Agenda of Council - 16 December 2015

Ethical Decision Making and Conflicts of Interest

A guiding checklist for Councillors, officers and community committees

Ethical decision making

· Is the decision or conduct legal?

· Is it consistent with Government policy, Council’s objectives and Code of Conduct?

· What will the outcome be for you, your colleagues, the Council, anyone else?

· Does it raise a conflict of interest?

· Do you stand to gain personally at public expense?

· Can the decision be justified in terms of public interest?

· Would it withstand public scrutiny?

Conflict of interest

A conflict of interest is a clash between private interest and public duty. There are two types of conflict:

· Pecuniary – regulated by the Local Government Act and Department of Local Government

· Non-pecuniary – regulated by Codes of Conduct and policy. ICAC, Ombudsman, Office of Local Government (advice only). If declaring a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest, Councillors can choose to either disclose and vote, disclose and not vote or leave the Chamber.

The test for conflict of interest

· Is it likely I could be influenced by personal interest in carrying out my public duty?

· Would a fair and reasonable person believe I could be so influenced?

· Conflict of interest is closely tied to the layperson’s definition of ‘corruption’ – using public office for private gain.

· Important to consider public perceptions of whether you have a conflict of interest.

Identifying problems

1st Do I have private interests affected by a matter I am officially involved in?

2nd Is my official role one of influence or perceived influence over the matter?

3rd Do my private interests conflict with my official role?

Whilst seeking advice is generally useful, the ultimate decision rests with the person concerned.

Agency advice

Officers of the following agencies are available during office hours to discuss the obligations placed on Councillors, officers and community committee members by various pieces of legislation, regulation and codes.

Contact	Phone	Email	Website
Bega Valley Shire Council	(02) 6499 2222	council@begavalley.nsw.gov.au	www.begavalley.nsw.gov.au
ICAC	8281 5999 Toll Free 1800 463 909	icac@icac.nsw.gov.au	www.icac.nsw.gov.au
Office of Local Government	(02) 4428 4100	olg@olg.nsw.gov.au	http://www.olg.nsw.gov.au/
NSW Ombudsman	(02) 8286 1000 Toll Free 1800 451 524	nswombo@ombo.nsw.gov.au	www.ombo.nsw.gov.au

TO: The General Manager
Bega Valley Shire Council

Disclosure of pecuniary interests / non-pecuniary conflict of interests

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Meeting Practice and the requirements of the Local Government Act and regulations or dispensation issued by the Office of Local Government I hereby disclose the following pecuniary interests and/or non-pecuniary conflict of interests at the meeting as indicated below:

Ordinary meeting held on _____ / _____ / 20___

dd mm yy

Item no & subject
Interest (tick one)	Pecuniary interest Non-pecuniary conflict of interest
* Nature of interest
If Non-pecuniary (tick one)	Disclose & vote Disclose & not vote Leave chamber

Item no & subject
Interest (tick one)	Pecuniary interest Non-pecuniary conflict of interest
* Nature of interest
If Non-pecuniary (tick one)	Disclose & vote Disclose & not vote Leave chamber

Signed
Print Name	Councillor

* Note: Under the provisions of Section 451(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 (pecuniary interests) and Part 6.11 of the Model Code of Conduct prescribed by the Local Government (Discipline) Regulation 2004 (conflict of interests) it is necessary for you to disclose the nature of the interest when making a disclosure of a pecuniary interest or a non-pecuniary conflict of interest at a meeting.

Council

16 December 2015

Agenda

Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners of Bega Valley Shire

I would like to commence by acknowledging, on behalf of Bega Valley Shire Council the Traditional Custodians of the lands and waters of the Shire – the people of Yuin nation and show our respect to elders past and present.

1 Apologies and requests for leave of absence

2 Confirmation Of Minutes

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 25 November 2015 as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed.

3 Declarations

Pecuniary, Non-Pecuniary and Political Donation Disclosures to be declared and tabled.

4 Deputations (by prior arrangement)

4.1 Mr Kim Boyd - Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee 2 Dec 2015.............................................. 9

5 Petitions

6 Mayoral Minutes

7 Adjournment to Standing Committees

Recommendation

That the Ordinary meeting of the Council be adjourned for the purpose of dealing with staff reports to Standing Committees.

8 Staff Reports – Planning and Environment (Sustainability)

In accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, this section of the agenda will be chaired by Cr Taylor.

8.1 Finalisation of amendments to Local Environmental Plan 2013: Boundary adjustments and subdivision of land with split zones....................................................................................................................... 11

8.2 Erection of a farm shed - Lot 37 DP 752164, 110 County Boundary Road, Cobargo.......... 16

8.3 Bega Valley Shire Coastal Processes and Hazards Definition Study....................................... 24

8.4 Regularisation of unauthorised additions to attached dual occupancy, 2 Coraki Drive, Pambula Beach 27

9 Staff Reports – Community, Culture and Leisure (Liveability)

In accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice , this section of the agenda will be chaired by Cr Tapscott.

9.1 Community Project Proposals - Summary and Assessment..................................................... 40

9.2 Conversion of building to library and community facility at Tura Beach .............................. 49

10 Staff Reports –Economic Development and Business Growth (Enterprising)

In accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, this section of the agenda will be chaired by Cr McBain.

10.1 Merimbula Wharf Public Toilet Facility....................................................................................... 54

10.2 Jigamy Youth Camp Development................................................................................................ 65

10.3 Old CBC Building in Bega............................................................................................................... 82

10.4 Lease of Land to Tulgeen Group.................................................................................................. 93

11 Staff Reports – Infrastructure Waste and Water (Accessibility)

In accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, this section of the agenda will be chaired by Cr Fitzpatrick.

11.1 Mobile Waste Transfer Services to Remote Villages.............................................................. 100

11.2 RFT 31/15 Airport management, operations and maintenance services........................... 104

11.3 Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee - 2 December 2015..................................................... 109

11.4 National Stronger Regions Fund - Round Two ........................................................................ 111

12 Staff Reports – Governance and Strategy (Leading Organisation)

In accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, this section of the agenda will be chaired by Cr Mawhinney

12.1 2016 Citizen of the Year and Young Citizen of the Year Awards.......................................... 114

12.2 Finalisation of MoU with Eurobodalla Shire Council............................................................ 116 .

13 Staff Reports – Finance (Leading Organisation)

In accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, this section of the agenda will be chaired by Cr Hughes

13.1 Southern Phone Company Pty Ltd - Dividend 2015............................................................... 126

13.2 Certificate of Investments made under Section 625 of the Local Government Act, 1993 128.

14 Adoption of Reports from Standing Committees

Recommendation

That all motions recorded in the Standing Committees, including votes for and against, and acknowledging declarations of interest already made, be adopted in by the Ordinary Council meeting.

15 Delegates Reports

15.1 Canberra Urban and Regional Futures (CURF) Seminar......................................................... 133

15.2 Cr Ann Mawhinney and Mr Terry Bunn, Chair, Internal Audit Committee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference (APSAC) 17th to 19th November.................................................... 137

15.3 NSW Public Libraries Association Conference 2015............................................................. 138

16 Rescission/alteration Motions

17 Notices of Motion

18 Urgent Business

19 Questions On Notice

19.1 Response to Question on Notice - Bus Shelters in the Bega Valley - Cr McBain............... 141

19.2 Response to Questions on Notice - Outdoor seating cost and fees - Cr Fitzpatrick.......... 144

20 Questions for the Next Meeting

21 Items of Interest Relating to Council Business

22 Confidential Business

23 Adoption of reports from Closed Session

24 Resolutions to declassify reports considered in closed session

Council 16 December 2015

Item 8.1

8.1. Finalisation of amendments to Local Environmental Plan 2013: Boundary adjustments and subdivision of land with split zones

The purpose of this report is to detail the outcomes of the public exhibition and government agency consultation to finalise two amendments to Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 to enable Council to consider development applications for boundary adjustments and the subdivision of land with split zones.

Group Manager Planning and Environment

Background

At the meeting of 12 August 2015, Council considered a report on the current limitations of the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 with regard to the approval of boundary adjustments and the creation of lots resulting from land with split zones. At that meeting it was Resolved:

“1. That Council staff prepare a planning proposal to amend Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 to include the draft clauses detailed in the body of this report to enable Council to consider development applications for boundary adjustments and subdivision of land with split zonings.

2. That the planning proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment’s Gateway Panel for determination.”

Exhibition of Planning Proposal

Council received a Gateway Panel approval for the planning proposal and delegation to make the Plan under Section 59 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 from the Minister of Planning and Environment on 22 September 2015. In accordance with the Gateway Determination, the planning proposal was placed on public exhibition for 14 days from 2 to 16 October 2015.

The exhibition of the planning proposal included notification on Council’s website, in local newspapers, by email to the development industry professionals within the Shire, and in writing to the NSW Rural Fire Service.

No public submissions were received, although there was some informal support for the intention of the draft clauses from some local development industry professionals. The submission received from the NSW Rural Fire Service, as well as the results of the staff liaison with the Parliamentary Council regarding the wording of the draft clauses, is discussed in the following section.

Discussion of submission / consultation with Parliamentary Counsel

NSW Rural Fire Service

The NSW Rural Fire Service raised no concerns or issues with the planning proposal in relation to bush fire.

Parliamentary Counsel

Council staff drafted the two clauses contained in the planning proposal based on the wording and formatting of clauses that have been previously gazetted in other NSW Councils' Local Environmental Plans. On the advice of the Department of Planning and Environment’s staff, Council staff notified the NSW Parliamentary Counsel of the draft clauses prior to seeking finalisation by Council.

The Parliamentary Counsel made a number of minor wording amendments to the draft clauses, however Council staff are satisfied the changes do not affect the intention or effect of the clauses.

The clauses as exhibited in the planning proposal are contained in Attachment 1 to this report. The clauses as proposed by the Parliamentary Counsel are as follows:

4.2E Exceptions to minimum subdivision lot size for boundary adjustments

(1) The objective of this clause is to permit the boundary between 2 or more lots to be altered in certain circumstances, to give landowners a greater opportunity to achieve the objectives of a zone.

(2) Despite clause 4.1, development consent may be granted to the subdivision of 2 or more adjoining lots where one or more lots do not meet the minimum lot size shown on the Lot Size Map if the consent authority is satisfied that the subdivision will not result in any of the following:

(a) an increase in the number of lots,

(b) an increase in the number of dwellings that may be erected on any of the lots,

(c) increased potential for land use conflicts.

(3) In determining whether to grant development consent for the subdivision of land under this clause, the consent authority must consider the following:

(a) whether or not the development is likely to maintain or improve the environmental values and agricultural viability of the land,

(b) the potential impact on the natural and physical constraints affecting the land, taking into account the long-term maintenance, management and protection of the land,

(c) the compatibility with existing or potential land uses and measures that are deemed necessary to avoid or minimise any potential for land use conflicts.

(4) This clause does not apply in relation to a subdivision under the Community Land Development Act 1989, the Strata Schemes (Freehold Development) Act 1973 or the Strata Schemes (Leasehold Development) Act 1986.

4.2F Exceptions to minimum subdivision lot sizes for resulting lots

(1) The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a) to provide for the subdivision of lots that are within more than one zone but cannot be subdivided under clause 4.1,

(b) to ensure that the subdivision occurs in a manner that promotes suitable land use and development.

(2) This clause applies to a lot (an original lot) that contains land in:

(a) a rural or environmental zone, and

(b) one or more other zones.

(3) Despite clause 4.1, development consent may be granted to subdivide an original lot to create other lots (the resulting lots) if:

(a) one of the resulting lots will contain all of the land within a rural or environmental zone, and:

(i) any existing dwelling, or

(ii) any land within any other zone with an area that is not less than the minimum size shown on the Lot Size Map in relation to that land, and

(b) all other resulting lots will contain land that has an area that is not less than the minimum size shown on the Lot Size Map in relation to that land.

(4) In determining whether to grant development consent for the subdivision of land under this clause, the consent authority must consider the following:

(a) whether or not the development is likely to maintain or improve the environmental values and agricultural viability of the land,

(b) the potential impact on the natural and physical constraints affecting the land, taking into account the long-term maintenance, management and protection of the land,

(c) the compatibility with existing or potential land uses and measures that are deemed necessary to avoid or minimise any potential for land use conflicts.

Conclusion

Public and Government Agency consultation of the Planning Proposal: Boundary Adjustments and Split Zones has been completed. No issues of concern were raised in submissions, and it is recommended Council support the proposed changes to the wording of the draft clauses made by the Parliamentary Council.

The proposed changes to the wording of the draft clauses is considered minor and would not require re-exhibition of the Planning Proposal and as such Council can proceed to finalise the plan in accordance with the delegations issued by the Minister for Planning and Environment.

Attachments

1 . Draft clauses as exhibited: boundary adjustments and split zones

Recommendation

1. That Council resolves to adopt the amendments to Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 subject to the minor amendments to the wording of the draft clauses contained in this report.

2. That, using the delegations issued by the Minister for Planning and Environment, Council proceeds to finalise the plan under section 59(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 8.3

8.3. Bega Valley Shire Coastal Processes and Hazards Definition Study

The Bega Valley Shire Coastal Processes and Hazards Definition Study provides a regional assessment of the coastal hazards impacting on the Bega Valley Shire coastline. It outlines the key coastal processes and interactions operating on the coastline and presents the projected extent of the coastal hazards arising from these processes.

