GREAT LAKES COUNCIL - Mid-Coast Council · Stronger Local Government, A Case for Sustainable Change...

NOTICE OF ORDINARY MEETING

Notice is hereby given that a meeting of

GREAT LAKES COUNCIL Will be held at the Council Chambers, Breese Parade, Forster on

22 MARCH 2016 AT 11.00AM

The order of the business will be as detailed below (subject to variation by Council)

At 1.30pm a Citizenship Ceremony will be conducted for Johanna Hender, Paramjit Kaur, Sandra Loeschke, Jochen Stockhausen

1. Acknowledgement of Country

2. Opening Prayer

3. Apologies

4. Declarations of Pecuniary & Non-Pecuniary Conflicts of Interest

5. Confirmation of the Minutes from previously held meetings: Ordinary Meeting 23 February 2016

6. Consideration of Officers' Reports: General Manager Director Planning & Environmental Services Director Engineering Services Director Corporate & Community Development

7. Late Urgent Matters (including Councillor requests for Approved Leave/Attendance at Conferences, Training etc)

8. Consideration of Business in Closed Session 9. Close of Meeting

11.30AM Meet the Public Session

12.30PM-1.30PM LUNCH

Glenn Handford GENERAL MANAGER

1.30PM Citizenship Ceremony

2.00PM Public Addresses

GREAT LAKES COUNCIL Council endorsed Great Lakes 2030 on 25 June 2013 incorporating a vision supported by four key directions identified by the community. This Plan is Council's primary forward planning document that aligns our community's vision with a clear strategic direction for the Great Lakes' long term future. VISION

a unique and sustainably managed environment balanced with quality lifestyle opportunities created through appropriate development, infrastructure and services

KEY DIRECTIONS & OBJECTIVES

Key Direction 1 Our environment

Objectives

Protect and maintain the natural environment so it is healthy and diverse Ensure that development is sensitive to our natural environment Prepare for the impact of sea level rise and climate change Sustainably manage our waste

Key Direction 2 Strong local economies

Objectives

Promote the Great Lakes as an area that is attractive for residents and visitors Establish and maintain a supportive business environment that encourages job opportunities Provide transport infrastructure that meets current and future needs

Key Direction 3 Vibrant and connected communities

Objectives

Provide the right places and spaces Plan for sustainable growth and development Increase and improve access to education for all ages Encourage a positive and supportive place for young people to thrive Develop and support healthy and safe communities Build on the character of our local communities and promote the connection between them

Key Direction 4 Local leadership

Objectives

Deliver Council services which are effective and efficient Strengthen community participation Represent the community's interests through regional leadership

GREAT LAKES COUNCIL

CODE OF CONDUCT PRINCIPLES AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING

Integrity – You must not place yourself under any financial or other obligation to any

individual or organisation that might reasonably be thought to influence you in the performance of your duties.

Leadership – You have a duty to promote and support the key principles by leadership and example and to maintain and strengthen the public’s trust and confidence in the integrity of Council. This means promoting public duty to others in the council and outside, by your own ethical behaviour.

Selflessness – You have a duty to make decisions solely in the public interest. You must not act in order to gain financial or other benefits for yourself, your family, friends or business interests. This means making decisions because they benefit the public, not because they benefit the decision maker.

Objectivity – You must make decisions solely on merit and in accordance with your statutory obligations when carrying out public business. This includes the making of appointments, awarding of contracts or recommending individuals for rewards or benefits. This means fairness to all; impartial assessment; merit selection in recruitment and in purchase and sale of Council’s resources; considering only relevant matters.

Accountability – You are accountable to the public for your decisions and actions and should consider issues on their merits, taking into account the views of others. This means recording reasons for decisions; submitting to scrutiny; keeping proper records; establishing audit trails.

Openness – You have a duty to be as open as possible about your decisions and actions, giving reasons for decisions and restricting information only when the wider public interest clearly demands. This means recording, giving and revealing reasons for decisions; revealing other avenues available to the client or business; when authorised, offering all information; communicating clearly.

Honesty – You have a duty to act honestly. You must declare any private interests relating to your public duties and take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in such a way that protects the public interest. This means obeying the law; following the letter and spirit of policies and procedures; observing the code of conduct; fully disclosing actual or potential conflict of interests and exercising any conferred power strictly for the purpose for which the power was conferred.

Respect – You must treat others with respect at all times. This means not using derogatory terms toward others, observing the rights of other people, treating people with courtesy and recognising the different roles others play in local government decision-making.

Ethical Decision Making Consider the following points when assessing a potential action or decision. Is the decision or conduct legal? Is it consistent with Council policy, Council’s objectives and Council’s Code of Conduct? What will the outcome be for yourself, your colleagues, Council and other interested parties? Does it raise a conflict of interest? Do you stand to privately gain or lose at the public expense? Can the decision be justified in terms of the public interest? Would the decision withstand public scrutiny?

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONSIDERATION OF OFFICERS’ REPORTS: ....................................................................................... 1

GENERAL MANAGER .............................................................................................................................. 1

1 GM - Merger Proposal, Great Lakes, Greater Taree & Gloucester Councils ................................................ 1

DIRECTOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES .............................................................. 11

2 PES - DA 122/2016 Proposed Exploratory Drilling - Maytoms Lane, Booral .............................................. 11 3 PES - DA 156/2016 Medical Centre - 84 Boomerang Dr, Boomerang Beach ............................................ 28 4 PES - Planning Proposal - Development in Rural & Environmental Zones ................................................ 60 5 PES - Penalty Infringement Notices issued February 2016 ........................................................................ 96 6 PES - Consents Issued Under Delegated Authority - February 2016 ......................................................... 98 7 PES - List of Matters Before the Land & Environment Court - March 2016 .............................................. 101 8 PES - Minutes for Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee .............................................................. 104 9 PES - Minutes of Port Stephens/Myall Lakes Estuary Committee, Nov 2015 .......................................... 110

DIRECTOR ENGINEERING SERVICES ............................................................................................... 117

10 ES - Marine Drive Replacement of Trees ................................................................................................. 117 11 ES - Naming of Cycleway ......................................................................................................................... 119

DIRECTOR CORPORATE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ............................................................. 121

12 CCD - 2016 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review .............................................................. 121 13 CCD - Bundabah - Proposal to Re-classify a Section of Community Land .............................................. 124 14 CCD - Forster Boat Harbour - Facility Renewal ........................................................................................ 130 15 CCD - Investment Report - February 2016 ............................................................................................... 132 16 CCD - List of Outstanding Reports ........................................................................................................... 140

CLOSED COUNCIL ............................................................................................................................... 142

17 ESCONF - Tender for Construction of Markwell Rd & Deep Creek Bridges ............................................ 142 18 CCDCONF - Civic Precinct Forster .......................................................................................................... 142

ORDINARY Meeting of the Great Lakes Council held 22 MARCH 2016 Page 1

CONSIDERATION OF OFFICERS’ REPORTS:

GENERAL MANAGER

1 GM - Merger Proposal, Great Lakes, Greater Taree & Gloucester Councils

Index: Local Government Reform Program Author: General Manager - Glenn Handford Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

The Minister for Local Government has made a proposal under Section 218E of the Local Government Act to amalgamate the existing areas of Gloucester, Great Lakes and Greater Taree into one new area. Dr Ian Tiley has been appointed by the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Office of Local Government to examine and report on the proposal.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council formally adopt a position in relation to the merger proposal 2. That in accordance with the Office of Local Government Council Decision Making During Merger

Proposal Periods Guidelines, Council adopt the Public Information Campaign and associated budget.

FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS:

Council has a very limited time to respond to the merger proposal which was notified to Council 9 March 2016. Submissions close on 15 April 2016. Council has worked closely with its community over many years on its forward planning and delivery program. As such Council should as far as possible assist the community to understand the implications of this proposal. A budget provision of $100,000 is proposed to conduct the public information campaign outlined in this report and prepare a submission in response to the Section 263 factors for consideration including business case matters.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Council is responding to a State Government initiated merger proposal.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no legal implications as a result of this report.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

A: Proposal for the amalgamation of Gloucester, Great Lakes and Greater Taree - Minister for Local Government.

B: Letter from Delegate, Dr Ian Tiley in response to the Minister's proposal C: FAQ document.


LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:

A: The Examination and Reporting Process for Council Mergers - NSW Government Council Boundary Review Website

B: Council Decision Making During Merger Proposal Periods - Office of Local Government C: Business Paper and Minutes - Gloucester Special Council Meeting 8 March 2016 D: Merger Proposal - NSW Government Council Boundary Review Website

REPORT:

The Minister for Local Government, the Hon Paul Toole, MP, has made a proposal in accordance with Section 218E of the Local Government Act to amalgamate the existing areas of Gloucester, Great Lakes and Greater Taree into one new area. Dr Ian Tiley has been appointed by the Acting Chief Executive of the Office of Local Government as the Delegate to examine and report on the proposal. The letter of referral from the Minister and the advice from the Delegate are attached. The proposal from the Minister would appear to have arisen from the investigation into the merger of Dungog and Gloucester Councils which was announced by the Minister for Local Government on 18 December 2015. During these investigations Gloucester Council made a submission which stated that it did not support a merger and would prefer to remain as a stand alone Council. As an option, Gloucester advised in its submission that if it had to merge its preference would be to merge with Great Lakes and Greater Taree. Following Gloucester's submission the NSW Government sought clarification from Gloucester Council on the intent of its submission on whether its preferred position is to stand alone or merge with Great Lakes and Greater Taree. Gloucester Council considered this at a Special Council Meeting held 8 March 2016 and confirmed its preferred position is to stand alone with the three way merger being a second option. A copy of the Gloucester Council Special Council Meeting business paper and minutes is provided as an attachment. As Council is aware the Local Government Reform Program has been occurring since August 2011 and Great Lakes Council has been a cooperative participant in all aspects of the Program. The following summarises the process to date from the investigation and analysis which resulted in Council being independently assessed as a fit Council when measured against State Government Benchmarks to the most recent merger proposal. How did this proposal come about? Timeline of events August 2011 - All NSW Councils meet at Dubbo to look at the future of local Government in NSW (Destination 2036 Report) April 2012 - Office of Local Government appoints an Independent Local Government Review Panel at the request of Local Government Shires Association July 2012 - Independent Local Government Review Panel issues a consultation paper Strengthening your Community November 2012 - Independent Local Government Review Panel issues a discussion paper Better Stronger Local Government, A Case for Sustainable Change April 2013 - Independent Local Government Review Panel issues their initial findings for further consultation Future Directions for NSW Local Government - 20 Essential Steps April 2013 - T-Corp releases its financial sustainability review which finds Great Lakes Council is financially sustainable


June 2013 - Council makes submission to the ILGRP based on their initial findings October 2013 - Independent Local Government Review Panel issues their final finding 'Revitalising Local Government' which identifies a possible merger of Gloucester Shire with either Greater Taree or Great Lakes Councils and places Great Lakes as part of the Hunter Group of Councils September 2014 - NSW Government releases response to ILGRP recommendations and announces Fit for the Future, a blueprint for local government. Council to assess their current position and submit a Fit for the Future proposal by June 2015. IPART appointed as expert panel to assess Fit for the Future submissions. March/April 2015 - Council engages consultants Morrison Low to review a Great Lakes and Gloucester Merger who find a merger would not be beneficial for either Council. Council resolves to stand alone. June 2015 - Council lodges Fit for the Future submission as a stand alone council October 2015 - The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal's (IPART) assessment of Great Lakes Council finds it is Fit for the Future, and in fact meets all five criteria for a 'fit' council. It is one of only 37% of Councils in NSW to be found fit. Great Lakes Council is found fit to stand alone. Both Greater Taree and Gloucester Shire Councils were found not fit. It recommends that Gloucester Council explore a possible merger with either Greater Taree City Council or Great Lakes. November 2015 - Council lodges submission that was consistent with ILGRP and IPART for GLC to stand alone December 2015 - The NSW Government releases its "Fit for the Future" Report that finds Great Lakes could continue to stand-alone in order to best provide local government services to its ratepayers. It recommends Gloucester Shire Council merge with Dungog Council. March 2016 - Gloucester Council makes a submission to the NSW Government that it wants to stand alone and not merge with Dungog Council, but says if it must merge, than it wants to merge with both the Great Lakes and Greater Taree City Councils. March 2016 - NSW Minister makes an additional merger proposal to the Boundaries Commission to merge Great Lakes, Gloucester and Greater Taree City Councils. The proposal is on public exhibition until Friday 15 April. As is clear from the above, Great Lakes Council was found to be fit for the future when assessed by IPART against the State Governments criteria. In December the State Government determined that Council could remain as a stand alone Council as was not affected by merger proposals. How this situation has changed between December and 9 March is not clear as there has been no defined merger proposal or business case prepared for the proposed three way Council merger. It is noted that on 14 March 2016 a six page proposal was posted on the State Government Boundary Review website which contains financial and demographic facts for each council. It contains a high level statement of KPMG assessed benefits of the merger. This merger proposal is included as Attachment D. The process of examining the merger proposal involves public inquiries under Section 263 of the Local Government Act and submissions must be lodged with the Delegate by 15 April 2016. The public inquiry details are as follows:


Date: Monday 4 April 2016 Time: 4.00pm - 8.00pm Venue: Club Taree Date: Tuesday 5 April 2016 Time: 9.00am - 1.00pm Venue: Club Forster Date: Tuesday 5 April 2016 Time: 3.00pm - 5.00pm Venue: Bulahdelah Bowling Club Date: Wednesday 6 April 2016 Time: 9.00am - 12.000pm Venue: Gloucester Soldiers Club

Members of the public who would like to attend can register using the on-line registration form available at www.councilboundaryreview.nsw.gov.au or by contacting 1300 813 020. Members of the public who would like to speak at the inquiry are required to indicate that they wish to do so when they register to attend. Members of the public may only speak once at the inquiry and the order of speaking will be determined by the Delegate. Registrations to speak will close as per the details on the web site. The factors to be considered by the Delegate in the examination process are as per section 263 of the Act as below: The financial advantages or disadvantages of the proposal to the residents and ratepayers of the

areas concerned; The community of interest and geographic cohesion in the existing areas and in any proposed

new area; The existing historical and traditional values in the existing areas and the impact of change on

them; The attitude of the residents and ratepayers of the areas concerned; The requirements of the area concerned in relation to elected representation for residents and

ratepayers at the local level, the desirable and appropriate relationship between elected representatives and ratepayers and residents and such other matters as considered relevant in relation to the past and future patterns of reflected representation for that area;

The impact of the proposal on the ability of the council to provide adequate, equitable and appropriate services and facilities;

The impact of the proposal on the employment of the staff by the council; The impact of the proposal on any rural communities in the resulting area; The desirability (or otherwise) of dividing the resulting area or areas into wards; The need to ensure that the opinions of each of the diverse communities of the resulting area or

areas are effectively represented; and Any other factors relevant to the provision of efficient and effective local government in the

existing and proposed new areas. Now that Council is officially under a merger proposal investigation process, it is required to comply with the Office of Local Government Council Decision Making During Merger Proposal Periods Guidelines. This impacts on Decision Making, Financial Management Workforce Management, and Merger Related Information Campaigns amongst other things. A copy of the Guidelines are provided as an annexure.


Merger Related Information Campaign Engaging with the community on the Merger Proposal will require an Information Campaign. Council has limited time to do this noting that the proposal was announced on 9 March 2016 and submissions close on 15 April 2016. For merger proposals announced by the Minister on 18 December 2015, Councils affected by those had to lodge their submissions by 28 February 2016. In Council's case, our ability to engage effectively with the community is impacted by a compressed timeframe. As such an Information Campaign is proposed and a draft Communication Plan is currently being prepared. This will be circulated to Councillors when available. Activities proposed in the Plan are summarised below: Fact Sheets and FAQ document (see Annexure C for FAQs) Council website and social media Media Release and Media Interviews Community Meetings Business Meetings Newspaper Advertisements Shopping Centre Visits In addition Council will need to prepare a detailed submission addressing the factors listed in Section 263 of the Act and revisit business case details. Given the constrained timeframes and the need for Council resources to assist in the information campaign it is proposed to engage Morrison Low to assist Council with this work. Morrison Low knows Council's business well having assisted with our Asset Improvement Plan and they also prepared the Business Case Analysis for the Great Lakes/Gloucester merger, suggested as an option by the Independent Local Government Review Panel (ILGRP). The budget required for the Information Campaign and submission is $100,000.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council formally adopt a position in relation to the merger proposal 2. That in accordance with the Office of Local Government Council Decision Making During Merger

Proposal Periods Guidelines, Council adopt the Public Information Campaign and associated budget.


ANNEXURES:

A: Proposal for the amalgamation of Gloucester, Great Lakes and Greater Taree - Minister for Local Government.


B: Letter from Delegate, Dr Ian Tiley in response to the Minister's proposal


C: FAQ download.


DIRECTOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

2 PES - DA 122/2016 Proposed Exploratory Drilling - Maytoms Lane, Booral

Index: DA-122/2016 & PK 35006 Author: Development Assessment Planner - Steve Andrews Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

DETAILS:

Date Received: 28 September 2015

Applicant: Coastplan Consulting

Owner: Mr M Tripolone

Land: Lot 60 DP1094397, Lot 1 DP159902, Lot 2 DP1166923, Lot 3 DP1166923, Lot 4 DP1166923, Lot 62 DP95029, Lot 63 DP95029, Lot 64 DP95029 67 Maytoms Lane, Booral

Area: Collectively 400.92ha

Property Key: 35006

Zoning: RU2 Rural Landscape, GLLEP 2014

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Development Application No. 122/2016 lodged seeking consent for the exploratory drilling of six (6) bore holes to determine rock substrate and its suitability for quarrying purposes.

Application notified to neighbouring property owners in accordance with Council's Policy and submissions were received from 28 properties together with a petition with 114 signatories.

Proposed development generally considered to be consistent with the various relevant planning controls.


Grant development consent subject to conditions.


Cost of defending any appeal against Council's decision.


Nil.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

A decision for approval subject to conditions or refusal may lead to an appeal to the Land and Environment Court requiring legal representation.


LIST OF ANNEXURES:

Nil. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:

A: Site plan with drilling/bore hole locations. Due to its large size, Attachment A has been circulated in hard copy to Councillors and Senior Staff only as a paper conservation measure. However, this Attachment is publicly available on Council's Website, copies are available at Council offices and copies are available on request.


