Council

 

 

An Ordinary Meeting of Lismore City Council will be held at the Council Chambers on Tuesday, 13 June 2017 at 6.00pm

 

Members of Council are requested to attend.

 

 

 

 

Lismore City Council acknowledges the people of the Bundjalung nation, traditional custodians of the land on which we work.

 

 

 

Gary Murphy

General Manager

6 June 2017


Agenda

1.    Opening of Meeting and Prayer (Mayor)

 

2.    Apologies and Leave of Absence 

 

3.    Minutes of Previous Meeting

Lismore City Council held  9 May, 2017............................................................................................ 125

 

4.    Disclosure of Interest

 

5.    Public Access Session

 

6.    Mayoral Minutes

 

7.    Notice of Rescission Motions

 

8.    Notice of Motions

8.1       Investments with Commonwealth Bank..................................................................................... 7

8.2       March/April Flood 2017 Lismore................................................................................................ 8

8.3       Richmond Tweed Regional Library.......................................................................................... 11

8.4       Reduce Rural Roadside Maintenance..................................................................................... 12

8.5       Nuclear Free Peace Zone........................................................................................................ 14

8.6       Marriage Equality...................................................................................................................... 16  

 

9.    Altering Order of Business (Consideration of altering the order of business to debate matters raised during Public Access)

 

10.  Matters Arising

10.1     Investments - May 2017........................................................................................................... 18

10.2     Public exhibition of Amendment No. 21 to the Lismore Development Control Plan - Chapter 1 (Residential Development) ..................................................................................... 39

10.3     Amended Rezoning Planning Proposal for Bexhill................................................................... 44

10.4     Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017-2020............................................................................... 76

 

11.  Reports

11.1     Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. - Request for Financial Assistance.......... 79

11.2     Nominations Aboriginal Advisory Group.................................................................................. 83

11.3     Approval to appoint new members to the Nimbin Advisory Group.......................................... 92

11.4     Tender T2017-15 Plant Replacement - 24-27 Tonne Excavator............................................. 94

11.5     Tender No T2017/4 Transaction to Interaction - Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Project..................................................................................................................................... 100

11.6     Lismore Flood Appeal Funds Allocation Process................................................................... 106

11.7     Annual Remuneration Fees for Mayor and Councillors......................................................... 112

 

12.  Committee Recommendations

12.1     Traffic Advisory Committee - Minutes of meeting of 17 May 2017...................................... 115

 

13.  Documents for Signing and Sealing

13.1     Documents for Signing and Sealing....................................................................................... 122

 

14.  Financial Assistance – Section 356

14.1     Financial Assistance – Section 356 Report............................................................................ 124   

 


 

  


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notice of Motions

 

 


Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion

Councillor Eddie Lloyd has given notice of intention to move:

 

 

 

That LCC write to the Chief Executive Officer and Director's of Commonwealth Bank reminding them of their Corporate Social Responsibilities in regards to climate change by encouraging them to:



1. Deliver a policy similar to Westpac Bank's Climate Change Action Plan Policy which will see Westpac cease investing in new coal and unconventional gas projects;



2. That the Commonwealth Bank specifically rule out funding the proposed Adani Carmichael Coalmine and railway line;



3. That LCC write to local Federal Member of Parliament, Kevin Hogan advising him of our letter to the Commonwealth Bank and stating LCC's dissatisfaction with any Bank or Government funding of the proposed Adani Carmichael Coalmine.

 

Councillor Comment

The Commonwealth Bank has agreed to be the banker for the Adani Group's Carmichael coal mine. The Commonwealth Bank has not ruled out funding the project.

 

The Carmichael mine would become the largest coal mine in Australia, furthering a legacy of devastating greenhouse gas pollution and contributing irrevocably to global warming at a precarious tipping point for our planet’s future.

 

Westpac listened to the community and has publicly refused to fund the Adani Carmichael Coalmine. Westpac has, in line with its Corporate Social Responsibility obligations developed and delivered a climate change policy which recognises that climate change is an economic issue as well as an environmental issue, and that banks have an important role to play in assisting the Australian economy to transition to a net zero emissions economy. The Commonwealth Bank should follow their leadership and do the same.

 

Lismore City Council has a strong commitment to a renewable and fossil free future, and is a leader in renewable energy initiatives. LCC should show leadership to other councils in encouraging the Commonwealth bank to rule out funding the coalmine and to develop a climate change policy aimed at ending the funding of new coal mines and unconventional gas projects which are significant contributors to greenhouse gas pollution.

 

Staff Comment

Not applicable.

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

 

TRIM Record No:

BP17/552:EF17/92

 


Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion

Councillor Bill Moorhouse has given notice of intention to move:

 

 

 

In view of the high damage costs and community distress caused by the March 2017 flood the Minister for Police and Emergency Services be formally requested to take the following actions:

 

1.   The Minister be formally requested to arrange an Independent Assessment of the management of the March flood that overtopped the Lismore levee. Council to receive a briefing from the writer when complete.

2.   That Council be given a detailed presentation on how future floods in Lismore will be handled by the SES managers. Briefing to include details of the proposed warning/ evacuation messages and the possible time frames associated with a safe evacuation when the levee is predicted to be overtopped.

3.    Items 1 and 2 above be completed by 1 November which will allow any necessary operational changes to be implemented before the 2018 flood season which often starts in January.

 

 

Councillor Comment

The Lismore CBD levee was designed to:

 

a.   Prevent small floods entering the City; and

b.   Give businesses increased time to evacuate when a major flood occurred.

 

Thursday, 30 May 2017 was a day of heavy rain. At around 4pm the Bureau of Meteorology officially advised that the Wilsons River would overtop the CBD levee in the early hours of Friday morning. 

 

Soon after this the SES put out an evacuation order for the CBD and followed this up with staff patrolling the city and ordering people to leave immediately. This prevented many businesses taking the necessary action to lift or remove stock from their premises. 

 

In fact the levee overtopped around 4am on Friday morning.  

 

Businesses that defied the evacuation order had 10-12 hours to lift/remove stock before the levee overtopped.

 

The concept of an orderly retreat from the CBD was built into the design of the levee. Even after the levee overtopped, it took 4-6 hours for the floodwaters to enter most of the city. It was still possible to enter and exit the CBD safely along Conway Street until late morning of Friday, 31 May.

 

Regrettably those in authority either did not know how the levee was designed to work or simply chose to do their own thing. Either way the community has suffered significant financial loss because of their actions. 

 

Hence the request for an inquiry and a briefing to Council as to how the SES proposes to handle the next flood, be it next week; next year or next decade.

