Agenda of Council Meeting - 24 00 2019 - …...2019/06/24 · Council Meeting 24 June 2019 Page 8...

Business Paper

Council Meeting

Monday, 24 June 2019

6:30pm

Council Chambers,

Level 2, Administration Building,

4-20 Eton Street, Sutherland

Council Meeting 24 June 2019

ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

2. OPENING PRAYER / RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE

3. APOLOGIES

4. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

5. PUBLIC FORUM

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS

7. MAYORAL MINUTES

MM012-19 Mayoral Minute - 2019 Queen's Birthday Honours

MM013-19 Mayoral Minute - Congratulations to Cronulla Little League Baseball Team

8. REPORTS OF THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE HELD ON 3 JUNE 2019

GOV019-19 2018 Community Satisfaction Survey

GOV020-19 Cash Payments and Investments Report - April 2019

9. REPORTS OF THE SHIRE SERVICES COMMITTEE HELD ON 3 JUNE 2019

SER007-19 Sutherland Shire Literary Competition Sub-Committee Charter

SER008-19 Proposed release and relocation of easement - 459 The Boulevarde, Kirrawee

10. REPORTS OF THE SHIRE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC DOMAIN COMMITTEE HELD

ON 3 JUNE 2019

INF010-19 Major Infrastructure Projects Review

11. REPORTS OF THE SHIRE STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE HELD ON 3 JUNE 2019

PLN019-19 Results of Exhibition of SSDCP2015 - Draft Amendment 4

PLN020-19 Discussion Paper - Local Character Overlays

12. REPORTS FROM OFFICERS

COR017-19 Draft Delivery Program 2017-2021, Incorporating Operational Plan and

Budget 2019-2020

COR018-19 Deeban Spit - Community Survey Results

COR019-19 Council Use and Management of Weed Killers Containing Glyphosate


COR020-19 Request to Review Council's Decision - Removal of Tree at 4 Coopernook

Avenue, Gymea Bay

COR021-19 Request to Review Council's Decision - Removal of Tree at 27 Bimbadeen

Avenue, Miranda

COR022-19 Fleet Electric Vehicle Initiatives

COR023-19 Cash Payments and Investments Report - May 2019

COR024-19 Report and Minutes of the Meetings of the Sutherland Traffic and Traffic Safety

Committee and Consultative Traffic Forum held on Friday, 7 June 2019

13. MOTIONS OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

14. MOTION

MOT012-19 Breed Specific Dog Off-Leash Area

MOT013-19 Putrescible Waste Management Initiative

MOT014-19 Request for Tree Removal - 39 Yarra Burra Street, Gymea Bay

MOT015-19 Request for Tree Removal - 5 Arika Close, Bangor

15. PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS

16. QUESTIONS

17. CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS IN CLOSED SESSION

18. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS FROM OFFICERS

COR006A-19 T808/18 Development of the Old Ferry Road Reserve on the Georges River,

Illawong


MM

012

-19

MM012-19 MAYORAL MINUTE - 2019 QUEEN'S BIRTHDAY HONOURS

Attachments: Nil

The Councillors of the Sutherland Shire

Dear Councillors

The Queen’s Birthday Honours recognises and celebrates those who make a difference, those who

achieve their best and those who serve others.

On behalf of Sutherland Shire Council, I would like to extend congratulations to the following members

of our community who were honoured in the 2019 Queen’s Birthday Honours.

* Dr Bahia Abou-Hamad – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to multicultural

affairs and to the arts.

* Mrs Patricia Mary Carroll – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to education

and to people with a disability.

* Mr John Charles De Cean – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to surf

lifesaving.

* Reverend Kevin Francis Engel – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to the

Anglican Church of Australia.

* Mr William Wordsworth Gilmour – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to the

community through charitable initiatives.

* Mr Kevin John Neilson – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to surf

lifesaving.

* Mrs Cecily Enid Rogers – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to horticulture

and to floral art.

* Mr Christopher Alan Watson – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to

engineering.

* Dr George Louie Williams – awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to medicine

in the field of paediatrics and developmental disability.

* Mr James Lindsay Glissan ESM QC – awarded the Member in the Order of Australia for

significant service to the law in NSW.

* Mr Harvey Warren Lockwood – awarded the Member in the Order of Australia for significant

service to rugby league as an administrator and to the community.

* His Honour Judge Christopher Gerard O’Brien – awarded the Member in the Order of Australia

for significant service to the law and to the judiciary.

* Mr Kevin O’Shea – awarded the Member in the Order of Australia for significant service to the

refrigeration and air conditioning industry.


MM

012

-19

* Detective Superintendent Jason William Box – awarded the Australian Police Medal for service

to the NSW Police Force.

* Mr Peter Geoffrey Evans – awarded the Australian Fire Service Medal for service to the Rural

Fire Service.

* Mr Brett James Tinker – awarded the Ambulance Service Medal for service to NSW Ambulance.

* Mr Ronald David Wright – awarded the Public Service Medal for outstanding public service to

skills development programs and infrastructure projects in NSW.

MOTION

THAT:

Congratulations be extended to the Sutherland Shire recipients who were honoured in the 2019

Queen’s Birthday Honours.

Councillor Carmelo Pesce

Mayor

File Number: 2019/328472


MM

013

-19

MM013-19 MAYORAL MINUTE - CONGRATULATIONS TO CRONULLA LITTLE

LEAGUE BASEBALL TEAM

Attachments: Nil

The Councillors of the Sutherland Shire

Dear Councillors

On behalf of Council and our community I wish to congratulate the Cronulla Little League Baseball

team in winning the 2019 National Championships which was held earlier this month in Lismore.

Our Shire team will for the second time represent Australia at the Little League Baseball World Series,

an under 13s competition, to be played in Williamsport, Pennsylvania in August 2019. The first time

our local team won the championship and represented Australia was in 2015.

Little League Baseball is the world’s largest organised youth sports program, with 2.4 million

participants across more than 7,000 communities, which culminates in four baseball world series

events. Little League is an under 13s competition.

The Shire team was one of 20 teams from across Australia to compete in the National

Championships. In winning this Championship, our team will now compete in a 10 day tournament of

16 teams (8 international and 8 US teams) in the United States of America in front of crowds of 10,000

– 15,000. The World Series is played in two groups, teams from the United States and the

international teams, with the winner of each playing off in the finals.

Congratulations to the outstanding achievement of our young team members and their coaches for

winning the National Championships and for representing Australia in the World Series. They have

certainly done the Shire proud and we wish them all the best in the World Series tournament.

MOTION

THAT:

Council extends congratulations to the Cronulla Little League Baseball team for winning the 2019

National Championships and for representing Australia in the 2019 Little League Baseball World

Series.


MM

013

-19

Councillor Carmelo Pesce

Mayor



REPORTS OF THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE HELD ON 3 JUNE 2019

GOV019-19 2018 COMMUNITY SATISFACTION SURVEY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council commissioned its bi-annual Community Satisfaction Survey in late 2018 to assess

satisfaction across Council’s assets and service, and examine community attitudes and

perceptions on priority values and issues for the future.

The analysis of the results, including trends from 2016 results and benchmarking with local

government sector are presented in the research report.

Key themes included a decrease in overall satisfaction with Council, with key drivers of

satisfaction identified in areas of development, governance and community engagement.

Results have informed the development of priorities in Council’s draft 2019/20 Operational Plan

and ongoing continuous improvement initiatives.

A summary of the key findings along with the full report will be available on Council’s website.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. The report on 2018 Community Satisfaction Survey be received and noted; and

2. The results of the Community Satisfaction Survey be published on Council’s website.


GOV020-19 CASH PAYMENTS AND INVESTMENTS REPORT - APRIL 2019

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides details of Council’s investment performance for the period ending 30 April

2019, along with presenting cash and investment balances and diversification.

Council may invest funds that are not, at any particular time, required for any other purpose.

Investment of these funds must be in accordance with relevant legislation and regulations and

in accordance with Council’s Policy for Investment of Cash Balances. Details of these

investments must be reported to Council monthly.

The return on Council’s portfolio to 30 April 2019 was 2.79% compared to the benchmark of

2.03%.

All investments have been made in accordance with legislative requirements and within relevant

Council policy.


THAT:

The information concerning Bank Balances and Investments held as at 30 April 2019, be received

and noted.


REPORTS OF THE SHIRE SERVICES COMMITTEE HELD ON 3 JUNE 2019

SER007-19 SUTHERLAND SHIRE LITERARY COMPETITION SUB-COMMITTEE CHARTER

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In November 2017 Council resolved that an annual literary competition be established and that

a Sub-Committee be formed to oversee the organisation of the competition.

This report seeks the adoption of a charter for the Sutherland Shire Literary Competition Sub-

Committee.


THAT:

The Literary Competition Sub-Committee Charter, attached as Appendix A, be adopted.


SER008-19 PROPOSED RELEASE AND RELOCATION OF EASEMENT - 459 THE

BOULEVARDE, KIRRAWEE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council has received a request to consider the release and relocation of a drainage easement

benefiting Council to facilitate the development of 459 The Boulevarde, Kirrawee (Lot 1 DP

218378 & Lot 1 DP 247359) as an industrial storage facility.

The existing drainage easement will be relocated across the front of the property. It will allow a

better design outcome for the proposed industrial use while addressing overland flow impacts.

An independent valuer has been engaged to determine the compensation payable to Council in

line with Council's Policy on the Release and Relocation of Drainage Easements.


THAT:

1. The release and relocation of a drainage easement within 459 The Boulevarde, Kirrawee (Lot

1 DP 218378 & Lot 1 DP 247359) be approved at terms and conditions to the satisfaction of

the Chief Executive Officer.

2. In accordance with the Power of Attorney dated 24 October 2018 (Registered 29 October

2018, Book 4751 No. 700) Manjeet Grewal, Council’s Chief Executive Officer, execute any

necessary documentation to give effect to this resolution.


REPORTS OF THE SHIRE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC DOMAIN COMMITTEE

HELD ON 3 JUNE 2019

INF010-19 MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS REVIEW

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This is the bi-monthly report to the Infrastructure Committee to provide an update on Council’s

major projects.

The report covers the status of current projects costed in excess of $750,000.


THAT:

The report “Major Infrastructure Projects Review” be received and noted.


REPORTS OF THE SHIRE STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE HELD ON 3 JUNE 2019

PLN019-19 RESULTS OF EXHIBITION OF SSDCP2015 - DRAFT AMENDMENT 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council adopted a number of minor amendments to Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan

2015 (SSDCP2015) for public exhibition.

The SSDCP2015 amendments are required to comply with previous Council resolutions or

changes to State Legislation, or clarify current development controls. The amendments include

changes to Flood Risk provisions (Chapter 40 Environmental Risk); and an amendment to allow

cafes and restaurants to open early for indoor and takeaway trade. A detailed list of the draft

amendments is attached in Appendix A.

The amended chapters of Draft Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015 are attached

as Appendices B – AN.

This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the proposed amendments as exhibited.


THAT:

Council adopt Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015 Amendment 4 as exhibited with

minor administrative amendments, as attached Appendices B – AN.


PLN020-19 DISCUSSION PAPER - LOCAL CHARACTER OVERLAYS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In response to the growing community concern about State led planning and inadequate

consideration of local character, the Department of Planning Industry and Environment (DPIE)

have recently exhibited for comment a Discussion Paper and Guideline on preparing Local

Character Overlays.

Council can use the local character overlay as a tool to maintain and enhance local character

and manage change. However overlays must be approved by DPIE and they cannot override

State complying development provisions.

Feedback to DPIE was due 20 May 2019, and accordingly an unendorsed preliminary

submission has been made and attached as Appendix A. A final submission will be made in

accordance with Council’s resolution.


THAT:

Council endorse the draft submission, attached as Appendix A, to the Department of Planning

Industry and Environment on the Discussion Paper – Local Character Overlays.


CO

R01

7-1

9

COR017-19 DRAFT DELIVERY PROGRAM 2017-2021, INCORPORATING

OPERATIONAL PLAN AND BUDGET 2019-2020

Attachments: Appendix A,⇩ Appendix B (under separate cover)⇨ and Appendix C⇩

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council endorsed the Draft 2017-2021 Delivery Program and 2019-2020 Operational Plan and

Budget for the purposes of public exhibition, at its meeting held on 20 May 2019.