Group Manager Planning and Environment

Background

In 2010-11 Council received support funding from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage’s Coast and Estuary Program to complete a Coastal Processes and Hazards Definition Study (the Study). The Study is a precursor to the development of a Coastal Management Plan for the Shire which will set out, through a risk management approach, the strategies, actions and responsibilities Council can implement to effectively manage its responsibilities in the coastal zone. The Study was prepared in accordance with the Guidelines for Preparing Coastal Zone Management Plans (OEH, 2013).

The Study is set out in Volume 1 Final Report as follows:

· Section 1 provides an introduction to the Study;

· Section 2 provides a summary of the geologic framework as well as the key coastal processes operating in the study area;

· Section 3 details the methodology used to assess each coastal hazard and the approach to defining and mapping associated hazard probabilities (the likelihood of a hazard extent) at the immediate, 2050 and 2100 planning timeframes; and

· Section 4 discusses the outcomes of the coastal hazard assessment for each beach compartment.

Volume 2 Figures Compendium provides a suite of hazard maps for the combined beach erosion and shoreline recession hazards and coastal inundation hazards along the coastline at the immediate, 2050 and 2100 planning periods. These hazards maps provide the hazard assessment lines related to likelihood of occurrence ‘almost certain’, ‘unlikely’ and ‘rare’.

As of 13 November 2015 the Minster for Planning has announced the Stage 2 reforms for coastal management in NSW. The centrepiece to this reform package is the replacement of the current Coastal Protection Act 1979 with a new Coastal Management Act. Part of this reform package is the change from ‘Coastal Zone Management Plan’ to ‘Coastal Management Plan’. This Council report utilises this new terminology. Council staff will keep abreast of this new legislation and ensure plans and actions implemented are consistent with all new requirements.

Council received 50:50 funding from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage’s Coast and Estuary Program to complete the Study.

Issues

Legal

There are no direct legal implications from the completion or adoption of the Study. However, the Study will feed into the development of a Coastal Management Plan (CMP) which will look at a range of issues and actions, through a risk management approach, regarding the management of the coastal zone. Through completing the Study, Council is meeting its due diligence in terms of compiling and making available the best available information to the community regarding coastal hazards in the Shire.

Policy

There are no direct policy implications from the completion of the Study but, through future work on a CMP, the Bega Valley Development Control Plan 2013 is likely to require updating in terms of standards as well as development application requirements and assessment considerations. Future updates of the Bega Valley Local Environment Plan 2013 may also emanate from the future CMP.

Environmental

The Study itself is a valuable contribution to the understanding of the physical processes affecting the Bega Valley Shire’s coastline. This understanding will allow Council to complete a risk assessment, as part of a CMP, for various land uses in the coastal zone including natural areas. In particular those natural areas adjacent to human developments will be assessed with appropriate management options proposed.

Strategic

The Study assists Council to better understand and manage coastal hazards in the Shire. It will play a key role in Council’s land use planning functions by providing critical information for the development of the CMP. The CMP will develop a risk based assessment for coastal land in the Shire and propose a range of management approaches, including planning controls for the coastal zone.

Consultation

Council’s Coastal Planning and Management Committee have been briefed on the preparation and progress of the Study throughout its development. The consultants that prepared the Study presented to the Committee on two occasions (15 August 2013 and 6 March 2015) and Council staff provided an update of the Study at each Committee meeting during the project.

The draft Study was also presented to Councillors at a Workshop prior to public exhibition.

The Study was placed on public consultation for 5 weeks in July and August 2015. Copies of the Study were made available at each of the Shire’s libraries. A media release and interview with ABC South East were completed and all documents were accessible on the Shire’s website. However, no submissions were received as part of this public consultation process.

Operational Plan

The completion of the Study helps meet ‘Outcome Area S1.2’ within the 2015-16 Operational Plan being: ‘The coastal zone remains our premier natural asset and is protected through appropriate land use planning, infrastructure siting and regulated resource usage.’

Conclusion

The Study is a valuable contribution to Council and community understanding of the coastal processes affecting the Shire’s coast and will be used as the basis for the development of a Bega Valley Shire Coastal Management Plan.

The links below provide access to the Final Report and Figures Compendium (please note that they are both large files and may take some time to download).

Coastal Processes and Hazard Definition Study Final Report (10MB)

Coastal Processes and Hazard Definition Study Figures Compendium (40MB)

A hard copy of the Final Report (Volume 1) and the Figures Compendium (Volume 2) will be tabled at the meeting and is available upon request.

Attachments

Nil

Recommendation

That Council adopts the Bega Valley Shire Coastal Processes and Hazards Definition Study Volume 1 Final Report and Volume 2 Figures Compendium.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 8.4

8.4. DA No. 2015.82: Regularisation of unauthorised additions to attached dual occupancy, 2 Coraki Drive, Pambula Beach

Group Manager Planning and Environment

Applicant	Robert Pointon
Owner	RW & MD Pointon
Site	Lot 46 DP 1054833, 2 Coraki Drive, Pambula Beach
Zone	R2 Low Density Residential
Site area	3,864 metres square
Proposed development	Regularisation of unauthorised alterations and additions to attached Dual Occupancy

Precis

Council is in receipt of a Development Application (DA) for the regularisation of unauthorised alterations and additions to an attached dual occupancy, comprising a water tank with supporting rock retaining wall, a timber and steel deck 10.5 metres x 4 metres, concrete supporting structure and spa pool.

A total of 327 submissions were received raising objection to the development.

The Application is reported to Council for determination on the basis of the broader public interest considerations for the locality.

This matter was reported to Council on 14 October 2015. Following an address to Council by the applicant Council resolved;

“That the matter be deferred for a site inspection by Councillors and suitable staff and for further report to Council’.

The site meeting was undertaken on 2 December 2015 and comment below is provided by staff on relevant matters raised in the address to Council.

The DA is recommended for refusal. Further, it is also recommended by staff to commence legal proceedings in relation to the breach of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Background

In 2007, Council issued a Development Consent (2007.137) for demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of an attached dual occupancy.

The approved plans endorsed a landscape detail that included a 20,000 litre water tank to be located behind existing sheds, adjacent to the south-west property boundary. The approved plans did not endorse any plan or specification for a water tank. This is not an uncommon practice as domestic rainwater tanks constructed of this capacity are commonly only 2-3 metres in height and have little or no impact on local amenity. Had the water tank been constructed in the approved location, it would have been screened by the existing sheds on the property.

Without consultation with Council, the property owner decided the tank would be constructed approximately 10m to the north of the approved location and in a slightly elevated position.

Work progressed from that point to what is today a substantial mass rock retaining wall, water tank (with an approximate 12,500 litre capacity) attached to which is a concrete tower with a timber and steel deck platform, designed to accommodate a spa pool.

Council became aware of works being undertaken on the land via public concern. As a result of a site inspection and onsite meeting, the owner was advised to cease works and submit a DA for the consideration of Council.

Following initial assessment, the applicant was requested to consider issues raised in regard to impacts on visual amenity, bulk and scale. Staff suggested the applicant may wish to provide additional supporting information relating to possible treatments of both the structure and the provision of suitable vegetation screening. Landscaping and colour treatment details were subsequently submitted by the applicant and have been considered in the assessment of the development application.

Photograph of structure when viewed from Pambula River Estuary

Description of the proposal

The DA seeks regularisation of unauthorised alterations and additions to an attached dual occupancy, comprising a water tank with supporting rock retaining wall, a timber and steel deck 10.5 metres x 4 metres, concrete supporting structure and spa pool.

A copy of the development plans is provided as Attachment 1 to this report.

Description of the site

The subject land is an irregular shaped block of 3,864 square metres, with road frontage to Coraki Drive and foreshore to the Pambula River estuary. The site accommodates an attached dual occupancy and various outbuildings. An internal concrete driveway accesses the land from Coraki Drive up to and including a metal shed and continues through to an unnamed laneway to Taleban Street.

A Locality Plan is provided as Attachment 2 to this report.

Planning assessment

The proposal has been assessed in accordance with the Matters for Consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The assessment has also included consideration of the objectives of State Environmental Planning Policy 71 (Coastal Protection).

A copy of the assessing officer's Section 79C assessment will be available at the meeting.

Zoning

The subject land is zoned R2 Low Density Residential Zone under the provisions of the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (BVLEP 2013). The proposed development would be defined as ‘structures ancillary to an attached dual occupancy’, which is permissible with development consent.

The objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential Zone are as follows;

· To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment.

· To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

The objectives of the zone have been considered in the assessment of this application.

Issues

The assessment of the application has identified several key issues which are discussed in detail below.

Impact on a sensitive coastal location

The subject site is located within the Coastal Zone and is identified as a ‘sensitive coastal location’ for the purpose of State Environmental Planning Policy 71 (Coastal Protection). In considering any development within the coastal zone a consent authority must have regard for the relevant objectives and provisions of the SEPP.

Staff have identified the following matters are particularly relevant to the application currently before Council;

Clause 2 objectives:

(e) to ensure that the visual amenity of the coast is protected; and

(k) to ensure that the type, bulk, scale and size of development is appropriate for the location and protects and improves the natural scenic quality of the surrounding area;

Clause 8 matters for consideration:

(d) the suitability of development given its type, location and design and its relationship with the surrounding area.

Clause 5.5 of BVLEP 2013 is also relevant to the assessment of this application, in particular the need for a consent authority to be satisfied that the principles of the NSW Coastal Policy are implemented. The following is most relevant to this application;

(1) (b) to:

(i) protect, enhance, maintain and restore the coastal environment, its associated ecosystems, ecological processes and biological diversity and its water quality; and

(ii) protect and preserve the natural, cultural, recreational and economic attributes of the NSW coast; and

(v) protect amenity and scenic quality; and

(vi) protect and preserve rock platforms, beach environments and beach amenity; and

(vii) protect and preserve native coastal vegetation;

(ix) ensure that the type, bulk, scale and size of development is appropriate for the location and protects and improves the natural scenic quality of the surrounding area; and

(x) ensure that decisions in relation to new development consider the broader and cumulative impacts on the catchment; and

(xii) protect and preserve items of heritage, archaeological or historical significance.

The subject site is located adjacent to a significant area of public open space which connects with the Council Reserve at the end of Coraki Drive, proceeds along the Pambula River foreshore and on to the Pambula River Walking Track located in the adjoining Ben Boyd National Park.

This section of the foreshore provides an important interface between the coastline, the estuary and adjoining residential areas. Staff consider the proposal is inconsistent with the objectives and principles of the NSW Coastal Policy, SEPP 71 and BVLEP Clause 5.5 in that the development results in an over-scaled, overbearing structure adjacent to foreshore reserve and is not in context with the natural setting in which it has been located.

Impact on the amenity of the public domain

In considering the applicant’s request to regularise the existing structure, staff have had regard to the planning principles established in Rose Bay Marina Pty Limited v Woollahra Municipal Council and anor [2013] NSWLEC 1046. The framework of the planning principle concerning impacts on views enjoyed from the public domain is broadly consistent with (but not identical to) the matters raised for consideration in Tenacity (which sets out the planning principle for considering the acceptability of the impact of a proposed development on the views enjoyed from private property in the vicinity of the development). The process for considering public views must account for reasonable development expectations as well as the public enjoyment of outlooks from public places.

The key public places which were identified for the purpose of assessing impact were the Pambula River Mouth Reserve and foreshore areas and the adjoining National Park.

Staff consider the placement of a such a substantial solid and imposing structure has significant adverse impacts on the amenity of the adjoining public domain. The location, size and design of the structure breaks the visual linkage between the natural landscape and the residential area above. The materials used and the overall bulk and scale of the structure are also considered to be out of character with this sensitive coastal foreshore setting.

In addition, the structure is of a size and has used materials that dominate the landscape, and has no spatial relationship or design connectivity with the old timber beach huts located in the immediate vicinity which forms part of the important visual link to the passive recreation amenity and enjoyment of the area and its iconic character.

The applicant was encouraged by staff to explore design treatments that may mitigate the severe visual impact of the tower’s concrete column. Additional information was submitted to Council for consideration that included the painting of the tower and planting of additional landscaping at the base of the tower, which would include the planting of semi-mature trees.

After reviewing the additional detail, staff concluded the proposed treatments would have little effect in negating the visual dominance of the tower when viewed from both the adjoining foreshore areas and the National Park.

Staff consider a more skilful and considered design could have achieved the reasonable expectations of the applicant whilst minimising the impact on the public domain. Staff have concluded the development as constructed is unreasonable and therefore cannot support regularisation of the development.

Height, bulk and scale

Height

The proposal exceeds the building height development standard of Clause 4.3 of BVLEP 2013 by approximately 1.5 metres. This results in a built form which unreasonably contributes to the bulk and scale of the development and has an adverse impact on the foreshore amenity of the adjoining public lands.

The objectives of BVLEP 2013 Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings are as follows;

(1) The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a) to retain the existing character and landscape of the locality and to encourage a low-set building form;

(b) to protect residential amenity, views, privacy and solar access.

(2) The height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map.

The maximum building height for this site is 7.5 metres. The term ‘building’ is defined to include “part of a building and any structure or part of a structure but not including a manufactured home, a moveable dwelling or associated structure."

A conservative interpretation of the structure height from both site inspection and from submitted plans confirms an overall height of 9 metres, representing an exceedance of 1.5 metres.

The combination of both the overall height and the use of materials result in a structure that is not sympathetic to the location and therefore staff consider the development fails to satisfy the objectives and overall height limitations stipulated in Clause 4.3 of the BVLEP 2013.

