Agenda of Council - 4 August 2021

Council 4 August 2021

Item 8.1

8.1. 1999.1438 Clay Target Shooting Range - Lot 101 DP 1172182, Murrah River Road - Additional Shoot Days

Director Community Environment and Planning

	Bermagui Field and Game Inc
Owner	Bermagui Field and Game Inc
Site	Lot 101 DP 1172182 (formally part of Lot 10 DP 849934), Murrah River Road, via Bermagui
Zone	RU2 Rural Landscape
Site area	24.6 Hectares
Proposed development	Section 4.55 Application to Modify Development Consent 1999.1438

Officer’s Recommendation

1. That Council approve the Section 4.55 Application to Modify Development Consent 1999.1438 for the Clay Target Shooting Range on Lot 101 DP 1172182, Murrah River Road, via Bermagui, by amending Condition 4 and including additional Conditions 11-15; as detailed in the Modified Consent (Attachment 6).

2. That those persons who have lodged a submission be notified of Council’s decision.

Executive Summary

This matter was reported to Council on 10 April 2019 with a recommendation that the Section 96 (now described as Section 4.55) Application to Modify Development Consent 1999.1438 be approved by amending Condition 4 and including additional conditions.

Council deferred the matter for a site inspection and to visit adjoining properties on a day when the Bermagui Field and Game Inc was in operation.

Further information has been provided by the Applicant since the site inspection was undertaken on 26 May 2019 that addresses contamination concerns raised by residents.

This matter is being reported back to Council for determination following that site inspection and provision of additional information for determination. This report also addresses the Question on Notice from Cr Griff in relation to potential pollution impacts of shooting activities.

Background

On 20 June 2017 Bermagui Field and Game lodged a Section 96 (now Section 4.55) Application to modify Development Consent 1999.1438, seeking approval for an additional 12 shoot days per year for the purpose of safety and training, with the provision for potentially holding a State Shoot Event. The Application was accompanied by an Acoustic Report by Renzo Tonin and Associates Pty Ltd, dated 4 February 2013. That acoustic report was lodged with a previous application to modify, submitted to Council in 2013 and refused, that sought the same increase in the number of shoot days.

In support of the request, the applicant has submitted that the 12 additional shoot days would be limited to one per month to enable owners of shotguns within the Bega Valley to train to be able to safely and efficiently use their firearms.

Council officers have assessed the information provided, including additional information regarding potential contamination issues which have been addressed by the applicant , and are satisfied that an additional 12 shoot days for training and safety would not adversely impact on the environment and that suitable mitigation measures can be included in a Modified Consent to ensure impacts on amenity and contamination can be adequately monitored and controlled.

Question on Notice by Cr Griff – Pollution Hazards

This report also seeks to address a separate Question on Notice from Cr Griff to the Council meeting of 10 April 2019, whereby Cr Griff asked if Council could receive information regarding pollution hazards and risk from sporting/shooting ranges as raised in the deputation by Friends of Five Forests.

The question was taken on notice by the Director Community, Environment and Planning and the sections on contamination in this report respond to this question.

Description of the proposal

Development Consent 1999.1438 is for the use of the site as a Clay Target Shooting Range with Condition 4 limiting its use to a maximum of 12 shoot days in any one calendar year, unless otherwise approved by Council, with not less than 20 days between any event.

The submitted Section 96 (now Section 4.55) Application to Modify requests the opportunity to undertake an additional 12 shoot days per year for the purpose of safety and training, with the ability to also hold a State Shoot Event.

If approved, the Modified Consent would allow for a maximum of 24 shooting days per year on Sundays at the site.

The Club detailed it would restrict the hours of the additional shooting days to between 10am and 5pm, on the second Sunday of every month.

The current terms of Condition 4 of the development consent states:

“The use shall be restricted to a maximum of 12 days (between the hours of 10.00am and 5.00pm) in any one calendar year unless otherwise approved by Council. There shall not be less than 20 days between any event.”

The Club seeks some flexibility for this additional day, “to ensure harmonious relationships with all of their neighbours to be maintained, especially where a clash occurs with other community events.”

The Club added, “flexibility would also benefit any application made for a State Selection Shoot to be held at the range in the future (with Council backing).”

A copy of the applicant’s justification for the modification is provided as Attachment 1.

Description of the site

The site is described as Lot 101 DP 1172182 (formerly part of Lot 10 DP 849934) and is located approximately 10 kilometres south of Bermagui (see Attachment 2).

The site occupies an area of 24.6 hectares, is well vegetated and is accessed through Forestry Corporation of NSW land via Murrah River Road. The site is described as undulating with a small ridgeline traversing the site in a north-south direction. The site retains a number of free-standing structures including shipping containers that accommodate the storage needs of the Club.

Planning assessment

The proposal has been assessed in accordance with the Matters for Consideration under Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Staff highlight the key issues of the proposal in this report for Council’s consideration.

A copy of the assessing officers updated Section 4.55 assessment including consideration of additional information submitted in respect to contamination and noise impacts is included as Attachment 3.

Zoning

The land is zoned RU2 Rural Landscape under Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (BVLEP 2013). It is noted that Recreational Facilities (Outdoor) is permissible within the RU2 zone subject to development consent.

Recreation Facilities (Outdoor) is defined as, “a building or place (other than a recreation area) used predominantly for outdoor recreation, whether or not operated for the purposes of gain, including a golf course, golf driving range, mini-golf centre, tennis court, paint-ball centre, lawn bowling green, outdoor swimming pool, equestrian centre, skate board ramp, go-kart track, rifle range, water-ski centre or any other building or place of a like character used for outdoor recreation (including any ancillary buildings)”.

It is considered that the proposed use of the site meets the definition of Recreational Facilities (Outdoor).

History of the development

Council granted consent to DA 1997.1328 for use of the land as a Clay Target Shooting Range on 26 May 1998, which applied for hours of operation between 10am and 5pm, with the usage of one day per fortnight. It was approved subject to the following conditions of consent:

1 Development shall take place in accordance with the Approved development Plan, except as modified by the following conditions.

2 This consent is for a trial period of 12 months from the date of commencement of this consent and will be reviewed in light of operation of the use during that time.

3. All requirements of Environment Protection Authority shall be complied with prior to commencement of the use. A copy of the EPA approval shall be submitted to Council prior to commencement of the use.

4. All requirements of the NSW Police shall be complied with prior to commencement of the use and a copy of their letter shall be submitted to Council.

5. Toilet facilities shall be provided to the requirements of Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor.

6. The use shall be restricted to one day every second weekend (between the hours of 10.00am and 5.00pm) in any one calendar year unless otherwise approved by Council.

7. No trees shall be removed without the approval of Council.

8. Public access to the site shall be restricted to the requirements of NSW Police Service.

9. No consumption of alcohol shall take place during the target day shooting use.

10. Signs shall be erected prohibiting public access.

11. Shooting shall only take place when supervisors approved by NSW Police Service are on site.

12. No commercial advertising signs shall be erected, painted or displayed.

At the end of the trial period the use was not reviewed and accordingly the consent lapsed.

Development application No. 1999.1438 was lodged with Council on 21 June 1999 for a Clay Target Shooting Range. The development application was reported to Council on 29 June 1999 with Council resolving to approve the application subject to the following:

1. The development consent shall operate for a trial period, which will cease on 28 February 2000 and will be reviewed in the light of the operation of the use at that time with Development Consent 97.1328.

2. Compliance with Conditions of Consent 97.1328 dated 26 May 1998, except for Condition 2, previously issued.

3. (i) that Council staff carry out appropriate noise tests on the days of normal clay target shooting range use to determine the noise impact on the surrounding locality.

(ii) the applicant must give a minimum of seven (7) days’ notice to Council staff in relation to the days that each clay target range shoot is to happen.

4. That a further report be submitted to Council at the expiration of the trial period on the 28 February 2000.

5. That adjoining and adjacent residents and objectors be notified of Council’s decision.

6. That in the circumstances of this case, no fee be charged for DA 99.1438.

Noise tests were undertaken by Council staff on 19 September 1999 and a further report submitted to Council. On 14 December 1999 Council resolved that for the development to operate beyond 28 February 2000, the applicant was required to provide an independent acoustic assessment carried out by a suitably qualified and practising acoustic consultant at the applicant’s expense and for a Section 96 Application to Modify to be lodged.

On 16 February 2000, the applicant lodged a [then] Section 96 Application to Modify, which was accompanied by a Noise Impact Assessment provided by Renzo Tonin & Associates Pty Ltd (consultants in acoustics, vibration and structural dynamics). The Modification Application sought approval for the deletion of Condition 1 being the six-month trial period and for the development to continue.

The application was reported to Council (Administrator) on 25 July 2000 with a recommendation of approval subject to the following conditions:

1. Development shall take place in accordance with Development Application No. 99.1438 and as modified by the following conditions:

2. All requirements of NSW Police shall be complied with prior to commencement of the use and a copy of their letter of approval shall be submitted to Council.

3. Toilet facilities shall be provided to the requirements of Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor.

4. The use shall be restricted to a maximum of 12 days (between the hours of 10.00am and 5.00pm) in any one calendar year unless otherwise approved by Council. There shall not be less than 20 days between any event.

5. No trees shall be removed without the approval of Council.

6. Public access to the site shall be restricted to the requirements of NSW Police Service.

7. No consumption of alcohol shall take place during the target day shooting use.

8. Signs shall be erected prohibiting public access.

9. Shooting shall only take place when supervisors approved by NSW Police Service are on site.

10. No commercial advertising signs shall be erected, painted or displayed.

A copy of the Council meeting report recommending approval which includes the recommendation of a restriction to a maximum of 12 days in any one calendar is included as Attachment 4.

The matter was deferred and reconsidered at the Council (Administrator) meeting of 22 August 2000. The Section 96 Application to modify was approved in accordance with the staff recommendation to the 25 July 2000 Council meeting. Copy of that report included as Attachment 5.

A further report was provided to Council on 18 December 2001 outlining additional noise monitoring of the site undertaken by Council staff. That report advised that the noise monitoring undertaken confirmed that the Bermagui Game and Field Association was operating in compliance with the conditions of consent and the provisions of the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) guidelines for Target Shooting Ranges: Application Note for Assessing Noise Compliance 2015.

The applicant lodged a Section 96 Application on 27 August 2012 seeking to modify Condition 4 to permit one additional training day per month. That application was reported to Council on 22 May 2013 and deferred as per the following Council resolution:

62/13 RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Fitzpatrick and Allen

1. That the matter be deferred to enable advice to be provided in a report to the next practicable meeting on the consequences of deletion of draft condition 12.

2. That report also provide further advice on the impact of lead shot on the environment, including potential remediation costs and liability.

3. That report also provide further advice on the impact of noise at distances greater than those assessed in the Acoustic Report.

4. Further, that the General Manager provide a report to the next practicable meeting advising Council of matters under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, if any, that would enable consideration to be given by Council to the refusal of the proposed modification of Condition 4 of DA 1999.1438.

5. That the General Manager’s report include reasons for refusal of the proposed modification in the event that Council ultimately determines to refuse the Section 96 application.

In favour: Crs Taylor, Hughes, Tapscott, Seckold, Mawhinney, Allen, Fitzpatrick and Britten

Against: Cr McBain

When the matter was then reconsidered at the meeting of 24 July 2013, the Section 96 application was refused by Council detailing the following reasons for refusal:

a. The proposed development would be contrary to Clause 65(1)(a)(i) of the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2002 as the increase in lead shot use would result in an adverse impact on the water quality in the area.

b. The proposed development would be contrary to Clause 65(1)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2002 as the increased hours would result in unacceptable impacts on adjoining and nearby dwellings due to increased noise generation.

c. The proposed development would be contrary to Clause 65(1)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2002 as the increase lead shot would result in unacceptable impacts on the environment.

d. For the purpose of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended), the proposed development would result in unacceptable noise impacts on adjoining dwellings.

e. Approval of the Section 96 Application to Modify Condition 4 would not be in the public interest, for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) as:

i) The development fails to mitigate noise impacts on adjoining and nearby rural dwellings.

ii) The development fails to mitigate concerns associated with potential contamination of the site and onto adjoining lands associated with the increase in lead shot.

The applicant lodged a Review of Determination on 2 August 2013 in accordance with the provisions of Section 96AB of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The request provided additional information for Council’s consideration including a reduction in the number of additional training shoot days from 12 per year to six days per year.

Upon lodging the review of determination, the applicant sought legal advice and on 12 December 2013, amended the request for Review of Determination to consideration of the Section 96 Application being:

“Use for the audible firing of firearms will be limited to Competition and training days. The use, for the purposes of competition, shall be restricted to a maximum of 12 days (between the hours of 10.00am and 5.00pm) in any one calendar year, unless otherwise approved by Council. There shall not be less than 20 days between any competition event. The use, for the purposes of training days, shall be restricted to a maximum of 1 day per month (between the hours of 11.00am and 4.00pm).”

Council at its meeting of 25 February 2015 resolved to refuse the Review of Determination to modify Development Consent 1999.1438.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement undertaken

The current Section 4.55 Application to Modify was publicly exhibited for 14 days from 30 June 2017 to 14 July 2017. A total of 84 community submissions were received during that exhibition period, with 43 objecting to the proposal and 41 submission supporting the application.

The NSW Police Force, Firearms Registry Range Inspector, was consulted as part assessment of the application and provided the following comments:

“I have looked at the attached application for a Development modification. The modification related to an increase of shooting days. This has no baring on the functionality of the range and poses no safety issue that would restrict the Range Approval issued to this range. NSW Police Firearms Registry has no objection to the D/A modification”.

At the Council meeting on 10 April 2019, there were 11 addresses to Council, six objecting to the proposal and five in support of the proposal.

Since the Council meeting of 10 April 2019, a further five submissions have been received raising objections to the application including a detailed submission from the Murrah River Action Group (MRAG). One additional letter of support was also received.

Council has also received a petition containing 123 signatures objecting to the proposal.

The issues raised in those submissions are substantially the same as those raised in addresses and previous submissions, being concerns in respect to contamination, noise and impact on the amenity of the area and wildlife.

Since the Council meeting, Council officers have liaised with the EPA in regard to contamination issues associated with the site and its operation.

Contamination and noise impacts are discussed further in this report.

Legal /Policy

In a submission received after the 10 April 2019 Council meeting, a question was raised in respect to whether the submitted Section 4.55 Application is substantially the same development to that originally approved. Council officers are of the view that the proposal currently before Council is substantially the same development to that originally approved and can be considered under Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

In making this consideration it is noted that the use approved under DA1999.1438 was originally lodged and approved in accordance with DA 1997.1328 which applied for and received approval to use the Clay Target Shooting Range (with the hours of operation between 10am and 5pm) and usage of the site one day per fortnight, as detailed under history of the development in this report.

Approval has previously been issued with a usage of one day per fortnight. The terms of the proposed modification seek substantially the same operation of the site.

Should Council resolve to refuse the Modification Application, the applicant has the normal appeal rights to the Land and Environment Court under the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Impacts of additional training day per month

Site Inspection 26th May 2019

An on-site inspection was held on Sunday 26 May 2019 with representatives of the Gun Club, Councillors Fitzpatrick, Tapscott, Dodds, Seckold and Griff and Council staff Dr Alice Howe and Ms Cecily Hancock. The purpose of the inspection was to provide Councillors some site familiarity and locational context.

