Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Everyone's in attendance around apologies today. Can I get a confirmation of the minutes of the last meeting? Thank you Councillor Stewart, Councillor Lorentson, all in favour? Thank you all. No presentations or deputations today but I'm aware of the CEOs. We'll move on to item 5. Reports for consideration of the committee and the first item on the agenda is the Trailfire Design and Construct Tender Award. Hayden and Craig here from Infrastructure, if you'd like to give a bit of an overview on the tender. Speaker 2: Good afternoon everyone. The Trail 5 upgrade is between Cooran and Pomona and this tender is for the design and construction of the trail itself including stormwater, works, resurfacing, some widening and signage upgrades. So it's a design and construct tender and it's over the value of $200,000 so under our procurement policy we've gone out to tender for that. It was a design and construct tender and it's over the value of $200,000 so under our procurement policy we've gone out to tender for that. We came out for a couple of weeks, advertise in Noosa Today .
00:01:00 We've got one respondent and that respodent is Trailworks which have done a lot of work round here, they're a local contractor. The procurement or assessment team has found that the tender is considered value for money, and the contractor is more than capable of doing the works. The value is $714,000 They're expected to complete the works by Christmas this year if they get started this month with design. We're recommending to award the contractor two trail works for the value of $714,000 and then approve expenditure under the contract up to $800,000 to allow for contingency spend. In this kind of contract we're not expecting that we would need to use that fund, those funds at the moment.
00:02:00 Councillor Jurisevic: So all of those works that have been conducted, you mentioned creek crossings and the like, there'll be environmental consideration to prevent erosion of those creek crossings and that kind of thing? Speaker 2: That's correct. So as part of the planning works we did an environmental and cultural heritage walkthrough. We've got reports done on that and that's been provided to the contractors to quote on. Councillor Jurisevic: Can you take them into consideration? Speaker 2: Yeah, that's correct. Councillor Jurisevic: And just with regard to the other elements of that project that are listed on Plan 6, is any more of that work being tended out when it comes to our council contractors? Speaker 2: Yes, the trail hub upgrades, so the design is almost complete for those. It's likely that'll be an invitation to quote. The actual construction works will be under the $200,000 threshold. Councillor Jurisevic: And the horse yards? Speaker 2: The horse yards are completed.
00:03:00 The shelter at the horse yard is to be constructed shortly and that's been awarded under an ITQ process. Speaker 7: Hayden, I was really interested to read that 95% of this funding is through the Queensland Reconstruction Authority through our local economic recovery. Which is fantastic. So Noosa Council is actually having to contribute $5,000 or is it about $71,000 or something in this case. So yeah, it's a great result. But you know, it's not really a burden at all on our rate payer because there's eight trails and the remediation work and all the upgrades will be fantastic for our hinterland, for our economy and our tourism. Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right for such a small input from council, $70,000 to get $1.68 million worth of trail is great. Councillor Lorentson: So is it 5%? Not 5,000, 5%. Speaker 7: So I said 5% and $71,000. $71,000 was the number somewhere, wasn't it?
00:04:00 Councillor Lorentson: $714,000 is council's contribution. Speaker 2: So the disaster recovery funding arrangement, the LER grant is $1.61 million and council's contribution is $70,000. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: $70,000. Yeah. That's terrific. Aidan, a community pop-up was originally planned for the Pomona markets and that didn't happen because of COVID. In the report it notes that a media release is going to coincide with this contract tender award and that's going to release all the information in regards to trail closures, construction program, et cetera. Can I ask, will the community be able to still consult during the construction phase of the upgraded works or is the consultation period over and done with?
00:05:00 Speaker 2: The consultation period for changing what we're doing to the trail is complete. That's complete. Okay. We'll be at the Pomona show displaying the plans with what we're going to do. So we've got a plan now but the design's not complete. So that'll be done as part of this contract. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. It's only a few weeks from now. It's September. Pomona show again. First week in September off the top of my head. Speaker 2: I think that might be right. I'm not too sure. Councillor Jurisevic: It's not far. Speaker 2: And then the other thing to remember with this trail is it's the first one of our, this popped out of the Noosa Biosphere trail, the master plan. So it's the first one of probably another seven. So there'll be further consultation on the implementation plan for that master plan. Councillor Wilkie: And there were some very intensive workshops done with the very involved representatives of the external project reference group, which involves tour operators, event managers, other
00:06:00 user groups, local businesses and associations. Can you perhaps, I remember we had a sort of writing input down on butcher paper and there's a lot of robust discussion and feedback from these very interested groups. Can you perhaps talk generally about how feedback from those hyper interested groups has shaped the design? Yeah. Speaker 2: So there's probably two major points that came out of those meetings. And one was that we wanted the trails to be multi-use. So not designed specifically for mountain bikes or horses. So this is the core trail is multi-use. And then the second point was that people wanted short, shorter trails. They didn't want to necessarily have to go out for a day to walk from Cooran to Pomona and then back again. So we've included. Formalisation of some shorter loop trails as well, which will be done as part of this project. So Trailworks will be doing the upgrades to that and signage.
00:07:00 Councillor Wilkie: So the other thing I'm not quite clear on as a result of this report, but it does mention that the project involves trail hub facilities, upgrades to trail hub facilities. Can you talk specifically to what this design and construct tender award will deliver in terms of upgrades to trail hub facilities or not? Speaker 2: So as part of this contract, the contractor will be responsible for the signage at the trail hubs. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Speaker 2: And that's pretty much it at the trail hubs. The actual, the rest of the facility work will be done under the ITQ for the trail hub constructions, which will be car parks, shelters, hitching rails. Councillor Wilkie: And what will be the timeframe for that? Speaker 2: That is also planned to be put out to quote and awarded and built this year by December.
00:08:00 Concurrent. Yeah, concurrently to this contract. Councillor Jurisevic: So the expectation is for the entire project to be finished by the end of the year? December 2020. Speaker 7: That's correct. With including weather contingencies too, I believe. Councillor Wilkie: That's correct. And there are other requests for works going to stand top of park. Could you talk about how these trail hub upgrades are going to be considered alongside other, what will be the process for considering these upgrades alongside other requests for upgrades to stand top of park? What will be the, what's the process there? Speaker 2: So these works, we've limited the works in stand top of park to signage and the hitching rails. We've, we've focused our trail hub facilities in Pioneer Park, Koora Mountain Park, which is just down from stand top of park with the view that stand top of park will be planned for and we didn't want to invest money in infrastructure that may not be in the right
00:09:00 Speaker 3: location or may not suit the park. So we've done minor works in stand top of park because it needs further planning. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: And the planning for stand top of park is something in the future that's already on the books? Speaker 3: We don't currently have any budget for planning in stand top of park, but it is being discussed. Being discussed. Yes. Councillor Wilkie: Another question I had was, you're confident that the 6% contingency is enough with, in the current climate, we've seen some projects like bridges, for example, by 40%. Can you, I guess, explain the thinking around why you believe 6% is sufficient for this project? Speaker 2: Yeah. So that's 6% the total project budget. I was looking at the numbers before I came up here to confirm, but there's actually more contingency built into each of those items.