Bulk and scale

It appears that the applicant has constructed the tower to place the spa at a level with unimpeded views to the estuary. It is the view of staff that an improved design could have been achieved by placement of the spa on natural ground at or near the level of the second storey of the existing residential development. Such a location would have been in keeping with the existing residential and beach interface, while at the same time retaining reasonable view and amenity for the landowner. This alternative location and design would have maintained the views and amenity afforded to the public from the adjoining beach areas and river.

The location and design of the structure is considered to be unreasonable and staff cannot support regularisation of the development for the reasons highlighted in this report.

Consultation

National Parks & Wildlife

As the property adjoins the Ben Boyd National Park, staff consulted with the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH).

The OEH response identifies not only concern the structure was built without appropriate planning approval, but also expressed the opinion that it has a significant impact on the visual amenity of the Pambula River Estuary. OEH is of the view that proposed works to mitigate the impact would not be successful as the vegetation screening is unlikely to adequately cover the structure and the primary planting chosen to screen the area is a species that is not likely to grow well in this location.

Submissions

The development application was placed on exhibition for a period of 25 days from 25 March 2015 until 10 April 2015 and a total of 327 submissions were received.

The key issues raised in the submissions centre on the impact the structure has had on the scenic amenity of this coastal estuary and clearly express the community’s attachment to the natural landscape amenity of the locality and the desire to ensure development impacts are minimised.

A number of the submissions draw Council’s attention to the fact that appropriate consideration of the design has not been possible because the structure has in fact been substantially erected. It is suggested that if properly considered, Council would have formed the view that any structure in this locality of similar height and size would not have obtained consent to proceed.

While some of the submissions have no bearing on matters relating to Council’s assessment, staff support the general view of the submissions that the structure has an unacceptable impact on what is an iconic South Coast setting.

A copy of the submissions will be available at the Council meeting.

Legal

The retaining rock wall, tower, deck and spa form an overall structure that required both development consent and construction certification. Detailed planning, organisation and coordination of engineering design, trades and labour would have been needed to execute what are significant works that required engineering certification for a complex design that incorporates substantial foundations and other structural considerations.

It is difficult to rationalise why the applicant believed that no approval was necessary for a structure of this magnitude. A simple enquiry to Council would have cleared any doubt as to a requirement for an approval. Staff can only speculate the owner’s intent was to erect the structure and be concerned about repercussions after the event.

As the works proceeded without consent it is difficult to determine the extent of vegetation that would have existed in this location. Given the extent of vegetation on both sides of the tower it is likely that substantial vegetation cover may have been removed.

A further concern in regard to development proceeding without any approval is that assessment has not been undertaken of possible indigenous cultural heritage that is commonly encountered in similar estuary locations in the Shire.

Staff are of the view the erection of the structure represents a serious breach of a legislative requirement to obtain approval to ensure that relevant matters including design and impact (not only to the landscape but importantly to public amenity) are taken into consideration. It is recommended that not only should the owner of the land be required to remove the unauthorised structures, but should also be prosecuted for the offences related to the erection of the structure.

While staff have the necessary delegations to prosecute the offence, it is important that this matter be reported to Council to highlight to the community the importance of ensuring appropriate approvals are in place prior to undertaking development.

It also serves to inform the community that Council does take matters of this nature seriously and will take action in such circumstances.

Staff comment on relevant matters raised by the applicant in the address to Council 14 October 2015

The applicant has suggested that consent is not required for elements of the structure as it now appears and has indicated that the water tank (tower) and retaining wall had consent. The argument put by staff in the body of this report is that the applicant cannot simply relocate a proposed water tank from the location as approved in 2007 without first obtaining consent to undertake the work. The only avenue open to the applicant is to seek consent from Council for the entire structure (including the spa).

It has been put to Council that the only opportunity to view the structure is from private property which is owned by the applicant. This statement is incorrect as the public can access the large area of beach in crown ownership to the west of the development site either by the access afforded by the applicant over their property or via Taleeban Street through the adjacent National Park or directly from the estuary. The legislation applicable to matter considers a public place to include the whole of the estuary including beach and waterways and adjacent National Park.

Based on information provided by the applicant and on-site appraisal the structure is approximately 1.5m higher than the maximum height permitted by BVLEP 2013. While the applicant does not accept the degree of non-compliance, there has been acknowledgement that the structure exceeds the height requirement.

Conclusion

The development application seeks to obtain approval for structures built without consent.

While it is unclear as to the motive and the rationale considered by the owner at the time of construction, staff are strongly of the view the works have had an unacceptable impact on the scenic beauty of this coastal estuary.

Assessing staff are of the view this impact cannot be adequately mitigated by either further treatments to the tower or by use of vegetation screening.

The application is recommended for refusal for the reasons contained within this report. Staff also recommend that notice be served on the owner to remove the unauthorised structures and that the owner should be prosecuted for failing to obtain the relevant consent and construction certification prior to the erection of the retaining wall, concrete tower and steel and timber deck.

Attachments

1. Development Plans

2. Locality Plan

Recommendation

1. That Development Application 2015.82 for the regularisation of unauthorised alterations and additions to an attached dual occupancy (including a rock retaining wall, concrete tower, deck and spa) be refused for the following reasons:

a. The proposed development fails to comply with the maximum building height development standard set by Clause 4.3 of the BVLEP 2013 and is inconsistent with the objectives of the clause in that the development does not retain the existing character and amenity of the locality.

b. The proposed development is inconsistent with the objectives of Clause 5.5 of the BVLEP 2013 and the principles of the NSW Coastal Policy as the development would have an unacceptable impact on a sensitive coastal location, being the Pambula River mouth and its environs in terms of scenic quality and amenity.

c. The proposed development is inconsistent with the objectives of SEPP 71 Coastal Protection as the development fails to ensure the visual amenity of the coast is protected and the type, bulk, scale and size of the development is inappropriate for the location. Further the development fails to protect and improve the natural scenic quality of the surrounding area.

d. The proposal would not be in the public interest.

2. That Council serve notice on the owner to have the unauthorised structure demolished.

3. That the property owner reinstates vegetation to the satisfaction of Council to a standard consistent with the extent of vegetation that currently exists on either side of the tower as it currently stands.

4. That legal proceedings be commenced against the owner of the property seeking prosecution for undertaking the construction of the retaining wall, tower and deck without development consent.

5. Those parties who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 9.1

9.1. Community Project Proposals - Summary and Assessment

This report provides a summary of Community project proposals received over the past 12 months for Council's information and consideration.

Group Manager Community, Relations and Leisure

Background

The community has an important role in helping Council identify and deliver new and/or improvements to community facilities. New proposals, regardless of the project size, that require Council involvement need to be considered in the context of all project elements including funding, personnel, procurement, workplace health and safety, environmental considerations, approvals, compliance and ongoing maintenance. It is also important to consider how the proposed works can link and add value to other Council projects, particularly in terms of the maintenance and replacement of existing assets.

Council staff have recently reviewed and amended the procedure by which community groups can make proposals to Council to undertake projects on land managed by Council. This procedure applies to the full spectrum of projects from small scale to larger scale and through to more complex projects. One of the aims of the procedure is to make sure all relevant project issues are considered and addressed.

The procedure details how Bega Valley Shire Council (BVSC) will receive, assess and manage project proposals by committees and community groups for the development and delivery of community infrastructure, civil assets and facilities. A key aspect of the procedure is the reporting of proposals to Council for consideration.

The challenge is to give proposals the consideration they need and deserve and to work out where they fit with other planned and programed works. The level of resourcing and contribution sought from Council is an important consideration.

The level of information required needs to be sufficient to enable the merits and issues of proposals to be adequately considered by officers, before going to Council. This initial assessment by staff seeks to minimise wasted effort (or expense) on proposals that may not obtain approval due to funding, planning or other reasons.

The complete Community Project Proposal Procedure and the Proposal Form is available on Council's website. Project proposals can be submitted using the Community Project Proposal Form ‘Attachment A’ and submitted to council@begavalley.nsw.gov.au

This report contains proposals for the last 12 months, it is envisaged these will be presented on a quarterly basis to Council for consideration and noting in the future.

Issues

Legal

There can be legislative elements that come into effect if the implications of works are not understood and accounted for in the project development stage. These include environment and heritage, access and building code compliance, planning and development approvals and in some instances land ownership.

Policy

Council’s Procedure 1.3.3 Community Project Proposals has been developed to manage project proposals by committees and community groups for the development and delivery of community infrastructure, civil assets and facilities.

The objective is to provide a clear and consistent approach for Council Officers, committees and community groups across the broad range of project types, scale, funding sources and delivery methods.

The Community Project Proposal Form is designed to achieve the following outcomes:

· Consistency of procedure and information required for all committee and community group initiated community infrastructure, civil assets and facility projects

· Assist committee and community groups to prepare proposals for Council consideration;

· Minimise the requirement for Council to seek additional information

· Assist Council to consider the merits of the proposals

· Prevent work on detailed proposals that cannot proceed (or need to be significantly modified) due to funding, planning, technical or other reasons

· Identify other funding opportunities for proposals

· Determine project management and/or project delivery responsibilities by the community group, Council and/or contractors; and

· Consider possible links and relationships with other facilities and programs.

Submission of a Community Project Proposal does not guarantee approval. On occasions projects deemed as suitable, may for a number of reasons including available resources be unable to proceed in the first instance. In these circumstances it may be appropriate for Council to formalise in-principle support for the project as this may provide opportunities for the applicant to source funding through other agencies.

Asset

Council has an adopted capital works programs included within the asset management structure. Asset management capital works programs are based on asset renewal (e.g. replacing existing assets to meet a similar service or provision level). The large majority of projects proposed by the community relate to new works or significant upgrades of existing assets. As such provision has not been made for including proposed projects in capital works programs already part of Asset Management Plans.

Social / Cultural

The community has an important role in helping Council identify and deliver new and/or improvement projects. Council recognises and values the important role and contribution of committees, community groups and volunteers in the management, operation and maintenance of Council infrastructure, civil assets and facilities.

Strategic

Council has a number of strategic and operational plans that outline the current and future priorities of infrastructure, civil assets and facilities. For example Asset Management Plans identify current assets, their condition and when they will need to be replaced. The Long Term Financial Strategy outlines how Council will pay for the replacement or upgrade of those assets.

Consultation

In reviewing the Community Project Proposal Procedure consultation was undertaken with Council's Access Committee, the S355 Sportsground Committee and also through a workshop involving representatives of service organisations from across the Shire.

The project proposal form includes a section on stakeholder engagement in which the applicant can identify the consultation they have undertaken and feedback they have received in the development of their proposal.

Financial

Committees, community groups and volunteers often seek funding and grant opportunities to support their project proposal. It is important these people talk with Officers prior to applying for funding to do work on Council assets. This ensures the amount being sought is sufficient to complete the works and there is a level of coordination to prevent already approved projects competing with new projects for the same grants.

The table below shows a summary of Community Project Proposal applications received over the last 12 months. Some applications do not require funding from Council only permission and as such have been approved and completed.

Resources (including staff)

To fund projects can mean reviewing, reprioritising or deferring existing projects. This is possible however there needs to be very clear justification of the need and reasoning to do so. As an example there are six projects in the current capital works program with a total value of less than $50k. To fund the outstanding $41k request for minor and medium projects, would likely affect the delivery of one of these projects. To provide funding for the outstanding major projects contributions requests totalling $699k, will have a significant impact on scheduled works requiring a number of projects to be deferred. It is probable there will be disappointment when scheduled works are deferred in favour of new project proposals.

Another area of resourcing is ensuring there are suitable Council staff resources available to clarify roles and responsibilities in project delivery ensure project development requirements have been completed and to assist and provide advice to the community group as required.

The Community Project Proposal Summary is attached to this report. In the summary it is noted where no resourcing has been requested from Council and there have been no other unacceptable project risks identified, approvals to progress have been issued by staff.

Operational Plan

Relevant key directions identified in the Council’s Operational Plan 2015 – 2016 are:

S4 Proactive support and planning: There is proactive planning with the community for the protection of our built and natural environment.

A2 Facilities and services: Our infrastructure, facilities and services are strategically planned, located, designed and maintained to meet our local and visiting community needs.

Conclusion

The Community Project Proposal Process seeks to provide a consistent framework for Council to receive and consider the wide range of suggestions for infrastructure projects put forward by the community. Often these projects relate to new works or major upgrades and as such have not been identified in the development of capital works programs included in Asset Management Plans.

Attached to this report is a summary of the Project Proposals received including comments and a recommendation. Hard copies of each of the full proposals received and the project assessment checklist have been distributed to Councillors for their reference and review.

Attachments

1. Attachment Community Project Proposal Summary 2015

Recommendation

1. That the report be received and noted.

2. That Council note those Community Project Proposals already approved.

3. That Council adopt the following recommendations for outstanding Community Project Proposals:

a. Council provide in-principle support to the Bermagui Chamber of Commerce for the installation of outdoor gym and fund requested amount if additional funding becomes available.

b. Council provide in-principle support to the Montreal Goldfields Committee for the resurfacing of their carpark and fund requested amount if additional funding becomes available.

c. Council provide in-principle support to the Tathra Headland and Wharf Access Group to enable the applicant to investigate other funding opportunities; noting the Council resolution of 12/08/2015 referring the proposal to the discussion about ‘headline projects’ to determine its priority against other ‘headline projects’.

d. Request Eden Whalers AFL Club to provide further information regarding the upgrade of lighting on the AFL field to reduce risk of unexpected cost and or delays.

e. Council provide in-principle support to Campbell Page Eden for the Eden Skate Park revamp to enable them to investigate other funding opportunities.

f. Council continue to work with the Merimbula Special Events Committee to identify suitable projects.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 9.2

9.2. Conversion of building to library and community facility at Tura Beach

This report details the outcome of negotiations with Edwards Construction following Council's rejection of all tender submissions for tender RFT 64/15 for the building conversion, renovation and fit-out of the old Tura Beach Tavern into a library and community facility.

