Ordinary Meeting Minutes

Held on Wednesday 21 May 2025

at Council Chambers, Biamanga Room, Bega Valley Commemorative Civic Centre, Bega, commencing at 2:00pm

 


 Present

Cr Russell Fitzpatrick, Mayor

Cr Mitchell Nadin, Deputy Mayor

Cr Tony Allen

Cr Simon Daly

Cr Peter Haggar

Cr Clair Mudaliar

Cr Peggy Noble

Cr Helen O’Neil

Cr David Porter

 

 In Attendance

Chief Executive Officer, Mr Anthony McMahon

Director, Assets and Operations, Mr Ian Macfarlane

Director, Community, Environment and Planning, Mrs Emily Harrison

Director, Business and Governance, Mrs Iliada Bolton

Manager Communications and Engagement, Ms Kellie Dodge

Executive Officer (Minute Secretary), Mrs Jackie Grant

 

 

Statement of Commencement of Live Streaming

The Mayor made an announcement about live streaming requirements:

Council meetings are recorded and live streamed to the Internet for public viewing. 

The recording will be archived and made available on Council’s website www.begavalley.nsw.gov.au.

Acknowledgement of Traditional Custodians of Bega Valley Shire

The Mayor commenced by acknowledging, on behalf of Bega Valley Shire Council, the traditional custodians of the lands, waterways and airspace on which we are gathering.

Statement of Ethical Obligations

The Mayor and Councillors are reminded that they remain bound by the Oath/Affirmation of Office made at the start of the council term to undertake their civic duties in the best interests of the people of Bega Valley Shire and to faithfully and impartially carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested in them under the Local Government Act or any other Act, to the best of their skill and judgement.

The Mayor and Councillors are also reminded of the requirement for disclosure of conflicts of interest in relation to items listed for consideration on the Agenda or which are considered at this meeting in accordance with the Code of Conduct and Code of Meeting Practice.

 

1.

Apologies

 

There were no apologies

 

02:01 pm      Cr Porter joined the meeting.

 

2.

Confirmation of Minutes

65/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Noble and Mudaliar

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 7 May 2025 as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

3.          Declarations

There were no declarations of interest

 

4.          Public Forum

Item 13.2 – Options for private native forestry in RU2 zones

·         Harriett Swift – AGAINST

·         David Gallen – AGAINST – On behalf of National Parks Association – Far South Coast Branch

·         Rob de Fegely – FOR

·         Peter Rutherford – FOR

·         Damien Bunting – FOR

5.                 Petitions

There were no petitions.

6.          Mayoral Minutes

There were no mayoral minutes.

 

7.          Urgent Business

Cr Nadin advised he has urgent business, the Mayor allowed it to be discussed at the notice of motion section of the agenda.

8.          Staff Reports – Community, Environment and Planning

 

8.1

Endorsement of Bega Urban Land Release Planning Proposal

66/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs O'Neil and Haggar

1.    That Council resolves to support the planning proposal for the Bega Urban Land Release Area (Attachment 1).

2      That Council endorses submission of the planning proposal (Attachment 1) and supporting information to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure requesting a Gateway Determination under Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

3.    That following Gateway Determination, the planning proposal be placed on public exhibition.

4.    That a further report be presented to Council to advise of the feedback to the planning         proposal received during public exhibition.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

 

Movement of Notice of Motion item 13.2 – Options for private native forestry in RU2 zones

67/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Allen

That item 13.2 be moved forward ahead of item 8.2 to be dealt with as the next item of business

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

13.2

Options for private native forestry in RU2 zones

 

A motion was moved by Crs Fitzpatrick and Allen

1.    Notes the NSW Private Native Forestry Codes of Practice administered under part 5B, Division 2 of the Local Land Services Act 2013 establishes comprehensive guidelines for overseeing private native forestry operations, consolidating regulations into a single instrument.

2.    Notes the PNF Codes of Practices were re-made in 2022 to provide certainty and consistency for landholders, while maintaining ongoing habitat values for native fauna.