Three other locations in the vicinity of the development site were also visited while the Sunday morning shoot was in operation, including attendance at the Four Winds Festival site (Lot 130 DP 1178806, Four Winds Road), the Rutter’s farm (486 Benny Gowings Road) and Mimosa Wines (Lot 82 DP 752153, 2845 Tathra-Bermagui Road).

During and after the inspection, there were several questions raised by Councillors, responses to which were sought from the applicant and are detailed as follows:

• Detail the clean-up protocols after each meet – eg collection of shells, targets, debris etc

• Provide details of the type of targets used (Brand/specifications) and confirm whether they are biodegradable

• Provide details of the Club’s remediation strategy for the site

• Confirm whether the Club is prepared to change to the use of an alternative to lead shot. Provide details

• Confirm whether a training component could be undertaken on the same day as competition (eg training in the morning, competition in the afternoon?)

• If training days are approved separately to competition days, could the hours of operation be reduced (eg 10am – 2pm)?

• Confirm whether the Club still wants to pursue a State Shoot event (that is, the two day event proposed once per year).

The applicant provided the following comments in regard to the operations undertaken at the site.

“Clean up procedures at the club involve picking up of un-shot clays at days end, spent cartridges are taken out of guns and placed in bins provided throughout the day. At day's end all rubbish and empty shells are taken from the club.

The types of targets used are environmentally friendly Laporte clay targets.

Remediation strategies at the club include, having silt barriers set up to Council staff requirements around the range, signage around the perimeter of the property, warning people that a shooting range is in operation, rain runoff and sediment gullies installed and maintained and pay particular attention to where shot fallout will be when setting the course.

Lead shot is primarily used in clay target shooting world-wide. If this were to change we would change also.

We have tried training days on competition days and it simply doesn't work, and as for half a day of each, it is not possible.

As for cutting back the hours for training, this could be looked at, but bear in mind, we would be hopefully catering for disabled shooters and new shooters alike, and there would be a set procedure, including range induction, pattern board testing, safety and practical information to pass on which all takes a lot of time, hence the ten till five requirement.

As for the Club wanting the two day State shoot, this seems to be getting everyone’s hackles up, so, to keep the peace, we would like to delete this from our D.A., request to be effective immediately”.

Cr Griff also requested information from staff as to “how much new residential development has arisen in the broad surrounding area in the last 5-10 years (in other words, what is the estimated population of Barraga/Murrah region?)”.

Staff response

There are three localities within a 3.5km radius of the gun club: Barraga Bay, Cuttagee and Murrah. The combined population of these localities in 2016 Census was 199 people. There has not been any major rural residential release areas or significant development in these localities in the last 20 years – nor are there any planned in the future.

For the broader Bermagui Coast – Wapengo area population has increased from 2,216 in 2001 to 2,458 in 2020, around a 0.7% annual increase. Population is expected to continue to increase, at a rate of around 1.6% per annum to 3,018 people in 2036.

Options

Council has the option to:

1. Approve the application to modify the consent as per the staff recommendation and in accordance with the conditions of consent identified in Attachment 6.

2. Approve the application to modify with additional conditions, as deemed appropriate by Councillors. Councillors would need to provide justification for the amended conditions.

3. Defer determination of the application and request a separate report from staff to the next practicable meeting advising Council of matters under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, if any, that would enable consideration to be given by Council to the refusal of the proposed modification of DA 1999.1438 including reasons for refusal of the proposed modification in the event that Council ultimately determines to refuse the Section 4.55 Application.

Financial and Resource Considerations

The processing of the Section 4.55 Application has been undertaken as part of Council’s regular work program and within the adopted 2021-22 budget.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The development, subject to compliance with the conditions identified in the existing and proposed consent, is considered to be consistent with the following goals of the Bega Valley Shire Community Strategic Plan 2040:

· Goal 2: We are an active, healthy community with access to good quality recreation and sporting facilities

· Goal 5: Our air and water is pristine and our natural environment and rural landscapes are protected

· Goal 7: Our Shire continues to be a vibrant, enjoyable, safe and affordable place to live

· Goal 8: Our Places retain their character and scale, development is well planned and a range of goods and services are available with our Shire that meet local needs

Environment and Climate Change

There is no material impact on climate change associated with the recommendation.

Contamination

A key issue raised in submissions is that of potential contamination associated with the use of the site as a clay target shooting range, including its impacts on the surrounding environment and potential impacts on future uses at the site and its surrounds.

Since the last report to Council on 10 April 2019, Council received an independent soil sampling analysis that undertook sampling at four locations outside the Bermagui Gun Club clay target area. This report identified lead concentrations at these locations containing elevated levels of contamination.

The report was referred to the EPA who advised that they have responsibility for regulating certain activities under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, and for regulating significantly contaminated land under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997. This regulatory responsibility does not extend to sites such as this, which are regulated by Council.

As part of its comments, the EPA recommended that the applicant engage a consultant to conduct a baseline contamination study of the site to address contamination issues.

The applicant engaged ERM Consulting to undertake a baseline contamination report with the objective to assess the concentrations of contaminates of potential concern and determine the potential for complete source-pathway-receptor (SPR) linkages resulting from the shooting activities undertaken at the site. Should the results of the assessment indicate the presence of a complete SPR linkage, a secondary objective of the assessment was to identify specific measures that may need to be undertaken to mitigate potential contamination of the site and adjoining lands and waterways.

The report by ERM Consulting was undertaken in accordance with relevant published Australian guidelines, including:

· Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, Australia and New Zealand Governments and Australian state and territory government, Canberra ACT, Australia, 2018

· Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG), National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) 2011

· Revision of the ANZECC/ARMCANZ Sediment Quality Guidelines, CSIRO, 2013

· National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999, Schedule B1 – Guideline on Investigation Levels for Soil and Groundwater, 2013.

The results of the investigation undertaken indicated that there are no complete pathways for identified SPR linkages and therefore the historical and current land use practices of sporting clay shooting poses no significant risks to identified human health and ecological receptors.

In addition, ERM Consulting detailed that, despite the club being in operation for 20 years, there is no evidence of significant migration of lead impacts from the higher impact areas within the core of the site toward the site boundary.

Based on these findings, ERM Consulting detailed that as no complete SPR linkages have been identified and the club is operating in line with the Draft Environmental Guideline for Shooting Ranges prepared by Sporting Clays Australia, specific additional measures to mitigate potential contamination of the site and adjoining lands and waterway are not required.

It is considered that the report prepared by ERM has adequately addressed the impacts associated with the activities undertaken on the site, and addressed specific concerns that have been raised in submissions objecting to the proposal over contamination issues and addressed the independent soil sampling analysis for lead contamination submitted to Council by MRAG.

The report prepared by ERM Consulting was signed off by two accredited site auditors listed under the EPA’s Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 register and provides suitable guidance for Council to consider and address issues of contamination of the site into the future.

In NSW there are currently no guidelines regarding managing contamination at shooting ranges and therefore the application was considered with regard to the Victorian Guide for Managing Contamination at Shooting Ranges (2019). The provision of the ERM Consulting report is consistent with the Victorian Guidelines recommendation for a baseline contamination study of the site that has considered the existing operations undertaken on-site, assessing pathway risks and appropriately acknowledging surrounding receptors. The study has appropriately addressed the operations at the site with the extent of soil samples undertaken in consideration of the dispersed nature of shotgun pellets across the site.

The site has existing mechanisms to control potential contamination consistent with the Victorian Guidelines including appropriate fencing to prevent people and livestock accessing the site, forms of sediment management measures with the retention of vegetation and ground cover within the shot fallout areas, and ongoing site management including the collection of un-shot clays at day’s end, removal of spent cartridges throughout the day and use of environmentally friendly Laporte clay targets.

The nature of the Bermagui range does limit the application of some forms of mitigation measures recommended in the Victorian EPA Guide for Managing Contamination at Shooting Ranges however it is considered that every reasonable step to the control potential contamination within the site has been incorporated, subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

The future use of the site is restricted, with no residential uses permitted as the allotment was created under Clause 18 of Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2002. As part of the subdivision approval, there is a Section 88B restriction prohibiting the erection of a dwelling on the land.

The existing consent currently provides no conditions regarding the ongoing review of contamination at the site into the future. As part of the Section 4.55 Application to modify, it is acknowledged that the level of materials that can lead to contamination will increase over the site and it is therefore recommended that additional conditions be applied to mitigate contamination at the site and on the surrounding environment.

These conditions include the provision of an Environmental Management Plan (Condition 13) and the development of a Remedial Action Plan (Condition 14) before a training event can occur from the site, as detailed in the draft modified consent included as Attachment 6.

Based on the above and as per the recommended modified conditions detailed in Attachment 6, it is considered that the issues raised in submissions concerning contamination at the site and the ongoing have been appropriately addressed.

Noise

The impact of noise has been one of the key issues raised in submissions to the Section 4.55 Application to modify currently under consideration and has also been raised and considered in past determinations of the original development application. As detailed earlier in this report, when the development application was originally submitted and determined, it was based on the hours of operation of between 10am and 5pm, with usage at one day per fortnight.

The applicant has lodged the Section 4.55 Application to increase the number of days at the site and Council is required to assess the application and make a determination. As part of the application, the applicant provided a report prepared by Renzo Tonin (2013) that detailed the following:

“since the original approval was granted to allow shooting, there has been no significant change to the following parameters:

The types of firearms being used;

The locations from which shots are typically fired;

The directions in which shots are typically fired; and

The distances from the firing locations to the nearest residential dwellings;

Since there has been no change to these parameters, we expect that noise levels from current shooting events would still be within the ranges that were reported in our original noise assessment, and therefore the conclusions of that assessment report are still valid.

Since the original report concluded that shooting is permissible up to one day per week according to the EPA noise criteria, and in the absence of any other specific Council issued noise limits, we advise that the current proposal for shooting on two days per month is therefore also permissible.”

Since the determination of the development application, there have been some additional dwellings built within the surrounding area ranging from approximately 2km to 4km away from the site and generally located within the Murrah and Barragga Bay areas.

Noise generated from activities from one additional shoot day per month for training and safety purposes would be audible from the surrounding area. It is recommended that a condition be applied for a further noise assessment to be provided by the applicant to reaffirm compliance for affected residences in the area prior to operation of the extended consent, if approved. The terms of the proposed condition specify that the use for the purposes of training days shall not commence until measures can be undertaken to mitigate the exceedance, to the satisfaction of the consent authority. This is consistent with the staff recommendation to the meeting of 10 April 2019.

Condition 11 in Attachment 6 details that prior to training days commencing at the site, the applicant shall provide Council with a field assessment noise report from a suitably qualified acoustic consultant (not Council) that identifies that noise levels produced from the site do not exceed 90 dB (Lin) Peak Hold at the most affected properties. The assessment shall be consistent with the NSW Target Shooting Ranges: Application Note for Assessing Noise Compliance (2015).

That condition also provides that if the field assessment noise report identifies that the noise levels produced from the site do exceed 90 dB (Lin) Peak Hold at the most affected properties, the use for the purposes of training days shall not commence until measures can be undertaken to mitigate non exceedance.

Further, it also proposed to incorporate noise monitoring in the Environmental Management Plan to ensure ongoing compliance on the site.

Economic

Financial capacity of the Bermagui Field and Game to address any site remediation in the future was raised by Council at the last meeting. The Club provided the following in response:

“although we have no intentions of selling our land, Council can rest assured, that the value of the land that the club purchased in 2010 would far exceed the estimated cost to remediate the site to RU2 zoning requirements”.

The Remedial Action Plan required under the proposed consent would determine whether remedial activities are able to be undertaken for the amount the land is valued at ($120,000 in 2019).

Council officers have also reviewed the EPA’s Draft Financial Assurance Policy that had been issued for public consultation. In reviewing this document, it is clear that this policy applies to anyone who holds or is applying for an environmental protection licence issued under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1979, is given a management order issued under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 or who holds or is applying for a radiation management licence issued under the Radiation Control Act 1990.

In reviewing the original development application as well as the recent Baseline Contamination Study undertaken on behalf of the applicant, it is clear given the above that the current use of the site does not fall within the draft policy parameters. Therefore, staff conclude that this draft policy does not apply. On this basis the inclusion of a Modified Condition to provide some form of financial assurance into the future is considered to be unwarranted.

It is, however, recommended and further detailed in this report that additional conditions be included in any Modified Consent to ensure that an appropriate review of contamination at the site into the future occur through periodic monitoring, with actions required if or when potential contamination from the use of the site is identified.

It is noted that the provision of this facility is likely to provide some positive economic benefit to the region through competition and training opportunities at the development site.

Potential adverse impacts on neighbouring businesses in terms of noise impacts can be suitably mitigated through the proposed hours of operation and subject to compliance with the identified noise controls.

Risk

Assessment of this development application does not introduce new risks to Council. Development impacts, and the risks associated with the use in terms of environmental impact, have been considered in this and previous reports.

Social / Cultural

There are no identified impacts to cultural heritage associated with the proposed modification application to increase the number of training days at the existing development.

A range of social impacts have been considered in the assessment of this application, including concerns raised by residential in relation to amenity and social benefit identified by club members and users in terms of recreational and educational benefits from the development.

Attachments

1 ⇩. Applicant's justification for proposed modification

2 ⇩. Locality Plan

3 ⇩. Assessment Report

4 ⇩. Council Report of 25 July 2000

5 ⇩. Council Report of 22 August 2000

6 ⇩. Draft Modification Notice

Council 4 August 2021

Item 8.2

8.2. Finalisation of planning proposal to permit dwellings on deemed concessional lots

The planning proposal to amend the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 to permit dwellings on deemed concessional lots has been publicly exhibited. This report seeks Council’s resolution to progress the planning proposal.

Director Community Environment and Planning

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council:

1. Support the amendment to Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (Amendment 39) (Attachment 1) to incorporate provisions to permit consideration of dwellings on deemed concessional lots as exhibited and request that the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces make the plan.

2. Advise those who made a submission during exhibition of the planning proposal of Council’s resolution on this matter.

Executive Summary

Public exhibition of the planning proposal to amend Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (BVLEP 2013) to permit consideration of dwellings on deemed concessional lots took place between 7 May 2021 and 6 June 2021. Three public and three agency submissions were received during the exhibition period. After reviewing the submissions, no changes to the exhibited planning proposal are recommended.

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the feedback received during exhibition of the planning proposal and seek a resolution to progress the matter to finalisation. As the NSW Department of Primary Industries Agriculture Division (DPI Agriculture), NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment Biodiversity and Conservation Division (BCD) and the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) have formally objected to the planning proposal, Council does not have delegation to finalise the matter. The amendment to BVLEP 2013 must be finalised by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

Background

State Environmental Planning Policy (Rural Lands) 2008 (Rural SEPP) amended Bega Valley Shire Local Environmental Plan 2002 (BVLEP 2002) by removing the clauses that enabled the subdivision of land to create concessional lots and approval of a dwelling on a deemed concessional lot.

As a result of the changes to BVLEP 2002, there was an unintended consequence that resulted in Council being able to consider the erection of a dwelling on most lots within rural areas. The NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) has confirmed that the intention of the Rural SEPP was to stop concessional lot subdivision but not to remove existing or create additional dwelling entitlements.

Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (BVLEP 2013) does not currently provide for consideration of dwellings on deemed concessional lots that existed before the Rural SEPP. At its meeting of 16 December 2020, Council considered a report on options to reinstate provisions to enable consideration of dwellings on deemed concessional lots and resolved to:

1. Authorise Council officers to submit the planning proposal (Attachment 1) and supporting information to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment requesting a Gateway Determination under Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

2. Consider a further report from staff in relation to feedback received during public and agency exhibition undertaken as part of the Gateway process.