SUBJECT SITE AND LOCALITY:


BACKGROUND:

5 August 2015 - On or about this date, following receipt of complaint of quarrying on the site, Council's Investigation and Compliance Officer carried out an inspection. Council then sought legal advice as to whether development consent was required for the exploratory drilling. 11 August 2015 - Council received legal advice that such exploratory drilling required development consent. 12 August 2015 - Council advised the owner's planning consultant of the above legal advice and instructed that the drilling should cease immediately and to lodge a development application for the exploratory drilling. The consultant indicated that they were obtaining their own legal advice. 19 August 2015 - Council contacts the owner's planning consultant and seeks reply concerning compliance with Council's earlier instructions. 25 August 2015 - The owner's planning consultant advises that works ceased on 20 August 2015 and in accordance with their legal advice a development application will be submitted. 26 August 2015 - Council's Investigation and Compliance Officers inspected the site following complaint alleging that further quarrying activity was being conducted. The inspection disclosed a bulldozer and excavator on site that had been used to clean dams and cut in several box drains on the high side of roads/tracks within the site. There was no evidence of further exploratory drilling. 30 September 2015 - The subject development application was lodged. 6 October 2015 - Application notified to neighbouring properties. 8 October 2015 - Applicant advised plans and Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) requires corrections. 13 October 2015 - Applicant submits corrected plans and SEE. 14 October 2015 - Following receipt of environmental health comments, applicant requested to provide further information. 28 November 2015 - Applicant submits revised plans and SEE. 11 December 2015 - Revised plans and SEE referred to the Environmental Protection Authority, NSW Office of Water, NSW Department of Industry - Resources & Energy, NSW Office of Environment & Heritage for their comments. 22 December 2015 - Revised plans and SEE notified broadly to neighbouring properties for the period ending 29 January 2016.

PROPOSAL:

The proposal is to sink six (6) bore holes (borehole TA DDH1 has been completed) generally centrally located on this large site and in already cleared pastoral areas, as indicated on the site plan - Attachment 'A'. The bore holes will be carried out by a four wheel drive truck mounted drill rig and by either a percussion drill or a core-hole drill depending on the location and the required depth. The bore holes will vary in depths up to approximately 120 metres. The purpose of the exploratory drilling is to determine the rock substrate and its suitability for quarrying. Existing well marked and in good condition tracks will generally be used to access each of the bore hole sites however, due to topographical conditions of the site it may be necessary to provide improved track access to some bore holes. The proposed development does not require the removal of any trees.


SITE DESCRIPTION:

The site is comprised of eight (8) rural lots under the one ownership and has an area of 400.92ha. The site is located to the western side of The Buckets Way south of the village of Booral and accessed via Maytoms Lane. The topography of the site is undulating with a combination of cleared pastoral and timbered areas and contains several watercourses.

REPORT:

The following matters listed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, are relevant in considering this application: a) The provisions of any environmental planning instrument; any proposed instrument that

is or has been the subject of public consultation and which have been notified to the consent authority; any DCP; any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F; any matters prescribed by the regulations; any coastal zone management plan that apply to the development application on the subject land.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPAA 1979) The subject site is mapped as bush fire prone and in accordance with Section 79BA of the EPAA 1979 the application is to be assessed having regard to the aims and objectives of the Rural Fire Service's publication ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with those aims and objectives of that publication particularly in respect to ensuring the protection of human life and providing suitable means of access and evacuation. Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan 2014 (GLLEP 2014) The proposed development is for exploratory drilling, the results of which will determine whether an extractive industry is a viable commercial future use of the site. This development application is not for an extractive industry and that use would be the subject of a separate development application and assessment. The site is located in a RU2 - Rural Landscape Zone and it is noted that an extractive industry is a permissible use with development consent in the zone. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant objectives of the zone that ensure the rural landscape character of the land is maintained, that provide for a range of compatible land uses, and that limit the fragmentation of rural land and the loss of potential agricultural productivity. Clause 7.2 of GLLEP 2014 requires development consent for the proposed earth works (ie. exploratory drilling and construction of access tracks). The objective of the clause is to ensure that earthworks will not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses and features of the surrounding land. The proposed development includes limited excavation works in drilling operations and the construction of access tracks. Issues of soil erosion, sedimentation and drainage impacts will be managed during and after execution of the proposed work subject to compliance with appropriate conditions that are included in this report's recommendation. Accordingly, the proposed development will be consistent with the objective of this clause having regard to the matters listed for consideration referred to in sub-clause (3). Clause 7.5 of GLLEP 2014 provides for Stormwater Management - The objective of this clause is to minimise the environmental impacts of stormwater on the site and adjoining properties, native bushland, groundwater, wetlands and receiving waters. The proposed development, subject to the conditions in this report's recommendation, is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the clause having regard to the matters for consideration referred to in sub-clause (2).


Clause 7.7 of GLLEP 2014 provides for Riparian Land and Watercourses - The objectives of this clause are to protect and maintain the water quality, the bed and bank stability, the aquatic and riparian habitats and the ecological processes within watercourses and riparian areas. The site contains an identified watercourse in accordance with the Watercourse Map. The proposed drilling sites are located on elevated areas of the site and not within 40 metres of a significant watercourse or a creek. Notwithstanding, the NSW Department of Primary Industries - Water was consulted and they have indicated no objection subject to the applicant obtaining a licence/approval from them under the Water Management Act 2000, prior to commencing the proposed activity. The proposed development, subject to the conditions in this report's recommendation including that from the Department, is considered to be consistent with the objectives of this clause having regard to the matters for consideration referred to in subclauses (3) and (4). State Environmental Planning Policy No.44 – Habitat Koala Protection The Plan applies to the subject site as at least two (2) species of Koala food trees occur on the land. These trees would potentially occur on certain parts of the land at greater than 15% of the canopy cover of the areas in which they inhabit. Therefore, potential Koala habitat is expected to occur on the land. The proposed development will not require the removal of Koala habitat and will not add to the risks, such as road kill, stress and disease and therefore it is not reasonable to suggest that an individual Koala management plan be prepared. Accordingly, the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant objectives of the Policy that encourage the conservation and management of vegetation that provides Koala habitat. State Environmental Planning Policy (Rural Lands) 2008 All development being undertaken on land within a rural land use zone must be considered against the 'rural planning principles' and the ‘rural subdivision principles’ contained within Clauses 7 and 8 of the SEPP. The site is zoned RU2 – Rural Landscape under the Policy. The relevant aims of the Policy are to facilitate the orderly and economic use and development of rural lands for rural and related purposes; to identify the Rural Planning Principles and the Rural Subdivision Principles so as to assist in the proper management, development and protection of rural lands for the purpose of promoting the social, economic and environmental welfare of the State; to implement measures designed to reduce land use conflicts; and to identify State significant agricultural land for the purpose of ensuring the ongoing viability of agriculture on that land, having regard to social, economic and environmental considerations. The relevant Rural Planning Principles are as follows: (a) the promotion and protection of opportunities for current and potential productive and

sustainable economic activities in rural areas,

(b) recognition of the importance of rural lands and agriculture and the changing nature of agriculture and of trends, demands and issues in agriculture in the area, region or State,

(c) recognition of the significance of rural land uses to the State and rural communities, including the social and economic benefits of rural land use and development,

(d) in planning for rural lands, to balance the social, economic and environmental interests of the community,

(e) the identification and protection of natural resources, having regard to maintaining biodiversity, the protection of native vegetation, the importance of water resources and avoiding constrained land,

(f) the provision of opportunities for rural lifestyle, settlement and housing that contribute to the social and economic welfare of rural communities,


(g) the consideration of impacts on services and infrastructure and appropriate location when providing for rural housing.

The relevant Rural Subdivision Principles are as follows: a) the minimisation of rural land fragmentation,

b) the minimisation of rural land use conflicts, particularly between residential land uses and other rural land uses,

c) the consideration of the nature of existing agricultural holdings and the existing and planned future supply of rural residential land when considering lot sizes for rural lands,

d) the consideration of the natural and physical constraints and opportunities of land,

e) ensuring that planning for dwelling opportunities takes account of those constraints. The proposed development site is comprised of eight (8) allotments of land ranging in size from 0.7407 to 167.2 ha. Whilst the proposed development does not include subdivision, consolidation of the eight (8) allotments into one (1) Land Title would be appropriate if future development consent were to be granted to a quarry on the site. The proposed limited scale development, generally centrally located on site, is considered to be consistent with the relevant rural planning principles, the relevant rural subdivision principles and the relevant aims of the Policy. State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007 (SEE MPPEI 2007) The aims of this State Policy are: (a) to provide for the proper management and development of mineral, petroleum and extractive

material resources for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the State, and

(b) to facilitate the orderly and economic use and development of land containing mineral, petroleum and extractive material resources, and

(b1) to promote the development of significant mineral resources, and

(c) to establish appropriate planning controls to encourage ecologically sustainable development through the environmental assessment, and sustainable management, of development of mineral, petroleum and extractive material resources, and

(d) to establish a gateway assessment process for certain mining and petroleum (oil and gas) development:

(i) to recognise the importance of agricultural resources, and

(ii) to ensure protection of strategic agricultural land and water resources, and

(iii) to ensure a balanced use of land by potentially competing industries, and

(iv) to provide for the sustainable growth of mining, petroleum and agricultural industries. The Policy applies to the proposed development that involves exploration (ie. the taking of samples and the assessment of deposits and extractive materials) for the purpose of determining whether an extractive industry is a viable commercial future use of the site. Council is the consent authority for the purposes of the Policy. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the Policy having regard to the relevant matters listed for consideration under Part 3 of the Policy.


Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP 2014) The aims of the Plan are to ensure good quality, sustainable development outcomes that maintain a high level of environmental amenity. The Plan is designed to allow flexibility in the application of its controls where strict compliance is considered unreasonable or unnecessary provided the relevant objectives of the Plan have been achieved.

The relevant provisions of the Plan are discussed as follows:

Part 3 - Character Statements - The proposed development/use will not detract from the rural character of this locality nor will it significantly impact on the natural environment.

Part 4 - Environmental Considerations - The proposed development is generally limited to existing cleared or disturbed areas of the site and is not considered to create any adverse ecological impacts. Natural hazards of flooding and bush fire are not considered to be significant in respect to the proposed use.

Part 12 - Trees and Vegetation Preservation - The proposed development does not require the removal of any existing trees or significant clearing of lesser vegetation.

Part 14 - Waste Management - Disturbed areas will be rehabilitated. Great Lakes Council Erosion and Sediment Control Policy The aim of this policy is to minimise erosion and sedimentation in catchments, resulting from the disturbance of the soil surface associated with earthworks. This is to ensure that potential pollutants are not directed to natural and artificial water bodies. The earthworks associated with the proposed development will be managed to ensure that erosion and sediment control measures comply with the aims and requirements of the Policy thereby protecting the water quality of neighbouring natural and artificial water bodies. Appropriate conditions of consent are included in this report's recommendation. b) The likely impacts of development including environmental impacts on both natural and

built environments and social/economic impacts in the locality Context and Setting The proposed development is considered to be contextually appropriate in this rural location. Site Design The site is comprised of eight (8) allotments of land under the one ownership. The proposed development is generally located centrally on site. Views The proposed development will not impact on views and outlooks from neighbouring properties. Privacy (Aural and Visual) The proposed development will not impact on the visual privacy of neighbouring properties and given the daytime operation of the proposed use and the separation distance of approximately 1.3km to the closest neighbouring dwelling, will not create an unreasonable noise impact. Access and Traffic Access to the site is from The Bucketts Way via Maytoms Lane. The proposed development will not create a significant impact on vehicle movements to/from the site.


Cumulative Impacts Approval of the proposed development does not establish an undesirable precedent for further similar development in this rural locality or set a precedent for approval of any further development application concerning an extractive industry use on the site. c) The Suitability of the Site for the Development The topography and configuration of the site are suitable for the proposed, small scale, development. Environmental issues are limited and satisfactorily addressed in the application and by conditions contained in this report's recommendation. The site is not susceptible to any natural hazards to a significant extent. d) Any Submissions Made in Accordance with the Act or Regulations The application was notified broadly to neighbouring property owners in accordance with Council’s Policy and submissions were received from 28 properties including a petition with 114 signatories. The submissions referred to the following issues: 1. What investigations have been carried out and what information has been obtained to warrant

exploratory drilling?

Comment: The proposed exploration is to determine if the mineral rhyodacite is present and in sufficient quantities to justify quarrying. A Geologist was engaged by the owner of the property to carry out a preliminary geological survey and assessment of the site given the extent of exposed rock formation and to establish suitable locations for further investigation given existing flora and fauna and the potential for noise and dust from further exploration activities. Geological information obtained thus far supports further more detailed exploration by way of drilling the proposed bore holes.

2. The number of bore holes should be confirmed.

Comment: The applicant has confirmed in writing that the number of bore holes is limited to the six (6) bore holes as indicated on the submitted plan (refer to Attachment 'A').

3. The applicant's Statement of Environmental Effects does not address likely land use conflicts

and amenity impacts with neighbouring commercial rural properties including poultry, cattle, horses, vineyards, nurseries and apiaries and other existing agricultural enterprises and tourism.

Comment: The large site, comprised of eight (8) rural allotments, has a combined area of 400.92ha. The topography of the site is undulating. The proposed exploratory drilling will generally occur centrally on elevated cleared areas of the site. The adjoining land to the north, east, south and west of the drill locations is generally heavily timbered/bushland with the exception of cleared pastoral land in the valley to the south east. The nearest dwelling on adjoining land to the south west of bore hole TAPH1 is approximately 1.35km, the separation distance of which is a heavily timbered and well elevated dividing ridgeline. The cleared areas of that adjoining land appear to be used for animal grazing. The nearest dwellings on adjoining land to the east and south east of bore hole TADDH1 is approximately 1.5lkm with two (2) of those properties having poultry farms close to the residences. The separation distance is generally heavily timbered and well elevated.

Having regard to the significant separation distances, topography and vegetation the proposed drilling operations are not likely to create any land use conflicts or adverse amenity implications for existing neighbouring rural uses. The truck based drill rig will be powered by the diesel truck motor which will omit similar amounts of fumes and noise to that of a farm tractor. Therefore the


applicant submits that the equipment to be used for the drilling of the bore holes will cause no more impact than existing equipment that is used in a farming operation, which is considered to be negligible. The only likely impact on the existing properties in close proximity to Maytoms Lane will be from vehicles using the lane to access and exit the site. The drill mounted truck will only use the lane at the start and end of the exploratory drilling operations. There will also be a maximum of two (2) vehicles associated with the drilling operations travelling to and from the site each day, Monday to Saturday. Therefore, the traffic movements will be fewer than what would be expected from someone living in the dwelling house on the site. It is noted that the dwelling house on the site is currently vacant and only used by the owner's family occasionally. Accordingly, the outcome is unlikely to create any adverse impact on people living in properties in close proximity to Maytoms Lane.

4. The hours of operation and a completion timeframe have not been indicated.

Comment: The applicant submits the drilling equipment will be operated between 7.00am and 6.00pm, Monday to Friday and from 7.00am to 5.00pm on Saturday. Depending on weather conditions, the drilling of all bore holes is likely to take 3 to 4 weeks. The drill rig is truck mounted and therefore the truck will drive to the site, using Maytoms Lane, to commence the work and will remain until the work is completed.

5. Number of staff/workers.

Comment: The applicant has indicated that two (2) staff will be employed to conduct the drilling operation.

6. The proposed drilling operations are not explained in detail nor implications or requirements for

each form of drilling.

Comment: The drill is mounted on the back of a four wheel drive truck that will be driven over existing tracks to each drill site. Once at the site and in the correct position the truck is stabilised on retractable arms and the drill boom is placed in position to commence drilling. If core drilling is being utilised, water is used from a tank on the back of the truck. Only sufficient water is provided to wet the drill head and no waste water leaves the drill hole. Percussion drilling does not require water. Core specimens will be taken from the site and drill holes will be capped on completion or will be used for water monitoring to obtain base level data for water quality. Appropriate conditions are included in this report's recommendation to address suitable erosion and sediment control measures to be adopted during the course of the exploration drilling.

The percussion drilling uses a different drill head and the rock chips are blown to the ground surface and taken away for analysis, therefore there is no waste left on the site.

7. The extent of proposed/required clearing (including tracks), measures to address impacts on

wildlife/habitat and rehabilitation is unclear and needs further detail. It is suggested that depending on the drilling method additional clearing with earthworks will be required.

Comment: Existing generally well maintained tracks will be utilised to access each of the proposed drilling locations that are on cleared pastoral land used for the grazing of cattle. Irrespective of the method of drilling, the only disturbance on site will be a very small area of the drill head and from the stabilising arms to the truck. The limited scale and duration of the proposed development is unlikely to cause a significant impact on existing wildlife and their habitats. Appropriate conditions are included in this report's recommendation to address suitable erosion and sediment control measures and ecological measures to be adopted during the course of the exploration drilling.


8. Noise, vibration, dust, exhaust, odour and soot from increased traffic and drilling operations will impact on health of residents (many of whom suffer respiratory illnesses), stock, crops, wildlife, existing vegetation, solar panels, dams and water storage tanks and watercourses. Proposed measures to suppress will deplete the water resource in the locality.

Comment: As discussed above the limited scale and operation of the proposed development will not raise any significant adverse implication for neighbouring properties and other rural land uses that are well separated from the proposed drilling operations. Traffic associated with the proposed development using Maytoms Lane is likely to be in the order of four (4) vehicle movements per day, less than that expected from the occupation of the dwelling house on the site, that is currently vacant. The emissions from the drill rig, which is driven from the diesel truck engine, will be no more than what would be expected from a farm machine ie. farm tractor. Also given the limited scale and methods for the proposed drilling operation as well as the separation distances, any potential for vibration transmission to neighbouring properties is considered unlikely. The proposed development does not include the use of explosives, as concern raised by the neighbours.

9. No conclusive investigation has been carried out as to the cultural heritage of the subject site.

Comment: The applicant has conducted an Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) search on the Office of Environment and Heritage website that indicated that there were no Aboriginal sites recorded in or near the site and no Aboriginal places have been declared in or near the subject site. This form of investigation is considered to adequately and satisfactorily address the likely impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage for the limited scale of the proposed development . However, should in the unlikely event that there is evidence found of any Aboriginal objects on the site during the drilling operations, the requirements of the National Parks and Wildlife Regulation 2009 will be followed. In this regard an appropriate condition is included in this report's recommendation.

As the transport of the drill equipment on the back of a truck will generally be limited to the existing tracks on the property and the drilling will be located on cleared parts of the site, there is not likely to be any impact on cultural heritage.

10. Will ground water level be reduced and/or contaminated to the detriment of other properties that

potentially rely on it as a future resource. More accurate distances to existing watercourses are required. The Office of Water approval should be required for possible aquifer interference.

