General Committee - 12 August 2024 Transcript

1 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES ¶

▶ 00:00:11

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

2 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ¶

▶ 00:00:20

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

4 DEPUTATIONS ¶

▶ 00:00:45

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

4.1 DEPUTATION - Planning Scheme Amendments Relating to Delorme St, Noosa Heads Applicant - Suzie McDonald Speakers - Suzie McDonald ¶

▶ 00:00:49

00:01:00 Lawrence and at the ordinary meeting on July 18th 2024 the opinions expressed today are my own this is a deeply personal matter not only for the community in our street but also for the hundreds of residents who I've spoken to across the community over the past five weeks who have supported and shared with me the same sentiments they have in relation to their streets. the reason we submitted this petition was to say to council you can't just identify a street on the map that meets your objectives and with the stroke of a pen our rights and our futures and our kids futures sorry with the stroke of a pen changes our rights and our futures and our kids futures. proposed amendment number two to the Noosa plan 2020 threatens not only our rights as landholders but also the very fabrics of our communities by making a single dwelling house or a duplex inconsistent in medium and high density residences. I want to be very clear the issues we have raised concern the diminution of

00:02:00 rights appropriate planning maintaining socially cohesive fabrics within our communities lack of community consultation and unknown economic consequences the issues we have raised are not about affordable housing we all recognize the importance of those issues and we commend council and acknowledge your efforts towards finding solutions our concerns are certainly not to dismiss this vital work rather to foster collaborations between council and residents if you know Delorme Street or have had the pleasure of meeting any of the residents you would know we are a street of hard-working Australians full of ordinary down-to-earth people our beloved street has its own identity one defined by safety security and a strong sense of community and one that we cherish and wish to preserve we are not simply a collection of old houses on good-sized blocks which are ripe for renovation to quote what I was told by the planning department we are simply a type of community a mix of business children and retirees with deep roots and shared values who are deeply concerned for our futures

00:03:00 for decades our street has been characterised by single dwelling homes with no holiday rentals or units until council planning changed just a medium density when it rolled out the Noosa plan 2020 in the middle of a pandemic when our focus was on survival remote work and navigating overwhelming amounts of information and misinformation with fear social isolation education disruption difficulty accessing essential financial stress stress and emotional well-being as well as being separated from our loved ones is there any wonder the Noosa plan 2020 went through with seemingly little objection in my recent submission I personally invited all the councillors to our street to meet with the affected residents and listen to what we genuinely have to say and understand our real issue which is potentially losing our fundamental rights to do what we want on our own land today Councillor Laurenston is the only councillor who has taken me up on that invitation and actually door knocked our street I learned from the planning department in a recent meeting that they identified Delorme Street

00:04:00 to be changed to a medium density zone under the Noosa plan 2020 because they looked at old houses which were on good sized blocks which were right for renovation I can't help but ask why us we only have 13 blocks over 600 square meters yet there are so many other streets directly around us also easy walking distance to Noosa Junction start with 25 to 50 blocks of land over 600 square meters in a single street that also meets planning's objectives yet those streets remain to this day low density residential this inconsistency raises serious questions about fairness in the decision making process I coincidentally joined the Noosa Chamber of Commerce just days before their monthly meeting on the 25th of June during which Russell Green and Ralph Rogers raised these proposed amendments this was the first time I had heard about them this information should not have been a coincidence it should have been communicated directly to every single resident of the Noosa Shire to date

00:05:00 I have only spoken to one resident who told me he received a letter from the council about the proposed amendments however that letter did not mention any changes within the medium density zone which is the information he needed regarding his property which is in a medium density zone I have spoken to hundreds of people who did not receive a letter and yet under the minister's guidelines and rules the state of Queensland the Department of Housing local government planning and public works July 2024 document it says in addition to the public notice requirements prescribed in the notice about the process given by the chief executive under section 18 a or b of the act or in part 4 of chapter 2 the local government must give must give notice to every property owner affected by the proposed planning change housing solutions were discussed by a councillor during the election campaign who responded to the question about population growth by saying we can accommodate population growth in the current town planning settings because of changes to state

00:06:00 government legislation around secondary dwellings however it's curious that the proposed amendments initiated in January 2023 and now viewed by council as a solution to the housing prices were not mentioned in that interview council fact sheet number three states that the medium density residential zone is for medium density development i.e dual occupancies and multiple dwellings and zones development for a single dwelling house is inefficient and unsustainable I take this opportunity to remind you that I have raised my three children in my home spent years working for local businesses and in recent years running my own business contributing to the local economy by shopping here putting my children through local schools dining in the local restaurants supporting the local sports clubs paying rates to Noosa council for 23 years now my children their partners and my five grandchildren get to come home on weekends and holidays to enjoy enjoy what they still call their family home so I certainly don't call my single dwelling house inefficient or

00:07:00 unsustainable you cannot stop changing their lives and there are hundreds of scenarios I suggest council hasn't even begun to consider where these proposed amendments may significantly and financially impact people one of which I raised in recent meetings was if a house burns down and a growing family needs to increase the scale and intensity of their home would there be able to do that under existing use rights or would it trigger a multiple change of use which could potentially risk their application being declined what would happen to the residents then I urge the council the people who sit at this table to empathize with our situation and grasp the gravity of what's at stake for many residents residents are confused and concerned the proposed amendments and instill fear and uncertainty in us all this is why residents are seeking greater transparency and meaningful consultation and engagement with the council these issues are not just about property they are about people in our futures I stand here today not only

00:08:00 to represent the support I have received from the community on our street but also the support I have received from the hundreds of residents I've spoken to or engaged with over the past five weeks and the hundreds of people who have signed out online petitions those petitions were started because my neighbor and I recognized that many others just like us were unaware of these proposed amendments we believe this would be the quickest rate way to raise awareness within the wider community those petitions have gathered 950 signatures in three weeks which clearly shows despite limited exposure many people have taken the opportunity to oppose these amendments imagine how many more residents might have voiced their objections to the increased community consultation we've given them more time to learn reflect understand and provide their feedback the state of Queensland Department of State Development infrastructure local government planning December 2020 community engagement toolkit for planning emphasizes the importance of community engagement which involves involving people in the

00:09:00 decisions that affect them it highlights key elements of accessibility timing and transparency noting that engaging communities early in the policy or project life cycle can lead to better outcomes by allowing for diverse community input and understanding of trade-offs additionally the toolkit references a 2015 framework by Consult Australia and IAP to Australasia the international association for public participation participation that quantifies the value of stakeholder engagement in infrastructure and The six core principles outlined in the community engagement toolkit for planning are engagement focuses on the best outcome of the community. Engagement is open, honest and meaningful. Approaches to engagement are inclusive and appropriate. Information is timely and relevant. Information is accurate, easy to understand and accessible. Decision making is transparent. Councillors, the economic consequences of these proposed amendments must be understood and quantified before these regulations are submitted to the state government for consideration. I urge you to consider these principles and the following points.

00:10:00 There needs to be an independent economic analysis of the impacts of all the proposed amendments to ensure no harm is done to the economy, including a full economic assessment of proposed amendments 1 to 12. Ensure all proposed amendments consider and support the development process. The proposed amendments include the Endorsed Economic Development Plan, the Endorsed Housing Strategy and the outcomes adhered to the principles of the Council Endorsed Small Business Charter. Reject proposed amendment number 2 to the Noosa Plan 2020 and determine what will work in reality and what will not. Engage with our communities before making final decisions so you can better understand the day-to-day experiences of people and communities. Take adequate time to consult with all stakeholders across the Noosa Shire. This process does not have to be rushed. Allow sufficient time for the community to consider information and then make a meaningful contribution to the plan making or development assessment process.

00:11:00 Facilitate open forums and community spaces and facilitate open, clear, easy to understand dialogue with the residents to inform the public of the potential impacts. Make sure the approach to engagement is inclusive and appropriate and engagement is open, honest and meaningful. Clearly published and easy to understand language. Assessments detail in what outcomes these amendments will achieve as the public have the right to know. Encourage the community to be involved in discussing planning and development issues that affect their lives, making sure to seek out diverse voices and perspectives. In closing, it is my belief that the residents of Doorme Street want to retain our rights to build a single dwelling house or duplex on our own land as do many of the residents I have spoken with in the medium and high density areas across the Noosa Shire. We want the status quo to remain. I urge council to reconsider the implications of amendment number two and to engage with the residents transparently and collaboratively.

00:12:00 There are some incredible minds across the Noosa Shire so let us work together to protect the essence of our communities and ensure that our future is determined by the voices of those who truly call this place home. Thank you for your time and your consideration. Speaker 10: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. And as with all the submissions made to the planning scheme amendments, your views and concerns are currently being considered and weighed on by staff and we will receive a report in the future looking at suggested amendments to what was advertised. We now move on to item five which is items referred from committees and the first one is material change of use 22-02-01 for application to the Noosa Shire. For a car wash, food and drink outlet at 34 Elm Street, Croy and we welcome Director Richard, Manager Patrick and Reporting Officer Nadine.

5.1 MCU22/0201 APPLICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR CAR WASH AND FOOD & DRINK OUTLET AT 34 ELM STREET, COOROY ¶

▶ 00:12:43· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

00:13:00 Oh, okay, we have a conflict. Councillor Wilson: Oh. Sorry about that. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I, Councillor Nicola Wilson, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter, as my partner, Roy Vanderberg, made a submission to this application when it was notified for 15 business days in 2023, in accordance with the Planning Act 2016, and received 520 properly made submissions. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person would have a perception of bias, because this is one submission of over 500, and neither Roy nor myself have a financial interest in the outcome.

00:14:00 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. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillors, does anyone have any questions of Councillor Wilson, or does someone wish to move a motion? Mayor Wilkie: I move that Councillor note the declarable conflict of interest by Councillor Wilson, and determine that Councillor Wilson participates and votes in this matter, because Councillor believes that a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Councillor Phillips: I'll second. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we wish to talk to the motion, Councillor Wilkie? I do not. Anyone else wish to? I'll put it to the vote. All those in favour? That's carried unanimously. Councillor Lorentson: And I would like to move an alternate motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We normally have the staff to... To speak first, and then you're welcome to move. Thank you, Chair. So, if we can do an executive summary, that would be good. Speaker 4: Okay. Good afternoon, Councillors. We're dealing with, this morning, an application for a material change of use, MCU 22-021, for a car wash and food and drink premises over at 34 Elm Street, Cooroy.

00:15:00 This application was considered at the Planning Committee meeting, and has been referred up to General for further discussion. The applicant proposes a car wash on the site, and a food and drink premises on the corner. The car wash comprises two auto bays, two manual bays, two super bays, as well as three vacuum bays, and a dog wash area on the northern side of the site. Just as a comparison, the Noosaville car wash next to the Bunnings has four car wash bays and vacuum bays, whereas the other one down there, Good Shepherd, has four bays and four car wash. The Noosaville car wash next to the Bunnings has four car wash bays and two auto bays. Two pre-lodgement meetings were held with the applicant, and whilst these pre-lodgement meetings indicated that there was some need for such a use, as there wasn't a car wash in the Cooroy locality,

00:16:00 any application, the applicant was advised that any application would need to clearly demonstrate a need, and outline all grounds for supporting this application. As well as reviewing other sites in the locality. During the process, there was various information requests that were issued, and further advices, and it is noted that the applicant responded to all of those information requests and further advices, and provided amended plans and further technical reports. The design, in response to those information requests, the design was altered several times to include further pitfalls. The site is located in the Coroy Local Plan area, and is included in the District Centre zone. A car wash is detailed in the assessment tables for the District Centre zone as an impact inconsistent use.

00:17:00 Inconsistent uses are defined under the Noosa Plan as a use that is strongly inappropriate in the relevant zones because it is incompatible with other uses generally expected in that zone. The Noosa Plan also has a list of defined activity groups and a car wash is included in the industry activities group. A service station, which has been indicated by the applicant, to the north of the site is included in the business activities group and it is also an impact inconsistent use in this zone. So just as an aside on that, in terms of industry activities and the groupings under the planning scheme, we do have things such as a car wash, extractive industries, high impact industry, medium industry and warehouses. Whereas business activities include things like, I'll miss the first, the adult store, but it thinks

00:18:00 like bulk landscape supplies, food and drink, garden centre, markets, office drops, etc. Speaker 3: The applicant has identified that there are, that, Speaker 4: this type of use is generally consistent in other schemes. Just for comparison, I've had a quick look. Brisbane City Council, it's accepted development, a car wash is accepted development in their business zone, but it's to be located in association with an existing service station and then there are caveats around within an enclosed car parking associated with a shopping centre. Morton, it's located, a car wash is accessible development, code accessible, if it's in a specialised or more a centre precinct area. And when you have a quick look at that precinct, that talks about bulky goods and the car wash is to be located internally to that development. Gympie, it's impact accessible, Sunshine Coast Centre, Sunshine Coast Council, it's code and Fraser Coast, it's impact as well. The application

00:19:00 as a result of being impact accessible, we're going to be looking at, we're going to be looking There were over 520 submissions received, 498 were received in support and over 19 against. Unfortunately it's been hard to actually identify where all of those submissions were because a lot of people did include just an email address. The district centre zone is intended to cater for commercial development with the Noosa plan indicating that development is to maintain a traditional town centre design with development addressing the street and providing active street fronts. The proposed car wash is not considered to meet the intent of this zone and locality. The car wash is considered to reinforce the partially established industrial character of Elm Street which is created by the existing historic service station. The zone seeks active street fronts with car parking not to dominate the frontage.

00:20:00 The proposed car wash provides limited street buildings to the street frontages with cars being highly visible. The car wash also results in loss of valuable district centre zoned land which is intended for commercial retail uses. As previous outlined, at the time of writing this report, which was several weeks ago, the original report, our traffic consultant had indicated that things were okay with it. Upon further investigation, the traffic consultant has come back and indicated to us that he has some concerns. He believes that the applicant hasn't satisfactorily demonstrated that access to the site is not acceptable. In terms of queuing and whether Diamond Street exit could accommodate all the traffic. It is noted that the application was referred to the state, SARA, because of its proximity and that they had no objections and just included standard conditions relating to impacts, making sure there's no impacts on their infrastructure. When we're looking at this application, we also considered need and there are three key aspects when we're considering need.

00:21:00 There's the economic, community and planning need. The strategic and environment department have advised that there is limited centre zoned land in Cooroy compared to that in the industrial land and that we should be retaining this land for commercial uses. I'm sure they'll come up later. There is other land available in Cooroy capable for development in Jarrah Street and also out at Hobbs Road. The applicant has raised that there's significant employment benefits. That's from this development, noting we've got four to six attendants over seven days. The food and drink has two people and it can generate up to 20 people in a part-time or full-time basis. It is agreed that this site will have some employment opportunities. However, we still believe this would be less than a commercial activity on the site. The staff also agree that there are benefits associated with the car wash in terms of water conservation, reducing waste water running to the site.

00:22:00 However, I would note that this could also be achieved if the site was located in an industrial zone. In relation to need, it is agreed that Cooroy and the surrounding area do not have a car wash and that many residents are supportive. However, on balance, the loss of the district zone land, the limited employment opportunities and the visual streetscape impacts are considered to outweigh these matters and the application is not supported by staff. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Wegener: Now, Councillor Lorentson has indicated she'd like to move a motion. May I ask a question this morning? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Lorentson did get first and suggested she wanted to move a motion. So, I'll give her the floor in a few seconds and we can then go on to questions if she wants to proceed. Councillor Lorentson: That Council note the report by the Coordinating Planning to the Planning and Environment Committee meeting dated 6 August 2024 regarding MCU 22-0201 for a development permit for materials

00:23:00 used in the site. A, to issue a development permit for material change of use for a car wash and food and drink outlet at 34 Elm Street, Cooroy. And, A, approve the application. B, delegate to the Chief Executive Officer to issue a development permit for material change of use for a car wash and food and drink outlet at 34 Elm Street, Cooroy and impose reasonable and relevant conditions on the approval. C, note that the report is provided in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Development Act 2016. And, D, find the following matters relevant to the assessment and sufficient reason to approve the application. 1. There is a strong level of economic, community and planning need for the development in this location. 2. There is no car wash currently provided within Cooroy and the Noosa hinterland and no other

00:24:00 suitable land available for that purpose. 3. The project is currently under development. It will provide substantial community benefit and will not cause any adverse impacts on the humanity and character of the area. 4. The proposed development accords with reasonable community expectations given the significant number of submissions in support that have been received. 5. There will be significant environmental benefits for a car wash to be provided in the location, resulting in improved water quality entering local waterways including local waterways. 6. A car wash is for the commercial washing of vehicles which is a complementary use to the existing service stations in this location which will result in sharing of facilities and reduce traffic movements. 7. Conditions can be imposed to address any issues raised by submitters about the hours

00:25:00 of operations of the development. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie, you can ask a question if you wish or we can second it. We can get a seconder so it's up to you. Mayor Wilkie: Just a question about the availability of industrial land. You've mentioned Jarrah Street and also Holts Road. Speaker 3: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Could you just explain the suitability of the land at Jarrah Street? How ready is that to go? And also the lots at Holts Road, please. Speaker 4: Holts Road, there are two lots. Two, three lots that are available that are ready. They are vacant at the moment. Of Taylorport, sorry. So it's Holts Road, Taylorport. So is there land available for development at the moment? Jarrah Street has some. There are, Council owns three lots at the end. They're not quite ready at the moment to go. There is some limited land available. There's another block that has not been developed as well which is further southward of here.

00:26:00 So there is vacant undeveloped land at the end. I suppose Council's land is ready, it will be ready soon to be developed. There are also four lots along Mary River Road which are undeveloped. They've got houses on them as well. So they could be converted to industrial uses. Mayor Wilkie: They're currently occupied? Speaker 4: They are currently occupied, yeah. Mayor Wilkie: The Holts Road, Taylor Court. The Holts Road, Taylor Court. They're vacant? They're vacant, that's correct. And available for sale? Speaker 4: I haven't looked at that, sorry. I don't think so. Mayor Wilkie: Because I'd like to test if there's a line in this. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor, are you asking a question or are you? Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, the question, there is no car wash currently provided within Cooroy, true, and the Noosa Henta land, and no other suitable land available for that purpose.

00:27:00 Is that a true statement? Speaker 4: Well, there's no, there is no car wash in Cooroy. There is land zoned, there is zoned land available, I suppose that's going to a real estate realm, sorry, Councillor. Mayor Wilkie: I mean land, suitable land available for a car wash. Speaker 4: There is land that is undeveloped, that is, there is land that is zoned industry, and that is undeveloped. So, yes, there is, I would say there is, yes, land appropriately zoned for that use. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: So, could I, given it's not the second, could I make a minor adjustment and just add the word, okay, there is no car wash currently and no other suitable land immediately available

00:28:00 for that purpose. That's fair. Thank you. Councillor Phillips: I have a question, please. In relation to Jarrah Street, it is a cul-de-sac, is that correct? Speaker 4: It's a dead end of the road. Dead end? Yes, that's correct. Councillor Phillips: Is there an opportunity that that will be through a road at some stage? Is that what's predicted? Speaker 4: Council owns the land, that slot. To the north. To the north, that's 70 Carpenters Road. That's approximately 10 hectares. Council owns that land, and currently there are plans, Council staff are currently developing a strategy to activate Council land holdings, so I understand that will be looked at in the future. So, it's zoned industry as well, and it's got some, it does have some constraints over it in terms of prior pairing. So, it's, at the moment it's in, I suppose, a holding pattern for industrial uses.

00:29:00 Councillor Phillips: So, I'm just a bit confused how Jarrah Street's then zoned, or has been, what was your word, that it's appropriate? Speaker 4: There are three blocks at the end that Council owns, that Council owns land at the end as well, and they're currently zoned, and they've been subdivided off. So, there are three lots there that could be, in the future, available on the market. And there's another block off Jarrah Street which is undeveloped as well. Councillor Phillips: I'm just picturing a car wash at the end of a dead end street, and wondering how it's perceived that that would be suitable for a car wash. Speaker 4: There are also other sites which we've indicated, yes, the Mary River Road, there are four sites there. They're zoned industry as well. And they are not at the highest and best use at the moment. They're residential. They could be redeveloped as well. They could be for a car wash. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, my question to that... If I could just clarify.

00:30:00 When planners talk about land being suitable, they're talking about in the land use context, not necessarily your commercial... Thank you, yes. Is that correct? Councillor Phillips: That's correct, yes. Okay. Just a follow-up question then around Mary River Road residential land. When we're talking about housing crisis nationwide, why would we be saying that residential land would be repurposed for industrial? Speaker 4: It's zoned industry. So, the four blocks along opposite the tennis courts is not going to be included in the industrial zone. Okay. Speaker 11: It's been earmarked for industrial land for some time. So, obviously, from a land use perspective, the industry would most likely be repurposed for that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Do we have more questions? I do. Okay. Councillor Wilkie, then Councillor Lorentson. Mayor Wilkie: Just consider the accuracy of the statement. So, number five, there will be significant environmental benefits for a car wash to be provided in the location, resulting in improved water quality entering local waterways, including

00:31:00 Lake McDonald's. How will this development improve the quality of water entering local waterways, including local waterways, is my question. Speaker 8: I think it's the assumption that... Won't make it worse? Well, people won't be washing their cars on their property. Yes. And therefore won't be running down driveways or running into waterways through that process. It also makes an assumption that all those people who are currently washing their cars are going to use the car wash. Yes. They may not. They may not... I mean, my understanding is that car wash detergents remove phosphates. Phosphates come out, yeah. Sorry. Some time ago. Okay. So, that was... Some of the environmental impacts were addressed through that mechanism. Okay. The... Any development, whether it's industrial or a warehouse in an industrial area, will have to do with water quality sensitive design outcomes. So, this is...

00:32:00 Yeah. This is providing what it needs to provide. It's not a benchmark for environmental performance in terms of water quality. Okay. Mayor Wilkie: So, would it be more accurate to say, resulting in an opportunity for improved water quality entering local waterways? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm happy with that change. So, Councillor... It's not... It's... It's a... It's a difficult question to ask staff, because you're dealing with someone else's motion. Yeah. So, I'm not going to accept it. Just one point of clarification. Did I read in the report that the site is not within the Lake MacDonald catchment area? Is that right? Councillor Wegener: That's correct. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: So, it's... It's not accurate to say that the water... Entering the waterways, including Lake MacDonald, because it doesn't go into Lake MacDonald? Councillor Lorentson: Can I... Can I respond? So, that references not only the car wash, but also households. So, people that would...

