Source: http://byron.infocouncil.biz/Open/2015/06/OC_11062015_AGN_382.htm
Timestamp: 2018-10-17 22:32:55
Document Index: 708646118

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 2', 'art 5', 'art 5', 'art 2', 'Application No. 10', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 9', 'art 1', 'art 2']

Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - 11 June 2015
6.1 Ordinary Meeting held on 21 May 2015
6.2 Extraordinary Meeting held on 10 June 2015
9.1 Mayor's Discretionary Allowance - 2014/15 .................................................................... 5
13.1 Section 355 Management Committees - resignations and appointments........................ 8
13.2 Report of the Safe Summer in the Bay PRG meeting 23 April 2015............................. 11
13.3 Report of the Public Art Assessment Panel meetings held 10 April and 7 May 2015.... 13
13.4 Council Investments May 2015....................................................................................... 16
13.5 PLANNING - Amendments to Chapter D2 Development Control Plan DCP 2014 ...... 22
13.6 PLANNING - Submissions Report - Planning Proposal to allow Detached Dual Occupancies and Secondary Dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones.......................................................... 26
13.7 PLANNING - Submissions Report - Planning Proposal to allow multiple occupancy development with consent at 226 Fowlers Lane, Bangalow (Lot 6 DP 261219).......................................... 34
13.8 Waiving Developer Contributions - Secondary Dwellings.............................................. 38
13.9 PLANNING - Submissions Report - Planning Proposal to rezone part of Lot 5 DP880917, Shara Boulevard, to RE1 Public Recreation............................................................................. 49
13.10 Report of the Planning Review Committee Meeting held on 19 May 2015................... 54
13.11 Request for an Early Implementation Program to supplement Council's Rural Lands Strategy Initiative ........................................................................................................................... 56
13.12 PLANNING - Reclassify land from operational to community at Lot 530 DP 238451 Orana Road, Ocean Shores................................................................................................................. 61
13.13 Consideration of Urgent Road Reconstruction Works Booyong Road, Booyong.......... 64
13.14 Updated Work Health Safety Policy............................................................................... 70
14.1 Report of the Finance Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015.................. 72
14.2 Report of the Internal Audit Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015.......... 75
14.3 Report of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015................................................................................................................................. 78
14.4 Report of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2015 81
14.5 Report of the Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2015 83
16.1 Confidential - Sale of land for unpaid rates............................................................. 85
16.2 Confidential - Tender - Hire of Plant and Equipment Contract 2015-0007............ 86
16.3 Confidential - Tender - Truck Haulage Hire Contract 2015 - 0006........................ 88
16.4 Confidential - Tender Assessment - Mullumbimby Trunk Water Main Replacement 2014-0039......................................................................................................................................... 89
a. $500 - S.H.I.F.T. Project Byron Inc.
b. $500 – Federal Community Children’s Centre Inc.
c. $350 – Community Forum - Zero Net Emissions
d. $650 – Byron Youth Service
2. That Council advertise the donations in accordance with Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993.
a. S.H.I.F.T. Project Inc. - $500
The S.H.I.F.T. Project Byron Inc. is for women who are homeless or at risk of homelessness, and are willing to engage in a three month education program. It is based on a foundation of providing a safe transition house where the focus will be on self education and physical wellbeing. The intention is to disrupt the revolving door cycle often experienced in homelessness. The Project will have a reciprocal focus in that the residents offer their assistance to the community in volunteer work within the Byron Community whilst members of the Community support the establishment and continuity of the Project. The S.H.I.F.T acronym stands for:
Providing a safe and sustainable environment for residents to reset their living circumstances. Building networks and resources within the community to encourage past residents to support current residents.
Having an emphasis on physical and emotional wellbeing to ensure interruption of limiting mindsets and behaviours.
Supported by the wider community while participants integrate into society and build resources to break the homelessness cycle. We use a variety of existing eclectic Byron projects to provide a space for participants to learn new skills and give back to the community. By building reciprocal relationships between participants and community, the opportunity to experience making a difference with actions, becomes learnt.
Each participant will have measurable goals and outcomes to build a sense of achievement build focused attention on self and others.
Providing a stable environment for participants moving from instability to living a healthy self sustaining life.
Further information on this initiative can be found at their website http://www.shiftproject.org.au/
b. Federal Community Childcare Centre Inc. - $500
Donation towards the Centre’s bush tucker garden and signage.
c. Community forum – Zero Net Emissions - $350
Donation of hire costs associated with the Community Forum to be held at on Sunday 21 June 2015 at The Cavanbah Sports Centre, Ewingsdale Road, Byron Bay.
d. Byron Youth Service - $650
Donation towards the Byron Youth Service fundraising to continue much needed youth programs.
Further information on fundraising and the Byron Youth Service programs can be found at their website http://bys.org.au/
Note and advertise donations from the Mayor’s Discretionary Allowance for 2014/15.
Mayor’s Discretionary Allowance (2153.13)
Management Comments by Mark Arnold, Director Corporate and Community Services:
Endorse and advertise the making of donations from the Mayor’s Discretionary Allowance for 2014/15 being:
This will have minimal impact on other projects/tasks.
The 2014/15 Budget adopted by Council included an allocation of $2,000 for budget item Mayor – Discretionary Allowance. The balance remaining in the unallocated amount of the Mayor’s Discretionary Allowance is $2,000.00. Sufficient Funds are available for the making the nominated donations totalling $2,000.00.
In relation to the making of Section 356 Donations from the Mayor – Discretionary Allowance, Council at its Ordinary meeting held on 14 May 2009 resolved as follows:-
Council has received the following resignation and appointment requests as follows:
· South Golden Beach Community Centre – resignation received from Sergio Scudery
· Byron Library Exhibition Space (managing the Lone Goat Gallery) Section 355 Management Committee – resignation from Cr Paul Spooner and appointment of alternate delegate Cr Alan Hunter
Information on the membership and each of these Committees has been included in the report.
This report aims to officially accept the resignations and thank each person for their role on these management Committees.
b) Endorse the appointment of the alternate delegate Cr Alan Hunter as Councillor’s representative on this Committee.
Byron Library Exhibition Space (managing the Lone Goat Gallery) Section 355 Management Committee
A resignation has been received from Cr Paul Spooner as the Councillor representative on the Byron Library Exhibition Space (managing the Lone Goat Gallery) Section 355 Management Committee and a request made for the formal appointment of the alternate delegate Cr Alan Hunter as the Councillor representative to this Committee.
Howard Sedgmen
Committee update: The Committee recently hosted the Archibald Prize 2014 Regional Tour as a satellite venue on behalf of Lismore Regional Gallery. The exhibition was well received with over 5,000 visitors during the 5 week exhibition period. The gallery space is steadily booked up until February 2016 and receiving great reviews from exhibiting artists and patrons commenting that the Gallery is an impressive and essential exhibition space for Byron Shire and is being professionally managed by the volunteer committee.
Management Comments: That Council accept the resignation from Cr Paul Spooner and appoint Cr Alan Hunter as the Councillor representative on this Committee. Council may wish to appoint an alternate delegate.
South Golden Beach Community Hall Section 355 Management Committee
Council has received a letter of resignation from Sergio Scudery from the South Golden Beach Community Hall Section 355 Management Committee.
Alternate Delegate, Cr Simon Richardson
Committee Update: The renovations at the South Golden Beach Community Hall have commenced with an estimated finishing date at this stage including final certification process being late August/September 2015 . The committee is in semi abeyance whilst this work is being carried out, as there will be no hirers generating income or expenditure on the facility.
Management recommendation: That Council accept the resignation received from Sergio Scudery from the South Golden Beach Section 355 Management Committee. It is noted that no replacement representatives have been requested at this time.
Section 355 Management Committees operate under Section 355 Committee Guidelines which is available on Council’s web site at http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/section-355-committees
With regard to Committee Membership the guidelines state:
The Committee membership will number not less than four (4) and not more than twelve (12) members as appointed by Council including office bearers unless otherwise decided by Council. Council reserves the right to appoint a Councillor to each Committee.
All Committees are presently meeting the Guidelines.
Further information, including meeting minutes for all Section 355 Committees, can be found on Council’s Web site http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/section-355-committees
A Safe Summer in the Bay Project Reference Group meeting was held on 23 April 2015. This report provides the minutes of that meeting to Council for noting.
That Council note the minutes of the Safe Summer in the Bay PRG meeting held on 23 April 2015.
1 Minutes Safe Summer in the Bay meeting 23 April 2015, E2015/25769
A Safe Summer in the Bay Project Reference Group meeting was held on 23 April 2015. The group:
· confirmed the committee membership and the revised Terms of Reference as per resolution 15-060,
· reviewed the feedback collated following New Year in 2014 which was provided in a Council report at the 26 February Ordinary Meeting,
· devised some agenda and discussion items for the next meeting scheduled for 25 June 2015.
A budget allocation for New Year in Byron Bay 2015, has been included in the Draft 2015/16 Operational Plan, budget, fees and charges which are currently on public exhibition.
Plan for New Year in Byron Bay 2015
A Public Art Assessment Panel meeting was held on 10 April where the panel dealt with public art proposals and business arising from previous meetings, the Public Art Small Grants Program (previously resolved by Council 14-263) and commissioning artwork on two Electricity Padmount Substations. The minutes of this meeting are attached, although there were no recommendations made to Council as a result of this meeting.
A Public Art Assessment Panel meeting was held on 7 May where the panel again discussed public art proposals, business arising and made some recommendations to Council for consideration. The Panel also assessed submissions received for the new Public Art Small Grants Program and concept designs and submissions for the Electricity Padmount Substations project. The minutes of the meeting are attached, and background to the recommendations is provided in the report.
a. All installation costs will be born by the proponents donating the artwork
b. That a vote of thanks be made to the organisers of the Uplift Festival where the Unity Pole was carved, and the artist for their generosity in donating this artwork to the Byron Shire community.
a. Note two priority areas have been identified for future public art in the Shire – Ocean Shores and Suffolk Park.
b. Notify local groups in Ocean Shores and Suffolk Park that Council would be pleased to receive applications to donate or loan artwork to the community in these locations.
a. Council has previously supported a Development Application for this project.
b. There is evidence of strong community support for the project.
c. A recent crowd funding exercise conducted by Creative Mullumbimby (supported by Creative Partnerships Australia with matched funds) has been very successful.
a. The Mullumbimby padmount to Karma Barnes and Inscribe Youth Street Arts Project ($1,500)
b. The Byron Bay padmount to Stay Gold/ Nitsua team ($1,500)
a. The following three successful projects from the Public Art Small Grants Program applications be funded for $500 each:
b. That a further $500 be awarded to the Brunswick Heads Memorial Seat project to assist them to provide proper formatted designs showing the resolved construction methods for the project.
c. The ‘Simpsons Sofa’ project will receive the funding described in ‘a.i.’ above subject to:
ii. Final concept designs being submitted to the PAAP for a permanent art installation donated to Council.
1 Minutes Public Art Assessment Panel meeting 10 April 2015, E2015/24512
2 Minutes Public Art Assessment Panel meeting 7 May 2015, E2015/29334
3 Public Art Small Grants Program - Round 1 April 2015 - Information Sheet, E2015/23139
A Public Art Assessment Panel meeting was held on 7 May where the panel again discussed public art proposals, business arising and made some recommendations for Council’s consideration. The Panel also assessed submissions received for the new Public Art Small Grants Program and concept designs and submissions for the Electricity Padmount Substations project. The minutes of the meeting are attached, and background to the recommendations is provided below.