Options

Council can proceed to request that the matter is finalised by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces. Although the outcome of the planning proposal is at the discretion of the Minister because of the three unresolved NSW Government agency objections, this option is recommended because it may achieve the intention of the planning proposal to re-instate dwelling entitlements lost following the implementation of the Rural SEPP.

Alternatively, Council could choose to formally withdraw the planning proposal and BVLEP 2013 would remain in its current form.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement undertaken

Consultation was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination and Council’s adopted Community Engagement Strategy. Public exhibition was undertaken for 30 days from 7 May 2021 and 6 June 2021. Exhibition of the planning proposal was notified on the ‘Have Your Say’ page of Council’s website, a public notice was placed in each of the three local papers and the development professionals group was notified by email.

In accordance with the Gateway Determination, consultation with DPI Agriculture, the RFS and the BCD was also undertaken.

Summary of submissions

Three public and three agency submissions were received during the exhibition. The key issues raised in the submissions are outlined below including discussion from Council staff.

1) NSW Department of Primary Industries - Agriculture

Issue summary: DPI Agriculture objected to reinstating dwelling entitlements on deemed concessional lots due to the inconsistencies with state, regional and local planning strategies including the Right to Farm Policy 2015 and Directions 8 and 28 of the South East and Tablelands Regional Plan 2036 that aim to protect important agricultural land and provide rural residential development in a strategic manner.

Staff response: Council staff presented a detailed response to the issues raised in DPI Agriculture’s submission outlining that, although inconsistent with policy, the dwelling entitlements were inadvertently removed and therefore should be able to be restored in this instance; any net increase in land use conflict would be negligible, enabling dwellings on these lots land may support agricultural production through the provision of accommodation for rural workers; and if Council were to adopt DPIE’s model clause for dwellings in rural and environmental protection zones this would have a far greater impact on commercial farming operations. However, the agency did not remove the formal objection.

Recommendation: It is recommended that Council proceed with the planning proposal and requests that the matter be finalised by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

2) NSW Rural Fire Service

Issue summary: The RFS stated that the proposal should not progress in its current form because it is not satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the Section 9.1 Directions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 regarding bushfire hazards. In order to support the progression of the planning proposal the RFS required either:

· a bushfire hazard assessment of any land expected to gain a dwelling entitlement as a result of the amended LEP clauses to demonstrate all effected lots can comply with Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019, or

· that proposed clause 6.12 (2)(k) be amended to read, the dwelling house will not be located on land mapped as bushfire prone.

Staff response: Council staff presented a detailed response to the issues raised in the RFS submission, which included outlining that neither of these options were achievable because the exact land affected by the planning proposal was unknown and that amending proposed clause 6.12 (2)(k) as suggested would exclude all lots from consideration because virtually all rural land in the Bega Valley Shire is mapped as bushfire prone. However, the RFS did not support the progression of the planning proposal.

Recommendation: It is recommended that Council proceeds with the planning proposal and requests that the matter be finalised by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

3) DPIE Biodiversity and Conservation Division

Issue summary: BCD responded that further information is required to demonstrate that Ministerial Directions regarding environment protection zones, coastal management, flood prone land and the implementation of regional plans were met. The response stated that Council should demonstrate that the proposed dwelling entitlements will not lead to any increase in environmental harm through existing and proposed provisions including assessment against other provisions in BVLEP 2013, the Bega Valley Shire Development Control Plan 2013, Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, Coastal Management Act 2016, and State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPP) such as SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 and SEPP (Coastal Management) 2018.

Staff response: Council staff presented a detailed response to the issues raised in the agency submission including outlining that detailed assessment required by the agency was not achievable because the exact land affected by the planning proposal was unknown; however, the agency did not support the progression of the planning proposal.

Recommendation: It is recommended that Council proceeds with the planning proposal and requests that the matter be finalised by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

4) 2-10 hectare standard for deemed concessional lots

Issue summary: Lot 191 DP 750238 and Lot 14 DP 750223 qualified as deemed portions under the provisions of BVLEP 2002; however, the proposed amendment introduces an additional standard that caps the size of deemed concessional lots to 10 hectares or less. The submissions stated that the rationale of this standard is appreciated but should not be applied to deemed concessional lots that are currently owned by people who do not own another lot containing a dwelling within the relevant existing holding.

Staff response: It is the intention of the planning proposal to strengthen the 2-10 hectare standard for deemed concessional lots; however, the standard is not new. Under the provisions of BVLEP 2002 deemed concessional lots were required to be “substantially the same” as concessional lots, which were all between 2 hectares and 10 hectares. The notes of BVELP 2002 also clarified that “With respect to lot area, generally the [deemed concessional lot] is to be commensurate with the 2-10ha requirement … although there may be mitigating circumstances that permit a lot of larger area, provided that all other assessment criteria under the plan are satisfied.”

Removing or amending the 2-10 hectare standard for certain land on the basis of ownership is not supported as it is would have the effect of enabling some vacant Crown portions to be considered as deemed concessional lots that would not have qualified under the provisions of BVELP 2002.

Recommendation: No change to planning proposal.

5) Allocation of deemed concessional lot dwelling entitlements within holdings

Issue summary: The planning proposal will give back dwelling entitlements to some landowners who already achieved a dwelling under the previous provisions and reinstates the worst aspects of the old concessional lot provisions that the Minister saw need to remove through the Rural SEPP. Example cited of an existing holding with five lots that may qualify as vacant deemed concessional lots with four separate owners but where only two dwelling entitlements exist. Submission that the owner of Lot 22 DP 1103458 has a higher right to at least one of the remaining entitlements as they are one of several owners that do not have a dwelling within the holding.

Staff response: Giving preferential treatment to one landowner over another on the basis that they made a submission to Council on a matter is inequitable and is not based on sound planning principles. The planning proposal seeks to re-instate the provisions for deemed concessional lots essentially as they existed prior to the implementation of the Rural SEPP in 2008 and, if the planning proposal is finalised, the approval of dwellings under the provisions will be subject to the full development assessment process, which will include demonstrating that there is capacity in the existing holding for an additional dwelling at the time of lodgement.

Recommendation: No change to planning proposal.

6) Use of Schedule 1 to create dwelling entitlements for certain lots

Issue summary: Request for a new provision in BVLEP 2013 Schedule 1 ‘Additional Permitted Uses’ to include development for the purposes of dwelling houses as the means to open dwelling entitlements on Lot 138 DP 750227, Lot 14 DP 750223 and Lot 22 DP 1103458.

Staff response: Clause 2.5 of the Standard Instrument Order allows Council to permit additional uses for particular land in Schedule 1 of BVLEP 2013. These uses are permitted in addition to those identified in the LEP Land Use Table for the nominated sites only. Lot 191 DP 750238, Lot 14 DP 750223 and Lot 22 DP 1103458 are predominantly zoned either RU1 Primary Production or E3 Environmental Management. As both zones currently permit dwelling houses with consent in the land use tables, the use of Schedule 1 would not create a dwelling entitlement for these properties, as the provisions of BVLEP 2013 Clause 4.2A which currently prevent dwellings on concessional lots would still apply.

Recommendation: No change to planning proposal.

Financial and Resource Considerations

The preparation of the planning proposal and its public exhibition were undertaken as part of Council’s regular work program and within the adopted 2020-21 budget.

Item	$ Excl GST
Expenditure Detail
Advertising	$1,500
Total Expenditure	$1,500
Source of Funds
General Fund	$1,500
Total income available	$1,500
Project Funding Shortfall	Nil

Legal /Policy

The planning proposal has been prepared in accordance with Section 3.33 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment’s A Guide to Preparing Planning Proposals (December 2018).

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The planning proposal does not specifically align with any Council strategies but instead seeks to reinstate dwelling entitlements for deemed concessional lots that were inadvertently lost with the application of the Rural SEPP in 2008.

Environment and Climate Change

The planning proposal has regard to environmental considerations and sustainability principles. The extent of any environmental impacts is expected to be limited due to the relatively small number of lots affected and the application of the planning assessment criteria for deemed concessional lots. Site-specific environmental impacts would be considered as part of any development application.

Economic

The planning proposal may increase property values of affected land; however, the extent of this impact is expected to be limited to approximately 132 rural lots.

Risk

The planning proposal may increase risk to life from placing dwellings in remote areas as well as increase the risk of land use conflict with existing agricultural operations. However, the extent of any additional risks is expected to be limited due to the relatively small number of lots affected and the application of the planning assessment criteria for deemed concessional lots at the development application stage.

Social / Cultural

The planning proposal may cause social impacts from placing dwellings in remote areas as well as impact cultural values. However, the planning proposal may also have positive social benefits in reinstating dwelling opportunities for certain rural landholders. The extent of any social or cultural impacts is expected to be limited due to the relatively small number of lots affected and the application of the assessment criteria for deemed concessional lots.

Attachments

1 ⇩. Exhibited Deemed Concessional Lot Planning Proposal

Council 4 August 2021

Item 8.3

8.3. Finalisation of planning proposal for certain land at Boydtown

The planning proposal to amend the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 to zone and apply minimum lot size standards for certain land at Boydtown has been publicly exhibited. This report seeks Council’s resolution to progress the planning proposal.

Director Community Environment and Planning

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council:

1. Support the amendment to Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (Amendment 38) for certain land at Boydtown as exhibited (Attachment 1) and request that the Minister of Planning and Public Spaces make the plan.

2. Advise those who made a submission during exhibition of the planning proposal of Council’s resolution on this matter.

Executive Summary

Public exhibition of the planning proposal to amend Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (BVLEP 2013) to zone and apply minimum lot size standards for certain land at Boydtown took place between 27 May and 4 July 2021. One public and three NSW Government agency submissions were received on the planning proposal. Following a review of the feedback received, no changes to the planning proposal as exhibited are recommended.

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the feedback received during exhibition of the planning proposal and seek a resolution to progress the matter. In accordance with the Gateway Determination, Council does not have delegation to finalise the planning proposal, instead the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces is authorised as the local plan-making authority.

Background

At the meeting of 20 July 2016, Council considered a report on several sites that were deferred from BVLEP 2013. With regard to Boydtown, Council resolved the following:

a) Site 1 – Boydtown Property (excluding the area around the Seahorse Inn)

That the land north of Nullica Short Cut Rd be zoned RU2 (120ha) and E2 (no lot size); the remainder of the land west of the Princes Hwy be zoned E3 (10ha) and E2 (no lot size); and the south eastern section of the property adjoining the Towamba River estuary be zoned E3 (40ha) and E2 (no lot size).

This resolution was based on the recommendation of the Southern Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP), which examined the Boydtown property in detail following the submission of a Masterplan and planning proposal by the property owner. The JRPP made explicit recommendations with regard to the zoning of most of the Boydtown property. These recommendations were endorsed by the [then] Minister for Planning and Environment and included that the land that is the subject of this planning proposal be:

“zoned in accordance with draft Bega Valley LEP 2010 as exhibited as E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management with applicable development standards, other than land occupied by the approved extractive industry along Nullica Short Cut Road which is to be zoned RU2 Landscape and E2 Environmental Conservation.”

The Gateway Determination was issued in August 2017 and extended at the request of Council in March 2019. Council staff commenced implementation of the Gateway Determination, but the planning proposal was not finalised as the owner has been preparing a separate planning proposal for the whole site.

A further request for extension of time for the planning proposal was refused in January 2021. Part of the reason for refusal was to ensure consistency with advice provided by the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) to all NSW councils to streamline and simplify the planning system, including accelerating planning proposals. Following that correspondence, Council received further notification from the Coordinator General of DPIE’s Planning Delivery Unit that plans needed to be put in place to ensure this outstanding planning proposal is completed before the end of 2021.

Options

Council can proceed to request that the matter is finalised by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces. This would ensure that part of the Boydtown area is undeferred from BVLEP 2013 and the standards of BVLEP 2013 would apply to the land. This is the preferred option.

Council could choose not to progress the planning proposal and the land would remain deferred from BVLEP 2013. Undeferring the land would then require a new planning proposal to be prepared, either by the landowner or by Council, and submitted to the Gateway so the process could begin again. This option would require the investment of significant resources by Council.

It is noted that progressing the current planning proposal will not preclude the owner of the land from lodging a new planning proposal over the land for Council’s consideration.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement undertaken

Consultation was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination and Council’s adopted Community Engagement Strategy. Public exhibition was undertaken for 39 days from 27 May until 4 July 2021. Exhibition of the planning proposal was notified on the ‘Have Your Say’ page of Council’s website, a public notice was placed in the Eden Magnet newspaper, and the owner of the land was notified directly by post and by email to their planning consultant.

In accordance with the Gateway Determination, consultation with the NSW Department of Planning, Industry rand Environment Biodiversity Conservation Division (BCD), NSW Department of Primary Industries – Agriculture (DPI Agriculture) and NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) was also undertaken.

Summary of submissions

One public and three agency submissions were received during the exhibition.

The key issues raised in the submissions are outlined below, including responses by Council staff.

1) NSW Department of Primary Industries - Agriculture

Issue summary: DPI Agriculture did not object to the proposal to rezone Boydtown lands west of the Princes Highway as the land being used for extensive agriculture and extractive industry will be zoned RU2 Rural Landscape enabling these uses to remain permissible.

Staff response: Noted

Recommendation: No change to planning proposal

2) NSW Rural Fire Service

Issue summary: The RFS raised no objections to the proposal subject to a requirement that future development complies with Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019.

Staff response: Noted. Compliance with Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019 is part of the normal development assessment process for any development application on bushfire prone mapped land.

Recommendation: No change to planning proposal

3) DPIE Biodiversity Conservation Division

Issue summary: BCD did not object to the planning proposal and supported the application of the E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environment Management zones. However, the agency did raise concerns regarding the minimum lot size of 10ha for the E3 zoned land on the western side of the highway as they prefer a minimum lot size of 40ha for any E3 zoned land.

Staff response: It is acknowledged that 10ha is an unusual lot size for E3 zoned land in the Bega Valley Shire and that the E4 Environmental Living zone would better reflect Council’s objectives for future development of the land for rural residential purposes and the strategic direction for the E3 and E4 the zones in the Bega Valley Shire.

Recommendation: It is recommended that Council advise DPIE that it would support the application of the E4 Environmental Living zone over the part of the land that is proposed to have a 10ha minimum lot size.; however, no change to the current E3 zone is proposed at this stage.

4) Submission on behalf of owner

Issue summary: The zoning and minimum lot sizes in the planning proposal are inappropriate, unjustified, based on inaccurate or old information and will sterilize future development opportunity on the site. The public exhibition of the proposed zoning demonstrates that Council have actively misled the proponent, resulting in substantial financial cost and losses. Council has not complied with the conditions of the Gateway Determination. Request that Council withdraw the existing planning proposal with a view to progressing the current Lyon Group planning proposal which has been developed over the last four years.

Staff response:

The zoning and minimum lot sizes in the planning proposal are in accordance with the recommendations of the JRPP as endorsed by the [then] Minister for Planning and Environment. The public exhibition of the proposed zoning is the result of Council fulfilling the requirements of the Gateway Determination for the site and in line with NSW Government directives.

