great difficulty. And in my view, you can't draw a line in its hand. So this one's going over the boundary. It is that I think both the manager of development control has clearly enunciated that there isn't enough clarity in the provisions around medium-density residential zone at the moment,
02:05:00 and we do need to change that. I don't think, you know, I think we've said there might be four here, and there might be seven to ten more under the current that have already been submitted. Hopefully, before we get more, we will have a very clear position on where we want to head, and that will send a clear direction to the market about the likelihood of success. And that's where we need to get to. It's not that we can make a bold statement by either approving or refusing one additional. So for me, it's about in development control, we consider various performance outcomes. And as I said, I understand that they are finely balanced arguments, but based on both how we've interpreted previously, but also my own personal view about what is the more important performance outcome in relation to this particular location, this is where I think it should go. Mayor Stewart: I've got a question for you, Tom.
02:06:00 Oh, yes. So you said, and rightly, it was a good point, you said, you know, if we make this short-term accommodation, we're taking away a house, but we don't, and this is a question to me, but you can't guarantee that if the owner doesn't use it for short-term accommodation, they're going to permanent rent it. They could, and I'm putting this to you as an example, close it up, couldn't they? And just if they can't get a short-term... My point is we don't know what the owner would do with this property. We can't guarantee that he would use it for permanent accommodation. And we can't guarantee that... Is there a question here? Yeah, I'm asking if Tom, if he agrees. And we can't guarantee that even if it is permanent, it's going to be affordable. Would you agree with that? Councillor Wegener: Actually, I do, because I see what you're saying, and that is when I moved to Sunshine Beach years ago, you'd walk down the street at night during the winter and it was dark, and it seemed to be a waste. So I take what you're saying very, very seriously,
02:07:00 but no, I... I don't want to... I want to... Yeah, I agree with the staff recommendation, but I absolutely take your point on board, that just because it's permanent, it's not a short-term, that it will be, that they'll put a home in there. Yeah, you're absolutely right. That is a point. A question to Kerry. Is... Well, didn't you just... Brian just spoke of a cumulative effect, a cumulative... Oh, a cumulative change. Isn't that exactly what your staff recommendation is based on, a cumulative change where all of a sudden you're saying 23%? My goodness, there is a cumulative change right here, and it's not serving it to us. Speaker 4: So I can acknowledge what Councillor Stockwell is saying.
02:08:00 One application is difficult to say. It puts us over the limit and there's a problem. But why we have recommended refusal is that we've got a problem, and our scheme identifies that it should remain predominantly permanent. So that brings into question as to whether there is a need for more properties in the area to be short-term accommodation or there is a greater need to protect it for permanent accommodation. And so that's why officers have recommended refusal. The scheme may ask that question, ask it to be predominantly permanent. And I think it's relevant then for us to consider need. I think it would be very difficult for an applicant to demonstrate that there was a need for further short-term accommodation in Shire. Councillor Wegener: Will this decision tonight bring in a precedent supporting more short-term... short-term stays in medium density
02:09:00 when staff is interpreting the town plan to say, we've come to that predominantly 23% of the insured stay already. This is a bad... Is this a bad precedent? Speaker 3: On what decision the council is going to make. In terms of precedent, I'll simply say that, you know, and it probably goes back to the previous application we just looked at, the one down at Peregian Beach, is that each application has to be dealt with on its own merits to assess its context and what it looks like. The question of precedent does come up, both in the minds of applicants and probably councillors as well, about what decisions were made. And it is important to be consistent once you start making decisions. But it's not for staff to say whether that's a bad precedent or a good precedent to make that judgement. Councillor Wegener: I misspoke. Will this precedent support the town plan
02:10:00 or support the staff's interpretation of the town plan? Speaker 3: I'll go into that again for two reasons. One is that, ultimately, it's a matter for council to make that determination. Staff have made a recommendation that this application should be refused and that's what their recommendation is. If the council wants to make a different decision, that's fine. No issue. Can I also just perhaps remind councillors that the purpose of the questions at this point is to elicit more information in order that you can make a decision rather than necessarily trying to push a point. If you want to push a point, you should be doing that through. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You're not suggesting Councillor Wegener is pushing a point, are you? Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Wegener, do hurry up. Speaker 4: We're saying, staff are saying that the area that's zoned residential medium density, it's predominantly visitor accommodation, that there's very little permanent accommodation and over time what we've seen is yes, traditionally the area along Gympie Terrace was all visitor accommodation, but that's moving back further and further away from Gympie Terrace.