The Draft Plans were placed on public exhibition from 21 May 2019 to 17 June 2019 and

submissions were invited from the public during this period.

The Draft Plans have been prepared in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and

the Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines.

The Draft Delivery Program 2017-2021, incorporating Operational Plan and Budget 2019-2020,

are now presented to Council for adoption.

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council receive the report on the draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 incorporating the

Operational Plan and Budget 2019-2020, and Schedule of Fees and Charges.

2. Council make and levy the 2019-2020 Ordinary Rates in accordance with the Rating Policy in

the draft Operational Plan 2019-2020 and as outlined in this report.

3. Council make and levy the 2019-2020 Cronulla Beach CBD Special Rate in accordance with

the Rating Policy in the draft Operational Plan 2019-2020 and as outlined in this report.

4. Council make and levy the annual charge for Domestic Waste Management in accordance

with the Rating Policy in the draft Operational Plan 2019-2020 and as outlined in this report.

5. Council make and levy the annual charge for Stormwater Management in accordance with the

Rating Policy in the draft Operational Plan 2019-2020 and as outlined in this report.

6. Council adopt the revised draft 2017-2021 Delivery Program and 2019-2020 Operational Plan

and Budget as attached.

7. Council adopt the Draft Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2019-2020, including the Domestic

Waste Management Charges and the Stormwater Levy with the following changes:

../../../RedirectToInvalidFileName.aspx?FileName=COR_20190624_ATT_1835_EXCLUDED.PDF#PAGE=3


CO

R01

7-1

9

Sandy Point Community Centre hire rates be amended as follows:

Hall hire $19.00 per hour

Squash courts $15.00 per hour

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to present the Draft 2017-2021 Delivery Program and 2019-2020

Operational Plan and Budget to Council for adoption. The report also seeks the making of rates and

annual charges and the setting of fees and charges for the 2019-2020 financial year.

BACKGROUND

Council develops a suite of planning documents to ensure the long, medium and short-term

aspirations, priorities and needs of the community are identified, and appropriate strategies are

developed and implemented to respond to those needs. These documents include Council’s long term

Community Strategic Plan (CSP), four year Delivery Program, annual Operational Plan and Budget,

and long term Resourcing Strategy.

The Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework applied at Sutherland Council is demonstrated in

the diagram below.


CO

R01

7-1

9

Sutherland Shire Council undertook a comprehensive review of its IP&R documents throughout

2016-2017, and the 2017-2021 Delivery Program commenced on 1 July 2017. The 2019-2020

Operational Plan and budget is the third year of the 2017-2021 Delivery Program.

The draft Delivery Program 2017 – 2021 and Operational Plan 2019-2020 were presented to Council

at its meeting of 20 May 2019 (COR012-19) where it was resolved that documents be placed on public

exhibition for a period of 28 days to receive community feedback.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Ongoing engagement with community and stakeholders underpins the continued development and

implementation of Council’s IP&R Framework. All engagement is undertaken consistent with Council’s

Community Engagement Policy Framework to maximise community participation and ensure

legislative requirements are met.


CO

R01

7-1

9

The following documents were on public exhibition for community feedback for a period of 28 days

between 21 May 2019 and 17 June 2019:

Draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2019-2020

Draft Fees and Charges 2019-2020.

During the consultation period, the draft documents could be viewed and feedback provided in a range

of ways:

Hard copies of the documents were available for viewing at Council’s Customer Service Centre

and all Council libraries.

Council’s online consultation hub, Join the Conversation contained detailed information on the

plans, copies of all draft documents and a direct feedback form.

Four (4) Community Drop-In Information Sessions held across wards during the consultation

period.

The consultation period was actively promoted through local media advertising and Council’s social

media channels throughout the four week period. Visitors could post comments on Facebook,

however were encouraged to review the draft documents and provide feedback through Join the

Conversation.

Submissions and feedback were accepted online, via mail or by phone.

Community engagement and feedback from the exhibition period was as follows:

Community

Information

Sessions

Online:

Join The

Conversation

Social

Media

Newspaper

adverts

Written

submissions

4 sessions

across wards

165 participated

301 visits

8 survey responses

Detailed FAQs and

key documents

9 posts

18,101 reach

54 reactions

4 comments

3 printed adverts

in local media

181,000

readership

293,873

circulation

1 written

submission

Summary of Submissions

A total of 9 submissions were made to the draft Plans, and are included as Appendix A to this report.

Document No. Submissions Received

Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-2019 5

Draft Fees and Charges 2018-2019 2

Generalised Feedback 2


CO

R01

7-1

9

Below is a summary of the key themes and comments from the submissions:

Issue/Theme No. times raised

Comment

General Feedback

Importance of prioritising outdoor open space, sport and recreational facilities

2 Identified as key community priority in community research and survey during development of plans. Delivery Program has incorporated this priority through actions including development of Open Space, Leisure and Recreation Strategy (DP 6F), continued implementation of Sports Services Plan (OP 3A.20.06)

Concerns about increased development and impact on character and quality of life

2 Identified as key community priority in community research and survey during development of plans. Deliverables across the six key outcome areas of the plans take a holistic approach to the development and service for to meet the needs of our changing community.

Prioritising support for local State Emergency Services

2 Council currently contributes funding to the emergency services, including the State Emergency Services, through levies imposed by the State Government. Council further contributed to maintenance of State Emergency Service facilities and provide support for vehicle acquisition.

Fees and Charges

Concern over increasing the fees, requesting reduced fee for hall hire and squash courts for the Sandy Point Community Centre on the basis of hardship

1 Proposed to reduce the fees as requested.

Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2019/20

Minor formatting amendments and updating of information such as financials and capital projects have

been made to the draft Plans. A revised suite of documents is included as Appendix B.

Draft Capital Program

Since the May meeting of Council, the capital program has been reviewed to incorporate works

relisted from 2018/19 financial year, Council decisions and other adjustments.

Details of variations to projects are listed in Appendix C. This attachment does not contain the

complete capital program, which can be found in the Delivery Program/Operational Plan document,

only projects amended from the exhibited program.

The revised capital program is now $47.865 million.

Draft Budget 2019/20

The proposed budget for 2019/20 provides a balanced budget based upon the special rate variation

approved by IPART and is aimed at providing the required financial resources to support the

implementation of the Operational Plan.


CO

R01

7-1

9

The draft budget projects a net operating result of $22.274 million including capital grants and

contributions and a net operating deficit of $145,000 excluding capital grants and contributions. The

draft budget is provided on page 78 of the Draft Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

The draft budget provides for $47.865 million of capital funding for infrastructure and equipment. The

details of this budget are provided on pages 84-88 of the Draft Delivery Program and Operational

Plan. This budget translates to an infrastructure renewal ratio of 98.85%, a capital expenditure ratio of

142.14% and an asset maintenance ratio of 103.68%.

Whilst on exhibition, a full review was undertaken by staff to refine some areas of the Draft Delivery

Program and Operational Plan. This was primarily as a result of the variations applied to the March

2019 Budget Review, identifying impacts carried forward to 2019/20, along with the incorporation of

infrastructure projects Council identified to be relisted from 2018/19 and adjustments adopted by

Council.

Significant variations applied to the budget are:

INCOME $million

Planning and Development (0.988)

Contributions – Excess Tonnage 0.344

Interest on Investments 0.107

Lease Income (0.315)

Interest on investments was reviewed in line with revised interest rates following the recent Reserve

Bank decision to reduce rates and the current level of investment funds. Due to the amount of

investment currently held for longer periods and the higher than anticipated level of funds, interest on

investments was increased for 2019/20, however future years have been significantly affected by the

rate reductions.

EXPENDITURE $million

Street Lighting (1.050)

Domestic Waste Recovery (0.243)

Development Assessment (0.300)

Emergency Services Levies 0.327

Projects Reclassified as Operating Expenditure 0.400

Residential Street Lighting LED Program 2.042

The Residential Street Lighting LED Program has been brought forward. This was previously

programmed for 2019/20 and 2020/21 but will now be completed in 2019/20. Although this impacts on

the operating result, the project is reserve funded so does not impact of funds available for the capital

program. Operational savings of $450,000 have been recognised, along with the reduction of

$600,000 resulting from contract renegotiations.


CO

R01

7-1

9

The following changes to the Operating Statement are recommended:

2019/20

As Exhibited

$’000

2019/20

Revised

$’000

INCOME

Rates and Annual Charges 167,433 167,433

User Charges and Fees 41,363 39,839

Interest and Investment Revenue 4,908 5,000

Other Revenues 20,255 20,469

Grants and Contributions – Operating 12,304 12,268

Grants and Contributions - Capital 20,750 22,419

TOTAL INCOME FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS 267,013 267,428

EXPENDITURE

Employee Costs 109,301 108,916

Borrowing Costs 188 188

Materials and Contracts 50,743 50,952

Depreciation and Amortisation 37,134 37,134

Other Expenses 46,276 47,464

Net Loss on Disposal of Assets 500 500

TOTAL INCOME FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS 244,142 245,154

NET OPERATING RESULT 22,871 22,274

NET OPERATING RESULT BEFORE CAPITAL

GRANTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS

2,121 (145)

These changes result in corresponding changes to the Projected Statement of Cash Flow and

Projected Statement of Financial Position.

Draft 2019/20 Rates

Council at its special meeting of 4 February 2019 resolved that:

“Council submits a Special Rate Variation application to IPART to increase the minimum rates for both

residential and business properties to $900, varying income by an additional 6.06% above the rate

pegging limit” (COR001-19).”

On 13 May 2019, IPART advised Council the Special Rates Variation has been approved in full.

The draft Operational Plan includes the proposed rating policy for the 2019/20 financial year which has

set the rates based upon the 2.7% allowable rate peg, and the special rate variation approved by

IPART. The Rating Policy can be found on page 89 of the draft Delivery Program and Operational

Plan.


CO

R01

7-1

9

The rate peg increase of 2.7% is equivalent to an increase of $3.23 million. An additional amount of

$0.098 million has also been included in income estimates for Crown Land rating adjustments dating

back to 2017/18. The approval of the special rate variation will increase the estimated income by a

further $7.285 million. These inputs are included in Council’s notional yield of $130 million for the

2019/20 financial year.

The recommended rate levy for the 2019/20 financial year is as follows:

Rate Type Category Subcategory

Ad Valorem

Amounts in

Cents in $

Minimum

Amount $

2019/20

Rate Yield % Yield

Residential Rates

Ordinary Residential Not Applicable 0.00196965 900.00 113,006,322 86.76

Business Rates

Ordinary Business General

Business

0.00433292 900.00 10,059,175 7.72

Ordinary Business Caringbah

Commercial

Centre

0.00433292 900.00 751,726 0.58

Ordinary Business Cronulla

Commercial

Centre

0.00433292 900.00 1,458,687 1.12

Ordinary Business Engadine

Commercial

Centre

0.00454957 900.00 529,563 0.41

Ordinary Business Kurnell

Finished Fuel

Terminal

Facility

0.02166462 900.00 442,425 0.34

Ordinary Business Kurnell

Industrial Rate

0.00649939 900.00 803,714 0.62

Ordinary Business Kurnell Sand

Mining

0.02383108 900.00 86,983 0.07

Ordinary Business Menai

Commercial

Centre

0.00519951 900.00 303657 0.23

Ordinary Business Menai

Quarrying and

Filling

0.00649939 900.00 2,996 0.00

Ordinary Business Miranda

Commercial

Centre

0.00433292 900.00 754,130 0.58


CO

R01

7-1

9

Ordinary Business Miranda Core

Major Shopping

Complex

0.01034977 900.00 1,203,865 0.92

Ordinary Business Sutherland

Commercial

Centre

0.00433292 900.00 673,114 0.52

Ordinary Business Sylvania

Southgate

Commercial

Centre

0.00519951 900.00 173,820 0.13

Cronulla Beach CBD Special Rate

The Cronulla Beach CBD Special Rate is set under Section 495(1) of the Local Government Act.