Council complied with the conditions of the Gateway Determination regarding updating the planning proposal, confirming the criteria for applying an environmental zone and consultation with the [then] Office of Environment and Heritage and the [then] Department of Planning. Copies of relevant correspondence was provided to the applicant prior to the exhibition and the exhibited planning proposal was endorsed by DPIE.

Council staff have been working with the owner of the land to develop a zoning scheme and planning controls for Boydtown since 2004. Despite some progress, the latest draft planning proposal prepared by the applicant does not align with the most recent Masterplan presented to Councillors in April 2020 and does not address many of the issues that Council and the JRPP have raised regarding future planning for this site.

Given the current situation with the planning proposal for the whole site, the significant Council resources that have been involved to date, the current requirements of NSW Government agencies regarding planning proposals and the directions of the Planning Delivery Unit to finalise a planning proposal for part of the site, it is considered prudent for Council to proceed to complete the 2017 planning proposal.

It is noted that Council staff remain committed to continue to work with representatives of the owner to finalise a zoning scheme and development standards for the whole site and that finalisation of this planning proposal will not prevent a future planning proposal being lodged to amend the zoning or lot size standards that are applied through this process.

Recommendation: It is recommended that Council proceed with the planning proposal to implement a zoning scheme under BVLEP 2013 for the subject area, and that any subsequent planning proposals submitted for the land be assessed based on Council’s adopted strategic land use objectives and in accordance with applicable legislation and DPIE guidelines.

Financial and Resource Considerations

The public exhibition of the planning proposal was undertaken as part of Council’s regular work program and within the adopted 2020-21 budget.

*Item*	*$ Excl GST*
*Expenditure Detail*
Advertising	$600
*Total Expenditure*	*$600*
*Source of Funds*
General Fund	$600
*Total income available*	*$600*
*Project Funding Shortfall*	*Nil*

Legal /Policy

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The planning proposal aims to achieve the following directions of DPIE’s South East and Tablelands Regional Plan 2036:

· Direction 14: Protect important environmental assets

· Direction 13: Manage the ongoing use of mineral resources.

The planning proposal is consistent with the following goals of the Bega Valley Shire Community Strategic Plan 2040:

· Goal 5: Our air and water is pristine and our natural environment and rural landscapes are protected as future development in rural areas resulting from the planning proposal will be appropriate

· Goal 8: Our places retain their character and scale, development is well planned, and a range of goods and services are available with our Shire that meet local needs as future development resulting from this planning proposal will be in keeping with the existing character and scale of existing development in rural areas

The planning proposal is consistent with the following directions of the Bega Valley Shire Local Strategic Planning Statement 2040:

· Continue to protect major estuary foreshores and sensitive water catchments to maintain and improve water quality.

· Protect catchments of sensitive receiving waters including water supply storages and priority estuaries used for aquaculture, tourism and recreation.

Environment and Climate Change

It is unlikely that this planning proposal will have an adverse impact on environmental values or increase risk to life or assets from climate change because the planning proposal does not provide a significant increase in the development potential on the land and seeks to zone environmentally sensitive land appropriately.

Economic

It is unlikely that this planning proposal will have any significant economic impacts because the planning proposal does not provide for a significant increase in the development potential on the land and no provision of public infrastructure is required by Council to implement the planning proposal.

Risk

The planning proposal will not significantly increase risk to life from new dwellings or increase the risk of land use conflict with existing primary industry operations because the planning proposal does not provide a significant increase in the development potential on the land.

Social / Cultural

The extent of any social or cultural impacts resulting from the planning proposal is expected to be limited due to the relatively small number of lots that will result from the planning proposal.

Attachments

1 ⇩. Exhibited Boydtown Planning Proposal

Council 4 August 2021

Item 11.1

11.1. Proposed divestment of Narira Village Complex in Cobargo

A formal request has been received for the purchase of Lot 2 DP 1027919, being Narira Village Complex in Cobargo and Council direction is being is being sought on how to proceed.

Director Assets and Operations

Officer’s Recommendation

1. That Council receive and note the report and attached Confidential Memorandum.

2. That Council decline the offer received from Southern Cross Housing and delegate authority to the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer to negotiate a sale of Lot 2 DP 1027919, being Narira Village Complex in Cobargo for a minimum value as set by Council taking into consideration the valuation received.

3. That all fees to finalise this matter be payable by Council and NSW Land and Housing Corporation split as per proportion of shareholding from the proceeds of sale.

4. That Council hereby authorise its official seal to be affixed to the contract documents under the signature of the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer.

5. That Southern Cross Housing be advised of Council’s decision.

Executive Summary

A formal offer to purchase Lot 2 DP 1027919, being Narira Village Complex in Cobargo has been received and Council’s consideration is requested to progress with divestment of the property. The request is in line with Council’s identified Land Divestment Strategy, with divestment removing this financial liability from Council.

Background

Council resolved at its Ordinary Meeting of 28 October 2020, when considering the proposed divestment or future management of Narira Village Complex as follows:

1. That Council receive and note the report.

2. That Council provide formal notice for a period of three months to NSW Land and Housing Corporation of its intention to divest its share of Lot 2 DP 1027919, being Narira Village Complex in Cobargo, to NSW Land and Housing Corporation, for the amount of $278,000 as determined by the Valuer General in July 2019, which includes registration of a Restrictive Covenant that the land only be used for community housing purposes.

3. Should NSW Land and Housing Corporation not accept Council’s offer to purchase its share of Lot 2 DP 1027919, Council appoint a suitably qualified Real Estate Agent by competitive quotation process to represent Council’s interests in divesting Lot 2 DP 1027919 by public auction or private treaty to an accredited community housing provider, which includes registration of a Restrictive Covenant that the land only be used for community housing purposes.

4. That, if a Real Estate Agent is appointed, Council delegate authority to the General Manager to enter into a suitable Agency Agreement with the successful Real Estate Agent upon completion of the competitive quotation process for the marketing, sale negotiation and transactional settlement for the above-mentioned land parcel.

5. That Council’s legal fees to finalise this matter be funded from the proceeds of sale.

6. That Council:

A. Consolidate funds raised through the divestment with the current Council Narira reserve balances and any additional community held funds linked to the Narira Village Complex as a contribution towards a future community housing development on the Narira site in Cobargo.

B. Delegate the General Manager to identify and implement appropriate measures to ensure the funds held for Narira Village complex and as a result of the sale of Narira village can only be used for the purpose of additional development on the site for community housing with a sunset clause of 5 years following which the funds would be available to projects across the shire for provision of community housing.

C. Transfer the balance of $42,238.72 for the ongoing operation/maintenance and renewal of the Narira facility to NSW Land and Housing Corporation or another accredited community housing provider that purchases Council’s share in the property.

7. That Council authorise its official seal to be affixed to the contract documents under the signature of the Mayor and General Manager.

Following the resolution of Council, formal notice of Councils intention to dispose of its interest in Lot 2 DP1027919, Cobargo (the property) was provided to NSW Land and Housing Corporation (NSW LHC), in accordance with clause 7 of the Deed between the parties. In February 2021 Council received formal notification from NSW LHC that they did not wish to purchase Council’s share in the property, and they wanted to progress a joint sale of the property.

Following this advice Council officers progressed a competitive request for quotation (RFQ) process to appoint a suitably qualified Real Estate Agent and registered Valuer to provide a formal market valuation for the property.

Following the RFQ process LJ Hooker Bega were appointed to represent both Council and NSW LHC in a divestment of the property by public auction or private treaty, to an accredited community housing provider, which includes registration of a restrictive covenant that the land only be used for community housing purposes. An exclusive agency agreement was executed by both parties on 10 June 2021. The exclusive agency period is until either party gives 30 days’ notice in writing to terminate the agreement.

In addition, a competitive RFQ process to engage Walsh and Monaghan Valuers was undertaken and a formal market valuation has been obtained for the property which is attached for the information of councillors.

LJ Hooker Bega has formally written to Council with an offer for the purchase of the property from the managing agent, Southern Cross Housing (SCH). As mentioned in the attached report from Councils Ordinary Meeting of 28 October 2020, SCH has not returned the executed Property Management Agreement (PMA) but has continued to manage the property.

The offer from SCH is attached for the information of Councillors. It is noted that the market is limited to those organisations that are accredited community housing providers due to the requirement that a restrictive covenant be registered on the title for the property that the land only be used for community housing purposes. It is also imperative to note that Council does not currently have the resources to directly manage the property which is why the management is outsourced to an accredited community housing provider. As outlined in the attached report of 28 October 2020, the management of units for community housing is highly regulated and providers are required to go through a regular and vigorous accreditation process which Council has not done.

Options

The options available to Council are:

1. Decline to accept the offer received and advise SCH of Council’s decision and set an agreed value for the disposal of the property taking into consideration the valuation received.

2. Decline to accept the offer received and advise SCH of Council’s decision and await improved offers from the sector.

3. Decline to accept the offer received and advise SCH of Council’s decision and set a minimum reserve asking price for the property so that LJ Hooker Bega can be requested to proceed to auction the property.

4. Proceed with disposal of the property for the value as offered and resolve accordingly. Noting this option will be for Council’s 83.7% share in the property as NSW LHC have advised they do not accept the offer from SCH.

5. Retain ownership of the property. Noting the requirements associated with the operation of community housing, Council’s inadequate accreditation to provide community housing in accordance with National Law, staff resources and risks associated with direct management of the facility.

6. Other options, as raised and resolved by Councillors.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement undertaken

Council officers have been liaising with NSW LHC regarding the sale of the property and NSW LHC have agreed to share all expenses associated with the sale of the property split as per proportion of shareholding. NSW LHC have considered the offer received from SCH and have confirmed they will not accept the current offer as it is below the market valuation and not within the market range as determined by Walsh and Monaghan Valuers.

As mentioned above LJ Hooker Bega were appointed to market the property on behalf of Council and NSW LHC following a competitive RFQ process and have received a formal offer for the purchase of the property from the managing agent, SCH.

Both Council officers and LJ Hooker Bega have been liaising with SCH regarding the sale of the property and SCH have been keeping the tenants informed of the process to alleviate any concerns.

Prior to marketing commencing Council’s legal representatives were engaged to prepare the necessary sale contract and will be required to formalise the necessary documentation to finalise the sale of the property.

Engagement planned

Council officers will continue to consult with LJ Hooker Bega, NSW LHC, SCH and legal representatives to action the Resolution of Council.

Financial and Resource Considerations

Council and NSW LHC are tenants in common with shares equivalent to their respective contribution as follows:

· NSW LHC - 70,000/429,467 – 16.3%; and

· Council – 359,467/429,467 – 83.7%.

Council has formal agreement from NSW LHC that all expenses associated with the sale of the property be split as per proportion of shareholding.

Under the terms of the agency agreement, fees payable to LJ Hooker Bega are 2.2 percent including GST commission upon sale of the property.

As outlined in the report of 28 October 2020 there is a reserve currently held by Council for the property of $108,632.78 which Council resolved to consolidate with funds raised through the divestment and any additional community held funds linked to the property as a contribution towards any future community housing development on the Narira site in Cobargo. Further Council consideration is required as SCH have advised the offer is subject to Council only including the current improvements on the property under the restrictive covenant. SCH would like the ability to subdivide the residual site in the future.

The reserve funds of $108,632.78 were accumulated over time by the Section 355 Committee up to June 2011. Following the 27 November 2019 resolution Sapphire Coast Tenancy Scheme (SCTS) transferred the balance of funds held in the Narira Trust account to Council. In addition, SCTS had accumulated $42,238.72 for the ongoing operation/maintenance and renewal of the facility, which was also transferred to Council. Council resolved to transfer the balance of these funds to the purchaser so as part of the disposal of the property these funds would be transferred to SCH.

Council does not currently have the resources to directly manage the facility at Narira. As previously outlined in this report and the report of 28 October 2020, the management of units of community housing is highly regulated and providers are required to go through a regular and vigorous accreditation process.

Legal /Policy

Under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) (LG Act), there is no restraint on Council’s ability to sell or otherwise dispose of land classified as operational land. Section 377(1)(h) of the LG Act requires a specific Resolution of Council to dispose of any land.

Council’s Acquisition and Disposal of Land Procedure may be varied to meet the needs of a particular matter, by Resolution of the Council. The reasons for the proposed disposal of an asset below market value, however, must be clearly articulated within the report submitted for consideration by the Council.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

Addressing the housing needs of the Bega Valley community is a key focus for Council and it has an adopted Community Strategic Plan, Local Strategic Planning Statement and Residential Land Strategy with the following goals and priorities:

1. Community Strategic Plan

Goal 6: We are leaders in sustainable living and support innovative approaches to resource recovery and the production of renewable energy and food.

Goal 7: Our Shire continues to be a vibrant, enjoyable, safe and affordable place to live

Goal 8: Our places retain their character and scale, development is well planned, and a range of goods and services are available with our Shire that meet local needs.

2. Local Strategic Planning Statement

Housing: Residential areas provide a range of housing styles, sizes and tenures that suit people of all ages, income levels and household sizes and enable communities to stay connected and healthy as people move through the various stages in life.

3. Residential Land Strategy:

Increase diversity of housing.

Environment and Climate Change

There is no environment and climate change matters associated with the proposed divestment of the property.

Economic

In accordance with Council’s adopted Financial Strategy, Council will be required to use the proceeds from the sale of ‘operational’ land to leverage investment or strategic outcomes. Council may also use funds generated from land disposal to leverage acquisition of other land critical to the orderly development of important urban or environmental areas, and to supplement its revenue sources and minimise the demand for increasing rates above rate-pegging, or a reduction in services.

Risk

In accordance with Council’s Acquisition and Disposal of Land Procedure 2.02.4, disposal of land by Council requires a formal process that ensures probity, due diligence, analysis of risk and other key issues.

There are legal, financial, safety and reputational risks associated with the operation of a community housing project, particularly relating to the duty of care towards tenants. At present Council is exposed to these risks. Council needs to ensure that legislative obligations are correctly applied and management for the facility complies with the National Regulatory Code.

Social / Cultural

So long as the property continues to be adequality managed for the benefit of the community as community housing there will be no social or cultural matters associated with the proposed divestment of land.

Attachments

1 ⇩. Council report dated 28 October 2020 - Narira Village Complex

2 . Confidential Memorandum to councillors regarding Narira Village Complex divestment (Confidential - As this attachment contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret as per Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

3 . Walsh and Monaghan valuation report for Narira Village Complex, Cobargo (Confidential - As this attachment contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret as per Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993.

4 . Formal offer from Southern Cross Housing for the purchase of Narira Village Complex, Cobargo (Confidential - As this attachment contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret as per Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Council 4 August 2021

Item 11.2

11.2. EOI 2021-104 Operation and management of the Bega Saleyards

This report details the results of the Expression of Interest (EOI 2021-104) process recently carried out for the operation and management of the Bega Saleyards.

Director Assets and Operations

Officer’s Recommendation

1. That Council receive and note this report and Confidential Report attached.

2. That Council note the Expression of Interest process for the operation and management of the Bega Saleyards has now closed.

3. That Council consider the Council officers’ recommendation as detailed in the attached Confidential Report.

4. That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor to enter into negotiations in order to execute the necessary lease documentation to provide tenure to the successful applicant.

Executive Summary

Following the resolution of Council on 11 November 2020, Council officers have progressed works associated with the subdivision of the Bega Saleyard land parcels and as advised are presenting the results of the expression of interest (EOI) process for Council consideration.

This report details the results of the EOI process conducted between 31 March 2021 and 12 May 2021 and seeks Council’s approval to enter into a lease with the successful applicant.