02:11:00 Councillor Jurisevic: It wasn't quite the question I asked. I was going specific to Nola Street and the other properties within Nola Street. Are there any permanent residents in that section of Nola Street? Speaker 4: Perhaps if we bring the map up on your report, sorry Cathy, just look at, in the planning environment. Councillor Lorentson: No, the planning environment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Nola Street, page four. Page four, yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: The first one. Page four, yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Page 11, there's a map. Speaker 4: I need mine in colour.
02:12:00 Page 11, so pick a five. Sorry, thank you. So you can see the properties there that's in the res medium. So the res medium's unshaded. It's just the aerial view that is the res medium area. Councillor Wilkie: Sorry, where's the property? In blue. In blue. Speaker 4: So you can see the... There are all the properties at the moment that are currently being used for visitor accommodation, but Nola Street in particular, next door has approval for visitor accommodation or permanent accommodation, so it can be either or, so yeah, it's a little bit of a mix in that street. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to the motion. I think I said this at Monday's general meeting, that we don't disagree with the refusal, with the staff recommendation to refuse the application, we're approving the application and we're asking to vary the recommendation for three, for me it was for three reasons, and I'll just quickly summarise it, because we're required by law to have regard to the importance of consistency in decision making.
02:13:00 We made, between the months of September 2020 and March 2021, we approved three STAs in similar zone applications that are almost identical locations, so going back to the reason, like cases should be decided in like manners, another reason that we're varying the staff recommendation is that we have to play fair, and we can't make policy on the run. The applicant spent months and money preparing applications based on the positive advice provided by planning officers. Council gave them the confidence to move forward, and the applicant, the town planners, they relied on the statements, and trusted and believed in the integrity of council to play fair and follow due process.
02:14:00 Third reason is that we have to avoid unnecessary legal challenges by developing clear statements. And that's what we've spent, I think, the last couple of hours arriving to. So I'm supporting the approval for those reasons that I've just stated. Mayor Stewart: Thanks, thank you, Councillor Asselin. Councillor Wegener: Are you, can I ask a question, or stay out of the room? No, I'm good. So are you, it sounds to me like you're saying that all residents that apply for an STS in that area should be approved for an STS, because it's a like area. Councillor Finzel: Is that a question? Councillor Wegener: Is that what you're saying, is that all like residences that apply to become an STS in that area should be approved as an STS?
135 minutes in ¶
02:15:00 Councillor Lorentson: What I'm saying is that we need to follow the due process, and due process is that we need an endorsed change in policy, and we can't do that by looking at individual land applications. We have to do that by waiting until our housing and needs assessment report is complete and comes to council in August, September. That's when we change our position, and that's when we can refuse an application. So, we can't do that application for STAs in medium density without the risk of potential legal challenge. I think we just need to follow due process, and in my opinion, due process is done by endorsing a changing policy position. Councillor Wilkie: I have a question for Kerry, Kerry. Is there anything about the staff's refusal of this application, recommend the refusal of this application?