With regards to recommendation 1 – Unity Pole; Council previously resolved (14-260) the placement of the Unity Pole in Denning Park, however engineering difficulties with installing the pole vertically in a public place were identified and it is proposed now to install the pole horizontally as a public seat. Council was contacted by the Unity Pole owners as they wanted to revisit placing the pole in a public place.
With regards to recommendation 3 - Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk; a letter of request for a donation was received from Creative Mullumbimby which was tabled at the Public Art Assessment Panel meeting.
Electricity Padmount Substations (Byron Bay & Mullumbimby)
With regards to recommendation 5, Essential Energy have offered to work with Council on the installation of artworks on two padmount substations in high profile locations in Byron Bay and Mullumbimby, and have provided $600 towards the painting of the two substations. A ‘call for expressions of interest’ was circulated on 12 February 2015 with a closing date of 6 March 2015, offering artists a commission of $1,500 per substation. Several high quality submissions were received and the Panel has made recommendations for Council’s consideration.
With regards to recommendation 6, the Public Art Small Grants program was developed by the Public Art Assessment Panel members during 2014 and supported by Council (resolution14-263). Round 1 of the program was advertised from 22 April to 6 May 2015. Information about the program as provided to applicants is included in attachment 3. The Panel assessed several submissions and made recommendation 6 allocating $2,000 from the Public Art budget between four projects.
The allocated public art budget for 2014/15 was $15,000 and the Public Art Assessment Panel made several budget allocations and a recommendation for carry over funds as included in the minutes of the 7 May 2015 meeting, and outlined in the report and recommendation 4.
This report includes a list of investments and identifies Council’s overall cash position as at 27 May 2015 for Council’s information.
That the report listing Council’s investments and overall cash position as at 27 May 2015 be noted.
In relation to the investment portfolio for May 2015, Council has continued to maintain a diversified portfolio of investments At the time of writing this report, the average 90 day bank bill rate (BBSW) for the month of May had not been released. Based on previous months and commentary received throughout May, the 90 day average BBSW is estimated to be around 2.20%. Council’s performance for the month of May is a weighted average of 2.98%. This performance is again higher than the assumed benchmark. This is largely due to the active ongoing management of the investment portfolio, maximising investment returns through secure term deposits. Council’s investment portfolio should continue to out-perform the benchmark as the capital protected investment earning 0% interest nears maturity.
There is now only one capital protected investment held by Council which is fully allocated to an underlying zero coupon bond. This investment is the Emu Note which will mature in October 2015.
The table below identifies the investments held by Council as at 27 May 2015:
Schedule of Investments held as at 27 May 2015
1,478,700.00
2,710,761
2,710,760.86
70,910,761
70,919,460.86
It should be noted that at the time of writing this report, Council had not received a valuation for the EMU Note for May 2015. This investment is highlighted in bold in the table above with the valuation reflective from 30 April 2015, this being the most recent current valuation received by Council.
Principal varies based on fund unit.
Price valuation, interest payable varies depending upon fund performance.
Principal varies due to cash flow demands from deposits/withdrawals, interest is payable on the daily balance at the cash rate +0.50%
Note 3. Floating rate notes and Term Deposits can be traded on a day-to-day basis, and therefore Council is not obliged to hold the investments to the maturity dates. Managed funds operate in a similar manner to a normal bank account with amounts deposited or withdrawn on a daily basis. There is no maturity date for this type of investment.
*Note 4. The coupon on these investments is zero due to the Capital Protection mechanism working. This occurs when the investment falls below a certain level. This coupon may be paid again in the future as the market recovers.
For the month of May 2015, as indicated in the table below, there is a dissection of the investment portfolio by investment type. It illustrates the current value of investments has increased from April by $6,450.00, demonstrating a cumulative unrealised gain of $8,700.00.
Dissection of Council Investment Portfolio as at 27 May 2015
(21,300.00)
70,910,760.86
The table below provides a reconciliation of investment purchases and maturities for the period 30 April 2015 to 27 May 2015 on a current market value basis.
Movement in Investment Portfolio – 30 April 2015 to 27 May 2015
Opening Balance at 30 April 2015
68,913,010.86
Closing Balance at 27 May 2015
Investments Maturities and Returns – 30 April 2015 to 27 May 2015
8,136.99
15,534.25
33,906.85
17,455.34
16,006.03
15,607.12
154,605.49
The overall ‘cash position’ of Council is not only measured by what funds Council has invested but also by what funds Council has retained in its consolidated fund or bank account as well for operational purposes. In this regard, for the month of May 2015 the table below identifies the overall cash position of Council as follows:
Dissection of Council Cash Position as at 27 May 2015
619,493.85
71,530,254.71
71,538,954.71
Council uses a diversified mix of investments to achieve short, medium and long-term results. Council’s historical strategy is to use credit/equity markets for exposure to long term growth. It should be noted that Council’s exposure to credit/equity products is capital protected when held to maturity, which ensures no matter what the market value of the product is at maturity, Council is insured against any capital loss. The investment strategy associated with long term growth is now prohibited under the current Ministerial Investment Order utilising credit/equity markets to seek investment products. However, the ‘grandfathering’ provisions of the Ministerial Investment Order provides Council can retain investments now prohibited until they mature. It should be noted that Council currently holds only one of these investments, the EMU notes. This investment will trend towards it’s full principal value as it approaches maturity.
Council’s investment strategy is currently to invest for the short term (generally 90 days on new investments) to take advantage of investment opportunities often offered in the market over and above the 90day bank bill rate whilst ensuring sufficient liquidity to meet cash flow requirements. This provides the ability to take advantage of interest rate movements in the market as short term rates are currently not dissimilar to longer term rates (2 to 5 years).
This report outlines recommended changes to Byron DCP 2014 in relation to detached dual occupancy dwellings and secondary dwellings in RU1 and RU2 zones. It is recommended that Council proceed with the public exhibition of amendments to Byron DCP 2014 Chapter D2 (Residential Accommodation and Ancillary Development in Rural Zones). This will bring the DCP into line with recent proposed changes to Byron LEP 2014.
The DCP currently refers only to attached dual occupancy in rural areas. While these controls remain relevant it’s important that additional detail be added to account for the location, design and siting issues that will come with detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings. This will assist applicants to prepare compliant development applications and assist Council planners to focus on key issues when undertaking assessment of any development applications.
The planning proposal that will permit detached dual occupancy dwellings and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones with Council consent has been on public exhibition. The intention is to align the timing of the LEP and DCP amendments so that applicants can respond to both once adopted and implemented.
This report recommends that Council agree to amend Byron DCP 2014 Chapter D2 in accordance with the changes highlighted in Attachment 1 and place the amended chapter on public exhibition for a period of six weeks.
Should no submissions be received it is recommended that Council adopt the draft amendments, However, if submissions are received these will be reported to Council.
2. That, if no submissions are received in response to the public exhibition of Byron DCP 2014 Chapter D2 (Residential Accommodation and Ancillary Development in Rural Zones), Council approve the amended Chapter of the DCP, and that notice of the decision be published in local newspaper within 28 days after the close of the public exhibition (deemed approval date).
1 Extract of DCP 2014 Chapter D2 , E2015/25720
Council resolved in June 2013 to proceed with a planning proposal to amend Byron LEP 2014 to permit detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings with Council consent on land zoned RU1 and RU2. The planning proposal was exhibited from 25 November 2014 until 16 January 2015. A report on the submissions received is also reported to the 11 June Council Meeting. The submissions indicate that shortly after finalising the LEP amendment there will be a number of development applications (DA) lodged. It is important that the DCP controls reflect Council’s preferred position so that these DA’s can be properly assessed.
The proposed amendments to the DCP reflect the location, siting and design issues raised by permitting detached dual occupancy dwellings and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones.
The amended version of Byron DCP Chapter D2 is attached to this report. For ease of reference the changes proposed have been highlighted yellow in Attachment ‘1.’ and are as follows:
1. Section D2.1.2 has been altered to make it clear the Chapter now applies to detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings.
2. Section D2.5 has additional objectives to emphasise the need to avoid conflicts with neighbouring land use and to preserve the viability of the subject land for agriculture as well as the rural character of the locality.
3. Performance criteria are added to ensure the location for any new dwelling considers the buffer requirements of Chapter B6 of the DCP. In keeping with the LEP it also requires that the additional dwelling be on the same title as the original dwelling with no expectation of future subdivision. The standard LEP definition of detached dual occupancy requires this.
4. Prescriptive measures are included that are similar to what is already required for a rural workers dwelling. They emphasise the need to avoid potential conflicts with adjoining land use and require access arrangements showing a shared driveway with no additional access points onto public roads.
5. Section D2.5.1 now indicates that parking requirements will be the same as for attached dual occupancy. Secondary dwellings have no parking requirements.
6. Section D2.5.2 applies the same character and siting requirements (privacy, bushfire hazards, environmental issues, visual impact, drainage, etc) that apply to attached dual occupancy, to detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings as well.
7. Prescriptive measures for the siting of the buildings are amended to make it clear that attached dual occupancy dwellings must be connected by a common dividing wall and must be serviced by a common vehicle access. Detached dual occupancy must be located not more than 100 metres apart (measured between the closest points of the buildings). The dwellings must be serviced by a common vehicle access. Secondary dwellings can be either attached to or detached from the principle dwelling as per the controls for dual occupancy (attached and detached).
8. Section D2.5.5. requires consideration of adjoining and nearby development and has been amended to ensure it applies to detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings. A performance criterion has been added that requires consideration of the scenic amenity of the locality.
As this DCP change results from a Council initiated planning proposal the cost of amending Byron DCP 2014 has been met by Council.
Council has followed the statutory process of amending its LEP to permit detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings in rural areas including Gateway Approval from the Department of Planning and an extended public exhibition. It should now exhibit the attached amendments to Byron DCP 2014 to ensure that development applications prepared subsequent to the changes to Byron LEP 2014 can be assessed in accordance with the revised Byron DCP 2014.
This report presents the public exhibition outcomes on a Planning Proposal to amend Byron LEP 2014 to:
§ Permit detached dual occupancy dwellings and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones with Council consent;
Council received a Gateway Approval for the Planning Proposal from the Department of Planning and Environment in November 2014. It was placed on exhibition from 25 November 2014 until 16 January 2015. Forty seven submissions were received from the public as well as two agency submissions (NSW Rural Fire Service and NSW Department of Primary Industries). Forty two submissions were in favour of the planning proposal, some conditionally, and five were opposed.
The Minister for Planning and Environment has issued an authorisation for Council to exercise delegation to make this LEP amendment should Council decide to proceed with it. This report recommends that Council proceed with the planning proposal without amendment.
1 Planning Proposal for Detached Dual Occupancies and Secondary Dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones, E2015/13989
Council at its meeting of 13 June 2013 resolved (13-301) that the permissibility of detached dual occupancies and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones be considered in a planning proposal to amend the Byron LEP.
The Department of Planning and Environment advised via the Gateway determination that the planning proposal may proceed subject to a number of conditions. One of these conditions is that Council undertake consultation with the NSW Rural Fire Service. Public exhibition was undertaken for a period of 53 days from 25 November 2014 until 16 January 2015.
· Forty seven submissions received from the public
· Two agency submissions (NSW Rural Fire Service and NSW Department of Primary Industries)
· Forty two submissions in favour of the planning proposal (some conditionally)
· Five opposed to the planning proposal
A copy of submissions (E2014/84839) has been provided to Councillors on CD.
Discussion of Issues Raised by Submissions ‘in Support’
1. 100 metre separation distance between dwellings – at least six submissions suggested this was too small because of topography, roads, vegetation and the existence of unapproved dwellings already located more than 100 metres from the primary dwelling. Some suggested 150 metres and others that it be a merit decision.