Group Manager Community, Relations and Leisure

Background

A full background of this project is provided in report 9.3 in the Agenda of the Ordinary Council Meeting of 14 October 2015.

Discussions have been held with Edwards Construction Pty Ltd (the Builder) to identify opportunities within the tender specification scope of works to reduce the overall cost of the undertaking a building conversion, renovation and fit-out of the old Tura Beach Tavern into a library and community facility.

Materials, works and design changes were identified that would seek to reduce costs, but not compromise the delivery of a high quality, functional facility that met the needs of the community and was fit for purpose. Initial discussion focussed on those items that were not required but would be nice to have but not essential, then on the materials being used and seeking alternatives that provide the same effect or function but without the cost, and finally more drastic measures of design changes to limit demolition works and simplify construction requirements.

Despite this review of the project and identification of a range of changes within the broad scope of the tender specifications, the savings that were identified were minimal given the overall cost of the project. To implement the savings identified there would need to be a review of the Development Application and the Construction Certificate with a possible re-issuing of these documents. This would likely cause some delays. If plans had to be redrawn or amended this would also add to the cost of the project and reduce any savings.

As such, this report re-presents the original tender from the Builder for consideration by Council, noting that work will continue with the Builder to identify cost minimisation opportunities that do not compromise the project outcome. Timelines for completion of the project will be revisited once a successful tenderer is appointed.

Issues

Legal

The project has received Development Application consent and a Construction Certificate.

The tender process complied with the Local Government Act 1993 and associated Regulations.

Asset

Tura Beach Library will form part of Council’s building asset register as a building owned and maintained by Bega Valley Shire Council.

Social / Cultural

It should be noted that Tura Beach is the only major population centre in the Bega Valley that does not have a community facility of some description. This area has recorded growth in population and the mix of residents.

It is anticipated the facility will be available outside library operating hours, this is the principle reason the principal entrance is on the Southern side of the building. This entrance allows access to the community meetings rooms after hours maximising use of the facility, provides for passive surveillance of the coming and goings at all times as well as creating a frontage and presence which the building currently lacks.

Strategic

Council adopted a Library Strategic Plan in early 2015 to drive the redevelopment and evolution of library services in the Shire over the next three years. One element of that Strategic Plan (available on Council’s website) is the transition to a new library in Tura Beach and the closure of Merimbula Library.

Consultation

As outlined in the report, consultation has been held with the preferred builder in-line with the Council resolution of the 14 October 2015.

Financial

The original funds identified for fit-out of the facility was $200k from a NSW State Library Capital Grant and $300k from the sale of gaming machine licences previously held by the Tura Beach Tavern and purchased as part of the original sale.

The negotiations and review with the builder of the proposed works did not identify significant savings for the project, however potentially compromised the architectural design of the facility. As such officers have reconsidered the funding models of the project for Council’s consideration.

The revised funding model for this project could use a mix of borrowings, sale of asset and licence, and grant funding. The funding for this project (excl. GST) is as follows:

Funding source		Amount
Sale of gaming licences	$	300,000
Fit-out allocation	$	300,000
Library Capital Grant from NSW Government	$	200,000
Proceeds from sale of the residence (former managers house)*	$	300,000

* The proceeds from the sale of the residence are an estimate as further work is required to prepare the site for sale.

Resources (including staff)

Project management will require officer time to ensure the project is delivered within the financial parameters agreed by Council.

Operational Plan

· Outcome L2.2 - Strengthen Bega Valley Library Service as a centre for life-long learning.

Conclusion

The works to convert a Tavern into a library and community facility requires significant work that has come to light through the Development Application, Construction Certificate and tender processes.

This project will deliver a facility for the Tura Beach community that currently does not exist.

Attachments

Nil

Recommendation

1. That Council receive and note the report.

2. That Council award tender RFT64/15 for the conversion, renovation and fit-out of the old Tura Beach Tavern into a library and community facility to Edwards Builders Pty Ltd for the lump sum price $996,561 (excl. GST) subject to variations and provisional sums.

3. That unsuccessful tenderers be advised of Council’s decision.

4. That Council authorise the General Manager to execute the relevant contracts and documentation for the project to commence.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 10.1

10.1. Merimbula Wharf Public Toilet Facility

A formal agreement needs to be entered into for the management and operation of the Merimbula Wharf public toilet facility.

Group Manager Strategy and Business Services

Background

Bega Valley Shire Council constructed a public toilet at the Merimbula Wharf site in the 1980’s and an agreement to operate the toilets with the Crown Land lease holder was entered into at that time. The original toilets were destroyed during a rock fall incident in the early 2000’s and the public toilets that are currently on the site were rebuilt at that time. Through subsequent leaseholders and relocation of the Merimbula Council Offices, the actual written agreement that was in place has been misplaced.

Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd is the current lease holder of Lot 475 in DP 728039 under Crown lease number 1987/3 which has been in place since 6 April 1990 for the occupation of the Wharf complex. Council holds Crown permissive occupancy number 164163 over the wharf platform, carpark and walkway which is not included within the area leased by Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd. Council, with the agreement of Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd, constructed a public toilet facility within the lease site. The Wharf has its own toilets located within the restaurant for their patrons, the public toilet facility is for public use for visitors to the Wharf.

The public toilet facility is connected to a private sewer pump station and associated gravity and pressure sewer pipes owned by Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd as well as their power supply. Council and Merimbula Aquarium have agreed that Council shall supply management services to maintain and operate the public toilet facility. Council have been paying Merimbula Aquarium an annual agreed sum of $1,100 (including GST), as a contribution towards the use of their private sewer pump station and associated gravity and pressure sewer pipes as well as their power supply.

Issues

Legal

Council’s external legal providers have been engaged to prepare the attached draft Management Deed of Agreement for the public toilet facility and Council resolution is required to enter into the Deed with Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd.

Environmental

The purpose of the Deed is also to ensure Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd keep, repair and maintain the private sewer pump station and associated infrastructure to minimise any environmental risks.

Asset

The Merimbula Wharf public toilet facility belongs to Council.

Consultation

Council staff have consulted with the current lessee of the Merimbula Wharf Aquarium and they are in agreeance that a formal agreement should be put in place for the management of the public toilet facility located within their Crown lease area.

Financial

An annual payment of $1,100 (including GST) increased annually by the Consumer Price Index (All Groups, Sydney) is payable to Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd. Payment is funded from the public toilets budget.

Resources (including staff)

Council property staff and external legal providers will be involved to finalise the relevant paperwork.

Conclusion

It is proposed the attached new Deed of Agreement supersede any previous agreements that existed and Council continue to maintain and operate the public toilet facility as well as make an annual payment of $1,100 (including GST) to Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd increased annually by the Consumer Price Index.

Attachments

1. Draft deed of agreement for Merimbula Wharf Public Toilet Facility

Recommendation

1. That Council enter into a formal Deed of Agreement with Merimbula Aquarium Pty Ltd for the maintenance and operation of the public toilet facility, located on Lot 475 DP 728039 and within Crown lease area 1987/3.

2. That Council authorise the Mayor and General Manager to execute the necessary documentation.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 10.2

10.2. Jigamy Youth Camp Development

This report seeks approval for Council to enter into a Deed of Agreement with Twofold Aboriginal Corporation Incorporated and the Aboriginal Evangelical Fellowship (Family & Youth Services) Incorporated and to grant an easement for Asset Protection Zone purposes over a section of unformed Council road reserve at Broadwater.

Group Manager Strategy and Business Services

Background

Council granted consent in 2011 to the development of a youth camp at Lot 25 DP 750242 Princes Highway, Broadwater. The consent provided that Twofold Aboriginal Corporation (TAC) were to provide an 85m Asset Protection Zone (APZ) in order to comply with NSW Government policy. The APZ required could not be accommodated wholly within TAC’s Lot 25.

Council is the owner and roads authority of an unformed road reserve adjoining the eastern boundary of Lot 25 and as an interim measure, Council resolved in 2010 to enter into a licence agreement with TAC for access over a section of that road reserve for maintenance of the APZ until such time as a formal legal arrangement could be put in place. Several options to provide a permanent legal entitlement have been investigated, one of those being permanent road closure and sale of the required portion to TAC, however as the unformed road provides legal access to a further property, being Lot 116 DP 750242, access cannot be restricted and a road closure application would not receive approval.

Council’s external legal providers sought Senior Counsel advice on the easiest and most cost effective way for TAC to comply with the conditions of their development consent for the youth camp facility. The advice provided that a plan for title issue of the required section of road reserve should be lodged with LPI, with an instrument pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act to be registered over the title which provides an easement for APZ purposes to the benefit of TAC, as well as a positive covenant to the benefit of the Rural Fire Service for TAC to maintain the APZ the subject of the easement.

The documentation and plans to effect the above have now been prepared and a formal Council resolution is sought in order to execute the required documents.

Issues

Legal

Council’s external legal providers have prepared the draft Deed of Agreement, Section 88B Instrument and Request for Title Creation, a copy of which is attached for the information of Councillors. The licence agreement entered into back in 2010 provides that it will formally terminate upon registration of the easement.

Asset

The Council owned road reserve is unformed and does not currently provide access from the Princes Highway to Pambula Lake however the option to do so in the future should not be restricted. The owner of adjoining Lot 116 DP 750242 does not currently use this section of road as their access, however it is their legal access point and should be maintained as a further means of emergency access or egress for that property. The requirement for TAC to maintain the 20m wide section of road reserve for APZ purposes does not prevent use of the road for vehicular access if required.

Consultation

Council planning and property staff, as well as the General Manager, have been liaising with Pastor Ossie Cruse from the Eden Aboriginal Evangelical Fellowship over the years in order to finalise this matter. Chris Bird from the Twofold Aboriginal Corporation has also been consulted regarding the best way to proceed.

Financial

All costs associated with this matter are to be borne by the applicant in accordance with the development consent and original Council resolution. Council Property staff has been advised the Aboriginal Evangelical Fellowship (Family & Youth Services) Inc. lease the site of the Youth Camp from TAC and that all costs associated with finalising this matter should be paid for by that organisation and not the landowner, TAC.

Resources (including staff)

This has been a complex matter to resolve and has required substantial staff resources and comprehensive legal advice since the development consent was issued in 2010. Further property staff resources will be required to finalise this matter.

Conclusion

In order to comply with the conditions of their development consent, Twofold Aboriginal Corporation are required to hold a formal legal entitlement over a portion of adjoining Council road reserve for Asset Protection Zone purposes. Council resolution is now sought to enter into a Deed of Agreement and execute a Section 88B instrument to finalise this matter.

Attachments

1. Council Report - Jigamy Youth Camp Development 9/11/2010

2. Draft Deed of Agreement Jigamy Youth Camp Development

Recommendation

1. That Council enter into a formal Deed of Agreement with Twofold Aboriginal Corporation Incorporated and the Aboriginal Evangelical Fellowship (Family & Youth Services) Incorporated for the provision of an easement for Asset Protection Zone purposes over a portion of Council owned unformed road reserve adjoining Lot 25 DP 750242 at Broadwater.

2. That Council authorise the Mayor and General Manager to execute the necessary documentation.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 10.3

10.3. Old CBC Building in Bega

Council is the appointed Reserve Trust Manager of the building known as the old Commercial Banking Company (CBC) building in Auckland Street, Bega. Council staff has been unsuccessful in obtaining grant funding to carry out works required to enable further occupation of the building and other options for its future need to be considered by Council.

Group Manager Strategy and Business Services

Background

The CBC Building is located on the Bega (R180031) Reserve in Auckland Street, Bega adjoining the Bega Valley Public School. It has been a Council Managed Crown Land asset since 1987. The building has significant heritage value and was listed on the State Heritage Register in April 1999. Through the Heritage Assistance program funding was obtained in 1989/1990 for the restoration of the façade, reinstatement of the original front veranda and exterior painting of the building.

Over the years the building has been occupied by Bega Valley Community Transport Service, who carried out further internal works to the building in 2003, however it has been vacant now since 2010. The building has presented many challenges due to its age, heritage listing status and proximity to the school grounds. The site the building is located on is only 162m2, which encompasses the footprint of the building and does not provide any off street parking. This, together with the lack of adequate accessibility to the building in compliance with today’s building standards, has prevented any further occupation of the site. Substantial works are required to the building to allow further occupation, which include:

· Repairs to leaking roof

· Complete rebuild of the internal staircase to allow use of the second storey

· Upgrades to electrical wiring

· Upgraded access to comply with the Building Code of Australia; and

· Provision of off-street parking.

Cost estimates obtained to carry out the above works were in excess of $60,000 not including the provision and construction of off-street parking within an adjacent unformed road reserve and upgraded access to the lower level of the building. The addition of those costs could see the project value increase to approximately $150,000.

Council staff first presented a report to Council on 3 May 2011 highlighting these issues and seeking a decision on the future management options for the site. Council were provided with the option of conducting an EOI process to seek a community organisation to partner Council in a funding application to carry out the works required and become a tenant of the building at the completion of those works, or to formally write to Crown Lands advising that Council wished to relinquish trusteeship of the Bega (R180031) Reserve Trust, or partner Crown Lands in a possible sale of the building with the proceeds of any sale to be applied as the Minister directs.

Council resolved to continue its search for a suitable community tenant to occupy the building and partner Council in a grant funding application to carry out the works.