Funds raised through this special rate are for the sole purpose of public domain improvements aimed

at enhancing the amenity and public domain appeal of the Cronulla CBD. Council will consult with the

Cronulla Chamber of Commerce in relation to plans for expenditure of funds collected from the levy.

All unspent funds collected from the levy at the end of each financial year will be placed in a reserve to

ensure expenditure is in accordance with the purpose for which it has been levied.

It is recommended the Special Rate – Cronulla Beach CBD is set as follows:

Ad Valorem Amounts Cents $

Minimum Amount $

2019/20 Rate Yield $

0.00216393 Nil 591,072

Domestic Waste Charge

Council levies a Domestic Waste Management Charge under section 496 of the Local Government

Act 1993. This charge will apply uniformly to each parcel of rateable land for which the service is

available. The charge covers the services of weekly collection of putrescible waste, fortnightly

collection of green-waste and recyclable materials, and a clean-up service.

Domestic Waste Management Charges for 2019/20 are estimated to yield $39.063 million and will be

charged as follows:

No. of

Services

Adopted

2018/19

$

Proposed

2019/20

$

Proposed

Annual

Increase

Regular Service 60,661 456.30 456.30 NIL

Shared Service 21,882 456.30 456.30 NIL

Regular Additional Service 886 394.50 394.50 NIL

Vacant Land Service Availability 454 97.20 97.20 NIL

Improved Service Availability 1,958 200.20 200.20 NIL


CO

R01

7-1

9

A “shared service” charge applies to those situations where a property owner shares a 240L bin for

putrescible garbage and recycling. “Shared” services exist only in home units and some

villa/townhouse developments.

A “Regular” service charge currently applies to all other domestic waste services. They are mostly

120L bin services for putrescible waste and apply to some villa and townhouse developments and all

single dwelling households.

Stormwater Management Service Charge

Council levies a Stormwater Management Service Charge under clause 496A of the Local

Government Act 1993.

The charge is applicable to rateable land categorised within the residential and business categories

and is projected to generate $2.063 million and will charged as follows:

Rating

Category

Property Type Charge

Residential

House $25.00

House – Pensioner $12.50

Strata Unit $12.50

Strata Unit - Pensioner $6.25

Business

Recreational Facilities $25.00

Commercial Property –

Strata Scheme

The greater of $5.00 or the relevant proportion (being

the proportion that the unit entitlement of the individual

lot to that of the aggregate entitlement) of the

maximum annual charge that would apply if the

property were not in a strata scheme

Commercial Property -

Other

Where Total land area =<350m2, a minimum charge of

$25 applies.

Where total land area is >350m2, a charge of

$0.071432 per m2 applies

Industrial Property –

Strata Scheme

The greater of $5.00 or the relevant proportion (being

the proportion that the unit entitlement of the individual

lot to that of the aggregate entitlement) of the

maximum annual charge that would apply if the

property were not in a strata scheme

Industrial Property -

Other

Where Total land area =<350m2, a minimum charge of

$25 applies.

Where total land area is >350m2, a charge of

$0.071432 per m2 applies


CO

R01

7-1

9

Fees and Charges Schedule

In support of Council’s Finance Strategy and in accordance with Section 608 of the Local Government

Act, 1993 and other relevant legislation, Council levies a range of fees and charges for services

provided. Further details are available on page 97 of the Draft Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

A draft schedule of fees and charges was endorsed for exhibition at Council’s May meeting. One

submission was received in relation to the proposed fees and charges.

The submission received was from the Sandy Point Hall Management Committee requesting:

A reduced hourly hire rate for the main hall,

A reduced hourly hire rate for the squash centre.

The Management Committee believes that the isolation and competition from other close (within ten

kilometres) community centres makes it difficult to attract hirers. It is proposed that the request for the

amendment to the fees be granted to assist in this area.

BUDGET AND RESOURCES

The Draft Delivery Program (incorporating the four year budget) recommends a financial model that

assists in addressing Councils infrastructure backlog and maintains service levels into the future. The

approval of the SRV has provided Council with enhanced capacity to invest in infrastructure renewals.

In addition to increased revenue levels, the draft plans also incorporate a $2.6 million recurrent

efficiency dividend.

POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

The Delivery Program, Operational Plan, and Fees and Charges, have been drafted in accordance

with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The Draft Delivery Program 2017 - 2021 and 2019/20 Operational Plan, Budget and Fees and

Charges, have been informed by ongoing research and engagement with the community.

The documents have been publically exhibited and the submissions received have been considered

and minor amendments made as detailed in the report.

This report recommends the adoption of the Delivery Program 2017 - 2021 and 2019/20 Operational

Plan, Budget and Fees and Charges as presented.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officers responsible for the preparation of this Report are the Manager Finance, Greg Hayes, who

can be contacted on 9710 0334 and Manager Communications & Engagement, Rebecca Dalton, who

can be contacted on 9710 0544.



CO

R01

7-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix A


CO

R01

7-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix C


CO

R01

8-1

9

COR018-19 DEEBAN SPIT - COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS

Attachments: Nil

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This matter concerns a submission made by Council in relation to a proposed amendment by

the State Government to a Marine Park plan. Council has no jurisdiction in this matter and

made a submission on behalf of the community as a stakeholder for the Government’s

consideration.

Community comments showed that Deeban Spit is important for family recreation and

highlighted a strong sense of community attachment to the area.

Protection for seagrasses, migratory shorebirds and the environmental importance of Deeban

Spit were also heavily represented.

The feedback evidenced that the reasons why the community value Deeban Spit are varied yet

evenly split overall.

The recommended management position seeks to balance the community’s desire for

recreation, while providing environmental protection and it recommended that this position be

conveyed to the Department of Primary Industries.


THAT:

1. Council endorses the map outlining the proposed boating and bait collection restrictions for

Deeban Spit as the preferred management framework for the area.

2. This report be forwarded to the Department of Primary Industries: NSW Marine Estate to

supplement Council’s Hawkesbury Shelf Marine Bioregion Marine Park submission.


CO

R01

8-1

9

PURPOSE

To inform Council of the results of the community consultation for the management of the intertidal

sand flats west of Deeban Spit and to seek endorsement for a further submission suggesting future

management options for the area.

BACKGROUND

In September 2018 council staff sent a submission to the NSW Government regarding the proposed

Hawkesbury Shelf Marine Bioregion Marine Park with the advice that it had been prepared by staff

and, due to limitations in reporting cycles, was yet to be endorsed by Council. The submission was put

to Council via Report PLN047-18 and was endorsed by Council at the 19 November 2018 Meeting

(Minute No: 426).

The St George and Sutherland Leader ran an article on 4 January regarding Council’s submission.

The article attracted community attention and concerns were raised by some community members. On

4 February 2019, at an Extraordinary Council Meeting, Mayoral Minute (MM004-19) on the issue was

put to Council. In considering the Mayoral Minute Council resolved;

THAT:

1. This item be deferred subject to a site visit being held for interested Councillors; and public

consultation be undertaken.

2. A submission be formulated following the site visit and public consultation, and reported to

Council within a two-month timeframe.

The aim of this report is to show the results of the public consultation and endorse a preferred

management framework for the ongoing management of the area.

DISCUSSION

Survey

Council conducted a survey on ‘Join the Conversation’, from 16 April to 15 May 2019, asking three

questions consistent with Mayoral Minute MM004-19. The questions asked respondents to:

indicate which activities should be allowed in the green zone;

question two asked residents which should be allowed in the red zone; and

the third question allowed residents to provide general feedback on the management of Deeban

Spit.

Council received 536 responses for each of questions one and two. Question three received 211

individual responses, covering more than 130 varying suggestions relating to the management of

Deeban Spit.

https://www.theleader.com.au/story/5835708/deeban-spit-could-be-added-to-marine-park/


CO

R01

8-1

9

Overall Usage

General responses to question three ranged from a strong case for increased protection to an

impassioned ‘no change’ sentiment, with most lacking any reference to the proposed red or green

zones. These general comments were placed into three broad categories, being; increased protection,

leave as is, and poor survey design. These categories were used to provide an overview of the

community’s feedback.

Councillors should note the results from the feedback section were not seen as zone specific, as it

was deemed this information was available from questions one and two of the survey.

Any feedback about wanting to protect seagrasses, migratory shorebirds, the environment or a need

for a safe spot for kids to swim was grouped into the ‘increase protection’ bracket. Comments relating

to allowing boating, fishing or bait collecting, or statements saying Deeban Spit was healthy under its

current restrictions were placed into the ‘leave as is’ bracket. Comments on the survey design or

issues with the clarity of the maps made up the ‘poor survey design’ bracket.

The results of the aggregated analysis in Figure 1 show the community is equally divided on Deeban

Spit. For nearly half the respondents, the spit is important for family recreational activities, including

fishing, swimming, snorkelling, picnics, pumping nippers, and boating. These residents also expressed

a strong sense of belonging to the area. For the others, protecting the endangered migratory

shorebirds and seagrasses was a priority, as was the significance of the area as a fish nursery for the

Port Hacking. Overall, the community loves Deeban Spit, and the reasons are varied yet evenly split.

A number of comments highlighted the confusion regarding the precise location of Deeban Spit.

Figure 1: Results from the pooled analysis from question three of council’s community survey

regarding Deeban Spit.


CO

R01

8-1

9

Motorised Boating

Analysis of feedback comments, specifically relating to motorised craft, regardless of zone, highlighted

the community’s concerns with motorised craft on Deeban Spit. Any comment mentioning banning or

restricting boating, regardless of zone was pooled into one category, while comments allowing boating

was pooled in the other. The aggregated results are shown in figure 2. A common reason given for the

need to restrict motorised craft (mostly jet skis) was for the safety of young swimmers.

Concerns were raised by Maianbar residents about access to their homes under Mayoral Minute

MM004-19. It is proposed Maianbar residents, whose homes have water access, maintain their

existing access rights regarding motorised craft.

Figure 2: Results from community feedback regarding motorised craft on the area known as Deeban

Spit, not zone specific.

Bait Collection

Pooled comments relating to bait collecting, regardless of zone or whether it was commercial or

recreational, are shown in figure 3. The feedback section of the survey showed a desire for no bait

collecting on Deeban Spit. However, survey questions one and two revealed a clear distinction

between commercial and recreational bait collecting, and that the community does not want

commercial bait collecting in either zone. Figures 4 and 5 show how commercial bait collecting was

the least preferable in each zone, while recreational nipper pumping was popular in both.


CO

R01

8-1

9

Figure 3: Results from community feedback regarding bait collecting on the area known as Deeban

Spit, not zone specific.

Red and Green Zones

Survey questions one and two were zone specific. The results show the community want less motor

boating in the red zone compared with the green zone, with a reduction of 100 people who think motor

boating should be allowed in the red zone (figures 4 and 5). Jet skis were seen as less preferable in

both the red and green zone when compared to motor boating.

People did stress concerns with the survey, as there was no option to select ‘No’ to motor boating in

either zone. Despite this, the most popular option in both zones was the non-motorised water craft

(see figures 4 and 5). This result ties in with the recreational activities outlined in the feedback section

of the survey and the aggregated responses of figure 2.

The community identified commercial bait collecting, collecting marine vegetation and jet skis to be the

least acceptable activities in both zones (figures 4 and 5).


CO

R01

8-1

9

Figure 4: The community responses to preferred uses in the green zone from the community survey regarding Deeban Spit

Figure 5: The community responses to preferred uses in the red zone from the community survey

regarding Deeban Spit

Preferred Management Options

The sheer volume of submissions and strongly worded feedback reveals how passionate the

community is about Deeban Spit. There is a need to find a balance between existing community

recreational expectations and ensuring the features that make this area such a favourite with residents

today, still exist for future generations to enjoy.

The following map is seen as the best balance between the community’s desire to protect the

environment, while still allowing the traditional family activities associated with the area.