Comment: The 100 metres is a numerical development standard that is intended to encourage detached dual occupancy and detached secondary dwellings to be intentionally located in proximity to the primary dwelling on the site. This will reduce the likelihood of land use conflicts, excessive clearing, duplication of services, and the pressure for future subdivision. However, Clause 4.6 of Byron LEP 2014 (Exceptions to Development Standards) specifically allows for flexibility in numerical standards to achieve better outcomes if it is justified in the circumstances. So a merit case for any distance can be submitted to Council.
2. Extend the provisions to allow detached rural dual occupancy and secondary dwellings in environment protection zones where a house already exists (two submissions).
Comment: Environmental zones are a deferred matter in Byron LEP 2014 with LEP 1988 zones applying to these areas. This is an issue that cannot be resolved at the present time but can be considered when the deferred matters are dealt with.
3. Three submissions suggested the location criteria should be more lenient for unapproved dwellings as they are already there.
Comment: The proposed controls are subject to Clause 4.6 of Byron LEP 2014 (Exceptions to Development Standards) which specifically allows for flexibility in numerical standards if its justified in the circumstances. So a merit case for any development standard (except the floor space of a secondary dwelling) can be submitted to Council, to achieve better development outcomes. Whether or not this can be justified for an unapproved dwelling will depend on the merits of the case.
4. Application of the LEP amendment to Multiple Occupancy (MO) and Community Title (CT) sites used for rural residential purposes. Three submissions suggested that the provisions should not apply to MO and CT sites while two suggested that it should.
Comment: : Development consent for M.O’s and CT’s is granted on the basis of an upper maximum number of dwellings for the entire development. Attached dual occupancy is currently permitted on MO/CT sites subject to Clause 4.2B of LEP 2014, the rationale being that this housing type is most compatible with the approved development footprint in these areas. By contrast, the cumulative impacts associated with a potential doubling of ‘detached’ dwellings in these areas could be contrary to the intended outcome of these approvals. Therefore, the current LEP amendment does not permit ‘detached’ dual occupancies and secondary dwellings on MO and CT sites.
5. Limiting detached rural dual occupancy to 60 square metres is not reasonable.
Comment: The 60 square metre limitation applies only to secondary dwellings and not dual occupancy dwellings. The 60 square metres limitation is imposed by the Standard LEP and is a way of distinguishing between secondary dwellings and dual occupancy buildings. If in the RU1 or RU2 zone and applying for a dual occupancy building the 60 square metres limitation will not apply.
6. Bushfire clearing may end up having a big consequential impact on biodiversity as detached dual occupancy approvals are given out.
Comment: The NSW bushfire controls have recently been amended and some concern has been raised about clearing as a result of the changes. The amendments are summarised by the Department of Planning and Environment as follows:
“The NSW Parliament passed legislation on 18 June 2014 to help protect homes from the threat of bushfires. The laws will allow for trees and vegetation that act as fuel for bushfires to be cleared around homes, tourist accommodation, schools, hospitals and child care centres located in bushfire prone areas, without the need to first obtain approval. The Rural Fires Amendment (Vegetation Clearing) Act 2014 will allow trees and vegetation to be cleared within 10 metres and undergrowth to be cleared within 50 metres of specified bushfire prone buildings. Areas able to be cleared will be known as ‘10/50’ vegetation clearing entitlement areas, to be determined by the Rural Fire Service (RFS).The changes contained in the legislation will make bushfire preparation easier while ensuring that environmental protection, personal safety and landowners’ rights are preserved.”
In considering development applications Council will need to be mindful of this change to the Rural Fires Amendment (Vegetation Clearing) Act 2014. However, Council must also consider impacts on the natural environment under Section 79C of the EPA Act, 1979, the Native Vegetation Act 2003 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. As such the change in bushfire controls is not a reason in itself to prevent the planning proposal from proceeding. There may be some cases where a detached dual occupancy (or detached secondary dwelling) is refused because of the level of clearing required.
Discussion of Issues Raised by Submissions ‘Opposed’
1. Additional rural dwellings will be used for holiday letting.
Comment: It is possible that lawfully approved detached dual occupancies (or detached secondary dwellings) could be used for holiday letting. It will be difficult to detect unless there are complaints from neighbours as rural house sites are often remote from public roads. Council has prepared a Short Term Rental Accommodation Action Plan to provide a planning framework and ‘whole of community’ approach to managing holiday letting in the Shire. There are also options for rural tourism in the form of farmstay accommodation (RU1 and RU2) and ecotourist facilities (RU2 only) which may satisfy some applicants who want to pursue a tourism income.
2. The amenity, character and privacy of rural localities will be lost due to widespread application of the changes leading to excessive rural dwellings.
Comment: Lismore City Council received only 5 supportive submissions when it exhibited a similar LEP amendment and then received 10 development applications in the first 12 months after Gazettal. Byron has received 42 supportive submissions many of whom openly state they would use the provisions if gazetted. Indications are that this will be popular in Byron Shire and it will need to be carefully dealt with if the character of given localities is to remain unaffected. The clause to be inserted into LEP 2014 specifically requires Council to be of the view that “the development will not have an adverse impact on the scenic amenity or character of the rural environment”. This has to be considered in the design stage by applicants and in the assessment phase by Council if it is to be effective. Cumulative impacts will be a relevant consideration in undertaking this assessment. If the assessment process is undertaken carefully and conditions are imposed that address amenity and privacy (e.g. location, design, landscaping, etc) then these issues should be adequately addressed.
3. Traffic will be excessive and rural roads are not good enough to take it.
Comment: Some rural roads will be unsuitable for additional traffic and this will be a consideration at the time of assessing any development application. A development application could be refused if traffic concerns cannot be properly addressed. Council also has the right to collect Section 94 contributions for road and infrastructure upgrades. This may assist in improvements in some locations. It is a merit issue that will be considered for each development application. Currently Section 94 contributions are waived for secondary dwellings. For more information on this issue please refer to report ‘Waiving Development Contributions – Secondary Dwellings’ that is also reported to the 11 June Council Meeting.
4. The additional dwellings will impact on the environment including Koalas. With no E zones in place we should not be allowing more dwellings.
Comment: It is possible that additional dwellings will impact on native vegetation (through bushfire buffers for example) and this could include Koala habitat. However SEPP 44 applies to land of 1 hectare or more and Council also must consider impacts on the natural environment under Section 79C of the EPA Act, 1979, the Native Vegetation Act 2003 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 for any development application. There is also a requirement in the amending LEP clause that states “the land is physically suitable for the development”. This includes the biodiversity of the location.
5. Potential for conflict with farming in the locality with agriculture being impacted negatively.
Comment: Detached dual occupancy dwellings (and secondary dwellings) in some cases will be used by family or farm workers who reside on the property. Where they are rented to someone not working on the farm it will be the landowners’ responsibility to ensure the tenants are aware of the working nature of the farm and its neighbours. Council has developed an information brochure specifically for this purpose that may assist. Neighbouring land use will be a consideration in the approval process and location of the detached dual occupancy is important. There is also a requirement in the amending LEP clause that states “the development will not impair the use of the land for agriculture or rural industries”. This issue will be addressed in the assessment process and is discussed in more detail below in response to comments received from the Department of Primary Industries.
Discussion of Issues Raised by Government Agencies
Comment: The advice is noted. Council will require this assessment if the locality is bushfire prone. It can be a reason for refusal if the matter has not been properly dealt with or may result in conditions of approval that relate to bushfire buffers and building construction.
(i) The planning proposal does not consider the long term implications or cumulative impacts on agriculture and resources
(ii) The planning proposal is not consistent with the objectives of the RU1 zone
(iii) The planning proposal is not well justified by an independent study or evidence
(iv) The planning proposal is not consistent with the Governments position on affordable housing
(v) The decision for additional housing is not reversible
(vi) The planning proposal does not address land use conflict, increased land values, or sterilisation of resources in the long term
(vii) A landscape of houses will make it difficult for new agribusiness to occur in the Shire
(i) Long term implications or cumulative impacts are difficult to gauge when applications are dealt with on a merits basis at a single point in time. However, the amending LEP clause requires that the development “will not impair the use of the land for agriculture or rural industries.” Council can refuse a development application if this requirement cannot be achieved. There is no assumption that all properties will be suited to additional dwellings.
(ii) The objectives of the RU1 zone are broad and include protecting the natural resource base, encouraging primary industries, minimise land fragmentation, minimise land use conflict, encourage lot consolidation, enable rural tourism, and protect scenic landscapes. The matters for consideration to be included in the LEP amendment are specifically aimed at ensuring any additional dwellings are consistent with the objectives of the RU1 (and RU2) zones.
(iii) Council has not undertaken an independent study of this issue. However, significant precedent has been provided by Lismore City and Kyogle Shire whose LEP’s permit rural detached dual occupancy dwellings. The Lismore experience is that it received ten DA’s in the first twelve months with seven of these being for existing unapproved structures.
(iv) Affordable housing is best located in an urban environment with easy access to facilities and services. However, in some circumstances such as family members wanting to remain on the farm, detached dual occupancy or secondary dwellings can be more affordable than moving off the land.
(v) The comment is noted. Council is able to revisit this issue if over time it considers the outcomes to be unacceptable.
(vi) The potential for land use conflict is a real and a valid concern and a matter that Council can consider in assessing any applications. It is a consideration for attached dual occupancy in chapter D2 of Byron DCP 2014, which states: “development must be located so that it does not create potential conflict with adjoining agricultural activities or other legitimate land uses.” This chapter is to be amended to also apply to rural detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings.
(vii) Council does not anticipate a “landscape of houses” as a result of this LEP amendment. It is expected that there will be an initial increase in interest and many of these may be for existing (unapproved) structures. The requirement for a shared vehicular access and a location of 100 metres from the primary dwelling should minimise sterilisation of rural land from future rural industries.
There are concerns about the potential for some detached rural dual occupancy or secondary dwellings to be used for holiday letting or cause problems with land use conflicts. However, this has to be weighed against the potential benefits to those in need of additional options for rural housing. On balance the planning proposal should proceed without any amendments.
As this is a Council-initiated planning proposal the administration cost has been met by Council.
For information regarding the financial implications of secondary dwellings please refer to report ‘Waiving Development Contributions – Secondary Dwellings’ that is also reported to the 11 June Council Meeting.
Council has followed the statutory process to amend Byron LEP 2014 through this planning proposal. Council should now consider the submissions received and issues raised, and decide whether to proceed to finalise the planning proposal (either with or without amendments). The Minister for Planning and Environment has issued an authorisation for Council to exercise delegation to make this LEP amendment should Council decide to proceed with it.
This report presents the public exhibition outcomes on a planning proposal to allow multiple occupancy development with consent at 226 Fowlers Lane, Bangalow.
Council received a Gateway determination to proceed with the planning proposal from the Department of Planning and Environment in October 2014. The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition from 8 April 2015 until 22 April 2015. One submission has been received conditionally in favour of the planning proposal. Consultation feedback has also been received from two government agencies (NSW Rural Fire Service and NSW Trade and Investment).
1 Planning Proposal to allow multiple occupancy development with consent at 226 Fowlers Lane, Bangalow, E2015/19030
2 Multiple Occupancy and Community Title Map Sheet, E2015/20214
3 Site Identification Map, E2015/20218
4 Confidential - Submissions to Planning Proposal, E2015/32106
5 Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest, E2012/2815
Council received a planning proposal request from Balanced Systems Planning Consultants seeking to amend the Multiple Occupancy and Community Title Map of the Byron Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014. The intent of the planning proposal is to allow multiple occupancy development to be permissible with Council consent at 226 Fowlers Lane, Bangalow (Lot 6 DP 261219).