00:33:00 Yeah. Yeah. That actually don't have access to a car wash, that actually travel 20, 25 minutes either to Gympie or Noosaville to use a car wash. For those residents in the Hinterland and Cooroy area, that would normally just wash their car. And I... Yeah. And I will speak to that. I've got some numbers. I've got some numbers and references. So, that's not specific to... It's the benefits of car wash. It stops people from washing their cars at home. And if they washed it at home, there... Yeah. There are detrimental or adverse impacts in terms of contaminants going through storm water and then into Lake MacDonald and . Yeah. But I'll... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll speak to that. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. I'll second. Councillor Finzel: Oh, sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Questions? Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Yeah. I have a question regarding when we talk about traffic entering and out of the site, traffic exiting the site with the lane going up the back.

00:34:00 Has there been an infrastructure agreement between the applicant and council with regards to widening that infrastructure or how is that going to be managed as part of this? Speaker 4: The applicant is aware and is... As part of the proposal, we'll be dedicating two metres across the frontage of that laneway. Councillor Finzel: And has there been a formal agreement? I... Speaker 4: There's no need for the agreement. We will condition it as part of any approval. Councillor Finzel: Okay. So I just ask questions. I don't see... I see there in point seven, conditions can be imposed... Yes. ...to address any issues about the hours of operation. Is there any other opportunity to talk about conditioning the development in a more broader sense? Councillor Linestone, I guess that's a question to you for the... I agree. I agree. Speaker 11: I agree.

00:35:00 Councillor Lorentson: So in terms of what are the reasons for refusal and the race to the DV, it remains valuable district centre zone land that is intended to be used for commercial community and entertainment related use. My question is what is the current retail floor space capacity within the Cooroy district zone and is there underutilised land that could be better developed for retail or commercial purposes? Speaker 4: That's a huge question. I don't think I can answer that. Speaker 8: Well I don't think we'd be able to give you the number of capacity. That would take quite an analysis. But there certainly would be sites that have development potential within the district centre. That may not be at their full potential at the moment. It would be reasonable to say that. Councillor Lorentson: And just another question in terms of the existing development at Plattenham approval.

00:36:00 I've got some drawings somewhere. I think it's nine tenancies, nine retail tenancies. Yeah. The MCU 18. The MCU 18. My understanding is that there was no uptake in any tenancies on the existing approval. And that was one of the reasons why the previous owners sold to the Kings group. From a planning perspective, given the location of the site, is it possible that the site, and I think Councillor Tom Wigner raised this at the Planning and Environment Committee.

00:37:00 Is there a possibility that the site is actually incorrectly zoned? Given that it is located between two service, industrial service petrol station. We also raised that at the Planning and Environment meeting that if there was a different owner, say for instance one of the owners from one of the service stations, then the application for a car wash would have gone through as it would have been a consistent use being an auxiliary to a service station. So again, my question, is it correctly zoned? Speaker 8: Well, the service station would not be able to develop a car wash on their site. And it just goes straight through. The business activity, the service station is allowed to have as an ancillary component, a shop or a car wash. So it would be expected it would be on the same site as the service station. And it would be a minor element. Probably just a little drive-through bay that you might have in a service station.

00:38:00 So certainly not a car wash to the extent that's proposed in these circumstances. The other question around whether the land is suitably zoned. I mean, there's a lot of documents within the planning scheme. And I'm not part of our strategic planning department, so I've got to keep what I say on their behalf. But there's a lot of documents in the scheme that talk about how it's envisaged that Cooroy will be developed and how the commercial area of Cooroy will be developed. Around its character, the types of uses that are to occur, the zoning within proximity of the site. And there seems to be a logical component to having this zoned as it currently is. Speaker 11: And if I might add, Patrick, to your comment. So obviously the land use planning element is focused on the next 10, 20, even 30 years in time. And obviously as Cooroy grows, and the population grows in Cooroy, and greater connectivity occurs, there is a need identified in the plan to see if that long-term use,

00:39:00 which is to create that village-like interface there, given it's obviously a highly utilised thoroughfare through Elm Street. So the long-term outcome is to see that that is turned into a district centre, as opposed to a sort of industrial interface that the community will utilise over time. So whilst it might, at this point in time, look like it's heavily dominated by service-type industries and service stations obviously at either end, the long-term intention for that particular project and the locality is to see a centre zone outcome, which is fairly well illustrated in some of the graphics and documentation that the planning's given. Mayor Wilkie: Question. Item 3 says that the development will not have any adverse impacts on the amenity and character of the area. In the graph in your report, you mention a non-compliance with the planning scheme, which is a 17 metre long concrete wall.

00:40:00 Whereas a shorter distance being allowed under the planning scheme. Could you explain why that is considered an important point of non-compliance with the planning scheme? And what are you trying to achieve by limiting the lengths? Because I understand this 17 metre long concrete wall will be facing the bowlers' club? Speaker 4: That's correct. Actually there is an error that has been found in the report. It's actually that wall is 19 metres long, whereas the planning scheme dictates 19 metres. A maximum length of the wall of 15 metres. So it does extend beyond that, mainly to provide some protection for this adjoining land use of the bowlers' club. In terms of, I suppose, visibility, noise, over spraying, things like that. I do note it is offset off the boundary and that there is that connecting walkway through to the site. And the applicant has also proposed a mural. The planning scheme does allow on side boundaries or development to go to side boundaries.

00:41:00 But the main reason for that 15 metre restriction is we're wanting smaller built forms. We're wanting things that reflect the character. And generally when you look at the character of these areas, there's smaller lots which might have, which generally might have a lot of maybe 20 metres wide. But you have smaller individual buildings that might be attached. So there's that differentiation in scale. Amenity, you've got vertical and horizontal elements that come out. And you've got breaks and setbacks. So yes, this doesn't comply with that 15 metre requirement. Mayor Wilkie: And so a 19 metre long concrete slab wall is something you're more likely, you wish to see in an industrial estate. In an industrial site, yes. And more consistent with the character and amenity of an industrial estate. Councillor Lorentson: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask, in terms of the width of the wall, was that discussed with the applicant ever designed?

00:42:00 Speaker 4: It was brought up in the information request. It was raised. And they didn't really sort of further address it. We were looking at a lot of the requirements relating to the quite visual aspects to the street and trying to get an improved outcome and reflecting those Cooroy, Comfeytown characters, especially for the front. So there would be an opportunity Councillor Lorentson: to condition the application so that it sits at, say, 15 metres or an agreed. Speaker 4: I'd like to just check in terms of what our noise consultant, whether that is a requirement. Speaker 8: Well, it's the length of the superwash bays plus a 1.2 metre eternity of the site. So I don't, the 15 metres wouldn't accommodate the superwash bay for the site. So it's a design. Councillor Lorentson: So having 19 metres again, just to get some clarity,

00:43:00 that also minimises any adverse impacts in terms of noise lining with the adjoining residents or the bowling club next door. Is that correct? Speaker 8: Yes. Well, it provides a utility outcome because it needs the wall there to service the bay and then there is additional length, which I would say would provide some noise mitigation. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: The 12 degree pitch roof, which is a character element of the Cooroy area. I understand you put the request to the design team and they said that they could accommodate the 12 degree pitch roof, but they'd have to raise the size of the building to accommodate the bays. That's correct. Speaker 4: That was mainly on the superwash. That's the big one at the back with the wall. That one doesn't have the 12 degree roof pitch. But yes, they said they couldn't reduce the building height because that was to get the

00:44:00 bigger vehicles and caravans through it. So if they, to achieve the height, they would have to just pop through the height limit. Mayor Wilkie: If that was in an industrial estate, the pitch roof would not be... Would it still apply in an industrial estate? No. No. No. No. And that's one of the reasons why it's going to suit them. Yes. Speaker 8: There's a number of character elements that raise concern from a street state point of view. You may recall the previous application, there was a lot of time that was spent getting a suitable design outcome. Yes. And in this instance, the design is of far less quality and you're dealing with hard surfaces, car movement. It doesn't have the... It doesn't have the character provision. It doesn't comply with the character provisions that we would like to see. Mayor Wilkie: Are you expecting more feedback from the traffic consultant about the impact on the side streets or...?

00:45:00 Speaker 8: Well, we have received feedback and as raised at the last meeting by Nadine, unfortunately, we don't have received that final feedback on the morning of the meeting. But it does raise concerns with the queuing that can be provided within the site. Is there sufficient room for the queuing? Yes. There is enough room for the queuing to occur and for other vehicles to maneuver through the site. So it doesn't impact out onto Opal Street. And there's also further material... Well, it hadn't been demonstrated that cars that were going to leave via Diamond Lane would have a satisfactory area and also that it would work. From a practical point of view, knowing the vehicle movements that come out of the service station. So it's anonymous... From our point of view, it's an unresolved matter. It's an unresolved matter to have that included in it. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask, did the applicant have an opportunity to respond to this last-minute traffic assessment? Excuse me. I have here 2022 was when traffic report had been available since 2022.

00:46:00 SAR indicated that it was acceptable. Now we're introducing new material. Speaker 4: Has the applicant had an opportunity to respond to that? I sent a copy of our comments from our traffic engineer to the applicant last week. Speaker 8: Yes. So... So September 2023, they responded to the information request. And that had some traffic elements that they responded to that Nadine had raised in the initial information request. Yeah, it's a disappointing outcome for the applicant and for ourselves that it was on the day of last week's meeting that these matters were raised. But notwithstanding, they weren't matters which changed an approval to a refusal. There was a refusal that had been appeared and it was additional matters. Certainly, it would have been our preference to give the applicant the opportunity to respond to those matters. We have spoken to them about that and said, would you like to defer a decision on this application until such time as you have the opportunity to do that? And they said at this point in time, they would like to proceed through the meetings.

00:47:00 Councillor Lorentson: So my understanding is at the moment, the car wash has the capacity to queue up to 16 vehicles, which is significantly higher than most car wash companies in the country. I'm sort of just trying to understand what are the specific concerns that the staff have identified with this queuing arrangement? Speaker 4: So it's our traffic consultant. He has identified those concerns. It is to do, and as we've mentioned, he's come back and said that the inadequacy of the queuing on the approaches to the various car wash components of the development. The drawing shows the maximum queuing that can be accommodated on the approach to the each component of the development on entry to the site from Opal Street without that queuing impacts on the ability of vehicles to access other adjacent components of the car wash. So he's concerned if there's queuing here, if these stop here.

00:48:00 Speaker 11: Could you do attachment? It's page 31 in the package. Councillor Wilson: In the proposal plans or not the plans? Speaker 11: It would be in the proposed plans. It should be attachment. Speaker 4: It should be attachment. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: So what would be the difference between the two? Attachment? Councillor Wegener: One or two? Speaker 3: Two. One or two? Yeah. Yeah. That will be... Probably haven't been in traffic vehicles. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That one here. Speaker 11: That one here. That one here. That one here. That one here. Director Walsh: That one here. That one here. Speaker 4: That one here. That one here. You can see if we've got the bottom one is the superwash with the caravans behind the vehicles. Then we have, this is on the basis that there is a car in each of the car wash bays.

00:49:00 So you can queue behind them. Then there's the next row of queuing. What he's concerned about is basically the third area up. If that gets bogged in there, then we'll have troubles that we'll end up with queuing and coming back onto Opal Street. Speaker 8: I'd suggest it's also the super bays. The way they've done all these pictures, you've got the car that's right up in here. This vehicle's got to get in behind the other ute with the caravans, whatever it might be. So I think if that's back further, what's the capacity for this vehicle to get in? Or if these vehicles are back? Are they going to potentially block other vehicles from even getting into the other parts of the site? So they just feel that it hasn't adequately been demonstrated at this point in time. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask, did a traffic consultant understand the car wash design ability to process cars?

00:50:00 I think in two and a half to three minutes. So my understanding, normal car washes are up to five to six minutes per wash. This one's almost half the time. Has that been cracked in? Speaker 4: He's been given all the information that was provided by the applicant. So he's been given all the reports and the further information. But yeah, we can clarify with him. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, Councillor Phillips, you've got a question? Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Just two, actually. I just want to read the report, the recommendation to refuse the application for the following reasons. With question section B, where it says that it fails to provide, sorry, it's not consistent, but suggestion from Councillor Phillips. So that it would meet more, a supermarket-based retail use envisioned for the zone. What would that look like? What that recommendation? Speaker 4: So there's a previous approval over the site, MCU18-0158. So that proposed, or that approved nine shops, which were down Diamond Lane.

00:51:00 Councillor Phillips: I've got a question that follows up. Speaker 4: Yeah, thank you. So yeah, it was shops with an internal layout of car parking. Councillor Phillips: Okay. So when we talk about a car wash and the road that you're discussing to respond to Councillor Lawrenson, when we talk about a supermarket retail, what sort of parking, and did the traffic consultant give us an indication of what that would look like for community over a car wash? Does that question make sense? Yeah. Because in my mind, all I can see is more traffic. For parking for the community surrounding this than a car wash, which is going through three-minute car washes. Speaker 8: The previous application was assessed by a traffic consultant as well. And the provision of car parking on site was deemed to be suitable for the amount of four area of shops that was proposed.

00:52:00 I think it's at a ratio of one to 20 square metres, and that also looks at circulation throughout the site. And in that instance, the vehicles had to leave back out by Opal Street, they weren't to go out to Diamond Lane. The only vehicles that were allowed to go out by Diamond Lane were the service vehicles, there was a boom gate, so there's a very limited amount of traffic that was going out to Diamond Lane. And in this instance, all vehicles are going out to Diamond Lane, so that's one of the elements that the traffic consultant has issues with, is the capacity, the amount of traffic that was going out to Diamond Lane. And the practical implications, but also, I mean, this is different to the supermarket, because vehicles, people still sitting in their cars, they're actually queuing, waiting to use the service. Whereas in the supermarket, you go and actually park in your car space, and you're not causing a problem with queuing. Speaker 4: So there was an entry, there was a two-way entry, so you could come in, you could turn around, and you could, if there wasn't a car park, you could drive out again.

00:53:00 Whereas if you get stuck here, you drive in, you could get stuck, and then you could be, you know, the queuing could have gone by Opal Street. Councillor Phillips: Okay, so my question specifically is what, if this wasn't approved, and then we see another application for a supermarket, what supermarket could potentially look at going in that, when it's suggested that that could be a retail use? Speaker 8: So the scheme's looking for a low-scale... A low-scale supermarket that accommodates local need. Councillor Phillips: So an IGA, or... Speaker 11: Potentially, something similar. Councillor Phillips: That Aldi could apply to, for a position there? Speaker 11: It has a small scale, and a middle scale. Councillor Phillips: And so then I just start thinking of the Aldi that we have in Noosa. Anyway, my second question, sorry, is, see services a larger catchment than envisaged by the Noosa plan's strategic outcomes?

00:54:00 What does that mean, a larger catchment? Speaker 4: So, yeah, the planning scheme talks about servicing Cooroy and the Hinterland. As I think even the applicant said, they're catering for people who are coming off the North Shore to come through town. So this is a local service centre, Cooroy, it's a district centre, it's supposed to be servicing the residents of the locality, so rather than catering for people coming out from outside areas. Councillor Phillips: So you're suggesting someone would come off the North Shore and use the car wash at Cooroy? Well, that was one of the applicants. They're going to drive past the Noosa ones to go? Speaker 4: Well, I think the applicant put that down, that this would be, did they say it? I think there were comments about that, that they need the visibility. I could be wrong on that. Speaker 8: Just to clarify the point about the supermarket, so there is a provision within our scheme, a strategic outcome that seeks for the eastern side of Cooroy, so specific to the district centre on this side, retains its service role to support the district centre by providing small-scale local convenience goods and services for nearby residents, which may include a small-scale supermarket, provided that the need can be economically justified.

00:55:00 So, yeah. Again, part of that vision for the development of this side of Cooroy would be such that there could be a small supermarket there. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wilson, do you have a question? Councillor Wilson: Yeah, so just back on this traffic flow central issue, and this information that councillors are just seeing for the first time today, it's my understanding that the designers designed over 300 car washes, and it's quite familiar to me. I'm not familiar with the flow and the projection, has she been given an opportunity to respond to this? Speaker 4: As we said, we did, this item came up late last week, and we have provided those comments to the applicant last week as well, so it did come up late in the process, and we did ask them if they wanted to defer to enable further discussion about that.

00:56:00 Speaker 8: The designer would have been involved in the process. The designer would have been involved in the process all the way through, and just to clarify, these plans actually form part of the agenda today, so it's not the first time that they've been put before council. Speaker 4: That's part of the original report in the attachment? Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So we had Councillor Pintle. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, thank you. Just in response to that, before the meeting I did speak to the designer, and she is happy to enter any conditions for agreement, but anyway, however, I have another question, my apologies if I was out of order. Back to staff member Richard's response around the future planning of this area, I'm interested in, when we talk about traffic, I'm interested in pedestrian traffic.

00:57:00 So when we look at Elm Street and we've got the car wash here, and we're saying it isn't the right zone, I'm interested in further development. Who is designing this area, including TMR in conjunction with Noosa Council to look at foot traffic and how the access across the railway line and everything, over the two things, is going to be managed here? Because when we talk about, you know, queuing or other matters around traffic that seem to be concerns around the table, where in this plan, further down the track, are we envisaging foot traffic to safely cross Elm Street in conjunction with, you know, what we're doing with the corner there, with the island in the middle and that, that's part of that bigger planning. Where is that currently sitting? Speaker 11: We've actually got our infrastructure services director sitting here. Director Walsh: Keen to jump in on that one. Thank you. So there's two initiatives underway.

00:58:00 The first one is the transit centre design. Do you remember the land around the train station? Yes. Which is also adjacent to the bus stop on Elm Street, as well as the, you know, the foot bridge across the railway line. So we have funding through the state government to actually design a transit centre, which actually brings forward both active transport, the public transport and the road exchange. That will need to address crossing to that transit centre. So we've actually engaged consultants who are working towards that. We've also forecast an infrastructure planning process for the Diamond Street, Boydissa Road, Elm Street, you know, through the Myall Street interchange that was profiled in the budget process for this financial year. Unfortunately, due to budget pressures, it was delayed to next financial year. But we see council working with TMR and the community to actually resolve, you know, what is its desired position on infrastructure. All these intersections around here and the ability for pedestrians to cross, and also character of the street staff, is a critical issue that does the design process.

00:59:00 Councillor Finzel: So just a question through the chair. Has that been progressed anywhere, that design element, or is it in very early stages? Director Walsh: It's still in the early stages. It has not influenced the design, and we don't have enough information to influence it. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Thank you. That's what I was after. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Another question? Just a couple of questions. You mentioned before about the supermarket being ideally sort of located in this area. Is there an existing development application for a supermarket in the core, I think, of Diamond Street? Is that correct? Speaker 8: That's right. You're correct. There's nine retail shops on this location, and just in Diamond Street there was another application that's been approved. It's got some supermarkets. Supermarkets. Small specialty shops, supermarket, and I think there's some accommodation as part of that one as well. Councillor Lorentson: There is, I think, two units or something.

01:00:00 Yes. Speaker 8: Just around that corner. Councillor Lorentson: So there is an existing application at the moment for a supermarket in Diamond Street and some accommodation. In terms of queuing, is that something that can be conditioned if this application goes forward? Yes. Okay. Is it as simple as just conditioning it? My understanding is, you know, that if there's a queue and there's road obstruction, people don't wait. What they do is they fill up petrol, they go home, and they come back another time. No one waits because it's an absolute process to unload and take the caravan off or the trailer off. And when you know it's there and you're available to go any time. Yes. You're not going to be queuing. So my question is, is it something that can be conditioned? Speaker 11: I mean, from my perspective, it's not something that can be conditioned. I guess what we need to do is the applicant is the onus to demonstrate non-worsening or

01:01:00 no adverse impact on traffic. So our preference would be that they demonstrate that there's no adverse impact from the queuing in terms of the functionality of traffic entering and exit and obviously backing up. So, you know, I don't know. In a normal circumstance, the applicant would go through a process of demonstrating there will be no adverse impact from queuing onto those joining road networks. And they would need to proof that up so that, let's say, in peak period demand, when there's the maximum number anticipated of vehicles, is that likely to spill out and how is that going to be managed? And the applicant would need to demonstrate that before we can be satisfied that it can be contained within the site and not spill out to happen. So we need to be able to have that queuing out onto the surrounding streets. Councillor Lorentson: Just my last question, Councillor Wilson. The Noosa Car Spa. It's a much smaller site, 1200 to 1400 square metres.

01:02:00 It's got a very good car washing system that I believe it's like five to six minutes. I drive past it almost every day. My husband half built Bunnings. So we're at Bunnings. Go on, Liz. I don't believe it's a question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I believe you're leading staff. Has anyone else got a question? No, I'm sorry. No, you were being argumentative there. So I'm going on to another question. If you can think of a short one, I'll come back to you. So, Councillor Wilson, do you have another question? Councillor Wilson: I believe there would always be a staff member on site during opening hours. So is that something the queuing problem and particularly the big vehicles blocking the entrance? Is that something that a staff member could reasonably manage? Speaker 4: I'm not sure how they'd manage that. Because once the vehicles are on, as we know, it's quite difficult to reverse.

01:03:00 And that's our concern, that they could block up that intersection by coming on if you drive on inappropriately. You could just block it up and I don't know how you get out of that. If someone's behind you, what happens? You've got to wait until that vehicle in front of you goes through. Speaker 8: I don't think the manager would be on site all the time. From the material that I've read, I don't believe that's really the case. Maybe on the peak periods. But certainly not. Not at all times. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor Lorentson, did you have a question? Councillor Lorentson: I do. So you mentioned that the onus is back on the applicant to demonstrate that there aren't going to be any adverse impacts with queuing. My question is, with a comparative analysis of other car washes across the Shire, would that be part of that demonstration that, you know, car wash to car wash, what

01:04:00 are the queuing impacts in other car washes of similar size? Oh. Speaker 4: Sorry. I would, basically, our traffic consultant needs to get together with their traffic consultant. And review it. And make sure we're both satisfied in terms of what happens. They might need to, if our consultant isn't satisfied, they comply. That it works. I mean, there might be some further information they can provide of that, exactly like that. Or maybe rearrange in the entrance. I'm not sure. As I said, I think it's those consultants, those experts. Speaker 11: I don't think a comparative analysis is necessarily required. It's more around what is the peak demand looking like for this location. And have they adequately demonstrated that the vehicles can safely queue without spilling out into the adjoining roads during those high peaks of demand. So that would be quite a technical report to address that. Thank you. Ms Finzel, you had a question? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Thank you, Mr Chair.

