Councillors try to design a unit block on the run

Noosa Council Ordinary Council Meeting of 18 October

There we were in Tewantin promptly at 6pm with mayor Tony Wellington, back from leave, in the chair and a full council plus six senior staff around the table. At the press desk was Peter Gardiner from Noosa News.

In the public gallery was community activist Greg Smith (president of OSCAR, the Sunshine Coast Association of Residents), two petitioners for a bike track and two Cooroy residents wanting to save a mango tree. And me.

Formal proceedings began with a mayoral minute noting that Noosa Council (along with the Peregian Beach Community Association as co-respondent) had settled with a developer in relation to a major residential project near Peregian village. The agreement, many years in the making, included as modifications less units, design changes and greater setbacks. It should also be noted that the beach motel and unit development cost Noosa ratepayers $855,000 in court appeals.

Petitions: herbicide spraying; pro & con a bike path

Cr Joe Jurisevic presented a petition from 200 petitioners aimed at stopping the council’s herbicide spraying. The petition particularly mentioned glyphosate, a chemical I am professionally familiar with. I believe these good people are ill-informed.

There was a second petition from 1,177 Cooroy residents encouraging the council to build a bike path between Cooran and Pomona (which the council had previously deemed unviable). It was followed by a petition, presented through Cr Ingrid Jackson, from Cooran and Pomona landowners who didn’t support the aforementioned bikeway. The property owners said they didn’t want freehold land used for public access, arguing it was a security risk. They also said a designated bike path already exists.

Additional gaming machines at Tewantin Noosa RSL Club

Cr Frank Pardon, a life member of the RSL club, declared a conflict of interest and left the room. Cr Brian Stockwell declared a perceived conflict of interest but was allowed to stay. He then acknowledged a previous conflict of interest breach at a committee meeting, an admission which the mayor said would be noted in the minutes (there are minutes taken at ordinary meetings).

Earlier this year Cr Stockwell was fined $500, compelled to attend a training course and forced to publicly apologise for two other conflict of interest matters. In a further breach, he was reprimanded by the mayor for inappropriate conduct in respect of personal criticisms of a councillor (probably Cr Jackson).

The mayor said the council had no power to place a limit on poker machines and would certainly lose an appeal, and moved to note the increase. Cr Stockwell said the RSL’s gaming area was too big and he wouldn’t support the motion. It passed anyway, 5-2, with Crs Frank Wilkie and Stockwell opposed and the council spared a futile and expensive court case.

The Cooroy unit development saga and the mango tree

Questions concerning a Cooroy unit development re-emerged. As I reported in my last column, this had been discussed at extraordinary length at the general committee meeting. Cr Stockwell (whose amendment had been rejected at the earlier meeting) moved his own motion to replace the original staff recommended motion. It proposed changes to reduce roof height and to vary the design of side ‘wing’ walls.

After showing a video to highlight his case, Cr Stockwell asked staff if the changes would better reflect Cooroy’s character. To my surprise, a manager said lowering the roof height was a minor change that could be an improvement. I beg to disagree – this had been an approval recommended by council planners. Cr Stockwell showed more photos reflecting his proposed roof change, removal of building’s side wings and added gable ends.

Cr Stockwell again asked staff to confirm that his changes would be an improvement. The mayor said he was unhappy with the councillor asking leading questions, but allowed him to continue. A staff director replied that the appearance of the streetscape was subjective but the design changes were minor (was she serious?).

Cr Jackson said she had visited the area and showed a map of nearby housing, observing that the design was appropriate and consistent with the streetscape. She contradicted Cr Stockwell’s references to the ‘character’ of the area saying this development was in a commercial precinct where there was no ‘Cooroy character’ evident. The staff director said the area was a mix of business, units and houses, adding that the development complied with the Noosa Plan.

Cr Pardon questioned Cr Stockwell’s projected changes, saying the proposed roof complied with height and design principles. Cr Stockwell said there was a need to improve the design for aesthetic reasons. The mayor called a point of order but the councillor continued unabated, now saying that the entrance was also faulty. All this after the council had approved the design and layout.