The background to this planning proposal being that the inclusion of this property was not supported by the Minister for Planning and Environment’s delegate when Byron LEP 2014 was approved despite Council’s support for this outcome on the land. As the provisions of the LEP can only be amended by a planning proposal (also known as a LEP amendment), this request has subsequently been made by the landowners.
The Department of Planning and Environment has advised via a Gateway determination that the planning proposal should proceed to public exhibition. Public exhibition has been undertaken for a period of 14 days from 8 April 2015 until 22 April 2015. In response to the public exhibition:
· One submission has been received from the public,
· Two government agency submissions have been received from NSW Rural Fire Service and NSW Trade and Investment.
A copy of the submissions are provided in Attachment 4.
Discussion of Issues Raised by Submission ‘in Support’
Supports the proposal provided all monies received by Council for the proposed development go towards upgrading Fowlers Lane. The first 900m of the lane is dangerous. Council should not miss the opportunity to use combined funds from 111, 112 and 226 Fowlers Lane to rebuild the first half of the lane to an acceptable safety standard.
Developer contributions for rural roads will be payable for development that occurs along Fowlers Lane, however the funds raised from developer contributions are not scheduled to be used specifically on Fowlers Lane. This is because upgrading work on Fowlers Lane is not identified for funding through section 94 contributions. As upgrading the road is not a section 94 matter it must be considered under the terms of S79C at the development application (DA) stage.
Section 80A (1) (a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 empowers Council to impose conditions of consent to address the impacts of the development as they relate to section 79C. For example Council has recently issued a development consent for a multiple occupancy development at 111 Fowlers Lane. In considering the DA it was identified that the lane does not conform to the current AUSTROADS standards. It was calculated that the development at 111 Fowlers Lane was responsible for the upgrade of Fowlers lane for 21.8% of the length of the road that is below standard. In the DA assessment report the upgrade works to Fowlers Lane were considered to be reasonable mitigation of the traffic/roadworks issue, and to be generally in the public interest. For this reason the cost of the upgrade works are able to be covered by roadworks contributions provided as ‘Material Public Benefit’. Conditions of consent were imposed to this effect. The same approach can be applied to the proposed development at 226 Fowlers Lane.
The RFS does not object to the use of the land for multiple occupancy development. However the RFS was concerned with the layout shown in a concept site plan that has since been removed from the planning proposal. It was noted by the RFS that this concept site plan was inconsistent with S117 Direction 4.4 Planning for Bushfire Protection and any development application that showed this site layout would not be supported by the RFS. Of concern was that a single access was shown with no alternative access arrangement. Also, the RFS advise that the vegetation restoration program referred to must be prepared in accordance with the specifications and requirements of the Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006 (PBP).
The concept site plan referred to by the RFS was removed from the planning proposal prior to its public exhibition. It is noted that both the site layout plan and the vegetation restoration plan must be consistent with S117 Direction 4.4 Planning for Bushfire and PBP. The matters raised by RFS will be addressed when Council considers a development application for multiple occupancy development on the site.
NSW Trade and Investment – Geological Survey
NSW Trade and Investment – Geological Survey of NSW has no issues with the proposal and considers it consistent with Ministerial Direction 1.3 – Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries.
The advice is noted.
As this is considered a Council-initiated planning proposal, given the background, the administration cost has been met by Council.
Council has followed the statutory process to amend Byron LEP 2014 through this planning proposal. Council should now consider the submissions received and issues raised, and decide whether to proceed to finalise the planning proposal (either with or without amendments). The Minister for Planning and Environment has issued an authorisation for Council to exercise delegation to make this LEP amendment.
The purpose of this report is to seek direction from Council on the data and assumptions that underpin the charging of section 94 contributions. This report arises from the workshop held with Councillors on 16 April 2015.
New population growth information has been released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics that show growth within the Byron Local Government Area (LGA) has increased rapidly over the last three years. The main driver of this population growth has been secondary dwellings. The waiving of developer contributions for these dwellings has been a significant factor in the production of secondary dwellings. Previous reports had recommended the removal of the waiver. This report proposes an investigation of an alternative solution to encourage the production of smaller dwellings to cater for increase in “couple only” and “single person” households out to the year 2031. To limit the impacts on Council’s finances it is proposed to provide a 25% discount for 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings to be funded by an increased charge on larger dwellings. This mechanism will enable Council to provide the required infrastructure without subsidisation from the general rate base.
d) Change the allocation of the number of persons per dwelling from a mean of 2.4 per dwelling to 1.1 persons per bedroom;
e) Factor in a charge for each additional bedroom in a dwelling above 3 three bedrooms up to the limit of the $20,000 cap;
f) Remove the waiving of contributions for secondary dwellings;
g) Factor in a 25% discount on the per bedroom charge for 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings;
h) The 25% discount for 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings is to be funded by a corresponding increase in the charge for dwellings with more than 3 bedrooms;
i) Retain the existing catchments to ensure that funds collected in a catchment are spent in that catchment;
j) Investigate the use of a single shire wide apportionment rate due to dispersed growth caused by secondary dwellings and detached dual occupancies in rural areas.
2. That a workshop be held with Councillors to review the draft Section 94 Contributions Plan.
3 That the draft Section 94 Contributions Plan be reported back to Council following the workshop.
The purpose of this report is to seek direction from Council on the methodology to be used to calculate developer charges for section 94 contributions. At the meeting of 9 April 2015 Council considered Report 13.8 Review of the Waiving of developer contributions for secondary dwellings and Council resolved:
A workshop was held on 16 April 2015 where the issues of population growth caused by secondary dwellings was extensively discussed. Further questions were raised about the basis for the growth the projections and data used in the contributions plan as well as equity issues relating to proportional charging for larger dwellings. At the conclusion of the workshop there was no clear direction from the Councillors present on how to proceed. Staff have subsequently reviewed the latest data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and from the Department of Planning. This new data will be used to advise Council on how best to select a methodology for calculating developer charges.
The following section of the report is to inform Councillors on the 3 different types of data used to make the population projections and to advise on the limitations of that data.
The population projections in the 2012 Byron Developer Contributions Plan were based upon the 2011 census. The census provides two sets of population data. The first set is based upon “place of enumeration” (POE). The ABS Census dictionary provides the following information on POE:
“The population count for place of enumeration is a count of every person, who spends Census Night in Australia, based on where he/she is counted. It includes people on board vessels in or between Australian ports, or on long-distance trains, buses or aircraft. This count is also known as a de facto population count.
This type of count provides a snapshot in any given area. Although the Census is timed to attempt to capture the typical situation, holiday resort areas, such as the Gold Coast and snow fields, may show a large enumeration count compared with the usual residence count.”
The other type of data that the ABS provides from the census is based on Place of Usual Residence. The ABS Census dictionary provides the following information on Place of Usual Residence:
“This is the place where a person usually lives. It may, or may not be the place where the person was counted on Census Night. Each person is required to state his/her address of usual residence in Question 8. The count of persons at their usual residence is known as the de jure population count.
For the 2001 and 2006 Censuses, usual residence data was available at Collection District (CD) level. For the 2011 Census, usual residence data are available for Statistical Area Level 1 (SA1), however it is only coded if sufficient information is supplied. If respondents give insufficient usual address information, their usual residence will be imputed at SA1 level. The variable Imputation Flag for Place of Usual Residence (IFPURP) is used to indicate if a person's place of usual residence has been imputed for the Census.
Characteristics of individuals are available for SA1s and aggregations of SA1s.
Census usual residence counts form the basis of the Estimated Resident Population (ERP).”
In the intervening years between the Census, the ABS produces another set of data called the Estimated Resident Population (ERP). The ERP most accurately predicts the total population of the LGA for any given year. In Census years the ERP is based on Census counts by place of usual residence (excluding short-term overseas visitors in Australia), with an allowance for Census net undercount, to which are added the estimated number of Australian residents temporarily overseas at the time of the Census. The Census net undercount is those persons who decline to provide data for the Census. In the intervening years the ERP uses births and deaths and net migration to estimate the change in the ERP. Net migration is determined by including electoral roll registrations, family allowance payments, medicare information and defence force data. Whilst the ERP is the most accurate prediction of the total population for the LGA its usefulness for contributions planning is limited. The smallest geographical area that the ABS provides ERP data for is the whole of the LGA. ERP cannot be used to identify the population of an individual town within the LGA. Staff made the decision to base the contributions plan on Place of Usual Residence census data as this data was available down to a level that would be compatible with the catchment areas in the S94 plan that was being developed.
The Department of Planning’s Centre for Demography, Economics & Research also produce population and housing projections for each LGA in NSW. These are based upon the ERP. The following table shows all of these data sets for comparison.
ABS Census Population count (place of usual residence) Actual
ABS Estimated Resident Population, Local Government Areas, New South Wales March 2015
Department Of Planning: New South Wales State and Local Government Area Population, Household and Dwelling Projections: 2014 Final
Byron Shire Council Section 94 Plan Population Projections 2012
Table 1 Population Data Sets for Byron LGA. (Numbers in blue are projections).
Changes in the Population and Housing Data
It should be noted that the differences in start points for the data sets are not critical to their use in population projections. The important information is in the growth rate or rate of change between the years (or five year increments). This rate of change is best shown graphically.
Graph 1: Population Data and Projections for Byron LGA.
From 2006 though to 2011 the growth rates are very low as shown by the purple and red lines in this time period. Growth in this time period was running at 0.31% per annum. The probable causes of this were the sewer moratorium operating in the LGA and the global financial crisis (GFC). The projections in the S94 plan (blue line) show growth accelerating from 2011. The growth projections in the section 94 plan were based upon continued infill development with a growth rate of 0.31% per annum across the LGA with additional population growth coming from new Greenfield release areas in Bangalow, West Byron, Bayside Brunswick, West Mullumbimby. The predicted lot yields done in 2011 for the S94 plan for these greenfield sites accelerated growth in the LGA up to 1.61% per annum by 2016 and tapering down 1.36% per annum from 2016 to 2021. It is to be noted that of the predicted 1450 new lots in the greenfield sites approximately 100 have been constructed in Mullumbimby. The remainder of these lots has yet to have houses constructed upon them.
The ABS ERP data (red line) shows a similar flat growth 0.32% per annum from 2005 to 2011. It accelerates up to 1.02% in 2012, 1.89% in 2013 and 1.61% in 2014. This accelerated growth in the population matches the predictions in the S94 plan. But the predictions in the S94 plan are based on developments that have not yet occurred. This raises the question of what has caused the additional growth? To answer this question staff have analysed the housing approvals from 2005 to 2014.
Analysis of the housing approvals in the LGA from 2005 to 2014 shows a significant change in the types of housing being produced.
Chart 2 Dwelling Approvals 2005 to 2014
As shown in chart 2, the approval of dual occupancies has stayed relatively stable over this period with a long term mean of 25 dwellings PA. The approval of dwelling houses has run at a long term mean of 109 dwellings per annum. A significant drop in single dwelling approvals occurred post GFC. It is to be noted that there is a lag time of 2-3 years for full affects of the GFC that occurred in 2007-2008 to flow through into the housing market. The most significant change in dwelling approvals occurs in 2011 with the rapid increase in the number of secondary dwelling approvals. This increase coincides with the waiver of the developer charges for secondary dwellings. Correlation does not automatically mean causation but in the absence of any other changed policy settings or outside influences it is probable that the significant increase in secondary dwelling production is the cause of the above trend population growth.
Dwelling Predictions and Future Household Structure
Staff have reviewed the Census data to see if there has been any change in the occupancy rates per dwelling or per bedroom.