3.    Notes that Zone RU2 Rural Landscape under the Bega Valley Shire Council LEP is compatible with private native forestry operations.

4.    Approves the preparation of a Proposal to amend the Bega Local Environmental Plan 2013 to         make Private Native Forestry permitted without consent in Zone RU2 – Rural Landscape.

5.    That council staff negotiate with the industry in relation to the contribution they are willing         to make towards the cost of preparing a planning proposal and report the outcomes back to         Council for budget consideration.

An amendment was moved by Cr Nadin and seconded by Cr Noble

1.    Notes the NSW Private Native Forestry Codes of Practice administered under part 5B,         Division 2 of the Local Land Services Act 2013 establishes comprehensive guidelines for         overseeing private native forestry operations, consolidating regulations into a single         instrument.

2.    Notes the PNF Codes of Practices were re-made in 2022 to provide certainty and consistency         for landholders, while maintaining ongoing habitat values for native fauna.

3.    Notes that Zone RU2 Rural Landscape under the Bega Valley Shire Council LEP is compatible         with private native forestry operations.

4.    That Council allocate $20,000 in the 25-26 budget to complete the scoping phase for a         planning proposal to amend the RU2 land use table in the Bega Valley Local Environmental         Plan 2013 to include ‘forestry’ as a land use permitted without consent.

5.    Upon completion of the scoping study, that staff provide a report to Council for further         consideration.

The amendment was put to the vote and it was CARRIED

In favour:             Crs Allen, Fitzpatrick, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble and Porter

Against:                  Crs Daly, Haggar and O'Neil

 

The amendment became the motion and was moved by Cr Nadin and seconded by Cr Noble

1.    Notes the NSW Private Native Forestry Codes of Practice administered under part 5B,         Division 2 of the Local Land Services Act 2013 establishes comprehensive guidelines for         overseeing private native forestry operations, consolidating regulations into a single         instrument.

2.    Notes the PNF Codes of Practices were re-made in 2022 to provide certainty and consistency         for landholders, while maintaining ongoing habitat values for native fauna.

3.    Notes that Zone RU2 Rural Landscape under the Bega Valley Shire Council LEP is compatible         with private native forestry operations.

4.    That Council allocate $20,000 in the 25-26 budget to complete the scoping phase for a         planning proposal to amend the RU2 land use table in the Bega Valley Local Environmental         Plan 2013 to include ‘forestry’ as a land use permitted without consent.

5.    Upon completion of the scoping study, that staff provide a report to Council for further         consideration.

The motion and was put to the vote and it was CARRIED

In favour:             Crs Allen, Fitzpatrick, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble and Porter

Against:                  Crs Daly, Haggar and O'Neil

68/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Noble

That Council:

1.    Notes the NSW Private Native Forestry Codes of Practice administered under part 5B,         Division 2 of the Local Land Services Act 2013 establishes comprehensive guidelines for         overseeing private native forestry operations, consolidating regulations into a single         instrument.

2.    Notes the PNF Codes of Practices were re-made in 2022 to provide certainty and consistency         for landholders, while maintaining ongoing habitat values for native fauna.

3.    Notes that Zone RU2 Rural Landscape under the Bega Valley Shire Council LEP is compatible         with private native forestry operations.

4.    That Council allocate $20,000 in the 25-26 budget to complete the scoping phase for a         planning proposal to amend the RU2 land use table in the Bega Valley Local Environmental         Plan 2013 to include ‘forestry’ as a land use permitted without consent.

5.    Upon completion of the scoping study, that staff provide a report to Council for further         consideration.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Fitzpatrick, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble and Porter

Against:                  Crs Daly, Haggar and O'Neil

 

 

8.2

Fire Safety Inspection Reports

69/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Haggar

That Council note the report and associated attachments.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

9.          Staff Reports – Assets and Operations

 

9.1

Request for Tender (RFT) 2425-089 - Upper Brogo Road Design and Construct Retaining Structure

70/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Haggar

That this Item be deferred for discussion in Closed Session under the provisions of Section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act 1993, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to (c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

In favour:             Crs Daly, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Crs Allen and Fitzpatrick

 

 

9.2

Appointment of volunteer representatives to Central Waste Facility Consultative Committee

 

03:21 pm      Cr Porter left the meeting.