The Bega Valley Historical Society displayed a keen interest in taking over occupation of the building and sourcing the funding required to carry out the works. Accordingly Council resolved on 27 February 2013 to grant them a five year licence. Lack of support from their membership as well as many unsuccessful Heritage and Community Building Partnership funding applications prevented the licence going ahead.

Council approval is now being sought to make a formal request under Section 102 of the Crown Lands Act 1989, for the consent of the Minister to sell the building with the proceeds of any sale to be applied as the Minister directs.

Issues

Legal

The Council (as Reserve Trust) would be required to cause a notice to be published in a newspaper circulating within the Bega locality, setting out the date and the terms and conditions of the Trust’s decision, the location of the land and any other prescribed particulars. After a period of 14 days, the Trust must apply to the Minister in writing for consent, giving full details of the proposal.

Initial discussions with Crown Lands staff have indicated that if the Minister’s consent to a sale was obtained, the Trust may be required to direct 50% of the proceeds to the Public Reserve Management Fund, with the remainder of the proceeds directed to be spent on other Reserve Trust assets within the Bega locality.

Asset

The building is a two storey brick dwelling with corrugated iron roof and timber internal walls. It consists of six bedrooms/offices, with a rear skillion containing kitchen and bathroom areas.

Council requested a market valuation and rental assessment for the property in December 2009. The valuation report indicated a current market value of the building in the order of $220 - $240 per week and if the property were to be offered for sale on the open market, it could achieve between $300,000 - $320,000. A current valuation will be requested if Council resolve to seek the Minister’s consent to a proposed sale.

On-going vandalism of the building whilst it remains vacant is a concern, with several unsuccessful attempts by vandals to obtain entry being reported in recent times by both the local Police and adjoining public school staff. The building has been secured as best as possible to prevent any access, however the recent smashing of a glass window has also occurred.

Social / Cultural

The building was built by Nicholas Bouquet in 1865 for the Commercial Banking Company of Sydney. It is understood to have been the first bank in Bega, the first two storey building, and the third building of substance erected in the town. The building is an important reminder of Bega’s early commercial development and its subsequent changes and may lend itself to either commercial offices or restored as a dwelling by any future purchaser, subject to development consent.

Strategic

Council, as the Reserve Trust, can seek consent of the Minister to redirect the proceeds of any sale towards improvements and/or upgrades to other Council Managed Crown Reserves within the Bega area.

Consultation

Council’s Heritage Advisor has attended several on-site inspections over the years to assist staff with the preparation of a scope of works which complies with its Heritage Listing status as well as discuss other management options for the building going forward. He is fully supportive of the proposal to sell the building and use the proceeds on other Reserve Trust assets within the Bega area and is hopeful that any purchaser will have the funds required to restore the building and enable its occupation and use well into the future.

Financial

As mentioned earlier in the report, vandalism to the building has required some funding in recent times.

Resources (including staff)

Property staff resources have been required over the years to establish lease and licence agreements, prepare a scope of works and investigate all options available to Council. Further staff resources will be required to progress a sale of the building.

Conclusion

After many unsuccessful attempts to obtain grant funding to carry out the works required allowing further occupation of the building, it is suggested that a sale of the building and use of the proceeds on other important reserve infrastructure within the township of Bega should now seriously be considered. Accordingly, Council approval is being sought to seek the formal consent of the Minister for Crown Lands to the sale of the building, with the proceeds of any sale to be applied as the Minister directs.

Attachments

1. Council Report - 3 May 2011

2. Council Report - 27 February 2013

Recommendation

1. That Council formally write to the Minister for Crown Lands seeking in-principle consent under Section 102 of the Crown Lands Act 1989 to a sale of the old CBC building located within the Bega Reserve Trust (180031) in Auckland Street, Bega.

2. That approval of the Minister also be sought to direct the proceeds of any sale to other Reserve Trusts within the Bega area managed by the Bega Valley Shire Council.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 10.4

10.4. Lease of Land to Tulgeen Group

The current lease of Council owned vacant land at Taronga Crescent in Bega to the Tulgeen Group for their Riverside Nursery is due to expire in January 2016. Tulgeen wish to expand their nursery development and are seeking a further long term lease of the land.

Group Manager Strategy and Business Services

Background

Council entered into a ten year lease with the Tulgeen Group Incorporated to occupy a portion of vacant land, being part Lot 14 DP 813625 at Taronga Crescent in Bega on 1 February 2006. That lease is due to expire in January next year and Tulgeen are now wishing to secure further long term tenure of the site prior to advancing plans to expand the plant nursery facility.

In addition to the lease of part Lot 14 mentioned above, Tulgeen sought Council approval to occupy a further section of Council owned community land at the rear of their leased site for the purpose of Christmas tree propagation. Council approved a further short term lease of part Lot 28 DP 914639 on 30 November 2010. The expiry date of the new lease was to terminate on the same date as their original lease, being 31 January 2016.

The expansion proposal is to construct a new workcrew shed with associated parking and access roads, as well as an accessible toilet added to the existing workshop building and roof addition to the sales shed within Lot 14 DP 813625. A new community group garden and covered shade shelter is also proposed within Lot 28 DP 914639.

Issues

Legal

In order to grant a lease of five years or more over only part lots of vacant land, a plan for lease purposes will need to be prepared and registered at LPI, which meet with the Registrar General's Directions. Council’s bridge crew use the remainder of Lot 14 DP 813625 for timber storage purposes, so there is no scope for them to occupy the whole of Lot 14.

Tulgeen Group have been advised that all costs associated with establishing any new lease, including surveyor costs to prepare the new plan, would need to be borne by them. Quotations received to carry out the survey works and prepare the deposited plan for lease purposes are in the order of $4,500 - $5,000. LPI registration costs would be in addition to the amounts quoted. Tulgeen have been advised of the likely costs and have agreed to engage the surveyors directly to prepare the plan required.

Policy

The annual rental fee payable by Tulgeen Group is discussed in the financial section of this report, however has been assessed against the criteria contained in Council’s Rental Assessment and Rebate procedure.

Asset

Both Lot 14 DP 813625 and Lot 28 DP 914639 are now classified as Operational land under the Local Government Act 1993. At the time the existing lease was established over Lot 28 it was Community land, however as part of the CLEP adopted in 2013, the site was reclassified to Operational land. Therefore there are no restrictions on Council’s ability to lease the sites and the level of consultation required for Community land no longer applies.

There are no Council plans for use of the sites currently occupied by the Tulgeen nursery and further Council owned vacant land is available within that vicinity if required.

Social / Cultural

Council has always been a strong supporter of the Tulgeen Group and its many ventures, as they provide opportunities to those with a disability that live within the Shire. On that basis, expansion of the existing nursery is supported by Council property staff.

Consultation

Tulgeen Group have provided Council property staff with a copy of their proposed Development Application for the nursery expansion as well as held preliminary meetings and discussions with planning staff. A formal Development Application will be lodged shortly and will require Council’s consent to its lodgement as Landowner.

A referral of the Development Application once lodged to Council’s Development Engineers and Water and Sewer staff will also identify any other issues which may need consideration prior to finalising any new lease documentation.

Financial

At the time the original lease was entered into, the annual rental was set at a nominal fee of $1.00 per annum. Due to the introduction of Council’s new Rental Assessment and Rebate Policy in 2010, the lease for the further section of land for Christmas tree propagation was at the new minimum annual rental fee of $350 (plus GST) per annum and has increased each year to $464 (plus GST) per annum in 2015.

As a rental rebate application had not been completed since 2010, Tulgeen Group was requested to submit a current rebate application form for assessment. A rebate percentage of 99% was achieved due to the high level of community benefit provided by the service. It is proposed the two existing lease areas be combined for any new tenure, with the minimum annual rental fee as per Council’s current fees and charges to apply.

A new market rental valuation was obtained from Opteon Property Group in June 2015, which provided an annual rental fee of $7,200 for both of the part lots occupied. Council would therefore be required to provide an annual property donation for the difference between market rental and the minimum annual rental fee, being $6,736 for the first year of any new lease. This amount would reduce each year as the minimum annual rental fee payable by Tulgeen increases.

Funding source		Amount
Annual property donation from Council	$	6,736

Resources (including staff)

Property staff resources have been required to undertake assessment of Tulgeen Group’s rental rebate application and if a further lease is approved, will be required to prepare the new lease documentation and arrange for its execution. Ongoing management of the lease during its term will also require staff resources as required.

Conclusion

As Council have no immediate plans for use of the site and further expansion of the nursery facility will provide further opportunities for those with a disability, a further 10 year lease to Tulgeen is supported by Council staff.

Attachments

1. Expansion Proposal

Recommendation

1. That Council grant a further 10 year lease to Tulgeen Group Incorporated for their continued occupation of Part Lot 14 DP 813625 and Part Lot 28 DP 914639 at Taronga Crescent in Bega (being approximately 1.247ha) at the minimum annual rental fee as contained in Council’s schedule of fees and charges, currently $510.40 per annum (including GST).

2. That all costs associated with establishing the new lease are borne by Tulgeen Group Incorporated, including any survey, plan preparation and registration costs.

3. That an amount of $6,736, being the balance of the market rental valuation for the site, be shown as a donation from Council’s property rebate fund.

4. That authority is given for the Mayor and General Manager to execute the necessary documents.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 11.1

11.1. Mobile Waste Transfer Services to Remote Villages

At its meeting of 23 September 2015, Council resolved to receive a report on the cost and the provision, in relevant areas of the Shire, of additional temporary waste facilities for seasonal placement.

Group Manager Transport and Utilities

Background

Council has substantially reduced the number of waste facilities over the last 15 years or more, driven by issues of cost and regulatory compliance. Poorly managed landfills were closed at Wonboyn Lake, Burragate, Wyndham, Towamba, Quaama and other locations within the Shire. The closure of these facilities was accompanied by improvements to collection services and centralising landfill at a single best practice landfill site with resource recovery and transfer facilities at Eden, Bermagui and Merimbula to replace landfill activities at these main population centres. Transfer facilities are also in place at Wallagoot, Cobargo, Bemboka and Candelo.

Members of the Wonboyn Lake community have requested that Council provide a local service for the disposal of garden waste. The community practice of disposal by burning at the old landfill site ceased as a result of Council notification in light of potential regulatory and environmental risk concerns approximately three years ago.

Council has held a position that disposal of garden waste at Eden Recycling and Waste Depot remains the preferred practice, as the site is supervised and the waste is recycled rather than being burned. It is understood the local community believe that a 40km one way trip to use the Eden waste and recycling depot is too costly due to travel and user fees to meet local needs.

It is further understood the Wonboyn Lake community do not favour provision of conventional kerbside garden waste collection services similar to those Council provides at over 11,000 properties at other towns and villages in the Shire. The community opposition to provision of a kerbside service seems to be based on the premise that a kerbside service would/could not be adequate to service the needs of the village given the unusually large and seasonally variable quantities of garden waste generated. However no consideration has been given to how a kerbside service could be managed to overcome these issues.

This report provides a comparison of the estimated costs of providing a temporary bulk transfer service compared with the costs of kerbside collection services for consideration.

Issues

It is generally understood that it would be cost prohibitive to provide appropriately managed permanent waste facilities at every remote locality within the Shire. Council wishes therefore to consider a mobile waste transfer service. As the request is understood to relate to garden waste issues at Wonboyn Lake, it is assumed that the mobile waste transfer facility comprises:

· A weekend event based service.

· Either one or two 15 cubic metre transfer bins for garden waste only (transferred for processing at Merimbula)

· Bins dropped off on Friday afternoon or Saturday Morning, then picked up Saturday afternoon or the following Monday.

· No other infrastructure

Wonboyn is used as a sample location for the reasons outlined in the background to this report. The costing makes no allowance for any fixed infrastructure such as fencing, pavements, signage, platforms, barriers, emergency facilities, amenities etc, which would generally be expected to manage risks in the establishment of basic waste transfer facilities. A 15 cubic metre bin has been chosen as it is the largest size that is practicable to load from ground level and therefore does not necessitate the construction of an elevated platform. However a larger bin is able to be transported by contractors (approximately 30m³) would be far more cost effective but is impractical without substantial supporting infrastructure or the provision of an additional item of plant to load the bin, at further cost.

Legal

If Council proposes to levy an annual charge for a mobile waste transfer service, section 501 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) would be the appropriate legislation. If Council proposes to provide a kerbside service, section 496 of the Act would apply and a charge for the service would be mandatory where it is available, irrespective of usage.

This report has not considered in detail the potential planning, WHS and environmental risks associated with a proposal for a mobile waste transfer service.

Policy

Any proposal to introduce additional waste management services to outlying villages is likely to be consistent with Council’s Waste Services Policy 4.08, provided it is effectively managed and reduces the environmental impact of waste generation.

Environmental

Waste facilities have inherent environmental risks which require effective management. The potential for incidents will generally depend on the scale and level of management of the facility. The regulatory expectations with regard to management of environmental risks at waste facilities are ever-increasing, and penalties can be significant for breaches of legislation.

The types of incidents which have the potential to occur at a mobile waste transfer facility include:

· Illegal dumping outside of operating hours

· Overflowing bins due to capacity issues or unsupervised dumping out of hours

· Dumping of hazardous materials including asbestos

· Waste spills

· Unlawful transport and dumping of noxious weeds

· Contamination of garden waste and impact on composting process/product quality

· Dumping of recyclable material as general waste

· Wind-blown litter

· Vermin

· Odour

· Scavenging

· Stormwater runoff (leachate)

· Fire

Suitable measures to manage these environmental hazards would need to be implemented to ensure effective management and reduced risk of environmental harm.