02:16:00 Speaker 4: I'm not quite sure of the question, but I would say no. That's the most obvious answer, but we're following due process. We've followed the statutory requirements for assessing a development application. So I don't know how else to answer that one. Speaker 3: I suppose you're correct. I mean, it starts right off the second answer. I mean, if they make, by their professional judgment, they make a recommendation to the council, the council makes the decision. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Look, I'll speak to the motion. Look, and just to emphasise the difficulty that we're all facing with this, I'm going to stand and put a contrary view, similar to Councillor Wegener's. I'll start by saying everything that the other councillors have said about this application. I understand. I understand that the way forward that we addressed in the previous motion
02:17:00 was to get more rigour and more support around our staff's future decisions regarding short-term accommodation in the medium-density zone in the future. But there is nothing that staff have done, that they have followed due process in making this application. They have, every application, as we've heard, every application has to be, has to be considered on its merits with the best and taking into account the best empirical information at hand. It would have been irresponsible of our staff to recommend approval for this, knowing, taking on board the migration index data and the housing data that showed that 20, there's 23% saturation of short-term accommodation across the coastal zone from Tewantin all the way down to Peregian Beach. And that means you take out Tewantin, where there's likely to be a lower percentage,
02:18:00 it's a higher saturation down on the Eastern Beaches. As we saw in the previous application, which we refused for short-term accommodation in the medium-density zone, the saturation, it looked like there's a greater than 50% saturation in some of them, in that particular neighbourhood. We've all acknowledged that we're in a housing crisis. And, so, I totally understand why it's been recommended for refusal given that the planning scheme says, that this is a medium density residential neighbourhood. The zoning, medium density residential, it's not medium density visitor accommodation. But these neighbourhoods, the data suggests that these neighbourhoods are fast becoming visitor accommodation. instead of their intended purpose under the planning scheme.
02:19:00 There is more than enough data to show that there's sufficient short-term accommodation in the Shire. I've heard from various reputable sources that there's greater penetration of STAs in the Noosa market than virtually any other Shire in Australia. It begs the question, when is enough enough? And I accept that there will be more work done about getting more data to help inform decisions, but I think there's merit also in just making a decision now. Consistency of decisions was brought up as well, and there were very good arguments. So, and I'm just as challenged by this as everybody else, and I'm happy to
02:20:00 refuse the application for short-term accommodation at Corrigian Beach for the reasons I mentioned. So the consistency side is a strong argument that suggests I should do the same here. I'll probably, this will be against the weight of numbers here, I think, tonight, but I think it just demonstrates that there are valid arguments on either side of this equation. I'd like to make the point that staff have followed due process in bringing it to us. It's just one of the, it would have been lovely if we'd had a heads up, but we're not. So, I don't think that this was going to happen, or have the luxury of more rigour. But we know that we're in a housing boom. Staff are inundated. We all would have loved a more proactive response. But it's come to us in a public report, and it falls to us, the decision
02:21:00 makers, to make hard calls. And it's hard because people's lives are affected. But I think the decision to refuse as a practice going forward is in the best order possible. And for the long term interests of the Shire, knowing what we know about the housing crisis, which is a term that's, we've all heard, and we've all used. So, like Councillor Witt, I think the staff are wanting to draw a line in the sand. This is it. There's provision in the planning scheme which allows a refusal on very good reasons, evidence based decision making. It's perfectly valid perspective to put. And the, in the long term interests, I just thought I would put that view tonight and so I won't be supporting this motion. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Finzel, you're the only person who hasn't spoken to this motion. Would you like to speak to it? Councillor Finzel: Sure. I just have a question first to Kerry. Moving forward after tonight, I guess, how will staff continue to measure, like we're at this 50-50, do you have enough to work on to, I don't know, what's the question, like how will this affect the staffing moving forward?
02:22:00 I thought it was 10 to 11 that are in the pipeline. With your application, sorry. Does that mean that you now don't have enough, do you have sufficient data to keep moving forward without the report coming through, I thought we were getting around September, October? Speaker 4: Yeah. So we've made a recommendation on four applications here tonight for refusal. So we feel that there is sufficient grounds to refuse all four. Councillor Finzel: Okay.
02:23:00 Speaker 4: It's obviously would be not a straightforward appeal. As we went to appeal, there are arguments, as we're having tonight, both for and against, particularly because we've approved three others. But I say that we have this housing crisis and that one's come up since approving those other three and there are grounds for us to have a different direction. In terms of the other applications before us, the officers feel quite straightforward. We've made recommendations and we will probably continue, depending, we'll have to assess each one on its own merits, of course, but potentially in their similar situations, we will continue to make recommendations for refusal where similar circumstances existed and council will need to decide it. Certainly the housing study that's on train and to be finished by August, September, will better inform those decisions and support those decisions. So that is an important point. Certainly that will support us better going forward in an appeal, if that was to eventuate.