01:05:00 Please correct me if I'm out of order on this one. Just wondering, on the corner of Open Street and Elm Street, currently there is power available there for the Breast Green van to come and service the community. I have been, that question has been raised as if the development goes ahead. Is there provision or has there been any consultation with Breast Green Queensland to ensure that that service can be added to the community? Speaker 8: We've had a representative from the Breast Green Queensland ask us and they became aware of this application. We've connected them with our, with an officer in our community services team and they're working with them, I believe, to go out to the sports ground. Councillor Finzel: Oh, great. Yeah. Speaker 11: So we have been working with them to resolve that issue in the event that this proposal is supported. Councillor Finzel: Fantastic. That's good news. Councillor Lorentson: I think I want you to raise a procedural motion.

01:06:00 Yes. I think I want you to raise a procedural motion to defer this decision until the ordinary meeting to allow the applicant's traffic consultant to discuss with our traffic consultant the matter of queuing. Mayor Wilkie: So did you capture that? I'll second it. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And while we're doing that, was queuing the only issue traffic management was raised with me that the Department of Transport, the Department of Transport, the Department of Transport and the Department of Transport had a very serious conflict between Diamond Lane, the exit of the service station and the merging of Diamond, from Diamond Street. And also refuse. Is that also an issue to be discussed? Speaker 4: And refuse as well. Sure. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And refuse? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, how is it going to be adequately managed? Procedural motion. Procedural motion. Shall allow the applicant. Shall allow the applicant to respond. Councillor Wilson: Okay.

01:07:00 Speaker 11: To respond to the traffic issues raised. Mayor Wilkie: Sorry, that wasn't the motion that I agreed to, it was something about traffic consultants meeting. Councillor Lorentson: Just to sort out this queuing issue, it's just... Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, so, to go back to Councillor Lorentson and you mentioned, let the matter be deferred, the ordinary meeting to allow time for the traffic, the applicant's traffic consultant to meet the council's traffic consultant. That's what I was seconding. I'm happy with that. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, just while you're there... Mayor Wilkie: To discuss the issue of queuing. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so we can fix this one up and then we'll fix the second up. Yep. So, let the matter be deferred to the ordinary meeting day 15 to allow the applicant's...

01:08:00 Mayor Wilkie: Applicant's traffic consultant. ...consultant. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: To discuss with council's traffic consultant issues... Mayor Wilkie: Related to queuing. Related to queuing. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think it has to be bigger than queuing. Okay. Yeah. Issues raised. Yeah. To... Traffic issues. Traffic issues raised. Traffic issues raised. Yeah. Are you happy to second that, Councillor Wilkie? Mayor Wilkie: Yes, that's more along the lines of what I understood it to be. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yep. And if I... Just before we do, just to note that we record on the moved motion above that the motion lapsed for want of a seconder. Mayor Wilkie: Didn't you second? Councillor Phillips: I seconded it. Mayor Wilkie: No. Councillor... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. No. There was no seconder. Councillor Phillips: I said... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. There was no seconder. I didn't call for a second. Councillor Phillips: Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. We wouldn't have been able to ask all those questions if it was second. Right. Yeah. Yeah. So you might have said you did, but... Okay. ...I didn't record that. Okay. Yeah.

01:09:00 Mayor Wilkie: Okay. I did hear you there. Thank you. Speaker 9: So that's a... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So now that's been moved and seconded... ...Council Lawton has the floor to talk to the motion. Councillor Lorentson: I just think there's a lot at stake here, and given that the traffic assessment report was only ascertained in the last week, I think it's only fair and equitable that the applicant has an opportunity to respond. Sure. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Question here. Councillor Finzel: So a question through the Chair to the CEO or staff. Does this provide enough time to actually have a meaningful meeting that's going to provide us with the outcomes? Speaker 8: It will be a challenge. It is a... Councillor Finzel: So what would be an alternative to this? Is it a stop-and-go? Is that the clock? Or what's the alternative to giving it time for meaningful engagement to get the outcomes that people are seeking to facilitate? Speaker 8: Well, it relies on the willingness of the applicant to engage in part. They haven't indicated that at this point, but hopefully today's resolution assists with

01:10:00 that. Our traffic consultant, I know, is very busy, and I'd likely say that theirs is as well. It may make some time. For it to be... If there's issues, it may not be resolved. If it... I mean, ideally, the recommendation we had to the applicant was to defer it to the next round of meetings, whether we come back to you on Thursday and say that's what's happened and suggest that it be deferred at that point in time might be a path forward. Speaker 11: I think... Yeah, I think we can make the attempt of best endeavours that, you know, all parties go in in good faith to make reasonable efforts to be able to come together and resolve prior to the ordinary meeting, whether that's feasibly... You know, whether that's possible to get them in the same room or online together to nut these things out, noting there might be some technical elements that might need some time to prepare. Some analysis may need to be undertaken, so we're happy to come back and update Council,

01:11:00 you know, at the ordinary meeting or prior to if these matters can be attended to and that. But I think best endeavours is probably... What we can put forward is we'll try our best, but no guarantees it will be able to be resolved by ordinary meeting. Councillor Finzel: So a question for the Chair to the staff. Then if there's no resolution and that comes to the meeting, that there was no... Not enough time to reach those outcomes, in the process, what is open to Council or the applicant at that point of the ordinary meeting? What's the process then if nothing... If you can find no resolution? Does that mean it just... It depends on the... It depends on the... Councillor Lorentson: Well, it depends on the position we're in. Ready time being deferred to the ordinary meeting if no resolution can be made within the next five days. Speaker 8: It's not a code, is it? Yes, it is, isn't it? So there's no risk of it going to... Yeah, okay. Councillor Finzel: It's all right. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Councillor Phillips: Mr Chair, I just have a question about my original second, which would have been

01:12:00 seen on the live stream and by the members of the gallery that I had seconded the motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. I didn't call that a second. Did you ever record a second? No. No, it was never recorded. Yeah. I must have. Mayor Wilkie: And the point you make about it was question... Questions were happening at that time. Yeah. Could you explain when you've got a mover? Yeah. And questions... Do you have... Question time is occurring. So... With second... Even though you might call... Say that you're seconding it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Questions still continue. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. So if... Yeah. If... The rec... My recollection, I gave Councillor Lorentson the opportunity to move. Councillor Wilkie then immediately asked a question. Okay. And that is possible. If I acknowledged a seconder, none of those questions could have occurred. So once it's moved and seconded, it has to go back to Councillor Lorentson to speak the motion. So that's why I'm confident I didn't acknowledge a seconder, because I wouldn't have had those

01:13:00 questions. You might have said it and I might have missed it, but... Yeah. Councillor Phillips: That's right. I guess, can I just ask that since I'm down here on the corner, that you swing slightly this way to see that I have had my hand up a couple of times, the CEO has acknowledged that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sure. Yep. And he's been letting me know. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. So, Councillor Lorentson has spoke to the meeting. Motion. Does anyone wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson: I'll close. No, I'll speak to this. Oh, I'm sorry. Councillor Wegener: I can't support this motion. I mean, we're going to go in and vote on the, at the ordinary meeting, regardless. That's when we actually make the final decision. This is meaningless in that if we vote on it today, we have a good understanding of where we're going towards the ordinary meeting. That's the procedure. That's the standard way we do things. You have the general meeting, you vote on things, you can hash it out and rehash it at the ordinary meeting. But here, by wanting to wait for the consultants to meet with each other in the next couple of days is, again, micromanaging staff, which I have got a problem with, because you're

01:14:00 all of a sudden telling them they've got to do something and our staff they've got to do something. And if they don't do it, well, then we're probably going to say, oh, well, let's kick it down the road to the next meeting. It just keeps, and just these delays are, I don't think, are counterproductive. And in my opinion, the traffic management is pretty much obvious. There's, they've been addressed thoroughly already, in my opinion, especially in the applicant's responses. And as we all know about car washes and petrol stations, if there's a long line, you go to the next one and you go later on. That's the whole idea. If there's a queue, you come back. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor, we're talking to the deferral. You're talking about the motion. I'm talking about the deferral. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Question. Question for staff. Assuming that the applicant's consultant, the council's traffic consultant, do get together to discuss these issues, we come to Thursday night's ordinary meeting, you'll be giving

01:15:00 us a report on the nature of the discussions and the applicant's response to the issues raised. Would that be the correct summation of what we can expect? Speaker 8: Assuming they do meet. We would be able to come back to you and provide you with an update of what's transpired. Yes. And whether that issue is still a live issue. Yep. Or otherwise. And that would potentially maintain the amended grounds of refusal that the Deans has prepared, or would remove those traffic elements. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Can I also ask if the issue of traffic is not resolved between the two of you? As a council, I can still raise the alternate motion and we can still make a decision on the application. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I'll talk to the motion. I have a different view to Councillor Weekner. If you're a councillor who wishes to support the staff recommendation, it is an unnecessary delay.

01:16:00 My understanding is that there are councillors here who do wish to support an approval of the application. I think it would be derelict of your duty to put through a motion when staff have already indicated that there is a query raised by the expert in the field. We as councillors haven't got expertise. We can only assess things from our own understanding. I think if there is a possibility for more information to either rule out or rule out, concerns about traffic movement, I think that is preferable then to debate something where we have partial understanding. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson, you wish to close. Councillor Lorentson: No, the only point I think I really want to make is that there's holding costs associated with delayed decisions and I just want to acknowledge that this is a four and a half year project for the applicant.

01:17:00 So I would like to reach some sort of agreement. I would like to make a resolution by ordinary meeting this Thursday. I think what's in front of us just gives due process, due diligence and to ensure that all the councillors have as much information as they can before ordinary meeting to make the best decision and the most informed decision. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Oh look, I convinced you. Okay, we then move on to the next item on the agenda. And it is a report direct to General Committee regarding the appeal relating to D96 of 2024 relating to refusal of MCU 24...

6.1 APPEAL D96 OF 2024 RELATING TO REFUSUAL OF MCU24/0003 MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR SHORT TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 428 COOTHARABA ROAD, COOTHARABA ¶

▶ 01:17:49· Carried 6-1 · 1 division from council's minutes

01:18:00 3 material changes used for short term accommodation at 428 Cootharaba Road, Cootharaba. Patrick, would you like to give us a quick heads up? Speaker 8: Yeah, quick heads up. As you'll be aware, this was a recent decision of Council to refuse an application for short term accommodation at 428 Cootharaba Road. The proposal was seeking to utilise a two bedroom dwelling for the short term accommodation. A rural zone property, 3.16 hectares. There was a recommendation made by the officer. However, at the ordinary meeting it was resolved to refuse the application. Accordingly, then the applicant has subsequently appealed that. But it's in order to defend the appeal. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor, just a reminder, being an appeal, we can talk just to the item whether we defend or not. Not at any substance regarding the actual nature of the appeal. Would anyone like to move the recommendation? Councillor Wegener: I have a quick question. Question?

01:19:00 Yep. Whether this is allowed. I see in the summary here, it doesn't mention the Rural Activities Code, which says that it is inconsistent with the acceptable outcomes AO 2.3, the 4 hectares rule, saying that that's the whole reason it was impact assessable in the first place. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, can I answer your question? Yes. The 2 hectares is in the table of assessment, not in the Rural Activities Code. The Rural Activities Code doesn't apply to this application. Councillor Wegener: The tables of assessment are 5, where this is under 9.3.53. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do you wish to confirm that the Rural Activities Code does or doesn't apply to this application being a short-term accommodation in the Rural Activities? Speaker 8: Oh, that's correct. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The code doesn't apply. Are there any questions being asked? Have you got another question? Councillor Wegener: Yes. If it's impact assessable because of an inconsistency, then you look at the entire planning scheme.

01:20:00 Isn't the quote the whole of planning scheme? Speaker 8: It is. But what you've got in front of you, the grounds of refusal that were sought and approved by Council are contained within the report. There's no new grounds that have been included. There's a bit of a summary at the start. But you'll find on page 3 of the report, it goes through all the grounds that were put forward by Council and that they're in the report in its entirety. And noting that an appeal starts anew and that the experts may refine those grounds and it possibly come up with new grounds as well. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Are you happy? Councillor Phillips: Am I allowed to ask a question about how much it costs us? To defend the appeal? Speaker 11: This is unknown at this stage. This is so early in the process.

01:21:00 It comes down to how long it may take to resolve the issues in dispute and whether a trial can be listed and when that may or may not happen. But, yeah, there's no financial ability to cost out what that will look like from a price tag perspective at this stage. But certainly what we will do is update through our process. We will update through our case management working group, which is every two months on the progress of this and other appeals that Council is dealing with. Councillor Phillips: Okay. I have a second question, a follow up then. Where does our, the funding come for from to defend an application like this? Is it from our general rates? Speaker 11: Yeah. Yes. Yes. They do come through the general rates. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Speaker 11: Okay. I'll move the motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Move Council Wigner. Any second? Second. Second from Council Wilkie. Do you wish to talk to the motion? Councillor Wegener: Yeah. I just feel this, defending this appeal is incredibly important. The decision to refuse the applications is so historically important for the hinterland.

01:22:00 It was a moment where we decided that we were going to save the hinterland for residents and not hand it over to the short term accommodation industry. And I think it's an absolute line in the sand that we have to support ourselves. I know that the planning scheme will attempt to, or will make it an inconsistent use of all the rural residential and rural areas. However, the planning scheme amendments have not been passed yet. And it's, to me, it's very, very clear that when you look at the strategic intent of our planning scheme, that short term accommodation, the Airbnbs and the solar panels, they're not consistent with rural and several rural residents. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I don't need to debate the subject rather than the field. So. Object. Councillor Wegener: Okay. That's my, this is a very, very important decision that we made. Long lasting ramifications.

01:23:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else wish to just talk? Councillor Phillips: I have another question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sure. Councillor Phillips: Can I land on the question? Yeah. What's our budget? Our overall budget for taking, for the construction of this building? Yep. The PL's budget, please. Speaker 11: We currently have a budget, circa $1 million for the 24, 25 financial year. Councillor Phillips: Okay. Follow up question. Last year, did we exceed our budget? Speaker 11: Last year we did. We had a number of large appeals that all sort of collided, I guess, in terms of airing, airing dates as well. So, it did exceed the budget from last year and we were able to reach out. But cost savings to fund the additional costs for defending appeals. Okay. Councillor Phillips: And protracted budget, where are we looking at, at the moment? Speaker 11: Hard to define how much it may cost us, but obviously we're budgeting and hoping to stick

01:24:00 to our budget anticipated this year. We don't envisage there being any prolonged hearings listed for the future. For this financial year. So, hopefully that will significantly reduce likely costs. And hopefully we might be able to budget this year. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Speaker 11: Thank you. Councillor Hinton. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a question following on from Councillor Phillips's question. Other councils, including Sunshine Coast Council, they, from my understanding, engage design advisory panels in the hope that, I guess, that there can be some strong collaboration, with the hope, I guess, to keep us out of P&E courts, through the Chair and the CEO. Is there any, something in the pipeline where Noosaville and staff currently engages with the design advisory panel? Or there's plans moving ahead to, you know, look at doing this practice to avoid and eliminate

01:25:00 some of these budget flaws? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I'm going to rule the questions and speak out of order. It is about a totally separate matter. It's not related to this issue. It's not related to this appeal or whether we defend it or not. So, it is something we can look at at another time. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll follow that up again. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. We'll follow that up. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Wegener? You wish to close? No. Thank you. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Lorentson, Councillor Finzel, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Wilkie, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Stockwell. And those against? Councillor Phillips. The motion is carried. We have a similar matter, being number 2, appeal 1997 of 2024, related to refusal MCU 230101, material change of use for short term accommodation at 561 Gimpy Kin Kin Road, Kin Kin. Speaker 8: Similar circumstance to the previous appeal.

6.2 APPEAL 1997 OF 2024 RELATING TO REFUSUAL OF MCU23/0101 MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR SHORT TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 561 GYMPIE KIN KIN ROAD, KIN KIN ¶

▶ 01:25:47· Carried 6-1 · 1 division from council's minutes

01:26:00 This is an application for development of short term accommodation in the rural zone. A four bedroom home to be used for short term accommodation. The matter was put to council by the officers with their recommendation to approve the application. After much debate at the council meeting, it was resolved by all councillors to refuse the application. The grounds of refusal, again, included the fact that it was a short term accommodation in this report. Again, it's in order for council to defend its decision, to defend this appeal. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, good. Councillor Wegener? I'll move it. Moved. Seconded by Councillor Finzel. Do we need to discuss this one? Councillor Wegener: I might just make one more appeal. Have we learned nothing from our experiences from our own beach communities and from around the world concerning short term accommodation? We need to defend this appeal. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Short and safe. Councillor Phillips: Can I please speak on behalf of just my opinion?

01:27:00 I don't want it publicly seen that I would like to see STAs riddled in our community. That is absolutely not what I want to see. I'm just very, very conscious of perhaps we need to reconsider how we are looking at STA applications, therefore avoiding this process that costs our ratepayers. So it is not that I support our community being inundated with STAs. I just want that very clear. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Hinton? Short and sweet. Councillor Finzel: King needs a home. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No one else? Councillor Wegener, do you wish to close? I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Lorentson and Finzel, Wegener, Wilkie, Wilson and Stockwell. And those against? That is Councillor Phillips. Okay. We move on to the next. That motion is obviously there carried. The third item for direct to committee is appeal 1998 of 2024 relating to refusal of

6.3 APPEAL 1998 OF 2024 RELATING TO REFUSUAL OF MCU22/0094 MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR CHILDCARE CENTRE AT 28 EENIE CREEK ROAD, NOOSAVILLE ¶

▶ 01:27:54· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

01:28:00 MCU 2209 and 4, mature change of use to childcare centre at 28 Indy Creek Road, Noosaville. Speaker 8: You might recall this was another recent refusal of a childcare centre at 28 Indy Creek Road, Noosaville, within the Shire Business Centre. There are a number of reasons for it to be refused. Generally speaking, it didn't provide a centimetre setback to Hofmann Drive, and that was a requirement of the reconfiguration approval. It failed, therefore, to provide the parkway setting. The use is an inconsistent use within that major centre zone, the business park precinct, noting that there is available land, suitably sown land, just behind it. There was issues with the location of the bioretention basin. Accordingly, it was refused, recently appealed.

01:29:00 Again, it's in order for Council to defend its decision to defend the appeal. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Does anyone like to move it? I'll move it. I'll second. I'll second Councillor Wilkie. So, this is a different one, nature of appeal. In response to, I suppose, Councillor Phillips' concerns with any appeal, you first have to agree to defend the matter. Otherwise, you've got no ability to affect an outcome. But there is generally a court-imposed mediation process where they see whether, after the receipt of expert opinion and expert witness statements, whether the matters that are in dispute can be resolved without the costly court hearings. That may be something that occurs in this instance. Speaker 8: Anyone else wish to speak? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's carried unanimously.

01:30:00 We are an hour and a half in. Are we ready for a short break? Councillor Lorentson: I think so, yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And when I say short, are we doing five minutes or seven and a half? Mayor Wilkie: Seven and a half, given that it is lunchtime. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We'll come back at 10 past 12. Thank you. Thank you. What was that? Two. Two? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 5: Yeah.

01:42:00 Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We resume the meeting and we're up to item four of the report's Director General Committee and that deals with the register of delegations from council to the CEO and we have Tewantin and the manager of government, Diane, here to give us a short executive summary of what this report has in for us. Speaker 1: Good afternoon councillors, this report is about the annual review of delegations, council to CEO. The register of delegations is attached to the report, item number one, it's 550 pages strong, apologies for that. As you are aware, the delegation of powers is required so that council officers are appropriately authorised to conduct their daily duties.

6.4 ANNUAL REVIEW - REGISTER OF DELEGATIONS - COUNCIL TO CEO ¶

▶ 01:42:14· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

01:43:00 Encount that council provides efficient community services and that US councillors can focus on high level strategic matters. The statutory powers required for council to operate are assigned to councillors by acts and regulations. This is the whole register here. And the local government act allows council by resolution to delegate these powers to the CEO. Subsequently to that, the local government act can then allow council to delegate these powers to the CEO. We ask the CEO to further delegate these powers to appropriately qualified employees or contractors. This stage of the review and this report is only in relation to delegations from you as councillors to the CEO. The local government act describes that this review must occur annually, that's why you see us here at the end.

01:44:00 And that it is required to maintain currency of delegations in response to changes to state or commonwealth law. Also provides opportunity to councillors to make changes to the register of delegations or conditions of delegations, what we've done this year. And it also provides opportunity for council officers to request additional delegated powers where required if they discover during the year that they do require additional powers. So as part of this year's review, we've conducted two delegations. Delegation workshops. We touch base on these three items. As part of the first workshop and the second. The governance team presented councillors with a legal update as received from the local government association . And in consultation with you as councillors, we applied changes to 13 registers of our delegation

01:45:00 register. The governance team presented to you also detail of two new registers, which were requested by our local laws team to manage stock where required, likely a rather infrequent item. But for that reason, to minimise risk, we've also added to the register the stock management act and regulations. And the planning and development assessment team also facilitated a review of the conditions pertaining to planning legislation as requested by council resolution 69B for the ordinary meeting held on 15 June 2023, last year's annual review. As a result, the conditions of the delegation of the planning act 2016 have been changed

01:46:00 and the development assessment rules and the planning regulation 2017 were modified in consultation with you as councillors to ensure that development matters are referred to council in accordance with councillor and community interests. Therefore, in sum, the recommendation today before you is that a the council note the report to the general committee dated 12 August 2024 regarding council's annual development and the current legislation. And B, adopt the register of delegations, council to CEO, pursuant to section 257 of the Local Government Act 2009 to delegate the powers of the local government outlined in the register of delegations provided in attachment 1 to the CEO. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have any questions or would someone like to move the recommendation? Mayor Wilkie: I'm happy to move it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I saw Councillor Wilson first. Okay. I'm happy to move it.