Asset

It is likely that once a mobile transfer service is provided the expectations of increased service level would grow, and community pressure would be to upgrade infrastructure and facilities in line with those expectations. There is potential for public liability claims in relation to the design and management of assets, and it is optimistic to expect that such facilities could be effectively provided and risks appropriately managed in the absence of any supporting infrastructure.

Strategic

Providing effective waste services to the community is consistent with Council’s Waste Management Strategy. The provision of enhanced collection services for recyclable materials is consistent with the Strategy as it is generally the most effective way of providing waste management services to households.

There are significant strategic considerations in providing equitable waste services across the Shire community.

Consultation

This issue has been the subject of considerable consultation between Council and members of the Wonboyn Lake Ratepayer’s Association. At this stage it seems clear the local community desire a service which is both inexpensive, and caters for larger volumes of green waste.

Financial

The provision of mobile waste transfer services is not a cost effective solution to the problem of collection and transport of garden waste from remote towns and villages. There are 95 households in Wonboyn Lake currently receiving domestic waste management services. In order to provide the same or an equitable level of service to all these properties, Council would need to provide a significant amount of waste transfer capacity at significant cost.

To enable every household to access the service with two cubic metres of garden waste (the equivalent of one voucher), six transfer events would be required transferring a total of 190 cubic metres of waste, at a cost of around $8000 ($84/household).

In comparison, provision of an improved, variable frequency kerbside collection service would be the most cost effective option at between $63 and $95 per household per annum. A variable frequency service would include fortnightly collections in spring and summer, and four weekly in autumn and winter. Assuming 20 lifts per annum, the kerbside service would provide capacity to dispose of up to 4.8 cubic metres of garden waste per household per annum. This is more than double the quantity of the mobile transfer service, and should be adequate to meet the needs of most residents. However, if this capacity remains inadequate, provision of a second bin is available as an option. Provision of a kerbside service is far less expensive than a mobile waste transfer facility/service on a unit basis and would be substantially more user friendly.

In addition to being significantly less expensive than a transfer facility, a kerbside service would operate on a full cost recovery basis and therefore would not require the cross subsidy required to operate waste facilities.

Resources (including staff)

Council is advised against providing unsupervised tipping facilities due to the risks and inevitable problems this will pose. Council does not currently possess the labour capacity to provide supervision of mobile waste transfer service events within current approved staffing levels.

Alternatively, roll-out of a kerbside garden waste service would have a reasonable impact on management and administration staff resources in the lead up and during the early stages of service provision, but once established would operate with minimal additional staff cost.

Conclusion

Council should consider the following issues when reviewing options for provision of mobile waste transfer facilities for the following reasons:

· The service will be difficult to provide equitably to all residents if capacity is limited

· The costs are likely to be significantly higher than providing kerbside garden waste services or encouraging self-haul via free vouchers

· The quantity of waste received and therefore the actual cost will be difficult to predict and budget for

· A low or no user charge (heavily subsidised) service will encourage waste generation requiring more waste transfers at higher cost

· The community expectation around level of service at the mobile facility is likely to change over time. Growing expectations to recycle more and provide greater user amenity will come at additional cost and greater subsidy

· The facilities will present a range of environmental and public liability risks which will require effective management at additional cost

· It is probable, depending on Council’s pricing structure (i.e. level of subsidy) that the demand for such a service may extend throughout the Shire further inflating Council’s Waste Services budget.

Given it is Council and the community’s expressed preference to provide a mobile garden waste transfer service, this could be trialled to confirm or establish actual performance and issues.

It is also recommended Council consult further with the community about the potential to provide a kerbside garden waste service at a variable seasonal frequency. Such a service could be provided equitably throughout the Shire subject to the outcome of contractual negotiation and/or procurement process at the completion of the current contract in 2017. Noting that a community provided with this service does not allow individual residents to option out.

Attachments

Nil

Recommendation

1. That Council trial provision of up to three garden waste event services at Wonboyn Lake.

2. That Council engage in discussions with Cleanaway and the Wonboyn Lake community with a view to conducting a trial kerbside garden waste service at Wonboyn Lake in the 16-17 financial year.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 11.2

11.2. RFT 31/15 Airport management, operations and maintenance services

Council has received tenders for the management of operations and maintenance services at the Merimbula Airport.

General Manager

Background

Over 2013 and 2014 a number of Councillor Workshops, Council Reports, public consultation meetings and community discussion took place regarding the future operational management of Merimbula Airport.

Council considered four basic models namely (1) Direct Management, (2) Contract Management, (3) Lease Management and (4) Private Ownership and resolved to exclude Direct Management and Private Ownership.

While further consideration was given to the Direct Management model, Council finally adopted the following Resolution on the 4 February 2015.

1. That Council resolve to call for Expressions of Interest from interested bodies to enter into an appropriate, legally binding instrument for the air services operations of the Merimbula Airport with the objective of providing the maximum benefit to the community of the Bega Valley.

2. That the statement of council requirements dated 30 January 2015 be adapted to inform the Expressions of Interest.

Accordingly, EOI documentation was prepared by Council officers and reviewed by an independent industry consultant, Cr Britten and Cr Mc Bain. EOI 31/15 was publicly advertised via Tenderlink. Three formal submissions were received.

At its meeting on 22 July 2015 Council considered the responses to the EOI and resolved:

1. That Council invite Airport Agencies Pty Ltd, IAS Airports Pty Ltd and Ambidji Group Pty Ltd to submit tenders in relation to the management and operation of Merimbula Airport.

2. That the tender documentation and tender evaluation plan be commissioned by the General Manager from an independent body and cover operation and management options.

3. That the General Manager be authorised to appoint an independent tender assessment panel to assess tenders under the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and report to her at the conclusion of the evaluation process.

Following the meeting the following actions were taken to enact the recommendation:

1. Councillors and several interested external parties were advised of the probity requirements of this process. There has been no inappropriate contact from tenderers, external bodies or Councillors throughout this process.

2. The three invited companies were formally advised of their shortlisting and provided an outline of the process and timelines. Regular updates on the development of the process and the requirements of tenderers were also provided to all three.

3. A Probity Advisor was appointed from NSW Public Works to provide advice and oversight of the tender process from preparation of the tender schedule of tasks, tender documentation, through onsite meetings, development of tender assessment process and criteria including appropriate weightings, and attendance at tender briefings and assessment.

4. An independent aviation company was appointed to provide technical advice on the aviation aspects of the tender documentation, review of Request for Tender (RFT) documents, and to participate on the tender assessment panel.

5. An independent tender assessment panel member with local government and airport management experience was appointed to the evaluation panel.

6. The General Manager acted as chairperson of the tender evaluation panel.

7. The Council’s newly appointed Procurement Coordinator acted as administrative support throughout the process and to the panel.

The Council Tender required the successful tenderer to:

· Manage, operate and maintain the Airport operation in line with Council’s strategic and commercial objectives identified within the RFT; and

· Provide specialised input into commercially variable arrangements for the implementation of the Merimbula Airport Master Plan.

· To establish an effective management model for the day to day operation and maintenance management of the Merimbula airport that:

· Benefits the community

· Meets anticipated demand growth

· Drives future development of the airport precinct; and

· Ensures the long term viability of the airport operation.

The selected commercial model for the Tender was a fee for services, provided over a fixed five year period which at Council’s discretion may be extended for a further five year term pending performance against pre-determined Key Result Areas (KRA’s) which will be included in the final agreed contract.

The submissions were evaluated based on evident capacity to deliver the Council’s strategic and commercial objectives outlined in the RFT, and support the Council in meeting its social, economic, and regulatory objectives.

Each member of the Tender Evaluation Panel signed the Council’s Code of Conduct for the Tender process and no conflicts of interest (pecuniary/non-pecuniary) were declared.

Scoring Non-price criteria:

The Tender Evaluation Panel members individually read the Tenders, evaluated the information submitted by each Tenderer and scored each evaluation criterion with a score out of 100 using the following weightings table. A guide was provided to all panel members, which outlined indicative examples of low, medium and high submissions.

Each non-price criterion was scored out of 100 using the following scale:

100	Meets all requirements of an ideal tender.
80	Meets most requirements of an ideal tender.
60	Meets a reasonable number of the requirements of an ideal tender.
40	Meets the minimum requirements but is only just satisfactory for this criterion.
<40	Fails to meet the minimum requirements. At the TEC’s discretion, it may pass over the tender or allocate a score that it considers appropriate.

Evaluation Criteria:

CRITERIA	WEIGHTING
THE SOLUTION
Tenderer’s responses and approach to meeting Council’s objectives and community expectation.	5%
Proven track record in providing similar services and demonstrated capacity to deliver successful outcomes for each KRA listed in the Service Section.	10%
The effectiveness of the proposed airport operating methodology, governance and assurance, and business, operational and financial management plans to deliver the KRAs.	15%
THE TEAM
Proposed organisation structure demonstrating experience and capacity in providing management, operation and maintenance service e of similar regional airports.	10%
VIABILITY, CAPACITY & CAPABILITIES
Tenderer’s Balance sheet and financial capabilities.	5%
The effectiveness of the community, quality, health, safety and environmental management plans.	5%
Track record of compliance with relevant regulatory and statutory requirements.	5%
Examples or proposed business development and airport promotion strategy.	5%
VALUE FOR MONEY
The monthly lump sum fee for service.	25%
The cost structure including base cost, overheads, and Margins.	5%
Risk sharing appetite represented in performance incentive regime.	10%

The Panel met on two occasions and a confidential report is currently being prepared for Councillors. This will be circulated prior to the Council meeting along with the Probity Report on the process.

Issues

Legal

The RFT has been undertaken in accordance with the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 as a Selective Tender process.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) is the statutory authority that conducts the safety regulation of civil air operations in Australia, including the regulation of certified and registered aerodromes.

The Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and associated Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005, establishes a regulatory regime to safeguard against unlawful interference with aviation.

Policy

Council does not have a policy position on the ownership, management and operation of the Airport. However, within Council’s Community Strategic Plan the importance of the Airport directly relates to the CSP Themes of: Enterprising Place, through support of the local economy and the tourism industry; and Accessible Place, as part of an integrated transport network and support of emergency services. Indirectly the operations of the Airport support Liveable Place by providing access to specialist medical and educational services.

Asset

Merimbula Airport is located in an environmentally sensitive area, between Merimbula Lake to the west and bushland areas to the east of Arthur Kaine Drive, where extensive foreshore dunes form part of Merimbula Beach. There are also wetland areas to the south, south west and east of the runway and within the airport site itself. The areas are environmentally significant and wetland areas are identified in SEPP14.

The Airport infrastructure is a significant and capital intensive asset. The ongoing maintenance, renewal and upgrade of the Airport are vital for safe, secure and reliable aviation operation. To this end, there is a need for substantial commitment of resources, particularly capital funding, over a long period of time.

Social / Cultural

Community benefit is arguably the main reason why Council owns and operates an Airport. Airport operations are seen as a vital component of an overall integrated transport network, which links the Bega Valley with capital cities. The Airport provides essential links for professional, legal, specialist and medical services as well as passengers for tourism, employment and business.

Economic

The economy of the Bega Valley has been traditionally dominated by primary industry including agriculture, forestry and fishing. While these industries are still significant, a number of other key sectors have developed, in particular, tourism and remote area employment. There is growing momentum for projects linking air freight from the area. The Airport as part of the regional/national transport network provides access to business markets and thereby significant support to the local economy at the same time airport operations generate a direct economic benefit.

Strategic

The Merimbula Airport Master Plan is the major strategic driver for the Airport. The Airport is a critical element of Council’s transport strategic direction and its management into the future will be critical to ensure the best outcomes for the community.

Resources (including staff)

This RFT process has been resource intensive and required the support of Council staff outside the usual process and the appointment of external support.

Financial

The current adopted budget provides no management allocation for the Merimbula Airport. When a final decision is made and contracts finalised appropriate adjustments will be made in the next quarterly budget review.

The costs of appointing the Probity Advisor and independent panel membership has been covered by the Merimbula Airport Reserve.

Operational Plan

The management models for the Merimbula Airport have been in an action item the Council’s operational plan for several years.

Conclusion

This report provides information about the tender evaluation process and advice by way of confidential memorandum on assessment of the received tenders and provides recommendations for Council to consider.

Attachments

Nil

Recommendation

1. That Council accept the recommendations as outlined in the confidential attachment.

2. That Council accept the tender submission from <insert> in relation to the airport management, operations and maintenance services RFT 31/15 5, in the amount of <insert> (including GST), subject to variations and provisional sum items.

3. That authority is delegated to the General Manager to execute all necessary documentation.

4. That other tenderers be advised of Council’s decision.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 11.3

11.3. Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee - 2 December 2015

This report recommends Council adopt the advice of the Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee from their meeting held 2 December 2015.

Group Manager Transport and Utilities

Background

The Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee held a meeting on 2 December 2015, the Minutes of which have been distributed separately. It is a requirement that Council formally adopt the recommendations prior to action being taken. The recommendations were supported unanimously by the Committee.

Attachments

Nil

Recommendation

That Council adopt the Traffic Committee recommendations as follows:

19^th Annual Bermagui Seaside Fair Street Parade – 12 March 2015

1. That, subject to conditions, Scenic Drive, Bermagui from Endeavour Point Headland will be temporarily closed from 9.30am to 11.30am on Saturday 12 March 2016 for the Bermagui Seaside Fair Street Parade.