02:24:00 Councillor Finzel: Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I will speak to it, Anna, briefly. I'd like to thank all the councillors and staff. Firstly, it has been a difficult decision where we've got to tonight, given that we've got 50-50, we're using words like predominantly, things are open to interpretation and that we have to take all this on board. We've got the legal considerations. We've got consistency with decisions made with the three prior to coming to this point tonight. So to promote fairness, to provide consistency and endorse equity and given predominantly is open to individual interpretation and that's where I sit tonight when I come to cast my vote, I am hopeful that the plan can deliver in a higher order of things. The heart of where we're trying to get. Given we have the COVID impacts, given that all those things that we've discussed tonight are on the table.
02:25:00 But what is good that we have been able to through this process and in the higher order of the plan, make visible what has been previously invisible. And that's an important dimension of the ethical and political project of critical social themes. Critical social themes. And that's what we've got here tonight. We have broken open this plan. We've got to really have a good look at it and interrogate that. We have identified that in some areas it's fallen short and in other areas it can serve our purpose. If we're looking at each one independently, I will support to approve the application, given that we're looking at this from a different perspective. This applicant was at the intersection of an intensification that came out of the blue, intensified by the impacts of the housing conditions that we've all discussed tonight.
02:26:00 So thank you. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'll quickly finish. Look, we've had, just under 12 months ago, it was endorsed right at this table, the Noosa Plan 2020. And we talk about the Noosa Plan in most of our decisions and we're told to hold the line and to stay firm and that's the guiding light, the Bible. Now, when looking at this application and with all the consultation and the years of consultation and the experts and the strategic planning that went into the Noosa Plan, short-term accommodation in medium and high density has been consistent after years and years of consultation. Now, that was under 12 months ago. We can't confirm, and Tom, I'll reiterate, that if this isn't used for short-term accommodation, we can't confirm what that'll be used for. That could very much be closed up.
02:27:00 I know for a fact that the land tax on some of these houses is $40,000 a year, the land tax. That makes a break even, if you're renting it out as an owner, probably $1,400 to $1,500. By the time you pay rates and you pay the pool and you pay the gardens and whatever else you have to pay, all the expenses, the air conditioner breaks down, it's not affordable. It may be closed up. And if you've ever walked down Bell Bravia or Knightsbridge or Chelsea in London, where I have to catch the bus, because I haven't stayed there, just caught the bus there, you'll see that they're ghost towns. Because wealthy overseas investors do just that. They buy the properties, they close them up. Now, what does that add to a fabric of society? What contribution do they make to an economy? Absolutely none. So I think that we can't suppose that just because we disapprove, we know what's going to happen to it, because we don't. We have no clue and no idea. I think, you know, we've talked about fairness and justness and equality and compassion.
02:28:00 Well, this is a like for like to Robert Street, which we did approve only a few months ago. Now, we are in a housing crisis. We've been in a housing crisis since we all acknowledged that in December 2020. Many of these applications haven't come on since that time. So we do know we're in a housing crisis. We know that because it's happening Australia wide. Australia has, and according to journalists and media last night, we have the lowest ever vacancy rate for rentals across Australia. So we're not immune. So we can't point the finger at STAs in medium and high density. We can't point the finger and say that's the problem because we don't know. And we have to look. We have to look at everything on merit. And low interest rates and a desirable location have ensured that people want to move here. They want to migrate to Noosa. So they should. They have every right to. Every single person around this table. Every one of us is a migrant.