Comment: The drilling of a small hole into the rock surface is not likely to deplete or reduce the ground water level or cause any contamination of the ground water. Drilling locations are on high ground and not within 40 metres of a watercourse identified on a topographic map or in GLLEP 2014. The drilling of an exploratory bore hole is similar to the drilling of a water bore, which is a common occurrence in this rural locality. The Office of Water was consulted and they have advised no objection to Council determining the development application subject to the applicant contacting the Office of Water to determine licencing and approval requirements under the Water Management Act 2000 and/or Water Act 1912 as applicable prior to the commencement of the proposed activities. An appropriate condition has been included in this report's recommendation.

11. Increase in traffic threatening motorists, resident safety (in particular local school children) and

wildlife on substandard roads that will deteriorate. Insufficient turning space for large equipment in Maytoms Lane and number of proposed traffic movements has not been indicated and discussed in the SEE. Also the Maytoms Lane/The Bucketts Road intersection may be unsafe for large vehicle use.

Comment: As discussed above the increase in traffic attributed to the proposed development is not significant. The drill mounted truck will stay on site during the drilling operations resulting in a total of two (2) vehicle movements whilst workers will generate approximately four (4) vehicle movements per day. These limited number of vehicle movements are unlikely to have a


significant impact on the surface condition of Maytoms Lane, the safety of motorists, residents, the general public and wildlife. Accordingly, the concerns of the neighbours are not supported.

12. Visual impact, use out of character and out of context with locality.

Comment: There will be no unreasonable visual impacts created by the proposed limited scale development. Accordingly, the proposed development for a limited period is not considered to be out of character or context with this rural locality.

13. Concerns with the use and storage of chemicals associated with the proposed development.

Comment: The applicant has indicated that there are no chemicals associated with the proposed development and there will be no fuel for the truck or drill rig stored on the site.

14. Potential for contamination. Drill sumps at various drill locations and the need/method of

providing water at each location and disposal of waste water.

Comment: Water is provided for the drilling rig from a tank on the drill mounted truck. Only sufficient water is provided to the drill head that is necessary and no water leaves the drill hole. Percussion drilling using a hydraulic hammer does not require water. Accordingly, drill sumps are not required and water is managed satisfactorily.

15. Management practices, testing procedures and emergency measures to address potential

adverse events/problems.

Comment: The applicant has submitted that normal work health and safety practices will be implemented during the operation of the drill equipment, that the only testing procedures relate to the quality of the extracted rock and due to the minor nature of the drilling operation there are no emergency measures necessary.

16. Reasons as to why one drill hole has already been carried out without development consent.

Comment: This issue was discussed under the earlier heading Background. The owner did not knowingly carry out the drilling of drill hole TA DDH1 without development consent. It was his understanding at the time that development consent was not required for exploratory drilling similar to other forms of drilling for various minerals, gases and water. It was not until Council sought legal advice and the owner obtained his own legal advice that it was revealed that development consent for exploratory drilling was required. On this basis the owner advised that the drilling would cease until a development application was submitted to Council and that development consent had been granted.

17. Loss of property value.

Comment: Property value is not a planning matter for consideration under Section 79 C of the EPAA 1979. And no further comment is offered.

18. Why isn't the development classed as 'designated development' under the EPAA 1979,

requiring the submission of an Environmental Impact Statement.

Comment: The proposed exploratory drilling is not an extractive industry as referred to in Schedule 3, item 19 in of the EPA Regs 2000, that is it is not an industry that obtains extractive materials by methods including excavating, dredging, tunnelling or quarrying or that store, stockpile or process extractive materials by methods including washing, crushing, sawing or separating and is therefore the proposed development is not classed as 'designated development' and does not require an Environmental Impact Statement.


19. Precedent for further exploration.

Comment: Any further exploratory drilling on this site will be subject of a new development application. Approval of the proposed development is not seen to be a precedent for any further exploratory drilling development application/s, those applications would be assessed on their own planning merits.

The application was also referred to the following State Government Authorities notwithstanding the limited nature of the proposed development and the following responses were received: NSW Department of Industry - Resources and Energy The proposed exploration is to determine if the mineral rhyodacite is present and in sufficient quantities to justify quarrying. The Department have indicated that this mineral is not a prescribed under the Mining Act 1992 and therefore the Department has no statutory role in authorising or regulating the proposed exploration for the mineral. Accordingly, whilst the Department has no issues with the proposed development they recommend, as condition of development consent, that the proponent seek the advice of NSW Mine Safety. An appropriate condition is included in this report's recommendation. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage The department has advised that it has no statutory role in the assessment of the application and has no objection to the proposed development however it draws Council's attention to considering issues of Aboriginal cultural heritage and biodiversity. In respect to Aboriginal cultural heritage the applicant has conducted an Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) search on the Office of Environment and Heritage website that indicated that there were no Aboriginal sites recorded in or near the site and no Aboriginal places have been declared in or near the subject site. This form of investigation is considered to adequately and satisfactorily address the likely impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage for the limited scale of the proposed development. However, should in the unlikely event that there is evidence found of any Aboriginal objects on the site during the drilling operations, the requirements of the National Parks and Wildlife Regulation 2009 will be followed. In this regard an appropriate condition is included in this report's recommendation. In respect to biodiversity, the ecological implications have been assessed by Council's Senior Ecologist who has advised that the proposed development is not likely to significantly impact on native flora and fauna, including existing native habitat. NSW Environment Protection Authority The department has advised that it has no statutory role in the assessment of the application and that the proposed development does not require an environmental protection licence from them. NSW Department of Primary Industry - Water (aka. Office of Water) The Department has indicated that they have no objection to Council determining the development application subject to the applicant contacting the Office of Water to determine licencing and approval requirements under the Water Management Act 2000 and/or Water Act 1912 as applicable prior to the commencement of the proposed activities. An appropriate condition has been included in this report's recommendation.


Unauthorised Work The owner did not knowingly carry out the drilling of drill hole TA DDH1 without development consent. It was his understanding at the time that development consent was not required for exploratory drilling similar to other forms of drilling for various minerals, gases and water. It was not until Council sought legal advice and the owner obtained his own legal advice that it was revealed that development consent for exploratory drilling was required. On this basis the owner advised that the drilling would cease until a development application was submitted to Council and that development consent had been granted. On this basis a recommendation for a penalty fine for the breach is not supported. e) The Public Interest The proposed limited exploratory drilling is permissible with development consent in this rural locality and based on the above assessment, approval of the proposed development would not be contrary to the public interest.

CONCLUSION:

The proposed development is consistent with the various planning matters discussed in the above assessment report and would not detract or unreasonably impact on the amenity relationship with neighbouring rural properties. Accordingly, the proposed development is supported and recommended for approval subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that DA 122/2016 for exploratory drilling on land at Lot 60 DP1094397; Lot 1 DP159902; Lot 2 DP1166923; Lot 3 DP1166923; Lot 4 DP1166923; Lot 62 DP95029; Lot 63 DP95029; Lot 64 DP95029, 67 Maytoms Lane, Booral be approved subject to compliance with the following conditions: The following conditions have been applied to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Regulations and Policies of Council: GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Development in accordance with approved plans

The development must be implemented in accordance with the plans and supporting documents set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

Plan type/Supporting

Document Plan No. & version Prepared by Dated

Exploratory Drill Locations Site Plan

Figure 1, Sheet 1 of 1 Version 1

VGT Environmental Compliance Solutions

12/10/2015

The approved plans and supporting documents endorsed with the Council stamp and authorised signature must be kept on site at all times while work is being undertaken.

Reason: Information and to ensure compliance.


2. Maximum number of approved exploratory drill holes

The maximum number of approved drill locations shall be six (6) as indicated on the approved plans referred to in condition 1, above.

Reason: To limit the extent of the proposed exploration.

3. NSW Department of Primary Industries - Water

Prior to the commencement of drilling operations the applicant shall contact DPI Water to determine licencing and approval requirements under the Water Management Act 2000 and/or the Water Act 1912.

Reason: To ensure compliance with other statutory authority requirements.

4. NSW Department of Industry - Resources and Energy

Prior to the commencement of drilling operations the applicant shall seek the advice of NSW Mine Safe.

Reason: To ensure compliance with other statutory authority requirements.

5. Obligation to minimise harm to the environment

The Registered Proprietor shall implement all practicable measures to prevent or minimise any harm to the environment that may result from the approved activity. The activity is to be in accordance with this consent and the details provided within the development application.

Reason: To protect the natural environment.

6. Control on the clearing of native vegetation

There must be no harm, removal or damage to any remnant native vegetation (as defined by the Native Vegetation Act 2003 or Regulation 2005) on the subject land or in the road reserve for Maytoms Lane for any aspect of the approved work. Reason: To protect the natural environment.

7. Bond required to guarantee against damage to public land

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, a Damage Bond Application form together with payment of a bond in the amount of $2000 and an administration fee of $320 must be submitted to Council. The bond is payable for the purpose of funding repairs to any damage that may result to Council assets from activities/works associated with the construction of the development and to ensure compliance with Council standards and specifications.

A final inspection will be carried out by the responsible Council officer and the bond (minus any fees required for additional inspections) will be considered for refund:

a) once all works, including restoration of bore holes, have been completed, and b) following issue of an occupation certificate by the certifying authority.

The damage bond is reviewed periodically and therefore the fee and bond amount payable will be determined from Council’s current fees and charges document at the time of lodgement of the damage bond.

Reason: Protection of public assets.


8. Install erosion and sediment control measures

Prior to the commencement of drilling at each approved site location, suitable erosion and sediment controls must be installed in accordance with "The Blue Book - Managing Urban Stormwater (MUS): Soils and Construction" (Landcom) and maintained for the duration of the work.

Reason: To protect the environment from the effects of erosion and sedimentation.

9. Toilet facilities - unsewered areas

Prior to the commencement of drilling at each approved site location, one (1) toilet facility must be provided at or in the vicinity of the site. The toilet provided must be a toilet connected to an accredited sewage management system approved by the Council.

Reason: To maintain the public health and the natural environment.

10. Existing trees

No trees shall be removed of lopped in order to conduct the approved development.

Reason: To ensure minimal impact on the environment. 11. Maintenance of sediment and erosion control measures

Sediment and erosion control measures must be maintained at all times until the site has been stabilised by permanent vegetation cover or hard surface.


12. Aboriginal heritage

This consent does not authorise the harming of an Aboriginal object or place. Under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, it is the responsibility of all persons to ensure that harm does not occur to an Aboriginal object or place. If an Aboriginal object is found, whilst undertaking development work, all work must stop and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage notified. All directions of the Office of Environment and Heritage must be complied with at all times.

Reason: To protect Aboriginal heritage.

13. Hours of operation

The hours of drilling operations shall be as set out in the following table:

Period Start Time Finish Time Monday to Friday 7.00 am 6.00 pm Saturdays 7.00 am 5.00 pm Sundays and Public Holiday Nil Nil

Any alteration to the above hours of operation will require the further consent of Council.

Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbouring properties.


14. Noise

Noise associated with the approved drilling operations must not be a source of “offensive noise” at the nearest affected premises:

"offensive noise" is defined under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 as noise:

a) that, by reason of its level, nature, character or quality, or the time at which it is made, or any

other circumstances: i) is harmful to (or is likely to be harmful to) a person who is outside the premises from

which it is emitted, or

ii) interferes unreasonably with (or is likely to interfere unreasonably with) the comfort or repose of a person who is outside the premises from which it is emitted, or

b) that is of a level, nature, character or quality prescribed by the regulations or that is made at a time, or in other circumstances, prescribed by the regulation.

Reason: To maintain acoustic amenity to adjoining properties.


3 PES - DA 156/2016 Medical Centre - 84 Boomerang Dr, Boomerang Beach

Index: DA 156/2016 & PK 9022 Author: Development Assessment Planner - Steve Andrews Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

The following item was deferred from the Development Control Unit Meeting of 25 February 2016 at the request of the Mayor. Since the Development Control Unit meeting, submissions of support to the proposed development have been received, the particulars of which, are contained on Council's file. The report is now presented for consideration. DETAILS:

Date Received: 21 October 2015

Applicant: Moore Design

Owner: Mr DN Furney & Mrs KM Furney

Land: Lot 10 DP 250863, 84 Boomerang Drive, Boomerang Beach

Area: 650.4m2

Property Key: PK 9022

Zoning: R2 - Low Density Residential, GLLEP 2014

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Development Application submitted seeking consent for the erection of a single storey building for use as a medical centre (dental surgery).

Application notified to neighbouring property owners in accordance with Council's Policy and submissions were received from four (4) neighbouring properties.

Amended plans submitted addressing issues raised by Council staff and neighbours Proposed development generally considered to be consistent with the various relevant planning

controls.


That the Development Application be approved subject to conditions.


Cost of defending any appeal against Council's decision.


Nil.


LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

A decision for approval subject to conditions or refusal may lead to an appeal in the Land and Environment Court requiring legal representation.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

A: Plans of proposed development.


Nil.


BACKGROUND:

There is no relevant development history for the site other than a meeting of the Development Assessment Panel on 8 September 2015 at which the prospective owners presented the proposed development. Since lodgement of this application Council has negotiated a number of design revisions with the applicant that have now been presented as amended plans and are subject of this report. T hose revisions include: 1. Increasing the south western external wall side boundary setback from 900mm and 1500mm to

1700mm and 2300mm. Accordingly, overhanging eaves will be setback from 400mm to 1150mm. Landscaping will be provided within the setback as well as stepping stone access from consulting room two (2) to the rear of the site. The existing side boundary fence and lattice screen will be retained.

2. Reducing the north eastern side boundary setback for the retaining wall from 1500mm to 1300mm.

3. Relocating the external door to the south western side of the laboratory further to the rear, off consulting room two (2).

4. Providing opaque glass in the highlight window to consulting room two (2). 5. Business hours will reduce from Monday to Saturday 8.00am to 6.00pm down to Monday to

Friday 9.00am to 6.00pm except for emergencies. The business will not operate on Saturday or Sunday.

PROPOSAL:

To remove two (2) existing trees on the currently undeveloped site and excavate approximately the rear three-quarters of the site to establish a level platform on which to construct a single storey building designed for use as a medical centre for dental surgery. The proposed building will be elongated and sited to the southern side of the site. Access to off-street parking for six (6) vehicles including a space suitable for use by a person with a disability will be located to the northern side of the proposed building. The roof of the proposed building will extend as a covered area to the rear of the site with a rear boundary landscaped setback. A business identification sign will be attached to the front (western) wall of the proposed building. A rain infiltration garden will be located within the front building setback. The dental practice will be conducted by two (2) dentists, two (2) clinical assistants and one (1) receptionist serving an expected twenty (20) patients per day. The use will operate five (5) days per week (Monday to Friday 9.00am to 6.00pm) except for emergencies. The business currently operates by lease near the Blueys Beach shopping centre however that property is now for sale and the lease will not be renewed.

SITE DESCRIPTION:

The site is located to the eastern side of Boomerang Drive just south of the Karnang Drive and Marilyn Place intersection, opposite the Pacific Palms Public School and is currently undeveloped. The site slopes upward from its front to rear boundaries (a fall of approximately 2.7 metres). There are two (2) trees on the site, one (1) adjacent to the southern side boundary, the other to the rear. Residential development is located on each of the adjoining properties. REPORT:

The following matters listed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, are relevant in considering this application:


a) The provisions of any environmental planning instrument; any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject of public consultation and which have been notified to the consent authority; any DCP; any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F; any matters prescribed by the regulations; any coastal zone management plan that apply to the development application on the subject land.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPAA 1979) The subject site is mapped as bush fire prone and in accordance with Section 79BA of the EPAA 1979 the application is to be assessed having regard to the provisions of the publication ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’. In this regard the application was referred to the Rural Fire Service (RFS). The RFS support the proposed development subject to conditions that are included in this report’s recommendation. Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan 2014 (GLLEP 2014) The following consideration addresses the relevant provisions of the Plan. Part 1.2 - Aims of the Plan

The relevant aims of the Plan are to protect and enhance the environmental, scenic and landscaped assets of the area and to facilitate the orderly and sustainable economic development of land. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with these aims.

Part 2 - Land use table

The site is located in a R2 Low Density Residential Zone and the proposed use (medical centre) is a permissible form of development in the zone with development consent. The relevant objective of the zone is to enable land uses other than residential that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents. The proposed development is contextually appropriate and considered to be consistent with this objective.

Part 4 - Principal development standards This Part identifies various numerical development standards for proposed development. The relevant development standards are:

4.3 - Height of building - The relevant objectives of the standard are to ensure the scale of proposed buildings is compatible with the existing environmental character and the desired future urban character of the locality. The proposed single storey development (at a maximum height of approx. 5.0 metres) sits below the desired 8.5 metres maximum height control in a built environment comprised of one (1) and two (2) storey residential buildings. The proposed single storey building is not considered to unreasonably impact on the residential amenity relationship with neighbouring properties. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant objectives for building height. 4.4 - Floor space ratio - The relevant objectives of the standard are to ensure the scale of proposed development is compatible with the existing environmental character of the locality. The maximum floor space ratio for the R2 zone is 0.5:1.00. The proposed development complies with this standard, having a maximum of 0.23:1.00 and is considered to be contextually appropriate in this locality having regard to the relevant objectives for floor space ratio.


Part 5 - Miscellaneous provisions

5.5 - Development within the coastal zone - The relevant objectives of the clause are to provide for the protection of the coastal environment through promoting the principles of ecologically sustainable development and to implement the principles of the NSW Coastal Policy (discussed later in this report under the heading NSW Coastal Policy 1997). The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the above objectives having regard to the matters listed for consideration under clause 5.5.

Part 7 - Additional local provisions

7.1 Acid sulfate soils - The objective of the clause is to ensure that development does not disturb, expose or drain acid sulphate soils and cause environmental damage. The Acid Sulphate Soils Planning Map identifies the site as class 4 land. The requirements of that class relate to excavations more than 2.0 metres below natural ground level or works by which the watertable is likely to be lowered more than 2.0 metres below the natural ground surface. The proposed development will require excavation to the rear of the site to depths of up to approximately 1.7 metres. Issues concerning acid sulfate soils are unlikely to arise however a condition is included in this report's recommendation drawing the applicant's attention to this issue. Accordingly, the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the objective of the clause. 7.2 - Earthworks - The objective of this provision is to ensure that earthworks will not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses and features of the surrounding land. The proposed development includes excavation works to the rear of the site to depths of up to approximately 1.7 metres. Issues of soil erosion, sedimentation and drainage impacts will be managed during and after construction and appropriate conditions are included in this report's recommendation. Accordingly, the proposed development will be consistent with the objective of this clause. 7.5 - Stormwater Management - The objective of this clause is to minimise the environmental impacts of stormwater on the site and adjoining properties, native bushland, groundwater, wetlands and receiving waters. The site is located on the back of a sand dune.The proposed development incorporates a stormwater management design that directs roof water to a 5000 litre storage tank with overflow to a rain garden in the front building setback that also collects the bulk of stormwater from the proposed parking areas. Overflow from the rain garden then flows to the street gutter in which a Council stormwater drainage inlet is located to the frontage of the property. The proposed stormwater management system is considered to be consistent with the objective of this clause. 7.21 - Essential services - This clause requires that development consent must not be granted to development unless the Council is satisfied that essential services (ie. water, electricity, sewage, stormwater drainage and road access) are available or that adequate arrangements have been made to make them available. The proposed development has access to all relevant necessary services subject to the conditions contained in this report's recommendation.