2. That, subject to conditions, Lamont Street, Bermagui between the intersections of Montague Street and Wallaga Street be temporarily closed from 9.30am to 11.30am on Saturday 12 March 2016 for the Bermagui Seaside Fair Street Parade.

3. That the proposed traffic arrangements involving the temporary closure of Scenic Drive and Lamont Street, Bermagui for the Bermagui Seaside Fair Street Parade on Saturday, 14 March 2015, be deemed a Class 2 special event and it be conducted under an approved Traffic Control Plan, in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) Traffic Control Manual.

4. That persons involved in the preparation and implementation of the Traffic Control Plan must hold the appropriate RMS accreditation.

5. That organisers fully implement an approved Special Event Transport Management Plan.

6. That organisers have approved public liability insurance of at least $20 million indemnifying Council, Police and Roads and Maritime Services by name for the event.

7. That organisers have written Police approval prior to conducting the event.

Far South Coast National Show, Bega – 19, 20 & 21 February 2016

1. That, subject to conditions, the section of roadway adjoining the Bega Showground between East Street and Tathra Road, Bega be temporarily closed from 9am to 5pm on 19, 20 and 21 February 2016 for the Far South Coast National Show.

2. That, subject to conditions, Park Lane and East Street, Bega, between the intersections of Parker Street and Belmore Street be temporarily changed to one-way traffic flow eastbound / southbound from 9am to 5pm on 19, 20 and 21 February 2016 for the Far South Coast National Show.

3. That the proposed traffic arrangements for the Far South Coast National Show be deemed a Class 2 special event and it be conducted under an approved Traffic Control Plan, in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) Traffic Control Manual.

4. That persons involved in the preparation and implementation of the Traffic Control Plan must hold the appropriate RMS accreditation.

5. That organisers fully implement an approved Special Event Transport Management Plan.

6. That organisers have approved public liability insurance of at least $20 million indemnifying Council, Police and Roads and Maritime Services by name for the event.

7. That organisers have written Police approval prior to conducting the event.

Rotary Club of Merimbula, Merimbula Mother’s Day Classic Fun Run – Sunday 8 May 2015

1. That the proposed traffic arrangements involving Ocean Drive and Fishpen Road, Merimbula for the Merimbula Mother’s Day Classic on Sunday, 10 May 2015, be deemed a Class 2 special event and it be conducted under an approved Traffic Control Plan, in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) Traffic Control Manual.

2. That persons involved in the preparation and implementation of the Traffic Control Plan must hold the appropriate RMS accreditation.

3. That organisers fully implement an approved Special Event Transport Management Plan.

4. That organisers have approved public liability insurance of at least $20 million indemnifying Council, Police and Roads and Maritime Services by name for the event.

5. That organisers have written Police approval prior to conducting the event.

6. That the event achieves all conditions of Council’s issued Land Use approval.

Car Parking at Merimbula Boat Ramp

1. Council approve the installation of signs stating “Cars with Trailer Parking Only” at either end of the designated area.

Bega Valley Rally

1. That organisers fully implement an approved Special Event Transport Management Plan.

2. That signage is displayed advising of Road Closures

3. That letters are sent to land owners seeking written approval for the closure of private gates.

4. That a Traffic Management Plan is required stating that private gates are locked in accordance with CAMS guidelines.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 11.4

11.4. National Stronger Regions Fund - Round Two

Council’s application for funding for the North Bega Industrial Estate sewer project has been successful. The Merimbula Airport project, whilst meeting all criteria, was not successful in round two.

General Manager

Background

Council was advised on 7 December 2015 that its application for funding, through the National Stronger Regions Fund, of $990,000 (GST exclusive) for the North Bega Industrial Estate sewer project was successful. The project provides for the expansion of the sewer network providing key infrastructure to allow business growth in the North Bega area whilst minimising the environmental impacts to the Bega River system and supporting Bega Cheese to remain a viable business and grow into new high value products.

The application submitted for the Merimbula Airport, whilst meeting all criteria, was not successful in this round. Council is still waiting on advice relating to NSW State Government Funding from the Regional Tourism (Regional Airports) program relating to this project.

Round Two of the NSRF was heavily subscribed with 514 applications received by the Department, requesting approximately $1.47 billion in grant funding. 111 projects were funded in Round Two (40 in NSW) with a total allocation of funding of $293,434,371.

Also funded in the Bega Valley in Round Two was the Community Carers Accommodation South East (funding $450,000) for the construction of the first stage of an 18 room carer’s accommodation facility at the new South East Regional Hospital. Stage 1 comprises six motel style rooms. This is a great outcome for the local community group.

Round Three will open for applications on 15 January 2016 and close 5pm on 15 March 2016. Information sessions for potential Round Three applicants will be conducted in each State and Territory between 18 and 29 January 2016.

Council has also been invited to receive feedback on its unsuccessful Round Two application. It is understood that the project met all benchmarks and advice can be obtained in order to improve the application for the next round.

Issues

Legal

Funding can only be received once there is an executed Deed of Agreement in place that sets out the terms and conditions under which the funding is provided.

Environmental

A key outcome from the North Bega sewer project is installation of infrastructure that will improve environmental outcomes for the Bega River system and address current effluent issues in the area.

Asset

The North Bega Sewer project will create sewer assets that will be included in the Sewer Asset Management Plan.

The Merimbula Airport Project aimed to implement key infrastructure aspects of the implementation of the Merimbula Airport Master Plan.

Economic

The North Bega sewer project achieves capacity for small business growth in the North Bega industrial estate and supports Bega Cheese to continue to grow on their Bega sites.

The key aspects of the Merimbula Airport application were aimed at the elements of Master Plan focussing on growing economic outcomes for the region.

Strategic

Both Council’s projects are aimed at achieving strategic outcomes from adopted Council plans. In order to continue with the approach adopted by Council it is also important for Council to consider projects for Round Three as it opens in January 2016.

After receiving feedback it would seem strategic to refocus and resubmit the Merimbula Airport project for funding.

Financial

The North Bega sewer project will be funded through:

· National Stronger Regions Fund grant and

· Bega Valley Shire Council sewer program and Bega Cheese (cash and property).

Resources (including staff)

Council staff have been involved in preparing the funding applications and will be involved in delivering the project.

Conclusion

Council has been successful in securing funding in the second round of the National Stronger Regions Fund.

Attachments

Nil

Recommendation

1. That Council note the successful Round Two National Stronger Regions Fund announcement for the North Bega Sewer Project.

2. That Council request staff to refocus the Merimbula Airport proposal for report to Council in February 2016 prior to submission on 15 March 2016.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 12.2

12.2. Finalisation of MoU with Eurobodalla Shire Council

Council has previously endorsed discussions with Eurobodalla Shire Council in relation to developing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to provide a framework to promote or guide working cooperatively. The MoU is presented for adoption.

General Manager

Background

At its meeting on 23 September 2015 Council resolved:

1. That Council note the report on the next stage of developing an alliance with Eurobodalla Shire Council.

2. That Council endorse the Mayor and General Manager and other Councillors as required, to form the Bega Valley Shire nominees to the working party to develop a draft for consideration.

3. That Council endorse the draft submission to the Office of Local Government on the Joint Organisations Emerging Directions Paper.

The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) sets out the objectives and management arrangements for the partnership between Bega Valley Shire Council and Eurobodalla Shire Council.

The intention of this MoU is to strengthen the partnership which already exists between the two Councils by implementing a more formal level of cooperation guided by the principles outlined in the MoU. This strategic partnership will achieve cooperative arrangements and establish a framework to deliver greater efficiencies and progress strategies for both Councils and the communities they represent.

It should be noted both Councils have been determined Fit for the Future by IPART and will continue as independent organisations supporting and servicing their communities.

During the Fit for the Future process, both Bega Valley Shire Council and Eurobodalla Shire Council identified the importance of being an active participant in the establishment of a joint organisation as a key strategy to achieving long term financial sustainability. While the model and boundaries of the South East Joint Organisations are yet to be finalised by the NSW Government, there is an opportunity to work collaboratively now. The response to the scale and capacity criteria of both Councils highlighted the collaborative partnerships achieving outcomes for the region, the individual communities and their Councils.

This MoU recognises the importance of the continued development of strong, resilient and unique communities in the far south coast region. The MoU outlines how both Bega Valley Shire and Eurobodalla Councils can continue to operate and serve their respective communities, whilst working together to achieve improved operational outcomes, improved services and financial results, and improved advocacy.

Key to achieving outcomes will be a commitment to the following objectives:

· Identifying and responding to issues that are of a regional nature i.e. the partnership will offer the opportunity for regional South Coast advocacy, strategic planning and implementation.

· Building a dynamic relationship between our population centres.

· Working within the NSW Government framework for building Joint Organisations of councils.

· Building on current partnership and collaboration arrangements.

· Inter-governmental collaboration.

On 2 November 2015, Council hosted a meeting with Eurobodalla Shire Council to further develop the draft MoU. Council was represented by the Mayor Councillor Michael Britten, Councillors Taylor and Tapscott and General Manager, Leanne Barnes.

The MoU outlines the approach and framework the partnership arrangement will follow including:

• Identify opportunities for joint initiatives and cooperation focused on long term sustainability, managing community assets and infrastructure, and delivery of community services.

• Focus on delivering services more efficiently in the face of increasing costs, community expectations and other challenges.

• Review and develop opportunities to reduce expenditure and operate more efficiently and effectively.

• Implement projects through effective collaboration and resource sharing to optimise opportunities and improve outcomes for the community.

• Strengthen strategic collaboration and develop cooperative arrangements in areas such as procurement, policy development, service reviews, regional planning, corporate training, tourism, economic development, benchmarking, advocacy and asset management.

• Stimulate innovation and pursue opportunities for greater efficiencies.

• Examine areas for economic growth (tourism, business development, related infrastructure).

Bega Valley Shire Council and Eurobodalla Shire Council have successfully collaborated in a number of areas including joint tendering and program delivery, sharing policies and other documentation, regular management meetings and economic planning for key facilities (e.g. Merimbula and Moruya airports, library service review processes, provision of services, advocating on regional projects).

More recently, the two Councils met to discuss the development assessment and building certification sections. The meeting was arranged with the aim of improving development pre-lodgement services, following the successful completion of customer satisfaction survey by Eurobodalla Shire Council and a similar survey being proposed by Bega Valley Council. This meeting identified a number of opportunities to share resources and collaborate on matters including: preparation of shared fact sheets and web content aimed at improving customer service; reviewing and standardising development conditions used by the councils; sharing of building certifiers when dealing with Council projects; independent assessment or peer review of council development applications; and training and professional development. Longer term opportunities were also identified to share resources to review and prepare strategic land use plans, development control plans and policies.

The sharing of resources and collaboration on work such as this not only represents efficiencies for the two Councils but also provides opportunities for standardisation of plans, controls and policies which benefits and provides efficiency for the development sector when working in both local government areas.

This MoU will build on the current productive outcomes. The opportunities identified will be further explored, prioritised and resources allocated to achieve mutual benefits.

Issues

Legal

The MoU is not a legal document although it outlines the partnership’s governance structure and source of authority. The parties agree to work together in good faith. The document is a statement of undertaking and is not intended to create a binding or legal obligation on either party.

Policy

Council’s Fit for the Future proposal establishes clear actions for pursuing opportunities for greater efficiencies as an active and effective members of the South East Joint Organisation.

A report will be presented to Council every six months detailing the outcomes of the Partnership.

Social / Cultural

Research on resource sharing in terms of community services indicates there can be a number of both financial and non-financial benefits. In some cases the development of a shared service arrangement can deliver improved service quality, stimulate innovation and enhance community outcomes.

Economic

The MoU will provide an opportunity for joint advocacy for regional projects and facilities for economic growth in the areas of tourism, business development and related infrastructure.

Strategic

Development of significant, strategic regional projects which respond to the NSW State Plan will provide a starting point for the development of a regional strategic plan proposed as one of the outcomes of Joint Organisations.

Financial

The MoU will provide opportunities for financial savings in terms of improved opportunities, increased efficiency and reduced costs in service delivery through improved procurement practices and increased resource sharing. The MoU has been developed using existing resources.

Discussions with the Member for Bega indicate there may be an opportunity for facilitation funding from the NSW Government. A joint approach from both Councils can be progressed once Council has formally adopted the MoU.

Resources (including staff)

It is not expected that working to achieve the intent of the MoU will add to staff resources. There is an expected benefit from the proposed approach. Previously Council staff were involved in contributing to projects with both Southern Councils Group and the South East Regional Organisation of Councils, the implementation of the MoU will provide the same positive regional outcomes.

Operational Plan

Working as part of a Joint Organisation has been identified as a project in the adopted Operational Plan.

Conclusion

One of Council’s Fit for the Future actions is to be an active and effective member of the South East Joint Organisation. While the model and boundaries of the South East Joint Organisation have not been finalised, it is timely to develop a partnership via a MoU to strengthen the current relationships with Bega Valley Shire Council and Eurobodalla Shire Council. The MoU will result in the development of a process that could be utilised once the Joint Model Organisation is finalised.

Attachments

1. Memorandum of Understanding Eurobodalla Shire and Bega Valley Shire

Recommendation

That Council endorse the Memorandum of Understanding between Bega Valley Shire Council and Eurobodalla Shire Council.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 13.2

13.2. Certificate of Investments made under Section 625 of the Local Government Act, 1993

This report details Council’s investments during the month of November 2015.

Group Manager Strategy and Business Services

Background

Under the legislation and regulations mentioned below, the Responsible Accounting Officer must present to Council on a monthly basis the status of the investments held by Council. The Responsible Accounting Officer must detail the investments held, and their compliance with both internal policy and external regulation under the Ministerial Order of Investments.