03:23 pm      Cr Porter returned to the meeting.

71/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Haggar

1.    That Council appoint the following volunteers to the Central Waste Facility (CWF)         Consultative Committee for the 2025-2026 term:

·    Steven McGrath

·    David Luck

·    Chris Shearer

·         Ben Hobill

2.    That the Terms of Reference for the Central Waste Facility Consultative Committee be         updated to include an additional committee member

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.        Staff Reports – Business and Governance

 

10.1

Appointment of volunteer representatives to Council committees

72/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs O'Neil and Nadin

That Council:

1.    Appoint the following volunteers to the Sportsground site committees for the remaining term of the current Council:

        a) Eden George Brown Oval: Rochelle Sykes and Mark Gleeson

        b) Eden Barclay Street Sporting Complex: Chelsie Cassie and Deb Heron

        c) Bega Sporting Complex: Nikki Edmunds, Rosemary Burgess and Jayde Green

        d) Bemboka Colombo Park: Jody Lloyd

        e) Pambula Sporting Complex: Sarah Linszen and Stephen Pickup

        f) Bermagui Indoor Stadium: Shelley Rowlands

2.    Appoint Deb Heron, Rosemary Burgess and Jody Lloyd to the General Sportsground s355 committee for the remaining term of the current Council:

3.    Note additional nominations for site committees and s355 committees will be reported to council for endorsement when received.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.2

Proposed boundary adjustment - She Oak Close, Bega

73/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Porter

1.    That Council approves the proposed boundary adjustment of a 5m2 section of Lot 4 DP 1304754 at Bega as shown on the attached plan for the value of $350 plus GST.

2.    That all costs associated with this matter, including all legal costs, survey work, plan preparation, subdivision application and registration fees be borne by the applicant.

3.    That the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor be authorised to execute the necessary documentation to affect the above course of action.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.3

Proposed communications lease - Bega Street, Tathra

74/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Porter and O'Neil

1.    That subject to the NSW Telco Authority making its own enquiries regarding development approval for the proposed use of the land, Council approves a tenure of twenty years, in the form of four consecutive five-year leases, to the NSW Telco Authority for part of Lot 1 DP 502253 at 146 Bega Street, Tathra, at an annual market rental determined by a registered valuer.

2.    That the NSW Telco Authority be responsible for covering all costs incurred by Council or its legal representatives related to the preparation and registration of the lease.

3.    That Council authorises the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor to execute all necessary documentation to provide the tenure.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.4

Legal matters update

75/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and O'Neil

That Council receive and note the information report on ongoing and closed legal matters as of 1 May 2025.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.5

Policy review (batch 1)

76/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Porter and O'Neil

1.    Council places the following draft policies on public exhibition:

·    3.03 Soil and water management

·         3.10 Waste services

·         3.12 Council related Development Application conflict of interest guidelines

·         3.13 Trees and vegetation on council managed land in urban areas

·         4.04 Companion animal management

·         4.05 Enforcement and compliance

·         4.06 Cemeteries and memorials

·         4.07 Water and sewerage services

·         4.10 Lands under council jurisdiction

·         5.01 Asset management

·         5.02 Transport services

·         6.01 Governance

·         6.02 Behaviour of Councillors and Staff

·         6.04 Conditions of employment

2.    The policies listed above be exhibited for a period of 42 days and council will accept         submissions on the draft policies during the public exhibition period.

3.    That Policy 3.09 Dedication of public land be revoked noting the provisions of this policy are         included in Council’s procedure 4.10.05 Acquisition, dedication and disposal of land or         interests in land.

4.    That council review and workshop the underlying Procedure 4.04.07 Dangerous and         Menacing Dog Declaration Appeals & Revocation.