00:10:00 Trail works and this sort of work, the trail works in particular, I know that they've given some data from their last contract. And where they work to the budget. So because the nature of the works with trail building is it's flexible. It's almost an art form. So we can reduce the scope if required, if there is huge rises in fuel prices and that sort of thing, or a supply cost increase should there be, but we don't expect that to occur. We set up a standard of what we want the trail to look like when it's finished, and if we have to adjust that, we can. Councillor Wilkie: And what is the standard? Refresh our memory on the standard that you're saying. Speaker 2: It's a specific standard developed as part of the master plan implementation plan. So it's for, it's a combination of the Australian walking track, mountain bike and horse riding.
00:11:00 So sort of a happy medium, which we're consulted on and yeah, we're looking to roll out across the trail network. Councillor Wilkie: And this section is going to be used as a template for the trail network? Yeah. That's correct. Yeah. Speaker 3: And the idea, once we've finished the master planning, then we can look for future grants and we've got a standard and we can look to roll out future upgrades. So it's very exciting. Councillor Wilkie: Great. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Aidan, I think you've already answered a couple of questions. In terms of multi-use, so I remember from the feedback that horses spook, bikes spook, runners spook this. Yeah. How are we addressing those potential conflicts of uses? Speaker 2: So a lot of the trail at the moment, it varies from a fire road width down to single trail. And this will be taking it to two metres minimum so you can pass. There's still opportunity for horses to be spooked, but generally the people that are
00:12:00 riding those trails are experienced horse riders. The horse yards provides an area where people can practice. There's not going to be bikers in there spooking, I suppose. Councillor Lorentson: And I note the stakeholder group, as Frank mentioned, there were reps from horse riding to other user groups, part of the consultation process, so they're all clearly in agreeance. Yeah. Yes, that's right. Right. Councillor Jurisevic: Following on from this, I know it's not actually part of the tender award and relative to this, but the thing is that you said it's not going to happen. Do you think the reason for the design is to upgrade this, that there's been some consideration in the maintenance budget going forward for maintaining these tracks to this new standard? Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a very good question. We've actually formed a working group with the multi areas of multi departments of council that are bringing that group together and we're working on that now with an intention of developing an operational plan for the trail network and that'll come back.
00:13:00 I assume. And I assume it may even come to council. So it's something we're working on at the moment. A very good question. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. So would it be integrated in asset management of natural assets or a separate category? Speaker 3: I think I might defer to the manager of civil operations and assets. Speaker 4: It becomes, yeah, I'll probably just jump in there. It depends on whose responsibilities it is by whether it's going to be an environmental asset or not. But we'll probably have an asset management plan or an operating plan at least because a lot of the infrastructure isn't on council property. So that's going to be a challenge in itself as we deal with that. It goes through national parks and road reserves, main roads, et cetera. And private property. So it's a combination of many. So we'll have to look at that and that's part of why we've got a working group established.
00:14:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Given that it's on their land and they do have tracks and trails on their land. I mean, they are responsible for maintaining the tracks and trails. Speaker 4: But not at this stage. We're trying to work out and get our own house in order first before we start engaging that external bodies. But that will be the intent over that of having some sort of MOU I would think we'd need to have. Councillor Lorentson: In regards to the private landowners, I thought all those issues had been resolved that we weren't coming through private properties. I could be wrong on that. Speaker 3: So we were looking to do a loop as part of this and it did involve access to private property. However, that didn't, it wasn't feasible. And so we're not pursuing that. Speaker 7: Okay. So private property owners aren't affected? Not on this one. Speaker 2: Not on this one. There is one section of the trail, just as you come into Cooran, that traverses through two private properties. But on public thoroughfare easements.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 So we're notifying the owners, not letting them know that the work is occurring, but there won't be any impacts for them. Councillor Wilkie: Is that different to the route that running routes use already? Speaker 3: Yeah. This is coming up the hill, is it? Speaker 2: This is the... Councillor Wilkie: In Cooran, this easement, this public easement section. Speaker 2: Yeah. This is where the events use at the moment. It's the current alignment. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Speaker 7: Yeah. So have those property owners had an opportunity, that they will pass through and that's on public land or thoroughfare, have they had an opportunity to provide feedback or...? Speaker 2: I've only just drafted letters to let them know that we're doing the work. So I haven't got in contact with them just yet. Okay. The work proposed through their particular blocks is very minimal. So it's already pretty close to the standard. Councillor Jurisevic: So the trail exists already? Speaker 3: Yeah. It's currently being used. And there is a... Yes. Speaker 7: It's just not greater than our existing... Speaker 3: But the notification is that we're carrying out works?
00:16:00 Yeah. Got it. Rather than the trial being... Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. I'm happy to move, don't you think? We'll second it. Councillor Jurisevic: Moved Council Wilkie, seconded Council Stewart. Thank you for the discussion. All in favour? Carried and answered. Thanks. Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Item two, tree management on public land policy. I am Matt. Matt, you might like to give us a bit of an update and introduce the court. Speaker 6: Yep. Certainly. Thank you for having us. So this is an update to an existing... We've had an existing tree management on public land policy. The last... The current version was adopted in 2018. Sort of the needs arisen to refine and, I suppose, amend parts of the policy just due to, I suppose, our learnings and experiences since that time with the nature of the types of tree requests that we get, which are highly varied and different situations arise.