01:47:00 We expect a five-minute discussion. And moved, Councillor Wilson, seconded by Councillor Wilkie and Councillor Wilson, you have the floor. Anyone else wish to speak? Mayor Wilkie: Just to note that in consultation with councillors, staff have recommended that there will be some planning matters that will be referred to the council for council, and they are, one, where a matter relates to the clearing of remnant of concern or endangered vegetation from a Biodiversity or Vegetation Management Act perspective, two, the disturbance of the habitat of the species listed under the Nature Conservation or Environmental Protection Biodiversity Acts, three, an extension of an approval that was made under a superseded planning scheme and or where there is a resolution of council to amend the planning scheme in a way that is relevant to the approval, four, to the removal of substantial alteration to

01:48:00 a structure or place of heritage significance identified in council's planning scheme or in an adopted study of council, and five, a development where council has a direct or indirect interest as a result of its involvement in previous or proposed land dealings. And that last one is about ensuring that council is held to the same standards as any other applicant in terms of development applications. And also the others reflect what we've learned from other development applications. We're trying to learn the lessons as we go along, and these changes to the delegation triggers reflect that. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, of course, yeah, I just want to reiterate and thank the governance team, the workshops

01:49:00 were really informative and gave us a really good opportunity to drill down and get some good insight into what was happening. I think it's great, it aligns with our goals for excellence in gender trust in our community, but also, like what Councillor Wilkie just raised, is the flexibility and agility to learn where we've been and where we are currently and where we're going. So I think it's great that we're meeting the legislative requirements to review that once a year, and as we adapt and move forward, I think it's really good. That we can have confidence in our governance team, our CEO and our organisation, and align with our community to see we are listening, and that we are taking those opportunities seriously, not only to fulfil regulation, but actually prove to our community that we are working hard and listening to what they're saying and responding accordingly. So I thank you all, the councillors as well, and the staff for their contribution. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. A question to the staff. Councillor Wilkie mentioned council requests.

01:50:00 Yes. There was also another council request, which I believe resulted in new conditions. Can I ask John C if you can run through them in terms of the Planning Act? If something is deemed approval, inconsistent use, and that we as councillors, for example, can bring a matter to full council for approval. I think that's a really important new condition. Speaker 1: Inconsistent use? Councillor Finzel: Yes. I think that's a really important new condition. Inconsistent use? Speaker 1: So it's under 332 of the report. Yes. Yes. Do you want us to read it? Councillor Lorentson: I'm happy to read it out, but I just thought, Nick, I can read that out. Absolutely. The chief executive officer may exercise the powers of the council under the Planning Act 2016 for an application other than the following. A, an application for a variation request mentioned in section 61 of the Planning Act 2016 to vary the effect of the planning scheme. B, an application which is for an inconsistent use as defined in the planning scheme.

01:51:00 C, an application for a proposed development where more than 30 submissions have been received during the notification part objecting to the proposed development. D, an extension of an approval that was made under a superseded planning scheme, that is pre-NUSA Plan 2020, and or where there is a resolution of council to amend the planning scheme in a way that is consistent with the planning scheme. E, an impact-accessible application involving the clearing of vegetation which is mapped as being in an area of biodiversity significance on the Biodiversities, Waterways and Wetlands overlay map and containing an endangered regional ecosystem, except in circumstances where the clearing is exempt clearing. F, the removal or demolition of a structure or place identified within the planning scheme's heritage and character overlay map. G, a development where council is the applicant requiring impact assessment.

01:52:00 And two, however, the chief executive officer may exercise the powers of the local government under the Planning Act for an application where the application has the potential for deemed approval in accordance with section 64 of the Act. Three, in exercising the delegated powers for a development application that's been decided by council, the CEO must give due consideration to the materiality of the application. Four, the changes sought through a negotiated decision notice are the change or minor change application. And consult with all councillors where those changes would have a material impact on the outcome of the original decision. And four, the councillor may request an application to be determined at a council meeting. The request shall be made to the CEO with a request to be made before the decision stage commences. Again, great new conditions. Reflecting great consultation and collaborations with both council and councillors.

01:53:00 So, thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And just for clarity, the list that Councillor Wilkie read out was actually the list that was in the previous resolution. And embedded within the list that Councillor Lorentson read out was the response to that request. And I suppose I'll talk to it while I've got the floor. I, too, think that this is a very important issue. I think that the revised settings for planning gets it a bit better. There will always be room for improvement. The key learnings came out of a 2017 decision to continue a eight-year-old approval of a land that had high biodiversity significance. That land's now been developed, but there was many years of community angst. And activism around the Save the Sunrise Glossies movement. What we now have is that those sort of decisions would come to council.

01:54:00 So that it's made in the public eye, and so that we really consider the current community sentiment around blocks. We're in that one. The biodiversity value had been identified at a higher level than existed at the time when the original approval was made. And that's the sort of thing that the triggers now will pick up. Anyone else wish to talk? Would you like to close, Councillor Wilson? Councillor Wilson: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? And that's unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. Anyone who's run out of sleeping tag blips, I can recommend the attachment. Speaker 10: No. No. Speaker 7: No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No.

6.5 BUDGET REVIEW 1 (BR1) FOR THE 2024/25 FINANCIAL YEAR ¶

▶ 01:54:46· Carried unanimously 7-0 · 1 division from council's minutes

01:55:00 Okay yes it's a very detailed document. So next item five is budget review one for the 2024-25 financial year and we welcome our manager of finance Pauline and Trent. Speaker 2: Director and Pauline are you speaking to this item? Yes I am. Good afternoon councillors. In accordance with local government regulation council is required to undertake regular reviews. Sorry Pauline could you help me I'm having trouble hearing you. Could you speak loud and slow. Sure. Good afternoon councillors. In accordance with local government regulation council is required to undertake regular reviews of the budget to ensure it remains reflective of planned activity. The first budget review of the year BR1 addresses the carryover of unfinished capital and operating projects where works have commenced and expenditure has been committed. BR1 also addresses any new or emergent actions arising from council resolutions, executive team meetings or the capital works executive. In summary this budget review is proposing to decrease council's operating position by $258,000 from $158,000 to $158,000.

01:56:00 surplus to $140,000 deficit. This decrement has occurred primarily due to many of the submissions relating to new or existing grant funded projects where funding has already been received but the associated expenditure falls into the following financial year. An amount for disaster management and resilience projects as well as several emergent temporary positions have also been included. Note as these are temporary positions there has been no change to council's full-time equivalent establishment position that was adopted at the budget in June. It should be known that forecasting a deficit position at BR1 is not uncommon with the financial year 2024 BR1 moving from a $121,000 surplus to a forecasted $761,000 deficit. Capital projects which have been committed to commence in the 2024 financial year and a $121,000 deficit have also been included in the financial year 2024 BR1 moving from a $121,000 surplus to a forecasted $761,000 deficit. Capital projects which have been committed to commence in the 2024

01:57:00 A further $5.7 million, which had already had funding allocated and had commitments against them, will be carried over to financial year 2025. A further $5.2 million relating to two multi-year projects has been reforecasted to FY2026, and $145,000 in emergent works has also been included. This brings Council's base capital works program from $45.2 million to $53.8 million. A further $78.7 million in QRA funded disaster projects that are currently committed and under construction have also been carried over,

01:58:00 taking the total capital works program to $132 million. There has also been a number of minor amendments to proposed 2024-25 fees and charges. These include a new fee for a remote access bulb for the new locker room, a new fee for Council offices to undertake private certification of building works where it's appropriate, the amendment of some right to information fees charged by Council so that they align with the legislated fees by the Office of the Information Commissioner, a tennis court hire fee which is set at an hourly rate, and an amendment of two fees for Noosa seniors so that they align with the domestic assistance fee. Council has continued to meet all financial sustainability ratios with the exception of one,

01:59:00 the operating surplus ratio, which has fallen just below a zero, and that's due to the forecast deficit position. Future budget reviews during the year will capture emergent savings and additional revenue to mitigate this deficit position and achieve a surplus by the end of the financial year in line with Council's financial sustainability policy. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you Pauline, that was beautifully articulated. Speaker 3: Thank you Mr Ben. Mayor Wilkie: Can I ask a question? You mentioned that at this time in the last financial year, BR1, the projected deficit was $700,000. Yep, $760,000. $760,000, some six or seven times what was predicted. Can you tell me what processes and practices does this Council have in place that enabled that to turn that from a $760,000 deficit into a multi-million dollar surplus?

02:00:00 Speaker 2: There's a number of different factors that impact on that. It can be additional revenue that we generate through sales, sales from polo parks and waste if there's upside on those. We had additional interest revenue last year. It can be cost savings, so where we've not had to spend as much on projects that we had originally budgeted for. That will also offset on those particular deficit positions. Mayor Wilkie: And conservative budgeting, could you explain the principle? Speaker 2: Conservative budgeting, so when we build the original budget or the adopted budget that we adopted in June, we always take a conservative position, so we don't, I suppose, forecast revenues to push them beyond where we believe they will achieve. That allows us to have upside during the year as well, but it is all dependent on market forces and demand. But we tend to do that so that we have this ability to catch up if we need to during the year. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Other questions? Just one more.

02:01:00 Could you speak generally about the importance of budget reviews for an organisation like ours that employ zero-based budgeting? Speaker 2: So budget reviews are important so that we're actually assessing where we're at and how we're performing against budgets. And we can adjust and make, I suppose, amendments to cater for any unforeseen or unforeseen needs. So if we have more emergent issues that come out, it also means that we're planning ahead to compensate for those things. So if we have, I suppose, let's say we had a large expense that we hadn't expected in Council, then we can adjust those forecasts and take negating action with the executive team as to how we might address that if we're not going to achieve a surplus position or come back to Council to explain why that might be the case if we can't rectify that. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I will move a motion which adds to the staff recommendation. And if the addition is B, to identify the amount returned to unconstrained cash reserves

02:02:00 from unspent budgetary allocations for the zero-emissions NUSA program in the 2022-23 and the 2023-24 financial year as seed funding for the commencement of the proposed Futures Fund. Noting that the intent of the fund is to generate a reserve for potential large-scale climate action projects and to demonstrate Council's ongoing commitment to reducing emissions from its operations. Do I have a seconder? Thank you, Councillor Wilson. Seconder, Councillor Wilson. So, Councillors, I'll explain the addition. We have, since we set ourselves a target of being a zero-emissions entity by 2026, allocated $400,000 per year in each budget to undertake projects such as putting solar on the roof of this building, on the depots, etc. So there was a $400,000 allocation to reduce the emissions coming from Council's own operations.

02:03:00 Last year, none of that was spent. And the year before, there was a significant underspend as well. Now, there were genuine reasons why that occurred. Part of it is that, as the Acting Director of Infrastructure tells us, it's not good practice to actually budget a set amount without having the plans on how you're going to spend it first. But it is important, I believe, that this Council really maintains its focus on what is the largest issue that faces this community and all Councils in the world in the long term. The failure to act is likely to have huge costs to future generations. We have got a range of potential projects in the pipeline. Some of them we're already going out for grant applications.

02:04:00 These are things like, you know, turning our green waste and potentially food waste into a valuable resource for composting. It includes, you know, potential for solar farms on the landfill, waste to energy. It also includes options of changing the way we look at buying land and putting carbon plantings onto Council land or perhaps, you know, programs putting carbon plantings onto other land to sequester the fugitive emissions from our economy. So, the Futures Fund is something that's not ready to announce yet, but once we set it up, what I'm suggesting is the amount that we haven't spent and we had committed to goes into that bucket rather than remaining in unconstrained cash reserves. And it's, to me, a way of Councillors just reminding staff that while we've been very busy and we've been focused on very urgent matters, that we should always have in mind that the strategic is something that requires our continual attention.

02:05:00 In the top part of it, I'd just like to thank staff, the diligence with which our finance team really undertakes both budgeting and budget review is something that always is something that surprised me after a couple of decades in state government and then coming to a local government, it's really something that the level of detail and hence the level of efficiency from ratepayers' money as a result is something that I'm always very thankful for. So, well done. Councillor Phillips: Am I allowed to ask you a question about your recommendation? You may. Please. If, not that I don't agree with the Futures Fund, I just want to ask you how I explain to approximately 800 people each night that are needing food and shelter in our community

02:06:00 why we wouldn't be passing on unrestrained cash reserves to our community and push this a little bit further down when we're not in an economic crisis with our cost of living. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, so this is not money that's coming out of the ratepayers. This is money that's sitting in cash reserves, unallocated cash reserves. So it's money that's in the bank that could have, and I would argue should have, been spent in the last two years. So there is a commitment. In terms of the cost of living crisis, it will continue to get worse if we don't pay our part in reducing the impacts of climate change. There'll be nothing more significant than the rise in energy bills as we're trying to keep our homes liveable through increased air conditioning. There'll be nothing more costed to the ratepayers than the significant projected increases in coastal storm surges and coastal storms.

02:07:00 That will result in potentially making the $175 million worth of flood damage, which was a climate-related event, make it look small. If we have a similar event that affects the coast, the cost may be ten times larger. So the reason we are in such a challenging state is that we've always put it off. Climate change is just a story of putting off the future in preference of the current. It's not one that will be taking anything away from other programs we run. Councillor Phillips: So, sorry, can you answer my follow-up question? How do I answer? If kids going to school without lunchboxes, without any food, how do I explain to them? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: My answer to them is a question, because every young person I talk to realises that climate change is the number one priority in their life, that they feel that we're frittering away the future. So that's how I'd answer. Mayor Wilkie: Question.

02:08:00 I think Councillor Phillips' question goes to asking what is this Council doing to address cost of living and homelessness in the community? And we have our Director of Community Services, Kerri Contini, online. Kerri, could you help answer Councillor Phillips' question in regards to what this Council is doing to support the most vulnerable in our community? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Because there are resources allocated specifically in that field. Speaker 5: Well, thank you, Councillor, for the question. In terms of the services that we provide to the most vulnerable in our community, that ranges from direct officer support, whether that is through our community development team, or, for example, through discipline, is helping the other people in our community. Councillor Wilson: So that's officers and services.

02:09:00 Speaker 5: Yes, certainly. So in terms of supporting the most vulnerable in our community, we provide a combination of staffing and services, as well as grants. So our staffing and services cross a number of areas in community services, both, for example, in community development, when we're helping, for example, our homeless or people leaving family and domestic violence situations. Then through to our services, for example, in New South Wales, for example, in New South Wales, where we're providing direct services to our older residents. We also provide grants.

02:10:00 And those grants go to not-for-profit community organisations who help the most vulnerable in our community. Councillor Phillips: So my question to you, Kerri, would it be beneficial for those organisations within our department that you're talking about, could they do with a cash insertion into their departments? Speaker 5: Every council team in that area would say they could benefit from more resources. Certainly, when we went through that budget process, we identified a number of areas that required additional resources. We have obtained some grant funding to support us in that space. However, it won't be a surprise to everyone that as we cycle around through the budget, again, that there will be those requests for additional resources will be repeated. Yes. Some of those services require not just capacity, but specialist skill sets, which we currently

02:11:00 don't have. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Along those similar lines, Councillor Stockwell, given we're looking at levies and the impact of constrained cash to the overall budget, I could read into this a future fund levy, because it's going to be constrained cash. I'm very much interested in looking after the future and the impact of climate change and our approach, including, I believe, we need to look at the actual impact of climate change for ourselves as an organisation. I would prefer to see that we have some more information from the financial mob to let us know what would this look like when we're taking unconstrained cash, which at times then we can call on anything in an emergency to go, we need to move this bucket here.

02:12:00 Where's the pros and cons for going that we are creating another constrained cash of money at the overall financial impacts of that? We're trying to, I believe, through the budget, we talked heavily about not raising levies, getting rid of levies. We're looking at how we're looking at our contracts with external organisations and addressing how we're managing that. I'm a little bit reluctant to support this unless we're able to. We have some workshops about what does this actually look like when we're looking at taking these cash reserves and making them a constraint. I thought overall, for fiscal good financial management, we were trying to look at managing that better. I just have some reserves about that. Have you got any?

02:13:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll answer my part, but I will pass it over. First thing, this would have no meaning if we don't decide to proceed with the Futures Fund. You're right. Before we do, we do have to have workshops and understanding how that's going to be funded. At the moment, they will sit in unconstrained cash until that decision is made. In terms of the potential rollout and consideration of this issue, my understanding is it's probably something that is going to start this financial year. Speaker 9: I think we can speak to that, councillors, through the Chair. This financial year, obviously following the adoption of your first budget for your election term in June, the work we're doing between now and February as we come through very quickly, as we do every year through the budget, is pulling together a new long-term financial plan or more of a long-term financial strategy. There's a lot of work underpinning that. Some of the work we're working on in the background at the moment, we're working on

02:14:00 is looking at, as you'll see in the corporate and the op plan, there's a strategic land review, there's a revenue diversification plan. Part of that is, and also the other one, is about alternative funding models. That covers a range of things. That covers what Councillor Stockwell talks about in terms of Futures Fund, but also we talk also about how we would fund other infrastructure investments, such as economic infrastructure or broader climate. There's a lot of work around the challenge of limited funds and a risk of that competing priority as to where those funds are occurring. The starting point for us through the budget is looking at where should we be funding and what should we be using to fund all of our activities across council. That'll help us get to a point of at least having an informed discussion about what a Futures Fund may look like and what it should fund.

02:15:00 At some point in the future, if you're going to fund a Futures Fund, if you're going to fund a Futures Fund, if you do decide to implement a Futures Fund model, we then look at what that investment would need to be in terms of setting cash aside for the long term and how much that would need to be. The same is also said for our existing infrastructure. The work that's occurring now in infrastructure planning is about what is our future cash needs to support future infrastructure investment in our roads and bridges and storm walls and water and open space. That's a competing priority for the unconstrained reserves. Is it for existing infrastructure or is it for climate resilience or future infrastructure investment? That's a lot of discussion we'll have over the next 12 months as we come into next year's budget. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of the Futures Fund, that is a levy. Is that correct? That's the concept, that it'll be a transport levy, a heritage levy. Is that what the concept is to tax?

02:16:00 Speaker 9: Through the Chair? Yes and no. The ultimate goal of the Futures Fund is about building a fund, a revolving fund of cash. If you think about some of that major climate resilience infrastructure, it could be in the tens of millions of dollars, for example, 5, 10, 20 years down the track. The types of funding mechanisms that we use to fund that is the key discussion point. Is it for the future? Is it through a levy? Is it through a mechanism through our fees and charges? Is it through a visitor charge of some description or others? That's the conversation we need to have about how that's structured and what does that mean for your existing levies? What's the remit of those? It's not just a discussion on a Futures Fund in isolation. It's about a discussion about what are the remits of your existing levies as well. Councillor Lorentson: Is that a discussion on a future fund in isolation? We should also be having with the community.

02:17:00 Yes. Yeah. Speaker 9: Great. It's an opinion only? That's for you to decide, councillors? Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: So it's part of our budget review consultation process. It's something that we can raise as a discussion point and get feedback. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Just on that, the budget. You mentioned preparing next year's budget. When will the work for involving councillors begin with that? I don't know. When will we be seeking our input on, I guess you're open to it already, but when will you formally be requesting input from councillors as part of putting together the 2025-26 budget? Speaker 9: The budget process starts for us internally now. There's no breather for Pauline. She's smiling quietly in the corner there. But we start planning now. We will start and we start working internally within the executive team and management on their projects. And then we'll work through the priorities over the next six months with the aim of commencing

02:18:00 workshops with yourselves, councillors, early in the new year, likely February, when we'll pick up the process. And we'll work through probably two months of budget workshops. And then the discussion is then should you wish to elicit any engagement on some of the decisions through the process? Does it occur at the start? Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Speaker 9: Or at a draft holding point through the process? Mayor Wilkie: We won't have a compressed timeframe after the election like we did in 2020 or this year. So we do have the time for consultation. For consultation. And we can ask questions about... Speaker 9: Correct, councillors. Mayor Wilkie: ...gift funds and... Speaker 9: And that falls within obviously the remit of competing priorities for being the engagement councillors. Yeah. Councillor Finzel: So then I just have a question about, and I might have missed it. Do we have a policy or does a policy have to be developed to inform this futures fund? Or where does that sit? Or maybe a question, CEO, whereabouts in the, you know, the workflow or the model of policies

02:19:00 informing action, where do you think this future fund fits? Is it already written somewhere? Is it in the pipeline? What's... Speaker 7: It still is, through the chair. It's still very much a discussion point, in my opinion. So we've got work to do on it. And we'll be bringing that back to council. So this is, you know, to be honest, what we're discussing here is BR1. We're also looking at putting the money aside until we have that further discussion and then decide where it goes. So it'll be back to you to decide on where that goes. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question to the CEO? And I may have missed it. Have we, in fact, had one workshop on the concept of a futures fund? Because I can't recall any discussion to this point. Speaker 7: I don't believe so, either. So it's... No. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. It's a minding work now. Speaker 9: Chair, just to support the CEO's response. The conversation has only been internally within senior offices about concept and preparation

02:20:00 at this point in the early planning. We haven't reached a point of any... No. ...engagement with workshops with yourselves at this point. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Am I right? I seem to recall in previous budgets, probably two or three of them, when we were looking at things like bushfire liberty, et cetera, that the concept of a future fund was discussed at that point, but it was informally as part of the period of budget discussions. Mayor Wilkie: Does this form part of the way we prepare for future disasters? The future fund help us mitigate the impacts of future disasters? No. Speaker 9: Through the Chair, it's complex. Obviously, climate resilience contributes towards mitigating the long-term impacts of disaster events. But in terms of disaster recovery and resilience and the impact on its community, that's part of that broader funding discussion as an organisation as to the remit of our levies, for example,

02:21:00 the bushfire levy versus the general raid, and what our funding opportunities are with State. And that's part of that broader funding discussion as an organisation as to the remit And that's why I mentioned earlier, the first step in this entire process is to look at what funds, what we should be using our revenue sources for, to be very clear about what we're using our general rate for, and what is the remit of environment versus bushfire levy, for example, for councillors. Mayor Wilkie: And in your opinion, will the amount of money available through bodies like the QRA, Queensland Reconstruction Authority, continue to be at similar levels, or is there an expectation that councils continue to provide this sort of, this sort of cash reserves that normally will be covered by the QRA? Speaker 9: Through the Chair, the challenge we face as a local government authority is for future tenures and election terms of State Government, faced with similar funding constraints than

02:22:00 what we do. The funding availability through QRA may become more constrained. It's not something we can speak to at this point in time. And as disaster events become more and more regular occurrences rather than black swan events, would that change their funding remit and their eligibility criteria for funding? That's not something we can speak to at this point in time. It's an ongoing discussion between State and Tribal and local government levels. And there is a risk there. Absolutely. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Question, or someone else wish to talk to the matter? Councillor Finzel: Yeah, just, you know, I welcome the opportunity to have conversations around the future funds. I think, you know, like today might be a little bit premature. Given, you know, our mantra for the budget was, you know, business as usual, finish what we started, let's take a breath, let's have a cause. So in terms of like leadership and decision making and bringing our community along with

02:23:00 the story. And doing that, I think at the beginning, very proactively then at the end. I really welcome the conversation. I think also we need opportunity to talk about where we're looking at to meet our targets. Like is the target we've got, is that really realistic? Or do we need to have a conversation about where we push that through to really celebrate reaching realistic targets? So it's, you know, I welcome what you're trying to do here to raise that. I just think that for me today, I think this is a little bit premature given collectively that we decided to, you know, take that cause. Let's take a breath. The organisation is already under duress. Community is looking for, you know, better governance and, you know, meaningful engagement. I think let's just have this on the table, have the workshops. But, yeah, I think to talk about, you know, putting a cash reserve that currently

02:24:00 sits unconstrained and then locking that down when we haven't like really had these conversations in depth. And I understand you've probably given a lot of thought. I respect that. You've been in this space for a long time. But I think for me personally, it's like I'm going to take the pause and let's just look at this, you know, a bit more, you know, a bit more in depth. But I think it's important to set a timeline and know where we're going and bring the community with us. Mayor Wilkie: Just a question. Councillor Soplin, you're not proposing this money be spent. You're proposing it be... It's money from that was this year... Sorry, previous year's budget set aside for zero emissions projects and that weren't spent for operational reasons, such as the solar on the roof of their sun-losed wood shops. And all it's doing is signalling to the community that it'll be put aside. We'll have a discussion about the future fund, so that the money eventually will be going towards projects for which it was originally intended.