 

 

Staff Comment

Manager Assets

The flood of March/April this year was the first time that the levee had been over-topped since its construction was completed in 2005. The floodwaters caused significant damage to local homes, businesses and public infrastructure.

 

The NSW State Emergency Service (SES) is the designated response agency for floods under the emergency management arrangements and is charged with leading the response to such events. There has been much feedback and comment about the way in which that responsibility was exercised on this occasion.

 

It is considered important to differentiate the actions of SES staff and volunteers in assisting the community on the ground, for which much thanks and praise has been received, from the issues raised in the notice of motion which seek to understand decision making processes and systems within the SES. Those processes are determined and managed from higher levels of the organisation.   

 

The SES has already commenced their usual process of an after–event review, including holding public forums open to the community. The results of these reviews will feed into a normal process of change from the lessons learned. These reviews are conducted at the local, regional and state levels of the organisation.

 

The Local Emergency Management Committee has also conducted a review of the event from an all agency operational perspective and the Floodplain Management Committee has similarly commenced a review.

 

All of these processes will deliver recommendations for improvements and change based on the lessons learned in this event.

 

It is considered important in any request for additional reviews over and above what is already occurring, that the processes already in train be acknowledged and respected. Any additional or independent review should include information and outcomes from those reviews already in progress and seek to value add rather than work separately.

 

Taking all of this into consideration, it is considered appropriate to allow the processes already underway to run their course. Any request for a further independent review could be in the form of an independent peer review of the outcomes and include bringing further information to the table as deemed necessary. 

 

 

 

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

 

TRIM Record No:

BP17/564:EF17/92

 

 


Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion

Councillor Adam Guise has given notice of intention to move:

 

 

 

That:

 

Council notes that the Richmond Tweed Regional Library committee at its 12 May meeting expressed disappointment and concern regarding the intended $79,900 library cuts to Lismore library services and asked that they be withdrawn;

 

The $79,900 per annum in cuts intended to the library budget as part of the Delivery Program be withdrawn.

 

 

Councillor Comment

Our libraries provide an essential community service and many people in our community depend on them for the safe community space that they offer. Cuts in previous budgets have already whittled down library services to the bare minimum. Efforts to close Goonellabah library by previous councils has been met with significant community opposition. Staff in libraries are already stretched thin and they're already providing more services than ever such as holiday programs, teen nights, computers, Wi-Fi, baby bounce, story time, guest speakers and more. Further cuts to the library budget will negatively impact levels of service and hurt the most vulnerable in our community.

 

Staff Comment

Manager Finance

 

The Council has received a submission from the Richmond Tweed Regional Library Committee regarding the proposed cuts to the Lismore City Council Library service. The submission will be reported to Council’s 20 June meeting where all submissions to the draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2017/18 will be considered.

 

With regards to this Notice of Motion, as it also relates to the draft Delivery Plan 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2017/18, the 20 June meeting is considered the most appropriate meeting for it to be considered.

 

Also, as advised to Councillors and to be reported at the 20 June meeting there is an error in the draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2017/18. The error is that the proposed library cuts were not included. Based on legal advice, the Council does not have the power to amend the draft operational plan after public exhibition to include the library cuts unless the documents were readvertised. As the readvertising option was not taken, the library budget in effect has not been cut.

 

 

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

 

TRIM Record No:

BP17/577:EF17/92

 


Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion

Councillor Vanessa Ekins has given notice of intention to move:

 

 

 

That Council:

1.   Reduce ongoing roadside maintenance costs by incorporating low maintenance vegetation options, such as lomandra species for all new works. Target areas being embankments near bridges and culverts, along with steep slopes, to help negate the future need for herbicide spraying and side arm slashing.

2.   Consider opportunities to undertake revegetation using suitable native species in areas of high conservation value where revegetation will increase connectivity and reduce weed maintenance requirements.

 

Councillor Comment

Council’s environment policies and Rous County Council’s catchment management plans highlight the problem of roadside gravel travelling into watercourses. These documents recommend planting appropriate vegetation during roadworks to protect water quality.

 

Council’s Roadside Vegetation Management Plan (RVMP) also identifies revegetation as a management option in road reserves and sets out criteria for areas where revegetation may be suitable such as steep slopes and cuttings. The plan recommends revegetation following roadworks to compensate for removal of native vegetation. In areas of high conservation value revegetation along roadsides can increase connectivity and reduce weed maintenance requirements.

 

Planting appropriate species for all new roadworks will ensure long term outcomes for our waterways and minimise roadside maintenance.

 

Staff Comment

Acting Coordinator, Environmental Strategies

Using suitable native species along road reserves in areas of high conservation significance is supported and, in principle, so is the use of low maintenance vegetation. The Roadside Vegetation Management Plan (RVMP) identifies revegetation as a management option in road reserves but also highlights the constraints such as: (i) high cost of establishing revegetation; (ii) high cost of ongoing management to control weeds particularly planting of low growing species in highly disturbed areas; and (iii) potential for inappropriate plantings to impact on driver safety through reducing line of sight.

 

The RVMP also sets out criteria for areas where revegetation may be suitable, such as steep slopes and cuttings, following roadworks to compensate for removal of native vegetation, and in areas of high conservation value to increase connectivity and reduce weed maintenance requirements. However, the RVMP is more focused on expending limited funds on restoring existing areas of HCV veg through weed control, rather than planting more areas.

 

With respect to costs it is difficult to generalise and would depend on the planting location, access and species to be planted and maintenance requirements. The maintenance requirements would be high in disturbed areas with high weed density, which is typical of the majority of road reserves. In addition, the need for traffic control adds significantly to the cost of undertaking works in the road reserve, and can often double the cost of works.

 

Manager Assets

It is important to maintain suitable gradients on roadside areas for water to run off the road pavement and shoulders into the table drains. This protects the road from water penetration and subsequent damage. Any vegetation on roadside areas has the potential to cause gravel etc. to build up and whilst keeping gravel out of the table drains is desirable, having a build-up of gravel such that water is unable to flow off the road into the table drains will result in shorter pavement lives and ultimately increased costs for Council in the longer term. This is why areas immediately adjacent to the road surface are slashed/mowed and periodically graded off - to ensure water can drain away from the road.   

 

Access from the road to the table drains is also required periodically for maintenance of the table drains and having areas of native vegetation planted along roadsides could make that more difficult. 

 

As such not all roadside areas will be suitable for the suggested approach.