Background

Council resolved at its Ordinary Meeting of 11 November 2020, when considering the future occupation and management of the Saleyards facility and the future use of the Council owned operational land parcels at Kerrisons Lane, Bega as follows:

1. That Council give notice of its intention to classify Lot 1 and 2 DP 1268814 at Kerrisons Lane, Bega as operational land under section 34 of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) upon registration of the plan of subdivision.

2. That Council enter into a formal Deed of Agreement and Licence with the NSW Rural Fire Service, for the provision of Lot 1 DP 1268814 at Kerrisons Lane, Bega for the purpose of establishing a fit for purpose emergency control centre and regional facility, as detailed in the attached draft Deed.

3. That Council approve the subdivision of Lot 282 DP 750190 and Lot 2 DP 1268814 for lease purposes as shown on the attached draft plan for lease purposes.

4. That Council note a public Expression of Interest process will be conducted by Council officers for the use and management of the Saleyards facilities incorporating a clause in relation to the ongoing use arrangements of the Kiosk through a community constituted organisation, shown as Lot 282 DP 750190 and Lot 2 DP 1268814 on the draft plan for lease purposes attached and the results be presented back to Council for consideration.

5. That Council approve a further 3-month lease to Sapphire Horizons Pty Limited, from 31 December 2020 to 31 March 2021 on the same terms and conditions as the existing lease.

6. That Council delegate authority to the General Manager and Mayor to execute the necessary documentation to affect the above course of action.

Following the resolution of Council, officers progressed negotiations with NSW Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS), for the provision of Lot 1 DP 1268814 at Kerrisons Lane, Bega with a final Deed of Agreement (Deed) being issued to NSW RFS on 24 November 2020.

The variation of lease to Sapphire Horizons Pty Limited to extend tenure from 1 July 2020 to 31 March 2021 was finalised and the lessee has remained on a month to month lease since the lease expiry.

In order to lodge the plan of subdivision of Lot 282 DP 750190 and Lot 214 DP 1253502 for lease purposes to formally identify the Saleyards site, Council’s stockpile site, new pound and fenced compound area so that an exclusive long-term lease can be progressed over the remaining Saleyards facility a subdivision certificate and development application (DA) is required as it does not fall under the ‘exempt’ subdivision provisions. Council officers have been working to obtain all the necessary information in order to lodge the DA. As there are numerous archaeological items identified over the adjoining land, consideration for Aboriginal heritage as well as biodiversity assessment was undertaken. Council officers are now able to progress lodging the DA which is required prior to the lease plan being lodged for registration at Land Registry Services (LRS).

An EOI process for the operation and management of the Bega Saleyards was also progressed. The EOI document was available on Council’s e-Tendering portal between 31 March 2021 and 12 May 2021.

A total of three (3) submissions were received and evaluated against the criteria by a Tender Evaluation Panel that included representatives form Councils People and Governance, Procurement and Risk and Internal Audit teams as well as a representative from Local Land Services Far South Coast.

The information provided by tenderers within their submission is considered ‘commercial in confidence’. They are attached as Confidential Attachments for the information of Councillors.

Options

The options available to Council are:

1. Accept the recommendation provided by Council officers in the attached Report and resolve accordingly.

2. Decline to accept the recommendation provided by Council officers in the attached Report and resolve to provide tenure to an alternate tenderer.

3. Decline to accept the EOI submissions received by all tenderers and advise tenderers of Council’s decision.

4. Other options, as raised and resolved by Councillors.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement undertaken

Council officers have been in regular correspondence with NSW RFS regarding execution of the Deed, for the provision of Lot 1 DP 1268814 at Kerrisons Lane, Bega. The last correspondence was 29 June 2021 where NSW RFS advised they are still considering the Deed and will inform Council of their decision once made.

Council officers completed an EOI process via public tender between 31 March 2021 and 12 May 2021. The tender was available on Council’s e-Tendering portal and publicly advertised on Council’s website and Facebook page. A media release regarding the EOI was also issued on 20 April 2021.

Engagement planned

Council officers will liaise with third party applicants who submitted EOI submissions to advise Council’s decision and legal representatives as required to action the Resolution of Council to formalise the future occupation and management of the Saleyards facility.

Financial and Resource Considerations

As outlined in the attached report from Councils Ordinary Meeting of 11 November 2020, the current annual lease fee payable by the lessee of the Saleyards is currently $8,800 per annum (base rental) plus 10% of all yard dues over $80,000 per annum. As there is no evidence to show how the existing lease fee has been determined, Council officers will commission a market rental valuation from a registered Valuer to determine a rental figure prior to entering into any new tenure arrangement.

Council officer time has been required to conduct the EOI process as well as ongoing management of a lease agreement during its term.

Legal /Policy

The EOI process meets the following objectives:

• To undertake an open, fair and transparent process to offer a lease for the future occupation and management of the Saleyards facility;

• To manage Council owned land in a way which complies with legislative requirements under the LG Act;

• To ensure the operation of the saleyard facility complies with several legislative requirements including but not limited to:

o National Livestock Identification System (NLIS);

o Relevant state and federal legislation, including the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 and environmental protection;

o National Model Codes of Practice for the Welfare of Livestock and Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines;

o RSPCA requirements;

o Heavy Vehicle National Law and Chain of Responsibility (CoR).

In accordance with Council’s Management of Leases and Licenses Procedure tenure may be granted by:

• Invitations for expressions of interest.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The EOI submissions received were evaluated based on the following criteria:

B1. ECONOMIC ACTIVITY – 40%:

Demonstrates how the activity will generate local economic activity and support for local agribusiness.

Demonstrates how the activity will support the growth in local agribusinesses through new approaches, partnerships and technology.

Demonstrates how the activity will enhance the use of the site to improve financial returns for Council and the broader community.

Proposed length of tenure.

B2. BENEFITS TO COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY – 10%:

Demonstrates what benefits the community will receive from this activity.

B3. EXPERIENCE & QUALIFICATIONS – 20%:

Demonstrated previous experience in the proposed activity and supply references.

Evidence of appropriate accreditations and/or qualifications of company and staff supplied.

B4. PROJECT DELIVERY AND COMPLIANCE – 30%

Evidence of how the proposal complies with all industry regulations, codes of practice planning, operational regulation and legislative requirements.

Evidence of how the proposal will support maintenance of the site.

Recognition of local outcomes, demonstration of support for local business and community enterprise.

Environment and Climate Change

A Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 for the purposes of lodging the DA. The SEE report:

· Describes the existing and proposed subdivision, the development site, and the wider locality;

· Discusses the planning context and statutory approval requirements,

· Identifies and assesses the significance of impacts on the environment, and

· Provides mitigation measures to avoid, minimise or mitigate identified impacts.

Economic

The Bega Saleyards is in the top 20 cattle throughput saleyards in NSW (2017-18) and is a vital infrastructure facility that enables transparent transaction of livestock on behalf of livestock producers in the South East NSW and to several buyers and sellers in Victoria. The saleyards play a vital role to the agribusiness industry by enabling transparent price discovery, presenting significant lines of stock in a central location and enabling smaller lots to be combined into larger lots for transport efficiency.

Risk

There are no adverse risks in allowing the Saleyards to be occupied if the use is authorised by way of a formal lease which contains appropriate indemnity and insurance clauses.

Social / Cultural

The development of Bega Saleyards, which would formalise the existing land uses and allow Council to continue to lease the proposed lots for industrial purposes is in the interest of the community as it supports maintaining employment opportunities in the Bega Valley Shire.

Attachments

1 ⇩. Council report dated 11 November 2020 - Bega saleyards

2. Confidential Report in relation to EOI 2021 104 (Confidential - As this attachment contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business and commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret as per Section 10A(2)(c) and (d) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

3. EOI 2021-104 Operation and Management of the Bega Saleyards - Submissions (Confidential - As this attachment contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret as per Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

Council 4 August 2021

Item 11.3

11.3. EOI 2122-003 Use and occupation of Bar Beach Kiosk, Merimbula

This report details the results of the Expression of Interest (EOI 2122-003) process recently carried out for the use and occupation of part Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula.

Director Assets and Operations

Officer’s Recommendation

1. That Council note the Expression of Interest (EOI 2122-003) process carried out for the use and occupation of part Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula.

2. That Council, as Crown Land Manager of Reserve 63203, approve a further five-year licence with an option for a further five-years to Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd (Phoebe Mills) for their continued occupation of part Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula for an annual rental fee as determined by a formal market valuation and increased annually by CPI.

3. That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor to execute the necessary licence documentation to provide further tenure.

Executive Summary

Council officers have carried out an open and transparent Expression of Interest (EOI) process seeking suitable tenants for the use and occupation of part Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula prior to the expiration of the current licence.

This report details the results of the EOI process conducted between 9 and 30 June 2021 and seeks Council’s approval to enter into a licence agreement with Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd.

Background

Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd currently occupies the Bar Beach Kiosk building located within Council Managed Crown Reserve 63203 by way of a five (5) year licence agreement which is due to expire on 30 September 2021.

To maintain transparency and avoid any suggestion of impropriety, Council has conducted a formal EOI process calling for suitable tenants for the use of part Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula. The EOI document was available on Council’s e-Tendering portal from 9 – 30 June 2021. Council only received one (1) submission from the existing operator, despite the EOI being read by 38 suppliers. The information provided within the submission is considered ‘commercial in confidence’. It is attached as a Confidential Attachment for the information of Councillors.

Council is the Crown Land Manager of Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula and proposed uses need to comply with the gazetted reserve purpose of public recreation. A development consent was issued in 2007 for the operation of a kiosk, with a further development application lodged in 2013 to regularise the deck and grease arrestor. The current development approval is for use of the site as a kiosk, which has the definition of “premises that are used for the purposes of selling food, light refreshments and other small convenience items such as newspapers, films and the like” under the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan.

Advice from Council's Planning officers has confirmed the current use and kiosk structure complies with the development approval and provided the footprint of the kiosk structure (including the deck) does not exceed 50m2 it is not required to provide any staff/customer parking on the Reserve. The kiosk structure is approximately 35m2, however this is ample for the size of the Reserve and anything larger would not be supported by Crown Lands or Council officers. The kiosk operator is currently required to pay for water access and usage charges, liquid trade waste removal and commercial waste management fees.

In accordance with clause 70 of the Crown Land Management Regulations 2018 (NSW) renewal of existing licences over pre-Plan of Management Crown Land, for a term not exceeding 21 years, is permissible when there was a pre-existing licence in force immediately before the repeal of the Crown Lands Act 1989 (NSW) providing that the new licence does not authorise any uses for the land that are additional to uses that were permitted under the previous licence.

Options

The options available to Council are:

1. Accept the recommendation provided by Council officers and resolve accordingly.

2. Decline to accept the EOI submission received and advise Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd of Council’s decision.

3. Other options, as raised and resolved by Councillors.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement undertaken

Council officers completed an EOI process via public tender between 9 and 30 June 2021. The tender was available on the e-Tendering portal and publicly advertised on Council’s website.

Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd have advised they would like further long-term tenure for their use and occupation of the Bar Beach Kiosk on part Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula. Given Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd have occupied the kiosk building since 2014 and no further applications were submitted as part of the EOI process it is considered appropriate to offer Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd a five-year licence with an option for a further five years as requested in their EOI submission.

Engagement planned

Council officers intend to issue a five-year licence agreement with an option for a further five years. In accordance with the provisions of section 47 of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) (LG Act) if Council proposes to grant a licence, in respect of community land for a period exceeding five years, it must:

· Give public notice of the proposal (including on the Council’s website), and;

· Exhibit notice of the proposal on the land to which the proposal relates;

· Give notice of the proposal to such persons as appear to it to own or occupy the land adjoining the community land, and;

· Give notice of the proposal to any other person, appearing to the Council to be the owner or occupier of land in the vicinity of the community land, if in the opinion of the Council the land that is the subject of the proposal is likely to form the primary focus of the person’s enjoyment of community land.

To ensure the continued use and occupation of the reserve is appropriate for the licence, the following items will be considered:

· Compliance with the legislation, related policies and guidelines;

· Compatibility with the Reserve purpose of Public Recreation;

· Native Title rights; and

· Aboriginal land claims.

Financial and Resource Considerations

The last market rental valuation commissioned by Council was in 2014 which indicated a rental figure in the order of $4,800 per annum. The annual licence fee payable by Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd since 2014 has increased each year by CPI, with an annual licence fee of $5,147.83 now payable.

An updated market rental valuation will need to be commissioned by Council to determine a rental figure prior to entering any new tenure arrangement.

Council officer time has been required to conduct the EOI process as well as ongoing management of a licence agreement during its term.

Legal /Policy

The EOI process meets the following objectives:

• To undertake an open, fair and transparent process for the issuing of tenure for the use and occupation of part Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula;

• To manage the use of Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula in a way which complies with legislative requirements under the Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW) and/or the LG Act;

• To optimise the potential use and financial return from activities conducted on Reserve 63203 at Bar Beach, Merimbula which is under the direct management of Council.

The purpose of the licence must be compatible with the classification and permitted use under the Local Environmental Plan.

In accordance with Council’s Management of Leases and Licenses Procedure tenure may be granted by:

• Invitations for expressions of interest.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The EOI submission received by Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd was evaluated based on the following criteria:

B1. ECONOMIC ACTIVITY – 30%:

Demonstrates how the activity will generate local economic activity and support for local business.

Demonstrates how the activity will attract external visitation to the area.

Demonstrates how the activity will enhance the enjoyment for reserve users.

B2. BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY – 20%:

Demonstrates what the level of community participation will be.

Demonstrates what other benefits the community will receive from this activity.

B3. EXPERIENCE & QUALIFICATIONS – 20%:

Demonstrated previous experience in the proposed activity.

Evidence of appropriate accreditations and/or qualifications supplied.

B4. SUSTAINABILITY – 30%:

Is the activity self-sustaining?

Evidence of how the proposal complies with all planning and building regulation requirements.

Proposed length of tenure.

Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd own the kiosk building and are responsible for all ongoing structural and reactive maintenance for the building.

Environment and Climate Change

Bar Beach Kiosk’s facade mirrors the beauty of the location. The kiosk blends in with its environment, making Bar Beach Reserve the focal point of visitor’s attention. Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd has committed to use environmentally sustainable practices by using environmentally friendly packaging and operations.

Economic

The proposal from Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd provides a level of economic activity and benefit to Council and the community. It has been noted by Council’s Economic Development Manager that Merimbula’s economy is primarily focussed on tourism. Failing to have a key public tourism asset operating for visitation on public holidays in peak tourism time, detracts from the overall visitation experience. It is imperative that this is addressed in any new licence issued for the kiosk building.

Risk

There are no adverse risks in allowing the Reserve to be occupied so long as the use is authorised by way of a formal tenure arrangement which contains appropriate indemnity and insurance clauses.

Council officers will be required to undertake a Native Title assessment and send notification to NTS Corp regarding a proposed new licence as it may affect Native Title interests in the Reserve.

Social / Cultural

Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd has a very good reputation amongst the local community and with visiting tourists. Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd employs a roster of 6 - 10 staff, creating jobs for locals of all ages. Bar Beach Kiosk Pty Ltd has demonstrated in their expression of interest that it is committed to being an integral part of the local community through sourcing local seasonal produce, as well as supporting sporting and community organisations.