02:25:00 Yes, that's correct. An accurate summation. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. And so what we found in the budget of year one was that there was no money spent in accordance with our commitment to spend $400,000 for zero emissions and internal matters, like the sun-losed wood shops. There was two options. One, we could ask for it to be carried over, and as a number of projects did, staff indicated that might have been an administrative burden. And so this mechanism was both to say, well, we're still committed, but we'll make it easy. We'll just make sure that that amount of money, which we initially allocated for this purpose over the last two years, can go into other projects in the future. And the notion of putting it into a future fund is something that I think has generated good discussion. Can I speak to the motion? You may. Councillor Wegener: We talked about this at the budget meetings, and I think it arises from our frustration

02:26:00 that things have not enough... That we actually didn't spend the money on this very, very important category of things like zero emissions and responding to climate change. And it is a little bit frustrating that we actually didn't spend that money, because it's such a bloody, huge, important thing. So I see this as it's not out of sight, out of mind. Once that disappears back into the general pool of money, then it's disappeared. We lose sight of it. Where this kind of says, no, look, this is right here. We need to spend this. We've allocated for it. The community wants this, demands this, that we take action on climate change. They've expressed so many times before. So I support this, because I think we need to do to support zero emissions, and the community

02:27:00 demands it. But it's not actually in our regular program, not our regular operation program. It's not a part of our depreciation program. These are some things that we actually have to forcefully forge head on. And I think it's kind of the counter to that. And I think it's the councilors that need it. It would be best if we pushed these projects. So I'm in favor of it, because I don't like to have that obligation for us, for the community, disappear and not fulfill it. Councillor Phillips: Can I please speak to the motion? I'll keep it very short and sweet. There is a lack of trust from community in local government, and many households having zero savings in their household budget. And therefore, I can't support unrestrained cash in our council. At this stage. And I'd like to see it part of the budget review next year. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councilor Lonson? Councillor Lorentson: Firstly, we did speak about a futures fund as part of just open discussions in the budget. What we didn't discuss is the detail and the implications.

02:28:00 What we didn't do is have a discussion with the community to see whether there is an appetite for it. So that's the part that I think is lacking in the budget. And that is the motion in front of us. I also, the motion references unconstrained cash reserves to be dedicated for a future fund related to climate change. My question is, rather than a future fund, we have immediate climate change risk, stormwater infrastructure, sewage infrastructure. I'd like to see our fund be a future fund. Our unconstrained cash reserves going to immediate risk. Clean waterways, shade, shelter. So I'd like to continue discussing this with the community and I respect the intent of the motion

02:29:00 but I can't support it not without proper discussion and consultation with community and without understanding what are the immediate climate change risk that we should be addressing right now and no discreet catchment planned. Again, something that I would identify as an immediate risk. Councillor Wilson: I still support the original intent of the motion in terms of making sure that we don't just forget this important issue each year and keep the can down the road. But listening to the views around the table, I do think we probably need to have a bit more time to actually establish everyone's views, get the community feedback and have a bit more detail about what that looks like. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I'll pose. I agree with everything everyone's said. Those who support and those who don't. It would have been easy to do this without mentioning

02:30:00 a futures fund but I thought it was time to raise it in the community. It's definitely time to raise it with staff and Councillor Wegener's quite right. It comes from a deep sense of frustration. This in 2018 when we declared a climate emergency, that's what it is. Flooding disaster relief is minor. If you think cost of living puts pressure on your household, if you understand what climate change will be bringing to us in the next 10, 20 years, we're in quite a buoyant economic period. And it is something that every organisation has to keep forefront and that's why I always bring it up. And yes, there are a range of funding options. One is as a levy. Another one, for example, we probably are well into the millions of dollars saved by the existing solar panels on the roof of council buildings.

02:31:00 One of the options to put in the future fund is all the savings we've got from the previous projects. And if we do get grant funding for a large solar phone, where is the profits from that going? Is it going into general revenue or is it going into doing more of the same or funding it? And that's the conversation we have to have is how do we get revenue streams for, you know, the projects out of the landfill alone are in the tens of millions each, you know. But they're the sort of scale of project we need to achieve the ambitious targets. And yes, we may have to review where we set our zero emissions target, but if we use a futures fund as one part of internal offsetting rather than buying offsets, it may be that by 2026, we can claim to have some carbon neutrality because we've allocated in the futures fund

02:32:00 a bucket of money which we will use to build our own future mitigation projects. Our offsets of council funds aren't going to an overseas fund. These projects are going into projects that will occur in the Shire for multiple benefits. So yes, I do think it's time to make sure that staff realise that we want to see this money used in future. Yes, I think it's time to start talking about how we fund it. And I still think it's quite OK to say that that amount be used for seed funding or the commencement of, probably should say potential, but I said proposed, futures fund. Therefore, I will be supporting my own motion. Councillor Wilson: Well, that's a good thing. Councillor Finzel: That's a good thing. Maybe it probably won't. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put a motion. All those in favour? That's Councillor Wegener, Wilkie and Stockwell. Those against? It's Wilson, Phillips, Finzel and Lorenton.

02:33:00 The motion has not been passed. So would someone like to move to staff recommendation? Mayor Wilkie: I will. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Phillips. And second, Councillor Wegener. Would you like to speak to it, Councillor Phillips? Councillor Phillips: No, thank you for the report that even I could understand. That summarises it, I think. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Does anyone else wish to talk to the motion? I'll therefore put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. The motion's passed. We then move on to the financial performance report for July 2024. And once again, to Pauline. Speaker 2: Okay, financial performance for the month of July 2024 is slightly higher than the year-to-date budget at this early stage of the new financial year. Operating revenue is $358,000 above budget, which is comprised of sales of goods and services from waste management, holiday parks and council facilities. Fees and charges, which are $81,000 above budget. But these have been offset by below budget rates and levies of $30,000, and that has

6.6 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – JUL 2024 ¶

▶ 02:33:31· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

02:34:00 resulted from the timing of some rebates and payment discounts with the July rates notices due on the 16th of August. And there's also a timing in the receipt of some unity water distribution, which is shown in the budget. However, these distributions are fixed, and so this variance is temporary. Operating expenditure is $324,000 underspent, with $83,000 relating to employee expenses and $187,000 relating to materials and services. Capital revenue is showing $1.1 million above budget, due to the receipt of QRA disaster funding money. And capital expenditure is $600,000 above budget year-to-date. As we've just talked about, Budget Review 1 will actually resolve a lot of these variances, once they're reflected in the financial statements. Council is currently holding $95 million in cash reserves, with $40 million invested

02:35:00 in hydroelectric power plants. At this early stage of the year, Council's financial performance remains on track. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. So we have questions. Councillor Wegener. In our money bank accounts here, I keep collecting interest. Is the interest rate stayed about the same for the past year now? Or has it not gone down yet? Speaker 2: So it is softening, definitely softening. We're still achieving over 5% at this stage, but we are seeing some of the other banks lower than 5%. Councillor Wegener: Yes, so that's been a bonus for us over the past few years. Speaker 2: Yes, but as you can see our cash balance is starting to decline as the construction of projects occur and capital gets delivered. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wilkie. Mayor Wilkie: Yes, and the fees and charges, building and plumbing, property, local laws, development assessment, they're all above budget. Oh sorry, executive development assessment below budget. A question about the building and plumbing, property and local laws being above budget.

02:36:00 That's a direct turnaround to the last six consecutive months, if I remember rightly, where they were all below budget. So does this reflect new projections? Speaker 2: Correct, so we were more conservative when setting those budgets. However, building and plumbing have got through a bit of backlog of some work that they had on the budget. So that's helped to bolster some of their revenue. And local laws has obviously got their camera cards starting up as well and we had quite a substantial provision last year for that. It's only just really started now. So that's probably why you're not seeing that significant decrease that we saw last year against budget. Mayor Wilkie: So that brings me to development assessment. That's been consistently below for quite some time as well and it's now below again. So what can you tell us about the projections?

02:37:00 The assumptions that we factored into this year's budget and why are we below still? Speaker 11: I was going to say, I'm happy to answer that. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, thank you Richard. Speaker 11: So we're still going through a process at the moment of reconciling our unearned revenue from last financial year. So potentially when we get to the end of the wrap up for the last financial year, we'll reconcile a lot of the unearned revenue. So we actually won't be far away from our previous budget. It's just that the large fees that we get, we hold over some of that revenue from previous financial years. We had some large application fees that were held over. So we'll find that when we get to the wrap up to the end of financial year. You'll see that the shortfalls that were proposed for development assessment will not be nearly as significant as they were. This first month, we've noticed that the revenue is slightly below. Due to a number of minor change applications. So we're getting lots of smaller applications rather than the ones that are proposing large fees.

02:38:00 Whereas last year, we did get a number of applications that incorporated large fees. But because of the large volume of revenue generated, they were held over. Because at the end of each financial year, we only process basically how much of those applications have progressed. And the amount of releases from those gets released. So it's a lot less than the earned revenue budget. So you'll find when we wrap up the last financial year. The gap, I guess, from projected to actually earned revenue won't be nearly as far as it was projected in those last. And to address some of this, what we're going to do is every quarter now we're going to be looking at the unearned revenue. And moderating that to release it into earned revenue. So that it gives a more accurate picture. Periodically for councils around revenue coming in through development assessment. Mayor Wilkie: Because I'm assuming that you've recalibrated your estimates based on what's happened the last six months. Correct.

02:39:00 Speaker 11: We've done a lot of work based on what's happening in the market and what our fee recovery structure looks like. There's still more work to do. But we're just making sure that we're not overshooting given the market has flattened out a little bit. And we're sort of back to sort of the around $600 applications. So we've factored in what our budget's going to be based on that. Mayor Wilkie: Okay, thank you. Speaker 9: Just a follow up. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I was just going to clarify, councillors. Speaker 9: It's probably really important also to be aware that this is the first month of the financial year. So as we get halfway, three quarters of the way through a financial year, we get to see those trends unfold. Particularly just buffering some of the ups and downs that might occur month in, month out. The first few months, you won't see that. So all it takes is an application to be in the first week of August versus the last week of July. And it can move our forecast significantly in the first month. So it is very early stages for those fees and charges and payments revenue. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, councillor. Councillor Lorentson: Just a follow up from where Frank sort of left.

02:40:00 In terms of looking at waste utility to waste management, holiday park revenue, sports facility revenue, etc. How accurate had council's revenue forecasts been compared to actual revenues? And what adjustments and revisions have been made to revenue forecasts throughout the year? We just heard Richard explaining it in context of planning. Does that happen with every department? Do they review their forecasts? Speaker 2: Certain departments definitely generally waste holiday parks and commercial business. You just review those consistently. We don't do that. We don't necessarily make changes every month. We generally make those changes as part of a budget review process. So we wouldn't necessarily reflect it straight away. And obviously, you've got to take into account the budget process. We have just started last year and those forecast coming through were conservative. And so we're now into the first month of that year. So we will be reviewing them, but we don't make an adjustment until we get to a budget review.

02:41:00 Councillor Lorentson: And my last question is how do we communicate financial performance and decisions to the community? Again, just running off what Richard said, that you're planning just to communicate that information to the public. Is that something we as a council are looking at doing better? Speaker 2: In terms of how we do our financial performance? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, we get this information. Through the public. Speaker 2: So that's obviously available publicly. And it is available on the website for council. We don't really do anything else other than making it available and putting it through the council meeting schedule every month. Councillor Lorentson: Maybe a snapshot or something where there's a lot of information in the reports. Can we look at maybe doing a one-page snapshot to put in your say in the news today or something monthly?

02:42:00 Speaker 9: Obviously, that's something that we can take on notice. I think the most important part is the year-end wrap-up. Our financial performance can move during the year, as I mentioned before, depending on fees and charges and timing and staff turnover and status of projects, etc. The most important part from a financial performance perspective is the year-end wrap-up. And the team are working right at the moment through preparing the financial statements. And our independent auditors from Queensland Audit Office will be here in the next month. And then what you will see is bundled in that annual report that finance and governance bring through in October is the wrap-up in terms of where we end up at the end of the financial year. That's going to be the most important piece of financial reporting for the organisation to ensure they're affordable and published. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I'll go on first because it relates. I may have learned something new if I understood what Richard said.

02:43:00 What he said is when we receive get figures about revenue for development applications, we aren't actually getting the figure of what's being receipted over the counter or in the bank account. We're actually getting a smooth figure that in some way is adjusted by how much of that application we actually have assessed to date. Speaker 2: So generally, no, you will see what's being received. But annually, we do a calculation for the end of financial statements to determine at the 30th of June. What has been earned by Council and what is potentially refundable by Council. That adjustment gets made in June. However, I will caveat there was a very substantial development application received in June. And we took the position to not put that through because it would distort it quite significantly. So we put that to final revenue. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So it's really just that end of financial year. Correct. Speaker 2: Richard suggested that they give us a look at that quarterly. But the amount of work involved in assessing every one. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm just saying as a fellow planner, never say that planners don't earn their income.

02:44:00 Speaker 9: So, councillors, the biggest mover there is, is there likelihood any given year for us that we are receiving a very significant development application towards the end of the financial year? And that will make the difference between your DA fees. Speaker 2: Potentially, that's going to be challenged and might get reduced. We don't want to recognise that too early, particularly at the end of the year. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Yeah. Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Hello. I think you mentioned before that rates are due on the 16th of August. Is that correct? Yes. So, rate may have three more days to get the early payment discount. Yes. As a reminder, everybody. Thank you. Just looking at, similar to Councillor Stockwell's point on clarifying issues, which anyone reading the financial statements might be confused by. So, in the profit and loss statement, we have recognised you today $48,514 in terms of rates, liabilities and charges.

02:45:00 I believe that's because we issued the rate notices and we start to recognise that in July. However, we haven't yet received the cash. So, monthly? Correct. We haven't received the cash. So, at the moment, we have a lower than normal cash balance in the balance sheet, but we have a lower than normal cash balance in the balance sheet. So, by the end of August, we expect to see that shift, that the receivable reduces and the cash balance increases. Speaker 2: So, we'll see our first take of you in our cash balance in August. Councillor Wilson: Great. Thank you. That is obviously recognised at the time the rates notice goes out. For our other items in the budget, we're saying we're on track for budget or behind or ahead. Do we recognise that there are other items in the budget? Do we recognise or allocate most costs evenly over the year? Or do we expect the services to actually be? Speaker 2: It's invariable.

02:46:00 So, the larger, a lot of the business areas do profile their budgets out. Some probably in some of the smaller areas, maybe not so much. And so, I wouldn't say that they're evenly spread. They are definitely profiled. But there are probably smaller areas that maybe aren't as profiled as, say, Adrian would be when they actually . But generally, yes, we look at profiling. I think that was it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's good. If there's no other questions, would someone like to move the recommendation? Yes. Moved by Councillor Wilson, seconded by Councillor Finzel. Would you like to talk to the motion, Councillor Wilson? Anyone else wish to talk to the motion? Those in favour? That's unanimous. Can we move on to the next item? Which is? Speaker 2: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We invite Deb Iezy to the take. Yezzy. Yezzy, sorry. It's okay. Councillor Lorentson: It's on you.

6.7 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT INCLUDING Q4 OPERATIONAL PLAN 2023-24 PROGRESS REPORT ¶

▶ 02:46:39· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

02:47:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I know that. Yes. I was just doing it phonetically, wasn't I? Speaker 9: All right. Speaker 6: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And she will talk through the annual performance report, including the fourth quarter operational plan for 2023-24. Speaker 6: Okay. Thank you, Council. This report provides an overview of the organisation's performance over the 23-24 financial year. It actually builds on the quarterly report that we normally do on the progress of the operational plan. So this report does include progress and commentary against all initiatives to provide you with a fairly detailed understanding of how things have progressed and how particular projects have progressed. It also highlights our operating environment. And some of the factors that have influenced our progress. And highlights 13 initiatives, which give a sort of a spectrum of the types of projects that we work on and start both in extent and in type.

02:48:00 So over 2023-24, there were several factors in our operating environment which posed both opportunities and challenges. And I mentioned that just briefly before. These factors were things like our local government. We had a lot of political elections, which resulted in us deferring some decisions. A very hot construction sector, cost increases and skill shortages. Now, on the positive side, in response to these, we've carefully monitored our project planning. We've continued to focus on developing our capabilities, with a focus on our people, financial sustainability, our business systems and our community. And these are identified within the body of the report. It may not contain all of them. But it does actually highlight the more significant ones. Overall, we've made considerable progress in progressing the initiatives in the 23 operational plan. But also in the normal routine delivery of our business as usual services to the community. And these are highlighted in the report.

02:49:00 There are 149 initiatives listed in the operational plan. And 69% were either complete or on track, with 31% experiencing a minor or a major disruption. And these initiatives are listed in the operational plan. And a comment made against the progress against each of them. And then also overall. To give you a very good understanding across the various themes, the initiatives which are aligned to the various themes in the corporate plan. Now, when we consider these results, it's really important to note there are initiatives which are phased or planned to be undertaken across more than one financial year. And so therefore, they may not necessarily be completed in that year. There are also initiatives which have encountered disruptions, which have extended project timelines. And in these situations, they've been relisted in the new operational plan, 2425, which has already been adopted by Council. Or they've been incorporated as part of our business as usual program delivery.

02:50:00 And where this has occurred, there are actually notations against the relevant initiatives in that attachment one that I mentioned before. In addition, this report provides an update on our operational KPI. Which we routinely report on. That's they're contained in attachment two. And an update on work being undertaken to review the performance measures in the corporate plan. Including the identification of supporting indicators, which we will continue to refine and monitor. The corporate plan identified 65 performance measures, which did require us to do some unpacking of those. And we've done quite a bit of work in that space. And that work is actually identified in attachment three. We've still got some more work to do there. To clearly align those performance measures with the outcomes that we desired in the corporate plan. But that is continuing. And you'll see with, in attachment three, that we've actually identified some of the baseline data to give you an idea of how things are progressing. But again, still more work to be done in that space.

02:51:00 So councillors, that's an overview to the report. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Questions? Mayor Wilkie: There is a drop in time lost, so I'm going to move on to the next question. Very important. Probably the most important point. Looking after the health and safety of the staff. What's happened since last year to improve the health and safety of our staff? Or see that figure move in the right direction? What are we doing differently? Speaker 6: I can't answer in detail for that. I might refer that to the CEO. Or if not, if we can't, if that's okay. Or if not, you can ask for more information before you think. Speaker 7: No, I can answer that through you, Chair. We get a monthly report from our health and safety officers and coordinators. And I can say that it's due to training. It's due to more awareness. It's due to the fact that the staff are just far more conscious of safety.

02:52:00 And in doing that, then there's less injuries. Therefore, less time off for injuries. So it's just more of a concerted effort. Thank you. And we've had hundreds of days with no lost time injury over the course of the year. You know, in blocks. Where it's been fantastic. And we get that report on a monthly basis. And it's been a real bonus to us. It's not to say that injuries and accidents won't happen. But we're certainly, we're very conscious and very strong in terms of workplace health and safety for this organisation. Mayor Wilkie: Does that involve a change in the culture? Absolutely. Outside workforces. For instance, some of the older. Yeah. Speaker 7: Absolutely. Keeping an awareness of that. Keeping and making sure that we do look after our staff. But also, there's always more work to be done too. I'm not saying that we're perfect at it by any stretch. But just, you know, doing things like taking time before we actually start the project or start work. Making sure we do the checks and balances beforehand.