412

230

502

372

492

316

11554

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Co

mm

un

ity

resp

on

se n

um

ber

s

Preferrred activities in the Green Zone

310

175

488

280

462

299

99 560

100

200

300

400

500

600

Co

mm

un

ity

resp

on

se n

um

ber

s

Preferred activities in the Red Zone


CO

R01

8-1

9

= Motorised craft allowed

= No Motorised Craft/ No commercial or recreational Bait Collection

= No Motorised Craft / Allow Recreational Bait Collection only

The Green Zone allows motorised craft to enjoy the continued use of nudging onto the spit to enjoy

recreational activities. This zone also provides access into Fisherman’s Bay for local residents. This

zone would see NO CHANGE in permissible use of the area.

The Red Zone, west of Fisherman Bay, would be free from any motorised craft and any bait collection

(both recreational and commercial). This area contains large patches of seagrasses, susceptible to

damage from boating and bait collection. No bait collecting in this zone will potentially make the area a

refuge/feeding ground for the migratory shorebirds.

The Orange Zone, the intertidal sandflats west of Deeban Spit, should be free from motorised craft

(excluding local Maianbar residents accessing their homes). This will provide families with safe areas

for recreational activities. In response to the community’s feedback, recreational bait collection

(nippers), not commercial, would be permitted in the orange zone.

Locality name

Some submissions expressed some confusion or raised some ambiguity about the extent of the area

under consideration. Deeban Spit was understood by some to refer primarily to the sand spit, not

including the adjacent sand flats. Consideration could be given to identifying a geographical name

that refers to the entire mapped area so that if the proposed restrictions proceed, understanding and

enforcement will be clearer.

RESOURCING STRATEGY IMPLICATIONS

As this area is managed by the State Government, there are no resource implications for council in the

recommended management position.


CO

R01

8-1

9


Council conducted a survey on Join the Conversation from 16 April to 15 May 2019, asking three

questions consistent with Mayoral Minute MM004-19. A total of 536 responses were received. The

results of the community consultation make up the discussion section of this report.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

And a deliverable from the delivery program

Community Strategic Plan Strategy Delivery Program (2017-2021) Deliverables

1.4 Ensure community confidence in Sutherland Shire council.

1L Review and implement the Governance Framework.

2: Beautiful, protected and healthy natural

environment

2C Develop and implement a catchment and

waterways management strategy


This report relates to the proposed amendment of a State Government policy.

CONCLUSION

The context of this report is that it is a submission on a draft proposal to amend a State Government

plan. Council has no jurisdiction or decision making authority in this matter and the Government has

the discretion to adopt or differ from Council’s opinion.

The sheer volume of submissions and strongly worded feedback reveals how passionate the

community is about Deeban Spit. There is a need to find a balance between existing community

usage expectations and ensuring the features that make this area such a favourite with residents

today, still exist for future generations to enjoy.

The above map is considered to be the best balance between the community’s need to protect the

environment while still allowing the traditional family activities associated with the area collectively

known as Deeban Spit.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation this Report is the Manager Environmental Science, Ian

Drinnan, who may be contacted on 9710 0547.



CO

R01

9-1

9

COR019-19 COUNCIL USE AND MANAGEMENT OF WEED KILLERS CONTAINING

GLYPHOSATE

Attachments: Nil

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report outlines the management framework and operational circumstances relating to the

use of pesticides containing glyphosate by Sutherland Shire Council to control weeds.

As per Council’s WHS Management System a risk management based approach is utilised,

supported by a number of control measures to ensure public and staff safety before considering

and applying pesticides.

Council’s Pesticides Use Notification Plan outlines the responsibilities in this area and acts as

the communication channel to both consult and inform the public about the timing and

application of pesticides in outdoor public spaces.

Council uses an integrated Weed and Pest management model, whereby a number of

alternative methods to control weeds have been explored and or adopted, however, the

continued selective use of glyphosate remains an effective tool in Council’s suite of

management practices for weed control, enabling Sutherland Shire Council to meet its

legislative obligations.


THAT:

1. The report on Council’s management and use of weed killers containing glyphosate be

received and noted.

2. That Council endorse the current suite of integrated weed management practices adopted

under the ‘Pesticides Use Notification Plan’.

3. That Council endorse the continued investigation, trial and where determined appropriate the

implementation of alternative weed control products and technologies, in order to continue to

reduce usage of glyphosate based herbicides.


CO

R01

9-1

9

PURPOSE

This report seeks to provide Council with information regarding Council’s operational management

and use of pesticides containing glyphosate, in accordance with Minute No: 89, BWN003-19.

BACKGROUND

At the Council Meeting of 15 April 2019, in considering BWN003-19, Council resolved:

THAT:

1. In the coming two months, Council receive a Report on:

i. The safety, handling, public notification and management and use of weed killers

(herbicides) containing glyphosates used in Council parks, playgrounds, gardens and

other public places; and

ii. Identify alternative, non-glyphosate solutions which may be used to safely and effectively

control weeds.

iii. Information from relevant external agencies be incorporated into the report.

2. Councillors receive a briefing on this matter.

DISCUSSION

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world. It is registered for use by the Federal

Government in Australia from home gardens right through to commercial farming and agricultural

operations. There are approximately 500 products containing glyphosate currently registered for use

in Australia, the most common and well-known brand name is Roundup. While Sutherland Council

does not use Roundup, it does use Clear-Up Bio 360 which is a similar product. Glyphosate is a

broad-spectrum, non-selective herbicide, which works by inhibiting an enzyme found in plants but not

found in humans or animals.

Information from External Agencies

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC – the scientific arm of the World

Health Organisation) classified glyphosate into Group 2A, which it considers probably carcinogenic to

humans (IARC, 2015). Other Group 2A classified substances and activities include red meat, cooking

food with high temperatures and shift work. In 2016 just after this classification, the Australian

Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) conducted its own review and found

exposure to glyphosate does not pose a carcinogenic or genotoxic risk to humans (APVMA, 2016).

So why the difference between the two agencies?

The IARC uses only publicly available, peer-reviewed scientific papers; whereby their decisions are

based on strength of evidence only, that is, it only considers the “hazard” element, it also uses

glyphosate based product studies in which the product contains other components. Whereas the US-

EPA (United States - Environmental Protection Agency) and APVMA: uses both published and

unpublished papers including industry commissioned studies, the weight of evidence approach and

also the relative risk (hazard x exposure); and, uses glyphosate technical studies where the majority of

the product contains >95% glyphosate.


CO

R01

9-1

9

These seemingly contradictory findings have prompted a review of many existing studies along with a

range of new studies. A recent US study analysing data from the Agricultural Health Study has

concluded that high exposure to Glyphosate Based Herbicides (GBH) does result in an increased risk

of cancer, in particular Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL). This differs from the USEPA and APVMA in

that these agencies have based their risk findings on the basis that use of GBH in accordance with the

manufacturer’s recommendations does not result in a high level of exposure, therefore there is no

increased risk. In all their assessments such agencies have been careful to state the risk in these

terms.

So what are the implications?

It means that high exposures to GBH may increase cancer risk, in particular NHL. If used in

accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, exposure is unlikely to be high and there is likely no

increased risk. However, as there may be some potential for increased cancer risk, a precautionary

approach is warranted and measures to minimise exposure (including reducing usage, and use of

Personal Protective Equipment) is prudent.

Management, Use and Public Notification

Sutherland Shire Council utilises a risk management based approach for the administration,

supervision and application of pesticides, which is supported by the following corporate documents

and operational control measures:

Safety

Corporate Policy and Procedures – key related documents are:

CSG07-Procurement of Goods

CSG21-PPE

CSG23-Hazardous Chemicals

INF PKS 242 F2 - Safe Work Method Statement

INF PKS 045 F2 – Operational Inspection Checklist

Council makes use of a web based chemical information database to search, identify and register

various types of products, including pesticides. It provides support by way of risk assessments and

manufacturer product information, as well as safety data sheets and label application details.

Council’s Pesticides use Notification Plan

Operating under the Pesticides Use Notification Plan Council uses an integrated weed and pest

management model across Council’s asset portfolio to control weeds. This approach not only

enhances public place asset presentation, it also reduces the reliance on any one given pesticide

product, whether glyphosate based, or not.


CO

R01

9-1

9

The plan covers the following items:

Council’s legislative obligations

Public notification arrangements

Operations including timing of and method of pesticide application

Community consultation process regarding the Plan with the ability for the public to be

registered with Council - 8 individuals and 1 organisation currently on the notification register

Public places we may operate, for example; road related assets, sports fields, parks and

gardens, bush reserves, CBD’s, coastal foreshore, etc

Council Officer’s responsibilities

Monitoring and Breach process

The register and use of pesticides and other products is reviewed annually to ensure the inventory is

accurate and products are still fit for purpose. Any potential new products are risk assessed and if

deemed suitable for use they are formally added to Council’s Chemalert database system after

consultation with Council’s WHS Committee and before they are introduced into operation for trial and

further in field assessment.

The focus under this Plan is to only use pesticides when it is considered the safest and most effective

and efficient method of weed control available, furthermore, to ensure the community are engaged

about this activity and Council’s operations are both transparent and informative.

Skills and Training

All of Council’s Parks Operations staff and contractors who apply pesticides are trained and accredited

to level 3 standard under the Australian Qualification Framework, therefore, complying with the

Pesticides Act 1999. To ensure qualifications remain valid Council officers monitor this requirement

annually.

Alternatives

In order to achieve better horticultural and asset presentation outcomes Council made an operational

decision some years back to minimise the use of pesticides and glyphosate based products by

exploring and implementing other various weed control options, for example:

Pre-emergent products – Barricade and Penn-Mag (non-glyphosate product control layers)

New products - Arsenal Super, Slasher and Non-Tox (including non-glyphosate, natural plant

based and bio-degradable options)

New technology (steam weeding) and upgraded spray application equipment

Increased use of manual and mechanical techniques (brush cutters, edger’s, hand pulling)

Increased use of mulch and application frequency

Ceased using high volume portable motorised spray equipment in high profile areas


CO

R01

9-1

9

These proactive steps have resulted in an approximately 40% reduction over the past six years from

670 litres used per annum down to about 390 litres, or $6,300 to $3,400 approximate spend per

annum, as illustrated in the graph below. (Source: Globe SSC PSA – 5th May 2019)

Consequently, this total volume of use equates to approximately 6 litres of concentrated product

applied per qualified Parks Operation Officer (69 applicable staff) across the LGA in a calendar year.

Whilst over recent years Council has significantly reduced its use of glyphosate pesticides it should be

noted that to date, no single or combined alternative product and or control technique that has been

trialled has proven to be as efficient and effective as glyphosate based pesticides at controlling the full

range of priority weed species Council aim’s to manage.

Use of mechanical methods of clearing are quite labour intensive and necessitate a higher repeat

frequency (approximately 9 times per year) to achieve similar weed control effectiveness by using

glyphosate based pesticides (approximately 3 times p/a). Also, these operational practices typically

require added resources due to the greater levels of safety and traffic controls essential near road

related assets. Therefore, the overall impact on resourcing won’t be determined until a full annual

steam weeding application program has been implemented and evaluated.

It should also be noted that steam weeding practices have limited capability on a broader scale given

their application is more suited to small scale weeds in easily accessible locations. They also require

a readily available water source given they use about 300 litres of water per hour. In addition, the

steam weeding plant generates about 75-80db of noise level, therefore limiting its operational

capability to specific locations and hours of use.


CO

R01

9-1

9

Arsenal Super Herbicide

Council has not yet trialled the use of the non-glyphosate based pesticide product ‘Arsenal Super’, a

Group B herbicide. Initial desktop investigation of this product indicates that it has merit for a trial to

determine its ongoing suitability and effectiveness, however, officers would need to approach the

APVMA / EPA for an ‘off licence’ permit to use it, as Arsenal Super has not been listed for label use

against our priority weeds such as Boneseed, Lantana or Privet.

Assessing new weed control products takes considerable time and effort to ensure a comparable

methodology and determination is reached, additionally, other factors such as changing weather

patterns, the diverse and evolving weed species we target, as well as the different asset types and

locations serviced, all have a big impact on successful weed control outcomes.

Risk Implications

In reference to Council’s Corporate Enterprise Risk Management Framework a number of potential

risks and consequences have been identified with respect to the use of glyphosate based pesticides to

control priority weeds within the Sutherland Shire.