Attachments

1 . EOI 2122-003 Use and occupation of Bar Beach Kiosk - Submission 1 (Confidential - As this attachment contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret as per Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

Council 4 August 2021

Item 11.4

11.4. Review of Master Plan for Bega Valley Fields

This report provides an update on the progress of the review of the Bega Valley Fields Master Plan and provides a revised document for Councils consideration and endorsement.

Director Assets and Operations

Officer’s Recommendation

1. That Council receive and note the information in the report including the feedback on the draft document distributed to site users and neighbours for comment.

2. That Council endorse the attached Draft Master Plan for the Bega Valley Fields Sportsgrounds with recommended amendments included in the report.

3. That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer, if required, to review and revise this Master Plan for minor amendments arising during the delivery of this plan.

Executive Summary

Over the past 18 months Council and Recreation Planning Consultants, ROSS Planning, have been working through a review of the Valley Fields section of the Bega Sporting Complex Master Plan adopted by Council in 2016.

The review reflects changes in use of the area since the Master Plan was adopted including increased use of Roy Howard Oval by the Bega Bombers AFL Club and a proposal from them to increase the facilities and amenities servicing that oval. There had also been a request for additional facilities at Keith Mitchell Oval by Sapphire Coast Hockey Club.

The Bega Valley Fields area has been used as a sporting oval for some time and Council is keen to see it well used into the future. However, to do that there are some challenges and issues that need to be acknowledged and balanced when considering future improvements and developments. These include:

· Changes in use over the past few years and future flexibility of the site

· A large part of the site is subject to increasingly frequent flooding

· Residential properties neighbour the ovals

· Existing facilities and amenities at Keith Mitchell Oval and Council’s ongoing asset management capability

Master Plan Review

The review process included project notifications and workshops with site users and neighbours, with opportunities to provide feedback either at the workshops or by email.

The outcome of the process is the Draft Bega Valley Shire Council Valley Fields Master Plan Review attached. The attached draft document has been distributed to site users and neighbours and feedback is attached. The report includes a summary table of feedback including some recommended amendments to the Draft Master Plan.

An adopted Master Plan assists with planning and delivering the proposed developments by capturing each separate element of this recreational space in a cohesive and workable manner.

Background

At the Council Meeting on 12 December 2018 Council considered a proposal from the Bega Bombers AFL Club to build facilities to service Roy Howard Oval. Council noted those facilities were not included in the Master Plan for the area adopted in 2016 for the site and resolved:

1. That Council undertake formal review of the Bega Valley Fields Sportsgrounds Master Plan including consultation and exhibition of the amendments proposed by the Bega Bombers AFL Club as a project to be included in the 2019/20 Operational Plan.

2. The works to review the Valley Fields elements of the adopted Master Plan be funded from the 2019/20 Sportsgrounds Capital works Budget.

3. The outcomes of the review with any recommended amendments to the Master Plan be reported to Council.

A project to review the Bega Valley Fields master Plan was included in the 2019/20 operational Plan and Consultants, ROSS Planning, were engaged. The review process began in late 2019. It is noted there have been delays in working through the project relating to the need to respond the 2019/20 bushfires, working (and community consultation) conditions due to COVID 19, and increasing capital works program prioritising other works and resources.

The Draft Bega Valley Fields Master Plan includes an overview of items which have been influenced by balancing user requests and needs, site flooding and the proximity to neighbouring properties.

Options

Options considered are outlined in the attached document. The options considered include:

- Option 1 - Transportable buildings

- Option 2 - Raised permanent buildings

- Option 3 - Permanent pavilions

- Option 4 – Retain 2016 Master Plan (No Change)

Option 3 has formed the basis of the Proposed Valley Fields Layout & Cost Estimate included on page 11 of the attached document.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement undertaken

A summary of stakeholder engagement in development and assessment of options is outlined in the attached Draft Master Plan document.

In October 2019 a workshop was held with the current users and neighbouring residents. The purpose of the workshop was to gather background information on use and needs and hear suggestions and discussion related to the future planning for the site.

The information gathered was then considered when developing a draft options study for comment. BVSC planning staff were consulted regarding planning requirements for the site, particularly noting the proximity of neighbouring residents. The planning process has considered the flood risk and advice, particularly referencing the Bega and Brogo Rivers Flood Study.

Regular users and neighbours of the site were invited to attend a second workshop and provide input into the review of the options used to develop a Draft Master Plan of the site.

Notification and distribution of the Draft Master Plan:

Site users being Bega Bombers AFL, Bega Annandale Cricket, Sapphire Coast Hockey and Bega Softball clubs were provided a copy of the draft master plan by email for comment and feedback. Site neighbours were provided notice of the Draft Master Plan and a copy of the Proposed Valley Fields Layout & Cost Estimate by letter box drop which included a link to the complete Draft Master Plan Document on the BVSC website and email address to provide feedback. A copy of the feedback received is attached to this report. The table below presents a summary of feedback, comments and recommended additional notes and minor amendments to the Proposed Valley Fields Layout & Cost Estimate (page 11 of the attached documents).

Valley Fields Draft Master Plan Feedback Summary
Stakeholder	Item	Feedback	Comment	Recommendation
Softball	Floodlights	Current floodlights impede softball field layout	Noted and agreed	Amend the Draft Master Plan document to include review of KMO floodlight location at renewal.
Softball	Shelter	Option 4 (current master plan) is the only plan that has considered the Softballs needs of improved facilities and a storage shed next to or attached to it.	Noted. Flood issues are noted in the document. The nature of flood water movement across Keith Mitchel Oval makes inclusion of a structure difficult.	No amendment to the Draft Master Plan
Softball	Storage	Option 4 (current master plan) is the only plan that has considered the Softballs needs of improved facilities and a storage shed next to or attached to it.	Storage is included in upgrade to the existing amenities servicing Keith Mitchell Oval.	Add a note to the draft master plan that improved storage is included in upgrades to existing amenities block.
Bega AFL	General	Only option that our club can support is a permanent building located at the south east corner, above the flood-line and away from major flood channels.	Noted. Amenities in SE corner. RHO included in the draft plan, noting need to set back from neighbouring properties.	No amendment to the Draft Master Plan.
Bega AFL	Access and parking	Recommend that the access road to this building be provided from the west (i.e. from Valley Street). This access could run parallel (or in lieu of) to the exiting pathway.	Noted. AFL proposed location is in a more flood prone area. Longer access road will increase costs. Benefit will move access away from neighbouring properties.	Amend Draft Master Plan to show vehicle access to new amenities from Valley Street.
Bega Angledale Cricket	General	Some further discussion about the location of the car parking could be part of the planning process once it reaches that stage, but on the whole Option 3 is the very much preferred option.	Noted comments re parking. Parking detail location to be determined at detail design.	No amendment to the Draft Master Plan.
Sapphire Coast Hockey	General	Understanding of flooding constraints. Supportive of Draft Plan. Consider floodlight pole relocation.	Noted.	Amend the draft Master plan document to include review of KMO floodlight location at renewal.
BVSC	Costs		Note escalation costs to time of construction at 3%pa.	Include to note / include escalation costs at 3% pa to time of construction.

Engagement planned

Stakeholders and those that have provided input will be informed of the outcome of this report. Information will be provided to stakeholders as separate items during the master planning process.

It is noted that a master plan is a conceptual document that provides overview and direction on future use and improvements. Detailed design will be worked through with key stakeholders as items progress. Concept designs of major elements (such as the Roy Howard Oval amenities building) will be reported to Council for endorsement. It is recommended that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to review and revise this Master Plan for minor amendments arising during the delivery of this plan, if required.

Financial and Resource Considerations

Option of cost is outlined in the attached document. These figures are to be used as an indicative guide only to provide cost comparisons against each option. As elements within an endorsed plan are progressed costs will need to be reviewed at that time.

The draft Bega Valley Fields Master Plan is unfunded. The Master Plan document will be used to source external funding to upgrade and build new facilities. Council has had considerable success in applying for and receiving external funding through endorsing facilities through a Master Planning approach including funding for the Bega and Pambula Sporting Complex projects, projects within the Barclay Street Master Plan the Coastal Accessibility Plans and the Tathra Headland Walk project Concept Plan.

The project cost plan is included on page 11 of the Draft Bega Valley Fields Master Plan Review

Item	$ Excl GST
Expenditure Detail
Proposed Valley Fields Cost Estimate	$2.4m
Total Expenditure	$2.4m

Source of Funds - Currently Unfunded
Total income currently available	$0

Total Project Capital Cost	$2.4m
Total Available Construction Funding	$0
Project Funding Shortfall	*= $2.4m*

Financial Option Impacts | Life Cycle Costing

Ongoing Financial Impacts	$ Excl GST
Capital Investment \| Renewal, Upgrade, New	$2.4m
Annual maintenance and operational costs pa for items identified	$8.5k
Depreciation costs pa for items identified	$31k
User charges (annual income 20/21)	$8.2k

Legal /Policy

The site of the Bega Valley Fields occupies several parcels of land. All are BVSC owned Community Land.

· Lot: 4 Sec: 41 DP: 758076 Property Name: Keith Mitchell Sportsfields

· Lot: 5 DP: 244692 Property Name: Keith Mitchell Sportsfields

· Lot: 1 DP: 1125998 Property Name: Keith Mitchell Sportsfields

· Lot: 2 DP: 1125998 Property Name: Keith Mitchell Sportsfields

· Lot: 13 DP: 712910 Property Name: Roy Howard Sportsground

The whole site is zoned RE1-Public Recreation under Council’s Local Environment Plan 2013 (CLEP 2013). The works on the Bega Valley Fields site reflect the long-term use of the site are permitted within the RE1 zoning.

Planning approvals regarding development of recreation facilities are often addressed under Division 12, Parks and other Public Reserves of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) (ISEPP 2007). The new pavilion may be regarded as a development permitted without consent under the ISEPP 2007. BVSC Planning will provide advice on the appropriate planning pathway. A development application will be submitted if required.

As the site is Council owned land it is exempt from the requirements of the Native Title Act 1993.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

Community Strategic Plan Goals related to the review of the Bega Valley Fields Master Plan are:

Goal 2: We are an active, healthy community with access to good quality recreation and sporting facilities, and medical health care.

1.2.1: Plan and manage boating infrastructure, sporting grounds and facilities, parks and gardens, natural areas and public amenities

1.2.4: Construct recreation facilities, boating infrastructure, public toilets and sporting grounds and facilities.

Master Planning Approach

Taking a strategic approach and having Council adopted master plan documents are an important part in obtaining external funding. The master planning process identified some clear provision gaps between existing assets and the community needs and expectations. It provides an agreed direction on future use and facilities development on the site.

Asset Management

Bega Valley Shire Council is committed to an asset management approach. Council has an adopted Recreation Asset Management Plan 2017 (RAMP). This plan puts a focus on renewing existing assets and/or linking capital upgrades and new assets to adopted Strategic Plans.

It is noted the attached Draft Bega Valley Fields Master Plan Review includes building new facilities, particularly floodlighting and an amenities building at Roy Howard Oval. The 2016 Master Plan did not include these items. The 2016 Master Plan did not increase Council’s asset responsibilities in areas such as new capital projects, ongoing maintenance costs and asset depreciation. However, it did not meet the changed users’ needs or promote increased community activities and the benefits to individuals and the community more broadly that come through increased recreation and participation.

Environment and Climate Change

The works included in the Proposed Valley Fields Layout & Cost Estimate (p11) present no ecological or biodiversity issues as they are located within the existing sportsground site area.

Climate Change will bring increased risk of flooding to the site. Page 5 of the Draft Bega Valley Fields Master Plan Review notes the issues related to flooding across the area. The document considers options to manage and mitigate flood risk. Internal advice referencing the Bega and Brogo Rivers Flood Study has been used in development of options and the recommended Master Plan.

Economic

Development and progressing the Sporting Master Plans will increase tourism opportunities for the Bega Valley by increasing the ability to host regional sporting, community and cultural events. The Bega Valley Fields site has very close links to the major project underway at the Bega Sporting Complex site and will support events hosted at the Regional Sporting site which will stimulate economic benefit for the local community through visitor spend and stays.

Hosting of sporting events such as regional tournaments, state championships, pre-season competitions, training and development camps, have flow on economic benefits to the community through hospitality and accommodation industries and return tourism to the region.

Risk

The main risks for Council in delivering the works included in the Master Plan relate to increasing project costs, expectations on delivery and potential flooding impacts.

Whilst preliminary costing has been provided through the design consultant, it is noted that these are a point in time opinion of cost. Actual costs will not be known until the procurement process for items has been completed. It is understood that costs will increase until projects are completed. To account for this an escalation rate of 3% pa will be applied in budgeting at the time of project delivery. Further to that, if the outcome of the procurement process exceeds the budget, the project/s may require value engineering (VE) by removing or reducing some elements from the project and/or revising scope to deliver within budget. If need be these items will be worked through with the project reference group at the time and authorised by the Chief Executive Officer (as per staff recommendation item 3).

Understandably there is a keenness and expectation amongst user groups that would like to see the improved facilities delivered as soon as possible. The reality is that the works are currently unfunded and Council staff (and stakeholders) will need to prioritise sourcing funding amongst other current and forward works programs. Having an adopted Master Plan puts both Council and other stakeholders in an agreed position when investigating funding options and when commencing detailed design work on items within the plan as they are prioritised.

It is noted the site is subject to flooding. The planning process has considered the flood risk and advice has been provided internally referencing the Bega and Brogo Rivers Flood Study in developing the options and the Proposed Valley Fields Layout & Cost Estimate (p11).

Social / Cultural

There is no doubt that sport is an important part of life in regional areas. It provides opportunities for health and wellbeing and also much enjoyed social interaction for many in the community.

The Draft Bega Valley Fields Master Plan provides direction on the asset renewals and facilities improvements that will provide better facilities for the local community and visitors and provide for increased participation in recreational activities at the site.

Insert Text here"

Attachments

1 ⇩. 2021.08.04 Attachment Draft Valley Fields Master Plan Review May 2021

2 ⇩. 2021.08.04 Attachment Neighbour Notification Flyer - Draft Valley Fields Master Plan Report

3 ⇩. 2021.08.04 Attachment Bega Valley Fields Master Plan User Submissions July 2021

Council 4 August 2021

Item 11.6

11.6. RFT 2021-09 & RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Infrastructure Works

This report details the outcome of evaluation of Tenders RFT 2021-95 Merimbula Airport Runway Early Works and RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Expansion Runway & Precinct Works.

Director Assets and Operations

Officer’s Recommendation

1. That Council accept the recommendations outlined in the confidential attachment relating to RFT 2021-95 Merimbula Airport Runway Early Earthworks

2. That Council accept the tender from <insert> in relation to contract for the works described in tender RFT 2021-95 Merimbula Airport Runway Early Earthworks, in the amount of $<insert> (including GST), subject to variations, provisional sums and prime cost items.

3. That Council decline to accept the submitted tenders for RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Expansion Runway & Precinct Works under Clause 178 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and enter into negotiations with the lowest conforming Tender with a view to entering into a Contract with <insert Tenderer> for the works to the limit of available funding.

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

5. That authority be delegated to the Chief Executive Officer to execute all necessary documentation in relation to the request for tender RFT 2021-95 Merimbula Airport Runway Early Earthworks & RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Expansion Runway & Precinct Works.

6. Council note that further funding for the Airport through the Federal Government Regional Airport Program Round 2 and the NSW Government Snowy Hydro Legacy Fund has been applied for and a decision is still awaiting on the outcome.