In accordance with the recommendations made by the Office of Local Government (OLG) Investment Policy Guidelines published in May 2010, the Strategy and Business Services section has made the monthly Investments Report an attachment to the Business Paper. This allows a stand-alone report to be published on Council’s website for the public to view without having to peruse the Council’s Agenda for the relevant meeting.

Issues

Legal

Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) determines money may only be invested in a type of investment authorised by order of the Minister for Local Government and published in the Local Government Gazette. The most recent Ministerial Order of Investment was published February 17, 2011.

Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 determines the Responsible Accounting Officer must provide Council with a written report setting out details of all money Council has invested under section 625 of the Act.

The report must also include a Certificate as to whether or not the investments have been made in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and the Council’s Investment Policy.

Policy

Council has an Investment Policy published under policy number 5.07. This Policy is reviewed every 4 years by Council and annually by Council staff.

Council’s current Policy allows for investment of funds in cash term deposits only with rated Authorised Deposit-Taking Institutions (ADI’s). Council does not hold any investments in sub-prime or managed fund products. At this time, Council holds no long term deposits nor any deposits introduced through an agent.

Financial

The attached report indicates a current investment portfolio of $39,000,000.
These funds can be broken into the following Funds:

Table 1: Investments by Fund $’000
Fund	September 2015	October 2015	November 2015
General Fund	$13,808	$13,808	$7,808
Water Fund	$14,842	$14,842	$14,842
Sewer Fund	$16,350	$16,350	$16,350

In addition, there is $10,428,000 in uninvested funds in Council’s operating account and another $5,000,000 in Council’s Corporate Transaction Account

8 Each fund’s allocation can only be utilised on its specific operations. For example, Water Fund cannot use its financial resources on General Fund projects, etc.

8 Externally Restricted is defined by purposes that are “restricted” by external legislation or regulations, such as unspent grants or loans tied to a specific project, or development contributions held for expenditure in accord with an adopted s94/s64 contributions plan.

8 Internally Restricted is defined by “restrictions” placed upon the use of these funds by Council internally, such as asset replacement, weeds, property, employee entitlements and the like.

8 Unrestricted funds are available for day to day operational uses, or emergencies. Those funds are reviewed daily for short term investment, depending on revenue cycles such as rates instalments.

Table 2: Restricted Cash and Investment by Fund $’000
Fund	External Restrictions	Internal Restrictions	Unrestricted	Total
General Fund	$10,902	$8,560	$2,970	$22,432
Water Fund	$4,224	$10,618		$14,842
Sewer Fund	$2,581	$13,769		$16,350

The restrictions reported in Table 2 relate to 30 June 2015.

Council formally calculates its Restrictions as at 30 June each year. These Restrictions are not reset until the following year Financial Audit. Any movement of funds during the year, is therefore, shown as movement in unrestricted cash.

There have been expenditures between July and year to date that will result in reduced restrictions (for example transfers from reserves to fund capital works), but is not reflected in the above table.

Attachments

1. 2015.12.16 Certificate of Investment

Recommendation

1. That Council receive and note the attached report indicating Council’s Investment position.

2. That Council note the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer.

Council 16 December 2015

Item 15.1

15.1. Canberra Urban and Regional Futures (CURF) Seminar

The Mayor and Group Manager Community, Relations and Leisure attended the Canberra Urban and Regional Future (CURF) Seminar on 6 November, 2015

Cr Britten, Mayor

Summary of presentations – Cr Britten

Australian Capital Territory

ACT has synergy with its region of Queanbeyan and Yass for population, employment and work. By 2050 Canberra and surrounds will have a population of around 800,000 and traffic congestion will be major by 2030.

Canberra has 500,000 now and 150,000 in region and both will grow to 800,000 by 2050.

Cross border traffic and means of transport is a major issue. Canberra is developing a Climate Change Policy In 2016, a Regional Catchment Management Strategy 2016; water sensitive urban design with the Commonwealth, and a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with NSW Regional Planning. A MOU was developed in 2011 with Canberra and Surrounds and in 2012 an ACT Planning Strategy.

Canberra regional centres are not doing well economically and a study has been done on Tuggeranong which has 90,800 people 16000 ha land and has a similar make up to Canberra generally. Town Centres need community activity and a report is due out in January.

Yass and Goulburn

Canberra drives business to these areas and water supply is adequate. Goulburn has affordable housing, quarries, wind farms, storage facilities. It has poor transport in and out of Canberra.

Yass is a commuter town with housing still affordable, with a growth in the Barton corridor. Yass needs water and sewer supply to Murrumbateman. There are cross border issues.

Queanbeyan

Queanbeyan is a growth area in need of sewer upgrade. A new suburb of Googong has 22,500 new people, is built to ACT standards and referred to as part of ACT.

Paper subdivisions from the past are being tested in court. Canberra airport affects Queanbeyan connectivity and infrastructure. The airport restricted zone affects 10,000 potential lots and Queanbeyan had limited land, it needs part of Palarang and Cooma.

They support Canberra strategy and need to develop niche markets, business park and use car parks as an economic activator.

Queanbeyan is an inter-nodal freight route and high speed train is needed for freight and create new areas of accommodation.

Queanbeyan could provide sewer service to Fyshwick and Cohen and discussions need to happen on recycling water.

10.8 tonne of freight originates out of Canberra region and 13.8 tonnes goes in.

Boorowa

Boorowa accepts amalgamation and is looking to relocate CSIRO. They believe mergers offer opportunities.

Bombala

Bombala is a rural economy of cattle, sheep, timber and particle board production with an ageing population and little housing growth. A wealthy area working in silos.

In need of Canberra airport for marketing, fresh flowers with approximately 50 farms around Australia run from Bombala.

Eco tourism and connectivity with the coast / the Bundian way, investment and work.

Palerang

Palerang is a divided shire where east around Braidwood is low socio economic and west around Bungendore is high socio economic, based on Canberra with rapid population growth.

Water entitlement on one major farm exceeds the whole of Bungendore.

Water is split between Sydney catchment and Canberra. Need to solve cross border issues.

On merger neither east not west could agree and on community vote 55% said stand-alone, 21% wanted to go with Queanbeyan.

Hugh Maginnis US agricultural attaché

Mr McGinnis addressed the seminar and said Canberra needed to forge more links with the region. The USA is the largest investor in Australia and in China - $1.3T in Australia

In America the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has a rural development program with capital for infrastructure and creates markets for local and regional food: promotion, placement and subsidy. It is now looking at water and waste.

For more information: http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome

Notes on Speakers – Group Manager Community, Relations and Leisure

Prof Barbara Norman – University of Canberra

· CURF is 5 years old

· Focus on renewable energies

· Challenges in bringing the 'region' together

Tony Carmichael - ACT Government

· G21 Geelong initiative good example of regional cooperation

· Canberra has a role in the regions development

· Increase in dwellings surrounding Canberra. Approx. 19,000 by 2030.

· Canberra running out of green field sites. Will rely on surrounding LGA's

· 40,000 cross border car trips by 2050

· 20 years of land left. Role of the regions in supplying land for dwellings.

· 30% of hospital procedures performed on people from outside of the ACT.

· Highest targets for carbon reduction in Australia

· MoU with NSW for regional strategic planning

· 12% car trips into Canberra coming from the South East

Integrated Regional Development - Stream 1

Professor Will Steffen - Climate Change Unit

· What happens to CO2 emissions if you increase production rather than bring food in from elsewhere? May increase CO2 emissions.

· Drying trend. Rainfall patterns changing to more summer rains. May lead to more rain along the coast. High fire danger.

· Sea level rise. 20cm over last 20 years. More over next 20 years. Economic implications if ignored.

Liz Beach - Exec Officer RDA ACT Region

· Knowledge based economy. Teleworking initiative.

· Economic growth doesn't have to have a negative impact on the environment. CSIRO research. Policy drivers need to be correct.

· ACT contributes 15% of the R&D expenditure. ACT has highest rates of education attainment. 12% vs. 5% Australia.

· Smart Work. ICT connectivity. Smart work hubs.

Sian Rinaldi - Dev Officer Agri Food Australia

· Agri food - niche farming or broad scale farming

· Any job that can be converted into an algorithm will be. Approx. 40% of current jobs. Less operators, more para-managers

· Gen Y will be largest proportion of employees in 2020

· Average age of farmers is 53! Generally no transition plans in place.

· Agri business not keeping up with remuneration rates of other industries. Not attractive to younger people. Can be a financial impact to work on the farm.

Hugh Maginnis - US Attaché on Agriculture

· US is the largest foreign investor in Australia.

· $1.3T in agricultural trade in 2014

· US has a trade surplus with Australia

· Washington also suffering from commuter congestion and working towards telecommuting

· USDA has $206B in loans portfolio. Started as a provider of credit for rural growth.

· Also plays a role in promoting healthy eating. 80% of the USDA nutrition program budget goes to providing food (coupons) access to healthy food for people that can't afford it.

LG GM Panel

Gabrielle Cusack - Canberra Region Joint Organisations

· Use of term Canberra as a way of creating identity.

Anthony McMahon - Boorowa

· Smallest Council around Canberra.

· Agriculture focussed community. CSIRO moving into LGA.

· Supportive of merger process.

Joe Vescio - Snowy River

· 6,000 sq km

· 1% pop growth per year.

· Believes that Snowy will merge with Cooma-Monaro. Will provide $$$ and scale to deliver better services and facilities.

Ngaire McCrindle - Bombala

· 3,500 sq km

· Rural economy based on sheep and cattle, and timber. Korean timber mill. A lot of Korean families in town.

· Limited housing stock capacity to cope with additional employment/jobs. Housing! Ageing population.

· Bundian Way has huge potential.

Peter Bascomb - Palerang

· In place since 2004 after previous amalgamation.

· Agriculture in the East and public servants in the West.

· Previously fastest growing LGA in NSW now Queanbeyan.

· Growth limited by water access.

Attachments

Nil

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 8.1 - Attachment 1*	Draft clauses as exhibited: boundary adjustments and split zones

Applicant	AJ & RA Allen
Owner	AJ & RA Allen
Site	Lot 37 DP 752164, 110 County Boundary Road, Cobargo
Zone	RU1
Site area	15.07 hectares
Proposed development	Erection of a Farm Shed

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 8.2 - Attachment 1*	Plans & Elevations

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 8.2 - Attachment 2*	Draft Consent

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 8.4 - Attachment 1*	Development Plans

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 8.4 - Attachment 2*	Locality Plan

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 9.1 - Attachment 1*	Attachment Community Project Proposal Summary 2015

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 10.1 - Attachment 1*	Draft deed of agreement for Merimbula Wharf Public Toilet Facility

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 10.2 - Attachment 1*	Council Report - Jigamy Youth Camp Development 9/11/2010

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 10.2 - Attachment 2*	Draft Deed of Agreement Jigamy Youth Camp Development

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 10.3 - Attachment 1*	Council Report - 3 May 2011

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 10.3 - Attachment 2*	Council Report - 27 February 2013

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 10.4 - Attachment 1*	Expansion Proposal

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 12.2 - Attachment 1*	Memorandum of Understanding Eurobodalla Shire and Bega Valley Shire

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 13.2 - Attachment 1*	2015.12.16 Certificate of Investment

Council	16 December 2015
*Item 19.1 - Attachment 1*	List of council maintained bus shelters at 02.12.2015

Ordinary

Meeting Notice and Agenda

To:

Copy:

Publishing Of Agendas And Minutes

Ethical Decision Making and Conflicts of Interest

A guiding checklist for Councillors, officers and community committees

Ethical decision making

Conflict of interest

The test for conflict of interest

Identifying problems

Agency advice

Disclosure of pecuniary interests / non-pecuniary conflict of interests

Agenda

Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners of Bega Valley Shire

1 Apologies and requests for leave of absence

2 Confirmation Of Minutes

3 Declarations

4 Deputations (by prior arrangement)

5 Petitions

6 Mayoral Minutes

7 Adjournment to Standing Committees

Recommendation

8 Staff Reports – Planning and Environment (Sustainability)

9 Staff Reports – Community, Culture and Leisure (Liveability)

10 Staff Reports –Economic Development and Business Growth (Enterprising)

11 Staff Reports – Infrastructure Waste and Water (Accessibility)

12 Staff Reports – Governance and Strategy (Leading Organisation)

13 Staff Reports – Finance (Leading Organisation)

14 Adoption of Reports from Standing Committees

Recommendation

15 Delegates Reports

16 Rescission/alteration Motions

17 Notices of Motion

18 Urgent Business

19 Questions On Notice

20 Questions for the Next Meeting

21 Items of Interest Relating to Council Business

22 Confidential Business

23 Adoption of reports from Closed Session

24 Resolutions to declassify reports considered in closed session

Council

16 December 2015

Staff Reports –Planning And Environment (Sustainability)

16 December 2015

Precis

Description of the proposal

Description of the site

Planning assessment

Zoning

Conclusion

Attachments

Recommendation

Precis

Background

Description of the proposal

Description of the site

Planning assessment

Zoning

Issues

Impact on a sensitive coastal location

Impact on the amenity of the public domain

Height, bulk and scale

Height

Bulk and scale

Consultation

National Parks & Wildlife

Submissions

Legal

Staff comment on relevant matters raised by the applicant in the address to Council 14 October 2015

Conclusion

Attachments

Recommendation

Staff Reports – Community, Culture and Leisure (Liveability)

16 December 2015

9.2. Conversion of building to library and community facility at Tura Beach

Background

Issues

Legal

Asset