Mean Persons per Dwelling
Mean Persons Per Bedroom
Table 2 Time Series Profile ABS Census Dwelling Occupancy
This shows there has been no change in occupancy rates of dwellings over time. The Department of Planning’s Centre for Demography, Economics & Research 2014 predictions for household size indicate that the mean household size will decrease over time as shown in table 3.
Table 3 2014 NSW Predicted Household Size 2011 to 2031 (Department of Planning)
Staff do not necessarily agree with the Department’s demographers stating point of 2.31 persons per dwelling in 2011 given the discrepancy with the census data that shows an actual count of 2.4 persons per dwelling. However, the declining number of persons per dwelling over time in the predictions is accepted. The reason for the declining number of persons per dwelling is due to an aging population. The aging population will lead to a significant change in household type. Table 4 sets out the Department of Planning’s predicted change in household type out to 2031.
Table 4 Household Structure 2011 to 2031 (Department of Planning)
Table 3 shows that Couple only and Single Person households contribute most to the changing household types with increases of 1000 and 1050 new households of these types from 2011 to 2031. This is an increase of 24.39% and 22.58% for these types households respectively. The changing household type will have an impact on the structure (number of bedrooms) in the dwellings that will be needed to house this population.
The Department of Planning 2014 Household and Dwelling Projections predicts that Byron Council will need a further 3100 dwellings by 2031. The 2012 Byron Developer Contributions Plan predicted an additional 3700 dwellings would be required by 2031. Neither of these predictions took into account the increased population growth created by the surge in secondary dwellings.
The increase in secondary dwellings has shown that the contributions charging rates can have a significant impact on the type of dwellings being produced.
In report I2015/203 Council is considering making an amendment to LEP 2014 to allow for detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings on rural zoned land. This change in policy will likely drive a further increase in dwelling production and population increase. If this LEP amendment proceeds there will be higher than expected growth in the rural catchments. It is highly likely that the preference for the type of dwelling to be produced will be determined by the amount of contributions to be levied. If Council proceeds with the LEP amendment then the expected population growth will need to be factored into the section 94 plan.
What the changes in the population and housing data mean for the S94 Plan
The fundamental basis for section 94 contributions is that new population generates a demand for public facilities. The cost of those facilities is split (apportioned) between the existing rate base and the new population. The new population’s share of the total cost of works shared out on a per person basis over the entire new population and then allocated. If population growth occurs and contributions are forgone, then Council either may choose not to provide the required facilities or Council must find an alternative source of funding to build the infrastructure. The data from the ABS has shown that population growth has occurred. If there are no changes to the policy of waiving developer contributions and Council opens up more land available for secondary dwellings the population growth due to secondary dwellings will continue.
The predicted changes to household type over time indicate that Council needs to support an increase in single bedroom and two bedrooms dwellings over the next 20 years. Council’s ability to influence the number of bedrooms in dwellings being constructed has in the past been extremely limited. The waiving of developer contributions has been marginally successful in making housing more affordable but it has been successful in the provision of single bedroom dwellings. It is evident that the cost of contributions can be a significant factor in determining the structure of the dwelling to be constructed.
The waiving of contributions in their entirety will have a continued adverse impact upon Council’s finances and the ability to provide infrastructure to a growing population. Because of this impact it is unacceptable from a financial sustainability perspective to allow this to continue. The ability to influence the number of bedrooms to be constructed by differential charging of section 94 contributions is a mechanism that should be used by Council to encourage the provision of housing to suit an aging population. In this regard an option for Council to achieve a diversity of housing by way of the continued production of smaller dwellings is to consider a cross subsidisation of smaller dwellings by the larger dwellings. This cross subsidy should be applied to not just secondary dwellings but to all single and two bedroom dwellings. The S94 plan would be reworked such that contributions are calculated on a per person basis of 1.1 persons per bedroom based on the ABS data and a further 25% discount be given to 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings. For a comparison between the current s94 plan occupancy rates and charges and the rates proposed based on preliminary modelling see table 5.
2012 S94 Plan
Proposed 2014 S94 Plan
Current Charge in Byron Bay
Proposed Charge in Byron Bay
Proposed Charge with 25% discount for 1 & 2 Bedroom Dwellings
9,222.91
11,272.45
8,454.34
12,297.22
Table 5 Comparison between Occupancy Rates and Charges in 2012 S94 Plan and Proposed S94 Plan.
The 25% cross subsidy is funded via the increased charge on dwellings with 4 or more bedrooms. The guidelines for the preparation of section 94 plans are silent on the use of cross subsidies. The $20,000 cap on contributions imposed by Ministerial direction limits Council’s ability to increase the s94 charge above the cap for 4 bedroom dwellings or above. Byron Bay was chosen as an example of how the proposed charging regime would work as this is where the majority of growth is predicted to occur.
An updated section 94 plan would also need to remodel the population projections based the increased growth caused by secondary dwellings to date and over the life of the plan. This will likely alter the apportionment rates across the entire plan. It is not proposed to amend the catchments or the methodology of how the funds are allocated within the plan. Higher growth rates across the entire LGA will improve the apportionment rate across all of the catchments. Higher apportionment rates may make it viable to have one apportionment rate and one charge across all of the catchments.
Parameters for the draft plan
Based upon the new data released by the ABS the following parameters will be used by staff to prepare a draft plan:
1 Increased population growth due to secondary dwellings;
2 Increased population growth due to secondary dwellings and detached dual occupancies in rural zones;
3 Retain the existing growth predictions for the greenfield release areas (West Byron, Tallowwood, Bayside and subdivisions in Bangalow);
4 Change the allocation of the number of persons per dwelling from a mean of 2.4 per dwelling to 1.1 persons per bedroom;
5 Factor in a charge for each additional bedroom in a dwelling above 3 three bedrooms up to the limit of the $20,000 cap;
6 Remove the waiving of contributions for secondary dwellings;
7 Factor in a 25% discount on the per bedroom charge for 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings;
8 The 25% discount for 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings is to be funded by a corresponding increase in the charge for dwellings with more than 3 bedrooms;
9 Retain the existing catchments to ensure that funds collected in a catchment are spent in that catchment;
10 Investigate the use of a single shire wide apportionment rate due to dispersed growth caused by secondary dwellings and detached dual occupancies in rural areas;
The increase in the number of secondary dwellings where no contributions are collected has two significant financial implications for Council. The first impact is the contributions forgone as was discussed extensively in “Report 13.8 I2015/419 Review of the waiving of developer contributions for secondary dwellings” as reported to Council on 9 April 2015. This means that the General Fund will have to contribute to the deficit in the s94 plan caused by secondary dwellings if Council wishes to complete all of the works in the works schedules of the s94 plan. Alternatively Council may reduce the scope of the works schedules.
The second impact is that this population growth does not correspond to an increase in the rate base for Council. Secondary dwellings are not able to be subdivided from the main dwelling house. A secondary dwelling produces and income stream for the land owner but it does not become a separate rateable property. The secondary dwelling does not alter the unimproved capital value of the land. There is no increase in rates due to new assessable properties or increased land values due to secondary dwellings. There is a cost to Council to provide the facilities and services to this increased population.
Amending the section 94 plan to take account of this new population growth would limit these financial impacts. By applying a cross subsidy to all 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings and not just secondary dwellings Council would be encouraging the creating of more rateable properties (unlike the secondary dwelling that are not rateable). The cross subsidy would be explicit in the s94 plan and would be cost neutral to Council.
There is a cost implication in terms of the staff time required to prepare a new growth model and section 94 plan. The amendments to the growth model will take approximately 4-6 weeks to complete and an estimated further 2 weeks to integrate into the works schedules. The cost of the staff time will be funded from the s94 plan administration levy.
A draft contributions plan would require exhibition and adoption in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. This report does not seek to initiate the exhibition process. The draft plan will be reported back for Council to determine if it wishes to exhibit the draft plan, amend the draft plan or not proceed with the draft plan.
This report presents the public exhibition outcomes on a Planning Proposal to rezone part of Lot 5 DP 880917, Shara Boulevard, Ocean Shores, to RE1 Public Recreation. This will enable recreation and sporting facilities to be permissible with Council consent at the site.
Council received a Gateway Approval from the Department of Planning and Environment in February 2015. The Planning Proposal was placed on public exhibition from 22 April 2015 until 20 May 2015. One submission has been received in favour of the planning proposal. Consultation feedback has also been received from two government agencies (NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and NSW Roads and Maritime Services).
The Minister for Planning and Environment has issued an authorisation for Council to exercise delegation to make this Local Environmental Plan (LEP) amendment should Council decide to proceed with it. This report recommends that Council proceed with the planning proposal without amendment.
1 Planning Proposal - North Ocean Shores Sports Field, E2015/2396
2 Land Zoning Map, E2015/22598
3 Site Identification Map, E2015/22602
4 Confidential - Submissions to Planning Proposal, E2015/32761
5 Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest Form, E2012/2815
Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 11 December 2014, considered the need to amend its LEP 2014 to enable the development of the North Ocean Shores Sports Field and resolved as follows:
“2. That Council endorses the North Ocean Shores Sports Field Planning Proposal (#E2014/78554 as amended by Cr Cameron) for submission to the Department of Planning and Environment as amended without the proposal to reclassify the land from 'community' to 'operational'.”
The proposal specifically relates to the “disturbed” north-western portion of Lot 5 DP880917, Shara Boulevard, North Ocean Shores, where the primary objective is to deliver a new soccer field and associated amenities. To this end it is proposed that land in the north-western portion of the lot be rezoned to RE1 Public Recreation. The proposed rezoning is listed as a critical project for Council.
The Department of Planning and Environment issued a Gateway Determination enabling the Planning Proposal to proceed subject to a number of conditions. One of these conditions is that Council undertake consultation with the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, NSW Roads and Maritime Services and Local Aboriginal Land Council under Section 56 (2)(d) of the EP&A Act. Accordingly, letters seeking comment were sent to these government agencies.
Public exhibition was undertaken for a period of 28 days from 22 April 2015 until 20 May 2015.
· One submission has been received from the public.
· Two government agency submissions have been received from NSW Roads and Maritime Services and NSW Office of Environment and Heritage
A copy of the submissions are provided in confidential Attachment 4.
Discussion of Issue Raised by Submission ‘in Support’
Support for the proposed rezoning of the land enabling the provision of sport and recreation facilities. Also support for the use of land for more than one field and other recreational and sporting facilities.
The submitter’s support is noted.
OEH recommends that prior to finalising the planning proposal Council should:
1 Ensure appropriate assessment and consideration has been undertaken for biodiversity including the use of the ‘avoid, mitigate and offset’ approach in determining a suitable future development for the site and ensure any biodiversity impacts are offset.
2 Incorporate the existing biodiversity offset area planted on the site as a requirement of development approval for the construction of a service station onto the planning proposal to ensure the offset is managed in perpetuity.
3 Ensure appropriate assessment and consideration has been undertaken for intangible Aboriginal cultural heritage as part of the planning proposal.
4 Consider the potential climate change impact on the flood assessment as part of the planning proposal.
5 Consider how any future development will impact the adjoining nature reserve.
Development consent is not required for the subject activity by virtue of Division 12 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. As such, the proposal becomes an ‘activity’ for the purposes of Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and is subject to an environmental impact assessment.
A ‘Review of Environmental Factors’ (REF) has been prepared by GeoLINK on behalf of Council. At the time of writing this report the REF is in draft and nearing completion. For the purposes of the proposed works, Byron Shire Council is the proponent and the determining authority under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).