7. Council endorse a further loan of up to $2.0 million to be funded by the future income generated by the lease of General Aviation Precinct land to assist in funding any funding gaps

8. That Council note the planned runway closure of 6 weeks and the two options for this closure from late November to late December 2021 or February to till early March 2022.

9. That Council note the options available for the Biodiversity Credit offsets requirements for the Runway Extension and endorse payout of the credits based upon the Bio Diversity Offset Credit Calculations - July 2021 of $579k (excluding GST) and progress the creation of the Stewardship Site at the Airport.

Executive Summary

This report details the outcome of the evaluation of Tender RFT 2021-95 Merimbula Airport Runway Early Earthworks and RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Expansion Runway & Precinct Works.

The projected final project cost for the Airport infrastructure upgrades is $19.436m. Council currently has $15.29m in available funding with a further $2.18m and $0.98m in pending funding applications for the Federal Government Regional Airport Program Round 2 and the NSW Government Snowy Hydro Legacy Fund respectively.

Pending the outcome of the funding applications there is a current funding shortfall of between $4.15m and $1.0m.

It is a recommendation of this report that Council endorse a further loan of up to $2.0 million to be funded by the future income generated by the lease of General Aviation Precinct land to assist any funding gaps.

Background

Council has a formally adopted Airport Master Plan that includes the extension and upgrades of the Merimbula Airport runway and creation of a General Aviation Precinct to the Southern end of the airport.

This report deals with the construction tenders for the following three projects:

1. Runway Extension

Scope: Extend the existing runway length so that it is fully compliant for maximum take-off weight for ATR 72 and Q400 Aircraft.

Deliverable: Design and construction of a 120m long runway “starter extension” at each end of the existing runway pavement (northern and southern ends of the existing runway) and retain the existing point of take-off and landing.

2. General Aviation & Commercial Precinct

Scope: Provision of additional general aviation infrastructure (taxiways, vehicle access, stormwater services) to permit the relocation of general aviation activity away from the secure areas that will be required for ATR72 and Dash8 Q400 aircraft.

Deliverable: Design and construction of infrastructure to permit the development of general aviation activity on the airport to the limit of available funding.

3. Existing Runway Overlay

Scope: Overlay and strengthening of existing runway, taxiway and aprons to increase the current pavement classification to allow unrestricted SF 340 and unrestricted Q400 operations.

Deliverable: Design and construction of an overlay of the existing runway, taxiways and aprons to the to the limit of available funding.

Council received a report at its meeting of the 25^th November 2020 providing an update on the project status, the proposed packaging of the works and advising of the funding shortfall and a request to actively lobby the State and Federal Government to assist in funding this gap and to endorse that the previously resolved loans program of $2.4m for the runway extension, be funded by the existing airport infrastructure Special Rate Variation.

Funding applications have since been submitted to both the State and Federal Government for the Government Regional Airport Program Round 2 for $2.18m and the NSW Government Snowy Hydro Legacy Fund for $0.98m.

Extensive lobbying has been undertaken by Council Officers and the Mayor and as of writing this report a decision is yet to be announced on the outcome of these two funding applications.

The runway extension project received Development Approval (DA 2019.359) on 11 May 2021 from the Joint Regional Planning Panel for the following:

“Construction and operation of a 120 metre extension of the runway to the northern and southern ends of the Merimbula Airport runway and installation of a new culvert at the Southern end of the airport site.”

The works contained within both tenders to be considered by Council are described below:

RFT 2021-95 Merimbula Airport Runway Early Earthworks

The works for this contract comprise:

Package 1 - Southern end runway extension embankment of the Infrastructure Upgrades at Merimbula Airport. These works create the southern runway extension platform within the Merimbula Lake.

The works are predominately civil in nature and create the southern runway extension platform within Merimbula Lake. It is a technically difficult project with significant engineering risk, including the potential for differential settlement of the platform post construction.

It is also in an environmentally sensitive area and to reduce these risks, it is desirable that the works be delivered as early as possible ahead of the subsequent runway construction and by a contractor focussed on achieving the strict environmental and engineering requirements.

The drawing below depicts the general scope of this package of works:

Image 1 – Southern Platform Early Earthworks

Public Tenders for the works were invited via VendorPanel on 19 May 2021 and a mandatory tender briefing was held on 31 May 2021, with a site visit to the Airport. This briefing was well attended by both local, regional and interstate companies.

Tenders closed on 23 June 2021 and two tender submissions were received. The attached confidential memorandum outlines the tender assessment and recommendations.

RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Expansion Runway & Precinct Works.

The works for this contract comprise:

Package 2 - General Civil Work: This includes the granular base, temporary surface seal, lighting infrastructure, drainage and other general services and flank filling for the GA apron and both runway extensions.

The work spans both airside and landside areas with interfaces to both existing runway thresholds, the existing runway and apron, as well as being on top of the Package 1 - Southern end runway extension (RFT 2021 -95 Merimbula Airport Runway Early Earthworks Package).

Package 3 - Existing pavement stabilisation and final sealing: This includes the existing runway, aprons and taxiways and the final seal of the runway extensions, new GA taxiways and aprons.

This work will be completed during a full runway closure which will have significant impact on the operation of the airport and ensuring a high-quality finish is critical.

To ensure optimal engineering outcomes for the strength, quality and longevity of the runway its preferred to undertake these works at the hottest and driest part of the year. Two windows either side of the busy Christmas period have been identified being late November to late December 2021 or February to till early March 2022.

The drawings below depict the general scope of this package of works.

Image 2 - Existing Runway Overlay Extents

Image 3 - Northern End runway Extension

Image 4 - General Aviation Precinct Southern End

Image 5 - General Aviation Precinct Northern End

Public Tenders for the works were invited via VendorPanel on 20 May 2021 and a mandatory tender briefing was held on 1 June 2021, with a site visit to the Airport. This briefing was well attended by both local, regional and interstate companies.

Tenders closed on 7 July 2021 and three tender submissions were received. The attached confidential memorandum outlines the tender assessment and recommendations for Councils consideration.

Options

A range of design and engineering options have been considered in the development of the project scope and project deliverables with reference to the available project budgets and environmental and engineering constraints.

The majority of the design decisions have been predicated on the upgrade of Merimbula Airport to allow for unrestricted operation of both the ATR 72 and Q400 Aircraft in relation to the relevant aviation safety legislation and consultation with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

In the planning for the delivery of the runway extension project, several delivery models were considered, and it was determined to tender the runway extension project in three packages. The primary reason for this being tendered in packages is due to the high-level focus on environmental protection for the southern platform and, if scheduling permits, the potential for the platform to rest prior to addition of the pavement layer.

However due to the time taken to secure Development Approval the original project delivery scheduling window in accordance with funding deeds has reduced but it remains imperative to seal the runway at the hottest part of the year to obtain optimal results for its performance and longevity.

Due to the scheduling constraints, Packages 2 and 3 were combined with the runway strengthening and general aviation precinct projects and will also incorporate specialised pavement construction works.

During the development of the runway strengthening project several options were considered this included various surface treatments including asphalt overlay, spray seal and a foamed bitumen seal. All options had advantages and disadvantages and finally it was budget constraints, not performance, that dictated the preferred final outcome of a foamed bitumen seal solution.

Several delivery methods were also considered in the planning including night works and rolling closures during the working day. In the end, and in order to get the best possible outcome for the runway in consideration of the current budget, it was determined that when all project constraints were considered including time, quality, budget and safety, that a continuous 6 week closure would be the projects best option.

Various windows for the closure were also considered however the sealing the runway at the hottest part of the year will provide the best engineering result and two windows either side of the busy Christmas period have been identified (late November to late December 2021 or February to till early March 2022).

It is acknowledged that a continuous 6-week closure will impact our airlines, Qantas and REX, with a knock-on effect on tourism and business during this period as well as our General Aviation users. However, in order to complete these works in the shortest possible time frame and to the required quality and cost parameters, it has been determined this is the best available option.

Various options for value engineering have been considered by the project team to reduce costs, primarily by changing scope, without effecting the longevity and strength of the runway to meet the project objectives.

Further options have been considered to reduce the cost for the General Aviation project and are discussed in the attached confidential memo for Councils consideration.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Considerable community and stakeholder engagement has taken place in both the initial funding application phase and throughout the various scoping, design and approval phases.

Engagement undertaken

Community and stakeholder consultation has occurred in the development of the Runway Extension project during the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project, where a key requirement is a demonstrated community consultation plan, and this was followed up with a further public exhibition period in November and December 2020.

Dedicated consultation has also occurred with the Merimbula Lake Oyster Growers as a key stakeholder in the project to ensure any impacts are mitigated during the delivery phase of the project.

A full Archaeological survey of the airport site has been undertaken in conjunction with the Local Aboriginal Land Council and an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit is in the process of being issued by NSW Heritage in regard to these proposed works.

A series of targeted workshops have been held with the General Aviation stakeholders of the airport to inform them of the runway extension, runway strengthen and the development of the General Aviation Precinct and this group has been notified about the restrictions for General Aviation usage during the construction phase.

Extensive engagement has also occurred at all three levels of Government in developing the project design and EIS submission though various referrals and approvals.

Engagement planned

Engagement with stakeholders will continue at the same levels during the construction works.

The oyster lessees will be receiving the results of the water monitoring in real time during the project to ensure any impacts on their operations can be mitigated.

Formal correspondence has been entered into with both Qantas and Regional Express Airlines regarding the impacts on scheduled services during the construction phase and this project will result in a planned closure for a period of 6 weeks and there are currently two options for the planned closure these being; late November to late December 2021, or February to till early March 2022.

During this time the Airport will be closed to all air traffic whilst the stabilisation and sealing of the runway is undertaken, and a range of communication will occur advising all stakeholders about the upcoming planned closure once confirmed with the contractor and airlines.

Financial and Resource Considerations

The projected final project cost for the Airport infrastructure upgrades is $19.436m this is consistent with the costs previously presented to Council at its meeting of the 25th November 2020.

Council currently has $15.29m in available funding comprising:

Runway Extension – NSW State Government Funding – Restart NSW – Regional Tourism Infrastructure Program - $4,391,040 – October 2016.

General Aviation & Commercial Precinct – NSW State Government – Drought Stimulus Package - $4,000,000 – December 2019.

Existing Runway Overlay – Federal Government - Regional Airports Program Grants – Round 1 - $4,500,000 – June 2020 with a $63,000 BVSC Co-Contribution.

Council received a report at its meeting of the 25^th November 2020 noting the current project funding shortfall and has actively lobby the State and Federal Government to assist in funding this gap and to endorse the previously resolved loans program by $2.4m for the runway extension to be funded by the existing airport infrastructure Special Rate Variation.

Funding applications have been submitted to both the State and Federal Government with application submitted the Federal Government Regional Airport Program Round 2 for $2.18m and the NSW Government Snowy Hydro Legacy Fund respectively $0.98m.

Extensive lobbying has been undertaken by Council Officers and the Mayor and as of writing this report a decision is yet to be made on the outcome of these two funding applications. An announcement on the Federal Government Regional Airport Program Round 2 is imminent.

Pending the outcome of the funding applications, there is a current projected funding shortfall of between $4.15m and $1.0m. Should Council not be successful in obtaining further funding for the Airport, through the Federal Government Regional Airport Program Round 2 and/or the NSW Government Snowy Hydro Legacy Fund, additional funding will be required.

It is recommended that Council endorse a further loan of up to $2.0 million to be funded by the future income generated by the lease of General Aviation Precinct land to assist in funding this gap.

Item	$ Excl GST
Expenditure Detail
Runway Extension	$6.58m
Runway Extension – Biodiversity Offsets Credits	$579k
Runway Extension – Fisheries Offset Works	$300k
Existing Runway Overlay	$4.55m
General Aviation Precinct	$7.43m
Total Expenditure	$19.44m

Source of Funds
NSW Government - Restart	$4.39m
NSW Government – Drought Stimulus	$4.0m
Federal Government – Regional Airports Program Round 1	$4.5m
Council Loan Program	$2.4m
Federal Government – Regional Airports Program Round 2	$2.175m (pending)
NSW Government – Snowy Hydro Legacy Fund	$0.98 (pending)
Additional Council Loan Program – GA Lease Funded	Up to $2.0m (pending)
Total income available	$20.45m

Total Project Capital Cost	$19.44m
Total Available Construction Funding	Between $15.29m & $20.45m
Project Funding Shortfall	*Between $4.15m and $1.0m* *= total expense – total income*

Financial Option Impacts | Life Cycle Costing

Ongoing Financial Impacts	$ Excl GST
Capital Investment \| Renewal, Upgrade, New	$16.1m
Annual maintenance and operational costs	$650k
Depreciation costs	t.b.c
User charges (annual income) Passenger Landing Fees Aircraft Landing Fees General Aviation Ground Lease Income	$600k $50k $100k

Due to the nature of airports and need to fully comply with aviation legislation, they will always require ongoing maintenance and capital upgrades. Increasing the runway will invariably increase both the operational and deprecation cots of the asset.

Merimbula Airport seeks to offset the cost of operating and maintaining the airport through user charges, via the published fees and charges on Regular Transport Providers (RPT) through passenger landing fees this income received from RPT services is directly proportional to passenger numbers at Merimbula

Council currently receives ‘passenger landing charge’ from all passengers landing and departing at Merimbula Airport as listed in our adopted Fees and Changes and prior to COVID was around $600k per year based on passenger numbers of 60,000.

Council also generates income from landing and parking charges for both recreational and commercial aircraft usage and leases and licences for the use of airport land.

Council has several fixed costs associated with running the airport to adhere to aviation legislation including the Operation and Management Contract for the Airport, these costs are budgeted to be offset by the fee income in accordance with Council’s adopted Fees and Charges.

It is important to note, as with many regional airports across the country, Merimbula Airport is heavily reliant on both State and Federal grant money to fund and deliver necessary capital upgrades to meet the ever changing aviation legislation and to ensure the assets are maintained and upgraded to meet industry standards for airport infrastructure.

Council also generates income through the lease of land to both private and commercial entities. The future General Aviation Precinct will seek to create up to 20 long term lease sites in which it hopes to attract investment from businesses and individuals to construct aviation related infrastructure (hangers, maintenance facilities and other such commercial endeavours).

A valuation has been obtained from a Registered Valuer, a copy of which is included as a confidential attachment, to obtain their opinion of the estimated income generated by leasing out this site at commercial market rates. In their opinion a figure of around $100k per year could be generated which could be used to support the repayment of any additional loan of up to $2.0 million to support this project.

Legal /Policy

The tender process complied with the Local Government Act 1993 and Council procedures.

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 primarily via the Manual of Standards (MoS) Part 139.

The Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and associated Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005, establishes a regulatory regime to safeguard against unlawful interference with aviation and is managed by the Department of Home Affairs.

The runway extension project was subject to a Development Application and received Development Approval (DA 2019.359) on 11 May 2021 for the following:

The existing runway overlay project is for the purpose of the landing and taking off of aeroplanes and is characterised as an airport for the purposes of the Infrastructure SEPP.

Bega Valley Shire Council is a local authority constituted under the Local Government Act 1993 and is a public authority for the purposes of the Infrastructure SEPP.

As result, the proposed upgrade is permitted without development consent under the Infrastructure SEPP, and the assessment pathway is via Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

The works proposed in the General Aviation Precinct may be carried out without development consent relying on clause 22(1) of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007.