00:17:00 So we wanted to make sure that this was a bit more comprehensive and covered off on those things. And a part of it was also that we went to community consultation on it as well to involve that sort of element to it, to refine it as well. So, yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: Any questions? Yeah, I've got... I'm just going to give you a little pause. Speaker 7: Yeah. No, no. I've just got a couple of questions. Matt, thank you. I mean, quite timely on the basis that we saw the poisoning of those trees last week. But... And a great result that council are re-vegetating those too. So, yeah. Really good. Question, page 15. Scope. This policy does not apply to trees on land controlled by council for conservation purposes, including bushland reserves, except where they abut private land. Can you just talk me through that? Speaker 4: I can, if you like. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Mainly, we do some hazard clearing in that space if there is a need to have like a fire
00:18:00 break or there's a dangerous tree causing impact on private property. So, that's where it would be exempt from that. Okay. And there's this trail on the wall. Speaker 6: Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. And the rest of that land is managed for conservation. So, it's not managed in the same way that we've managed trees on other parts of private land, which is centered around risk and things like that. Councillor Jurisevic: And that's interesting to clarify that there is issues associated with public land and those environmental reserves have a different arrangement on them with environmental conservation, in my view. Speaker 6: That's right. Yep. Speaker 7: Brian, just going back to that, on tree removal, and that's page 36, a decision is made to remove a tree when one of the following is being determined by the tree assessment arborist report recommendation. Tree is dead. Tree is dying. Tree is dangerous. I was just noticing here, there was no mention of if it's in the middle of a fire trail
00:19:00 or like it's potentially a hazard, a fire hazard. And I'm just wondering if that is included in- Speaker 4: To probably to answer that, Councillor, it's mainly around the fact that one, this is the guidelines for us to manage the trees. This isn't the policy. The guiding lines are- Our fire management practices and a lot of that will be in that bush land and conservation areas. So it'll be exempt to that as well. Speaker 7: Yeah, great. Speaker 4: So the policy really does target how we manage on our road reserves, essentially, in those road corridors. Speaker 7: Okay, perfect. Thank you. And pass. Speaker 4: And pass. Open space pass. Speaker 7: Fire is just the first thing I thought of. Speaker 4: Yes, exactly. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: On page 12, there's summary of changes. An addition of trees provides social, cultural, economic, and environmental benefits.
00:20:00 In terms of understanding the value of trees and why some trees are sacred to our indigenous, our Gubbi Gubbis, how do we go about assessing heritage? How do we know if they have cultural significance? And I raise that because we've had some issues just recently in that scope. Speaker 6: So some trees in the Shire and elsewhere are actually recorded on a register because the historical scar trees, which is an indigenous, we've got a couple in the Shire, you know, where the- It's an aboriginal register. Yeah. Yeah. And they're put in a register. The register's not made public because they need to be protected, not vandalised or whatever. But there's certainly a register that the environment team here at council hold. And they, when we're doing projects or maintenance works, they make us aware of the vicinity
00:21:00 of those trees. In terms of other cultural elements, we certainly take that on board if we know about it. And if, when it comes to our attention, we go through a process of consultation. Councillor Jurisevic: Exactly. The three-in-one tree and the tree-in-one council here. Yes. Correct. Yes. And for Tommy's. That would be on a register and being maintained. Speaker 4: Yep. There is also our heritage advisor too, Jane Harding, who we do consult regularly on trees of significance and we use her part of that process, particularly similar to what the current issue we have. And we do that in a location as well, is how is that culturally significant and what that relates to because it is, that's got to be determined as well or whether there's, because we do deal with a lot of emotion around tree removals.
00:22:00 And this is to try and take a lot of that around and just put the facts on the table. Councillor Jurisevic: There are a number of examples where we've got trees that are in photographs that are a hundred years old where the planting was a burning or you know, you know, a tree that was in photographs of the past where you can see the tree growing and the significance of it to the community during those events that they have undertaken. Councillor Lorentson: And do we ask or consult with an Indigenous representative? We don't have one here on council, but with Indigenous officers say, I don't know if Sunshine Coast Council have one, but is, do we undertake that process as well just to be thorough? Yes. And in respect to what's important or what's valuable to people in this community? Speaker 4: We don't because predominantly the trees we're managing are ones that have been planted as a result of development and we're coming back to do maintenance and as a result of
00:23:00 that. But you know, if there were areas that we were going to that were greenfield sites for whatever reason, then that would form part of a project. And that's what we do. That normal process would follow through. So this is really around what's on our road reserves. If there is, we also, again, the register with our environmental staff and we're working very closely with our environmental staff at the moment to identify where there is endangered species as well, that our clearing activities and maintenance activities are monitored to ensure that we don't do any damage to any of those types of trees going forward. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: And one last question for me. Just in regards to those two trees, I think it was, that were just removed. What's the penalty for unlawful removal of trees and is it tough enough?
00:24:00 Speaker 4: Well, that's dealt with by our local laws and the planning area, unfortunately, so yeah, it's dealt by a different department, so I don't know the answer. Speaker 7: I can tell you what poisoning a tree is, it's in excess of $10,000. $10,000. Yeah. Yeah. Quite expensive. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Extensive, I don't know. $10,000 for a million buck view, I'm not sure. Yeah. Speaker 7: Well, that's what someone said yesterday. They rang in on the radio and said that seems quite a small amount. Yeah. It is. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: You said this policy's been around since 2018. There's some changes you've updated. What's the biggest change? And how does it make your job easier? Speaker 4: Sure. Probably just to speak on behalf. Yeah. It's probably the guiding light, the guiding principles that we've got to support it. The previous policy had indicated that we needed some procedures to support, which they would never develop, so we've developed those guiding principles. So they enable us to put in practice the policy and articulate that into a little bit more detail for the decision-making.
00:25:00 Mm-hmm. Councillor Jurisevic: Mm-hmm. In Hinterland, road reserves and trees were cleared and probably created some challenges with regard to runoff and the like when the trees were removed. We've got anything in the policy that deals with, I notice it talks about replacement of trees and the like, but ensuring that when trees are removed that we don't actually create a situation that needs to be addressed such as- Sure. Speaker 4: Yeah. I guess they come under a different type of policy in regards to how we, because these are really around- Yeah. The removal of trees in a built environment more so, but we've actually developed and drafted some guiding principles on vegetation management and proceduralised that into a working document for our field staff, working with environment to ensure that we've got checklists and also mechanisms to consult with our environmental staff before those
00:26:00 activities happen again. Even in the event of emergent works, pre and during and post-disaster events. Speaker 7: Correct. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: I've got just a few more questions. I do love some of these solutions that you've got in the guiding principles, such as redirect pathways. If space allows, pathways should be redirected away from tree roots. May also be beneficial to reduce the newly directed pathway width. Bridging footpaths. If self-supporting construction methods such as pier and beam could be used to raise pathways above the roots, allowing for root expansion without damaging the pavement. That's wonderful. Have any of these methods been used before, or will this signal a new approach? Speaker 6: To my knowledge- Have we done this already? To my knowledge, we've done those to some degree. Probably not as extensively as we could, but it certainly signals a new direction and it's
00:27:00 always a horses for courses, depending on the situation and consult the list and see what we can do. And certainly- Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: So this means also, instead of a straight pathway where there might be a tree with roots, you might curve around the tree, which indicates a value placed on the tree. I think that sends a fantastic message. Speaker 4: And we've done that in recent times in Noosa Waters and the like as well. Yeah. I was going to say, I can cite examples of them. Yeah. We do need to look in at the cost benefit of that too, for a planted species because of the development and what the overall benefit to the greater community is to remove the tree and replant a more suitable species as well. A lot of them that are causing damage to infrastructure are unsuitable species, and whilst they might be magnificent trees, they do at some point are going to continue only doing bandaid fixes. So we need to look at that as well, and that's all part of that assessment of what we can
00:28:00 do and get the best benefit for the tree and for the community. Councillor Jurisevic: Does it give you the full gamut of consideration as to what the best option is in that circumstance? Speaker 4: Correct. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: So have I read right, undesirable species include coconut palms at Main Beach? Is that, have I read that correctly or not? Speaker 4: As an example? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, on page 38. Speaker 4: We have removed, again, that's an example in our guiding principle. Yeah. Of what we've done with unsuitable species because of the dangerous coconuts that have been falling. Yep. And they were quite prolific along there. So we've actually been working on reducing the numbers of those palm trees over time. So yes, that would be deemed an unsuitable tree in a high trafficable area. Yeah. For safety reasons. Yep. Councillor Jurisevic: What have they been replaced with, Brian? Have they been replaced in that situation?