1. Environment – moderate adverse effect through poor management practices and impact of

invasive species on biodiversity in Endangered Ecological Communities, or threatened flora

species in compliance with the Biodiversity and Conservation Act.

2. Financial – possible minor asset loss due to loss of public use or expanded mechanical weed

remediation action required.

3. Legal / Safety – compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 whereby Council has a duty to

prevent establishment of exotic pests and diseases likely to harm Australia’s natural

environment, community health and economy. Council continues to discharge its obligations

through the responsible use of appropriate methods which minimises this risk.

4. Reputation – there is heightened community concern following recent media attention of

potential health risks associated with the continued use of glyphosate based herbicides. Council

has adopted strict management and use controls to mitigate this risk by ensuring there is no

staff or public safety exposure and alternative options continue to be actively considered.


There is currently no additional budget or resource impact, as alternative weed control practices have

already been incorporated into existing operating and grant funded project budgets. Whilst at this point

in time the full resourcing effect of using less glyphosate pesticide weed control methods is unknown,

as staff continue to adopt more manual methods and alternate technologies such as steam weeding, it

is expected that these practices may result in supplementary resource requirements (operating plant

and wages) which will need to be monitored.


CO

R01

9-1

9


Under the Pesticides Act 1999 Council is obligated to develop and implement a ‘Pesticides Use

Notification Plan’. This Plan forms the basis for two way public consultation and notification regarding

Council’s management and application of pesticides and is readily accessible via Council’s website.

Any major amendments to the Plan are communicated to the community via the local newsagency

with a minimum four week consultation period, as well as on Council’s website. Flagged changes will

be incorporated into a new draft Plan to be exhibited in 2019.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT


1.3 The community is informed and empowered

to rise to the challenges and opportunities

presented by a changing world.

1L Advocate and maintain dialogue across all

levels of government and with key stakeholders

around issues impacting our community.

1.4 Ensure community confidence in Sutherland

Shire Council.

1I Develop and implement an Enterprise Risk

Management Framework

2.2 Enhance and protect diverse natural

habitats.

2B Review, revise and implement the Urban Tree

and Bushland Policy and Program

2.4 Environment and climate risks and impacts

are understood and managed.

2B Review, revise and implement the

Environment and Sustainability Strategy and

Plans


The following government legislation applies to the management and use of Glyphosate:

APVMA - Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority - Federal regulatory body

governing the registration, supply and use of Pesticides.

Work Health and Safety Act 2011 - Framework to protect the health, safety and welfare of all

workers at work and other people who might be affected by the work in the community.

Pesticides Act 1999 - The Environmental Protection Authority in NSW regulates the safe and

correct use of Pesticides to protect the environment and community.

Biosecurity Act 2015 - Prevent the establishment of exotic pests and diseases likely to harm

Australia’s agricultural systems, natural environment, community health and economy, for

example, Bitou Bush, Boneseed, Lantana.

Biodiversity and Conservation Act 2016 - Conservation and management of biodiversity and

threatened species via Strategies or Plans that reduce the impact of invasive species on

Council’s endangered ecological communities (EEC’s) and threatened flora and fauna species.

CONCLUSION

Council has a comprehensive safety and governance framework in place to ensure the responsible

use of glyphosate based products. As a result, all officers are well trained, qualified and supervised to

meet their responsibilities concerning the selective use of glyphosate based pesticides.


CO

R01

9-1

9

The pesticide reduction achieved to date and continued focus in lowering the overall volume of

glyphosate based pesticides through alternative products and control techniques, coupled with

Council’s ‘Pesticide Use Notification Plan’ clearly demonstrates Council’s ongoing commitment to

safety and engagement via the current high standards of practice demonstrated in keeping with

current Australian legislation.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer’s responsible for the preparation of this report are the Manager Parks Operations, Grant

Willoughby who can be contacted on 9710 5724 and the Manager Environmental Science, Ian

Drinnan who can be contacted on 9710 0547.



CO

R02

0-1

9

COR020-19 REQUEST TO REVIEW COUNCIL'S DECISION - REMOVAL OF TREE

AT 4 COOPERNOOK AVENUE, GYMEA BAY

Attachments: Appendix A⇩ and Appendix B⇩

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Following the recent conclusion of the Tree Sub-Committee, Council adopted a new process

whereby Council could elect, through Notice of Motion, to determine requests for the removal of

trees.

A Notice of Motion was put forward and supported by Council for this review report to be

prepared for Council’s consideration.

This report outlines the condition of the tree, a safety risk assessment (TRAQ), a history of

requests and actions, and an assessment against Council’s Policy documents and Community

Strategic Plan.

The report concludes that there is not adequate justification to approve removal of the tree.


THAT:

1. The tree in the front yard of 4 Coopernook Avenue Gymea Bay be retained.

2. The property owner be advised of Council’s decision for the tree to be retained and that further

assessment applications will only be accepted should there be notable changes in the

condition of the tree.


CO

R02

0-1

9

PURPOSE

The purpose of the report is to respond to Notice of Motion 010-19 and to review the decision of

Council staff to refuse the removal of a tree on private property at 4 Coopernook Avenue, Gymea Bay.

The matter is submitted for Council to determine.

BACKGROUND

The table below sets out a history of Council officers’ assessment of this tree:

Date Request Details Determination

01/09/2014 TP14/0326 Application for removal Refused

11/09/2014 TP14/0404 Application for removal Refused – pruning to remove all deadwood and reduce extended lateral growth over house and over road to balance the crown. Remove no more than 15% of live canopy.

16/06/2016 eTP16/0846 Application for removal Refused – Pruning to remove any deadwood, remove low downwards growing branch over the driveway, and reduce extended lateral branches and balance the crown. Do not simply crownlift. Do not remove more than 15% of the live canopy.

10/11/2016 eTP16/1536 Application for Removal Refused

13/03/2017 CR17-169826

Cr Pesce and Cr Johns

Representations in regards to the refusal to grant approval to remove tree

TRAQ conducted and approval given for removal of branches overhanging driveway and from sail area.

17/07/2018 CR18-277721

Cr Johns

Representations in regards to blocked sewer , large branches failing and driveway lifting

Reply provided – removal not allowed.

24/08/2018 CR18-285752

Mark Speakman MP

Issues with large gum, numerous damages.

Reply provided – removal not allowed.

03/04/2019 CR19-337363 Cr Johns

Representations in regards to gum tree

Notice of Motion put to Council

DISCUSSION

This report outlines the condition of the tree, a safety risk assessment (TRAQ), a history of requests

and actions and an assessment against Council’s policies.


CO

R02

0-1

9

The Tree

The tree at 4 Coopernook Avenue, Gymea Bay is located in the front yard of a residential property

(see location map in Appendix A). The tree species is an Angophora costata – Smooth Barked Apple.

This species is local and indigenous (see photo in Appendix A).

The tree provides social, economic and environmental benefits. It provides good streetscape amenity,

wildlife habitat and plays a role in the urban character and aesthetics of Gymea Bay.

Assessment

Council uses its tree assessment criteria outlined in Sutherland Shire Development Control plan 2015

to determine tree pruning and removal requests. The use of assessment criteria by qualified tree

management staff ensures a consistent approach to tree determinations. An assessment of the

subject tree against the DCP is provided below:

DCP OBJECTIVE - CHAPTER 39 COUNCIL ARBORIST COMMENT

4.5 Special Considerations for Trees Jeopardising Public Safety

4.5.1 Objective

1. Ensure trees in urban areas are managed in a

way that reduces known risk to human life and

property.

TRAQ report has been conducted and this

tree poses a low risk (see Appendix B)

4.6 Special Considerations for Trees and Bushland

in Areas subject to Bush Fire Risk

4.6.1 Objectives

1. Achieve an appropriate balance between the

conservation of the natural environment and the

provision of appropriate bush fire protection

measures for development in areas subject to

bush fire risk.

2. Minimise the risk to life and property from bush

fire by limiting exposure to bush fire threats.

N/A – not a bushfire prone location

4.7 Special Considerations in Relation to Trees

which are Causing Personal Hardship

4.7.1 Objectives

1. Balance the protection of trees against the needs

of frail and/or aged residents who cannot

manage necessary tree maintenance

2. Ensure that all reasonable alternate options for

support in the maintenance of a tree (physical

and financial) from family, friends, community

services, have been exhausted

3. Recognise that some trees result in significant

debilitating medical conditions for residents.

N/A – hardship not claimed by property owner


CO

R02

0-1

9

4.8 Special Considerations for Trees which

Contribute to Scenic and Visual Quality

4.8.1 Objectives

1. Prevent the degradation of visual amenity and

scenic quality by requiring the retention and

enhancement of vegetation in areas of high

scenic quality.

2. Ensure the preservation and enhancement of the

natural character of foreshore areas.

3. Preserve existing streetscape character.

4. Preserve trees in areas where trees of a similar

type or scale make a strong contribution to

neighbourhood character.

5. Retain individual trees which are local landmarks

or which singularly make a positive contribution

to the quality of the streetscape or locality.

6. Ensure trees are retained along ridge tops where

they provide a backdrop to development.

7. Ensure remnant trees are retained throughout the

urban area.

8. Provide an appropriate balance between

residents’ desire for views from their properties

and the achievement of the objectives of this

section.

Tree adds significant scenic value to the

streetscape and the local vicinity.

N/A – not foreshore area

Removing the tree will have negative affect on

the streetscape as the tree is of significant

size and prominence – refer photo above.

This tree makes a strong contribution to the

neighbourhood amenity

The tree makes a positive contribution to the

streetscape

The tree is located on a ridgetop plateau

This appears to be a remnant tree

N/A – not stated as an issue by property

owner

4.9 Special Considerations for Trees in Greenweb Areas

4.9.1 Objectives

1. Prevent direct loss of habitat in core and support

areas by requiring the retention or restoration of

habitat in a size and configuration that will

enhance long term sustainability.

2. Prevent fragmentation of bushland by requiring

the retention or restoration of vegetation that

contributes to the functioning of that area as a

wildlife corridor, linking proximate areas of

habitat.

3. Require the retention and/or restoration of

vegetation on steeper slopes to assist in

minimising slope instability and soil erosion.

4. Require restoration of degraded areas of habitat

or corridor.

5. Require the creation of a habitat or corridor so as

to compensate for detrimental impacts accruing

from development of land.

The tree is within the greenweb support area

retention will assist these objectives

Above aerial phot shows that tree removal

over time has created gaps in connectivity.

Removal of this tree will exacerbate this

impact

N/A – land is not steep

N/A – land is not degraded


CO

R02

0-1

9

6. Re-establish corridors in established urban areas

through canopy links across properties.

Retention of this tree will achieve this

objective – as stated above, connectivity is

being compromised over time

N/A

4.10 Special Considerations for Trees which are

Growing in Close Proximity to Buildings

4.10.1 Objectives

1. Recognise that some residents do not feel

comfortable when large trees are located close

to their residence and to balance this against the

need to protect trees which contribute to the

scenic and visual quality of the Shire and the

sustainability of habitat.

The tree is located approximately 5m from the

dwelling. There are no major branches

overhanging the dwelling. Strongest

prevailing winds are southerly, so if tree fell it

is most likely to fall away from the house.

4.11 Special Considerations for Dead Trees which Contain Habitat

4.11.1 Objectives

1. Preserve habitat and breeding sites of native

fauna.

N/A

4.12 Special Considerations for Trees which Contribute to

Residential Amenity

4.12.1 Objectives

1. Preserve trees which add value to residents’

quality of life by enhancing privacy and outlook

and offsetting the bulk and scale of buildings.

2. Preserve trees which help to establish a more

desirable micro-climate for residents.

The tree adds value to the streetscape and

enhances the amenity of the area.

The tree provides significant shade to

hardstand areas, counteracting heat island

effect.

4.13 Special Considerations having regard to Health and

Growing Conditions of Trees

4.13.1 Objectives

1. Facilitate the removal of a tree that is in a poor

state of health or is contributing to the poor

health of a tree growing nearby.

2. Facilitate the removal of a tree that is not suited

to its site conditions.

The tree is in good health

The tree is suitable for the current location

growing in an open front setback area well set

back from the dwelling.