Before commencing the proposed development, Council must satisfy the legal obligations in Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to assess likely environmental impacts of the proposed development.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The Airport is a critical element of Council’s transport strategic direction and its management and the provision of Regular Passenger Transport (RPT) services into the future will be critical to ensure the best outcomes for the community.

Upgrade of infrastructure at Merimbula Airport is consistent with several key strategic directions set by Council as part of the Community Strategic Plan and this upgrade was planned to increase RPT travel and stimulate General Aviation activity:

Goal 3: Our economy is prosperous, diverse and supported by innovative and creative businesses.

Goal 9: We have opportunities to work, learn and socialise through the provision of affordable public transport and telecommunications services.

Goal 10: We have a good network of good quality roads footpaths and cycleways connecting communities throughout the Shire and beyond

This project also aligns with actions identified in Council’s adopted Delivery Program 2021-22:

5.9.3 – Deliver capital works programs for Merimbula Airport

5.10.1 – Manage, construct and maintain Merimbula Airport

The Merimbula Airport Master Plan is also another 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.

Environment and Climate Change

The runway extension project was subject to a Development Application and received Development Approval (DA 2019.359) on 11 May 2021.

As part of the Development Application for the Runway Extension a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared.

A Review of Environmental Factors (REF) in accordance with Part 5 of the EP&A Act has been prepared for the Runway Extension and General Aviation Precinct works in order to consider the environmental impacts of the project.

Regarding the Runway Extension, all impacts have been identified and ameliorated or mitigated wherever possible. Where amelioration or mitigation is not possible, environmental offset requirements under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Fisheries Management Act 1994 will apply.

The consent conditions stipulate that the following credits must be either fully retired or paid into the Biodiversity Conservation Fund (BCF) prior to construction commencing:

PCT 920 Mangroves 28 credits

PCT 1126 Saltmarsh 1 credit

Beach stone curlew 43 credits

Sooty oystercatcher 29 credits

Pied oystercatcher 29 credits

Council has developed an Offset Strategy that incorporated DPI Fisheries and BCF input as part of the environmental assessment of the project.

There are several options available for Council in the current strategy for retirement of credits:

Option 1: Pay out the credits as calculated by the BAM Credit Calculator. This equates to $579k as at July 2021.

Option 2: Seek a modification to the existing consent to create a stewardship site to offset the credits at the airport while allowing the works to commence prior to retirement of the credits. It is uncertain if a modification would be accepted and the timeframe would put the sealing works at risk of potentially delaying the project by up to 12 months and therefore incurring cost escalation.

Option 3: Progress the creation of the stewardship site and retire the credits prior to works commencing. Setting up the stewardship site would take several months; the timeframe would then put the sealing works at risk of potentially delaying the project by up to 12 months and therefore incurring cost escalation.

Each option has its own risks and costs attached. On balance it is considered that paying out the credits will provide the most secure outcome when all factors are considered, as Council could still progress the Stewardship site in parallel and then either sell on the open market or retain for future use.

The image below shows the general extents of the stewardship site which is currently being refined with DPI Fisheries and BCF. This stewardship site is to be created at the airport to offset the impacts of the Runway Extension.

Image 6 – Proposed Merimbula Airport Stewardship Site Extents

The areas bounded by the red line have been identified as having the ‘like for like’ habitat needed for the retirement of credit requirements. It is proposed to excise the turquoise lined area to allow for further future development at the airport.

The solid area in blue is identified with DPI Fisheries as the offset area required for fisheries. In order to fulfill this obligation a further approval for the removal of the southern haul road will be required.

This additional activity is proposed purely to improve environmental outcomes in the lake; removal of this hydrological barrier (haul road) will improve the marine habitat and associated terrestrial vegetation in this area and this methodology has been supported in principle by both DPI Fisheries and BCF.

Environmental risk has been mitigated by comprehensively testing the sub ground conditions; extensive surveying of tidal flows, investigation and substantiation of information provided by oyster lessees and consequent refinement of design, and multi-disciplinary approaches to environmental risk identification and management measures.

The runway is positioned at a height of 2.4m Australian Height Datum (AHD). The existing Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) level across the Arthur Kaine Drive zone is 2.19mAHD. The year 2100 PMF is 2.81m AHD. Lifecycle pavement works to the runway and taxiways (every 10-15 years) will increase its height by 50mm to 100mm on each occasion. The height of the General Aviation Precinct has been located above this mark to mitigate these impacts.

The extension of the runway facilitates routine use by larger passenger aircraft. These aircraft will be required to service increased passenger numbers and/or to replace existing airline passenger aircraft (as existing passenger aircraft reach the end of their service life and are replaced by those now in production – which are larger).

The extensions are the first of a two-stage process, the second stage of which will be triggered by larger passenger numbers (if a Development Approval is achieved). In this way, the needs of the current population are met, and the needs of the future generations are achievable, when they arise.

Economic

The Airport infrastructure projects are aimed at increasing options for the community regarding RPT travel and to support and stimulate General Aviation activity at the airport.

The short-term effects of the delivery of these projects will have a negative impact due to the 6-week scheduled runway closure. However, when looking at the bigger picture, the result of these works will provide a runway of sufficient length and strength to increase the current pavement classification to allow unrestricted SF 340 and unrestricted Q400 operations.

The General Aviation precinct is aimed at providing the necessary infrastructure to attract further investment at the airport from the private sector and support the 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 and at the same time airport operations generate a direct economic benefit.

Risk

There are several risks in the delivery of this project and in recognition of this, during the project development stage, a two-day risk workshop was held in February 2021 that addressed all the airport capital projects. It was attended by Council personnel, key members of the consultancy team and the Airport Operator. Risks were examined and mitigation mechanisms were developed.

Identification and mitigation of environmental risk was included in the Environmental Impact Statement. Mitigation requirements have been included in the Development Approval and include construction period and operational risks.

Aviation operational risk is being mitigated by a Method of Working Plan, developed to ensure aircraft movements are undertaken safely during the construction period, with the plan being drafted in accordance with aviation legislation by suitably qualified consultants and will be approved by CASA prior to the works commencing.

Some of the key risks have been summarised below:

Issue	Impact	Mitigation
Budget	Inability to deliver the scope of the project	Actively seeking State and Federal additional funding to cover shortfall Identified ability to seek additional loan of $2m funded by future income from GA precinct Several value management options have been identified in the GA precinct to reduce project cost.
LATEnt conditions	Potential for cost overruns	Project contingency has been allocated with a higher level for the Southern end runway extension (10%) and early staging allows for decisions to be made in a timely manner in regard to the allocation of the project contingency.
Runway Closure	Services interruption of RPT services and General Aviation	Early engagement with airlines and General Aviation over impacts Contractual Conditions for contractor to complete works within period of closure have been included within the contract. Two windows have been identified either side of the Xmas period for the runway closure.
Impacts of water quality of the Merimbula Lake	Degradation of Water and impacts to aquaculture to Merimbula Lake	Water Quality Monitoring Plan which requires regular sampling the water during construction and sharing this with Oyster growers. Acidic Sulphate Soils Management Plan are in place to deal with this aspect of the project. Engineering Controls have built into the contract documentation.
Aboriginal Heritage	Impacting cultural heritage of area	Full archaeological investigation of site and Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permits Involvement of Local Aboriginal Land Council during project development.
Loss of marine and terrestrial habitats	Impacts of extension of runway on ecology of area	Full flora, fauna and biodiversity study undertaken during EIS. Undertake Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) assessment and offset strategy to be adopted by Council to mitigate impacts. Council to pay out like for like credit prior to construction commencing Council to establish a stewardship site to offset impacts of runway extension within the airport site.
Safety issues around airport construction	Potential for harm to person and property	Development of Method of Working Plan Contractual Conditions for contractor Working with Airport Operator to mitigate impacts Closure of runway during high risk works to allow shorter construction period and reduce safety rick
Quality Assurance	Potential for settlement of platform	Regular inspection by independent Geo-tech Engineer Contractual Conditions for contractor to ensure quality control

It is important to note the risk of not progressing with the proposed works would ultimately lead to Merimbula Airport not being suitable to serve RPT service requirements now and into the medium to long term future and risk the ongoing provision of regular services to and from Merimbula Airport.

Another risk of not proceeding with these proposed works in could put existing funding agreements with both the State and Federal Government in jeopardy as Council would not be able to meet the milestone deadlines and could loose this funding in its entirety.

Social / Cultural

Community benefit is arguably the main reason why Council owns and operates an airport. Airport operations are 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.

The social benefits of ensuring the airport’s infrastructure keeps pace with the community’s needs and changes in aircraft have been identified in:

‘Working Towards Our Future’ Bega Valley Shire Community Strategic Plan 2040.

Failure to keep pace with the changes in aircraft over time is likely to lead to reduced passenger services and increased isolation of the region.

Across the course the airport projects, it has been necessary to undertake a full Aboriginal Heritage investigation of the site, not previously undertaken at all.

As a result, the knowledge of the Aboriginal Heritage of the site has grown considerably and been recorded permanently.

The works are subject to Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permits and any artefacts will be salvaged and buried on site and also marked and recorded permanently.

Attachments

1. Confidential attachment 1 to RFT 2021-09 & RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Infrastructure Works (Confidential - As this attachment contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business as per Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

2. Confidential attachment 2 to Council Report RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Expansion Infrastructure Works (Confidential - As this attachment contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business as per Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

3. Confidential attachment 3 to RFT 2021-09 & RFT 2021-106 Merimbula Airport Infrastructure Works (Confidential - As this attachment contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business as per Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

4. Confidential attachment 4 to RFT 2021-09 & RFT 2021 - 106 Merimbula Airport - Valuation Report - Proposed General Aviation Commercial Area (Confidential - As this attachment contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business as per Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest (as defined in Section 14 of Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act 2009) as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

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

Item no & subject
Pecuniary Interest	In my opinion, my interest is pecuniary and I am therefore required to take the action specified in section 451(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 and or any other action required by the Chief Executive Officer.
Significant Non-pecuniary conflict of interest	– In my opinion, my interest is non-pecuniary but significant. I am unable to remove the source of conflict. I am therefore required to treat the interest as if it were pecuniary and take the action specified in section 451(2) of the Local Government Act 1993.
Non-pecuniary conflict of interest	In my opinion, my interest is non-pecuniary and less than significant. I therefore make this declaration as I am required to do pursuant to clause 5.11 of Council’s Code of Conduct. However, I intend to continue to be involved with the matter.
Nature of interest	Be specific and include information such as : · The names of any person or organization with which you have a relationship · The nature of your relationship with the person or organization · The reason(s) why you consider the situation may (or may be perceived to) give rise to a conflict between your personal interests and your public duty as a Councillor.
If Pecuniary	Leave chamber
If Non-pecuniary (tick one)	Disclose & vote Disclose & not vote Leave chamber
Reason for action proposed	Clause 5.11 of Council’s Code of Conduct provides that if you determine that a non-pecuniary conflict of interest is less than significant and does not require further action, you must provide an explanation of why you consider that conflict does not require further action in the circumstances
Print Name	I disclose the above interest and acknowledge that I will take appropriate action as I have indicated above.
Signed

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.1 - Attachment 1*	Applicant's justification for proposed modification

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.1 - Attachment 2*	Locality Plan

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.1 - Attachment 3*	Assessment Report

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.1 - Attachment 4*	Council Report of 25 July 2000

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.1 - Attachment 5*	Council Report of 22 August 2000

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.1 - Attachment 6*	Draft Modification Notice

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.2 - Attachment 1*	Exhibited Deemed Concessional Lot Planning Proposal

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 8.3 - Attachment 1*	Exhibited Boydtown Planning Proposal

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 10.1 - Attachment 1*	Previous Service NSW Memorandum of Understanding Sept 2018

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 10.1 - Attachment 2*	Proposed Partnership Agreement - Council and Service NSW - July 2021

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.1 - Attachment 1*	Council report dated 28 October 2020 - Narira Village Complex

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.2 - Attachment 1*	Council report dated 11 November 2020 - Bega saleyards

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.4 - Attachment 1*	2021.08.04 Attachment Draft Valley Fields Master Plan Review May 2021

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.4 - Attachment 2*	2021.08.04 Attachment Neighbour Notification Flyer - Draft Valley Fields Master Plan Report

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.4 - Attachment 3*	2021.08.04 Attachment Bega Valley Fields Master Plan User Submissions July 2021

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.5 - Attachment 1*	Pambula 2 Merimbula 5k Fun Run

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.5 - Attachment 2*	New Years Eve Market

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 11.5 - Attachment 3*	Main Street Photos

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 12.1 - Attachment 1*	Minister Shelley Hancock Gazette Local Government Act 1993 - postpone Councillor elections from September 2021 to 4 December 2021

Council	4 August 2021
*Item 12.1 - Attachment 2*	Frequently Asked Questions -postponement-of-local-government-elections

Table 1: Investments by Fund $’000
Fund	April-2021	May-2021	June-2021
General Fund	16,643	15,804	18,396
Water Fund	22,909	22,981	24,744
Sewer Fund	41,929	42,891	41,799
TOTAL	81,481	81,676	84,939

Table 2: Investments by Restriction
Source of Funds	Value
Total cash and Investments	$84,939,294
External Restrictions as at March QBRS	$59,503,747
Internal Restrictions as at March QBRS	$6,663,461
Unrestricted funds	$18,772,086

Ordinary

Meeting Notice and Agenda

To:

Copy:

Live Streaming of Council Meetings

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

Local Government Act 1993 and Model Code of Conduct

Agency advice

Disclosure of pecuniary interests / non-pecuniary interests

Agenda

Statement of Commencement of Live Streaming

Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners of Bega Valley Shire

1 Apologies and requests for leave of absence

2 Confirmation Of Minutes

3 Declarations

4 Public Forum – report by Mayor of deputations heard prior to the meeting

5 Petitions

6 Mayoral Minutes

7 Urgent Business

8 Staff Reports – Planning and Environment

9 Staff Reports – Community, Culture and Leisure

10 Staff Reports –Economic Development and Business Growth

11 Staff Reports – Infrastructure Waste and Water

12 Staff Reports – Governance and Strategy

13 Staff Reports – Finance

14 Councillor Reports

15 Rescission/alteration Motions

16 Notices of Motion

17 Questions with Notice

18 Questions without Notice

19 Confidential Business

Statement of Cessation of Live Streaming for the period of the Closed Session.

Statement of Re-Commencement of Live Streaming

20 Noting of Resolutions from Closed Session

21 Declassification of reports considered previously in Closed Session

Council

4 August 2021

Staff Reports –Planning And Environment

4 August 2021

Officer’s Recommendation

Executive Summary

Background

Description of the proposal

Description of the site

Planning assessment

Zoning

Attachments

Council

4 August 2021

Staff Reports – Economic Develoment and Business Growth

4 August 2021

Council

4 August 2021

Staff Reports – Infrastructure Waste And Water

4 August 2021

11.5. Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee

Officer’s Recommendation

Pambula 2 Merimbula 5k Fun Run – Sunday, 7 November 2021

Recommendation:

New Year’s Eve Market 21 – Friday, 31 December 2021

Recommendation:

Bus Stop Main Street Merimbula (near Aldi Development)

Recommendation:

Attachments

Council

4 August 2021

Staff Reports – Governance And Strategy

4 August 2021

Staff Reports – Finance

4 August 2021

16.1. Cr Cathy Griff - Recognition of housing crisis in Bega Valley Shire

Notice of Motion

Background

Attachments