00:29:00 Speaker 6: They're being replaced where there's room to replace. Yeah. Yeah. But a lot of the times they're growing out of established gardens where the roots have just filled up that there's no soil to plant back into. So, but we are working, we work with the Hastings Street Association identifying, you've got to be careful too because if you plant something somewhere it's going to cause someone's, an issue with somebody. Councillor Jurisevic: Here's why I raise the question. What are we replacing those sort of trees with so that we don't create the same sort of problem? Speaker 4: We have been with lower shrubs and vegetation. There's a lot more that, more maintained and more shrub than a tree in those instance. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. Okay. We can have you a second. I think I've got another question from the councillor in the gallery, Councillor Wignall. Please. Councillor Wegener: Yes. I was looking at the questions that went out to community consultation. And on page 27 it says council will not remove the trees which are inhibiting TV, radio, or satellite reception. But it didn't mention solar panels.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 So that going out to public consultation didn't address that. Speaker 6: Yeah. I can address that one, councillor. So, the original plan was to remove the trees. The current policy from 2018 already has solar panels in it. The consultation that we did was just on the amendments to the policy. And so that's why that particular question is part of the same line in the policy that already had reference to solar panels. And this is the addition of the other things. Like I said earlier, there was a few little gaps that we've identified over the years in between. And things like TV, radio, or satellite reception popped up. And so that's just addressing, yeah, addressing that. Councillor Jurisevic: It's been handed to the solar panel department. Speaker 6: That's it. Exactly. Yeah. Okay. Councillor Wegener: Also, the, you're aware of the really old trees between the, unhasting trees between the information centre and Natanga.
00:31:00 Those are, you know, very special trees. I just always bring it up because is it true that those trees have been there in the past since settlement, basically? Since they settled, Europeans came to Noosa. There's a handful of trees that are right along there that are very, very old. And I've just heard that that's where the aboriginals actually used to collect underneath those particular trees down on Hastings Street. Speaker 4: And I was wondering if you knew about that. No, I'd have to take that on notice to find. Yeah. I don't think they're that well established, some of those ones along the, along the pathway from between the visitor centre and Natanga you're referring to or? Councillor Wegener: There's plenty old. They're very, very old. Okay. Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 6: It's not, I'm not think, you know, I can't think of the ones you mean in that context either. Most of the ones we have around there, as Brian said, have been planted back when it was developed and are now sort of mature. But yeah. There's the odd remnant eucalypt through there, but that's all I can think of.
00:32:00 Councillor Wegener: They look more like pine. But just keep an eye out for them, because I understood that the people that were making Natanga had to actually goof around and change the structure of the building to make, to keep those trees. Yeah. Just between the, just between the two buildings. Speaker 4: Take that on notice and have a look. Yeah. Councillor Wegener: I'll look that up. Yeah. They're pretty impressive. Sorry, Councillor. Yes, thank you. Councillor Finzel: Just leading on from that, that poses a question. Do you feel there's sufficient in this report to cover it? So if the tree's already been there and like pavement or future infrastructure, private or public, goes over that, how do you, what's in the report to manage that? How do you assess that? The tree was there prior to the, say, the pathway going over it or a driveway going over it? Speaker 4: It would be subject to approvals as well.
00:33:00 So it would still fall within our planning approvals to, if we needed to get a driveway put in where a tree is of significance. So it still needs to go through this process. This is really about the management post the tree being planted and, and removing it and replacing it with more portable. So again, we just go back to the planning scheme and the approvals for that. It's not dealt with in this policy. Okay. That's part of the planning. Building infrastructure around trees. Councillor Finzel: That's through the planning? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. That's part of the planning application process. And if you, if you look at planning applications that come forth, often, well not often, but occasionally, there is a request for a tree to be removed where a driveway might incur or a building goes in. And it's all part of the planning approvals and the plan is turned around to determine whether additional plantings are required or if that tree can be removed in significant periods. Sorry. Speaker 4: I may have missed that question. Sorry. Because there is an element in regards to that in that. Did you? Speaker 6: Yeah. So in the, in the, the, what's in the current policy as well, but in the, in the proposed
00:34:00 new version, page one of that, which is actually page 15 of the council report, the last sentence in the bottom of that scope, says that the policy does not replace requirements determined by legislation associated regulations, local laws or planning scheme requirements. Councillor Lorentson: So in regards to Noosa Parade, that's an example of trees being removed for road infrastructure and undesirable species were the palms, unfortunately. And the magnificent. African tulips. Fancy panties. And the African tulips, yeah. Were any of those reused? Did you? I know that I sent a request to some. Yeah. Some residents wanted the plants. What happened to all the trees that were removed, Matt? Speaker 6: To my knowledge, they were all just removed by a contractor.