 

Opportunities for the use of native vegetation in roadside areas are currently explored in new works subject to drainage issues as outlined, and budget limitations. The comments by the Acting Coordinator, Environmental Strategies regarding steep areas and the like are supported in that these locations would be the most suitable. The Review of Environmental Factors (REF) undertaken for these projects is the mechanism where opportunities can be explored. Any areas to be planted would need a suitable allocation of funding for ongoing term maintenance.

 

Staff will continue to explore these opportunities as part of our REF and design processes for capital works.

 

In regard to revegetation of existing roadside areas, this could only be undertaken with an appropriate budget allocation as no funding is provided for such activities at present. The issues around drainage and access as outlined above are equally applicable.

 

There will be limited opportunities through the Biodiversity Management Strategy for roadside areas that provide connections to vegetation corridors and areas of high conservation value to be treated as suggested. It is however important that when planting these areas, drainage off the road is not adversely affected and maintenance regimes are not negatively impacted.

 

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

 

TRIM Record No:

BP17/590:EF17/92

 

 


Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion

Councillor Vanessa Ekins has given notice of intention to move:

 

 

 

That Council:

1. Write to the federal government and Kevin Hogan urging them to sign the proposed United Nations Treaty for the Banning of Nuclear Weapons Worldwide, scheduled to be signed by international governments on July 7th 2017.

2. Erect signage at the entrances to Lismore declaring the city a nuclear free peace zone.

Councillor Comment

In 1984 Council was declared a nuclear free peace zone and for many years there were signs at the entrance to the City reflecting this stance. Twenty years later Council resolved to remove the signs. With the nuclear war rhetoric gaining national and international traction, it is time to make our policy known and signage at the entrances to our city is an effective tool.

 

Our federal government appears reluctant to participate in the upcoming UN negotiations on nuclear weapons. Commentators claim Australia will be sitting in self- imposed exile from one of the biggest and most important international treaty making initiatives in recent history.

 

Tim Wright, the Asia-Pacific director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons says 'This will be the first time that Australia has ever boycotted disarmament negotiations. We are a party to treaties prohibiting chemical weapons, biological weapons, landmines and cluster munitions. It beggars belief that the government is now refusing to negotiate a ban on nuclear weapons'.

 

As a council we have an opportunity to lobby our federal government to take action.

 

Staff Comment

Not applicable.

 

Attachment/s

1.

Definition of Nuclear Free Peace Zone

 

 

 

TRIM Record No:

BP17/608:EF17/95

 

 


Definition of Nuclear Free Peace Zone

Attachment 1

 

Policy manual

Policy title:

DEFINITION OF NUCLEAR FREE PEACE ZONE POLICY

Policy number:

3.1.1

Objective:

To define Nuclear Free Peace Zones.

Link to community vision/service:

Environmental Health

Program Area:

Environmental Health & Development Assessment

Policy created: 1/5/84

Council reviewed: 18/7/95, 20/7/99, Aug. 03

Last reviewed by staff: August 2013

TRIM Ref: ED12/10252 & ED16/26993

 

The definition of Nuclear Free Peace Zone means an area in which -

 

1.   A person shall not construct or operate -

a)   A mill for the production of uranium or thorium ore concentrates (except where permitted under Section 6);

b)   A facility for conversion or enrichment of any nuclear material;                         

c)   A facility for the fabrication of fuels for use in nuclear reactors;                          

d)   A nuclear reactor or a nuclear power reactor;                         

e)   A facility for reprocessing spent fuel; or                         

f)    A facility for the storage or disposal of any nuclear materials (including any waste) resulting from any of the processes or facilities described in paragraphs (a) to (e).

 

2.   A person shall not -

a)   Have in his possession;

b)   Use; 

c)   Sell; 

d)   Transport; 

e)   Store; or 

f)    Dispose of by any means - any nuclear material unless, in respect of the nuclear material concerned -

i.    he is in possession of a licence under appropriate legislation;

ii.    the provisions of restricting or controlling regulations under that legislation do not apply;

iii.   he has complied with the provisions of any legislation affecting the particular material.

 

3.   The whole of the City of Lismore be a Nuclear Free Peace Zone.

 

 


Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion

Councillor Darlene Cook has given notice of intention to move:

 

 

 

That:

 

1.   Council confirms its long held commitment to publicly support marriage equality for all persons irrespective of sex, gender identity or sex characteristics.

 

2.   Council writes to all Federal Members of Parliament and the Commonwealth Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission advising them of Council’s ongoing commitment and support for marriage equality.

 

3.   Council write to all political parties with representation in the Federal Parliament encouraging them to prioritise debating changes to the Marriage Act and to allow a genuine conscience vote on marriage equality; and

 

4.   Council fly a rainbow flag or banner in a prominent place in the City until Marriage Equality is achieved at a Federal level.

 

 

Councillor Comment

Council has previously passed a motion, "in principle" supporting the legalisation of same sex marriage. This motion calls for a reaffirmation of that support and for the Council to advise our parliamentary representatives that the communities we represent are overwhelmingly in favour of changes to the Marriage Act to enable marriage equality.

 

The Lismore LGA contains, per capita, the highest population of LGBTI persons outside of the capital cities of Sydney and Melbourne. The contribution of LGBTI community to the LGA cannot be measured just in dollar terms; we are your neighbours, teachers, doctors, accountants, lawyers, builders - we are the people next door. Why should our relationships be treated differently from opposite sex attracted persons' relationships, under the law? 

 

Staff Comment

Not applicable.

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

 

TRIM Record No:

BP17/609:EF17/95

 

  


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Matters Arising

 

 


Matters Arising

Matters Arising

Subject

Investments - May 2017

TRIM Record No

BP17/6:EF09/2213

Prepared by

Management Accountant

Reason

Required by Local Government Act 1993, Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council's Investment Policy

 

Executive Summary

Investments as at 31 May 2017 are estimated to be $66,374,450.

 

The interest rate reported for May 2017 is estimated to be 2.72% which is above the 90 Day Bank Bill Index of 1.74%.  The final interest return may vary due to actual returns achieved on investments advised after month end.

 

The Council’s Investment Policy is also required to be reviewed at least annually. The opportunity is taken to recommend some minor amendments. These were presented to the Councillor Briefing held on 6 June 2017.

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       The report be received and noted.

2.       The amended Investment Policy be adopted.

 

 

Background

The Local Government Act, 1993 (Section 625), Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 (Clause 212) and Council’s Investment Policy requires a monthly report be submitted to Council on investments. The report is to include the source and amount of funds invested, investment portfolio performance for the period and a statement of compliance in relation to the requirements of the Local Government Act, 1993.