Cr Jackson said she was satisfied with the original motion from the general committee meeting but perhaps this amendment could be an improvement. I felt that was beside the point: the applicant was recommended by staff for approval because the design was compliant. One can always make improvements – after all, it’s only money. Cr Jurisevic agreed that the ‘minor’ changes were okay and Cr Pardon said perhaps the wall wings could be changed. Oh dear!

Cr Jurisevic wanted to move an amendment to Cr Stockwell’s motion. He wanted to save the mango tree and relocate the driveway to accommodate this. Cr Jackson questioned the need for a driveway change – would this not pose a safety risk? The staff director agreed but said such traffic issues were not imminent.

Cr Jackson asked whether the mango tree would in fact be saved by moving the driveway, a topic more than adequately covered at the general committee meeting. The staff director said there was provision for a tree protection zone and if the driveway was moved from Wattle Street to Garnett Street the mango tree could be saved.

And so this sterile topic, pulled out for the ordinary meeting by Cr Stockwell when every angle seemingly had been exhausted and he’d lost the vote at the general meeting, continued. After we had exchanged head shakes some time before, I noticed that public interest activist Greg Smith had left.

The debate proceeded and there was much more talking. It added greatly to the passage of time but not to the sum total of human knowledge.

Eventually the amendment was put and lost 4-3 (for: Stockwell, Jurisevic, Wilkie; against: Wellington, Jackson, Pardon, Glasgow).

The mayor then moved a new amendment to defer the application so possible changes could be discussed with the developer and council traffic engineers. Why would you conduct business in Noosa? Everything is conditional and has to pass some obscure test.

Cr Jackson said she supported a deferral because more information was needed. Cr Wilkie supported it and thanked the residents who supported the mango tree (applause from the two supporters in the gallery). The new amendment was passed unanimously.

Traffic management during peak holiday periods

The peak period traffic management plan came up for discussion. The main initiatives – with summer approaching – were an increase in free buses, use of interactive parking signage and an app for ride sharing. I don’t think any of this will have much effect and certainly won’t solve Noosa’s traffic problems.

Cr Jackson said she was excited by this plan. Really? To her credit she had appeared on Rod Blackmore’s breakfast show that morning where she summarised this latest pathetic transport strategy. She said there had been lots of consultation and the important issues had been prioritised. Cr Stockwell liked the concept of ride sharing for Hastings Street workers.

Cr Pardon said he was concerned by fuel prices and would like to see a transition to public transport and electric buses. Cr Jurisevic agreed that increased fuel prices could facilitate more public transport use and said an app for ride sharing was good. Cr Glasgow said this was a turning point for the transport strategy and he was excited about the future. Methinks they were talking up a nothing program. This council is not spending enough on infrastructure like wider roads and car parks.

There was a flippant enquiry about what sort of street Hastings Street was. Acting CEO Alan Rogers cleverly said “dead end and therein lies the problem”. The traffic plan was passed unanimously.

Organic waste processing looks a likely goer

There is a tentative proposal for the councils of Noosa, Sunshine Coast and Moreton Bay along with Unity Water (in which Noosa Council has a five percent share) to partner in an organic waste facility. Waste management is a huge problem and, in our neck of the woods, load sharing is always good because waste management is a big expense for a small de-amalgamated council where there are no economies of scale.

Cr Jackson said the collaboration was a win-win for all concerned while Cr Stockwell appreciated the input of Unity Water and wondered (or should that be wandered) laterally whether the production of methane gas would be economic (a thought that did not seem to go anywhere). Cr Pardon said the proposal was good because Noosa has a share in Unity Water. Cr Jurisevic said there would be long term benefits. It was passed unanimously.

At which the chair put us out of our misery by closing the meeting at 8 pm.

In summary, it was a frustrating meeting. An inordinate amount of time was spent revisiting the relatively minor issue of a unit development in Cooroy after amendments had already failed at the general committee meeting. Not accepting that decision, the losers dragged the matter on to the arena again. It’s their right, of course, but it served only to perpetuate a farcical situation. No wonder the president of the Sunshine Coast Association of Residents walked out.