CO

R02

0-1

9

The following table summarises the concerns raised by the owner of the property in relation to the tree

and provides a comment on each issue raised:

CONCERN RAISED BY

OWNER

COUNCIL ARBORIST COMMENT

Safety The tree has been inspected by a Tree Management Officer

using the TRAQ methodology. The tree has been classified a

low risk. To further minimise risk the low risk, mitigations options,

including branch pruning, can be carried out.

Lifting Driveway With the tree in close proximity to the driveway (400mm) minor

lifting of the driveway does appear to be attributed to the tree.

Construction solutions are available through the use of

alternative pavement materials to minimise further lifting.

Removal of the tree will not rectify the damage to the driveway.

Should the resident wish to replace the driveway, any root

pruning that may be necessary to prevent future damage to the

new structure can be assessed by an independent arborist.

Property Damage Damage to old stormwater pipes was potentially contributed to

by the tree roots. Further damage to stormwater is unlikely now

that old dilapidated pipes have been replaced with PVC.

Damage to vehicles parked in driveway can be minimised

through pruning of deadwood.

Any damage to electricity wires unlikely as the branches are

clear of the wires. Should damage occur to the electricity

networks then AusGrid should be contacted.

Where assessment against Council’s adopted policies does not find any valid grounds for removal,

refusal of the application is the appropriate outcome of the assessment process. Council Officers have

inspected the tree subject to this report and concluded that tree removal is not warranted in this

circumstance. All reported concerns in relation to this tree can be resolved through pruning works.

Tree removal would not rectify any faults or possible damage to property reported to Council by the

resident. Often concerns residents have about trees can be addressed without tree removal.

Appropriate maintenance and pruning can often alleviate concerns, and appropriate repair or redesign

of infrastructure can also be undertaken with little impact to the tree, achieving a win-win outcome.


Tree is on private land and should removal be approved it would be the responsibility of the owner to

fund the removal and compensatory replanting.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

Council’s Community Strategic Plan aims to protect and sustain our beautiful natural environment,

including the streets and public places. Residents, community groups, schools, Council, and

developers all have a role in protecting our environment for the benefit of us all and our future

generations. The following relevant extracts are from the Community Strategic Plan:


CO

R02

0-1

9

COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN

PRINCIPLE 3: We understand the need for ecologically sustainable development.

Inter-generational equity

Biological diversity and ecological integrity

Environmental costs need to be considered

OUTCOME 2:

Sutherland Shire: a beautiful, protected and healthy natural environment

Measures include: No net canopy loss

STRATEGY 2.2 - Enhance and protect diverse natural habitats.

2.2.1 Enhance and protect our diverse flora, fauna and ecological communities.

2.2.2 Manage, promote and enhance our tree canopy in urban and natural areas.

2.2.3 Encourage responsible urban planning which balances growth with environmental sustainability

Strategy 2.4 Environment and climate risks and impacts are understood and managed.

2.4.1 Plan for and respond to long-term climate related changes.

2.4.2 Monitor and manage the environment to minimise the impacts of natural disasters.

2.4.3 Build community resilience to respond and adapt to environment and climate risks.

OUTCOME 6:

Sutherland Shire: a liveable place with a high quality of life

Strategy 6.3 Provide welcoming, safe and accessible places and spaces that encourage active lifestyles.

6.3.3 Provide streetscapes and public places that are cool, attractive and where people feel safe.


Two main policies set out Council’s framework on the management of trees in the urban environment.

These are the Urban Tree and Bushland Policy and the Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan

2015, which is discussed in detail above.

CONCLUSION

The tree located at 4 Coopernook Avenue, Gymea Bay has been assessed by four different tree

management officers over the past five years. The recent TRAQ report determined that the tree has a

low risk rating. Mitigation measures, such as removal of deadwood, pruning of selected branches,

and reduction in the volume of canopy have been approved on several occasions previously.

Further mitigation measures can be carried out to further reduce any risk. The concerns in relation to

the lifting of the driveway and storm water pipes can be resolved through the upgrading of

infrastructure by the owner. It continues to be the recommendation that the tree be retained due to the

absence of justification for its removal and the positive contribution that it makes to the streetscape

and local ecology. The resident be informed of these reasons and that further assessment will be

undertaken only if there are significant changes to the tree.


CO

R02

0-1

9

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager Environment Health and

Building, Michael Ryan, who can be contacted on 9710 0131.



CO

R02

0-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix A


CO

R02

0-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix B


CO

R02

1-1

9

COR021-19 REQUEST TO REVIEW COUNCIL'S DECISION - REMOVAL OF TREE

AT 27 BIMBADEEN AVENUE, MIRANDA


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Following the recent conclusion of the Tree Sub-Committee, Council adopted a new process

whereby Council could elect, through Notice of Motion, to determine requests for the removal of

trees.

A Notice of Motion was put forward and supported by Council for this review report to be

prepared for Council’s consideration.

This report outlines the condition of the tree, a safety risk assessment (TRAQ), a history of

requests and actions, and an assessment against Council’s Policy documents and Community

Strategic Plan.

The report concludes that there is not adequate justification to approve removal of the tree.


THAT:

1. The tree in the road reserve in front of 27 Bimbadeen Avenue, Miranda be retained.

2. The property owner be advised of Council’s decision for the tree to be retained, and that

further assessment applications will only be accepted should there be notable changes in the

condition of the tree.


CO

R02

1-1

9

PURPOSE

The purpose of the report is to respond to Notice of Motion 011-19 and to review the decision of

Council staff to refuse the removal of a tree in the road reserve in front of 27 Bimbadeen Avenue,

Miranda. The matter is submitted for Council to determine.

BACKGROUND

The table below sets out a history of Council officers’ assessment of this tree:

Date Request Details Determination

01/02/2014 Pruning Branches falling during high winds

Ground crew attended following day to remove branches

12/05/2015 Pruning/

deadwooding

Branch fell during storm event. Pruning of branches away from dwelling.

Deadwooding. Minor Pruning. No branches growing above the roofline.

23/10/2015 Removal Storm damage causing branches to fall and split the roof of the house. Cracking driveway and making grass rise.

Deadwooding, weight reduction pruning of extended limbs over wire of private pole and above driveway.

04/01/2017 Removal Dead branches and new growth from previous pruning. Recent branch failure and damage to car. Council to reconsider removal.

Deadwooding, pruning of old branch stubs, cut 2m from branch extending towards house.

24/11/2017 Pruning Pruning and removal of deadwood

Deadwooding, pruning of branch stubs, pruning of 1-1.5m branch tips away from driveway and house.

29/04/2018 Removal Damage to visitors car Deadwooding and weight reduction pruning of branches towards the house. Claim denied.

03/07/2018 Eleni Pentinos MP Removal

TRAQ conducted - Low level risk. Minor pruning.

07/12/2018 Pruning Tree requires deadwooding Deadwooding

31/01/2019 Branch Pick Up

Branch fallen from tree Branch picked up

30/04/2019 Clr Collier Review tree Deadwooding

Deadwood is a naturally occurring process for all trees. Council officers recommend deadwooding

down to minimum branch diameter of 25mm to reduce the risk associated with falling branches.


CO

R02

1-1

9

DISCUSSION

This report outlines the condition of the tree, a safety risk assessment (TRAQ), a history of requests

and actions, and an assessment against Council’s policies.

The Tree

The tree in the road reserve in front of 27 Bimbadeen Avenue, Miranda is located as shown in the

location map attached, see Appendix A.

The tree is a Native species – Corymbia maculata. It is a mature specimen presenting good health

and vigour of characteristic size and form of this tree species. This tree has been previously pruned for

minor weight reduction towards the dwelling and deadwood. Minor pruning for wire clearance has

been carried out by Ausgrid. The tree has a slight crown bias to the south due to previous weight

reduction pruning. Photo attached, see Appendix A.

Assessment

Council uses its tree assessment criteria outlined in Sutherland Shire Development Control plan 2015

to determine tree pruning and removal requests. The use of assessment criteria by qualified tree

management staff ensures a consistent approach to tree determinations. An assessment of the

subject tree against the DCP is provided below:

DCP Objective - Chapter 39 Arborist Comments

4.5 Special Considerations for Trees Jeopardising Public Safety

4.5.1 Objective

1. Ensure trees in urban areas are managed in a way that reduces known risk to human life and property.

TRAQ report has been conducted and this tree poses a low risk (see Appendix B).

Pruning work has been carried out on several occasions over a number of years. Photos submitted show minor deadwood, which is part of the growth cycle of the tree and has been managed appropriately by Council. Minor branch drop has occurred during storm events and high winds.

4.6 Special Considerations for Trees and Bushland

in Areas subject to Bush Fire Risk

4.6.1 Objectives

1. Achieve an appropriate balance between the conservation of the natural environment and the provision of appropriate bush fire protection measures for development in areas subject to bush fire risk.

2. Minimise the risk to life and property from bush fire by limiting exposure to bush fire threats.

N/A – not a bushfire prone location


CO

R02

1-1

9

4.7 Special Considerations in Relation to Trees

which are Causing Personal Hardship

4.7.1 Objectives

1. Balance the protection of trees against the needs of frail and/or aged residents who cannot manage necessary tree maintenance

2. Ensure that all reasonable alternate options for support in the maintenance of a tree (physical and financial) from family, friends, community services, have been exhausted

3. Recognise that some trees result in significant debilitating medical conditions for residents.

N/A – the tree is on Council land and Council meets the cost of maintenance.

4.8 Special Considerations for Trees which

Contribute to Scenic and Visual Quality

4.8.1 Objectives

1. Prevent the degradation of visual amenity and scenic quality by requiring the retention and enhancement of vegetation in areas of high scenic quality.

2. Ensure the preservation and enhancement of the natural character of foreshore areas.

3. Preserve existing streetscape character.

4. Preserve trees in areas where trees of a similar type or scale make a strong contribution to neighbourhood character.

5. Retain individual trees which are local landmarks or which singularly make a positive contribution to the quality of the streetscape or locality.

6. Ensure trees are retained along ridge tops where they provide a backdrop to development.

7. Ensure remnant trees are retained throughout the urban area.

8. Provide an appropriate balance between residents’ desire for views from their properties and the achievement of the objectives of this section.

Tree adds significant scenic value to the streetscape and the local vicinity.

N/A

Removing the tree will have negative affect on the streetscape. This is one of the few remaining trees in the street, so its impact will be especially obvious.

The tree makes a positive contribution to the streetscape

N/A

N/A

N/A

4.9 Special Considerations for Trees in Greenweb Areas

4.9.1 Objectives

1. Prevent direct loss of habitat in core and support areas by requiring the retention or restoration of habitat in a size and configuration that will enhance long term sustainability.

Not a greenweb location


CO

R02

1-1

9

2. Prevent fragmentation of bushland by requiring the retention or restoration of vegetation that contributes to the functioning of that area as a wildlife corridor, linking proximate areas of habitat.

3. Require the retention and/or restoration of vegetation on steeper slopes to assist in minimising slope instability and soil erosion.

4. Require restoration of degraded areas of habitat or corridor.

5. Require the creation of a habitat or corridor so as to compensate for detrimental impacts accruing from development of land.

6. Re-establish corridors in established urban areas through canopy links across properties.

4.10 Special Considerations for Trees which are

Growing in Close Proximity to Buildings

4.10.1 Objectives

1. Recognise that some residents do not feel comfortable when large trees are located close to their residence and to balance this against the need to protect trees which contribute to the scenic and visual quality of the Shire and the sustainability of habitat.

The tree is located approximately 10m from the dwelling on Council land and is not assessed as posing a material risk to nearby dwellings (see TRAQ assessment).

4.11 Special Considerations for Dead Trees which Contain Habitat

4.11.1 Objectives

1. Preserve habitat and breeding sites of native fauna.

N/A

4.12 Special Considerations for Trees which Contribute to

Residential Amenity

4.12.1 Objectives

1. Preserve trees which add value to residents’ quality of life by enhancing privacy and outlook and offsetting the bulk and scale of buildings.

2. Preserve trees which help to establish a more desirable micro-climate for residents.

The tree adds value to the streetscape and enhances the amenity of the area.