00:35:00 I don't think any of the ones down there were suitable for translocation. They were all just too mature. That's the reply that I had. The roots have compacted and gotten underneath the existing road surfaces. It's really quite a difficult thing to relocate trees of that size and scale that are that well established already. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: And were fairly constrained in terms of . Speaker 6: Yes. Correct. Yes. Speaker 7: And just on Noosa Parade, we, and I remember this when we talked about it initially at the opening of the soft launch, that we are actually planting more trees than what we pulled out. That's correct, isn't it? Speaker 6: Absolutely. Speaker 7: Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Because with this concern at the moment, it looks quite barren. Yes. But it's not when you're finished. No. Just, I remember saying, I remember, and it was something like over 3,000 trees were planting along there. 8,000? I thought it was 8,000. Speaker 6: I think it's 8,000 shrubs and trees collectively. 8,000 shrubs. Which is more than what we pulled out. The number of trees would be in the hundreds of, of tree trees would be in the hundreds,
00:36:00 though, yes. Speaker 7: Yeah. Yep. I remember those stats. Yeah. Thank you. Can I ask one more question? Councillor Wegener: There's a question regarding a particular beach tree that was near Lake McDonald. That one, it, I was looking at the policy. First, it was ordered, or, you know, creating a problem with the driveway next to it, that the tree roots blew up from public property through the, through the driveway, creating bumps. And here, on page 28, it says, Council will not remove trees which claim to be damaging private property unless, unless, unless, unless, unless, unless, unless, unless, unless, unless, But also, again, I understand the tree was being taken out, but I'm trying to figure out why, because there's three reasons. One, the tree was dying. It was old, according to the arborist. Two, it was growing around lines, through electricity lines. And three, it was lumping up the driveway there. And so when people ask, why did you cut it down, I can't say that it was because of the driveway,
00:37:00 because we don't take out trees if they're injuring a driveway, it sounds like. Is that correct? Speaker 4: I might get, Deb, do you want to respond to this one? Speaker 5: Councillors, I can talk to this particular situation. We currently have an administrative action complaint, two administrative action complaints before council in relation to the matter. The tree has not been removed as yet, but I actually physically visited the site and examined the tree. I think the relevant section under the policy, and you might correct me if I'm wrong here, is that if there is a issue, if there's a hazard and an unacceptable risk, that is a consideration and would be considered if the tree was to be removed. And also, if the damage being caused by the tree, if there isn't, I think, a practical solution or other solution to the situation that can be introduced,
00:38:00 then it might be that, you know, removal of the tree is the best option in that space. The tree hasn't been removed yet, but there are currently two administrative complaints relating to the tree, both separate, both separate complaints. Councillor Jurisevic: And we've got a question of specific tree issues there, we might, if all the questions are done. Moved by Councillor Stewart, seconded by Councillor Wilkie. I've heard the discussion of councillors. Speaker 7: I'll just confirm that it is over 350 trees. Over 350 trees on Noosa Parade and 8,000 ground and cover plants and shrubs, so there you go. Thank you very much. 350 trees. Over 350 trees. Councillor Jurisevic: That's great. All in favour, councillors? Yes. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, guys. Thank you, guys. Thank you, guys. Item three. Outsourced expenses for reimbursement and provision of facilities. Speaker 5: Okay. Yes.
00:39:00 So, councillors, this report proposes two changes to the existing policy. The last time this policy was reviewed was just after the council elections. Now, the changes are proposed in the area of the mandatory professional development and representation, but also in the section on discretionary professional development and representation. In the mandatory area, it's recommending that there be a change to the policy. The change is that three delegates be able to attend the LGAQ conference, where in the past it was two. This is an industry conference. It's very valuable. We, council, have submitted motions to this conference for consideration, so it's very important that council be represented at that conference. So that is taking it from two to three delegates, and the approximate cost of attendance at that conference is approximately $1.5 billion. Approximately $3,000 per attendee. Around $3,000 when you look at transport and accommodation and things like that.
00:40:00 So that's increasing it by one. In the area of discretionary professional development, the current allowance is $1,500 per year. This change is proposing that that be increased to $2,500 per year. What this does is it allows councillors to identify particular courses or opportunities for development or attendance at conferences that they can attend. It's discretionary, but when you look at the types of conferences that councillors attend, it's things around peak industry type things, things that relate progressively to strategic directions that we take, whether it be in waste management or tourism or other areas. And when you are travelling away to those conferences, the majority of conferences do actually cost around that $3,000. And the current allowance is $1,500 per year. So what that means is that a councillor might actually be out of pocket and actually pay
00:41:00 for some of the attendance, the costs themselves. And that can actually inhibit a councillor from attending if they've used their allowance or they're not prepared to pay. We do allow the unspent funds to be carried over for one year. So if a councillor didn't spend their allocation in one year, they can roll it over to the next. And then they may be able to afford to go to a conference, but that's over a two-year period. So this is proposing the increase. If you look at what other councils, provisions for other councils in the same category, where category three, there's a bit of a mix. There is, I did actually research all of the councillors in the same category. So you've got five out of the 14 are actually allocating $5,000 per term, which is currently what we have under the old policy, under the policy prior to these amendments being recommended. Three of them actually identify reasonable costs within a budget allocation, but don't
00:42:00 actually specify. And I couldn't actually obtain it from the research that I did. You had six that had no limits, but reasonable costs and with council approval. So that would mean a resolution of council and then one for reimbursement of reasonable expenses with no limit. So if you look at the amount, we've only increased the allowance once, and that was six years ago, and it was only a marginal increase. So I suppose what we do have to recognise is the increasing costs of travel, attendance, accommodation, food, et cetera, you know, if in attending the conferences or even different types of development courses or workshops, et cetera. So this is doing that. Okay. Yeah. And that's what's been proposed. Speaker 7: Thanks Deb. So reasonable costs, up to reasonable costs is the majority of other councils.
00:43:00 Speaker 5: Yeah. Yeah. Reasonable costs and within affordable budget allocations seem to be the two things that, you know, that are considered by other councils when you do the research. Speaker 7: And it would be reasonable, in your opinion, Deb, as head of governance to assume that a councillor can attend one conference a year and actually have accommodation provided for one night or two nights. Yeah. Maximum two nights. And their transport there. Speaker 5: Yeah. When you consider the cost, I'll go back to the $3,000 example. Even with $2,500 being allocated, it's not enough to pay for attendance at a conference, and a councillor is out of pocket, say $500. I think a number of councillors here have actually attended courses where they've actually had to pay from their own personal funds. So even the $2,500 may not meet the cost. But not every councillor will attend a conference that costs $3,000. And to be quite honest, when you look at the spending patterns, councillors don't expend
00:44:00 all of the funds every year. So there is sometimes money that is unspent because councillors are prudent in what they, you know, how they spend the right person's money and the courses that they attend. Speaker 7: Jo, do you want to give your example? Councillor Jurisevic: Well, I'll quote plenty of examples. There's going to the LGAQ conference, we know that a councillor off their own bat, and what we have done in the past is through the CEO's office, when the conference, the LGAQ conference was in Brisbane, we enabled a third councillor to attend because there weren't airfares involved. Motel costs and conference costs were covered. There were no airfares incurred. So it was a bit of a local travel. So I was able to attend one LGAQ conference in one year because it was in Brisbane because there was the airfare expense that allowed that total spend that was there for two councillors to attend one interstate to be covered. My attendance at the WAIS conference is two yearly.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 Yearly simply because the cost of the WAIS conference, which is held in Coffs Harbour, is in that $2,500 to $3,000 including accommodation. I usually drive my own vehicle down. But the only time I've ever stayed in the accommodation, the conference accommodation is in the first year when it was affordable. After that, I was the one that requested that we look at being able to expend that $1,500 over with a two-year allowance so that I could attend every two years. I'm still taking my own vehicle. The last one I attended, I took my own caravan and I stayed in the caravan park because the cost of accommodation put it outside of the realms. The cost of the fuel and that was out of the allowance that we're already provided with council vehicle, the vehicle, sorry, to enable us to drive for council business in our own vehicle. So, yeah, so $1,500 a year, even being able to do that over two years, it does make it very challenging to attend any conferences or any things that are outside of the realm
00:46:00 of South East Queensland in particular. Even if you do go down to Brisbane, something's an all-day function, there's a networking as part of it. It means that you're trying to get home very late at night and then back again very early in the morning. So, an overnight stay is often part and parcel of a two or three-day conference in Brisbane. I know Brian was in Tewantin, Tasmania. I mean, I've been to all the rest of it. We've been there. We've been there quite a bit. But again, I don't, you know, I think this is in keeping with what these things are starting to cost. Councillor Wilkie: Just as a relevant point, the $1,500 that was the allocation or is the allocation currently is not sufficient to cover the cost of registration for the LGAQ conference anymore, I understand. No. Should a councillor decide to go outside the two delegated councils? Speaker 5: No, it isn't. No, it isn't. And those sorts of conferences, like the LGAQ conference is a perfect example where
00:47:00 it's industry-based. It's an opportunity for council to be able to advance motions that all local government can sort of progress. So, you know, they're very valuable conferences, especially for new councillors as well. So, if a councillor, for example, was to put forward a motion that was quite leading edge and significant on a particular matter, and I know we've got a number of motions going before the current conference, then, you know, that councillor, if they weren't one of the three that were permitted to go, would have to fund that, and their allowance wouldn't be enough for them to be able to attend, so. Councillor Wilkie: Well, to be fair, there are two nominated delegates assuming the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor. Speaker 5: Yes, that's right. They're the ones that can only speak on the floor. That's right. That's right. Councillor Wilkie: And their costs are covered. That's right. It's a mandatory expense. But should other councillors who are not delegates wish to attend, the $1500 will not even cover the cost of registration. Speaker 5: No. No. It's a great learning... Yes. It is a really great development and learning opportunity.