5.    That a further report be presented to Council if any submissions received could change the         scope, purpose, and intent of the draft policy.

6.    If no submissions are received, the exhibited policies be adopted and published on Council’s         website.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.6

Certificate of Investment April 2025

77/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Allen and O'Neil

1.    That Council receive and note the report on Council’s investment position at 30 April 2025.

2.    That Council notes the certification of the Responsible Accounting Officer.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.7

Inquiry into ability of local governments to fund infrastructure and services- NSW Government response

78/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Fitzpatrick and O'Neil

That Council:

1.    Notes the NSW Government’s response to the Legislative Council’s Standing Committee on State Development inquiry into the ability of local governments to fund infrastructure and services.

2.    Writes to the Minister for Local Government and the Office of Local Government seeking details on timeframe and accountability reporting for implementation of the proposed changes.

3.    Writes to Local Government NSW expressing concern about the lack of detail in the government’s response to address the very real and significant financial sustainability issues that councils are facing and encourage continued advocacy to ensure that when these proposed changes are implemented councils are well represented.

4.    Support Bega Valley Shire Council staff in applying to participate in the Expert Advisory Panel         once established to ensure that our concerns and that of regional councils across the state,         continue to be advocated for.   

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.8

Actions from resolutions of Council - Progress Report

79/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Mudaliar and Noble

That:

1.    Council be provided quarterly update reports to monitor progress on implementation of Council resolutions

2.    Council notes the progress update on implementation of Council resolutions contained within this report

3.    Council endorse the completed resolutions contained within this report

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.9

Extension of Tenure for LS-07 at Merimbula Airport

80/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Haggar

1.    That Council delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor to execute the necessary lease documentation, granting an extension of tenure to Mr John Moffatt until 31 December 2025, under the same terms and conditions as the existing lease over Lot 7 DP 1257793 at Merimbula Airport.

2.    That Council delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor to execute the necessary tenure documentation, granting a 10-year land-only tenure arrangement from 1 January 2026 to Sapphire Coast Autos Pty Ltd for the occupation of the existing lease site, Lot 7 DP 1257793 at Merimbula Airport, with a commencing annual rental of $20.00 per m² plus GST, and an annual CPI increase, for the purposes of operating a car hire business and office space.

3.    That Council delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer and Mayor to execute the necessary licence documentation, granting a maximum 10-year non-exclusive licence agreement to Sapphire Coast Autos Pty Ltd for space adjoining lease site Lot 7 DP 1257793, at a rate of $5.00 per m² plus GST with an annual CPI increase, to accommodate car parking outside the lease area.

4.    That Council notes the new tenure arrangement over Lot 7 DP 1257793 will be subject to Sapphire Coast Autos Pty Ltd demolishing the existing car hire business building located on Lot 2 DP 1257793.

5.    That Mr John Moffatt be invoiced $660 for the assignment of lease fee as outlined in the Council’s Fees and Charges schedule.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

 

10.10

Roles and Rights of Councillors on Committees and Advisory Groups

81/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Haggar and Porter

All Councillors can choose to attend any appointed committee or advisory group meetings and openly participate in discussion noting the appointed delegate vote on behalf of Council where required.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

11.        Councillor Reports

There were no Councillor reports.

12.        Rescission/Alteration Motions

There were no rescission/alteration motions.

13.        Notices of Motion

 

13.1

Use of Bega Valley Commemorative Civic Centre for polling and pre-polling for future Federal, State and Local Government elections

82/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs O'Neil and Daly

That Council actively encourages the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) and New South Wales Electoral Commission to use  the Bega Valley Commemorative Civic Centre (BVCCC) for polls and pre-polling for future elections at Federal, State and Local Government levels, recognising the value of our civic centre as a place to celebrate and promote participation in Australia democracy and, further recognising that it is designed to be accessible for elderly and disabled voters and has adequate parking.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

Item 13.2 - Options for private native forestry in RU2 zones was moved forward ahead of item 8.2 to be dealt with as the next item of business.