The tree provides significant shade to hardstand areas, counteracting heat island effect.

4.13 Special Considerations having regard to Health

and Growing Conditions of Trees

4.13.1 Objectives

1. Facilitate the removal of a tree that is in a poor state of health or is contributing to the poor health of a tree growing nearby.

2. Facilitate the removal of a tree that is not suited to its site conditions.

The tree was in good health at time of inspection

The tree is suitable for the current location within the road reserve.


CO

R02

1-1

9

The following table summarises the concerns raised by the owner of the property in relation to the tree

and provides a comment on each issue raised:

CONCERN RAISED BY

RESIDENT

COUNCIL ARBORIST COMMENT

Safety The tree has been inspected by a Level 5 Council Arborist using

the TRAQ methodology. The tree has been classified a low risk

after mitigation options have been completed. These mitigation

works have been scheduled for inclusion within the tree

maintenance program and subject to the ‘No Go Zone’ approval

process.

Lifting Driveway A tree of this size has a significant root system. With the tree in

close proximity to the driveway cracking does appear to be

attributed to the tree. The tree existed prior to the installation of

the driveway. The driveway and hardstand area should have

been designed accommodate for the tree roots. Engineering

solutions are available through the use of alternative material to

minimise cracking. Should the resident wish to replace the

driveway, any root pruning that may be necessary to prevent

future damage to the new structure can be assessed by an

independent arborist.

Property Damage Further damage to dwelling or vehicles parked in driveway

unlikely as pruning of branches overhanging dwelling and

driveway has occurred.

Threat to overhead wires The resident will need to contact Ausgrid about the possible treat

to their network. At time of recent inspection it does not appear

to Council that there is a significant threat.

Council’s tree inspection process incorporates a tree assessment ranking tool TRAQ. TRAQ is the

International society of arboriculture (ISA) internationally recognised method for tree risk assessment

and recommendation for mitigation measures. A TRAQ assessment was performed on 3 June 2019

and the findings of the assessment (that the tree is low risk) are in Attachment A.

Where assessment against Council’s adopted policies does not find any valid ground for removal,

refusal of the application is the appropriate outcome of the assessment process. Council Officers have

inspected the tree subject to this report and concluded that tree removal is not warranted in this

circumstance. All reported concerns in relation to this tree can be resolved through pruning works.

Tree removal would not rectify any faults or possible damage to property reported to Council by the

resident. Often concerns residents have about trees can be addressed without tree removal.

Appropriate maintenance and pruning can often alleviate concerns, and appropriate repair or redesign

of infrastructure can also be undertaken with little impact to the tree, achieving a win-win outcome.


CO

R02

1-1

9


Council’s reactive street tree maintenance program prioritises removal of trees identified as unhealthy,

diseased, dangerous, or in decline. Where canopy trees do not present significant arboricultural

defects, retention is generally the outcome.

Council’s current operational budget for tree maintenance and removal is approximately $3.6m per

annum. Removing healthy trees that are not required to be removed for safety seasons will result in

the need to increase this amount or to reduce the level of service provided in higher priority or risk

cases.

The cost to Council to remove this particular tree would be $5060.00. Where removal of a significant

tree occurs, the DCP requires offset planting at the rate of five trees for every significant tree removed.

The cost to Council to plant a tree, including cage and border and maintenance is $415 (ex GST),

making the cost of replacement $2075 (ex GST). The total cost would be $7135 (ex GST).

Expenditure of funds to remove and replace a healthy tree on public land could create a precedent. If

similar requests from residents across the Shire were dealt with in the same manner, there would be a

significant cumulative financial cost to Council.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

Council’s Community Strategic Plan aims to protect and sustain our beautiful natural environment,

including the streets and public places. Residents, community groups, schools, Council, and

developers all have a role in protecting our environment for the benefit of us all and our future

generations. The following relevant extracts are from the Community Strategic Plan:


PRINCIPLE 3: We understand the need for ecologically sustainable development.

Inter-generational equity

Biological diversity and ecological integrity

Environmental costs need to be considered

OUTCOME 2:

Sutherland Shire: a beautiful, protected and healthy natural environment

Measures include: No net canopy loss

STRATEGY 2.2 - Enhance and protect diverse natural habitats.

2.2.1 Enhance and protect our diverse flora, fauna and ecological communities.

2.2.2 Manage, promote and enhance our tree canopy in urban and natural areas.

2.2.3 Encourage responsible urban planning which balances growth with environmental sustainability

Strategy 2.4 Environment and climate risks and impacts are understood and managed.

2.4.1 Plan for and respond to long-term climate related changes.


CO

R02

1-1

9


2.4.2 Monitor and manage the environment to minimise the impacts of natural disasters.

2.4.3 Build community resilience to respond and adapt to environment and climate risks.

OUTCOME 6:

Sutherland Shire: a liveable place with a high quality of life

Strategy 6.3 Provide welcoming, safe and accessible places and spaces that encourage active lifestyles.

6.3.3 Provide streetscapes and public places that are cool, attractive and where people feel safe.


Two main policies set out Council’s framework on the management of trees in the urban environment.

These are the Urban Tree and Bushland Policy and the Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan

2015, which is discussed in detail above.

CONCLUSION

Canopy trees contribute an enormous amount to the landscape quality and biodiversity of the Shire,

and these attributes are highly valued by the broader community who choose to live in the Shire.

In recognition of the reality that canopy trees cannot always be harmoniously accommodated on

private residential property, Council has softened its position on private tree retention and now focuses

more on maintaining and enhancing tree canopy on public land. The removal of healthy trees in the

public domain should be very carefully scrutinised to ensure canopy cover is maintained in our urban

areas.

The tree in question is a large, healthy, vigorous tree that makes a very positive contribution to the

locality visually and ecologically. The tree is a native species to the east coast of Australia.

The management of canopy trees can be an emotive issue. In order to arrive at consistent, rational

outcomes, each request for removal of trees needs to be assessed against a set of accepted and

robust criteria (i.e. SSDCP2015 and TRAQ). In this instance the tree has been thoroughly

investigated and analysed by a number of appropriately qualified Council officers with the conclusion

being that there is not sufficient justification to remove the tree at this time. The minor issues with the

tree can be addressed through tree management activities and risk mitigation options.

The cost of removing and replacing the tree would be $7,135 (ex GST), not including administration.

Removing and replacing healthy trees at this cost, ahead of trees on public land that are higher priority

due to their health, level of hazard, proximity to infrastructure, etc. would require redirection of funds in

the tree management budget.

For these reasons it is recommended that Council refuse the request to have this tree removed.


CO

R02

1-1

9

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager Environment Health and

Building, Michael Ryan, who can be contacted on 9710 0131.



CO

R02

1-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix A


CO

R02

1-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix B


CO

R02

2-1

9

COR022-19 FLEET ELECTRIC VEHICLE INITIATIVES

Attachments: Nil

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report details Council’s planned Electric Vehicle (EV) initiatives to support future reductions

in Council’s own vehicle fleet emissions and operating costs.

Passenger vehicle manufacturers are well advanced and are transitioning quickly, particularly in

the area of EV innovations where technology has rapidly improved and production costs

continue to reduce.

The introduction of fully electric heavy vehicles offer the greatest opportunity for reductions in

greenhouse gas emissions as these vehicles make up 54% of Council fleet emissions.

Council is introducing four Hyundai Ioniq - electric vehicles plus charging infrastructure into its

car pool fleet in July 2019.

In September 2019 Council has arranged for a three month trial of a fully electric rear loading

garbage truck from Bucher Municipal. In March 2020 Council will trial the Bucher Municipal

electric vehicle compact sweeper for three months.

The decision to progress these initiatives are underpinned by a comprehensive governance, risk

and fleet strategic management framework to ensure these assets are well managed and

provided for in a financially sustainable manner.


THAT:

Council endorses the initiative of introducing electric vehicles to Councils fleet to support

operational service delivery.


CO

R02

2-1

9

PURPOSE

This report informs Council of current and planned fleet initiatives embracing new environmentally

sustainable and socially responsible electric vehicle (EV) technologies to support future reductions in

Council’s own vehicle fleet emissions and operating costs.

BACKGROUND

Council officers have been actively investigating new innovative vehicle technologies and

development of the different types of powertrains to determine the best economic and environmental

solution for Council’s future operational fleet demands. These include:

Hybrid – fossil fuel / electric

Hydrogen fuel cell

EVs (dedicated electric vehicles)

Council’s existing combined fleet assets contribute approximately 4,200t CO2-e annually to the

atmosphere which represents 26% of the organisations total greenhouse gas emissions. This is

predominantly attributed across the following fleet category groups as detailed.

15 % - Motor Vehicles

31% - Heavy Fleet

54% - Heavy Waste Fleet

DISCUSSION

Council’s heavy waste services vehicles are major contributors offering the greatest opportunity for

reduction. There is no current commercially produced heavy EV offered by the original equipment

manufacturers (Isuzu, Iveco, Hino, Volvo etc.).

Heavy vehicle manufacturers are still in the development and testing phase in relation to EV

technology, providing advice to us that they are still approximately four years off in delivering a

commercially available product into Australia.

There is a viable interim solution available through a reputable third party (SEA Electric) who are

based in Victoria Australia. SEA Electric specialise in retrofitting mass produced diesel powered heavy

vehicles by removing the vehicles conventional diesel engine and transmission powertrain and

replacing it with an integrated electric motor and battery power pack electric drive system.

Advice from Council’s main suppliers of garbage truck bodies (Bucher Municipal and Superior Pak)

indicate that they will soon be releasing their own EV versions based on retrofit chassis using the SEA

Electric drive system, after considerable field based pilot testing of prototype vehicles.


CO

R02

2-1

9

In contrast to lagging heavy vehicle innovation and technology change towards alternates, light vehicle

manufacturers are well advanced and transitioning quickly, particularly in the area of EV innovations

where technology has rapidly improved and production costs continue to reduce.

Recent announcements from government supporting the transformation of transport through

technology, and recognising the need for a clear direction forward to guide government and industry

actions on EVs. Their Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Plan presents a comprehensive approach to how

NSW is preparing for this transition and provides a catalyst in regards to timing of these initiatives.

It is expected that consistent with NSW State Government Policy over the next 5 to 8 years electric

vehicles will become the mainstream default solution and reliance on fossil fuel powered vehicles will

be dramatically curtailed in metropolitan areas.

Initiatives

(1) Acquisition of Four EVs and Supporting Infrastructure

Acquire four new EVs, Hyundai Ioniq ($39,350 each)

Install two fast charging, dual AC units located at Council’s Administration Building carpark and

Council’s Kirrawee depot respectively.

Progress towards installation of renewable energy sources PVs (solar panels) at both sites via

grant funding.

The risk of being an early adopter is significantly mitigated by Government and vehicle manufacturers

firming in the transition to EV technology. Hyundai’s release of the Ioniq will achieve broader public

acceptance of EV technology being the new norm.

The EV vehicle range on a full charge is 230km – 280km with an energy cost of $0.02/km. Council’s

existing petrol engine pool vehicles travel an average of 43km / day, with a daily range of 31km to

73km with a fuel cost $0.16/km. Whilst there is a premium of $10,451 in net whole of life capital costs

in comparison to a petrol variant, this amount is returned back to Council in 3.7 years in operating cost

savings.

Power consumption used in the vehicle charging process could be offset through the future installation

of renewable energy sources (solar panels) PVs at each site utilising available grant funding.

There is a one off infrastructure costs of $29,645 inclusive of charging units required to support the

EVs. This infrastructure will be able to support up to six vehicles per charge point based on current

usage patterns. The major cost involves providing the electrical sub-mains to deliver the minimum

charging current and is not scalable to but does provide future proofing of capacity for additional

vehicles.

For the purposes of amortising the cost of charging facility infrastructure, these costs have been

averaged over 16 EVs (33% less than the maximum possible of 24) with a cost of $1,852 per vehicle.

A comprehensive induction process utilising a manufacturer’s representative and fleet staff will be

provided to Council staff, covering aspects of vehicle operation, safety and charging process.