02:53:00 And it's showing good results. Speaker 6: In addition, I'd probably add to that is our people and culture branch has put forward some various initiatives around employee wellbeing. Focusing on our health and issues and being conscious of that. So, there is a concerted effort in that space as well. So, and when we have our appointment of our manager to the position too, which has created some stability. So, things are continuing as well. So, they're just relevant factors in thinking. Okay. Mayor Wilkie: Is demographics a factor? Are they more of a high proportion of younger people in the workforce now? Speaker 7: No, I wouldn't put it out of that. I think, again, it's more just being conscious and being, you know, having safe practices. Mayor Wilkie: Well, it's very, very important. Speaker 7: Thank you. Yeah, well, we're really happy with it. Credit the staff and credit the management of the staff as well. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of turnover, the report says high employee turnover due to competitive labour market. Yes. And recruitment challenges. We've been taking longer to recruit key people.

02:54:00 12.7% is the turnover rate over a 12-month period. How does that compare to other local governments? Is that high or standard? Speaker 6: If you look at government generally, 17% seems to be about... 17. 17% seems to be a common figure. When we have reported these, in the past, there's been a lot of discussion around, in the past, we included casuals and temporaries were included in those percentages, so that's why we thought it was just really important to note that in our permanent staff, in our turnover rates, it's actually around that 12.7% figure, so that has actually declined, so that's improved for us. But it is still increasingly hard to recruit to some positions. In finance, for example, we've been trying to recruit to an accountancy position, which we haven't been able to do, despite several rounds and things. So... You want another occupation? You can moonlight.

02:55:00 That's right. Quick wink. So there are some areas where there still are school shortages, and especially within the construction area as well, still encountering, you know, shortages in those spaces where we're competing with bigger projects that are occurring around the state as well, so here. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, Wilson. Councillor Wilson: There are a couple of initiatives that are classified as competitive initiatives, and there are some police initiatives that I would have expected to see some ongoing or notation that they've been added into the next year's fund, and maybe that's just a... I'm sorry. I won't... I know why that is. So it doesn't have to do with that. Right. So there's 2.1.2. Continue to implement the short-stay letting local law to manage the impacts of short-term letting, including increased resources towards compliance. So I know that the comment has is that the team resourcing is complete, but I would expect

02:56:00 that the initiative to continue to implement for the local law is ongoing. Speaker 6: Yeah. It is, and it may be that if it's not actually picked up as an initiative in the operational plan, it's now part of our business as usual. So while the short-stay was a new initiative and we've implemented it, it's now part of our business as usual program and the delivery of our services. So it may not be featured as a specific initiative in the operational plan, but definitely part of our ongoing service delivery. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: And that is probably the same answer for the next one. 2.1.3, which is to support... Yes. Organisations. Yeah. Speaker 6: Yeah. Definitely. And you will see normally there is something either... If it's not listed in the new operational plan, it's very... There's a similar initiative. Because the bottom line is we do continue to provide an annual program of work, and by identifying it, it allows us to feature the specific things that we're doing in that year.

02:57:00 So the operational plan is a mix of new initiatives as well as some of our program delivery. And then we highlight what we do throughout the year in our reporting to you. Yeah. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of delays, how does... How do... How do you... How do we capture the costs associated with delays, project delays? Is that captured or costed or reviewed? I'll defer that to you. It depends on what... In what... In what frame you're talking. Oh, from... You know, there's a human resource implication... Oh, okay. ...a service implication when something's delayed. And what I want to understand is how that's captured in our operational plan, and how that's communicated to the community. Speaker 7: Mm. It's not necessarily... From a human resource point of view, it's not always captured because we turn them into another project. So there's plenty of projects for them to do. So if one's delayed, we'll move our resources into another project, for project management,

02:58:00 for example. If the delay causes an increase in cost to the project itself for the delivery... Yes. ...you know, if it's financial cost, then we capture that through our budgets and through our capital works program. So that gets reported back through... If there's a cost increase. If not, we try to limit that. If there's a cost increase, then we try to limit that, or... Through other savings, or... So it doesn't necessarily get reported in the bottom line, but it is absolutely captured in our project. Capital works. Capital works. Yes. Yes. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Okay. Mayor Wilkie: Question. One of the graphs shows it looks like almost about 97% of all payments to Council are electronic. Are there any plans to make it 100% electronic? Can we give reassurances that the 3% that like to pay by cash will always be able to

02:59:00 continue to do so? Speaker 7: That's one for our... Speaker 6: That's one for our... Yeah, Director. Yeah. I know that... I can say that we have encouraged electronic payments... Yeah. ...as a service to the community. I can see that electronic... Mayor Wilkie: As long as cash payment's always an option, isn't it? Of course. Speaker 9: Through the Chair, okay. There is no intent to change our cash payment policy at this point in time. The intent of anything is to try and give a broader opportunity for different types of payment mechanisms as we... As we further progress our systems and enable people if they want to, move on to direct efforts in those type of payment arrangements. But certainly there is... There is no intent to change the type of currency in terms of cash versus online or card payments at this point. Mayor Wilkie: And further to that, the Hinterland Service Desk at the Coor library is a trial to extend the services to the Hinterland. Are you able to give us an indication of how it's...

03:00:00 How it's going? We... Is it... And how it's being received? Speaker 6: We'd have to defer to Kerri Contini because the customer experience now falls within her directory. Mayor Wilkie: Yes. Speaker 6: And I know the business pilot. So if she's online... Is Kerri online? She's... No. Oh, okay. I'd have to take that on notice. Speaker 7: My understanding is it's been reasonably successful. There hasn't been a flood of people using it, but it's certainly providing a service for the Hinterland people that need it. And I think it's been successful. We... As you know, we don't take cash through that because it's from a security and safety point of view only. No other reason. It's just that holding cash there is a risk to our staff. So... But, you know, that's something that we can look at in the future if the requirement or that, you know, the need is there. But currently, I think it's providing a service that people enjoy and it's working. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Great. Speaker 7: Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Happy to move. Move Councillor Wilkie. I think Councillor Finzel got into the seconding.

03:01:00 And... Councillor Wilkie. Mayor Wilkie: Look, thank you, Deb, for the... For the report. We always say it's exhausting just reading what happens in the course of one year. And it's amazing what a small but ambitious council and hard-working council can deliver for its community. So... We are out of total weather lines that... We are out of total weather lines that... We're going to have to set up... set the tasks and the objectives. But you and your team are the ones that have to carry it out. And we carry it out very well to a high standard. So, we owe you a debt of gratitude. So, please, on behalf of the councillors, could you pass on our... Yeah. Councillor Wilson: Thanks. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: To all the staff, to all the departments for the extremely hard work they do every Speaker 7: We've got a lot of work, as you say, and that's the kind of work that we get through, and we're very dedicated to the cause, and there's things that they'd love to be able to get to sometimes, but just can't, but on the whole, it's a very positive report, and we're doing some wonderful things for this community.

03:02:00 Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, that's great. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I also want to speak to it as well, because I know you were checking it. Firstly, the list of concisely put issues in the operating environment are really pithy, and it doesn't really, if you look at how this organisation's going and where the hard surfaces are grinding together, and you look at that list, there's no real surprises. There is nothing in there that screams out as a wonderful opportunity at the current operating environment. Other than perhaps the funding for disasters. It is all challenges. Having said that, you've identified some ways forward, which I think is really important from an organisational point of view that we do spend time on. So reading out one part, you talk about going forward, the opportunity exists to review and better define some project scopes.

03:03:00 Give greater consideration to project timeframes, or the staging of projects, and Council's resourcing capacity. And then you have mentioned this briefly, but you go on to say, I want to talk about, while the focus of the review of performance measures has been to further refine those within the corporate plan, a review of service profile for all Council services has recently been undertaken, which includes the identification of efficiency and effectiveness performance measures, which is really important at that service level. However, what we don't see in our annual report is progress towards our outcomes. And you also mentioned that. And that's, I think, the key area. If we do that project planning and the program planning better, we'll have a really clear focus on what we want to achieve, when we want to achieve it by, how we do it effectively and efficiently.

03:04:00 And there's some other measures we could also put in there in terms of what we're developing. How appropriate are the processes we're doing to achieve that outcome? Like, is our current investment of just putting away $400,000 a year for ZEN, in the right and appropriate way, or is there different ways? So, to me, that is a challenge. It's one I know that we've had the conversations about. By this time next year, I would expect this report actually to have a fair bit of information about where we're tracking on those key outcomes we've set by strategy. Not just, have we done a project or not? Has that project achieved either the intermediate outputs or the intermediate outcomes? And how's that tracking towards long-term outcomes? So, we know that what we're doing is not just timely, efficient, effective, but it's achieving the impact that we want it to. And that's the key thing for me. Speaker 6: And in response to that, one of the things that we need to further refine is that the corporate plan is a great document,

03:05:00 and it's got some goals that aren't necessarily core goals, but they are goals and there's objectives. But what we do need to just distil from that are those outcomes. And some work has been, that work has progressed. We're doing that so that we're really clear about what those outcomes are to be able to report against. So, work has started in that space. We have got to a position of a draft in that space of what those outcomes are to further support the corporate plan, but also to clarify what those outcomes are. And look, there's no doubt when you read the corporate plan that, you know, the main pieces come through. It's very much fluid. It's not laboured that way. But from a clarity point of view, I think it's important that we do actually define what those outcomes are. So, work in progress, but yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Can I just add to what Councillor Stockwell said? It would be great to also understand expenditure and to see whether our expenditure actually aligns also with our strategic priorities.

03:06:00 Yeah. Yeah, strategic priorities. Speaker 6: And that, and just to further, just to discuss that, it's, when we're talking financial sustainability going forward, so that's the link there. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Speaker 7: But certainly that's part of our budget process here. Yeah. To make sure that we do spend the money in the places that we think are our priorities. Oh, yes. That's part of that. Speaker 6: And we are looking at how we can improve this reporting. For example, we're having some discussions with the infrastructure services about, there are separate reports coming forward on, for example, how the capital program is progressing, for example, whereas it would be nice to have a complete picture in this space. So, we are looking at how we can better align that reporting as well. So, that's to come as well. Okay.

03:07:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Does anyone wish to talk to motion? Councillor Wilson, I think you moved it. Did you want to close? Speaker 6: No, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You're looking at me. Did you move it? Speaker 7: No, it was Frank. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It was Councillor Wilkie. You were the last motion. Sorry. Speaker 7: No, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Thank you. That's unanimous. Councillor Wilson: Thanks, sir. All right. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anybody think it was a long day? No. Okay. Speaking on it. Five minutes. The Minister is making his way to the table with Craig, his manager of design, and they're here to talk about the Emu Mountain Road Shared Pathway. Director Walsh: The report concerns a proposed shared pathway along Emu Mountain Road between a residence

6.8 EMU MOUNTAIN ROAD - SHARED PATHWAY ¶

▶ 03:07:20· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

03:08:00 unit outside the Shire and the Peregian Springs locality to come through to the eastern shores to actually access both the Peregian Bridge Village within Euston Shire, as well as facilities south such as Coolum Village and the Coolum State School. The need for the link is without question, it's even shown on Council's own site building and walking strategy, it's been desirable. But the options available for actual construction are being subject to ongoing discussion between Council officers and Councillors now for over two years, without a clear answer being provided. The ideal route does not have a perfect answer. So one option has a better environmental footprint, but it is less than optimal from a safety perspective, both due to the pedestrian crossing across the Emu Mountain Road, as well as a sector issue. So the option that is sought by Sunshine Coast Council has probably a more significant nature conservation footprint. On the road reserve adjacent to Noosaville National Park, it is optimal from both a

03:09:00 usability perspective, being, you know, the direct route, you know, for cyclists and walkers. Has the least crossing points at the lowest speed environment adjacent to Davidlow Way. But, you know, it's not optimal from a natural environment perspective. So we've analysed it and we consider that option 1B, as recommended by Sunshine Coast Council, is the optimal outcome. We consider the risks associated with the crossing point north of Davidlow Way around about as being part of Transport and Main Road's responsibility. De-risk it for New South Council perspective. We note that there possibly could be congestion issues associated with the Bridge and Beach roundabout. There already are. That is a long-term issue that we'll all have to work towards with TMART and so on. So that's the summary of the recommended report. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have any questions? Mayor Wilkie: Sean, could you explain the funding arrangements in terms of the build and also ongoing maintenance

03:10:00 and perpetuity? Director Walsh: Yeah. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. The proposal is to be funded by Sunshine Coast Council, but they are sending grant funding from state and federal funding partners to actually execute the works. They are prepared to execute an infrastructure agreement with New South Council because even though the route is within New South Council, it doesn't serve our residents by and large. So they propose that they will undertake the ongoing maintenance at their cost on behalf of New South Council. Mayor Wilkie: Could there be an indirect benefit for Noosa Shire residents and particularly residents living in Bridgin that more people might be accessing the village by means other than a car now? Director Walsh: Yeah. Certainly it's consistent with Council's congestion reduction program so that we have residents who live in Bridgin Breeze who want to get to Bridgin Beach Village who won't have to use their car. They can actually use a bicycle. So it actually will benefit Bridgin Beach residents as part of congestion reduction. And there may be the occasional residents who has a friend or a relative who lives in

03:11:00 Bridgin Breeze and they might want to go the other way. So from the Noosa Council perspective. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of risk, the report says the main risk at a crossing point on the northern side of David Lowe Way involves the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. Despite being considered the safest crossing point due to the lower speed environment, there are still concerns and it's listed what those concerns are. High vehicle speeds, pedestrians and cyclists may not always be visible to drivers and again a point you made, the jurisdiction is managed by TR not Council. What safety or roundabout modifications are being considered? I think there are a number of things that need to be introduced to mitigate that risk. And my other question is do the benefits outweigh the risk? I looked and did some stats at how many pedestrians were killed on our nation's roads in car accidents

03:12:00 and the numbers are really quite startling and took me back a little bit actually. One death every 66 minutes and that was in 2021. So my question is how are we going to mitigate the risk? It's not an optimal solution. What can we do? And again, do the benefits outweigh the risk? Director Walsh: So the crossing point has been chosen because it is the lower speed environment compared to any crossings on any mountain roads. So that's the first risk mitigation. The second risk mitigation is that Sunshine Coast Council and TMR are proposing an amendment to the lanes on the roundabout. To actually create a deflection or a bump out. Which will actually require vehicles to slow down to navigate the roundabout. So that's risk mitigation two. The third risk mitigation to Noosa Council is in respect to the fact it's under TMR jurisdiction

03:13:00 rather than under Noosa Council jurisdiction. So if there is an incident that it won't be ours to actually resolve. I do point out that this crossing environment on the David Lowe roundabout is not dissimilar to the crossing environment that Council is running. It meets accepted standards from TMR engineers and Sunshine Coast Council engineers. But of course, it's not without risk. So there's risk on anyone who rides anywhere, you know, or drives anywhere. But in consideration of those risk mitigations, we think it's appropriate. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. I'm happy to move it. Move Councillor Wilkie. I'll second. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think Councillor Wilkie is right. Thank you.

03:14:00 Mayor Wilkie: Thank you for the report, Shaun. This is a very important project. It represents a new level of inter-Council cooperation that places the safety of residents and children regardless of where they live. As a priority. Schoolchildren are already riding on Emu Mountain Road on their bikes or walking beside it to get to school and the village. This project will take them off the road into a safer environment to a changed northern crossing at the roundabout, which would be safer than currently where they're crossing. The risk is if we don't do it, it's highly, highly, more highly likely that something will happen. It might, it might not happen. But in my opinion, to someone who's currently using the, the roadway to access the village, the school and the coastal pathway, bike pathway, it is, there's no financial risk to Noosa Council. The project is entirely funded by Sunshine Coast Council and there will be ongoing maintenance

03:15:00 funded and provided by Sunshine Coast Council. I think it's a great, as I said, great example of inter-regional cooperation. It's the responsible and the local. It's the right thing to do. And thank you for your, your report on this, Shaun, and your advice. Councillor Wegener: It just seems like it's going to be a very nice ride, actually. And when it comes to the safety of the roundabout, we just have to learn how to drive slower, don't we? Just put, put a speed bump or a race, you know, something there so that cars like say, hey, we, we actually share the road. We have to get past this often notion in Australia that the road is for cars and not for anybody else. And that's, it's not the case. You have to share it. I just wanted to. Councillor Lorentson: I would just like to acknowledge Councillor Murray, Deputy Mayor Murray Suarez, who's sitting

03:16:00 in the gallery all day writing this report. And I want to acknowledge and thank you for all your efforts. Thank you. You've been here from day dot with this project. And it must be quite rewarding for you to see it through. So congratulations. Councillor Phillips: I'll just say one thing, very quick, short and sweet. As a police, previous police officer that's been to many accidents on that, in that stretch, in that area. Safety first, which is really exciting. And I just want to say thank you. It's exciting to see that we've put that at the forefront of our decision making. This gets up. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll say one thing. And that's it. Interestingly, when I used to do a bit of talking for the Literary Environment Lead Hub, I always used to start off with how many, how did you get to school? And did you walk?

03:17:00 Did you ride a bike? Did you get driven? Did you catch a bus? And hands down, the highest percentage who walked or rode a bike was actually Kulin High. That's because they've got very good pathways going out that way. And so this will create another opportunity for those in Fridgham Breeze to also make that trip. And it's also instructional in terms of our own pathway network. We know, if I look at the school that has the lowest, it's also the school that has the least safe connectivity for walking and cycling. And that's Good Shepherd. So it is important to look at these measures. You know, with any, crossing any arterial road network is a little bit fraught. The upside of this one also, if you like going for long rides and not packing forward along the coastal track, you can go down to Kulin, out the back of Kulin and come back through Fridgham Springs and come back this way. It makes a very nice day ride. So that's something for those who like to do long rides.

03:18:00 That's about all I'm going to say, Councillor Wilkie. Anyone else? I think everyone's had a go. Councillor Wilson, did you wish to speak? Councillor Wilson: I'll just thank you for the report and thank you to some of the taxpayers' council. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, just to reiterate everything that's been said, thank you to the staff. It's good to see that those safety risks have been mitigated to the best of our abilities. But I think the most exciting thing, apart from connectivity and safety, is the collaboration with the Sunshine Coast Council and showing that regionally we can work together to get outcomes that benefit our community. So I think that's really good. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, I'll just close by thanking Deputy Mayor Maria Suarez who's driven the project, got us to the table. So please pass on our gratitude to your staff. You've been part of that. And our best regards to your mayor and councillors. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is it possible for her to drive the pathway? Stop it. Stop that now.

03:19:00 All those in favour? That's unanimous. Okay, on a related topic. Could we have a five minute break, please? Councillor Phillips: Oh, sure. Thank you. Ten, maybe, would be fine. Speaker 7: Okay, 3.49. Speaker 10: Yeah, we'll come back at four o'clock.

03:29:00 Speaker 5: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, we are going to open the meeting back up again. Welcome back. So we are now onto the final agenda item for today. And it's the Go Noosa Transport Initiative 23-24 evaluation agenda for this week. And we have once again with us the Acting Director, Shaun and Craig, who's giving the brief overview. Director Walsh: I'll be giving the brief overview as I've drafted the report, so there's quite significant issues in the report, so lots of significant items of interest, so I'll draft it in my name. I also want to introduce Council's new Sustainable Transport Coordinator, Dr Stephanie Vallone. And while Stephanie's only been on board two weeks, I may need to defer to her on some specific technical opinions as well as to Craig as well. The report provides a very comprehensive overview of Council's Go NUSA program, which is a program to implement our transport strategy. And a key area of our transport strategy is about motor shift.

6.9 GO NOOSA TRANSPORT INITIATIVES 2023/24 EVALUATION AND 2024/25 IMPLEMENTATION ¶

▶ 03:29:15· Carried 5-1 · 3 divisions from council's minutes

03:30:00 You know, with the number of visitors and residents needing to move around our Shire, critical at holiday times, you know, private cars aren't the answer. It has to be towards buses and active transport and ferries and the like, to actually get people moving around, which is consistent with an international approach. So Council levies a transport levy upon residents, which raises about $937,000, of which we expend just over a million dollars tapping into general revenue to deliver a comprehensive suite of programs to actually work towards better congestion management and better environmental outcomes in terms of carbon emissions. The report, first of all, goes through the sort of the more routine or the everyday matters, which is, you know, providing public transport to some of the more remote communities, such as Boring Point in Kin Kin, through the Boring Point Taxi Link Service and the Council Cab Service, which are those communities that don't have any access to public transport at the moment. The report also goes through the more routine Go NUSA Weekends program,

03:31:00 which is free buses on the weekend to get people moving around, particularly focused at residents on weekends. And then the report goes through some of the behavioural train initiatives, about particularly the Go NUSA Schools program, which is really aimed at congestion reduction around our schools, because as we're all aware on our non-peak holiday times, the worst congestion we experience in Noosa is around our schools at Sunshine Beach, Noosaville, Tewantin and Cooroy. And that's largely due to people dropping off students in private cars. And we know that when we don't have holidays or we don't have school on, those congestion problems actually resolve themselves. The report then also outlines a new initiative, which is the car park tech trial, which is funded through the levy. This is the first time that we've actually done a comprehensive examination of the use of car parks in and around the Main Beach Precinct, using new technology and actually helping to direct people actually using those car parks

03:32:00 and getting an indication of how long they park and where they park and what the supply capacity is. And that's fundamental data to actually help prepare a parking management plan. The report also goes into the overall Go NUSA free holiday bus program, which includes council paying for additional bus services, which are particularly targeted towards people parking in satellite car parking stations and changing onto buses and coming into the Main Beach Precinct. The report goes into more routine matters such as traffic control at Main Beach, trying to get people moving around the roundabouts. And then really then really goes into a couple of really specific things concerning the Main Beach people drop off zone and NUSA Heads Lions Park. Now these are matters which have created significant community discussion and debate and that's why they're being prioritised as separate sections in the report. And the report recommends that consistent with previous resolutions

03:33:00 we don't proceed with use of the temporary overflow NUSA Head Lions Park for car parking. And it does recommend we proceed with the use of the Main Beach drop off zone because it provides significant operational benefit to actually keep the Main Beach Precinct safe and also reduce traffic congestion at a critical point at Haston Street. I know this will be subject to significant council discussion and debate and we'll open to your questions. Councillor Lorentson: I'd like to move an alternate action through the Chair. Sure. Council A, note the report by the Acting Director Infrastructure Services to the general meeting dated 12th of August regarding the Go NUSA initiatives. B, delegate authority to the CEO to approve the ongoing implementation of the Go NUSA initiatives as outlined in this report subject to Council's budget processes. C, note the proposal for Council offices. To undertake a review of the Boring Point FlexiLink and Council CAB services

03:34:00 and report back to Council. D, approve the use of the NUSA Heads Lions Park for additional overflow parking in the period from Saturday 14th of December 2024 to Tuesday 28th of January 2025 and Saturday 2nd of April 2025 to Monday 21 April 2025 by the Tewantin NUSA Lions Club at their discretion and communicate these intentions with the Queensland Department of Resources. E, seek community feedback on the future use of the park. F, approve the temporary use of the Main Beach Local Government Reserve adjacent to the NUSA Heads Surf Club as a Main Beach drop-off zone for the peak Christmas, New Year's Eve two-week period, including drop-off, pick-up, disability permit holders, scooter, motorbike, council lifeguards, emergency service vehicles, New Year's Eve rapid response area

03:35:00 and additional facilities such as waste collection, temporary toilet block, etc. G, note that a parking management plan including a local parking plan for NUSA Heads is under preparation and a movement and place study is proposed for the 2025-26 financial year. That closely considers car parking and circulation in the Main Beach locality including future use of the NUSA Heads Lions Park, the NUSA Heads bus station, the Mace car park and the Main Beach Local Government Reserve which will holistically consider the uses, design and circulation within these critical spaces for NUSA Heads and will be subject to community consultation. Engagement. H, note that Council's resolution on 13 September 2021 that allowed the concept of a one-way local loop with bus priority lane

03:36:00 from NUSA Drive to NUSA Parade be referred to a Council workshop to encourage bus usage and frequency. And that's all. I don't want to add I. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Just a question, Amelia. Number H. Yes. Note that Council's resolution on 13 September 2021 would the word allowed be synonymous in your intention to referred? Councillor Lorentson: Referred. Excuse me. That referred the concept. It's just simply and I really want to make clear my intention with that noting. It's only a noting recommendation. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: The other question I had, Amelia, was Park D, Tewantin NUSA Lions Club, at their discretion. So the three words, at their discretion. Director Walsh: Through the Chair, I can probably respond to that.