State Environmental Planning Policy No.71 – Coastal Protection (SEPP71) The provisions of SEPP71 apply to the proposed development as the land is located within the Coastal Zone. The site is not located in a Sensitive Coastal Location, as defined by SEPP71. The proposed development is considered to satisfactorily address both the aims and the relevant provisions of SEPP 71.


State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 (SEPP64) The aims of this Policy are to ensure signage is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area; provides effective communication in suitable location and is of a high quality design and finish. The proposed development includes a 'business identification sign' attached to the front wall of the building (4.0 metres wide x 1.0 metre high). The Policy requires Council to be satisfied that proposed signage is consistent with the above aims and that the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1 of the Policy. The proposed 'business identification sign' is considered to be satisfactory having regard to the assessment criteria and the relevant aims of the Policy. Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP 2014) The aims of the Plan are to ensure good quality, sustainable development outcomes that maintain a high level of environmental amenity. The Plan is designed to allow flexibility in the application of its controls where strict compliance is considered unreasonable or unnecessary provided the relevant objectives of the Plan have been achieved. The relevant provisions of the Plan are discussed as follows:

Part 3 - Character Statements - The proposed use will complement the desired character of this coastal locality, maintaining the village's natural setting and providing a service that meets the needs of the local community, consistent with the relevant objective of the R2 zone (ref. GLLEP 2014). Part 4 - Environmental Considerations - The site is not prone to any significant natural hazard. The proposed development will not adversely impact on the local ecology. Part 5 - Single Dwellings, Dual Occupancies, Villas and Townhouses - The designer submits that although not a residential proposal, the proposed development sits within a R2 residential zone and therefore aims to comply with the character of such areas, through compliance with the following provisions of Part 5:

5.1 - Solar Access & Overshadowing - Impacts are minimised by a suitably located low single storey design.

5.2 - Views & Privacy - There will be no loss of views and privacy is maintained by generally locating windows to the north eastern elevation that enjoys the greatest boundary offsets. The highlight opaque glass window and the proposed door in the south western external wall of the building will not unreasonably impact on the privacy of the adjoining two dwelling units.

5.3 - Energy Efficiency - The proposed building has large north facing windows and wide eaves, stormwater is collected for reuse and low water use fixtures will be used and appropriate areas will have LED lighting.

5.4 - General Building Design - The proposed building is single storey with an articulated form, off-street parking will be screened behind native planting and accessed by a 6.0 metres wide driveway opening. The entry to the Dental Surgery is visible from both the car park and the street. Proposed 1100mm wide eaves provide for optimum passive solar control. The proposed building is set midway up the site to minimise excavation whilst maintaining safety and accessibility to the car park and street. External materials will be neutral in colour.


5.5 - Setbacks - Proposed setbacks allow privacy, solar access and landscaping. The

proposed front setback is compliant at 4.5 metres and the articulation zone is compliant. The south western side boundary setback at 1700mm to 2300mm complies with the minimum 1500mm setback for residential development in the Pacific Palms area and maintains a reasonable amenity relationship with the two (2) adjoining dwelling units.

5.6 - Building Heights - The single storey building is compliant with the 8.5m maximum. 5.7 - Cut & Fill - This will occur to the rear of the site with two (2) terraced areas with 900mm

high retaining walls. The street frontage remains open with generous landscaped areas. 5.8 - Private Outdoor Areas - A covered north facing outdoor space is provided for staff. 5.9 - Fencing & Walls - There is no fencing and walls to the frontage. A 1.5m high fence will be

provided along the rear boundary. Part 6 - Residential Apartment Buildings, Mixed Use Development and Business Premises - The controls contained in this Part do not specifically address commercial or retail buildings that do not contain a residential component however they should be considered when designing this type of development. The design, scale, height and siting of the proposed development is considered to be contextually appropriate in this R2 Low Density Residential zone and positively contributes to the streetscape character. Safe pedestrian access to the site is readily available and off street parking facilities are available for staff and patients, including a space suitable for use by a person with a disability. The proposed use and building design ensures a reasonable privacy and shadowing relationship with neighbouring residential development. Proposed side and rear setbacks and the positioning of fenestration ensure a reasonable amenity relationship with neighbouring residential development. Part 10 - Car Parking, Access, Alternative and Active Transport - The relevant objectives are to ensure that there is adequate and safe provision for access, manoeuvring and parking on site, to restrict vehicular access to buildings in a manner that is compatible with pedestrian movements and safety, to integrate vehicular access and parking facilities without compromising street character or landscaping and to provide an adequate level of on-site parking based on anticipated occupancy rates and proximity to alternate and active transport. The DCP defers to the RMS document ' Guide to Traffic Generating Developments 2002' for required parking rates for the proposed use. Professional Consulting Room rates are three (3) spaces per consulting room. The proposed use consists of two (2) surgeries generating a demand for six (6) off-street parking spaces that are provided on site including one (1) space suitable for use by a person with a disability. Furthermore, the Guide permits in respect to the proposed use that a reduction in this number may be possible if convenient on-street parking is available subject to such spaces not adversely affecting the amenity of the neighbouring area. The proposed development is not dependant on on-street parking. The Guide also addresses medical centres that have hours of operation that extend beyond normal business hours and suggests four (4) off street parking spaces per 100m2 of gross floor area. This is based on a survey conducted by the RMS in 1991 for Sunday and Monday demands. The proposed use will operate Monday to Saturday 8.00am to 6.00pm and using the per square metre rate generates a demand for 6.0 spaces (rounded up from 5.8 spaces) that are to be provided on site. Accordingly, the number of proposed off-street parking spaces complies with either of the above analysis and is considered adequate for the proposed use.


The off-street parking is suitably located and designed to allow safe forward entry and exit to/from the site. The 6.0 metre wide driveway occupies 28.1% of the frontage contrary to the desired maximum of 25.0%. The insignificant excess is considered acceptable having regard to the presentation of the development to the streetscape, the desirable two-way entry/exit design and the relevant objectives of the Part. Covered bicycle parking is also provided to the rear of the site that complies with Council's requirements. Part 11 - Water Sensitive Design - The relevant objectives are to reduce the consumption of potable water, to reduce waste water discharge into the receiving environment, to harvest wastewater and urban stormwater runoff where appropriate. The site is located on the back of a sand dune. The proposed development incorporates a stormwater management design that directs roof water to a 5000 litre storage tank with overflow to a rain garden in the front building setback that also collects the bulk of stormwater from the proposed parking areas. Overflow from the rain garden then flows to the street gutter in which a Council stormwater drainage inlet is located to the frontage of the property. The proposed stormwater management design is considered to satisfactorily address the Plan's requirements and objectives subject to conditions that are included in this report's recommendation. Part 12 - Tree and Vegetation Preservation - The relevant objectives are to ensure the proper consideration is given to trees and native vegetation in designing, planning and constructing development; minimise injury or destruction of trees and native vegetation; conserve trees and vegetation of ecological, heritage, aesthetic and cultural significance and to balance the removal of trees and vegetation with the planting of suitable local indigenous species that positively contribute to the visual amenity, environmental function and ecological sustainability. The proposed development requires the removal of two (2) existing Angophora trees. To offset the loss of these trees native landscaping is proposed for the site. Accordingly, the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant objectives of this Part having regard to the matters listed for consideration. Part 13 - Landscaping and Open Space - In this regard the proposed use has been assessed under the objectives and provisions for low scale residential development typical of this locality. The proposed landscaped area of the site complies with the 30% of site area minimum that will be planted with native species. At least 50% of that area is considered to allow deep soil planting. Part 14 - Waste Management - The relevant objectives of this Part are to encourage sustainable waste management that includes re-use and recycling of commercial waste. The proposed use includes suitable waste management facilities and a satisfactory waste management plan has been submitted. A condition of this report's recommendation requires compliance with that plan of management. Part 15 - Advertising and Signage - The relevant objectives are to provide opportunities for business to communicate with the public, to ensure advertising signs do not detract from the visual environment and to provide for an orderly display of advertising. The proposed business identification sign will be attached to the front wall of the building (ie. Wall Sign). Part 15 seeks to limit the area of a commercial signs in a residential zone to 0.75m², however, the size may exceed 0.75m² when attached to a legal use and provided there is no detrimental impact on the surrounding residential area. The size of the sign must also be related to the length of the street frontage, the scale of the proposed development and the streetscape. The proposed sign has an area of 4.0m², will be attached to a legitimate use and is considered to be consistent with the relevant objectives of the Part having regard to the matters for consideration listed in Part 15.5.1.


Accordingly, the proposed development is generally considered to be consistent with the objectives and relevant requirements of DCP 2014.

NSW Coastal Policy 1997 The New South Wales Coastal Policy is a broad policy for the Coastal Zone that is required to be considered having regard to the provisions of Clause 92 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000. The site is located within the Coastal Zone. Relevant to the principles of the Coastal Policy, the proposed development will not compromise the natural, cultural heritage (both Indigenous and European) and spiritual values of the coastal area. The proposed development is considered to be a low impact development that incorporates the principles of ESD and implements the planned urban development of this residential locality. The proposed development will not compromise the goals or strategic actions of the Coastal Policy. Coastal Design Guidelines for NSW The Guidelines are designed with reference to the NSW Coastal Policy 1997, complementing the State Government's Coastal Protection Package and are based on the principles of ecologically sustainable development. Whilst recognising the pressures due to an expected future population growth of coastal areas the guidelines establish a set urban design principles to ensure new development is sensitive to the unique natural and urban settings of coastal places. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the scale and desired character of development in this residential locality. A suitable number of off-street parking spaces will be accommodated on site and the proposed use will provide an essential service to the local community. Accordingly, the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant urban design guidelines. Erosion and Sediment Control Policy The aim of this policy is to minimise erosion and sedimentation in catchments, resulting from the disturbance of the soil surface associated with building works, changes in land use and urban development, the installation of services and road construction and maintenance. This is to ensure that potential pollutants are not directed to natural and artificial water bodies. The construction works associated with the proposed development will be managed to ensure that erosion and sediment control measures comply with the aims and requirements of the Policy thereby protecting the water quality of neighbouring natural and artificial water bodies. Appropriate conditions of consent are recommended. Vehicle Crossing Policy The Policy provides guidelines on the provision of vehicle crossings and driveways to properties by setting an appropriate standard for their construction and maintenance. The proposed development incorporates a 6.0 metres wide driveway crossing that will allow the entry and exit of vehicles simultaneously. The proposed driveway design is considered satisfactory subject to the submission of a driveway levels application that is addressed by a condition in this report's recommendation.


b) The likely impacts of development including environmental impacts on both natural and

built environments and social/economic impacts in the locality Context and Setting The proposed development relates positively with the local context and maintains a reasonable relationship with the character, height and scale of neighbouring development, as viewed from the surrounding locality. Site Design and Internal Layout The site design, including its configuration, levels and size is suitable for the proposed single storey development with off street parking. The internal layout of the building is designed for the proposed medical use and provides a high standard of occupant amenity. Views The proposed development does not unreasonably impact on views and outlooks from adjoining residential allotments. Privacy (Aural and Visual) The proposed development has been designed to reasonably address the privacy relationship with the adjoining residential allotments. Overshadowing The proposed single storey development does not cast unreasonable shadowing on neighbouring residential allotments. Visual Impact The proposed single storey development does not visually detract from the residential character of this locality. Flora and Fauna The proposed development does not have a significant impact on local flora and fauna. Cumulative Impacts The proposed development does not establish an undesirable precedent for further similar development in this residential locality. c) The Suitability of the Site for the Development The site design, including its configuration, levels and size is suitable for the proposed single storey development with off street parking.


d) Any Submissions Made in Accordance with the Act or Regulations The application was notified to neighbouring property owners in accordance with Council’s Policy and submissions were received from four (4) neighbouring owners. The submissions refer to the following issues: 1. The proposed use is for ' Health Consulting Rooms' not a 'Medical Centre' and 'Health

Consulting Rooms' are not permissible in the R2 - Low Density Residential zone under GLLEP 2014. Does the land require rezoning? Should Council approve a 'Medical Centre' then any approval should be limited to two (2) consulting rooms for a Dental Surgery.

Comment: Both 'Health Consulting Rooms' and 'Medical Centres' are permissible in the R2 zone with development consent. The subject application is for a 'Medical Centre'. The land does not require rezoning to permit the use. An appropriate condition is included in this report's recommendation to identity the 'Medical Centre' use and to limit the number of surgeries to two (2) and staff to five (5).

2. A commercial activity 6 days per week and for emergencies is out of character in the R2 - Low

Density Residential zone under GLLEP 2014 and does not enhance the existing residential environment. More appropriate alternate commercial areas (three localities) are located in the vicinity, including Blueys Beach commercial centre, in which the current use operates and the land adjacent to the café in the tourist facility in Redgum Road Boomerang Beach. Those localities cater for vehicle loadings, noise, business operating hours and other impacts that might otherwise impact on residential areas and the natural environment.

Comment: The relevant objective of the R2 zone is to enable land uses other than residential that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents. The locality is primarily residential with a Public School opposite the site. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the zone's relevant objective, providing a service to meet the day to day needs of residents with a building design that is considered to be low in scale and generally contextually appropriate in this locality. The proposed use currently operates from a residential property in the R2 zone just outside the Blueys Beach Commercial area (zone B1 - Neighbourhood Centre). The other suggested locality is land adjacent to the Moby's Resort (Redgum Road Boomerang Beach) that is also zoned R2. A benefit with the Blueys Beach location is that patients may have linked or multi-purpose trips with other uses in that locality. The applicant has pointed out that there are a number of uses in the R2 zone that are not residential and provide services and facilities to the public. Those uses include the current dental practice, Blueys Cellars, Blueys Osteopathy and Chiropractic, Pacific Palms Medical Centre, Jens Café and Gift Shop, Blueys Retreat Resort and Restaurant in Blueys Beach; Moby's Beachside Retreat Resort & Restaurant in Redgum Road Boomerang Beach and Pacific Palms Public School. Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours are not supported.


3. Traffic congestion and limited on-street parking is already a major problem in this locality with a

high number of holiday rental units and the Public School operation. Safety concerns are raised for the general public and in particular the school children with some motorists conducting unsafe 'u-turns' over unbroken centre lines in this locality. A pedestrian island is suggested to improve on the current situation. Access to the site will be impeded during the construction process and when the use is operating due to the lack of on-street parking, the conflict in hours with the neighbouring school, the location of the bus stop, local deliveries and waste collection, the lack of a footpath on the subject side of the road and the lack of a pedestrian crossing.

Comment: Given the uses in this locality, with competition for on-street parking, the proposed development accommodates suitable parking on the site. Also whilst not reliant on this fact, a number of patients can walk to the site or cycle from nearby areas. Simultaneous vehicular access to/from the site is in a forward direction with sufficient sight distances to ensure appropriate standards of public safety in this 40kph school zone speed limit. It is noted that a 'u-turn' over the unbroken centre line is an illegal manoeuvre. Council's technical officers have favourably assessed the proposed design subject to conditions that are included in this report's recommendation. A traffic island, footpath and pedestrian crossing are not recommended and access/parking/traffic implications during the construction process would be managed by the builder and construction employees utilising the proposed car parking area. The proposed development will generate a marginal increase in traffic along Boomerang Drive. The additional traffic generated above a typical residential block is minimal and as such the development will not exceed the capacity of Boomerang Drive that has been designed as a collector road. Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours are not supported.

4. Unreasonable noise - The hours of operation will adversely impact on this quiet coastal

environment with traffic noise from an additional 40 to 44 vehicle movements not including deliveries and waste collection; vehicle reversing alarms; potential noise from the air compressor located in the sub-floor area of the proposed building; and security alarms.

Comment: The proposed hours of operation have been reduced since the original application and are considered reasonable having regard to the site's context and the design of the development. As discussed above the potential increase in traffic attributed to the proposed use is considered marginal. The location of the compressor beneath the building in a masonry housing, has been designed to ensure a reasonable amenity relationship with the neighbouring residential development (86 Boomerang Drive). Access to the space is from an opening in the floor of the laboratory and the space will be ventilated through the northern sub-floor wall. An appropriate condition is included in this report's recommendation that addresses this design outcome. Security alarms are not uncommon in a wide range of developments with their activation occurring either by intrusion or false responses. They are not considered to be a reasonable ground for sustained objection to the proposed development. Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours are not supported.

5. Air Pollution - From increased traffic

Comment: The potential increase in traffic generated by the proposed development is not considered to significantly increase air pollution levels in this coastal locality. Accordingly the concern of the neighbours is not supported.


6. Stormwater - The proposed development will direct additional stormwater to the street that already suffers from localised flooding during periods of high rainfall.

Comment: The site is located on the back of a sand dune. The proposed development incorporates a stormwater management design that directs roof water to a 5000 litre storage tank with overflow to a rain garden in the front building setback that also collects the bulk of stormwater from the proposed parking areas. Overflow from the rain garden then flows to the street gutter in which a Council stormwater drainage inlet is located to the frontage of the property. The proposed stormwater management design is considered satisfactory having regard to Council's requirements referred to previously under the headings Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan 2014 (GLLEP 2014) and Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP 2014) and significantly limits the volume of water leaving the site. Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours are not supported.

7. Amenity relationship with unit 1, 86 Boomerang Drive (to the southern side of the site) -

Potentially direct surface water to their property; create overshadowing; impede northern light; and cause a loss of privacy to outdoor area, kitchen and bedroom 2. Suggests increased side boundary setback or locate the building to the northern side of the site. The fire rated door from the sterilisation room will be used for deliveries and removal of contaminated waste on a daily basis. Adverse impacts from security lighting. Existing fencing is 1.5m rather than 1.8m indicated on the plans - if a new fence is proposed neighbour wants to be consulted regarding materials, workmanship and responsibility.