CO

R02

2-1

9

(2) Three Month Trial of EV Rear Loader Garbage Truck

Council has entered into a three month trial of a Bucher 15 cubic metre rear loader electric garbage

truck commencing September 2019. The trial will assist both the supplier in development field testing

of their product whilst providing Council with a learning opportunity to understand the broader impacts

and implications of EV ownership.

This trial will be at no cost to Council with exception to electricity recharge costs consumed performing

Council related services.

(3) Three Month Trial of EV Compact Road Sweeper

Council will be the first in Australia to trial Bucher Municipals new fully electric small compact road

sweeper commencing March 2020 for a three month period. This trial will be at no cost to Council with

exception to electricity recharge costs consumed performing Council related services

(4) Investigating EV Side Loader Garbage Truck

Council has closely monitored the development and trials of fully electric garbage trucks (side and rear

Loader applications) based on the SEA Electric retrofit chassis from both of Council’s main suppliers

of garbage trucks. The current evidence based on successful pilot testing and cost analysis strongly

supports Council’s aspiration to acquire one or more of these vehicles in the coming year.

The acquisition, whilst fulfilling operational service level demands in the waste stream, will provide

Council with invaluable knowledge about EV ownership and the likely impact in operations,

maintenance needs and infrastructure requirements.

Superior Pak’s successful 15 month EV side loader garbage truck (SEA Electric) pilot testing in

Auckland, New Zealand has resulted in their first commercially produced EV being delivered to

Cleanaway Waste Management Victoria in May 2019. Council will use this vehicle to validate

information/data including costing comparisons against the diesel variant provided as part of Council’s

own investigations to support the decision making process.

Whilst there are obvious significant immediate advantages from an environmental perspective,

economically there is an indicative upfront premium of $150,000 in net whole of life capital costs in

comparison to a diesel variant, this amount based on an initial business case analysis is returned back

to Council in 5.9 years in operating cost savings.

Bucher Municipal pending outcomes of trials (Initiatives 2 and 3) and business case analysis, Council

will look to consider the benefits of proceeding with the future acquisition of these types of vehicles.

(5) Trial of Other EVs

Council will continue to proactively approach its suppliers seeking opportunities to participate in the

evolution and innovation of new zero emission fleet technologies and powertrain alternates. Council is

in initial discussions with Isuzu Australia in relation to similar opportunities.

This trial will be at no cost to Council with exception to electricity recharge costs consumed performing

Council related services.


CO

R02

2-1

9


Initiative (1) will be funded within existing 2018/2019 budget provisions for Council’s fleet capital

renewals and operational services maintenance budgets.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

The initiative is consistent with Council’s CSP Goal – A Beautiful, Protected and Healthy Natural

Environment.


2.1 Effectively manage and conserve our

resources.

2.1.2 Promote and pursue energy and water

efficiency, productivity and clean generation

2.2 Enhance and protect diverse natural habitat 2.2.1 Enhance and protect our diverse flora,

fauna and ecological communities

2.4 Environment and climate risk and impacts

are understood and managed.

2.4.3 Build community resilience to respond and

adapt to environment and climate risks


The fleet initiatives pertaining to EV technologies is informed by its fleet asset management plan that

has an emphasis on technological advancements and environmental awareness, its impacts and

opportunities. The plan also aims towards creating a sustainable Fleet by investigating industry trends

and markets for alternate technologies (electric vehicles/plant) and zero emissions assets.

It adheres to the Procurement Policy and Guidelines and Council’s Enterprise Risk Management

Framework.

CONCLUSION

These initiatives are consistent with Council’s Community Strategic Plan, procurement policy and Fleet

asset management plan, demonstrating Council’s proactive approach to reducing the environmental

impact and costs of its transport activities, transitioning to cleaner and renewable energy sources.

The decision to progress these initiatives are underpinned by a comprehensive governance, risk and

fleet strategic management framework to ensure these assets are well managed and provided for in a

financially sustainable manner.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager Fleet and Workshops, Mark

Mills, who can be contacted on 9710 5753.



CO

R02

3-1

9

COR023-19 CASH PAYMENTS AND INVESTMENTS REPORT - MAY 2019


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides details of Council’s investment performance for the period ending 31 May

2019, along with presenting cash and investment balances and diversification.

Council may invest funds that are not, at any particular time, required for any other purpose.

Investment of these funds must be in accordance with relevant legislation and regulations and

in accordance with Council’s Policy for Investment of Cash Balances. Details of these

investments must be reported to Council monthly.

The return on Council’s portfolio to 31 May 2019 was 2.78% compared to the benchmark of

2.01%.

All investments have been made in accordance with legislative requirements and within relevant

Council policy.


THAT:

The information concerning Bank Balances and Investments held as at 31 May 2019 be received

and noted.


CO

R02

3-1

9

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of funds invested in accordance with Section 625 of the

Local Government Act. Additionally, the report provides details and certification as required by Clause

212(1) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

BACKGROUND

The Cash Payments and Investments Report is required to be submitted for Council’s consideration

each month detailing investments and their performance.

DISCUSSION

Council invests funds which are not required in the short term for any other purpose. These

investments are governed by strict legislative requirements and Council’s Policy for Investment of

Cash Balances. The Responsible Accounting Officer must report to Council monthly details of the

funds invested and certify that they have been made in accordance with the legislation and policy.

The return on Council’s total investment portfolio has averaged 2.78% for the period to 31 May 2019

against a benchmark of 2.01%. Total interest earned for the eleven months was $4,477,613.33

against an annual budget of $4.637 million, of which $1,560,206.96 is applicable to the Section 94

Trust Fund. Details of the investments and performance are in the attached document (Appendix B).

Appendix A outlines the Summary of Bank Balances as at 31 May 2019, and identifies cash

movements throughout the month along with a summary bank reconciliation statement.


Actual interest from investments is trending above budget and is expected to marginally exceed the

estimate for the full year. A proportion of this will be applicable to other funds, not just general

revenue, although it is expected that a minor gain to general revenue will be recorded. As there are no

further opportunities to reflect this gain in budget reviews, the expected additional revenue will be

incorporated in the year end results.

The increase in investment income is the result of higher than originally anticipated investment funds,

primarily from restricted assets held. Estimated investment income for future years was assessed in

line with the increased funds level, however this position will be reassessed, in line with the current

year, and incorporate the anticipated impacts of the recent reductions in official interest rates


Appropriate consultation has occurred with Council’s financial investment advisor and fund managers.


CO

R02

3-1

9

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT


1.4 Ensure community confidence in Sutherland

Shire Council.

1E Implement the Finance Strategy including

the Long Term Financial Plan.


Council invests funds in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act. Council also has

an Investment of Cash Balances Policy that outlines how investments can be made, including

procedures and reporting requirements.

Clause 212(1) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires a written monthly report of

all money invested to be considered at the first council meeting following month-end. Due to Council’s

meeting cycle, investment reports will now be submitted direct to the Ordinary Meeting of Council

rather than via Standing Committee in order to comply with the Regulation.

CERTIFICATION BY RESPONSIBLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER

In accordance with Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, I hereby certify

that all investments have been made in accordance with the Act, the regulations and Council's

investment policy.

Greg Hayes

Manager Finance and

Responsible Accounting Officer

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager Finance, Greg Hayes, who

can be contacted on 9710 0334.



CO

R02

3-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix A


CO

R02

3-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix B


CO

R02

4-1

9

COR024-19 REPORT AND MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF THE SUTHERLAND

TRAFFIC AND TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AND CONSULTATIVE

TRAFFIC FORUM HELD ON FRIDAY, 7 JUNE 2019


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Meetings of the Sutherland Traffic and Traffic Safety Committee and Consultative Traffic Forum

were held on Friday 7 June 2019.

The Minutes of the Meetings are attached as Appendix A and Appendix B.


THAT:

1. The committee recommendations contained in the Minutes of the Sutherland Traffic and

Traffic Safety Committee Meeting held on Friday 7 June 2019 be adopted.

2. The recommendations contained in the Minutes of the Consultative Traffic Forum Meeting held

on Friday 7 June 2019 be adopted.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Team Leader Traffic & Transport

Services, Greg Holding, who can be contacted on 9710 0514.



CO

R02

4-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix A


CO

R02

4-1

9

Ap

pe

nd

ix B


MO

T01

2-1

9

MOT012-19 BREED SPECIFIC DOG OFF-LEASH AREA

Pursuant to Notice, Councillor Johns submitted the following Motion:

THAT:

1. Council receives a report, as soon as practicable, on establishing a breed specific dog off-leash

area to meet the needs of Sutherland Shire’s retired greyhound community.

2. The report

a. consider the merits of possible locations including current Council dog off-leash areas,

Bonnet Bay playing fields and other suitable open spaces in the Sutherland Shire,

b. is informed by the recommendations from the NSW Greyhound Welfare and Integrity

Commission,

c. details the financial impacts of a breed specific dog off-leash area, including capital and

on-going operating costs and options to secure funding from State and Federal

Governments and from Greyhounds NSW, and

d. explains legislative and other requirements, safety controls and risk considerations,

liability and insurance requirements and operating and management protocols

necessary for a breed specific dog off-leash area.

3. Input from users and stakeholders of Bonnet Bay Playing fields, special interest and advisory

groups, users in general and the community at large be sought on the merits or otherwise of

establishing a greyhound breed specific dog off-leash area in Sutherland Shire.



MO

T01

3-1

9

MOT013-19 PUTRESCIBLE WASTE MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE

Pursuant to Notice, Councillor Steinwall submitted the following Motion:

THAT:

1. Council receives a report by December 2019 on the options for a voluntary scheme promoted

by non-monetary incentives to reduce putrescible (red bin) waste from single homes, units and

businesses in the Sutherland Shire.

2. Council’s Waste and Recycling working party provide input on the report to Council.



MO

T01

4-1

9

MOT014-19 REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVAL - 39 YARRA BURRA STREET,

GYMEA BAY

Pursuant to Notice, Councillor Collier submitted the following Motion:

THAT:

1. Council receives a report at its next meeting on the request from Ms Amanda Barry to remove

a tree located on private property at 39 Yarra Burra Street, Gymea Bay.

2. The report includes:

a. Details of the request and the reasons for seeking removal;

b. Outcomes from the visual assessment and TRAQ assessment undertaken;

c. An assessment against the relevant criteria in Part 4 of Chapter 39 in Sutherland Shire

Development Control Plan 2015; and

d. Recommendations for the management of the tree and associated costs (if applicable).



MO

T01

5-1

9

MOT015-19 REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVAL - 5 ARIKA CLOSE, BANGOR

Attachments: Nil

Pursuant to Notice, Councillor Riad submitted the following Motion:

THAT:

1. Council receives a report at its next meeting on the request from Mr John Ellerman to remove

a tree located in the road reserve in front of 5 Arika Close, Bangor.

2. The report includes:

a. Details of the request and the reasons for seeking removal;

b. Outcomes from the visual assessment and TRAQ assessment undertaken;

c. An assessment against the relevant criteria in Part 4 of Chapter 39 in Sutherland Shire

Development Control Plan 2015; and

d. Recommendations for the management of the tree and associated costs (if applicable).



CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS FROM OFFICERS

In accordance with Section 10A(1) of Local Government Act 1993, the following matters will be

considered in the Closed Session:

COR006A-19 T808/18 DEVELOPMENT OF THE OLD FERRY ROAD RESERVE ON THE

GEORGES RIVER, ILLAWONG

Section 10A(2)(d)(i) Commercial Information of a Confidential Nature:

This matter is being considered in Closed session as it relates to commercial information the

disclosure of which would be likely to prejudice the commercial position of the person, company or

tenderer who supplied it. On balance, the public interest in preserving the confidentiality of information

provided by persons, companies or tenderers outweighs the public interest in maintaining openness

and transparency in council decision-making because the disclosure of this information could reveal

information that is commercial in confidence and the release of which could damage the commercial

position of the person, company or tenderer who supplied it.

Agenda of Council Meeting - 24 00 2019 - …...2019/06/24 · Council Meeting 24 June 2019 Page 8...

Documents

Transcript of Agenda of Council Meeting - 24 00 2019 - …...2019/06/24 · Council Meeting 24 June 2019 Page 8...