 

13.3

Cr Nadin - Late urgent motion - Council rates and plans

83/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Nadin and Porter  

1.    The maximum rate increase Council can legally approve in the 25-26 financial year is 4.9 per         cent as set by the Independent Pricing and Regulator Tribunal (IPART) which is included         “Option C” of Councils draft long term financial plan currently on exhibition.

2.    “Option A” and “Option B” in Councils draft Long Term Financial Plan currently on exhibition         are only financial scenarios designed to give the public an example of what projects might be         considered with extra funding or a fully funded asset management plan. They are also         designed to show the council’s project and spending priorities.

3.    That council has not currently given consideration to any special rate variation in this term of         council and that the draft delivery program for this term of council currently on exhibition         does not assume rate income increases above the allowable rate peg limit set by IPART each         year.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Nil

 

14.        Questions with Notice

 

14.1

Cr Porter - Does council recognise interest as a fee or charge?

 

A response to Cr Porter’s Question with Notice was provided in the Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda of 21 May 2025 with the response as follows:

Interest is neither a rate nor a charge, but it can be recovered as though it were.

The following has been provided to us through the revenue professionals group and Primary City of Sydney:

According to section 566(1) “Interest accrues on rates and charges that remain unpaid after they become due and payable.” This section distinctly refers to a rate, a charge and interest as three different things. This is also why interest cannot accrue on itself. It is not a rate or charge.

Section 566(1) is really all you need as explanation because it is a statement. “Interest accrues…”. The only choice for councils is to determine the rate at which the interest accrues, but the circumstances of when it accrues are given in the section. The words, “may” or “can” are absent. There are no requirements within the legislation to effect the interest accrual by service of a notice, as there is for a rate and a charge.

The Act sets out what rates can be made and levied under Chapter 15 Part 1. Similarly, the Act sets out the exact circumstances for when a council may levy different charges, and each is stipulated as a charge within those sections (refer sections 496, 496A, 496B, 501, and 502). Further, charges are made and levied “for a service”, as mentioned in section 539 which discusses the criteria relevant in determining the amount of a charge. None of these sections about making rates and charges include interest.

Interest is, however, able to be recovered as though it were a charge, which is stipulated in section 566(4). This section is important to help you clarify the difference between rates, charges and interest: “Accrued interest is, for the purpose of its recovery, taken to be a rate or charge which is due and payable.”

This means that, although interest is not a rate or a charge, it can be recovered as though it were, which means it is a debt on the land, and the sections of the Act that refer to the recovery of rates and charges can be extended to the recovery of interest.

In short, because interest is not a charge, it is not something you “levy” and you do not need to issue a Rates and Charges Notice for it to be valid.

The Regulations tell you what needs to be shown on a Rates and Charges Notice. This does not apply to an instalment reminder notice sent in accordance with section 562(5) of the Act. A Rates and Charges Notice needs to be issued only when you are levying or amending a rate or charge.

Regulation 127 (1) states “A rates and charges notice must contain the following information—

(c)  particulars of each rate or charge levied on the land by the notice,…

(f)  particulars of any outstanding arrears of rates and charges levied on the land and of any interest payable on those amounts,…”

It is interpreted that clause 127(1)(f) means that only the interest payable at the time of issuing a rates and charges notice needs to be shown on it. So, if interest is outstanding, you need to show it. If it’s paid, it is no longer “payable” and you do not need to show it. Further, because interest is not a rate or a charge, clause 127(1)(c) does not apply to interest.

 

15.        Questions without Notice

 

15.1

Cr Nadin - Whether and how a threshold or trigger could be introduced to require the actions included in table 3.1 of council’s development control plan?