The purpose of the REF is to describe the proposal, to document the likely impacts of the proposal on the environment, and to detail protective/mitigation measures to be implemented. The review of environmental impacts has been undertaken in context of clause 228 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).
In doing so, the REF helps to fulfil the requirements of Section 111 of the EP&A Act, which requires Council to examine and take into account, to the fullest extent possible, all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment by reason of the activity.
As such the REF assessment includes the issues raised by OEH and a response taken from that document is provided below. It should also be noted that Council’s Capital Projects Officer has recently contacted OEH to arrange a consultation meeting. The issues are addressed in order of the above OEH comment summary.
1 In respect to possible impacts on biodiversity the REF outlines environmental safeguards, management measures and recommends compensation measures. These would be incorporated during construction and operation of the proposal. These safeguards would minimise any potential adverse impacts arising from the proposal on the surrounding environment. All safeguards described in the REF would be incorporated into a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).
2 Development consent was previously issued for the construction of a service station on the land (DA 1993.118). Filling associated with that approval was carried out in the north-western part of the site, resulting in the clearing of vegetation and a raised ‘fill pad’, with an area of approximately 0.89 ha. While the filling and offset planting associated with that approval was undertaken no further development occurred. The location of the proposed sports field will result in the loss of the offset planting; however this loss has been accounted for in the recommended compensatory measures in the REF.
3 An Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) search was undertaken for the site. No sites of cultural significance have been registered within the search area.
Additional onsite Aboriginal heritage assessment was undertaken by Spinifex Heritage and an Aboriginal Party representative from the Byron Bay Tweed Shire Aboriginal Land Council on 28 January 2015. The findings of the assessment determined that the proposal is not likely to impact on any places or items of significance. The REF states that as the proposal is considered to present low risk to Aboriginal heritage no additional consultation is required at this stage. At the time of writing this report no response had been received from the Tweed/Byron Local Aboriginal Land Council in response to a request for comment.
4 Prior to purchasing the land, Council commissioned BMT WBM to review the flood risk at the site and to estimate the impact of the proposed development on peak flood levels.
BMT WBM noted that the site lies on the Marshalls Creek floodplain, immediately downstream of a floodway through the Pacific Highway. BMT WBM noted that the existing fill pad constructed on the site is flood immune in the 100 year Annual Recurrence Interval (ARI) flood. Subsequent to this preliminary assessment, flood modelling has been undertaken to include climate change considerations which were found not to require an increase in flood immunity for the site.
5 Please refer to 1 above.
Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) generally has no safety or traffic concerns with the proposal. In planning access to the site the following matters should be considered:
- Direct access from the highway to the sporting field will not be considered by RMS,
- All access to the sporting field should be from Shara Boulevard and AUSTROADS standard adopted for the access design.
The advice is noted
Council has followed the statutory process to amend the Byron LEP 2014 through this planning proposal. Council should now consider the submissions received and issues raised, and decide whether to proceed to finalise the planning proposal (either with or without amendments). The Minister for Planning and Environment has issued an authorisation for Council to exercise delegation to make this LEP amendment should Council decide to proceed with it.
10.2014.760.1
373 Left Bank Road
Mr M Bown & Ms K D Barnes
29 Goondooloo Drive
Multi dwelling development (3 units)
10.2015.161.1
Mr N G Eichler
10.2014.503.1
18-22 Marvel Street
Demolition of existing dwellings and shed/ bowls room and construction of ancillary accommodation comprising 5 x 1 bedroom and 3 x 2 bedroom cabins plus associated tree removal
The extent of variation to Council policies proposed
40 Mullumbimbi Street
Alterations to a dwelling and a new residential flat building
Council has also determined the following original development application. The Section 96 application to modify the development consent has been referred to the Planning Review Committee to decide if the modification application can be determined under delegated authority.
10.2011.508.2
5 Mona Lane
S96 to alter the approved design – two storey apartment building / three units
Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.11
A request has been received from Balanced Systems Planning Consultants and Planners North for an “Early Implementation Program to supplement Council’s Rural Land Use Strategy Initiative”, (Attachment 1).
In short the request specifically seeks Council’s consideration of an amendment to its existing Byron Rural Settlement Strategy (BRSS) 1988, which if endorsed by Council (and the Department of Planning and Environment) would enable lodgement of multiple planning proposals for the properties to be rezoned for rural residential subdivision.
The reason given by the consultants for this request is their concern over the timing of the development of Council’s Rural Land Use Strategy, and in their opinion the resultant need to have a “stop gap measure to correct anomalies and provide urgently needed rural residential subdivision product to the marketplace” now.
The purpose of this report is to provide the details of the program proposal to Council as submitted by the consultants, with staff comments.
For reasons discussed in this report this approach is considered pre-emptive and preferential to some land owners over others, and as a consequence will undermine the credibility of the Rural Land Use Strategy process commenced, and is not supported as the approach to managing such an important issue as the Shire’s future settlement pattern.
That Council not support the “Early Implementation Program to supplement Council’s Rural Land Use Strategy Initiative and instead consider these properties in the Byron Rural Land Use Strategy now under preparation.
1 Proposal for early Implementation Program, E2015/33229
2 Consultants presentation to 7 May 2015 SP Workshop, E2015/33195
3 Consultants Assessment of properties against site selection criteria, E2015/33228
On 7 April 2015, Balanced Systems Planning Consultants and Planners North wrote to Council to request consideration of an early implementation program to supplement Council’s Rural Land Use Strategy Initiative. This request included nine properties:
1. R & C Mudge
Lot 27 DP 1016168
Mountain View Crt Billinudgel
Minor expansion to existing Zone R5 land around already serviced area– adjust minimum lot size map
Create an additional say 5 rural residential lots
2. D & A Hope
Lot 8 DP 589795
53 McAuleys Lane Mullumbimby
Create an additional say 12 rural residential lots
3. N Morrison
Lot 2 DP 859817 & Lot 1 DP 1116009
Create an additional say 6 rural residential lots
4.A Maxwell
Lot 6 DP 792431
Balraith Lane Ewingsdale
Minor expansion to existing Zone R5 land – adjust minimum lot size map
Create an additional say 5 to 7 rural residential lots
5.S & P Alidnes
Lot 21 DP 259447
Hyrama Crescent
Adjust minimum lot size map
Allows one addition lot
6.BHCF
Lot 1 DP 10318482
To provide conventional titling arrangements for an existing approved use
The creation 33 CT Lots
7.J & N McDonald
Woodford Lane, Ewingsdale
Rural residential subdivision and provision of land for park & ride facility
Creation of say 20 rural residential lots and provision of land for a possible future Park and Ride facility
8.DeVendra
Lot 7 DP 1091198
Fix anomaly with MO map
9.Raywood Community
Lot 13 DP 615522
307 Skinners Shoot Road
Regularise existing MO
The consultants were given the opportunity to brief councillors directly on their proposal on 7 May 2015. (Attachment 2)
The consultants have advised that the basis for their site selection is that the properties chosen are of low controversy and have otherwise been considered by Council previously, but deferred to the Rural Land Use Strategy process.
Following queries made by certain Councillors at the 7 May 2015 briefing, the consultants submitted further information to support their site selections (Attachment 3). The consultant’s site selection criteria is summarised below:
· Property already included in BRSS but fettered in some manner;
· Council has engaged and consulted the landowner regarding future rural settlement;
· Proceeding with the proposal would be consistent with the existing or intended settlement pattern of the site or locality;
· Proceeding with the proposal brings with it special public interest community benefits (beyond normal additional housing/rates/contributions/ecological restoration); and
· Proceeding with the proposal would not create significant demands on local infrastructure.
The existing rural strategies such as the 1998 Byron Rural Settlement Strategy and 2004 Sustainable Agricultural Strategy are in need of review. As such preparation of a new Rural Land Use Strategy has commenced, and is a priority project for the 2015/2016 Operational Plan.
The Rural Land Use Strategy will be an integrated strategy, underpinned by environment, economy, social and governance considerations. As such the strategy will deliver a full strategic assessment of settlement needs including: development opportunities and constraints, infrastructure provision, environmental capacity and landscape values for the Byron Shire.
A project timeline has been developed to support the strategy preparation in the most expeditious manner notwithstanding that it is a 12 – 18 month process; the key stages of the project include:
1.Rural Land Use Discussion Paper
2.Rural Opportunities and Constraints Study and Mapping
3.Policy Directions Paper
4.Rural Land Use Strategy
5.Implementation: Amend planning controls (LEP &DCP)
Stage one of the process has occurred with the exhibition of the Rural Land Use Discussion Paper. Further, consultants have been engaged to undertake the next stage of the vegetation mapping for the Shire. These two components form necessary precursors to the later stages of the Strategy. This has been previously discussed with Councillors at workshop sessions.
Initial discussions have occurred with the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) about the Rural Land Use Strategy process and methodology, due to the current review of the Far North Coast Regional Strategy. The DPE are supportive of the Council process.
A preliminary review of the relevant particulars of the selected properties has confirmed that they are outside of the current local and regional strategy framework and corresponding settlement planning guidelines for the far north coast LGAs. Most of these properties contain ‘Deferred Matter land’ and as such any assessment is dependant on the E zone review which, although subject to State Government’s release of the final report, will be progressed as part of the main Strategy process based on the information available at the time. The review of the vegetation mapping will assist in this regard. Further, most of the properties listed have a current Council resolution deferring their consideration for any development/zone change to the main Strategy due to planning and/or environmental issues associated with their individual site assessments.
As such it could be viewed by the community as premature to review and/or support the rezoning of these particular properties ahead of the others currently deferred for consideration in the main Strategy.
With this in mind the program proposal as submitted raises a number of concerns, as follows:
· A dual and separate process has the potential to be viewed by the community as an alternate/fast track pathway for landowners outside of the main Strategy and once this expectation is created, may not be able to be managed reasonably or equitably by council;
· A dual and separate process has the potential to see other landowners bring forward their properties for consideration, not part of this proposal, during the exhibition of amendments to the BRSS. There is no way to quantify this, and if this occurs, consideration of these properties will be at the expense of the main Strategy work as there would be an expectation that staff would then be assessing these properties at the same time as well;
· A dual and separate process that establishes criteria for certain sites to be selected has the potential to be viewed as preferential by design and not by assessment, particularly by other landowners that have land that is to be assessed through the main Strategy (possibly under different criteria) as per Council resolution. This raises concerns about procedural equity and fairness;
· A dual and separate process will take staff resources away from the main Strategy as staff resources will still be required to prepare an RFQ/EOI, run the RFQ/EOI process, engage, brief and then manage any consultant engaged to complete the work for council;
· A dual and separate process has the potential to diminish the importance of the main Strategy and of more significance to Council, undermine the broader community’s confidence in Council’s local strategic planning processes.
· A dual and separate process is considered an inefficient use of resources (time and money) given a potential net gain of up to 1 years land supply @70 lots (if these sites are supported), with the amendment to the BRSS and corresponding planning proposals being completed not much earlier than the main Strategy process.
It is acknowledged that under the current Far North Coast Regional Strategy, Council needs to supply 2600 dwellings by 2031. More recent estimates provided by the DPE on household and dwelling demand predict that Byron will need up to 3100 dwellings by 2031. Further information on future household and dwelling demand is contained in report I2015/419 on the Agenda.
Given this predicted increase in demand/growth, the future location and mix of dwelling needs to be considered holistically and strategically for the Shire as a whole. This is best achieved via the review of the Far North Coast Regional Strategy and the Byron Rural and Residential Lands Strategy processes currently progressing.
As such it is the position of staff that Council not support the “Early Implementation Program to supplement Council’s Rural Land Use Strategy Initiative” but rather include these properties for consideration in the main Strategy. This will ensure that a robust strategic framework for future planning and development decisions affecting all rural land uses in Byron Shire is in place before further rezoning of land occurs.