02:29:00 None of us were born here. In fact, there might be one person in this whole room who may be a dinky die Noosarite. But we're all migrants. We've all migrated here at some point. We're just feeling the pressure now, as is every other town and every other state and every other country. And then I think about what the legal implications are. What if we don't approve this? What precedent does that set? How many people are lining up with medium density properties saying I bought this on the basis that it's consistent? What's that data? How many are out there? What does that mean? The last thing we want to do is incur unnecessary legal costs. Tom, to do that is like cutting off your arm. You hate incurring and losing in court. What precedent does that set? We don't have the data. So I think that's why I'm so heartened with our first motion to get the data. To get the facts. To get increased data, Councillor Wilkie.
150 minutes in ¶
02:30:00 Add additional data. Get the facts. Get the studies done. Bring it all together. And then we make the decisions. But until then, I think we need, for consistency, fairness, justice and all of the reasons mentioned, we need to approve this application. Speaker 4: Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'll put it to a vote. All in favour? Councillors Lorentson, Stockwell, Jurisevic, Finzel, Stewart. Against? Councillors Wilkie and Wegener. Thank you. Thanks. Okay. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: So that brings us to... Item 2. Speaker 3: Item 2. Page 23 on the agenda. Mayor Stewart: Application for material change of use for short-term accommodation at 29 Ferguson Street, Sunshine Beach. There is also a further report requested at the General Committee. And does anyone have any questions for Kerry? Councillor Wegener: Do you want to do this all over again? Mayor Stewart: Please don't.
02:31:00 Councillor Wilkie: Just to clarify, this is a similar argument. It's not a similar argument. Just the last one. Kerry, isn't it? Yeah. Speaker 4: It is very similar. I'll just point out to you on this one. There's an additional condition proposed around front setbacks. So there was a roof terrace, roofed terrace proposed within the front setback of six metres. The condition asking it to be pulled back to the six metres is proposed at four. We're asking it to be pulled back to six, consistent with the streetscape. Speaker 3: And a similar issue to the previous one is the Council wishes to move a resolution to approve. And we should have the reasons for that. They're the same reasons as the previous one. Mayor Stewart: Would anyone like to move the motion before us for approval? Councillor Lorentson: I'll move the motion. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. I'll second it. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I'm not going to speak to the motion. I think the decision was already clearly stated in the previous application.
02:32:00 And I'm just moving to approve. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie, would you like to talk to this motion? Councillor Wilkie: No. Not really. Thank you, Mayor. I think the similar arguments were thrashed out with the last application. I don't believe there will be anything. It's a different site this time. I don't even... Yeah. I'll leave it at that. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Councillor Wegener, do you have any questions for this motion? No. Would you like to speak to this motion? You don't have to. You don't have to. Councillor Wegener: I feel that we're going to regret these decisions tonight. Sorry. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Councillor Stockwell, or Councillor Jurisevic, Finzel, would you like to speak to this motion? We have a motion before us to approve with conditions for 29 Ferguson Street, Sunshine Beach.
02:33:00 Councillor Finzel: I will move to approve the application in order of fairness, consistency and equity as discussed previously. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Jurisevic: Same argument. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll concur with that one. Mayor Stewart: I won't. Councillor Lorentson, I'm just close. No. We'll put it to a vote. All in favour? Councillors Lorentson, Stockwell, Jurisevic, Finzel, Stewart. Against? Councillors Wilkie and Wegener. I think it's passed. Thank you, Cat. Speaker 4: Okay. Mayor Stewart: Item three. Change of development approval for material change of use for multiple housing. Oh, there you go. Page 28. Page 28. On the agenda. On the agenda. Number three, page 28 of 47. Yeah.
02:34:00 Either change to a development approval for material change of use for multiple housing, type 2 duplex and short-term accommodation at 139 Duke Street, Sunshine Beach. This, too, is a further report requested the General Committee. Does anyone have any questions for Kerry? Would anyone like to move the motion that is before us that is to approve with conditions? I don't want that. Okay. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. This has had additional. Oh, with the word additional. I beg your pardon? Speaker 3: I'm assuming the same thing. Conditions of the board. Conditions of the board. We have something different to the staff recommendation. I think so. Councillor Lorentson: This one has high density. Speaker 3: High density. That's the only difference. The other one is medium density. Mayor Stewart: Well, thank you. Thank you. Would anyone like to second this? Thank you, Councillor Livingstone. Would you like to talk to the motion, Councillor Finzel? No. Would anyone like to talk to this motion? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, Rob. Look, there's a significant difference here. I believe this property is surrounded by short stays.