 

Report on Investments

 

·    Confirmation of Investments – at Market Value – 30 April 2017                                    $64,104,450

·    Estimated Investments – at Market Value – 31 May 2017                                             $66,374,450

 

The increase in investments of $2.27 million during May is attributable to the final instalment of the Financial Assistance Grant of $1.4 million being received during the month as well as the 4th instalment of rates due on 31 May.

 

The current rate of return on investments for May 2017 is estimated to be 2.72%. This is above the 90 Day Bank Bill Index of 1.74%. The rate of return reported has been calculated using actual returns where available and estimates based on the previous period balances and interest rates.

 

The estimated interest earned to May 2017 is slightly more than the pro rata 2016/17 Budget. Estimated interest earned to May 2017 is $1,654,799 compared to the pro rata budget of $1,612,967. The favourable variance of approximately $42,000 is mainly due to the delay in timing of carrying out major capital works.

 

S & P Long Term Credit Ratings Downgrade 22 May 2017

On 22 May 2017 Standard and Poors Global Ratings (S&P) downgraded the long term credit ratings of 23 Financial Institutions operating in Australia due to the ‘build-up of economic imbalances’.  This imbalance has increased due to strong growth in private sector debt and residential property prices in the past 4 years.  They believe that financial institutions in Australia now face an increased risk of sharp correction in property prices, and if this was to occur, a significant rise in credit losses.  The domestic four major banks (ANZ, NAB, CBA and Westpac) were excluded from this downgrade on the basis that they remain ‘too big to fail’ and would implicitly receive government support in a crisis, however their long-term credit rating remains on negative outlook.

 

This downgrade had affected 6 institutions that Council currently has funds invested. Of these, investments in the Bank of Queensland and Bendigo Adelaide Bank who were downgraded from A- to BBB+, have resulted in a credit rating non-compliance between current investments and the Investment Policy. Specifically, the non-compliance is approximately $3.5 million or 5% over the maximum 40% allowed for investments in the BBB and unrated ADI’s category.

 

The prudent person approach to this situation is to not overreact and immediately dispose of these assets in order to comply with Investment Policy as this would result in income losses and future underperformance.  The preferred process will see these funds divested as they mature and a move towards policy compliance as soon as possible.

 

Review of Investment Policy

Council’s Investment Policy formalises the guidelines for investment.  It includes all relevant investment information such as the goals and objectives of investing, constraints, legislative requirements, the assets that are authorised for investment, the appointment of advisors and other external service providers, and the identification of key risks.

 

A requirement of the policy is that it is to be reviewed at least annually and any amendments reported to Council to determine.

 

The annual review of the investment policy has been completed and findings presented to the Councillor Briefing on the 6 June 2017. There are some minor changes recommended which are highlighted on the copy of the policy attached.

 

Strategic Alignment
This report is consistent with the requirements of the Imagine Lismore 4 Year Plan for Civic Leadership/ Management.

 

 

 

 

Comments

Finance

All investments with various financial institutions have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act, 1993, Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

With regards to the reported non-compliance of the investment portfolio compared to the Investment Policy requirements, the proposed action to divest from these investments as they mature is supported.

 

Conclusion

A report on investments is required to be submitted to Council monthly. As at 31 May 2017, investments are estimated to total $66,374,450 and the annualised rate of return is estimated at 2.72%.

 

The annual review of the Investment Policy has been completed and some minor changes recommended.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Capital Value Movements including name of institution, purchase date and maturity

 

2.

Estimated Interest showing interest rate and estimated interest earned for the year

 

3.

Total Investment Portfolio held by month and Weighted Average Interest rate graphical

 

4.

Investment by Type graphical

 

5.

Investment by Institution as a percentage of total portfolio graphical

 

6.

Amended Policy 1.5.4 - Investments

 

  


Capital Value Movements including name of institution, purchase date and maturity

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Estimated Interest showing interest rate and estimated interest earned for the year

Attachment 2

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Total Investment Portfolio held by month and Weighted Average Interest rate graphical

Attachment 3

 

PDF Creator


Investment by Type graphical

Attachment 4

 

PDF Creator


Investment by Institution as a percentage of total portfolio graphical

Attachment 5

 

PDF Creator


Amended Policy 1.5.4 - Investments

Attachment 6

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Matters Arising

Matters Arising

Subject

Public exhibition of Amendment No. 21 to the Lismore Development Control Plan - Chapter 1 (Residential Development)

TRIM Record No

BP16/897:EF15/184

Prepared by

Strategic Planner

Reason

To seek Council approval for the public exhibition of Amendment No. 21 to the Lismore Development Control Plan - Chapter 1 (Residential Development)

 

Executive Summary

Amendment No. 21 to the Lismore Development Control Plan – Chapter 1 (Residential Development) has been prepared as part of ongoing updates and improvements to the DCP in response to feedback from the community, developers and Council staff.

 

Minor changes are proposed to the text contained in Chapter 1 based on feedback from Development Assessment staff and a further review by Strategic Planning staff.  These changes are summarised in Table 1 of this report. A full copy of the proposed amended Chapter 1 is provided as an attachment to this report.

 

It is proposed that the public exhibition period will occur from 29 June 2017 to 31 July 2017 in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

The outcomes of public exhibition will then be reported to Council including an analysis of issues raised in any submissions received and a justification for the proposed changes to the draft DCP Chapter.

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       Council approve the public exhibition of Amendment No. 21 to the Lismore Development Control Plan – Chapter 1 (Residential Development) with proposed changes shown in red text in Attachment 1, from 29 June 2017 to 31 July 2017.  

2.       a report will be prepared to Council with the outcomes of public exhibition and any proposed changes as a result of submissions received.

 

 

Background

The role of Lismore’s Development Control Plan (DCP) is to provide detailed planning controls and guidelines to complement the State standard planning provisions contained in Lismore’s Local Environment Plan (LEP). 

 

The Strategic Planning section of Council is responsible for ongoing updates to the DCP in response to feedback from the community, developers and the Development Assessment team.  The aim of ongoing updates is to gauge the effectiveness of existing planning provisions and ensure the DCP reflects contemporary reforms in planning practice and current State Environmental Planning Policy. 

 

 

Chapter 1

Chapter 1 of the Lismore Development Control Plan (DCP), Residential Development, was reviewed by Council in 2014-2015 to ensure it encourages innovative design, improved built form outcomes and housing diversity. The original DCP was adopted in 1992, with various amendments in the 1990’s and in

2007, and it became necessary to consider the need for more contemporary control.