00:48:00 Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: I might be wrong, but my understanding is that if you did advance a motion, that the councillor can speak to the motion at the conference. Is that correct? Is that the case? Speaker 8: Through the Chair, we'll have a look at that, Councillor Lorentson. That's my understanding of past councils. Yep. It may have its own view around that, particularly the way that it has just been the Mayor and Deputy Mayor attending. But noting that you do have a motion, if it's appropriate, you could absolutely put that forward there. But no, we have a resolved position in relation to your motion that's been put. And, yeah, we'll have a discussion in relation to these specifics. Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. Councillor Wilkie: Yep. I know at the conferences in the past, when non-delegate councillors have got up to speak, it's been an issue on the floor. Oh, wow. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Okay.
00:49:00 Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. And, Deb, what I always notice... Councillor Jurisevic: Billiard, though. I mean, what? Billiard. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: I'm nominated to speak on behalf of the local government. Yeah. Speaker 7: I always notice, Deb, that whenever we go to these conferences, and I've been to a few, that Noosa, it's Frank and I, but a lot of other councils seem to have a lot more councillors there. You see four or five councillors and some staff. They're well represented. So I think I'm hoping that this will enable Noosa to be... More people can attend. More of the councillors better represented, because... Oh, that's the one thing that I always notice, is that we seem to be underrepresented. Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: I would say some of those larger councils in particular, it's not a discretionary spin. It's a spin that comes out in the... Speaker 7: Yeah. I'm not sure. ...conference budget. Yeah. Anyway, I notice that. Often they have four or five. Speaker 5: And if you... And with the larger councils in the higher categories, their allowances are higher. You know, so... Speaker 7: Which is understandable. Speaker 5: Yeah. Yeah. I'll give you an example.
00:50:00 In Bundaberg, for example, it's $9,000 per councillor per term. So there you go. Very close to the figures that we're looking at. And then you look at the higher levels again. Yeah. Yeah. So they do vary, but... Yeah. Yeah. The larger councils do have... Tend to have a higher allowance. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: And monies that are unspent by the end of the term, they don't rise. No. And they're untouched. Speaker 5: Yeah. That's right. That's right. Councillor Jurisevic: You were saying per term then, not per year, not per annual? Speaker 5: No. That's per term. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Thank you, Laura Smith. And secondly, Councillor Stewart. No further discussion? Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: All in favour? Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Member Poinard? Thank you. Very good. Councillor Lorentson: Thanks, Deb. Thank you. Very welcome. All right, gentlemen. Shall we go to the page? Councillor Jurisevic: Page 52, Mr... Four.
00:51:00 Amendment of the General Committee and Order in Committee Dates for October 2022. Mr CEO, would you like to give us an update on the date? Rhymes and reasons between the date changes for October. Speaker 8: Chair, thank you. And what a good segue from the LGAQ Conference. We are lucky enough this year to have not only our Mayor, Deputy Mayor but also Councillor Lorentzen and Finzel attending the LGAQ Conference, a great opportunity for our Councillors to be able to work with local government across Queensland, then also the many vendors that attend there as well. Unfortunately though, at the time of the conference and the scheduling of our public We have four councillors that won't be available at that time so what we're requesting through this recommendation is to defer the date of the general committee to from the 17th to the 24th of October and then also defer the date of the ordinary meeting from the 20th of October to the 27th of October so literally just moving each of those meetings back a week still within the month of October so we still deliver the requirements under the local government
00:52:00 act but we do need a resolution of the council and then we will work through at an executive level the notification process throughout the community happy to take any questions. What will that do to the meetings that follow in November and December I mean does that put a less applied rate for staff to prepare things for the November meeting for example? Chair yeah it somewhat does look it gives us a compressed time frame in relation to November but then there is also a little bit of a gap in October then as well for officers so my discussion with the executive team will be taking advantage of the gap that you have with pushing back those meetings we are sequencing all of our reports on a monthly basis so that they should be well and truly advanced in the reporting for the next round of November meetings by mid-October. So it is something for us to be aware of but my advice to the executive team will be is utilise the week where there is a few of us away get some work done and ensure the rest of the year is prepped and ready to go.
00:53:00 Speaker 7: We'll have the Olympics Mr Chair from 21 to 24 it's only three years sorry short time's right you know it's 20 years 20 or 24 years away I'm having to move it I'll second it. Councillor Jurisevic: Any questions at all? I think it's a very logical and necessary approach. Is Cora not being available or is the CA? Councillor Thom you've got a question before we go. Just a comment. Councillor Wegener: I actually am coming back from South Korea on the 19th of October so I'm just very happy that you moved it back those days just for me. I thought it was just an excuse. That's right. Speaker 8: Thank you councillor. There we go. Even more the reason. Absolutely.