Comment: 86 Boomerang Drive is located to the south western side of the subject site and is occupied by a single storey attached dual occupancy. The attached building is located to the north eastern side of that property, driveway and parking to the opposing side of that property and with Unit 1 located to the front and unit 2 to the rear of the building. Active living indoor and outdoor areas and a second bedroom in Unit 1 are presented to the common boundary with the subject site. As previously indicated stormwater will be effectively managed on the subject site. Any other surface water will be readily infiltrated into the site that is on the back of a sand dune. The location of the proposed amended building (at 1700mm to 2300mm) in respect to the south western common boundary and the relocation of the external door are considered appropriate having regard to overshadowing, privacy and visual impact on the neighbouring property, as discussed previously under the heading Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP 2014) Part 5.5 - Setbacks. The applicant has indicated that deliveries will be minimal, occur during business hours and will be via the main car park to the reception or staff kitchen by the rear door. Also waste collection (general garbage, disposable bibs/paper cups) will be via residential waste collection. There is no radioactive waste from the site, all sharps are discarded in mandatory sharps containers and taken by the owner to Forster Dental Centre for collection by specialist disposal companies. Any external lighting will be addressed by condition contained in this report's recommendation. Existing fencing and lattice screening to the common side boundary will now be retained and provide a suitable barrier between developments. Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours have been reasonably addressed.

8. Amenity relationship with unit 2, 86 Boomerang Drive (to the southern side of the site) -

Overshadowing of courtyard particularly in Winter; glare from proposed roof; loss of privacy. Suggest increased boundary setback and window to consulting room 2 be provided with opaque glass or other screen features including landscaping to soften their outlook and to reduce glare. Also roof over water tank could be setback. The boundary fence and retaining wall indicated on the left side of the south east elevation is considered to be incorrect and does not account for existing levels and the retaining wall to their courtyard.


Comment: 86 Boomerang Drive is located to the south western side of the subject site and is occupied by a single storey attached dual occupancy. The attached building is located to the north eastern side of that property, driveway and parking to the opposing side of that property and with Unit 1 located to the front and unit 2 to the rear of the building. Active living indoor and outdoor areas to Unit 2 are presented to the common boundary with the subject site. The location of the proposed amended building (at 1700mm to 2300mm) to the south western common boundary is considered appropriate having regard to overshadowing, privacy and visual impact on the neighbouring property, as discussed previously under the heading Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP 2014) Part 5.5 - Setbacks. Opaque glass is provided to the highlight window in the south western external wall. The building setback is now proposed to be landscaped and the proposed roof material will be neutral in colour and non-reflective. A 1.5m high fence will be provided to the rear boundary. Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours have been reasonably addressed.

9. Radioactive materials and hazardous waste - Will they be held on site and hazards in

residential area for collection and disposal.

Comment: All waste collection (general garbage, disposable bibs/paper cups) will be via residential waste collection. There is no radioactive waste from the site, all sharps are discarded in mandatory sharps containers and taken by the owner to Forster Dental Centre for collection by specialist disposal companies. Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours are not supported.

10. Loss of trees contrary to protecting the natural setting.

Comment: The site is currently undeveloped and two existing trees require removal to enable the proposed development. The proposed development includes the landscaping of the site with suitable native species. On balance, the loss of the two existing trees is not considered significant or warrants the revision of the design.

Accordingly the concerns of the neighbours are not supported.

11. Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) states that the proposed works are not limited to

those described therein raising the question that further works are proposed.

Comment: The SEE and plans provide sufficient clarity as to the extent of the proposed work. The conditions contained in this report's recommendation identify that those works on the approved plans are the works approved in respect of the development consent subject to the conditions listed in the development consent.

12. Proposed off-street parking - Neighbour's experience in the area of public health suggests that

there should be a minimum of ten (10) off-street parking spaces based on two (2) spaces for medical practitioners, two (2) spaces for receptionist/nurses, five (5) patient spaces including one (1) for a patient with a disability and one (1) space for emergency parking for ambulance and Police.

Comment: The proposed development provides the required level of off-street parking as discussed under the earlier heading Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP 2014) Part 10. Accordingly the suggestion by the neighbour is not supported.


13. Loss of property values

Comment: Property value is not a planning matter for consideration under Section 79C of the EPAA 1979 and therefore no further comment is offered.

e) The Public Interest The proposed development is consistent with the relevant planning controls for the locality, as discussed in this assessment. The proposal will not detract from the character of the existing streetscape or the general locality, nor will it undermine any of the social or economic values of the site or surrounding area. The proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the relevant zone and will not have an unreasonable impact upon neighbouring properties. Accordingly, approval of the proposed development would not be contrary to the public interest.

CONCLUSION:

The proposed use is a family run business that currently operates from rented premises at Blueys Beach. That property is now for sale and in order to continue the beneficial service to the local community the practice needed to secure a new location. The proposal is considered to be suitable for the site and the locality having regard to the existing planning controls as discussed in this report and maintains a reasonable relationship with neighbouring developments. Accordingly, the application is supported and recommended for approval subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that DA 156/2016 for the construction of a medical centre at 84 Boomerang Drive Boomerang Beach be approved subject to compliance with the following conditions:

The following conditions have been applied to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Regulations and Policies of Council: GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Development in accordance with approved plans

The development must be implemented in accordance with the plans and supporting documents set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

Plan type/Supporting Document

Plan No. & version Prepared by Dated

Site Plan Dwg 03 Revision B Moore Design 4/2/2016 Floor Plan Dwg 04 Revision B Moore Design 4/2/2016 Elevations Dwg 05 Revision B Moore Design 4/2/2016 Elevations Dwg 06 Revision B Moore Design 4/2/2016 Section Dwg 07 Revision B Moore Design 4/2/2016 Advertising Signage Dwg 11 Revision B Moore Design 4/2/2016


The approved plans and supporting documents endorsed with the Council stamp and authorised signature must be kept on site at all times while work is being undertaken.

Reason: Information and to ensure compliance.

2. Compliance with Building Code of Australia

All building work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia as in force on the date the application for the relevant construction certificate or complying development certificate was made.

Reason: Prescribed condition under the Environmental Planning & Assessment

Regulation 2000. 3. Staff Numbers

The approved dental surgery use being operated from two (2) surgeries by two (2) dental practitioners supported by two (2) clinical assistants and one (1) receptionist.

Reason: To limit the scale of the approved development having regard to the off street

parking capacity of the site and the residential context of the site. 4. Staff Parking

Staff parking is to be marked and signposted on site in accordance with the approved plan.

Reason: To ensure the effective management of the approved off street parking design. 5. Adjustment to utility services

All adjustments to existing utility services made necessary by the development are to be undertaken at no cost to Council.

Reason: To ensure utility services remain in serviceable operation.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE The following conditions must be complied with prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate: 6. Structural details

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, structural drawings prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced structural engineer must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority. The plans must include details for:

a) All reinforced concrete floor slabs and/or beams or raft slab (having due regard to the

possible differential settlement of the cut and fill areas. b) Footings of the proposed structure. c) Structural steel beams/columns.

Reason: To ensure structural stability and safety.


7. Plans of retaining walls and drainage

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate plans and specifications of retaining walls or other approved methods of preventing the movement of soil, where excavation or fill exceeds 600mm above or below the existing ground level, must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority, Adequate provision must be made for drainage in the design of the structures.

Reason: To ensure site stability and safety.

8. Driveway levels application

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, a Driveway Levels Application must be submitted to Council for approval. A Driveway Levels Application Form must be completed and submitted to Council together with the application fee and all required plans and specifications.

Driveways must be constructed by a qualified/licensed contractor at no cost to Council in accordance with the driveway levels and construction standards issued by Council.

Reason: To ensure works within Council’s road reserve are constructed to a suitable

standard for public safety. 9. Car parking

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, plans and specifications detailing access, parking and manoeuvring on the site must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority. Vehicular access, parking and manoeuvring must be in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.1: Parking facilities: Off-street car parking. Plans must include the following items:

a) Pavement description; b) Existing and design levels; c) Drainage (pipes, pits, on-site detention, etc.). d) Accessible car parking space/s designed in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS

2890.6: Parking facilities - Off-street parking for people with disabilities; e) Line-marking.

Reason: To ensure suitable vehicular access and manoeuvrability is provided within the

development. 10. Bond required to guarantee against damage to public land

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, a Damage Bond Application form together with payment of a bond in the amount of $4,000 and a non-refundable administration fee of $320 must be submitted to Council. The bond is payable for the purpose of funding repairs to any damage that may result to Council assets from activities/works associated with the construction of the development and to ensure compliance with Council standards and specifications.

A final inspection will be carried out by the responsible Council officer and the bond (minus any fees required for additional inspections) will be considered for refund:

a) once all works, including landscaping, driveway construction, turfing, etc, have been

completed, and b) following issue of an occupation certificate by the certifying authority.

The damage bond is reviewed periodically and therefore the fee and bond amount payable will be determined from Council’s current fees and charges document at the time of lodgement of the damage bond.


Reason: Protection of public assets.

11. Bicycle Parking

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, plans and specifications detailing bicycle parking for the development must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority. The development must be provided with a class 2 bicycle enclosure (for employees) and one class 3 bicycle rail (u-frame for use by visitors). The bicycle spaces must be designed and constructed in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.3: Parking facilities - Bicycle parking facilities.

Reason: To ensure suitable bicycle parking is provided within the development.

12. Erosion and sediment control plan

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, an erosion and sediment control plan prepared by a suitably qualified person in accordance with “The Blue Book – Managing Urban Stormwater (MUS): Soils and Construction” (Landcom) must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority. Control over discharge of stormwater and containment of run-off and pollutants leaving the site/premises must be undertaken through the installation of erosion control devices including catch drains, energy dissipaters, level spreaders and sediment control devices such as hay bale barriers, filter fences, filter dams, and sedimentation basins.


13. MidCoast Water approval

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, a Certificate of compliance from MidCoast Water, stating that satisfactory arrangements have been made and all payments finalised for the provision of water supply and sewerage to the development, must be submitted to the certifying authority.

Reason: To ensure suitable water and sewage disposal is provided to the development.

14. Access and facilities for people with disabilities

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, plans and specifications detailing access to and within the development and facilities for persons with disabilities must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority. The development must be in accordance with Australian Standard AS 1428.1 - Design for access and mobility and Part D3 of the Building Code of Australia.

Reason: To ensure the development provides equitable and dignified access and

facilities for people with disabilities. 15. External roofing material and colour

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, details of the external material and colour of the roof must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority. Metal roof sheeting must painted or be of a coloured metal that minimises reflection and is sympathetic and compatible with the building and surrounding environment. Zincalume finish or off-white colours are not permitted.

Reason: To ensure that excessive glare or reflectivity nuisance does not occur as a result

of the development.


16. Landscape plan

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, plans and specifications detailing the landscaping treatment of the site must be submitted to and approved by the certifying authority. The plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified landscape architect or horticulturalist who has appropriate experience and competence in landscaping and must include the following information:

a) proposed location for planted native shrubs and trees, b) botanical names and pot supply sizes of shrubs and trees to be planted, c) mature height of trees to be planted, d) location of grassed and paved areas, e) screening of garbage receptacles from public view, f) location of common tap(s) and/or irrigation system to ensure all landscape works can be

adequately watered, g) stormwater detention or bio-retention systems;

Reason: To maintain environmental and streetscape amenity.

17. S94 contributions

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, a monetary contribution must be paid to Council in accordance with Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The services and facilities for which the contributions are levied and the respective amounts payable under each of the relevant plans are set out in the following table:

Code Contributions

Plan Facility quantity unit rate amount

GLW-07

Great Lakes Wide

Headquarters Building

$232,079 $1 non res @ $0.001 = $232.08

Contribution rates are subject to indexation. The rates shown above are applicable until 30 June following the date of consent. Payment made after 30 June will be at the indexed rates applicable at that time.

The Contributions Plan and the Standard Schedule for Section 94 Plans may be viewed on Council’s web site or at Council’s offices at Breese Parade, Forster.

Reason: Statutory requirement to be paid towards the provision or improvement of

facilities and services. 18. Long Service Levy

Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, a Long Service Levy must be paid to the Long Service Payments Corporation. The amount payable is currently based on 0.35% of the cost of the work. This is a State Government levy and is subject to change.

These payments may be made at Council’s Customer Service Centres. Cheques must be made payable to Great Lakes Council.

Reason: Statutory requirement.


PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THIS CONSENT The following conditions must be satisfied prior to the commencement of any building construction or subdivision work: 19. Construction certificate required

Prior to the commencement of any building or subdivision construction work (including excavation), a construction certificate must be issued by a certifying authority.

Enquiries regarding the issue of a construction certificate can be made to Council’s Customer Service Centre on 6591 7222.

Reason: Statutory requirement under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act

1979. 20. Notification of commencement and appointment of principal certifying authority

Prior to the commencement of any building or subdivision construction work (including excavation), the person having the benefit of the development consent must appoint a principal certifying authority and give at least two (2) days notice to Council, in writing, of the persons intention to commence construction work.

Reason: Statutory requirement under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act

1979. 21. Site access

Public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted, when building work is not in progress or the site is unoccupied. The public safety provisions must be in place prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained throughout construction.

Reason: To ensure public health and safety during the construction of the development.

22. Erosion & sediment measures in accordance with approved plans

Prior to the commencement of work, erosion and sediment controls must be installed in accordance with the approved erosion and sediment control plan and must be maintained for the duration of the project.


23. Pollution prevention sign

Council’s “PREVENT POLLUTION" sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position at the frontage of the property so that it is clearly visible to the public for the duration of construction work.

Council’s PREVENT POLLUTION sign can be purchased at Council’s Customer Enquiry Counter at the Forster, Tea Gardens and Stroud administration buildings.

Reason: To increase industry and community awareness of developer's obligations to

prevent pollution and to assist in ensuring compliance with the statutory provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.


24. Toilet facilities - sewered areas

Prior to the commencement of work, toilet facilities must be provided at or in the vicinity of the work site at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. Each toilet provided must be a standard flushing toilet connected to a public sewer.

Reason: To maintain public health.

25. Site construction sign

Prior to the commencement of work, a sign or signs must be erected in a prominent position at the frontage to the site.

a) showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for

the work, and b) showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a

telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and c) stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

The sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

Reason: Prescribed condition under the Environmental Planning and Assessment

Regulation 2000. CONDITIONS TO BE SATISFIED DURING DEVELOPMENT WORK The following conditions must be complied with during any development work: 26. Acid sulphate soil assessment

Prior to the commencement of significant excavation works care should be taken not to expose material containing acid sulphate soil. If such material is disclosed then work should cease until an acid sulfate soil management plan is prepared to the satisfaction of the certifying authority and with the recommendations of such plan adopted with the ongoing excavation works.

Reason: Management of acid sulphate soils.

27. Construction times

Construction and/or demolition works, including deliveries on or to the site must not unreasonably interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood and must occur only in accordance with the following:

Monday to Friday, from 7 am to 6 pm.

Saturday, from 8 am to 1 pm.

No construction and/or demolition work, including deliveries are to take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

Reason: To maintain amenity during construction of the development.


28. Construction dust suppression

All necessary works must be undertaken to control dust pollution from the site. These works must include, but are not limited to:

a) restricting topsoil removal; b) regularly and lightly watering dust prone areas (note: prevent excess watering as it can

cause damage and erosion; c) alter or cease construction work during periods of high wind; d) erect green or black shadecloth mesh or similar products, 1.8m high around the perimeter

of the site and around every level of the building under construction.

Reason: To maintain amenity during construction of the development. 29. Builders rubbish to be contained on site

All builders rubbish is to be contained on the site in a suitable waste bin/enclosure. Building materials must be delivered directly onto the property. Footpaths, road reserves and public reserves must be maintained clear of rubbish, building materials and other items at all times.

Reason: To ensure that materials and waste do not adversely affect traffic or pedestrian

safety and amenity. 30. Maintenance of sediment and erosion control measures

Sediment and erosion control measures must be maintained at all times until the site has been stabilised by permanent vegetation cover or hard surface.


31. Burning of felled trees prohibited

The burning of trees and vegetation felled during clearing of the site is not permitted. Where possible, vegetation is to be mulched and reused on the site.

Reason: To maintain amenity and environmental protection.

32. Compliance with waste management plan

During demolition and/or construction of the development, waste disposal must be carried out in accordance with the approved waste management plan.

Reason: To ensure waste is minimised and recovered for recycling where possible.

33. Vibrating compaction rollers

Vibrating compaction rollers must not be used unless a report prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer has been submitted to and approved by the certifying authority which demonstrates that such use will not result in adverse structural impacts to adjoining properties.

Reason: To avoid damage to adjoining properties from vibration impacts.


PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE The following conditions must be satisfied prior to any occupation or use of the building: 34. Works to be completed

The building/structure or part thereof must not be occupied or used until an interim occupation/final occupation certificate has been issued in respect of the building or part.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the development consent and statutory

requirements. 35. Site to be landscaped

Prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, the site must be landscaped in accordance with the approved landscape plan.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the development consent and to maintain amenity.

36. Completion of car parking areas and provision of signs

Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the car parking areas must be constructed in accordance with the approved plans and be fully line-marked.

Reason: To ensure that adequate parking facilities for the development are provided on

site. 37. Sealed driveway in accordance with approved Driveways Level Application

Prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, a driveway must be constructed from the edge of the road formation to the property boundary in accordance with the approved Driveway Levels Application. A certificate of compliance must be obtained from Council certifying that the driveway has been constructed to comply with the approved driveway application.

Reason: To ensure suitable vehicular access to the development.

38. Rainwater tank

Prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, rainwater tank/tank-stand installations must be structurally sound and in accordance with manufacturers details. Overflow from the tank must be connected to the existing stormwater system, or disposed of in a manner that does not cause nuisance to neighbouring properties or degradation of land.

Reason: To ensure rainwater tanks stands are structurally adequate and overflow from

the tank is discharged in a proper manner that protects adjoining properties. 39. MidCoast Water approval

Prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, a certificate of compliance from MidCoast Water, stating that satisfactory arrangements have been made and all payments finalised for the provision of water supply and sewerage to the development, must be submitted to the principle certifying authority.

Reason: To ensure suitable water and sewage disposal is provided to the development.


40. Survey certificate of complete building

Prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, survey certificates from a registered surveyor must be submitted to the principal certifying authority upon completion of the building.

Reason: To determine the height of buildings under construction and ensure compliance

with the approved plans. 41. Soundproofing of mechanical equipment

Prior to the issue of a final occupation certificate, all mechanical equipment must be adequately soundproofed so as not to create offensive noise as defined under the Protection of the Environmental Operations Act 1997 and regulations.

Reason: To maintain the acoustic amenity of surrounding properties.