 

The revised Chapter 1 had not been adopted by Council prior to the Health Precinct rezoning and DCP proposals being endorsed for exhibition by Council. Rather than prepare a separate DCP for the Health Precinct, additional criteria and provisions were included in the revised Chapter 1 to guide the form of development in the proposed R3 Medium Density Residential zone.

 

This revised Chapter that included with a separate section on the Lismore Health Precinct was adopted by Council on 12 July 2016. Since this time, in implementing the new Chapter 1, development assessment have identified that some minor amendments are necessary.

 

The proposed changes are regarded as minor and relate to text only, resulting from feedback from Development Assessment staff and a further review by Strategic Planning staff.

 

An explanation of the proposed changes are summarised in Table 1 below. A full copy of the Chapter is included as an attachment to this report.

 

Table 1

 

Proposed amendments to Chapter 1 - Residential Development of Part A of the Development Control Plan – Comparison of existing and proposed

 

DCP section

Existing Chapter

Recommended changes

2. Definitions

 

Definitions re-worded to be clearer

Definition added for ‘Deep Soil Zone’

Definition of ‘Flexible housing’ deleted

4. General Provisions

4.1 Element – ‘Design, Height and Siting’ changed to ‘Setbacks, Design, Density and Height’

No building setbacks for rural zones

Building setbacks for residential zones re-worded to be clearer

 

Building setbacks added for rural zones

4.2 Visual Privacy

 

Text added to the Acceptable Solution on decks, verandahs, terraces and balconies:

“Maximum opening of 25%” to be consistent with the Codes State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP)

4.3 Acoustic Privacy

 

Text added to improve explanation of Acoustic Privacy.

4.4 Element – Open Space and Landscaping

 

The term Total Open Space is replaced with ‘Primary Open Space’.

4.5 Element – Earthworks, Retaining Walls and Erosion controls

 

The maximum height for a retaining wall is changed from 1.2m to 1.5m to be consistent with the rest of the section.

4.6 Element – Off Street Car Parking, Carports, Garages, Outbuildings and Driveways

 

The term ‘on-site’ car parking is changed to ‘off street’ car parking to be consistent with diagrams.

 

Driveways – the maximum gradient for driveways is changed from 20% (which is the preferred) to 25% (the maximum)

This change is also made in Figure 21 for upslope and downslope driveways.

4.7 Element Fences and Walls

 

Reference to ‘Walls’ is removed as this is covered in Element 4.5

 

Element 4.7 - Fences rewritten as the information in the previous Element was inconsistent with the Codes SEPP (State Environmental Planning Policy)

 

The re-written provisions are aimed at providing guidance for fencing that is not defined as Exempt Development

Figure 23: Fencing

 

Diagrams of fences removed as they are not consistent with the Codes SEPP

4.8 Element – Service Areas

 

Reference to medium density added into section on Service Areas.

 

‘Waste Management’ added to this Element to include provisions for Waste Management Plans.

4.9 Element – Orientation, Glazing and Shade Control

 

First paragraph re-written to better explain design features for Lismore’s climate.

 

Under ‘Energy and Water Efficiency’ heading, wording added to outline that a BASIX assessment is compulsory with a development application.  

4.10 On-site Sewage and Waste Water Management System

 

Minor changes to wording to explain the application of these provisions.

5 Expanded Dwelling

 

Two new Acceptable solutions added to make provisions clearer. 

6 Small Lot Housing

 

New Acceptable Solution added for vehicle access. 

7 Secondary Dwellings

 

Minor changes to wording to provide more information about Secondary Dwellings

8 Shop Top Housing

 

Minor changes to the description of Shop Top Housing for improved explanation

 

Removal of Acceptable Solutions relating to:

·    balconies that have private open space having to be completely enclosed;

·    dwellings with access to ground level private open space having a screened clothes drying area;

·    internal laundry facilities being provided where dwellings don’t have access to ground level private open space.

 

These clauses are not deemed relevant to Shop Top housing and may have been carried over from previous provisions relating to residential flat buildings and multiple dwellings.

10 Flexible Housing

 

Section removed as the provisions for this housing type are not compulsory and are advisory only. 

All the provisions in the DCP are required to be considered except for this section.  The most appropriate place for this information would be a factsheet, publicly available on Council’s website that advises clients on how this housing type can be designed. This approach would ensure that this information that provides innovative methods on designing Flexible Housing would not be ‘lost and’ would remain easily accessible to potential developers.   

11 Lismore Health Precinct

 

Paragraph on ‘Pre-lodgement consultation’ removed as already included in the Introduction to the Chapter.

 

New Acceptable Solution 48.3 added for a Waste Management Plan to be provided.

New Section

 

New paragraph on Rural Detached Dual Occupancy to give policy guidance when variations to the LEP Clause may be considered

 

 

Strategic Alignment
The ongoing amendments to the LEP and DCP are part of the recurrent activities listed in Imagine Lismore.

 

Amendment No. 21 to DCP Chapter 1 is consistent with the community’s vision for growth as detailed in the Imagine Lismore 10 Year Plan Growth in Lismore.  The draft DCP Chapter 1 has been prepared by Council staff. 

 

The only costs borne by Council for this Draft Amendment were internal staff resources accommodated within existing Sustainable Development budgets.

 

There are no identifiable risks associated with this proposal.

Comments

Finance

Not required.

 

Other staff comments

Development Assessment staff as the key end users of this document have provided valuable feedback to the preliminary drafting of DCP Chapter 1. 

 

Public consultation

Council intends to place draft DCP Chapter 1 on public exhibition for at least 28 days to fulfil its public consultation obligations under Clause 18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.   

 

The notice advising the public of the proposed changes to this DCP Chapter will be placed in Local Matters and copies of the draft Chapter will be displayed at the front counter at Council’s Corporate Centre. 

 

Local planning and development consultants will also be advised of the proposed changes.

 

Conclusion

Amendment no. 21 to DCP Chapter 1 (Residential Development) will introduce greater consistency and more contemporary planning principles to the DCP.  The public exhibition of this amendment will allow an assessment of any submissions from the public and the local development community to ensure a range of views are considered prior to its adoption. 

 

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Chapter 1 Residential Development - Mark up

(Over 7 pages)

  


Matters Arising

Matters Arising

Subject

Amended Rezoning Planning Proposal for Bexhill

TRIM Record No

BP17/570:EF12/504

Prepared by

Strategic Planning Coordinator - Integrated Planning

Reason

Obtain a resolution of Council to seek a Gateway determination for an amended Planning Proposal to rezone land adjacent to Bexhill village to RU5 Village and E3 Environmental Management zones.