02:35:00 And in fact, having a residential property in amongst all of these short stays would potentially create a situation of the exact opposite of what we're trying to achieve, residential amenity in amongst all the short stays. So I'm prepared to support the recommendation for this to be a short stay and be consistent with all the properties surrounding it. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak to this motion? Councillor Wilkie: So just to clarify, this is in a high density residential zone. Speaker 4: That's correct. It's in a different zone to the other properties we've been dealing with, high density. Councillor Wilkie: And what is the intention of the high density residential zone? What does that imply? Is the term residential being included in that zone? Speaker 4: Yeah. So one of the requirements for the high density residential zone is that it remain predominantly permanent, similar to the medium density zone.
02:36:00 Councillor Wegener: A question for Perry. In the future, say there's a downturn in the economy, how will having these short-term stays affect work in a very downturn economy? Because as of now, we're just booming everything. Mayor Stewart: I think that might be a real move. Kerry, can you answer that question, or do you have the economic experience to answer that? Speaker 4: I was going to look to our economic development manager over there, who might like to answer that one. Councillor Wegener: Through you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Speaker 1: I think I need to clarify whether actually it's a conversion back to permanent. Would you know, through the CEO, would that actually be able to just convert back to permanent? Anyway, I think the market would respond. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think the question would be, is a dwelling unit an acceptable development within the high-density residential zone
02:37:00 that wouldn't require further application if there was a change of years? Councillor Wilkie: Has Councillor Stockwell just confused the issue? No. No. Speaker 1: It's getting late. Speaker 4: Yeah, okay, these use rights are not straightforward, but for this one, it's an application for another change. So it's already got approval for a duplex dwelling, which permits permanent occupation. They're seeking to just add short-term accommodation, which would mean they have interchangeable rights going forward. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: So to clarify, just because a property has short-term accommodation rights, doesn't mean it has to operate as a short-stay accommodation. It has the option of operating as a short-stay accommodation.
02:38:00 Speaker 4: That's correct. I imagine part of that decision-making would be which one allows them to afford the highest rental return. Councillor Jurisevic: Economic viability would be a significant factor. Yeah. Speaker 1: And I won't stand up this time, Chair. Thank you. I think it's a good question, and it's good to clarify that there is that dual use, and I think that's the critical thing, and I think what we will see is the market will respond. Yes, I agree, there's a risk around this conversion, but I think in most circumstances, there is that dual purpose or dual use option. So as the market changes, in theory, there should be the ability to convert and accommodate a permanent workforce, potentially. And so it's not a change, and a permanent change. But I think there might be some exceptions to that, but in general, there is that dual use. Speaker 3: I might just have one observation and come up in conversation.
02:39:00 I don't think it was the visit around the table, but I've had a conversation. We are in boom time for both people wanting to move into short-term, but also the tourism generally. And at the moment, what I call the traditional tourism places, for example, they have very high occupancy rates, and I hate to break it to no one. The interesting question there would be, what would happen if there is a downturn in the tourism sector, and if the people who came stayed in the short-term and not in the traditional tourism places, where would we get pushed back there? That's the only thing that's a bit of an unknown at this stage. And I don't think that ever happens, that we have that sort of downturn, but what implications would come from that to be an unknown at this stage? Mayor Stewart: Does that help? Yeah, thank you. Does anyone want to speak to this motion? All right, we'll put it to the vote. All in favour of approval, with conditions. Councillor Zorinston, Stockwell, Jurisevic, Finzel, Stewart, against.