 

A response to Cr Nadin’s Question without Notice was provided in the Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda of 21 May 2025 with the response as follows:

View impact assessment is a matter of merit consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). Table 3.1 of Clause 3.2.2.6 of the Bega Valley Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP) is intended to provide transparency and guidance for applicants regarding the steps in a view impact assessment, in line with the court determined principles of view sharing which have been long established in NSW case law and originate from the NSW Land and Environment Court case of Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council [2004] NSWLEC 140. While Council could remove Table 3.1 from Council’s Development Control Plan (DCP), this would not remove the requirement for view impact assessment under the EP&A Act.

Under the EP&A Act, applicants are required to consider the impact of their development on adjoining land, including potential view impact. During the assessment of the application, additional information may be required to validate the level of impact. This can be requested by Council’s assessing officers if it is evident that a development may have an impact on views, particularly in the case of views from public places. The need for a view impact assessment can also be triggered from a concern raised by neighbouring landowners. If the assessing officer believes there is merit in the concern, additional information may be required. This is part of the standard merits assessment required under the EP&A Act.

There are a number of ways in which applicants may provide information to help inform the assessment of impact. The erection of height poles (by a surveyor or builder) is the preferred method to enable assessment officers to visit adjoining sites and take photographs of the likely impact. Alternatively, detailed survey information of adjoining properties may be requested to measure and determine likely impact on view paths, to enable an assessment of impact.

Principles of view sharing

Table 3.1 of the BVDCP 2013 provides a summary of the four planning principles which are used to determine the extent of potential view loss. More detailed commentary, from the case law, is provided below.

Step 1: Assessment of views to be affected

“The first step is the assessment of the views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (e.g. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, e.g. a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured."

Step 2: Assessment of what part of the property the views are obtained

“The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.”

Step 3: Assessment of the extent of the impact

“The third step is to assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.”

Step 4: Assessment of the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact

“The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.”

 

15.2

Cr Porter - Interest charged on rates and water notices

 

Cr Porter asked in relation to regulation 127(1)(f) that says particulars of the interest payable on those amounts should be on the bill, is Council compliant in not showing those particulars of outstanding interest?

Chief Executive Officer, Anthony McMahon took the question on notice.

 

15.3

Cr Nadin - Tiny Homes

 

Cr Nadin asked in Council’s Local Environment Plan (LEP) and Development Control Plan (DCP), what is the definition of a tiny home?

Chief Executive Officer, Mr Anthony McMahon advised there is no legal definition of a tiny home.

Cr Daly asked with the review that’s coming up into the review of caravans, movable dwellings etc, is the definition going to be clarified?

Mr McMahon advised he is not aware but expects that it will be highly unlikely.

 

 

15.4

Cr Daly - Apprenticeships, Trainees and Cadets funding

 

Cr Daly noted there was an announcement made of more than a thousand apprentices, trainees and cadet cadets starting their careers with NSW Council’s Government, 60% were for regional and rural areas. How many Apprenticeships, Trainees and Cadets have we employed and how was it prioritised into the different areas of council?

Chief Executive Officer, Mr Anthony McMahon clarified there could be a difference between how many positions have been awarded and how many we have employed. We have employed people to fill the funded roles we have. The roles are a cadet planner, a trainee planner and a cadet engineer, they were awarded in round 1 of that program. We didn’t apply in round 2, we are expecting a round 3 and intend to apply, we will be focusing on apprentices due to indicative guidance received from the Office of Local Government. We will likely start preparing for what we might apply for through that future round, opening possibly around July, not yet confirmed.

Cr Daly asked why didn’t we apply in round 2?

Mr McMahon advised due to competing priorities for our staff time and resources. We had some consideration  of what we might have applied for but in the end didn’t get a submission in due to time constraints.

 

15.5

Cr Nadin - Accidents on roads

 

Cr Nadin asked in relation to the number of serious accidents on our roads in the last few weeks, what is the process around Council’s response to those incidents and what involvement Council has with authorities, State Government, Transport for NSW, Traffic Committee and how do we go identifying what happened and making sure these roads become priorities with our advocacy to State and federal Governments for roads funding?