00:54:00 No you're not that special. Councillor Jurisevic: You could have watched it online. All in favour? Thank you. Go again. And I think we've got one, another item. Capital program delivery status to the 30th of June 2022. Hey back again. Speaker 3: And I'll introduce Dean Arnold. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Would you like to give us a bit of a. I don't think we've got time. Sure. Speaker 3: So this report summarises the capital works program up to the 30th of June 2022 and specifically Q4. So the expenditure of 21, 22 was 34.4 million. Expenditure and direct control of infrastructure services was 41.9 million and other projects such as ICT, fleet, community was 6.1 million. As at the 30th of June, councillors expended 71% of the 21, 22 budget with 22.7 million
00:55:00 in commitments. As a result of the floods events in May and February, this has impacted on projects and council's assets up to 130 assets got affected through those two events. Additionally, we've had internal resources redirected to those projects and the recovery activities. This redirection has resulted in impacts on the design and delivery and obviously impacts on the capital works program delivery. And it's continued right through now and it's still continuing and will probably continue into the next two years as well. Resulting in carryovers and the carryovers for 22, 23 are sitting at around 14 million. Availability in labour and materials. It's also impacting delivery and also the construction industry.
00:56:00 So it's presenting a lot of challenges and it's a very challenging time at the moment. But we're managing projects within budget at this stage. The resale program was budgeted at 5.3 million and it's being completed at 5 million. Council has a current forecast of grant projects for this year at 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, 26, and 27 million. And council's contributions as part of those grant projects was 16.2 million and non grant projects made up 12.8 million. The design services team are focusing on 19 projects at the moment with an estimated design value of 970,000 and estimated construction value of 16 million. The planning and infrastructure services team is currently supporting master planning activity. There's an estimated value of $350,000 in the 2022-23 budget and an investment value of $15 million and there are currently 25 multi-year projects in various stages of completion.
00:57:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Given the weather conditions and COVID and all the challenges that we've had, I think it's an outstanding result for the team and the contractors. I actually feel privileged for being able to deliver such a significant amount of infrastructure in some challenging times and continue to deliver multi-year projects. I noticed the Becquers Road van events now have at least been temporarily closed. They've been brought into line with these things phased in while they can complete the works there. It's a lovely new piece of infrastructure. I believe the comments that I've already got was traffic was flowing better than ever at that intersection, even with only one lane available. So I think people will appreciate that, don't round it out and use the come one.
00:58:00 So it's fully complete. And again, with the rain in recent times to deliver, I mean, we were talking the end of July and the end of June. The end of June. Just August and they've managed to get the vehicles out of that basically construction. So thank you very much. Speaker 7: I'm having to move it, Councillor. Mr Chair. I'll second. Councillor Jurisevic: So you can go to Councillor Wilkie. He's hand up before you. Speaker 7: Yeah, I'd like to speak to it. I just want to again reiterate what Jo said. Well done, guys. I mean, I was writing about this yesterday and there's 25 major projects already currently started and ongoing. And, you know, things such as the Wilpunga Lane Bridge Renewal, the Cooroy, Bell Eye Creek Road Bridge Renewal, the Noosa Parade Corridor Upgrade, the Tewantin Bypass Stage 1, Noosa Hinterland Trail 5, Stormwater Upgrade, Sunshine Beach Skate Ramp. There's so much. And, you know, and the reseal program came in $300,000 under budget.
00:59:00 And also the grading is starting as well, which is fantastic. And I noticed that the roads resurfaced that have been resurfaced included right across the Shire. So we're looking at Tewantin, Cooran, Timbewa, Cooroy, Noosaville, Kin Kin, Noosa Heads, Pinbarren and Pomona. So it's certainly a Shire-wide program. And to come in $300,000 under budget and to undertake this much work on top of a $25 to $30 million major landslide at Black Mountain, I think it's so commendable. And I really want to thank you because there's so much work being done and so much work to do. But you guys are doing a great job. So thank you. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. I just want to sort of just highlight that it's not all over. Like that's the frightening part. I've come back from the South Coast and my husband's working at the Tweed Hospital. And I sort of started believing that the, you know, the construction, that heated construction market was slowing down.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 But no way. It's not. So there are still challenges ahead. And again, just repeating what the Mayor said, really great achievement should be where you are considering some, you know, insurmountable sort of issues. The issues is not construction. The issue is actually people, skilled workforce. And that challenge, you know, it's not going away. Yeah. Not in the near future. True forgetful. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: A couple of points about the heated market. Hot. We'll continue. We've got a 10-year lead up to the electric cars. I mean, construction and capital works, while the state are going to continue to take a fair point in that. But there's also one thing to be noted in there. The year-to-date capital delivery expenditure is 31.4 million at 70% of the capital budget.
01:01:00 That's over twice the capital works budget when Council first came to be again. So what we're delivering now is such an extremely significant increase on what we started with, with this Dean Overman Council. It's from a relatively small team. As I said before, it's a credit to your guys with the amount they're delivering and what the contractors have been able to achieve under trying conditions with the amount they're delivering. It's a credit to the way we've had issues. Phenomenal effort. Phenomenal result. Thank you, guys. And the work's continued with more projects in the pipeline, more design work on the way, and $16 and $20 million worth of projects coming up in design work. So thank you for all of your efforts. Please relate. Bring those things to the table. Speaker 7: Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: And a classic example of that, too, is the completion of the Cooroy Hinterland Adventure Playground. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah, among all that, there was that real fantastic signature legacy project, the Hinterland Adventure Playground, which has surpassed everyone's expectations, especially the community's.
01:02:00 And it's really well used, really loved. Councillor Jurisevic: It's so great. One thing to say, it costs a lot of money, but I don't think anybody at the moment is turning around and saying what the money was. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Can't wait for the $6 million skate park and recreation hub. Just saying. Tewantin Sports Complex. Any opportunity, I'm going to say that. Councillor Jurisevic: All right. Anything further? No. We've had a mover and shaker, haven't we? We have. So all is well. Councillor Lorentson: We've got a mover and shaker. We're all here. Thank you. Thank you, Craig. Thank you, guys. Councillor Jurisevic: I'd like just a bit of an overview of the Holiday Parks. Certainly. Speaker 1: This report brings an update for the financial year that's just closed, being the 21, 22 financial
01:03:00 year. Overall, the Holiday Parks program has delivered a strong operating surplus. Our actuals in revenue exceeded budget by 18%, which is a great result. And as I said, we were able to deliver a strong operating surplus. As always a good outcome is a collective result. I put the result down to several key aspects. We have a strong operational program in place. We've got good facility and asset management. Our marketing and website programs are strong and we've got really high quality service delivery from our management companies. The key aspect to the holiday parks is the guests of course and the guest experience. They drive the revenue. So making sure that every visitor through the door has a good experience is key and all those aspects I just mentioned
01:04:00 all contribute to the level of service and experience we provide. Councillor Jurisevic: I notice that Point in Point is operating surface and it's a little bit of a different service. I notice the Montreal Beach campground is in deficit this year. Would that be primarily due to the amount of downtime that we had through the work period there but also the issues with the wastewater treatment system at the campground? Speaker 1: Largely attributed to some of our infrastructure challenges, yes. Speaker 7: So Robert just looking at this, we're well and truly surpassing pre-COVID aren't we? The numbers before COVID. Speaker 1: That's right. Our last full operating year prior to COVID, the overall revenue level was approximately 2.9. So we've actually driven the program quite substantially through
01:05:00 the COVID period and beyond to have two years in a row now of a revenue level of around 3.5 or 3.6 million. So overall the program as a commercial business unit is driving a much higher level of revenue. Councillor Lorentson: Robin, most of our campgrounds experienced significant flooding during the February flood event. I note on page 68 under operation and maintenance some mitigation sort of mitigation options you've thrown in there is raising the level of maintenance. Is that an option that was that's been relayed to the other campgrounds including the Noosa River campground or is it only exclusive to the North Shore campground?