42. Stormwater Treatment System

Prior to issue of any occupation certificate, the infiltrating raingarden must be constructed in accordance with the approved plans (Carpark Levels & Drainage Design No.C01 Issue A & Typical Raingarden Detail No. C02 Issue A), including any amendments contained within these conditions. The infiltrating raingarden must meet the following criteria:

a) Have a minimum filter surface area of 13m2, and positioned along the contours. The

infiltrating raingarden is to receive overflow from the 5KL rainwater tank collecting 100% of the roof area. Runoff from the driveway area is to be collected and directed to the raingarden in accordance with the designs submitted.

b) Be constructed to allow infiltration into the in situ sandy soil. The garden (from the base)

is to consist of: 600mm of sandy loam filter media and 200mm of depth for water detention, the top of the garden is to be finished a minimum of 50mm (freeboard) above the maximum water level.

c) The sides must be lined with a HDPE impermeable liner or equivalent extending 200mm

below the filter media to avoid exfiltration of water into surrounding sands. The lining on the side of the raingarden closest to the building is to extend 400mm below the filter media.

d) Contain filter media of uniform sandy loam texture consistent with the specifications

contained in Great Lakes Council's Fact Sheet 16 ‘Filter Media for Raingardens: Guidance for Water Sensitive Provisions of the Great Lakes Development Control Plan' (April 2014).

e) High flow from the overflow pit is to be laid on a 1:100 grade to the kerb and gutter via a

suitably manufactured kerb adaptor. Drainage lines within the road reserve must be sewer class or other approved equivalent. All drainage works must be installed by a suitably qualified person and in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard AS/NZS 3500.3: Plumbing and drainage – Stormwater drainage.

f) Inlet pipes to the raingarden from the rainwater tank and driveway are to contain rock

protection to prevent erosion.

g) Have 50% of the raingarden area planted with a minimum of 2 species from Great Lakes Council's Fact Sheet 15 ‘Local Plant Selection for Raingardens, Guidance for Water Sensitive Provisions of the Great Lakes Development Control Plan' (April 2014), at densities indicated in the fact sheet. The remaining area is to be planted with species of the owners choosing which are suited to intermittently dry and wet conditions.


h) Be protected by sediment and erosion control measures during construction and be

connected to the stormwater and planted after all hardstand areas have been paved / sealed and cleaned.

Reason: To ensure water quality requirements as contained in the Water Sensitive

Design section of the Great Lakes Development Control Plan are met. 43. Compliance of infiltrating raingarden to plans

Prior to the issue of any occupation certificate, written certification by the builder or plumber is to be submitted to the certifying authority that construction levels and drainage lines have been installed in accordance with the approved stormwater drainage plans and conditions.

Reason: To ensure compliance with Council's water quality objectives and comply with

the Water Sensitive Design section of the Great Lakes Development Control Plan and ensure that the raingarden systems are constructed in accordance with approved plans and standards and conditions of consent.

44. Raingarden Maintenance for Dwellings

Prior to issue of any occupation certificate a permanent notice identifying the location of the raingarden is to be displayed in the metre box or other visible locations on the property.

The raingarden shall be maintained by the owner in perpetuity including free draining filter media and approved plant species and densities (including the removal of weeds) and protection from erosion and scour within the raingarden.

Reason: To ensure that ongoing compliance with the Water Sensitive Design section of

the Great Lakes Development Control Plan. ONGOING USE The following conditions must be satisfied during the ongoing use of the development: 45. Security lighting

Any outdoor security lighting must be located or shielded so that no additional light is cast on adjoining land.

Reason: To ensure residential premises are not affected by inappropriate or excessive

illumination. 46. Sign quality

All signs must be neat and professionally sign written. Signs must be maintained in a structurally sound, neat and attractive condition.

Reason: To ensure that signs are consistent with Council’s controls.


47. Hours of operation

The hours of operation of the business are restricted to the times set out in the following table:

Period Start Time Finish Time Monday to Friday 9.00am 6.00pm

Any alteration to the above hours of operation will require the further consent of Council.

Reason: To protect the amenity of adjoining premises.

48. Noise

Noise associated with the premises including all associated mechanical plant and equipment must not be a source of “offensive noise” at the nearest affected premises:

"offensive noise" is defined under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 as noise:

a) that, by reason of its level, nature, character or quality, or the time at which it is made, or

any other circumstances: i) is harmful to (or is likely to be harmful to) a person who is outside the premises from

which it is emitted, or ii) interferes unreasonably with (or is likely to interfere unreasonably with) the comfort or

repose of a person who is outside the premises from which it is emitted, or b) that is of a level, nature, character or quality prescribed by the regulations or that is made

at a time, or in other circumstances, prescribed by the regulation.

Reason: To maintain acoustic amenity to adjoining properties. OTHER AGENCY CONDITIONS 49. Rural Fire Service (RFS) requirements

The development must be carried out in compliance with the following conditions.

Details from an appropriately qualified bushfire consultant (BPAD) accredited with the Fire Protection Association of Australia or a building certifier accredited with the Building Professionals Board demonstrating compliance with these conditions, must be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

Reason: To ensure work is carried out in accordance with the determination and other

statutory requirements. 50. Asset Protection Zones

At the commencement of building works and in perpetuity the entire property shall be managed as an inner protection area (IPA) as outlined within section 4.1.3 and Appendix 5 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006' and the NSW Rural Fire Service's document 'Standards for asset protection zones'.

Reason: The intent of measures is to provide sufficient space and maintain reduced fuel

loads so as to ensure radiant heat levels of buildings are below critical limits and to prevent direct flame contact with a building.


51. Water and Utilities

Water, electricity and gas are to comply with section 4.1.3 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006'.

Reason: The intent of measures is to provide adequate services of water for the

protection of buildings during and after the passage of a bush fire, and to locate gas and electricity so as not to contribute to the risk of fire to a building.

52. Landscaping - Bushfire

Landscaping to the site is to comply with the principles of Appendix 5 of 'Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006'.

Reason: To ensure that landscaping does not contribute to the passage of a bushfire.


ANNEXURES:

A: Plans of proposed development


4 PES - Planning Proposal - Development in Rural & Environmental Zones

Index: SP-PP-16; Local Environmental Plan General; North Arm Cove Author: Senior Strategic Land Use Planner - Alexandra Macvean Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

This report provides a summary of the submissions received during the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones. Individuals who made submissions have been invited to make a brief oral presentation at the Ordinary Council Meeting.


That Council adopt the Amended Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones. Council forward the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning & Environment for the associated local environmental plan to be drafted and made.


The work associated with the preparation of the planning proposal is being accommodated, as a high priority, within the Strategic Planning Section work program.


Adoption of the Amended Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones does not represent a significant change to existing Council policy and practice. The Amended Planning Proposal does represent a clarification in Council's position that residential and tourist-based land uses should only be permitted on land that can satisfy Clause 4.2A Erection of dwelling houses on land in certain rural and environment protection zones of Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 i.e. land that has a minimum area of 40 hectares, forms the whole of an existing holding, or meets the other specified criteria of this clause. This reflects the intention of the Manning LEP Plan No.1, Great Lakes LEP 1996 and recommendations of the Rural Living Strategy (2004) with regards to residential development and tourist facilities in rural and environmental areas.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

Council is party to a case before the NSW Land and Environment Court. The case relates to the refusal of a development application for a motel at Pindimar. The land on which the motel was proposed is zoned RU2 Rural Landscape and does not satisfy the requirements of Clause 4.2A Erection of dwelling houses on land in certain rural and environment protection zones of Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014.


Therefore the land subject of the court case is affected by the Amended Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

A: NSW Department of Planning & Environment Gateway Determination. B: Summary Table of Submissions. C: Website objection. D: Zone Transition Table - Manning LEP No.1 & Great Lakes LEP 1996 into Great Lakes LEP 2014. E: Definition Comparison Table - Manning LEP No.1, Great Lakes LEP 1996 and Great Lakes LEP

2014.


A: Amended Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones.

B: Transition of Land Use Permissibility - Manning LEP No.1 & Great Lakes LEP 1996 into Great Lakes LEP 2014.

Due to its large size, Attachments A and B have been circulated in hard copy to Councillors and Senior Staff only as a paper conservation measure. However, this Attachment is publicly available on Council's Website, copies are available at Council offices and copies are available on request.

REPORT:

Background At the Ordinary Council meeting on 6 October 2015 Council endorsed the preparation of a Planning Proposal for amendments to Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 to: 1. Provide an incentive to increase the provision of livable housing in the Great Lakes, in

accordance with the Active Ageing Strategy. 2. Clarify that development for the purposes of residential and tourist accommodation are

permissible in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones, only when a dwelling house can be approved on the land by Clause 4.2A Erection of dwelling houses on land in certain rural and environmental protection zones.

3. Introduce flexible zone boundary provisions for urban release areas to facilitate subdivision after rezoning.

The Planning Proposal was prepared in accordance with the resolution and submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment (the Department) for preliminary comment and review on 28 September 2015. At this time, the Department recommended that the proposal be separated into two (2) proposals to allow for additional consideration of the liveable housing provisions and requirements. As a result, the resolution is being progressed in the form of two (2) separate proposals: 1. Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2

Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones; and 2. Planning Proposal for General Amendments - Liveable Housing and Flexible Zone

Boundaries.


The Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones was subsequently lodged with the Department on 25 November 2015 and a Gateway Determination was issued on 17 January 2016. A copy of the Gateway Determination is provided in Annexure A to this report. The following section of this report documents the community engagement program, provides a summary the submissions and associated amendments to the planning proposal. The Summary Table of Submissions is provided in Annexure B and the Amended Planning Proposal is in Attachment A, to this report.

Report The Planning Proposal - Residential and Tourism Development in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones was placed on public exhibition from Wednesday 20 January 2016 to Friday 26 February 2016 inclusive. Notification of this exhibition was arranged in the Great Lakes newspapers and the Port Stephens Examiner. The Planning Proposal and all supporting documentation were made available at Council's district offices in Forster, Tea Gardens and Stroud. Direct mail notification to all potentially affected land owners was not undertaken for this Proposal as it was cost prohibitive. The Planning Proposal and all relevant supporting information were also made available on the 'Have Your Say' and 'Planning Proposal' pages of Council's website. This information will continue to be available on the Planning Proposal page until the amendment is made by the Minister for Planning. As required by the Environmental Planning & Assessment (EP&A) Regulation 2000, notification of the Planning Proposal is also provided on S149 Planning Certificates issued over potentially affected parcels from the first day of public exhibition until the amendment is made. In response to the public exhibition, one (1) online submission, one (1) letter and seven (7) pro forma submissions were received. During this time an objector also anonymously created a website objecting to the Proposal, a copy of which is provided in Annexure C to this report. The Summary Table of Submissions in Annexure B to this report provides detailed information on the submissions, officer responses and information regarding any final amendments to the Planning Proposal proposed in response to the submissions. The Amended Planning Proposal is provided in Attachment A to this report. The remainder of this report outlines a summary of significant matters from the submissions and in particular, those that have resulted in amendments to the exhibited Planning Proposal: Submission: We absolutely reject your assertion that "The proposal also reflects Council's Rural Living Strategy (2004) recommendations for tourist facilities in rural and environmental areas" as there is no mention of minimum lot size in it. Response: The following is an excerpt from the Minimum Requirements for Rural Tourism Development (p.74-75) section of the Rural Living Strategy:

"There can be merit in prescribing a minimum size for a property upon which a tourist facility can be developed. By doing this there is greater guarantee that the development will function as a tourist operation because small holdings of say two or five hectares would be excluded from such development. A minimum area of, for example 40ha, would at least ensure sufficient area for other activities normally associated with an environmentally based operation."


Additional information on the relevant content and recommendations from the Rural Living Strategy (2004) has been included in the Amended Planning Proposal in Attachment A to this report. Submission: Available options for development of rural and environmental land have been gradually reduced over the years seemingly in direct correspondence (as is the case here) to DAs being lodged for allowed development. Response: Within the Land Use Planning Implementation Framework of the Rural Living Strategy (2004) it was recommended that Council:

Objective: Develop a land use framework that will give a level of certainty to the people who live in the rural areas of the Great Lakes LGA. Implementation Strategy: Provide controls and management requirements for specific land uses that are considered to be non-sustainable or problematic. Policy Action: Prepare specific controls for the following land uses and define and regulate them in a new rural LEP and DCP as set out in the strategy: • Dual Occupancies • Farmgate Sales • Intensive Animal Establishment • Intensive Plants • Rural Residential development • Rural Tourist Development • Land Clearing

Since adoption of the Strategy a significant number of the recommendations have been implemented, including the rezoning of land through the Urban Release Area program. Progressive implementation of the recommendations within the new planning framework of the Standard Instrument Local Environmental Plan and single Great Lakes Development Control Plan is on-going through Council's Strategic Land Use Planning work program. Other projects on the current Strategic Planning work program with links back to the Rural Living Strategy include: planning proposal to clarify subdivision and boundary realignment in rural and environmental

areas, planning proposal for subdivision and protection of ecological lots; planning proposal and development control plan provisions for short-term holiday rental

accommodation; and planning proposal for dual occupancy development in rural areas. Therefore, the clarification of matters for consideration in determining a development application for residential and tourism-based development in rural and environmental zones by applying Clause 4.2A is considered to be only one additional opportunity to provide certainty to land owners in these areas of the Great Lakes. Additional information on the relevant content and recommendations from the Rural Living Strategy (2004) has been included in the Amended Planning Proposal in Attachment A to this report. Submission: Development of rural land to include tourism-based development (incorporating accommodation) has always been permissible under all Great Lakes Council LEPs for a number of years (at the least since 1995).


The requirements for tourism based development are not identical to that of residential development – tourism based development is a good match for many areas of RU2 land that would not meet the current requirements for residential development. Response: This submission warranted a close review of the permissibility of residential and tourism-based land uses in the relevant rural and environmental zones. Annexures D and E to this report document the transition of zones and land use definitions from Manning LEP No.1, Great Lakes LEP 1996 and Great Lakes LEP 2014. Attachment B to this report then provides a detailed breakdown of the transition of land use permissibility from Manning LEP No.1 and Great Lakes LEP 1996 into Great Lakes LEP 2014 to determine the validity of the statements in the submission. In essence, this review found that contrary to the submission, tourism-based development has not always been permissible in rural and environmental zones, but there were differences in matters under consideration for residential versus tourism-based development in these areas and the Great Lakes generally. Some of the critical findings of the review include: LEP 2014 generally maintains land use permissibility from previous Manning & LEP 1996

provisions. Based on advice from the Department of Primary Industries, rural workers dwellings (second

dwelling for employee of agricultural land use) became a prohibited land use in rural areas under LEP 2014. However, Council sought to retain some flexibility in these areas by permitting dual occupancy (attached) and secondary dwellings with consent. This was on the understanding that both uses required a dwelling/house to be established.

Similarly, exhibition homes are assessed as a dwelling house on the basis that within the land use definition it is clear that the 'exhibition home' is a temporary use of a dwelling/house. Therefore this land use is permitted with consent on the understanding that the 40 hectare/existing holding provisions of Clause 4.2A would also be applicable to this form of development.

Great Lakes LEP 2014 was required to combine multiple zones and requirements into the new Standard Instrument LEP zones and clauses; the transition was relatively conservative in that strategic initiatives, (such as those recommendations from the Rural Living Strategy) with the exception of some recommendations from the Employment Lands Strategy (2010), were largely excluded and discouraged by the Department of Planning & Environment. These findings are generally consistent with the recommendation of the Rural Living Strategy that Council "Develop a land use framework that will give a level of certainty to the people who live in the rural areas of the Great Lakes LGA". The Rural Living Strategy (2004) recommended that tourist-based accommodation be considered to require a minimum of four accommodation 'units' and a 'manager's residence'. Therefore, the permanent 'residence' component of this land use would also require consideration and compliance with the 40 hectare/existing holding provisions of Clause 4.2A. In this regard, the Rural Living Strategy also noted that farm stay accommodation operates in a manner consistent with a bed & breakfast establishment (p.69). This is not clearly or specifically addressed in LEP 2014 or the Great Lakes Development Control Plan (DCP). However it is noted that this land use is already restricted by the LEP 2014 definition, limiting farm stay accommodation to a secondary activity on properties being used as a working farm.


Therefore, it is considered to be necessary and appropriate for the Amended Planning Proposal to progress and further assist in clarifying the intent and purpose of Great Lakes LEP 2014 and the Great Lakes Development Control Plan (DCP) when it comes to development in rural and environmental zones. It is also important to correct an anomaly whereby LEP 2014 could be interpreted as allowing various types of accommodation in rural areas even though a dwelling house is prohibited on the land. It is also relevant to note that there are inconsistencies in the permissibility of caravan parks and manufactured home estates in rural and environmental areas, based on the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 21 - Caravan Park and SEPP 36 - Manufactured Home Estates. While there are no stated prohibitions in SEPP 21 for the establishment of caravan parks in rural or environmental zones, SEPP 36 specifically prohibits the establishment of manufactured home estates in environmental protection zones; rural zones not next to urban land; and non-urban land in the Great Lakes. This distinction is relevant within the Great Lakes where over the last decade several properties developed for the purpose of a caravan park have transitioned into manufactured home estates. Within these properties, short-term and temporary accommodation for visitors has progressively been replaced with an increase in low-cost permanent accommodation for residents. The provisions and inconsistency between SEPP 21 and SEPP 36 may also therefore, create a legislative anomaly where in certain circumstances, the SEPP provisions may be used to obtain permanent occupancy on land where a single dwelling would not be permissible under the provisions of Clause 4.2A Erection of dwelling houses on land in certain rural and environment protection zones of Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan 2014. Additional information on the land use permissibility review and findings, including relevant issues relating to caravan parks and manufactured home estates, has been included in the Amended Planning Proposal in Attachment A to this report. Submission: There have been no recent studies or community consultation to support a change to the development potential of RU2 land. Proper and reasonable development of the North Arm Cove area should be allowed especially tourist development given its location in the Hawks Nest/Tea Gardens tourist area. Allowing tourist based development will promote and encourage proper and reasonable economic development of the North Arm Cove area. Response: The Rural Living Strategy (2004) considered a range of land uses and areas of potential development within the rural and environmentally zones of the Great Lakes. Subsequent conservation and development strategies have focused on the urban areas of the Great Lakes. The recommendations from the Rural Living Strategy have progressively been implemented through an urban release area program and amendments to the planning provisions of the local environmental plan and development control plan. As indicated within the Rural Living Strategy, residential and tourism-based development in rural and environmental areas does have the potential to create land use conflict, but can be accommodated where an appropriate framework of controls are in place. The intentions of this Planning Proposal are to clarify some of the provisions within this framework and to provide consistency within the development assessment process for residential and tourism-based development within the rural and environmental areas of the Great Lakes. It also corrects an anomaly whereby LEP 2014 could be interpreted as allowing various types of accommodation in rural areas even though a dwelling house is prohibited on the land.