Chief Executive Officer, Mr Anthony McMahon advised that after accidents, a crash report is prepared, Council gets access to the data, that we can assess and utilise in seeking funding through grant programs. Occasionally there are crashes that aren’t reported and we can’t get that data. For the crashes referred to we will be able to access the data and assess if there is anything that can be done to prevent them from happening in the future that relate to road conditions, road alignment and any treatment on our roads in these or similar locations.

 

15.6

Cr Fitzpatrick - DA2025.37 - 48 George St, South Pambula

 

Cr Fitzpatrick noted in relation to DA 2025.37- construction of a home at 48 George Street, South Pambula. Despite only having a few trees on this block they have been advised of a BAL rating of 40, all cost estimates on BAL rating of 29. The cost between a BAL 40 and a BAL 29 Costs is around $200k difference. This DA will be refused by Council because they can’t meet the BAL 40 requirements of the asset management protection, it relates to a council block of land noted as bushland and high fire area. Is there anything Council can do to work with the applicants to make this property happen?

Chief Executive Officer, Mr Anthony McMahon advised this situation is not unique across the Shire, there are similar situations that crop up from time to time elsewhere. Our staff do assessment of the BAL rating of the property in accordance with the rules we are required to work to. Our staff have given those applicants the opportunity to seek their own detailed independent assessment, that comes at a cost. Our staff have done all they can to try and support this developer with the options available to them to address the issues. Othe than considering concessions legislatively or contributing to their development costs to help them get assessments done there is nothing further we can do.

 

16.        Confidential Business

 

Adjournment Into Closed Session

84/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Allen and Nadin

1.    That Council resolve to adjourn into Closed Session to discuss the following confidential items:

9.1  Request for Tender(RFT) 2425-089 - Upper Brogo Road Design and Construct Retaining Structure

Reason for Confidentiality

This item is classified CONFIDENTIAL under the provisions of Section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to (c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

2.    That pursuant to Section 10A of the Local Government 1993, the press and public be excluded     from the proceedings on the basis that the business to be considered is classified confidential     under the provisions of Section 10A(2) of the Act as outlined above.

3.    That the correspondence and reports relevant to the subject business be withheld from      access to the press and public as required by the Local Government Act 1993, Section 11(2).

In favour:             Crs Daly, Haggar, Mudaliar, Nadin, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Crs Allen and Fitzpatrick

 

4:06 pm       The Ordinary Meeting was adjourned.

4:07 pm       The Confidential Closed Session meeting commenced.

4:07 pm         Cr O'Neil left the meeting.

4:09 pm         Cr O'Neil returned to the meeting.

4:29 pm         The Ordinary Meeting was reconvened.

Statement of Re-Commencement of Live Streaming

The Chairperson advised that the recording of the Council Meeting would recommence and reminded those present that Council meetings are recorded and live streamed to the Internet for public viewing.

17.        Noting of Resolutions from Closed Session

17.1

9.1    Request for Tender(RFT) 2425-089 - Upper Brogo Road Design and Construct Retaining Structure

85/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Fitzpatrick and Allen

1.    That Council accepts the recommendations outlined in the confidential memo.

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Cr Nadin

86/25

RESOLVED on the motion of Crs Fitzpatrick and Allen

2.    That Council accepts the tender from A W Dummett Pty Ltd in relation to contract for the works described in Tender RFT 2425-089, in the amount of $214,101.14  (excluding GST), subject to variations, provisional sums and prime cost items.

3.    That authority be delegated to the CEO to execute all necessary documentation and approve contract variations up to the available allocated budget.

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

In favour:             Crs Allen, Daly, Fitzpatrick, Haggar, Mudaliar, Noble, O'Neil and Porter

Against:                  Cr Nadin

 

18.        Declassification of reports considered previously in closed session

There were no declassification of reports considered previously in closed session.

Closure

There being no further business, the Chairperson closed the meeting at 4:30pm.

Confirmed Russell Fitzpatrick
                                (digitally signed)

Chairperson of the meeting of the Bega Valley Shire Council held on Wednesday, 21 May 2025.