 

Executive Summary

A rezoning application for land adjacent to the Bexhill village, shown on Figure 1 below, was lodged with Council in 2007 with a request that the land be rezoned to RU5 Village as part of the Comprehensive Standard Instrument LEP process. The matter was not progressed due to various unresolved issues. It was then resubmitted in 2012 as a Planning Proposal under new Part 3 provisions in the EP&A Act 1979, a key part of which is the Gateway process.

The planning proposal submitted by the applicant sought a rezoning of the entire site to the RU5 Village Zone with a lot size that would allow the creation of around 160 lots able to connect to reticulated sewer. This was not supported by Council for the following reasons:

·        significant concerns about the economic feasibility and septicity issues;.

·        land in the north eastern part of the site is steep and potentially unstable and was regarded as unsuitable for a RU5 Village zone.

·        land in the south western part of the site is in the flood planning area and also unsuitable for the RU5 Village zone.

Instead, at its meeting on 12 May, 2012 Council endorsed a Planning Proposal for the purposes of seeking a Gateway determination to rezone part of the site to RU5 Village and R5 Large Lot Residential, with around 3.5 hectares to be retained in the RU1 Primary Production zone. A minimum lot size for subdivision of 2,500m2 was proposed in both RU5 and R5 zones.

A Gateway determination was issued by the Department of Planning and Environment on 2 June 2015. The applicant provided the information required by the Gateway determination and the Planning Proposal was forwarded to state agencies for review and comment.

The flora and fauna report submitted by the applicant showed that large areas of the site are constrained for development by the presence of threatened flora species and endangered ecological communities. This led to a number of discussions between Council staff, the applicant and the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) and a significant change in the proposed zoning of the land is now recommended.

The amended planning proposal is to rezone the site to the RU5 Village and E3 Environmental Management zones. This represents a reduction in the area suitable for future development by close to 50%. This proposal aims to enable the development of part of the site for village housing, with a potential for 40-45 lots, while supporting the conservation of habitat for threatened species and endangered ecological communities.

The recommended amended rezoning Planning Proposal now requires endorsement by Council before it is referred to the Department of Planning and Environment for a new Gateway determination.

 


 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       Council support the Rezoning Planning Proposal detailed in Attachment 5 for the expansion of Bexhill Village and inclusion of land in the E3 Environmental Management zone and forward the planning proposal to the Minister for Planning to seek a Gateway Determination.

2.       the proponents are to undertake the following key investigations where Council receives a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning and Environment that the Planning Proposal may proceed:

a)  land use capability assessment for on-site effluent disposal based on a minimum lot size of 2500m2 in the RU5 Village zone;

b)  land use conflict risk assessment;

c)  a Vegetation Management Plan detailing protection and enhancement of threatened flora and fauna habitat, EECs and Koala habitat.

d)  a Threatened Species Management Plan for the Hairy Joint-grass habitat.

3.       the proponent is to prepare a conceptual Structure Plan in consultation with Council to guide the future residential development and environmental management and conservation of the site, for inclusion in Chapter 6 of the Lismore Development Control Plan, prior to the making of this LEP amendment.

 

Background

At the 12 May 2015 Ordinary meeting of Council, a Planning Proposal to rezone land adjacent to the Bexhill village was endorsed by Council for the purposes of seeking a Gateway determination. The proposal was to rezone the 35 hectare site to RU5 Village and R5 Large Lot Residential with a minimum lot size for subdivision of 2,500m2. The anticipated lot yield was around 80 lots.

 

The resolution also sought the submission of a number of studies and site investigations, including an expanded flora and fauna assessment. A Gateway determination was issued by the Department of Planning and Environment on 2 June 2015. The applicant was requested to provide the information required by the Gateway determination and following submission of the information the Planning Proposal was forwarded to state agencies for review and comment.

 

The flora and fauna report submitted by the applicant showed that large areas of the site are constrained for development by the presence of threatened flora species and endangered ecological communities. This led to a number of discussions between Council staff, the applicant and the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) and a significant change in the proposed zoning of the land is now recommended.

 

The amended proposal is to rezone the site to the RU5 Village and E3 Environmental Management zones. This represents a reduction in the area suitable for future development by close to 50%. The proposal aims to enable the development of part of the site for village housing while supporting the conservation of habitat for threatened species and endangered ecological communities. This amended rezoning Planning Proposal now requires endorsement by Council before it is referred to the Department of Planning and Environment for a new Gateway determination.

 

In addition to the flora and fauna assessment, the proponents prepared a number of other reports to support the rezoning proposal along with additional investigations as required by the Gateway determination. Studies that were not included in the original Gateway determination but which, in the opinion of staff or a state agency, are still required are recommended for completion.

 

All state agencies provided responses to the Planning Proposal with the RMS objecting and requesting a traffic assessment, which has been provided by the applicant. Other state agencies either raised no concerns or any issues raised could be addressed. However, referral of an amended Proposal will still be necessary to some agencies unless the Department of Planning and Environment advises to the contrary.

 

Councillor Briefing

A formal briefing of Councillors about the amended planning proposal has not occurred. Instead, a site inspection with Council staff and the applicant was conducted on 18 April 2017.

 

Site Location and Characteristics

The land shown in Figure 1 has an area of 35.5 ha, consisting of 22 lots and two (2) different landowners. The street address and cadastral descriptions of each of these lots is provided in Table 1 below.

 

Table 1: Bexhill Site Details

STREET ADDRESS

CADASTRAL DESCRIPTION

 41 North Street, Bexhill

Lot 5, DP733335

37 and 39 North Street, Bexhill

Lot 1 and Lot 2, DP1133256

21 North Street, Bexhill

Lot 1, DP1036803

46 and 48 and 48A Osborne Road, Bexhill

Lot 189, DP755686 and Lot 1, DP1125837 and Lot 11 Sec 11, DP758102

1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 Numulgi Street and 16, 18, 20, 22 and 24 Withers Street, Bexhill

Lots 1 to 10 Sec 17, DP758102

17, 17A and 21 Withers Street, Bexhill

Lots 17-19 Sec 6, DP758102

23A Withers Street, Bexhill

Lot 1 Sec 6, DP758102

23 Withers Street, Bexhill

Lot 175 and Lot 189, DP755686

 

The site is to the immediate east of Bexhill village, with access from Withers Street. The Lismore urban area is a 12 minute drive south of the site via Bangalow Road.  Clunes village is a 6 minute drive north east of the site via Bangalow Road. Bexhill village primarily consists of a small number of residential dwellings and businesses fronting the eastern side of Bangalow Road.  The village also has a general store, Primary School, public hall and sporting fields.