03:37:00 So the Tewantin NUSA Lions Club have provided a proposal, you know, to actually use the park. And there are some days they don't use it for car parking, you know, because it's raining or wet or the like. Yes. Or they might have staffing issues or we might have an operational issue that we can't allow them to use it. So, and there's an ongoing, as part of the operating arrangements, there's a daily conversation about the operation of the park. Yep. So it's really, rather than putting the whole of the proposal in there, it's really consistent with the proposal by Tewantin NUSA Lions Club. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Speaker 7: So it's for you, Chair, as well. It could be at their discretion and in agreement with Council. Yep. That's a good point. Okay. Councillor Wilson: I want to raise some minor amendments to Part D of that motion, just to get a bit more of that detail in that wording. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So just before you brought that in, that was a CEO's suggestion. It was just my suggestion. We don't put that in. Oh, okay. Sorry. Until it's elected.

03:38:00 You've got a wheel train. Councillor Wilson, back to you. Councillor Wilson: Are we able to pull those up as well? We'll see if we can move an amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, it hasn't been seconded. So, Councillor Wilson, you can suggest to the mover that you, some amendments, either that or you could move an amendment after it has been seconded. Councillor Finzel: And then you add your bit after that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Generally, if it's just clarification and wording, you do it now, but if it's change in any degree of substance, then you move it as an amendment. Councillor Wilson: I can't find it. It was basically to give the CEO authority to negotiate any fees, just for transparency of the step of fees. And the second one was that any future kind of decisions around this part be subject to the Arts Council's decision.

03:39:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, that would be an amendment to the motion once it's moved. Yes. Councillor Phillips: Can I please ask a question? If I second this motion, is that saying we're not asking questions? Is that... No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I don't want to make the same... If you had seconded it already, then we'd have to go straight to Councillor Lorentson's first speech and then questions come later. If you'd like to second it... Can I second the motion so I don't get missed? Councillor Lorentson: I'll start first with H, and again, just a noting report. I just believe it's important to formally note the Local Loop Initiative on the resolution in Council, 13th of September, 21, and have it recorded in Council meeting records. Documenting this, I believe, will ensure that it's recorded and that the initiative is recognised and potentially considered

03:40:00 in our ongoing discussions and planning. To D and E, I'll speak to both of those now. Speaker 7: Do we want to ask questions first? I'm comfortable with that. Oh, thank you. In terms of taking that resolution to our meeting in Council, just to... I appreciate that and I respected your advice, Larry, beforehand. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Thank you. Since 2021, I've been advocating opening Lyons Park for paid parking during long weekends and school holidays on behalf of the Tawantin Noosa Lyons Club, our residents and our local businesses. We all know the intense pressure holiday periods place on our infrastructure, especially parking. Removing 239 parking spots during this period at specific times, in my opinion, would only worsen the situation.

03:41:00 Further, the report that we've got in front of us, and I'll ask questions to understand exactly what the people, the main beach drop-off zone trial, how many car vehicles... Are displaced. Are displaced. But my understanding is... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Excuse me, Councillor Lorentson, if you start to ask questions, that means you've stopped talking to your motion, so you either have to continue to talk to your motion... Or ask a question. Councillor Lorentson: Or ask a question. So, further, the report recommends that approving the temporary use of the main beach drop-off zone, which will, again, reduce some prime parking spaces for the community, so allowing car parking at Lyons Park will help mitigate this loss. The motion in front of you requests that holiday parking be continued in the Lyons Park during Christmas as Easter, as has been the practice for the Lyons Club for the past 20 years. A total of 30 days of car parking is requested only.

03:42:00 Further, the motion requests that any decision regarding the future use of Lyons Park undergo public consultation to allow the community to express its views. Arguably, Lyons Park might not be the perfect long-term solution, but it offers a practical option for now, for the present. The Noosa Shire Local Economic Plan emphasises the importance of considering the needs of our local business community within our transport strategy. It's crucial that we ensure that our essential infrastructure meets the needs of our residents, businesses and visitors. For over 20 years, the Lyons Club have managed parking during the Easter and Christmas school holidays. The report highlights some stats which I'd like to present here today. Between 2018 and 2019, the Lyons Club volunteers raised over $1 million

03:43:00 and parked 50,728 cars. The Noosa Lyons Club fundraising efforts directly support community projects such as the All Access Beach Mat at Noosa Main Beach, the Seahorse Snipper Program, personal care packs for those in need, and sponsorships for many of our local sporting organisations. They sponsor Red Kite Charity, our youth, and the Lyons Mobility Foundation, just to name a few. Managing the car parking at Lyons Park represents the Lyons Club's largest contribution to its fundraising efforts, and we cannot simply cut off their primary source of fundraising without first consulting with the community. We made a promise to the Lyons, and we made a promise to our community in March 2023. In March 2023, Council decided by resolution to consider public consultation

03:44:00 on the issue of paid parking during long weekends and school holidays, and to seek community feedback on the future use of the Lyons car parking. We promised to consult the community, but for reasons that are already stated in the plan, it hasn't happened yet. Therefore, it's only right to allow car parking during the Christmas New Year period in 2025 and Easter, preserving a Lyons Club 20 year tradition. We must then commit to consult with the community, as we promised back in March 2023. Until then, we must maintain the tradition and not make any decisions. To do otherwise, in my opinion, would be neither equitable nor fair. We serve the community and they should have a say in the future on the park. Recent feedback on the Noosaville foreshore infrastructure management plan,

03:45:00 the river plan, and feedback on the people's park has clarified that the community does value its parking spaces. We must therefore commit to consultation before deciding about the park's future and not make that decision around the table. We need to understand and balance the broader Noosa community's need for access to public parkland, with the request for paid parking on this reserve. But we can't do this without consulting with the community first. I've spoken with Michael Roach, President of the Lyons Club, and past President Ian Glew, who are both with us today. They have emphasised that without parking, the community and local businesses will suffer. As they pointed out, buses aren't always practical for everyone, particularly those with prams, young children, and those with beach gear, surfboards, trolleys, beach toys. We need to consider and understand the impact of losing 239 parking spots on everyone.

03:46:00 What is the cost to residents? What is the cost to businesses? Who loses out if we leave this space unused? And what about our community? What is the cost to the community which directly benefits from the funds raised by the Lyons Club? What are the unintended consequences? Where will the cars go? Will there be an overflow of parking in residential areas along Noosa Parade? Will there be more competition for the already limited parking spaces? And what will be the impact on traffic? How will this affect Hastings Street workers, the lifeguards, the volunteers? Again, my question, who suffers? And why? Is it okay to allow Lyons Park to be used for events like Noosa? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I request, through the Chair, some consideration given how important Councillor Lorentson: and significant this matter is. I need one paragraph. Thank you. I'm happy to continue. Mayor Wilkie: I'm happy to continue. Councillor Lorentson: Again, who suffers? Why is it okay to allow Lyons Park to be used for events like the Noosa Tri,

03:47:00 car shows, and it's not okay for community service? And I will reference also the cost to the businesses on Hastings Street, which pay premium rent and rely on peak holiday sales for the profitability and survival. I have a letter of support from the Hastings Street Association advocating for the Tewantin Noosa Lyons Club to reopen the paid parking during these crucial times to help support the Lyons Club fundraising. And they've also requested thorough community consultation regarding the park's future use. Councillors, the 30 days that have been requested in this motion for paid parking are charged by the Tewantin Noosa Lyons Club, which allow the Tewantin Noosa Lyons Club to perform community service, unpaid work that benefits others. By supporting this motion, we preserve a 20-year Lyons Club tradition. I ask that you support the motion in front of us.

03:48:00 I'll move amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Are we right for the amendment? All right. Mayor Wilkie: Change to item D to be changed to read, but note that as Council has yet to conduct community engagement specifically on the future use of Noosa Heads Lyons Park Reserve during peak periods as per the motion on March 16, 2023, approve the use of the reserve for additional overflow parking in the period from Saturday, 4th of December to Tuesday, 28th of January, 2025, and Saturday, 2nd of April, 2025 to Monday, 21st of April, 2025. By the Tewantin Noosa Lyons Club at their discretion, I communicate these intentions with the Department of Resources. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We have a seconder for that amendment. Councillor Wegener got your hand up first.

03:49:00 Councillor Wilkie, you have the floor. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, thank you. Look, in March 2023, the decision to discontinue the parking in Noosa Heads Lyons Park for school holidays and long weekends was based on this motion previously to allow it during the COVID declaration only. We were honouring. We were honouring the intention of a motion and a resolution of this council. What we're doing here today by continuing parking in Lyons Park until we've had community consultation specifically on the future use of Noosa Heads Lyons Park during peak periods is honouring what we had in the motion on March 16, 2023. We don't make changes without community consultation. Even though, as the report states, during the first phase of the destination management plan, there was a general sentiment that green space not be used for car parking as

03:50:00 a principle. We hear that, but specifically for the Lyons Park, we haven't done specific consultation on that. And I think we have an obligation to honour what we said we'd do in the motion on March 16, 2023. Now, discussions about how much longer car parking can continue there, given the independent engineers report about it, creating congestion, adding to traffic congestion and so on and so forth, I'll say for the, when we debate the motion itself, but this is about honouring what we told the community we would do. I'm hoping you'll support the amendment. It makes it clear why we're allowing car parking in the Lyons Park. I'm hoping you'll support the amendment. To continue this Christmas and Easter. I hope you'll support the amendment.

03:51:00 Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. I just have a question with the Tewantin Noosa Lyons Club at their discretion and communicate these intentions with Queensland Department of Resources. Does that mean there's going to be a change in the process where Council doesn't manage any of that funding? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Finzel. Sorry. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Finzel. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, I'm asking through the Chair. Yeah, well, Councillor, you're talking to the original motion, not to the amendment. So that would be a question once we've finished dealing with this amendment. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. I'm happy to support the motion of the amendment in front of us. There will be, and I think it just makes it clear why there is a motion in front of us to approve the overflow parking for the Christmas period, and it is consistent. Thank you. Thank you. And we will be happy to be in touch with you with our motion on March 2023. So I'm happy with the additional words. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And Councillor Wilson, you wanted to talk to it?

03:52:00 Councillor Wilson: No, I put my amendments on second after. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, so you have one amendment at a time. Councillor Phillips: I have a question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sure. Councillor Phillips: Can I ask specifically what the community engagement will look like? Because it doesn't... Mayor Wilkie: We don't know yet. Shaun. Director Walsh: Through the Chair. Okay, another art of the resolution is actually the idea of a movement and space of place study. It actually looks at this headlines park, the bus station, and the initial work on the bus station indicates a very wasteful facility with unnecessary circulation, if that's, you know, the ugly structure which come into Hastings Street, the nice car park, and then also the main beach reserve. So the best solution to this overall area is actually looking at the whole list of that, and actually figuring out what is the best circulation, what is the best parking, what is the best places for buses to go, what is the best interface with the main beach. We can't solve one without the other. And then, you know, as a result, the wasteful use of land around the Nooseheads bus station, there's actually land to be liberated that could be repurposed for community and parking or other purposes. So the forecast

03:53:00 is that that would need to have the land to take an engagement process and get all the stakeholders involved. Do you want to add anything to that, Chris? Speaker 11: No, it's also looking at space for people as well. Yeah, yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll speak to the motion, because I don't agree with the amendment. I don't agree with the supposition that we haven't discharged our responsibilities that we did in March 16, if my recollection of events is correct. And my recollection of events is that that particular report referred to that this would occur as part of the destination management planning process. Now, what did the destination management plan discussion paper say? It said under the total parking congestion, there are approximately 1,700 car parkings in the area, and there are about 400 car parks in the Hastings Street precinct. Adding additional parking spaces in high use areas has failed to minimise traffic congestion. Parking spaces are costly and paid for by residents. It then went on to list scenarios, and the concept of not doing

03:54:00 anything was to do nothing. Then the steady state current scenario was open space slash parks in highly congested areas not utilised for parking. That was considered to be well-known. In fact, less than 20 per cent of the people supported that. Two thirds of the population wants us to go further. Two thirds of people, when we asked what they want for the future of that area, not only didn't want parking in the green space, they wanted us to do more to reduce parking congestion. So you can't tell me we haven't honoured it. It's important also to note that this is not the first time we asked in general terms. Protection of open spaces from being used for car parking is a community priority. This is in the destination management plan. That's what we went out to the community with. And why did we say that was a priority? Because that's what the community told us when we did the Noosa Shire liveability study. So I don't think we can hide behind the fact that we haven't asked specifically

03:55:00 about Lyons Park, because everyone knows what they were talking about. There's not more parks in Hastings Street that are used for car parking. The community has loudly and clearly told us where they want to go. And it's not about putting cars in recreational areas. So I won't support the amendment. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question? Is the destination management plan in draft form? Has it gone out to community consultation? And has it been ratified by hold council? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I can answer that. No, the discussion paper where we put the scenarios has gone out. And the statistics I'm using it. It's in the report from staff about the results of that community consultation. Councillor Phillips: Can I please ask you to clarify what you mean by everyone knows, given the past lot of consultation we've had over the last topical reports before us would indicate that not everyone knows?

03:56:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well, if it's following a sentence that says 1700 car parks in Hastings Street Precinct, and then it talks about additional parking space in high-use areas. And then it talks about protection of open space from being used for car parking as a community priority. I think the logic is fairly clear. But what we're asking people, we're asking people, do you think we should be putting car parking into open space in the Hastings Street Precinct? I think it's fairly clear. Councillor Phillips: And my question is clear to you or clear to community? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I would think clear to the people who filled out that response. And there's quite a lot. Thank you. Thank you. But that's my view. Obviously, Councillor Wilkie has a different view. But that's my view. My view is the community has on a number of occasions indicated very strongly what their preference is. And I understand that there's a balancing one of a petition where people said they wanted the reverse to be the case. And I suppose answering the question is what

03:57:00 now? They'll not answer the question. I'll wait till next time. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Thank you. I just have a question then through the Chair of Council on Wilkie then. Council has yet to conduct a community engagement specifically for the future use in Noosa Heads. When do you propose that might be, if it's specifically for that, given we've already done some engagement and results back from the liveability, given our comms program, we've got a heavy schedule, just given we've supported that and we've, you know, given we've supported that and we've said, you know, in your words, let's take a pause, let's finish what we've started, which we, you know, that's your mandate as a leader. Where do you envisage we're going to put this community engagement so that it is meaningful and it does give us data back that is, you

03:58:00 know, clear, that we've engaged, you know, in the right manner to elicit the responses from the community that we're seeking to inform this decision? Mayor Wilkie: Awesome. Thank you. I'll just make a point that in the body of the motion, this reinforces and spells out part E of the motion that says we need to conduct community consultation on the future uses of the park. Yeah. This echoes that. Yeah. In terms of when and where that consultation is going to happen, Shaun made some suggestions. I would say it would be a council group decision when it comes to, you know, when it comes to spacing out the community consultation. And so we haven't had that discussion yet. We haven't had that internal briefing yet, but we know it has to happen. That's the imperative. What, by agreeing to the motion and this amendment, you're saying to the community, we're not

03:59:00 going to make any final decision on the future of the Noosa Heads, uses of the Noosa Heads Lions Park until we've had some form of community consultation specifically on the future uses of the Lions Park, as we promised. Because I have a different view. I don't believe that we specifically have. We've had general consultation in phase one of the DMP about use of green spaces. We've got feedback saying that green spaces ought not to be used as car parks. But my belief is we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard in this current climate and have specific consultation on the future uses of the Lions Park. But what form that may take, staff will make some suggestions and every councillor's input will be critical to that. What you're agreeing to is the principle. Yeah, I hear the principle. But in terms of the detail of when it's going to happen, Karen, I can't answer that at the

04:00:00 moment. But it has to happen, in my view. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. So then I guess that's a question through the chair to the CEO. I support the intent. But in terms of staff and impacts, we've had a lot of debate and extra meetings and things to address our meaningful communication with the community, which I highly value and appreciate. In your opinion, how do you think this is going to affect your staff? It's brought the executive committee to the table that have actually identified some significant impacts and issues. And I want to ensure that when we do go out to community engagement, that it is meaningful and we support that process that is positive. We don't want to do it, you know, a half-hearted approach. How do you think that is going to go through your staff? Director Walsh: Through the chair. So the report and the recommendation of references are financial year 25, 26. And it will occur after the Noosaville Portial Infrastructure Master Plan. So that's in terms of chronology of when we'd start that process within existing resources.

04:01:00 And we have capacity if we sequence it in that way. Okay. Councillor Phillips: Can I speak to the motion? You may. No problem. Speaker 7: Sorry. Sorry. That's okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Now I'll have Councillor Phillips first. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. I just want to support the amendment and the motion on the basis, in my opinion, that the Tewantin Noose Alliance Club provide a fundamentally, words can't describe, support for our local staff. And therefore, until I know more, I support this motion. Speaker 10: So the next stage is at the DMP. As you rightly said, it was identified as a priority in the DMP not to use green spaces. But if we've learned anything from the Portial Master Plan is that what we say and what

04:02:00 we mean may not always be the same thing. So the intent of the Tewantin Noose Alliance Club is to make sure that it's a priority in the DMP is that we actually test the scenarios, the pros and cons, to get a more clear direction on what exactly. So if you're saying no, then this is what happens. Are you still saying no? So it's that push and pull. And we're scheduled to go out at this stage, subject to councillor's endorsement, in November. So we'll be asking more pointed, yin and yang questions of the community to get their actual response. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's good clarification. So November is the answer to your question, councillor Finzel. Speaker 10: Yes. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone wish to talk to the motion? Amendment. No? That's it? Amendment. Amended. It is the amended. No? Would you like to close, councillor Wilkie? Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Look, this doesn't change the intent of the motion that was moved by councillor Lorentson

04:03:00 or seconded by councillor Phillips. It just spells out the reason why more community consultation is required in this instance. And as I said before, in this age where people want to be consulted clearly about and they want to know when consultation is happening, they want to know what it's about, and we have to be, we've heard the anxiety that consultation heralding any sort of change is causing in the community. We need to heed that and hold ourselves to a higher standard in terms of the way we honour our motions and also what we put out to community in terms of the consultation, the structure of the consultation. We have to spell it out really clearly so there's no grey areas. If we were to just assume that everyone thought we meant the Lions Park by saying green spaces

04:04:00 ought not to be used for car parks, which is the principle I support. But if we just proceeded on the basis and changed the use of the Lions Park on the basis of that, I think we're, I couldn't do it. I couldn't do it in this current climate and also knowing what the original motion was back in March 2023. And it goes back to the reason why we discontinued parking in the Lions Park over school holidays because it was a motion that that would end once the COVID declaration was over. So it's the same principle applies. That's it. I think I've said enough. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the amendments. Those in favour of the amendment. So that's Council Wilson, Wilkie, Phillips, Wagner, Finzel and Lorenton. And against? That would be Stockwell. The amendment becomes the motion.

04:05:00 Council Wilson. Wilson, you are now open to move further amendments. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. That's a couple of little details to add also to item D, which I don't think in any way negates what Council has already placed. And that's just two points to authorise the CEO to negotiate fees. And number two, to note that usage post April 2025 holiday period is to be determined by Council's parking requirements. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think we need a seconder. Would anyone like to second? I'll second that. Councillor Wegener. Now you may speak first. Councillor Wilson: So the first one is really about transparency for the community. So it is noted in this report that the, at the moment, all our money that comes from the $20 parking fees per day is divided 60% to the Lions, 40% to Council. But I think Council and Coors are constantly maintaining that plan.

04:06:00 So I think we need a seconder. There's also an agreement that on rainy days, which last summer we had lots of, that Council pays the Lions $1,600 per day, even if there's no cars parked there. And I think that's something that we might want to think about if we were to continue this use of the car park. So that's just to make sure that that doesn't necessarily just roll over on the current terms, but that we get Council to really appreciate that. The second one is that in the last few months, we've been hearing about initiatives on transport and parking have been delayed due to lack of resources. We're now very lucky to have an expert on staff. And I think it's prudent to give time for due process before making decisions on this one car park in isolation, when we're committed to preparing Council's parking management plan and anything that we raise as part of that parking management plan. We'll have community consultation. But for the whole area, just not looking at that parking isolation.