The Mid-North Coast Regional Strategy (2009) also identified that land in the North Arm Cove - Pindimar area was subject to various environmental, infrastructure and servicing constraints that would make it generally unsuitable for identification as an urban release area for the life of the Strategy (2030). Additional information on the relevant content and recommendations from the Rural Living Strategy (2004) and Mid North Coast Regional Strategy (2009) has been included in the Amended Planning Proposal in Attachment A to this report. Submission: Council acknowledges that approximately 8,500 parcels are affected by the planning proposal within the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management Zones but states that notification by direct mail to the affected land owners is cost prohibitive. This is nothing more than an excuse given the rates notices were posted by Council on 27 January 2016 and Council had ample opportunity, since September 2015, to prepare a newsletter to insert in the latest rates notice. Response: Officers have complied with the Gateway Determination conditions and state requirements. Full details of this compliance are provided in the Annexure B: Summary Table of Submissions, to this report. In summary, Council undertook notification in all local newspapers including the Great Lakes Advocate, Dungog Chronical, Gloucester Chronical and Myall Coast News. Council elected to undertake additional advertising in the Port Stephens Examiner based on previous community consultation that indicated this was also considered to be a 'local' newspaper in the areas of North Arm Cove, Karuah, Carrington, Pindimar and surrounds. The cost of direct mail to approximately 8,500 would have been very costly. There must be a clear "value add" to the engagement process if this significant additional cost is to be justified. In this case, the engagement undertaken was sufficient to ensure broad notification to the community and to elicit responses on the main issues of concern. For all Planning Proposals and amendments to the Great Lakes DCP where direct mail is cost prohibitive, supplementary notification in local and surrounding newspapers and on the Council website is undertaken to assist in communicating changes whenever possible. With regards to this Planning Proposal, the required public exhibition period was extended from fourteen (14) to thirty-eight (38) days to provide additional opportunities for community discussion and input. Officers investigated options of including a notice within the Council Communicator, distributed with the rates notice on 27 January 2016, when the Planning Proposal was submitted for a Gateway Determination in November 2015. Unfortunately, the publisher's deadline for the Council Communicator was the 10 December 2015 and a Gateway Determination had not been received from the Department of Planning & Environment by this time. Officers could not anticipate when the Gateway Determination would be issued and as a result the public exhibition period for the Panning Proposal was unknown. Therefore the pre-emptive inclusion of a notification within the Communicator was determined to be inappropriate. Officers continue to investigate and trial alternative and cost-effective methods of communication with land owners, including the new 'Have Your Say' section of the Council website and invitations to land owners and residents to join a Community Consultation Forum. Additional information on the community engagement program has been included in the Amended Planning Proposal in Attachment A to this report.


CONCLUSION:

Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 currently provides clear criteria for when dwelling houses are permitted on land within the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones in Clause 4.2A Erection of dwelling houses on land in certain rural and environment protection zones. However, in the transition from Great Lakes LEP 1996 and Manning LEP No.1 to Great Lakes LEP 2014, the application of these criteria to other residential and tourism-based land uses that incorporate accommodation, became unclear. Due to the inflexibility of the standard LEP template, the necessary clarification could not be provided. The intention is to amend Great Lakes LEP 2014 so that: Clause 4.2A Erection of dwelling houses on land in certain rural and environment protection

zones applies to all development applications for residential and tourism-based land uses that incorporate accommodation within the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones. This is considered to be a be a minimum requirement for such residential based uses.

The provisions of Clause 4.2A currently allow dwelling houses on existing holdings, land where a dwelling was permissible under a previous LEP is on a Council approved subdivision or on land over 40 hectares within the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones. Individual parcels that cannot satisfy the requirements of Clause 4.2A, commonly referred to as non-urban lands, often have other restrictions to development related to location, environmental sensitivity, services, infrastructure and access that would also restrict and limit opportunities for development generally. It is acknowledged that the Planning Proposal, in clarifying this intention, will expand the current application of Clause 4.2A so that the development restrictions associated with this clause are applied consistently to dwelling houses and other forms of development with accommodation in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones. However, the purpose of the amendment is three-fold: ensure development restrictions and matters for consideration on non-urban lands from Manning

LEP No.1 and Great Lakes LEP 1996 have been consistently transitioned into Great Lakes LEP 2014;

address an anomaly where some land uses incorporating permanent accommodation may be considered to be permissible with consent on land where a dwelling is not permitted; and

implement recommendations of the Rural Living Strategy (2004) that are being exercised in the development assessment process, but have not been clearly documented within Great Lakes LEP 2014.

The provisions and requirements of Clause 4.2A are considered to represent a suitable method for this, specifying a minimum lot size for each specific land use. Therefore, this amendment would achieve the aim of ensuring residential and tourism-based development is occurring on allotments of a size, location and character to accommodate these land uses. In satisfying the requirements of Clause 4.2A the land would be 40 hectares or larger, have a dwelling entitlement or constitute an existing holding (which may incorporate several lots). Such allotments would then have greater potential to be in a location, of a size and have the character necessary to accommodate:


the buildings, access, on-site disposal and recreational/private outdoor facilities associated with residential development over and above a single dwelling house, or a tourism-based development that includes accommodation facilities;

a development design which ensures that the agricultural (rural) or environmental values of the allotment are protected and maintained.

In addition, the Rural Living Strategy 2004 (Strategic Environmental Assessment & Strategy) findings and recommendations relating to residential and tourism activities in rural and environmental areas would be partly addressed and transitioned into Great Lakes LEP 2014. Therefore it is recommended that the Amended Planning Proposal in Attachment A is adopted by Council and forwarded to the Department of Planning & Environment for drafting and subsequent publication on the NSW Legislation website. RECOMMENDATION:

A. That Council: 1. Pursuant to S59 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, adopt the

Amended Planning Proposal for Residential and Tourist Development in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones contained in Attachment A.

2. Submit the Planning Proposal to the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office for the LEP to be drafted. 3. Upon acceptance of the Parliamentary Counsel's Office draft clause to give effect to the

Amended Planning Proposal for Residential and Tourist Development in the RU2 Rural Landscape, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones, submit the LEP Amendment to the Minister to be made and notified on the NSW Legislation website.


ANNEXURES:

A: NSW Department of Planning & Environment Gateway Determination.


B: Summary Table of Submissions.


C: Website objection.


D: Zone Transition Table - Manning LEP No.1 & Great Lakes LEP 1996 into Great Lakes LEP 2014.


E: Definition Comparison Table - Manning LEP No.1, Great Lakes LEP 1996 and Great Lakes LEP 2014.


5 PES - Penalty Infringement Notices issued February 2016

Index: Laws and Enforcement: Infringement Notice Issued Author: Manager Waste Health and Regulatory Services - John Cavanagh Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

This report provides a summary of the Penalty Infringement Notices issued by Council Regulatory Officers during the month of February 2016.


It is recommended that the information be noted.


Nil.


Nil. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

Nil. LIST OF ANNEXURES:


Nil.

REPORT:

During the month of February 2016, 53 verbal warnings and 90 penalty infringement notices were issued. These were issued for the following reasons:


OFFENCE

FINE ($)

TOTAL

NO. Park longer than permitted $106.00 42

Stop on path / strip in built-up area $106.00 3

Stop in parking area for disabled $531.00 4

Disobey ‘No Stopping’ sign $248.00 13

Use more parking bays than necessary $106.00 3

Not park at 45° angle (front to kerb) $106.00 1

Stop in Taxi Zone $177.00 1

Disobey 'No Stopping' Sign - School Zone - Loss of 2 demerit points

$319.00 1

Disobey 'No Parking' Sign - School Zone - Loss of 2 demerit points

$177.00 3

Fail to comply with Terms of Notice erected by Council (driving/park/use of vehicle) to vehicle

$110.00 11

Fail to comply with Terms of Notice erected by Council to person

$110.00 1

Deposit litter from vehicle - individual $250.00 1

Abandon motor vehicle $550.00 1

Companion animal not registered as required not dangerous/menacing/restricted dog

$275.00 1

Owner of dog not under control in public place $220.00 1

Not angle as on parking control sign rear to kerb $106.00 2

Stop on traffic island $106.00 1

TOTAL 90

Cautions Issued

Dogs: 15 Street/Parking: 18 Campers: 10

Signs: Nil Overgrown: 10

RECOMMENDATION:



6 PES - Consents Issued Under Delegated Authority - February 2016

Index: Development Consents Issued Under Delegated Authority Author: Director, Planning & Environmental Services - Lisa Schiff Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Consents which have been issued for February 2016 under authority delegated by Council on 14 June 1994 are contained in Annexure "A". Should any Councillor have a query regarding the attached Annexure, please contact the Director Planning & Environmental Services, so that the appropriate documentation may be brought to the meeting for clarification.


It is recommended that the information be noted. FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.


Nil.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

A: Consents issued for the month of February 2016.


Nil.

REPORT:

Consents which have been issued for February 2016 under authority delegated by Council on 14 June 1994 are contained in Annexure "A". Should any Councillor have a query regarding the attached Annexure, please contact the Director Planning & Environmental Services, so that the appropriate documentation may be brought to the meeting for clarification.

RECOMMENDATION:



ANNEXURES:

A: Consents issued for the month of February 2016.


7 PES - List of Matters Before the Land & Environment Court - March 2016

Index: Land and Environment Court Appeals - Development Applications Author: Manager, Development Assessment - Wayne Burgess Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

This report lists and provides an update on matters currently before the Land and Environment Court.


It is recommended that the information be noted. FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS:

Indicated in Annexure 'A'. POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

Indicated in Annexure 'A'.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

A: List of matters currently before the Land and Environment Court.


Nil.

REPORT:

This report lists and provides an update on matters currently before the Land and Environment Court.

RECOMMENDATION:



ANNEXURES:

A: List of matters currently before the Land and Environment Court.


8 PES - Minutes for Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee

Index: NS-EST-W/L-S/L; Estuary Coastal Management-Smiths & Wallis Author: Natural Systems Projects Officer - Prue Tucker Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

The Minutes of the Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary (WSCE) Committee meeting held on 25 November 2015, and adopted by the WSCE Committee at their quarterly meeting of 24 February 2016, are submitted for information.


It is recommended that the Minutes of the Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee meeting for 25 November 2015 be noted. FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS:

Nil. POLICY IMPLICATIONS:



A: Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee Project Progress Report for 25 November 2015 meeting.


A: Minutes of the Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee Meeting held 25 November 2015.

The Attachments have been circulated in hard copy to Councillors and Senior Staff only, as a paper conservation measure, however, they are publicly accessible on Council's Website, with hard copies available on request.

REPORT:

The minutes of the Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee meeting of 25 November 2015 were moved as a true and accurate record by the WSCE Committee members at their meeting of 24 February 2016, and subsequently adopted.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the Minutes of the Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee for the meeting of 25 November 2015 be noted.


ANNEXURES:

A: Wallis & Smiths Coast & Estuary Committee Project Progress Report for 25 November 2015 meeting.


9 PES - Minutes of Port Stephens/Myall Lakes Estuary Committee, Nov 2015

Index: NS-EST-PS-MGT; Estuary Mgmt Port Stephens Author: Senior Environmental Officer - Debbi Delaney Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

This report presents the minutes from the Port Stephens Estuary Management Committee meeting held on 18 November 2015 and adopted by the committee on 10 February 2016.


That the information be noted.


Nil.




A: Minutes of the Port Stephens/Myall Lakes Estuary and Coastal Zone Management Committee - 18 November 2015


Nil.

REPORT:

A copy of the minutes of the Port Stephens/Myall Lakes Estuary and Coastal Zone Management Committee for 18 November 2015 is included in Annexure A. RECOMMENDATION:

That the minutes be noted.


ANNEXURES:

A: Minutes of the Port Stephens/Myall Lakes Estuary and Coastal Zone Management Committee - 18 November 2015


DIRECTOR ENGINEERING SERVICES

10 ES - Marine Drive Replacement of Trees

Index: Landscaping - Minor Author: Manager Parks and Recreation - Andrew Staniland Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

The Marine Drive Reference Group have been meeting regularly since their inception, discussing ways to improve the foreshore along Marine Drive Tea Gardens with particular focus on improving the green space for all to enjoy. The Marine Drive Reference group recommend that Council allocate specific funding to the Marine Drive Foreshore to permit the purchase of additional replacement shade trees to be planted along the Marine Drive foreshore between Maxwell and Ogden Streets Tea Gardens. With the purchase and installation of these replacement trees, the group feels that the community of Tea Gardens will be more accepting of the removal of Coral Trees in this section. The Marine Drive Foreshore Reference group was formed to act as a communication beacon between Council and the various community organisations they represent. Council resolved during ordinary meeting 9 December 2014, to acknowledge the formation of the group as well as recommendations the group propose in relation to current and future works along the foreshore of Marine Drive, Tea Gardens.


That Council: 1. Consider the allocation of funding in the amount of $50,000 in the March quarterly review, to

continue to enhance the Marine Drive Tea Gardens foreshore area, through the recommendations made by the Marine Drive Foreshore Reference Group.

2. Endorse the removal of identified Coral trees between Maxwell and Ogden Streets, Tea Gardens as per independent arborist report 18 February 2015.


To date Council, through the Parks and Recreation budget has funded $37,800 on foreshore improvements requested by the Reference Group. The additional funding requested is not available within the existing Parks and Recreation budget this year.


Nil.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

Nil.



Nil.

REPORT:

On the 11 November 2014 Council resolved to remove six (6) Coral Trees (Erythrina x sykesii) which were impacted by road works from along the foreshore of Marine Drive, Tea Gardens between Maxwell Street and Ogden Street. The root system on the identified trees has been severely compromised by the upgrades to the car park. A visual tree hazard assessment undertaken by Council's Tree Preservation Officer on the 24 November 2014 further confirmed that the damage to the trees was irreversible and that there is a high risk the trees will fall in a storm event or in the event of strong winds from the south west. Following the resolution of the Council meeting 9 December 2014, an independent arborist was sourced to undertake an assessment on the six identified Coral Trees. The Arborist report received 18 February 2015, recommended the removal of two (2) of the identified trees immediately. This work was done. The remaining trees were identified to be removed within six (6) months of the report. This work has not been done. At present the remaining identified trees are still standing on the site, however, are displaying signs of poor health. The risk of potential injury or property damage while retaining these trees on this popular and well used site grows daily. The Marine Drive Foreshore Reference Group has met regularly since the inception meeting 27 November 2014. The group has reviewed the existing landscape plan for the area, identified future works, discussed the need for adequate shade and selected a suitable replacement tree species that will set the scene for an avenue planting along the foreshore. As the Reference Group were operating without a budget the Parks section of Council assisted by allocating maintenance funds to action requests from the group. Initially the group were allocated $15,000. However, to date a total of $37,800 has been spent. This expenditure has seen the purchase and installation of two (2) replacement trees with tree guards and four (4) wave style shade shelters installed over existing table and seating infrastructure. The Foreshore Reference Group indicated a need to install additional replacement trees prior to the removal of the remaining identified Coral trees. The Reference Group indicate that the community will be more accepting of the removal of Coral Trees if additional replacement trees are installed prior. It is proposed to allocate continued funding within future Parks and Recreation budgets to allow for small improvements to the foreshore annually. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council: 1. Consider the allocation of funding in the amount of $50,000 in the March quarterly review, to

continue to enhance the Marine Drive Tea Gardens foreshore area, through the recommendations made by the Marine Drive Foreshore Reference Group.

2. Endorse the removal of identified Coral trees between Maxwell and Ogden Streets, Tea Gardens as per independent arborist report 18 February 2015.


11 ES - Naming of Cycleway

Index: Roads - Naming of Bridges & Cycleways Author: Administrative Support Officer - Karen Lawless Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Council received a request to name the cycleway along the Pacific Highway between Glen Ora Road, Nabiac and the village of Nabiac after Norm Cunningham/


It is recommended that Council approve the proposal to name the cycleway Norm Cunningham.


Council is responsible for the costs associated with advertising the proposed name as well as appropriate signage.


This process has been undertaken in line with Council's Road Naming Policy and Procedure and the NSW Geographical Names Board of NSW Guidelines.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

Nil.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

A: Map showing cycleway


Nil.

REPORT:

Norm Cunningham was a member of the local fire brigade and a prominent local resident advocating for improvements to the area. Norm recently passed away and a request has been received from residents and family members to name the cycleway in his memory. The cycleway runs adjacent to the Pacific Highway and a portion also falls within Greater Taree City Council (GTCC). In light of this, a letter outlining Council's proposal was sent to Roads & Maritime Services (RMS) & GTCC. As no submissions / objections were received from RMS or GTCC, the proposal was advertised by Council in the Manning Great Lakes Extra on 16 September 2015 with the closure date for objections/submissions being 30 September 2015. It is noted that no submissions or objections ere received by Council.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that Council approve the proposal to name the cycleway Norm Cunningham.


ANNEXURES:

A: Map showing cycleway


DIRECTOR CORPORATE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

12 CCD - 2016 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review

Index: Governance - Councillors - Allowances incl Mayoral Allowance Author: Manager Corporate Finance & Planning - Phil Brennan Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

To advise Council of the process being followed by the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal with respect to its review of Mayoral and Councillor Allowances for 2016.




Nil at this time, indexation of existing allowances is made within the draft 2106/2017 budget.




A: Letter from Local Government Remuneration Tribunal dated 20 January 2016. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:

Nil.

REPORT:

The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal has commenced its review of the fees to be paid to Councillors for the 2016/2017 financial year. It advises that it is considering the impact of the current reform process which sees merger proposals being examined by government appointed Delegates. In its letter of 20 January 2016 (Annexure A) the Tribunal advises that it will not be seeking general submissions from individual councils during this review period. It also identifies the need to reclassify new councils that may be created as a result of the current review program. From this information it can be concluded that the Tribunal is likely to restrict any increase in Councillors fees to 2.5% or less for 2016/2017.

RECOMMENDATION:



ANNEXURES:

A: Letter from Local Government Remuneration Tribunal dated 20 January 2016.


13 CCD - Bundabah - Proposal to Re-classify a Section of Community Land

Index: Council Property - General Author: Manager Property & Building Assets - John Dougherty Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

At the February meeting a request was made to provide a report to Council in respect of a land matter at Bundabah. The matter at hand involves a request from an adjoining land owner to either acquire a strip of Council owned community land or be granted permission to obtain legal access across the narrow strip of Council owned community land.