The consultants have included a fee proposal with their request. This includes an initial lodgement fee and then further payments made by the landowners to Council to enable Council to then engage an independent consultant to undertake the assessment of the properties against the BRSS criteria and make recommendations to Council. The fee proposal does not include the receipt and processing of any resultant planning proposals. These would need to be considered on a site by site basis following any amendment to the Strategy, under Council’s adopted Fees and Charges at the time.
The Far North Coast Regional Strategy states that:
Future rural residential land will only be released in accordance with a Local Growth Management Strategy agreed to by council and the Department of Planning, and consistent with the Settlement Planning Guidelines.
No new rural residential development will be permitted within the Coastal Area, other than development already zoned or within an approved rural residential release strategy.
Planning for rural residential land must be integrated with the supply of relevant infrastructure and transport provision.
Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.12
On 21 May 2015, Council resolved to forward the Planning Proposal relating to Lot 530 DP 238451 Orana Road, Ocean Shores (the former ‘Roundhouse’ site) to the NSW Department of Planning & Environment with a request to draft and finalise a local environmental plan amendment relating to Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 essentially having the effect that the land is reclassified ‘operational’ land, ceases to be a public reserve (if it is a public reserve) and is discharged from trusts (if any) and all interests except for statutory reservations and easements for electricity, rising main, services and a right of carriageway.
Council also resolved to note that a further report will need to be considered by Council, seeking a resolution of Council reclassifying Lot 530 DP 238451 Orana Road, Ocean Shores from ‘operational’ land to ‘community’ land, just prior to the making of the local environmental plan amendment to Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 relating to the Planning Proposal. The Department has requested that Council resolve to reclassify the land to ‘community’ land as soon as possible, to facilitate the Department’s making of the LEP to reclassify the land to ‘operational’ land without delay.
The purpose of this Report is to seek a resolution of Council to reclassify the land from its current ‘operational’ land classification to ‘community’ land.
That Council resolve that the public land owned by Byron Shire Council and known as Lot 530 DP 238451 Orana Road, Ocean Shores is reclassified from “operational” to “community” under Part 2 of Chapter 6 of the Local Government Act 1993.
Council is the owner of Lot 530 DP 238451 Orana Road, Ocean Shores (the former “Roundhouse” site). The land is within the R2 Low Density Residential Zone under Byron LEP 2014 (LEP 2014) and is classified ‘operational’ land – interests not changed. Development Application No. 10.2001.627.1 for subdivision to create eleven (11) lots and associated road works was consented to on 8 April 2003. The subdivision works are understood to have been completed in preparation for the lodgement of the subdivision certificate application, prior to registration of the final plan of subdivision.
An auction of some of the approved residential lots in April 2014 was cancelled to investigate certain assertions including that the land could not be sold due to the land being subject to a trust for a public purpose that was not expunged by the reclassification to ‘operational’ land. In accordance with the resolution of Council dated 10 April 2014, a Planning Proposal was prepared having the effect that the land is reclassified from ‘community’ land to ‘operational’ land, ceases to be a public reserve (if it is a public reserve) and is discharged from trusts (if any) and all interests except for statutory reservations and easements for electricity, rising main, services and a right of carriageway. The Planning Proposal was forwarded to the NSW Department of the Environment & Planning.
The Department issued a Gateway Determination dated 7 November 2014. The Planning Proposal was publicly exhibited and a public hearing was held in relation to the Planning Proposal, in accordance with legislative requirements and conditions of the Gateway Determination. Council considered a report on the community consultation for the Planning Proposal, which included the report of the independent planning consultant who presided at the public hearing, at its meeting on 21 May 2015 and resolved as follows:
15-217 Resolved:
2. That Council note that a further report will need to be considered by Council, seeking a resolution of Council reclassifying Lot 530 DP 238451 Orana Road, Ocean Shores from “operational” land to “community” land, just prior to the making of the local environmental plan amendment to Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 relating to the Planning Proposal”.
To finalise the LEP 2014 amendment to reclassify the land from ‘community’ to ‘operational’ land – interests changed, Council must first resolve to reclassify the land from the current ‘operational’ land to ‘community’ land. In accordance with applicable legislative requirements, Council placed a public notice in the local newspaper and on Council’s website of the following proposed resolution of Council:
“That the public land owned by Byron Shire Council and known as Lot 530 DP 238451 Orana Road, Ocean Shores is reclassified from “operational” to “community” under Part 2 of Chapter 6 of the Local Government Act 1993.”
The public notice which is subject to a minimum 28 day period, commenced on 28 January 2015 and ended on 4 March 2015. The public notice period was conducted at the same time as the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal. The submissions received were considered in the report to the Council meeting of 21 May 2015.
The Planning Proposal was forwarded to the Department on 25 May 2015. The Department provided a draft local environmental plan to Council for consideration. The Department has requested that Council resolve to reclassify the land to ‘community’ land as soon as possible, to facilitate the Department’s finalisation of the LEP amendment to reclassify the land to ‘operational’ land without delay.
The financial implications relate to Council’s ability to sell, develop and / or use each approved residential allotment in accordance with the Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2015/2016.
The legislation of relevance to this Report includes the Local Government Act 1993 particularly Chapter 6 Part 2 relating to classification and reclassification of public land, and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 particularly Part 3 Division 4 relating to local environmental plans.
To advise Council of urgent road maintenance works which are required to address safety concerns on a 1.4km section of Booyong Road, Booyong (between Stewarts Road and Booyong Bridge).
Recommended road works are to change the 1.4km stretch of failed, sealed bitumen road to an unsealed gravel road.
That a 1.4km failed, sealed section of Booyong Road, Booyong (between Stewarts Road and Booyong Bridge) be changed to an unsealed gravel road at a total cost of $36,000, noting that:
1 Booyong Road Photos, E2015/28597
2 Yearly Traffic Counts for Booyong Road, E2015/28956
3 Traffic Count Data for Booyong Road, E2015/28964
4 Reply from Alan Ladd, E2015/35391
5 Reply from Margaret Morrow, e2015/35394
6 Excavate Public Road Material Exemption 2014, E2015/28646
7 Reply from Sheenah Fawns, e2015/35396
8 Reply from Les Dorahy, e2015/35393
The condition of a 1.4km stretch of Booyong Road between Stewarts Road and Booyong Bridge has deteriorated to a state where it has failed and is now causing a considerable safety risk to motorists.
The section of road requiring urgent reconstruction work extends in a westerly direction from the abutment with Booyong Road Bridge towards Stewarts Road for a distance of 1.4 kilometres. A locality map of the failed section of the road is included in the body of the report..
The potholes on Booyong Road were inspected in accordance with our Risk Management Procedure on 2 March 2015 and again by Council Engineers on 31 March 2015. More than 200 potholes were identified on this 1.4km stretch of road. Photos of the failed section of the road taken on 2 March 2015 are an attachment to this report.
Our response time accorded to this section of road is 92 days, and the priority rating is considered ‘medium’. The low priority rating is due to low traffic volumes. Booyong Road is classed as a rural minor road under the Risk Management Procedure.
Due to the number and size of the potholes, it is estimated to take the Jetmaster Pothole Patching Machine one (1) week to repair the potholes at an estimated cost of $30,000 (minimum).
This same pothole filling works, to ensure the safety of this stretch of road, will be required every six (6) months (as a minimum). The result will be a cost of over $60,000 a year to maintain this 1.4km section of failed road.
Council does not have enough funding in the Rural Roads Maintenance budget to allocate to the ongoing pothole filling works and this maintenance regime for this section of failed road. Pothole patching this section of road to this extent is unsustainable.
Following advice from operational staff in the Works Team on the state of the road and the number of potholes on this section of Booyong Road, inspections were undertaken by the Works Engineer on 31 March 2015.
The Director Infrastructure Services, Manager Works, Works Engineer and roads staff also inspected this section of Booyong Road on 5 May 2015 to consider and formulate actions to minimise the road safety risks to motorists.
The recommendation to alleviate safety concerns within the current budget constraints is to re- compact this section of road to remove the seal and create a temporary gravel road.
The traffic volume counts for Booyong Road since 1998 are detailed in the two attachments, but are summarised in the table below:
Booyong Rd at viaduct
Note AADT is Average Annual Daily Traffic ( number of vehicles)
Ten Year Long Term Financial Plan
The temporary gravel road will remain in place until funding for the full reconstruction can be included in Councils’ 10 Year Capital Works program.
At present the draft 2015/16 10 Year Capital Works program does not include any items for the reconstruction of this failed section of Booyong Road.
Booyong Road is a local road in our road network and is classed as a rural minor road under the Risk Management Procedure.
The only appropriate and available source of funds that could be used for its reconstruction is revenue. And currently the draft 2015/16 Ten Year Long Term Financial Plan does not have revenue allocated for this section of Booyong Road.
Options & location of Houses
There are three houses along this section of Booyong Road located approximately 15, 95 and 135m from the roadway. By changing the failed section of sealed road to a gravel road there would be dust impacts of varying degree to these residences. The one located approximately 15m from the road would obviously be the worse affected.
An option to not change the sealed road to a gravel road adjacent to the nearest house to the road was investigated but the pavement immediately adjacent and west of this house is failed and could not be retained or maintained as a sealed road pavement economically and in a sustainable manner. The recommended action is to change the road in front of this residence to a gravel road.
Letters were sent to the property owners and letters were also placed in all letterboxes to ensure tenants of rented properties were consulted.
At the time of writing the report, four (4) replies were received from
1. Mr Alan Ladd
2. Mrs Margaret Morrow
3. Shennah Fawns
4. Les Dorahy
All letters are attachments to this report.
Both residents object strongly to the proposed recommended action in this report to change the sealed road to a gravel road and raise the following issues:
- Council failed to carry out its responsibility to properly maintain the road
- Council spending money on projects in Byron Bay for a select few, eg, sand pumping Tallows to Belongil
- Council does not have the right to downgrade the infrastructure
- Request to allocate funds to properly repair (reconstruct) the road
- Unsealed road is no benefit to users, residents or property owners
- Road has been in poor condition for a long time
- Owners pay their rates but Council maintenance inadequate and infrequent
- Gravel road will be less safe than sealed road especially during wet weather and high rainfall events.
- Requests more warning signs abut condition of road
- Request more roadside slashing
- What guarantee do the residents have that Council will maintain the unsealed road properly?
- More work needed on road to stop potholes forming
- Booyong Road is a high traffic rural road
- Request formal time when Council would reconstruct the road if it is changed to a gravel road
- Concerned that Council may never reconstruct the road
- Significant negative impact on daily life’s of residents with increased dust levels, damage to vehicles form loose gravel and increased vehicle maintenance costs
- Request compensation to residents by reduced rates if change to gravel road occurs
- Condition of road is dangerous and neglected
- High use of road by livestock trucks to abattoir as well as use by school buses, tractors and farm vehicles
The estimated cost to change this section of Booyung Road to a gravel road is $36,000, if it is done at the same time as the capital project at Left bank Rd / Azalea St intersection (see details later in report).
It should be noted that there are no eligible Disaster Funding funds allocated for reconstructing Booyong Road.
A full road reconstruction comprising a 1,400m long x 6m wide x 300mm deep section will cost approximately $672,000, if undertaken now.
In conjunction with a project in the approved 2014/15 Capital Works Program (Left Bank Rd / Azalea Road intersection), there is an opportunity to change the failed 1.4km section of Booyong Road to a gravel road with a 130mm gravel pavement base. This would result in future cost savings should funding become available to undertake a full reconstruction and reinstate the sealed section of Booyong Road.