 

The subject land is bounded partly by Coleman Street to the north, North Street road reserve to the west and Osborne Street road reserve to the south. The land generally has west to south westerly slopes and rises up to a ridgeline of about 80m AHD.  About 10 hectares of the land in the north-eastern corner are classified as having high to very high geotechnical constraints. The developable area is generally clear of woody vegetation; however, there are significant areas of native grasslands, threatened species and endangered ecological communities. The land is bounded by mostly rural land uses to the east, south and north. To the west is village zoned land. Rural residential housing is located on the western side of the Lismore Bangalow Road.

 

 

 


 

Figure 1: Site Location Map

 

Figure 2 below show the key physical constraints of the site, including the flood planning area, waterways up to level 3 and contours that highlight the steep area in the north eastern part of the site.

 

Figure 2: Contour, flood planning area and stream order map

Figures 3 to 5 below provide views within the site.

 

Figure 3: Views of the site looking west towards the existing village

 

Photo point D (2).JPG

 

Figure 4: Views to the north west towards the general store

 

Photo point D (4).JPG

 

Figure 5: Views to the south across the middle of the land

 

Photo point D (4).JPG

 

Existing Zone and Growth Management Strategy

As shown in Figure 6 below, the land is currently in the RU1 Primary Production zone. Village zoned land adjoins the western boundary of the site. The land was included in Council’s former Village Development Strategy 1997, is in the Lismore Growth Management Strategy 2015-2035 and was nominated in the former Far North Coast Regional Strategy and now is included in the newly adopted Far North Coast Regional Plan.

 


 

Figure 6: Bexhill existing zone map

 

Figure 7: Bexhill Proposed Expansion in Lismore Growth Management Strategy

Map18

 


 

Planning Proposal Adopted by Council 12 May 2015

The Council report of 12 May 2012 and the Planning Proposal endorsed at that meeting are included as attachments to this report. The following is a brief summary of that Planning Proposal.

The planning proposal submitted by the applicant sought a rezoning of the entire site to the RU5 Village Zone and indicated the potential for 167 lots with an average lot size of 1,500m2 on the basis of connecting the land to Council’s reticulated sewer system. Reports accompanying the proposal investigated the suitability and feasibility of a conventional gravity wastewater collection system with transfer of the wastewater to the South Lismore Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) via a pump station and a 10 kilometre rising main.

The proponents were not able to satisfy Council’s significant concerns in relation to controlling septicity within the rising main and the economic feasibility in terms of “Whole of Life” costs for the sewerage assets. Therefore, the planning proposal endorsed by Council included a minimum lot size of 2,500 m2, consistent with other zoned non-sewered villages, with future dwellings to include on-site wastewater systems.

In addition, due to the areas of unstable slopes towards the upper ridge and over the ridgeline in the north-eastern part of the site, this land was recommended for the R5 Large Lot Residential zone, which is a less intensive land use zone compared with the proponents requested RU5 Village Zone. Approximately 3.5ha of land in the south west corner of the site is in the flood planning area and this was proposed to remain in the RU1 Primary Production zone.

The planning proposal endorsed by Council at the 12 May 2015 Ordinary meeting for the purposes of seeking a Gateway determination was for a combination of the RU5 Village Zone and the R5 Large Lot Residential Zone, with the residue land to remain in the RU1 Primary Production Zone. Figure 8 below is the zone map adopted by Council at the 12 May 2015 meeting. A minimum lot size of 2500m2 was proposed in the RU5 and R5 zones with a minimum lot size of 40ha applying to the residue RU1 Zone. A maximum building height of 8.5m was proposed for land within the RU5 and R5 zones. The potential lot yield could have been around 80 lots.

Figure 8: Planning Proposal Zone Map Endorsed by Council 12 May 2015


In addition to endorsing the above zone map, Council resolved that:

1.       The proponents are to undertake the following key investigations where Council receives a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning and Environment that the Planning Proposal may proceed:

a)      Land use capability assessment for on-site effluent disposal based on a minimum lot size of 2500m2;

b)      Expanded flora and fauna assessment;

c)      Updated contaminated land assessment;

d)      Bush fire hazard assessment;

e)      Updated stormwater management assessment addressing both quantity and quality issues as well as providing recommendations regarding the impacts of runoff on the slope stability of the site;

f)       Aboriginal and European cultural heritage assessment;

g)      Updated traffic assessment in particular considering the changed nature of the Bangalow Road traffic and providing further information on the Bangalow/Clunes/Corndale staggered “T” intersection; and

h)      Land use conflict risk assessment.

2.       The proponents provide, based on the assessments above, a conceptual structure plan for the future development of the site.

 

Gateway Determination and Additional Information

The Department of Planning and Environment issued a Gateway determination on 2 June 2015 that required the submission of the following reports:

·        expanded flora and fauna assessment;

·        updated contaminated land assessment;

·        bush fire hazard assessment; and

·        Aboriginal and European cultural heritage assessment.

On 11 June 2015 the applicant was requested to submit the reports specified above, which were provided to Council on 11 March 2016. The Planning Proposal and supporting information was also forwarded to state agencies. State agency responses are discussed in the next section of this report.

 

Results of Flora and Fauna Assessment

The findings of the flora and fauna assessment led to a number of discussions with OEH, including an on-site meeting, along with an additional response from the applicant. OEH provided a written response on 3 May 2016 and, subsequent to a revised report from the applicant, provided final comments in November 2016. These assessments and discussions have led to a significant amendment to the Planning Proposal.

 

The applicant has provided the following assessments:

·        Flora and Fauna assessment by David Fell (March 2016) - includes an ‘amelioration design’ outlining areas of environmental protection/ management at the site;

·        Response to OEH Report Flora Fauna (May 2016) - provided an updated amelioration design for the site;

·        Response to LCC Flora Fauna V2 (August 2016) – added to the response to OEH and provides responses to issues raised by Council on the proposal;

·        EPBC HJG Assessment (April 2017) – response to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

 

A summary of the key findings of the flora and fauna assessment is as follows:

·     Site vegetation: six vegetation communities were recorded at the site as described below:

Camphor-dominated closed forest

Exotic regrowth shrubland

Camphor-dry rainforest

Riparian sedgeland-grassland-forbland

Derived grassland

Managed grassland

·     Endangered Ecological Communities (EECs): two EECs listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) were recorded at the subject site, consisting of Freshwater Wetland EEC (vegetation community Riparian sedgeland-grassland-forbland, occurring in the low-lying south-western part of the site – 0.37 ha) and Lowland Rainforest EEC (vegetation community Camphor-dry rainforest, occurring in a small area in the far south-eastern corner of the site – 1.25 ha).