02:40:00 Councillors Wilkie and Wegener, thank you, carry. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, carry. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you, carry. That was easy. Oh, my gosh. Item four. Rachel, next one. Oh, my gosh. I'm exhausted. I'm still going, aren't we? One more, one more. One more. One more. One more. One more. Speaker 1: Thank you, Michael. Councillor Jurisevic: Page 33. Yes, thank you. Mayor Stewart: So, item four is our financial report, June 2021 interim position. As Mr CEO said, page 33 of the agenda. We have Michael Shave, our Director of Corporate Services here. Does anyone have any questions for Michael about this? Thank you, Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: Madam Chair, if I look at page 43 of 47, the Statement of Income and Expenditure, I note, I always look at, you know, near the end of financial year, I expect percentages to be somewhere around 100%, but I see under capital funding, contributed assets at 28%, and under capital expenditure, contributed assets at 28%. Can you explain why those percentages are so low
02:41:00 near the end of the financial year, please, Mike? Speaker 2: I can, Councillor. I think the key point here is the interim results. So with the end of financial year, our finance team, the hard close at 30 June doesn't mean all of our information is in our systems, particularly with contributed assets. So what we rely on there is there's a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes with our development team. It has to provide a lot of information through those developments that have to come through them. That information goes through our asset management team through to our finance team. So there's a lot of plans and a lot of number crunching that has to happen because there's things like pipes and footpaths and things that have to be valued from developers. They hand that over to us. We have to then account for that, write that onto our books as assets, and that will probably be happening between now and mid-August. So that number will increase probably upwards to that $2 million depending on the level of development.
02:42:00 And we're assuming there'll be still plenty of development happening. So I hope that answers the question. We expect that $2 million to be roundabouts by the time we adopt the financial statements or prepare the financial statements. Councillor Jurisevic: Perfectly and well explained. Thank you very much. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Eddie, would anyone like to move the recommendation? Thank you, Councillor Perisvich. I'll second it, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Joe, would you like to speak to this? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I will. Look, it's a significant financial position we find ourselves in. A turnaround from the original budget with an unexpected operating position of somewhere in the vicinity of $4.2 million from a negative $900,000. And that originally forecast. So I think it's a promising turnaround in a COVID year. I'd like to thank staff for their efforts in being conservative in their budgeting and being able to... The fact that we've seen ourselves out of COVID in such a positive way
02:43:00 is a very positive outcome for the community. There's still a lot of work to be done. It's a very challenging time through the COVID period. Capital expenditure has still got some way to go, of course. But again, with that, there's still an element of invoicing to come in to conclude that. So I'll be interested to see what the final position on capital works are at the end of the reporting period. Thank you, Greg. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Anyone else like to speak to this question? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, I guess... But it looks like we're going to finish in surplus. Are you a little bit... Disappointed that you haven't had one deficit budget in your career? Mayor Stewart: Last year. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, no. Councillor Jurisevic: It was a budget forecast, not a budget conclusion. Speaker 2: Not at all. And Councillor Joe sort of reiterated that, you know, the fact that we are conservative with our budgeting approach.
02:44:00 We always look to achieve this type of result. And obviously part of that surplus is, you know, our holiday parks and our facilities. We were very conservative... Delivery. We were very conservative about COVID closures. But we've been very lucky there. And we've seen that those revenues have come back early. And thankfully, that's been able to supplement our bottom line. And there is probably still some more expenditure to come through. So that surplus will reduce a bit. And similarly, with our cash position, we'll have quite a bit of carryover that we'll be looking at BR1 with our capital program. So whilst we have a $10 or $14 million extra cash versus what we forecast, we'll be spending a fair bit of that over the next 12 months, so... Mayor Stewart: Thank you all. Thank you all. Anyone else like to speak to this motion? Put it to a vote. All in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you, Kat. Thank you. Thank you, Michael. Thank you. There are no confidential items. We have no submissions to public question time.
165 minutes in ¶
02:45:00 Thank you, everyone. That brings us to the end of our agenda. The next meeting will be held on Thursday, the 19th of August, 2021. Declare the meeting closed at 7.48pm. Well done. Thank you, everyone. Speaker 2: Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you.