01:06:00 Speaker 1: So in February when we had the significant flood event, Noosa River actually didn't flood at that time. It's quite resilient to flooding due to the step up with the retaining walls that we have there. Fantastic. So we had no flooding at that site. Noosa North Shore just experienced some pooling of water but no flooding. But we do have some challenges with water moving around the site. So when we have a rainfall event for a couple of days, it has been impacting on our guest and revenue levels. So those have been minor capex works that we just consistently roll out with our ground maintenance to make sure we protect our commerciality. Boring Point Campground experienced a significant flood event of up to 1.8 metres in some places. It was substantial. Councillor Lorentson: So do we have flood warning systems in the campground? I'm sort of trying to understand is there an evacuation, an emergency evacuation? Speaker 1: Yes, so we follow the process of monitoring the bond data coming through with all the
01:07:00 river level heights further up at Wakunga Lane and we're able to evacuate all guests before roads closed and do as much as we could. Okay. So the first thing that we did was we started to get the site ready for flooding. But it was a substantial recovery program. We managed to reopen in two weeks which was quite a good That's terrific. That's a good birdie. Largely down to our management company. It was a collective effort. So in response to your query about raising site levels, it comes a lot down to drainage and making sure that when we have weather events and rainfall the water can disperse and move away so people can still stay. Great. Councillor Jurisevic: I can't see us raising the level of what boarding point campground. What point that means? Any further? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, I've got a couple more questions. Wastewater treatment system at Noosa North Shore on page 70. What have I got here? One of the risks. I can't find it on the map. I can't find it
01:08:00 in the system. So what are the environmental risks with the issues that we've got with the wastewater system at the Noosa North Shore? Speaker 1: Currently we don't have an environmental risk that we're reporting on. It's our wastewater system has had some infrastructure challenges and we manage those with a regular pump out program. And access to SCADA data from offsite so we can check balances from offsite whenever we need to. So currently no environmental risk. Councillor Jurisevic: But we have had some. Speaker 1: We have had some previously. Yes. Councillor Lorentson: And that's been totally rectified. Speaker 1: Yep. We're managing it on a regular basis and we're shifting or transitioning to a alternate wastewater
01:09:00 system, treatment system and disposal system that will continue. To manage our environmental risk. Councillor Lorentson: And my last question. Okay. Just in terms of, and I've just spent some time with Tourism Noosa, but just in terms of economic benefit derived from, you know, every dollar spent by a caravan, someone who parks their caravan in one of our parks. Do we have that data, Robin? Or is that data sort of scraped from the industry, the caravan industry? Speaker 1: Yeah. I'll probably speak to that at two levels. At an industry level, they do collect data that is driven from assumptions around number of sites. And then they do input output economic modelling that can pick up the level of economic productivity from campgrounds.
01:10:00 I think that happens at the CPAC, which is the Queensland industry. And also at the Caravanning Australian industry level. What we see at a regional level here is that the increase in revenue driven by our program over the past couple of years does improve economic productivity from an employment level within cafes or tourism experience providers that are located at Boring Point, for example, or Noosa North Shore. We see the ability to drive sales through the campgrounds with kiosk items, associated pubs and cafes. Anecdotally, we see them opening for longer hours and more frequently and employing more staff. We don't have a data measure or a formal collection of that data. It's something we may look forward to in the future. Councillor Lorentson: Or maybe even request Tourism Noosa to undergo that sort of data collection.
01:11:00 Yeah. Sure. Councillor Jurisevic: As far as the increase in patronage in the three holiday parks since the amalgamation over the years, do we have a concept of what it was like in, say, 2014 when we came back to what it is now? Speaker 1: In terms of visitor levels? Yes. The visitor levels are documented within the report back to 17-18. I don't have them prior to that. But you can see... Councillor Jurisevic: Relating to Amelia's question there with the... Yeah. I can see the figures saying so it's an increase. So it has been a steady, a fairly steady increase year in, year out, with some exception based on the COVID impact and closures. And apart from where we've had to close, it's continuing to be on the increase, isn't it? Speaker 1: Absolutely. I think it's fairly well accepted that every visitor is going to drive expenditure
01:12:00 within the region. They're going to bring money and productivity to the region. So, of course, if we're increasing the number of visitors within our holiday park program, then we'll be contributing to economic productivity. Councillor Wilkie: Oh, good. I have a question. Just a discrepancy. The occupancy of Noosa River, so the 2122, is quite high, 91%, higher than the previous year. But when it comes to occupants, 2122 is... has fewer occupants than the previous year, despite having a higher occupancy rate. Why is that? Speaker 1: That would largely be driven by the structure of a booking. So, the occupancy level is measured across the 132 sites and how many nights they're occupied. The number of occupancy is driven by counting the number of people. So, we might have gone from having 30%, for example, of sites occupied by families, which may be four, and then that may have shifted and transitioned
01:13:00 into couples. So, it's just less people. Okay. And that data's available within the booking system, but from a much sort of deeper layered report. Speaker 7: Thank you. That's an interesting step, isn't it? Less families, potentially more couples or retirees, or just, yeah. Speaker 1: Patronage at the Noosa River Holiday Park is largely that retiree grey nomad space. They come and stay annually for longer periods of time. Yeah. Yeah. Interesting. And I think the COVID shifted that up a little. Councillor Jurisevic: I think it's interesting, just looking at that number of occupants and additional occupants and additional fees. So, as far as revenue, it's still essentially the same revenue, but it's just that you've got less occupants. Yeah. It's less impact. So, you can use those additional $10 a night, $5 or $1 a night fees for additional occupants. Anything further councillors? Can I move that? Councillor Lorentson, I'll do a second.