04:07:00 So I just think it's important that we kind of consider that bigger picture for the whole beach area, rather than sticking out long. Councillor Lorentson: Question to the staff. The original motion has a recommendation to note that a parking management plan, including a local parking plan for Noosa Heads, is under preparation and a movement of the council in place study is proposed for 2025. That closely considers car parking and circulation in the main beach locality, including future use of the Noosa Heads Lions Park, the Noosa Heads bus station, the Mace car park, and the main beach local government reserve, which will holistically consider the uses, design and circulation within these critical spaces for Noosa Heads and will be subject to community engagement. My question is, does Councillor Wilson's amendment. Sorry. Second amendment. Is that captured under that recommendation?

04:08:00 Director Walsh: Yes, it is. And I'm also concerned for just treating Noosa Head Lions Park in isolation for a parking management plan. Because we need to. Now, some ideas, like, you know, could the main beach reserve 42 car parking spaces be relocated, you know, to part of the Noosa Head Lions Park? That there's a trade off in terms of open space. How we can condense the bus station or actually liberate space, which might provide, you know, better drop off facilities for everyone there. So I'm just concerned by just looking at one aspect of it, which is, you know, timed parking, you know, location of car parks. We're actually not engaging in the broader topic about the way all those spaces are used. So my recommendation would be to defer to the existing motion rather than point two on that. Councillor Wegener: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So it's been moved and seconded. Would you like to, the Council, to consider removal item two, or? Yes. So is everyone happy if we remove item two, because we believe it's already covered in

04:09:00 the substantive motion? Speaker 6: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The seconder. Speaker 6: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. So that becomes the motion, the amendment. Anyone else like to speak to it? Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to it. The motion in front of us is for this Christmas and this Easter. That's it. 30 days. At the moment, I think the arrangement is 60, 40% with the Lions' Club. And where I'm sitting, given that there's uncertainty what the future use is, that's going to come out to public consultation, I probably would sit comfortable to say, yes, we're going to allow the current existing ratio to sit as is. Again, understanding that there is no certainty whether this is going to be a continued practice or not, and understanding that every cent of the Lions' raise comes back to the

04:10:00 community. This is not a commercial venture. This is a community service. A bunch of volunteers who give up 8 o'clock in the morning till 5 o'clock in the morning or 4 o'clock at night, I go and visit them. And there's the same people, seven, eight days, who are probably the best steward and welcoming committee to our visitors that I've ever seen. You feel loved when you walk through that door. And I think that's why the Lions' Club are so loved. So I am not going to support this. I think this is quite, this is a really good amendment, Nicola. But let's consider it when we understand what the future use is. This is one of 30 days. And we've put the Lions' Club under a little bit of stress. I just think it's the right thing to just continue, as we have agreed, at a 60-40 for

04:11:00 these 30 days only. Mayor Wilkie: Look, just listening to the comments, very original, I'm going to support it because within that is the commitment. It's the capacity for the CEO and the Tewantin Lions' Club members to have a discussion about whether they want an increase or not or whether they want to keep it the same. There's no implied predetermination that we're going to decrease the fees or anything. It keeps it open and it gives latitude to both parties to arrive at an agreeable outcome. So I support it. In principle, I think the CEO ought to be able to negotiate with the Tewantin Lions' Alliance about what their financial arrangements ought to be. It just gives them more latitude. All parties more latitude. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question through the CEO? Is it likely that Council would agree to more than 60-40%?

04:12:00 Mayor Wilkie: I think that's a bit premature. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, no. They have already undergone negotiations and I just wanted, when we negotiated the 60-40%, that is after March. That's the past. Speaker 7: As I understand, this agreement's finished because we weren't going to use this park again. So it's, everything's back on the table. Not to say that we wouldn't do 60-40%, but I'm saying it's a new negotiation. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You get to finish if you've got a question. Councillor Wilson: All right. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else wish to talk? I'll leave it to you, Councillor Wilson, to pose if you feel so. No, that's fine. Councillor Phillips: That's fine. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: The main reason I've raised this really is because for the last year, Lions took, were able to make $19,000 roughly from this and Council made $20,000.

04:13:00 I'm just worried about there's a risk that if we get lots more rainy days in the next season, that we're still going to be able to do that. If we end up paying that $1,600 per rainy day, we may end up having some sort of deficit as a result, which then would be kind of quite a risk that we're not using. Councillor Phillips: I have a question now. Sorry. Because you prompted it. No. No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Sorry. Councillor Phillips: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Good point. So those in favour of the amendment? Those against? Oh, sorry. I didn't read out the names. It was Wilson, Wilkie, Wegener, Finzel and Stockwell were four and against was Phillips and Lorentson. So that now becomes part of the substantive motion. I have a question and I'm looking at the staff present and Craig, you may have been the only one there and you may not have been involved. I believe it was 2019 where the State Department of Natural Resources wrote us a letter and

04:14:00 clearly identified that in the amendment. In their opinion, car parking in the Moosehead Alliance Park was an inconsistent use and they wouldn't approve it going forward. Is that correct? Speaker 7: That's correct. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So. Director Walsh: Through the Chair, there's actually been some very recent amendments to the Land Act. I'm aware of that. I didn't ask that question. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: So I'll ask the question. Through the staff, there has been amendments through the Land Act and the onus, I believe, is being placed now on Council to manage the land appropriately on the basis that it will not affect a public interest. Can I ask the staff to expand on that? Director Walsh: Yeah. So it is very recent amendments and it's untested, if you like. That's how hot it is in the press. But they've very clearly stated that they would desire Council to do something about the use of, you know, uses within, you know, reserves. It's no longer governed by what the reserve status is, a recreation reserve.

04:15:00 But if Council wants to approve an inconsistent use, it should go down an engagement process, you know, with the general public and ideally have what's called a land management plan under the Land Act that expresses those purposes. I think in this context, because it has been temporarily used as a temporary car park, you know, for 20 years, you know, over the Christmas period, and there is an intention to actually engage the community, I think it sort of passes muster in terms of being a fair interpretation of the Act, but I just want to stress it is untested. But I think that intention to engage with the community, you know, is appropriate. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sure. Okay. We're back to the substantive motion. Council Lawrenson has spoken to it. I believe we went straight into amendments after that. So everyone else can speak to it. Councillor Finzel: Coming back to that original question, I'm interested then in that it's Park D with the Noosa Tewantin Lions Club at their discretion and communicate these intentions with the Queensland Department of Resources.

04:16:00 So I'm a little bit conflicted on that because I'm hearing they've said council takes the lead, then we're saying Noosa Lion Club, they communicate directly with Queensland Department of Resources. I just want clarification on that process. Director Walsh: So on the err on the side of the portion, council would write to the department on behalf and say that, you know, that subject to council resolution intends to use it temporarily again as a temporary car park, but committing to a future more formal engagement process. So we would undertake that. Mayor Wilkie: So I guess... The discretion is if it's a wet day or there's people not available, the discretion is whether they open or close on a particular day. Councillor Finzel: Okay, so based on that, I guess that's back to Councillor Morristead, if she's happy with that word and how it reads, I just see it as a change.

04:17:00 Councillor Lorentson: For clarity, if you want to add, at their discretion and that council communicate these intentions with the Queensland Department of Resources to make that clear. Yeah, I think that it would. I'm happy with that. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is everyone else happy with that clarification being added in? Yes. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So have you got a question? Councillor Lorentson: I've got questions, yeah. In terms of the... So we're talking Lawrence Cotter. I want to go back to the main beach drop-off zone. I'd like to understand what is the total loss or gain of particular parking spaces. There's gains, I think, in bicycles, scooters, disability, lifeguards. I'd like to understand what is the loss, what's the gain in particular parking spaces. And how does that compare to the last trial? Director Walsh: So there's 42 car parking spaces within the main beach local government reserve. Councillor Lorentson: And I think there's three disabled car parking spaces.

04:18:00 Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Director Walsh: Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Two more. Director Walsh: Three. Three. So last year we removed the car parking spaces, but we provided four disabled car parking spaces. And significant areas are scooter and bicycle parking. If council endorsed this proposal, we would actually come back with a plan that actually helps us with the utility factors, which is the drop-off zone, disabled parking, scooter parking, and cycle parking, and explore the provision of temporary toilets. So we're focusing more on the utility and the functionality of the space and making it a very useful place for people to exchange goods and people at the beach interface and make their beachfront visit much more practical. Councillor Lorentson: I've been toying with you with the idea of starting the trial at 9 o'clock. And I respect that. I respect the reasons why it can't happen. It's not logistically sort of possible. What I've been thinking, because I think one of the biggest criticisms was that we have

04:19:00 a community that wake up at 4 or 5 o'clock most mornings. They swim. They run. I know elderly, you know, six, I won't call elderly 60, but over 70-year-olds who ride skis. And it was a real nuisance to have to park at the police beat and cross the road with these massive surfclubs. Racing males. I don't know if you've ever carried a racing male. Yes. Hello. Yes, you have. Excuse me. So I've been giving it a lot of thought because I really would love to return the car park to locals or visitors or whoever. But open that up. According to her? The 9 till 3 period. Again, I understand the reasons. Okay. My question is, the lifeguard patrols start at 7 o'clock every morning. Can you consider maybe allowing those lifeguard allocated car parking spaces, say from before

04:20:00 6 o'clock to our residents, for those who do wake up at 4 o'clock during Christmas period, go out for a surf run? And there's lots of them. I'm just trying to think of a way to allow them car parking space at a time that no one uses the park. I was there during that trial period and it was busy. I'm just talking to you now that you've asked the question. Director Walsh: Can we have it from you? Councillor Lorentson: Excuse me. Thank you. Back to you. Director Walsh: So the only point I'll make about that location where the life-saving spaces are is that that critical interface between the public and the beach. And we already have safety issues with vehicles moving around in that area, particularly when we have large crowds of people. So the Surf Life Savers are a responsible entity and they drive through the space slowly and move to their particular places. If we actually allow less qualified or less considerate people to use their parking spaces,

04:21:00 I think we are not fulfilling the overall intent of the space, which is to make it safer for everyone. And there's also the opportunity for these people who have their surfskis to actually drive into the drop-off zone, unload the surfski, and we can explore the availability of staff there to meet them, hold the surfski available for them while they go and park. So if you think about the idea of it being a concierge or a drop-off service, let's explore that and embed that in because we usually have staff available at that time anyway setting up, cleaning the site and making it available. And maybe there's some sort of, you know, if you think about a hotel foyer and the entry to the beach, maybe that's something we can definitely explore. Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. Councillor Wegener: I think the other concern would be the distinction between the local and the tourist and how you verify that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: At this stage we can't do that without number plate recognition. Councillor Phillips: Councillor Phillips? A couple of questions please, just in relation to the staff assisting with a surfski. Are we not then kind of looking at how to lift it and all these other extra safety

04:22:00 considerations on staff when their responsibility isn't probably to hold someone's property while they go and park? My second part of that question, which is that given we've only had the park for one year, is this not the time to negotiate the times and see if, as Councillor Lorentson has asked, that the times have changed? Is this the time to negotiate the time changes for this year given it's the second time until we get it right? Director Walsh: So the problem is logistically, you know, moving all the objects and moving them around to change from a drop off zone to a gathering space and the like. And the deployment of a large amount of council staff and plant and equipment to do that. Christmas, New Year is an incredibly busy period and we might need those staff to be deployed to other sites and they have other priorities they're attending to. And also that transition period of where you're getting people to park and then they have

04:23:00 to move out, you know, it could be a two hour delay. And that's at the peak time of arrival where people need to drop off and pick up. And then I'm also concerned that if someone doesn't come back in to collect their car then we have to tow it. And the overall reputational damage associated with that, even with our best efforts of communication when we set up this zone, I think we still had three cars that had to be towed at the start of it. So because they might be visitors or the like. So it's, you know, it's not an easy thing that you can swap in and out of easily to actually allow parking for locals up until 9am and then transition across. I can't see how we could do that within available resources and staffing. Councillor Phillips: I'm just trying to get my head around how it's going to look for my husband passing a surf ski to a staff member and then going and parking and how that actually looks in real life. Councillor Lorentson: They can just plant their surf ski. I just drop off my racing medal and surfboard outside the surf club and then park. But it's... Director Walsh: And I wasn't suggesting that they need to lift it or carry it. I was just saying that the staff could keep an eye on it while they go and grab their

04:24:00 car and come back. And little locks like the bikes. Councillor Lorentson: I think that's a good option. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We're going to move on. Member Spud. So we are abating the substantive motion until only one person has talked to that motion. Mayor Wilkie: Look, I'd like to thank the staff for the work done on this, the Go Noosa program, the holiday program. It's an integrated system. Not one element of it is the magic bullet. It's... All elements work together. The free buses. The loop bus, which is a new addition. The drop off zone, which means that... I support it because it means that no matter how full the road network, no matter whether all 1,600 car parks in that precinct are full, people will still...

04:25:00 Up to six vehicles will be able... At any one time, will be able to pull in right up to the doorstep of the main beach, unload families, all their equipment and gear, and drop off, and pick them up as well. I really applaud the trial done with the VMS boards, which gave you real-time data, gave motorists real-time data on which car parks are full at any time, and allows motorists to make a choice as to whether they continue to drive down and circulate and get a park, or make an informed choice and catch a bus. We know that... It's not a choice between no cars or buses. Cars will always be part of the equation, unless we block traffic going to Hastings Street. People will always have the option to travel down there in a car. Currently, the advantage of a bus is that if you travel in a bus, you'll get there no slower than a car.

04:26:00 But the time you spend in a car circulating, looking for a park, if you're on a bus, you could have had a swim, had a coffee, and be on your way back out. It's about options. And the complete suite of Go Noosa initiatives offers options, and allows access, a range of ways in which people can access main beach. And if I understand correctly, record numbers are accessing main beach, because they can get down there by electric bikes now, electric scooters have changed again. The free buses are there now. They're extremely popular. I was really heartened to see that the survey done, even though it only involved 100 people, showed that well over half the locals, that they really liked it. That they would have caught a car, a private vehicle, or a cab, or an Uber, if the free bus hadn't been available. So we know it's working. We know it's giving people options.

04:27:00 But people are still free to drive down and take their chances in finding a bus. And also, we know that because the Lions Park, sorry, the Surf Club, is not going to be used as a car park anymore, there won't be that backup of vehicles onto the roundabout. And congestion has been eased there. We won't totally get rid of congestion as long as cars continue to travel down there. But we can make fact-based, smart decisions to reduce congestion where we can. And the use of the drop-off zone achieves that. So thank you for your work. It's not easy. There will be criticism, as there has been since the 70s, when we've all seen that editorial that if Noosa Council doesn't do something to address congestion in Hastings

04:28:00 Street, no one will be coming to Noosa anymore. Well, they're coming in greater numbers than ever. But just because it's a difficult challenge and a problem doesn't mean we shouldn't keep trying. So thank you. Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: I'd like to echo what the Mayor says. So many times over the past year, I will say, you know, talking to people and they're saying, oh, no, nobody's ever going to use the free bus. And I say, I use the free bus. And I've timed it. You know, my surfer buddies go there in a car and I stop. I even drove during my surfboard down, dropped it off in front of the Surf Club turnaround, drove back through the traffic, hopped on the bus to not have a park and driven in and still beat my friend who left at the same time as me. He had a car park. So I was in the water first. So it amazes me when I tell people that I use the free bus and I love it. And then they tell me that nobody uses the free bus.

04:29:00 And I just go, oh, that's our problem, isn't it? Because you're in so many people's headspace that they don't want to use it. They don't want to recognize it. They want to go back to a 1960s past where there wasn't congestion. Well, you read Bob McAllister's book. And going into Caloundra, you're backed up to the Bruce Highway on hot weekends. So it's always been congested. It's a matter of how we deal with it. And so I commend the Billy Noosa program. I contend the walking, biking strategy. I will commend the transport strategy. And as I said before, keep doing it. Don't wait for the DMP. Just keep doing it. Because it's working, I believe. And the signs are working, everything. It's a work in progress. So thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Just briefly, I wanted to touch on something that isn't in the report that hasn't been talked about yet. And again, it's to do with the main beach drop-off zone. And that is a real possibility of people coming into the beach or to the restaurants on Hastings Street by Uber.

04:30:00 So at the moment, if somebody tries to stop in an Uber to get out, that obviously causes a congestion issue and a pedestrian safety issue, technically, as well. So that drop-off zone will help to take those Ubers, those stationary cars off the street, put them in a drop-off zone. And it also really helps the Uber drivers be able to get back out again to get the next fare rather than get stuck in that parking lot on Hastings Street. So just another positive to put there. Councillor Lorentson: A question to the staff. Clive understood from the report that we're actually taking three car parkers in the taxi zone and allocating them specifically for Uber and DoorDash. So that's a separate drop-off point? Yeah, that's what we're proposing. That's what we're proposing. That's separate should be Main Beach drop-off. Director Walsh: And that's really to do with the food collection and drop-off. So to really assist with that. But it will be available for Uber drivers as well. And some of those locations are really beneficial because if people are trying to park there, what they do is they stop and wait in their car.

04:31:00 And that can create a five to ten minute delay, which makes all the way up here. So it's actually repurposing those spaces to fast turnover. Councillor Finzel: I think it's a moving feast. I think it's great. I think these conversations around the table really open it up and we can honour our past. We can acknowledge the work of the Tewantin Lions, the 20 year history there. We can address what's happening now and everybody's working together collaboratively to try and mitigate these issues and work towards a sustainable future where everyone can live, work and enjoy this great place. So I just want to thank everyone, the staff, the Lions, our community and the councillors around the table. Let's keep having these conversations and work through these challenges and get the outcomes that benefit everyone. So thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thanks. Councillor Phillips, did you wish to talk to the motion? Councillor Phillips: Not to reiterate what everyone said.

04:32:00 Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll finish off. I make these decisions based on our policy. Our policy is very clear. Our policy has principles and it's reflected in the transport strategy and it says prioritise our focus on moving people and goods rather than on moving cars. Provide infrastructure and services that are designed to give priority to pedestrians, cyclists, scooters and public transport over private cars. Improve the safety and amenity of pedestrians and cyclists in our transport. Address peak time traffic conditions by reducing traffic rather than increasing road capacity. Those principles have been in place for seven years. We first, as a council, moved to stop car parking in the Lions Park in 2019. That decision was made. It was a council position and on four occasions since then we've sought to defer it.

04:33:00 We've sought not to implement our principles. We've sought to extend it for COVID. We sought to extend it to consultation. We've sought to extend it to do more specific consultation. If I looked at the Land Act both then and how it's amended, it's still really quite clear that that's a park for people to recreate in. That's a park for people to recreate in. It's got, to me, this decision should be divorced of the wonderful work that the Lions do as a result of the income on that site. No one's going to argue that they don't play a very useful role. But putting that into our consideration really takes it outside of this consideration of what it is, which is a land use planning matter about a use that's inconsistent under the Land Act and inconsistent under our planning scheme.

04:34:00 It's inconsistent. As we say, a traditional use that we choose to continue if this motion is passed for yet another delay. And I represent all those people in the community that have said over and over again that they want this park as a recreational area. I think in 2023 I actually suggest we look at running community activities in the park. Get people in there. Have activities that they can use during these peak periods. So it's actually energising the space, activating it rather than turning it into a car park. And we hear in this report that the four times we've done this, it's to increase, to provide parking for one point something percent of the vehicles that travel there each day. So by supporting this, you're abandoning the principle set down.

04:35:00 And providing an option for one point something percent of the cars that go there each day. Other than that, I think the Go Noosa program's been very successful. And the free buses, and we should keep on it. And I completely understand the desire in the current environment to double check. But to me, another thing I hear in the community all the time is council keeps on consulting, keeps on producing plans and never puts it on the road. And once again, we're pushing off the hard decisions. Councillor Lorentson: I'd like to close. Thank you. You may. Okay. I first want to reference item H. Director Walsh: Excuse me, Chair. Can I be excused? Yes. Thank you, Shaun. You may. I'm a single parent. Thank you. And Craig's all the capital. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So I want to just speak briefly about the one way local loop with bus priority lane from

04:36:00 Noosa Dry to Noosa Parade. Just listen to the conversation around- Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So Councillor, I don't believe you talked about it. And I don't believe anyone else has talked about it. So in closing, you can't raise your business- Councillor Lorentson: Excuse me. I did speak about it. Did you? I'm going to say it. I apologize. That's okay. It just is, just to add to the conversation that we're having around the table. Councillor Wegener referenced bus use. You referenced the transport strategy, Go Noosa initiatives, which encourages free bus travel. The local loop bus priority lane, to me, the best way we're going to get high usage of our free buses is if we have a dedicated bus priority lane. So that buses don't get stuck behind cars going down to Hastings Street. And that's why I've added that to the motion in front of us for further discussion.

04:37:00 It'll work. It'll work when people know they can just fly down an express bus lane. Back to the motion with Lyons Park. I won't speak much. Everything's been said. But I will say this. What's in front of us is... A motion that allows the Lyons Club to continue a practice that they've had for 20 years. It's 30 days. The remainder, 335 days of the year, that park remains open space. Those 30 days are not being used for commercial events or sport events or food and wine or car shows. The purpose of allowing the Lyons Club, Tewantin is the Lyons Club, to manage the cars and car parking. The purpose... They've only got one purpose. To raise funds that directly go back into the community. You know, I actually looked up the definition of community service.

04:38:00 It's unpaid work that benefits others. We've got a bunch of volunteers that work tirelessly for this community. And most of the work, like I said, a full shift, you know, 10-hour days, five, six days a week. I thank them for putting their hand up to want to do this. I thank them for their tireless work. And I think today we've got an opportunity to thank them the way they would like to be thanked by being acknowledged of this 20-year tradition. So I hope everyone is supportive of the motion in front of us today. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I put motion. Those in favour? That would be Lawrence and Finzel, Wegner, Phillips. Any opposed? Wilkie and Wilson. And those against? Would be me. You can put Stockwell instead of me.

04:39:00 And that brings us to the end of the meeting. Thank you all for your patience and politeness during the meeting. Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you, Mr Chair. We're going to close. Thank you. Councillor Phillips: Mr CEO. Thank you, Craig. Thank you.

8 MEETING CLOSURE ¶

▶ 08:55:25

Council's recording ends before this item. Where a meeting resolved to close its doors, that is what the end of the recording means — see what council discussed in private.