This can be achieved by utilising the existing poor quality gravel from the road pavement in Left Bank Road and Azalea Street at Booyong Road. The reuse of the gravel from Left Bank Road/ Azalea St would result in a direct savings, as opposed to purchasing the gravel required for Booyong Road. The $30,000 for placement of the gravel at Booyung Road would be funded from the Rural Roads Maintenance budget, with a further $6,000 to be funded from Disaster Funding allocated to the repair of the table drains on Booyong Road.
Any future reconstruction would only then require a 100mm gravel pavement overlay and seal. It is estimated this would cost an additional $136,000.
The gravel taken from the Left Bank Road / Azalea Street reconstruction would be reused / recycled at Booyong Road.
Initially the gravel taken from the Left Bank Road / Azalea Street reconstruction was intended to be used for the reinstatement of flood damaged roads in the rural area. The works to repair these flood damaged roads, however, have now been completed due to the urgency to do these restoration works and to reduce expenditure on locals roads due to the current financial status of the local roads budgets. This has necessitated relocating operational staff from any non essential maintenance works on both rural and urban roads.
Council is unable to legally stockpile gravel unless it is situated on the road reserve in the immediate vicinity of construction works and is to be specifically used for that construction and within a reasonable period of time. See Attachment 2 regarding the EPA exemption.
The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of the gravel being extracted from Left Bank Road/ Azalea Street is unsuitable to be used for anything other than maintenance gravel on a lower order priority road (low traffic volume). It is unsuitable to be utilised in an urban area, or any road with high traffic volumes.
If the gravel taken from Left Bank Road is not able to be used at Booyong Road, works on the Left Bank Road / Azalea Street reconstruction will need to be delayed until a suitable alternative to stockpile, or dispose of the gravel can be found.
A total of 1,850 tonne of gravel will be removed from Left Bank Road. The cost of disposing the gravel to the Myocum Transfer Station will be approximately $273.00 per tonne resulting in a total cost of $505,000 if it were to be disposed of this way. This disposal method is not proposed for the Left bank Rd / Azalea St intersection project due to the high cost.
EPA Resource Recovery Exemption under Part 9, Clauses 91 and 92 of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2014. (Attachment 2)
Staff Reports - Organisation Development 13.14
Report Author: Shannon McKelvey, Executive Manager, Organisation Development
Council has an adopted Work Health Safety (WHS) Policy due for review. Attached is an updated WHS Policy prepared in accordance with WHS legislation and the relevant Code of Practice.
That the Work Health Safety Policy (#E2015/32312) be adopted and replace existing Policy 12/016 Work Health Safety Policy.
1 Draft Work Health Safety (WHS) Policy , E2015/32312
Council is required to have a Work Health Safety (WHS) Policy and has had one in place for many years.
The existing WHS Policy can be downloaded from http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/policies. The revised policy has been prepared in accordance with the Mandatory WHS Code of Practice – How to Manage Work Health Safety Risks and supporting resources provided to Council by its workers compensation insurer.
This is an update of an existing policy, following a systemic review. There is no requirement to put the updated policy on public exhibition prior to adoption.
The updated policy has been revised using available staff resources.
The draft revised WHS Policy complies with Council’s statutory obligations under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011.
The updated WHS Policy complies with Council’s Workforce Plan (which can be downloaded from http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/publications/integrated-planning-documents-2012-2013 ), which includes the following commitment to WHS:
“Council wants each and every one of its staff to stay safe every day. Council must as far as reasonably practicable ensure the health and safety of its employees. Council must make Work Health and Safety the highest workforce management priority. Making Work Health and Safety the top priority requires a commitment and dedication of adequate resources to all required Work Health and Safety systems, this includes ensuring that WH&S considerations and measures are adequately built into every Council project, process and system and addressed at all times.”
In addition, the update WHS Policy complies with Action 2.7 of Council’s 2014-2015 Operations Plan.
This report provides the minutes and recommendations of the Finance Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015 for determination by Council.
3. That Council adopt the following Committee Recommendations:
2. That Council note that it adopted the revised estimated General Fund Accumulated Surplus/(Working Funds) surplus of $1,957,550 for the 2014/2015 financial year as at 31 March 2015 at its Ordinary meeting held on 21 May 2015.
1 Minutes 14/05/15 Finance Advisory Committee , I2015/407
The attachment to this report provides the minutes of the Finance Advisory Committee Meeting of 14 May 2015 for determination by Council. The agenda for the meeting is at the attached link:
http://byron.infocouncil.biz/Open/2015/05/FAC_14052015_AGN_402_AT.PDF
Councillors were advised in Memorandum (#E2015/31175) dated 15 May 2015 of the Committee’s Recommendation in relation to Report 13.9 – Budget Review – 1 January 2015 to 31 March 2015.
Council at its Ordinary meeting held on 21 May 2015 considered Report 13.9 – Budget Review – 1 January 2015 to 31 March 2015 and Committee Recommendation 3 has been amended to have Council note its authorisation of the budget adjustments detailed in part 1 of Committee Recommendation 3 and the adoption of the revised estimated General Fund Accumulated Surplus/(Working Funds) surplus detailed in part 2 of Committee Recommendation 3.
As per the Reports listed within the Finance Advisory Committee Meeting of 14 May 2015.
The report provides the minutes and recommendations of the Internal Audit Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015 for determination by Council.
1. That Council note the minutes of the Internal Audit Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015.
4. That Council adopt the following Committee:
1 Minutes 14/05/15 Internal Audit Committee Meeting held 14 May 2015, i2015/400
The attachment to this report provides the minutes of the Internal Audit Advisory Committee Meeting of 14 May 2015 for determination by Council. The agenda for the meeting is at the attached link:
http://byron.infocouncil.biz/Open/2015/05/IAAC_14052015_AGN_397_AT.PDF
The Committee Recommendations have been amended for this report to read as a recommendation to Council.
As per the reports listed within the Internal Audit Advisory Committee Meeting of 14 May 2015.
Reports of Committees - Corporate and Community Services 14.3
The purpose of this report is to present the minutes of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee of 14 May 2015.
1. That Council note the minutes of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015.
1 Minutes of the Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015, I2015/401
The attachment to this report provides the minutes of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting of 14 May 2015 for determination by Council. The Agenda for the meeting can be found via the following link:
http://byron.infocouncil.biz/Open/2015/05/AMUAC_14052015_AGN_426_AT.PDF
As per the Reports listed within the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting of 14 May 2015.
Reports of Committees - Infrastructure Services 14.4
Water Supplies – Management
This report provides the recommendations of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting of 7 May 2015 for determination by Council.
1. That Council note the minutes of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2015.
1 Minutes Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting 7 May 2015, I2015/387
The attachment to this report provides the minutes of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting of 7 May 2015 for determination by Council.
The agenda may be viewed at http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/meetings.
As per the Reports listed within the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting of 7 May 2015.
Reports of Committees - Infrastructure Services 14.5
This report provides the minutes of the Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting of 7 May 2015 for determination by Council.
1. That Council note the minutes of the Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2015.
1 Minutes Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting 7 May 2015, I2015/389
The attachment to this report provides the minutes of the Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting of 7 May 2015 for determination by Council.
The agenda may be viewed at http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/meetings
As per the Reports listed within the Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting of 7 May 2015.
Confidential Reports - Corporate and Community Services 16.1
Report No. 16.1 Confidential - Sale of land for unpaid rates
File No: I2015/418
On 11 December 2014 Council considered a report on Sale of Land for Unpaid Rates and Charges
and resolved (14-608):
1. That Council sell by public auction the land and properties detailed in Part A and Part B of the confidential attachment to this report in order to recover unpaid rates and charges
pursuant to Division 5 Local Government Act, 1993.
The Legal services team sought external legal advice as to whether there is any actual and/or perceived ethical impediment to Council proceeding to sale for the land and properties identified in the Report. The legal advice is that there are processes to be followed in relation to the proper serving of rate notices for properties that are the subject of this report.
1. That pursuant to Section 10A(2)(g) of the Local Government Act, 1993, Council resolve into Confidential Session to discuss the report Sale of land for unpaid rates.
a) advice concerning litigation, or advice as comprises a discussion of this matter, that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege
the report is based on and contains legal advice going to Council's ability to recover rates by exercising its powers of sale and in relation to Council's ability to fetter a statutory discretion.
1 CONFIDENTIAL - legal advice HWL Ebsworth, E2015/32930
Report No. 16.2 Confidential - Tender - Hire of Plant and Equipment Contract 2015-0007
On the 9 March 2015, the General Manager approved the invitation of tenders for the Hire of Plant and Equipment in conjunction with Tweed Shire Council as per S55 of the Local Government Act.
1. That pursuant to Section 10A(2)(c) and (d)i of the Local Government Act, 1993, Council resolve into Confidential Session to discuss the report Tender - Hire of Plant and Equipment Contract 2015-0007.
The report contains the details of all tenderers for the Hire of Plant & Equipment Contract.
1. That pursuant to Section 11(3) of the Local Government Act, 1993, resolve that the Annexures to the report, Tender - Hire of Plant and Equipment Contract 2015-0007 are to be treated as confidential as they relate to matters specified in s10A(2)(c) and s10A(2)(d)i of the Local Government Act 1993.
1 24.2015.32.1 Hire of Plant and Equipment Price Schedule PDF, E2015/32635
Confidential Reports - Infrastructure Services 16.3
Report No. 16.3 Confidential - Tender - Truck Haulage Hire Contract 2015 - 0006
On the 9 March 2015, the General Manager approved the invitation of tenders for the Truck Haulage Hire in conjunction with Tweed Shire Council as per S55 of the Local Government Act.
1. That pursuant to Section 10A(2)(c) and (d)i of the Local Government Act, 1993, Council resolve into Confidential Session to discuss the report Tender - Truck Haulage Hire Contract 2015 - 0006.
The report contains the details of all tenderers for the Truck Haulage Hire Contract.
1. That pursuant to Section 11(3) of the Local Government Act, 1993, resolve that the Annexures to the report, Tender - Truck Haulage Hire Contract 2015 - 0006 are to be treated as confidential as they relate to matters specified in s10A(2)(c) and s10A(2)(d)i of the Local Government Act 1993.
1 24.2015.33.1 Contract Truck Haulage Price Schedule PDF, E2015/32634
Confidential Reports - Infrastructure Services 16.4
Report No. 16.4 Confidential - Tender Assessment - Mullumbimby Trunk Water Main Replacement 2014-0039
Report Author: Hayden Kress, Engineer Community Infrastructure
Water Supplies – Operations
At the Ordinary meeting 10 October 2013, Council resolved 2013-518 to prepare and advertise tenders for the construction of the Mullumbimby Trunk Water Main Replacement.
disclosure of the confidential information could compromise the commercial position of the tenderers, could adversely affect Council's ability to contract with preferred tenderers or could affect Council's ability to attract competitive tenders in the event that fresh tenders are invited.
1. That pursuant to Section 11(3) of the Local Government Act, 1993, resolve that the Annexures to the report, Tender Assessment - Mullumbimby Trunk Water Main Replacement 2014-0039 are to be treated as confidential as they relate to matters specified in s10A(2)(c), s10A(2)(d)i, s10A(2)(d)ii and s10A(2)(d)iii of the Local Government Act 1993.
1 24.2012.6.1 - Price Criteria Scoresheet - 2014-0039 -for Council report, E2015/33682
2 24.2012.6.1 - Tender Evaluation Scoresheet - 2014-0039 for Council Report, E2015/33680
3 24.2012.6.1 - 2014-0039 - Final Tender Scoresheet for Council Report, E2015/33679