That Council agree to the request from the landowner to commence the process required to enable the eastern portion of the Steve Rich Reserve adjacent to Second Avenue to be dedicated as public road subject to the following:

a) All costs associated with the reclassification of the land and dedication as a public road are to be met by the owner of Lot 21, DP 1041318.

b) The landowner making a contribution toward the future sealing of Second Avenue. FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS:

In the event that a section of the community land is re classified and ultimately sold a small amount of revenue will arise. The value will be determined by an independent valuation. All expenses are proposed to be borne by the adjoining landowner.


Current practices require an independent valuation to determine the value of any land proposed to be sold. Land can be sold to adjoining landowners where there are no other likely purchasers for the land.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

A re-classification of community land needs to be undertaken in accordance with the procedures clearly set out in the relevant Acts (Local Government Act, 1993 and Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979).

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

A: Site map - showing community land (Steve Rich reserve); area proposed to be reclassified; and also alternate access to site through land also owned by the owner of Lot 21 DP 1041318.

B: Site map - showing Lot 21 DP 1041318 and that this site also has access of Bundabah road.


Nil.


REPORT:

As requested in late business at the Council meeting held in February, this report deals with a request from an adjoining land owner to either acquire a strip of Council owned community land or be granted permission to obtain legal access across the narrow strip of Council owned community land. The initial enquiry to Councils Property services section was made on 11 July 2014. The parcel of Council land in question is Lot 21 Section 7 of DP10915 located at Bundabah and is classified as community land, natural area foreshore. This is known as "Steve Rich Reserve" and it is a long narrow strip of land designed to provide community access to the foreshore. The owners of the adjoining parcel of land being Lot 21 DP 1041318, otherwise known as 154 Bundabah Road, Bundabah have stated that they "wish to erect a dwelling on their land and close to the water and have established that the best practical access to the house site will be to take our driveway off Second Avenue, and from there use existing logging trails out to the house site. This is an easier and much shorter route to the proposed house site than any entry where our property adjoins Bundabah Road at the far Eastern end of the property" They have made an enquiry by email to "gain permission, or do whatever is necessary, to cross this strip of land where it starts at Second Avenue". The applicant's proposal is to essentially to either acquire or obtain a legal access across the community land. Community land is held for the wider public benefit and enjoyment. Section 45(1) of the Local Government Act, 1993 clearly states that "a council has no power to sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of community land". In addition the Act sets out limitations in respect of other dealings for community land. Council is not permitted to grant a licence, lease or other estate in respect of community land for private enjoyment. The Local Government Act requires that all such dealings must be for the public benefit. Councillors may recall a previous incident along the Nerong public foreshore where Council was found to have erred in allowing a private structure to be erected on community land. Hence the Local Government Act clearly prohibits the applicant's proposal to gain permission (by lease, licence or other estate) to cross the narrow strip of community land. Given the above restriction in respect of dealings on community land and discussions with engineering services staff at the time the applicant was informed that Council could not grant access across the land nor sell a portion of the community land to them to enable access. This was conveyed in an email response to the applicant on 17 July 2014. Further representations by the owner have recently been made. It should be noted that the owners also have a number of alternative options that can provide legal access to their land where they wish to build a residence. As stated in their email to Council the "property adjoins Bundabah Road at the far Eastern end of the property" - access can be obtained from Bundabah Road. In addition they can also obtain access to Lot 21 DP 1041318 from a smaller adjacent lot that they also own - being lot 3 in sec 8 DP 10915. Hence they currently have legal access to Lot 21 DP 1041318 via two alternate means.


In the event that Council wanted to permit access through the community land then the only means by which that can be done is for the land to be reclassified as operational land. The Act sets out the mechanism by which this can occur. This involves advertising the proposal and Council arranging a public hearing under section 68 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in respect of a proposal in a draft Local Environmental Plan to reclassify community land as operational land. With this in mind further deliberation and discussion was held with Councils Director of Engineering to determine a possible solution. In order to provide access to the applicants land only a small section of the community land is actually required - the bulk of the reserve can be preserved and retained for public purposes. It may be feasible that this small section at the end of the adjoining public roadway (Second Avenue) is proposed to be reclassified as operational land (refer to Annexure A). This proposal would require all appropriate advertising and public hearings as outlined above. This still allows the remaining section of the reserve to facilitate access and provide stormwater drainage (see comments below) and hence the public benefit intended to be provided by the reserve is maintained. If this small section of reserve is reclassified as operational land Council then has two alternatives:- 1. Dedicate the land as public road - this retains the land in public ownership OR 2. Sell the land to the adjoining landowner - Council will obtain some revenue as determined by

an independent valuation of the land. Council and the community would retain the remaining bulk of the reserve, and its use and intended purpose is not impacted significantly. A subdivision of the land would be required to facilitate this proposal as well. It should also be noted that by Council agreeing to undertake this reclassification of land does not guarantee the outcome described above - members of the public have the right to object to the reclassification of community land which may impact the outcome. The LEP to amend the classification of land is approved by the NSW Planning Minister after consideration of all matters raised during the process. Comments from the Director Engineering are as follows:- COMMENTS - Director Engineering Services The subject land may be required for the purposes of conveying stormwater to the foreshore in the event that the adjacent streets are sealed, which is likely in the near term. Accordingly, sale of the entire reserve cannot be supported. However, it would be feasible for the eastern portion, adjacent to Second Ave, to be subdivided and dedicated as public road as an extension to Second Ave, without any impact on the public access to the land. This would enable the property owner to access their land directly from Second Ave. If this proposal is supported, the applicant should be responsible for all costs involved in the process as there is no additional community benefit derived from the action. In addition, as there is a windfall benefit to the property owner and an increase in traffic on Second Ave, Council should also consider whether a contribution towards the future sealing of Second Ave would be appropriate.


This matter is submitted for Councils consideration. If the proposal to reclassify a small section of the public reserve is supported by Council then it is recommended that all costs associated with the reclassification of land is at the expense of the owner of Lot 21 DP 1041318, otherwise known as 154 Bundabah Road, Bundabah. Should Council wish to proceed in accordance with the landowners request, Council will need to resolve to commence the process to provide for the reclassification of the section of Steve Rich Reserve (being Lot 21 Section 7 of DP10915) from Community land to Operational Land, and that all costs associated with the reclassification be met by the owner. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council agree to the request from the landowner to commence the process required to enable the eastern portion of the Steve Rich Reserve adjacent to Second Avenue to be dedicated as public road subject to the following:

a) All costs associated with the reclassification of the land and dedication as a public road are to be met by the owner of Lot 21, DP 1041318.

b) The landowner making a contribution toward the future sealing of Second Avenue.


ANNEXURES:

A: A: Site map - showing community land (Steve Rich reserve)


B: Site map - showing Lot 21 DP 1041318


14 CCD - Forster Boat Harbour - Facility Renewal

Index: 16/15 TEN-FBH-CONSTRUCTION; Council Properties - Marina, Boat Harbour Author: Manager Property & Building Assets - John Dougherty Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

This report provides an update to Council in respect of the outcome of negotiations to select an appropriate contractor to undertake the required works at the Forster Boat Harbour Facility.


That the report be noted.


The project can be funded by existing grants secured totalling $351,000 plus existing reserves and loan funds in the event that additional grant funding cannot be secured. Any loans utilised will be repaid from the operational surplus from the mooring facilities. An application for further funding from the NSW Government Public Reserves Management Fund (PRMF) is being undertaken in accordance with the previous resolution of Council.


Nil.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:

Standard contract obligations will apply.

LIST OF ANNEXURES:

Nil.


Nil.

REPORT:

Council considered a confidential report at its meeting of 24 November 2015 in respect of significant upgrade works required at the boat harbour facility that were subject to a tender. Council resolved as follows: "That Council: 1. In accordance with the Local Government (General) Regulations 2005, s178 1(b), decline to

accept any of the tenders submitted for 16/15 TEN-FBH-CONSTRUCTION for the renewal, repair and construction of various mooring facilities within the Forster Boat Harbour.


2. Decline to invite fresh tenders due to the competitive process failing to produce an advantageous or satisfactory offer within the projects budget.

3. Enter into negotiations with all tenderers with a view to entering into a contract in respect of the Forster Boat Harbour facility renewal works within the existing project budget.

4. Discuss potential securing of additional funding from the State Government. 5. Maintain the confidentiality of the documents and considerations in respect of this tender." Discussions have been undertaken and further information sought in respect of the tendered works and alternative options with all tenderers. Following the negotiations, further advice was requested from its consultants (Australian Ports & Marinas) in respect of the proposals and the capabilities of the preferred contractor. As a result of the above discussions and negotiations, Southern Marine Constructions Pty Ltd trading as Dick Rowe Marine, has been engaged to fulfil the project requirements in accordance with the above resolution. It is expected that works shall commence late May/early June 2016 and all stakeholders will be informed of the impending works. The mooring licensees have been informed of the works and the licensees at the southern pontoon will be required to vacate for the construction duration to allow that structure to be rebuilt. The construction works are expected to take between 10-12 weeks after which maintenance works will be undertaken. The maintenance works will be undertaken in a fashion that minimises disruption to the facilities. In accordance with item 4 from the resolution detailed above, an application for further funding from the current round of the NSW Government Public Reserves Management Fund (PRMF) is being undertaken. This funding round closes on 8 April 2016. This report is submitted for Council's information. RECOMMENDATION:

That the report be noted.


15 CCD - Investment Report - February 2016

Index: Investments Author: Manager Corporate Finance & Planning - Phil Brennan Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Council's Investment report as at 29 February 2016 is provided in accordance with Part 9, Division 5, Section 212 Local Government (General) Regulations 2005.


That the report be received and noted.


Interest received to the month ending 29 February 2016 was $870,037 with a further $366,571 accrued in respect to the current financial period, totalling $1,236,608 for the year to date. POLICY IMPLICATIONS:



A: Investments held as at 29 February 2016 B: Monthly Interest Comparison C: Responsible Accounting Officer Certificate


Nil.

REPORT:

Pursuant to Part 9, Division 5, Section 212, Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 Clause 1(a) attached (Annexure A) are details of all money that Council has invested in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993. Council’s investments as at 29 February 2016 amounted to $57,874,296. It should be noted that the amount currently invested represents all Council’s external and internal restrictions (i.e. grants, Section 94 funds, loans, crown reserves, etc) as well as cash flow requirements of which a detailed summary is included in Council's Investment Policy to the 30 June 2015. The following table provides a summary of movement of Investments for the month of February 2016.


Investment Type Opening Balance Movement Closing Balance

Fair Value Portfolio %

Term Deposits $27,250,000 $0 $27,250,000 47.08%

Managed FRNs & FTDs $25,042,640 $0 $25,042,640 43.27%

11am Call Deposits $3,074,998 $2,506,658 $5,581,656 9.64%

Total $55,367,638 $2,506,658 $57,874,296 100.00%

Whilst Annexure A provides a detailed summary of each investment held by Council, the following table provides an analysis of those investments based on their maturity horizon, the actual amount and percentage invested, the benchmark return and the actual weighted average return for the month.

Investment Horizon Amount Invested Actual % of

Portfolio Targeted Minimum

Return

Weighted Average Monthly Return

Investment

On Call $5,581,656 9.64% Cash Rate (2.00%) 2.22% On Call Accounts

0-3 Months $14,250,000 24.62% BBSW +20-40 (2.48%) 3.05% Term Deposits, FRNs, FTDs

3-6 Months $12,992,640 22.45% BBSW +30-50 (2.58%) 3.24% Term Deposits, FRNs, FTDs

6-12 Months $2,000,000 3.46% BBSW +40-60 (2.68%) 5.04% Term Deposits, FRNs,

FTDs

1-2 Years $8,300,000 14.34% BBSW +80-100 (3.08%) 3.68% Term Deposits, FRNs,

FTDs

Greater $14,750,000 25.49% BBSW +100 (3.28%) 3.42% Term Deposits, FRNs, FTDs

$57,874,296 100.00% Council uses a weighted average when determining the return (interest rate) on investments within any given period. A weighted average calculation takes into account the interest rate applied to each investment and the actual amount of each investment. The greater the amount invested the more weight its interest rate carries. As can be seen from the above table, Council's investments remain heavily weighted towards the shorter term, however longer term investments are being purchased when suitable returns are attainable. The following table provides a break-up of Council's investments into long and short term with their corresponding credit ratings.

Credit Quality Dissection Long Term Credit

Rating % Of

Portfolio Short Term Credit

Rating % Of Portfolio

AA 10.37% A1 42.89%

A 11.66% A2 22.46%

BBB & Unrated 3.46% Unrated 9.16%

25.49% 74.51%

Long term investments are investments with a maturity of greater than 2 years


One of the primary goals of any investment portfolio is to ensure that there is suitable diversification in how funds are invested and whilst Council has predominately used Term Deposits in recent years it has been conscious of not over investing with any one institution. The following table provides a summary of Council's investments dissected into counterparties (organisations), credit ratings, maximum limits for each credit rating as determined in Council's Investment Policy and the current level of exposure with each counterparty.

Organisation Credit Rating Limit Actual

NAB A1/AA 25% 18.13%

CBA A1/AA- 25% 9.25%

AMP A1/A+ 15% 8.15%

Bank QLD A2/A+ 15% 6.90%

Bendigo A2/BBB+ 10% 5.18%

ING A1/A 15% 5.18%

Macquarie Bank A 15% 5.18%

Suncorp A1/A+ 15% 5.18%

CUA A2/BBB+ 10% 3.46%

Defence Bank A-2/BBB+ 10% 3.46%

ME Bank A2/BBB 10% 3.46%

Police Credit Union SA NR 6% 3.46%

St George A1/AA- 25% 3.46%

Newcastle Permanent BBB+ 10% 2.25%

ANZ A-1+/AA- 25% 1.73%

Auswide Bank A-2/BBB 10% 1.73%

Bank West A-1+/AA- 25% 1.73%

BCCCU NR 6% 1.73%

Greater A2/BBB 10% 1.73%

People's Choice CU A1/A 6% 1.73%

Police Bank A2/BBB+ 10% 1.73%

RaboDirect P-1/Aa2 25% 1.73%

Teachers Mutual Bank A2/BBB+ 10% 1.73%

Westpac A1/AA- 25% 1.73% The total interest physically received to the month ending 29 February 2016, was $870,037 with a further $366,571 accrued in respect to the current financial period, totalling $1,236,608 for the year to date.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report be received and noted.


ANNEXURES:

A: Investments held as at 29 February 2016


B: Monthly Interest Comparison


C: Responsible Accounting Officer Certificate


16 CCD - List of Outstanding Reports

Index: Council Meetings Author: Director Corporate & Community Development - Steve Embry Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

A current list of all outstanding reports is shown within this report and details the current status of each item.


This list of outstanding reports shown in the report is submitted for Council's noting.


Nil.





Nil.

REPORT:

The following is the list of all outstanding reports and details the current status of each item.


DATE ITEM

NO WHO MEET ITEM STATUS

11/03/2014 3 DES SC A report be bought forward on the development and maintenance of a Significant Tree Register which would include trees listed in the Heritage Study. A review of the Tree Preservation Order is to be undertaken which will incorporate information on a significant tree register

Presentation to be made to the 12 April 2016 Strategic Committee Meeting.

14/10/2014 Late Bus PES SC Follow up on the protocols for the issuing of fines and report back.

Presentation to be made to the 12 April 2016 Strategic Committee Meeting.

28/10/2014 7 DES Ord That this item be deferred for a strategic report looking at the viability of the operational requirements of the SES into the long term future.

Discussion held with MidCoast Water and possible site located at Tuncurry. Initial environmental assessment has indicated that full environmental assessment is required. Consultants engaged to undertake environmental assessment.

27/10/2015 7 PES Ord That a report be prepared on what resources can be provided to address the control of feral animals within the local government area which should include further communication and consultation with the community and local veterinarians.

A report will be presented to the Ordinary Council meeting to be held 28 June 2016.

27/10/2015 11 DES Ord That a further report be presented at the earliest possible time incorporating projected running costs and all projected costs related to Nabiac pool.

A BP report will be presented to Council after the current swimming season.

23/02/2016 21 DES Ord A report be provided on alternative measures available to be added to Council's policy and, further, that the illegal removal of vegetation be reported to the Police.

A report will be presented to the 26 April 2016 Ordinary Council Meeting.

08/03/2016 Late Bus DPES SC Difficulty surrounding disabled persons trying to obtain a beach parking permit because they don't have a licence. The DPES to investigate and provide a report.

A report will be presented to the 10 May 2016 Strategic Meeting.

RECOMMENDATION:

This list of outstanding reports shown in the report is submitted for Council's noting.


CLOSED COUNCIL

17 ESCONF - Tender for Construction of Markwell Rd & Deep Creek Bridges

Index: EN-TA-BRI-MARK/DEEP (05/16), Summaries of Tenders Author: Manager Design and Investigation – Kumar Kuruppu Ordinary Meeting: 22 March 2016

REASON FOR CONFIDENTIALITY:

This report is CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to the following: - (d) commercial information of a confidential nature that would if disclosed: (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it Tender details, should they be revealed, may result in commercial disadvantage to parties involved in the tender process. Some information provided to Council by tenderers is provided on the basis that Council will treat it as commercial in confidence. It is not in the public interest to reveal all details of these tenders or the assessment process. Tenderers have provided sensitive information about their operations in the confidence that their details will not be made public by Council. The practice of publication of sensitive information provided by tenderers could result in the withholding of such information by tenderers and reduction in the provision of information relevant to Council's decision.

18 CCDCONF - Civic Precinct Forster

Index: Civic Precinct Forster; 04/16 EOI-FORSTER-CIVIC-PR Author: Director Corporate & Community Development - Steve Embry Council Meeting: 22 March 2016

REASON FOR CONFIDENTIALITY:

This report is CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to the following:- (d) commercial information of a confidential nature that would if disclosed: (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it Expression of Interest details, should they be revealed, may result in commercial disadvantage to parties involved in the process. Some information provided to Council by proponents is provided on the basis that Council will treat it as commercial in confidence. It is not in the public interest to reveal all details of these submissions or the assessment process. Proponents have provided sensitive information about their operations in the confidence that their details will not be made public by Council. The practice of publication of sensitive information provided by proponents could result in the withholding of such information by proponents and reduction in the provision of information relevant to Council's decision.

Glenn Handford GENERAL MANAGER

GREAT LAKES COUNCIL - Mid-Coast Council · Stronger Local Government, A Case for Sustainable Change...

Documents

Transcript of GREAT LAKES COUNCIL - Mid-Coast Council · Stronger Local Government, A Case for Sustainable Change...