·     Threatened Flora: Four (4) threatened flora species listed under the TSC Act/ EPBC Act were recorded at the site: 

Hairy Joint-grass (Arthraxon hispidus) - has a widespread occurrence in tussock grassland/ sedgeland on hills and footslopes with drainage soaks/springs.  Occupies 21.72 ha of the subject site (occurs across approximately 61% of the subject site).

Fragrant Myrtle (Gossia fragrantissima) - three individuals recorded within the Lowland Rainforest EEC patch in the SE of the subject site.

Thorny Pea (Desmodium acanthocladum) – occurs in the Lowland Rainforest EEC patch and is also more broadly scattered in the Camphor Laurel dominated forest in the NE of the site. 

Arrowhead Vine (Tinospora tinosporoides) – three individuals recorded within the Lowland Rainforest EEC patch in the SE of the subject site.

·     Fauna habitat: due to the considerable past disturbance of the site and general lack of key habitat features for threatened fauna (e.g. tree hollows), the potential for the subject site to provide habitat for threatened fauna is generally limited.  The fauna survey recorded the (probable) occurrence of two microbat species, as well as Grey-headed Flying-fox.  Rose-crowned Fruit-dove has also previously been recorded at the site.  In addition, the flora and fauna assessment indicated that several other threatened birds and bats are possible occurrences on occasion; however, none of these fauna species would be resident at the site.

Comments on Hairy Joint-grass

Hairy Joint-grass occupies a substantial area within the subject site (21.72 ha of a total of 35.5 ha).  The population may extend off-site, as similar suitable habitat occurs on adjacent farmland to the south-east (although this was not surveyed as part of the current proposal).  Due to its cryptic nature, Hairy Joint-grass is likely to have previously been under-recorded in the North Coast region, with most records being made in the last 15 years in association with residential development and infrastructure projects.  Of the known occurrences, the population on the subject land appears to be one of the largest.  For comparison, some previously identified occurrences are:

·        Between Lennox Head and Skennars Head (Ballina LGA) - 32.38 ha;

·        Tintenbar to Ewingsdale Pacific Highway Upgrade (Byron LGA/ Ballina LGA) - 6.78 ha;

·        North Lismore Plateau - 2.83 ha.

The initial flora and fauna assessment provided some recommendations for Hairy Joint-grass management at the site stating that, “options include retention of the flood reserve located in the SW part of the site. This will achieve retention of part of the HJG habitat and will ensure that the local population remains viable and not placed at risk of extinction. The maintenance of any retained areas as threatened species habitat will require long term guidance under a Threatened Species Management Plan. Other opportunities for retention of HJG habitat are potentially available within larger lots under conservation covenant where appropriate”. 

 

Council’s Ecologist advised that retention of part of the HJG habitat in the ‘flood reserve’ located in the SW part of the site would not adequately ensure that the local population remains viable as Hairy Joint-grass occurrence in the flood reserve is relatively minor in comparison with other parts of the subject site and the flood reserve occupies only 3.71 ha and is only a small portion of the 21.72 ha of Hairy Joint-grass occurring at the subject site.

 

In addition, protection of Hairy Joint-grass by way of conservation covenant on larger lots is undesirable as it would be difficult to ensure that the specific management regime required for maintenance of a viable population of HJG (consisting of biomass reduction through either slashing or controlled grazing) is effectively undertaken on these lots.

 

The initial Flora and Fauna assessment also recommended habitat retention within three conservation areas to protect ecological features (along with enhancement as directed by a VMP) as described below:

·        Freshwater Wetlands EEC (flood reserve in SW of site);

·        Lowland Rainforest EEC containing threatened rainforest flora (SE corner of site); and

·        Thorny Pea habitat (Camphor-dominated closed forest on steep slopes in NE of site) including retention of Forest Red Gum for Koala habitat. 

While Council’s Ecologist broadly supported the purpose and intent of the habitat retention within these conservation areas, he also recommended that an additional area of the site supporting the Hairy Joint-grass population (total area yet to be determined) be retained and managed as a conservation area.

 

Following discussions with OEH, Council staff met with the applicant and recommended that the following areas be excluded from rezoning for village development:

·        The area of Lowland Rainforest in the SE corner of the site supporting the threatened species, Fragrant Myrtle, Thorny Pea and Arrowhead Vine.

·        Areas of Camphor Laurel regrowth in the NE section of the site supporting Thorny Pea and Koala food trees.

·        Part of the HJG habitat extending down the eastern part of the site between the two abovementioned areas.   

·        The flood-prone section of the site in the south-west, also mapped as Freshwater Wetlands and containing Hairy Joint-grass.

In addition, it was recommended that:

·        A threatened species management plan would be required for Hairy Joint Grass.  This may include detail of:

o   Protection of a viable population of Hairy Joint-grass at the site (guided by the agreed area of acceptable loss determined in association with OEH) to be protected in perpetuity by an appropriate legal mechanism;

o   A best practice management strategy likely to consist of annual biomass removal/ weed control; and 

o   Enhancement by way of translocation/ seed collection (if required) within an onsite or offsite offset area.

·        A Vegetation Management Plan would be required detailing protection/ enhancement of threatened flora and fauna habitat, EECs and Koala habitat.    

These management plans can be provided post a Gateway determination for an amended Planning Proposal.

 

The proponent has responded to these recommendations and Figure 9 below is the revised plan nominating areas for conservation and rehabilitation along with a proposed environmental protection zone represented by the purple line on the figure.

 


 

Figure 9: Ecological Conservation Plan

  

 

 

Department of Environment and Energy

Due to Hairy Joint-grass being listed as a threatened species on the Australian Government Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), it is possible that the future subdivision may be considered a controlled action under that Act. OEH advised that it may be useful to better understand the likely position of the Australian Government on this matter at the rezoning stage to inform the rezoning process.

Staff therefore held a tele conference with relevant staff from the federal Department of Environment and Energy and discussed the implications of the EPBC Act for any future subdivision application. The applicant provided an EPBC Act Assessment of Significance for Hairy Joint Grass. Council’s Ecologist has confirmed that this assessment is adequate and has been prepared in accordance with the EPBC Act significant impact guidelines (EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1).

 

Response of State and Other Agencies to May 2015 Planning Proposal

The Planning Proposal and supporting information were referred to the following agencies as required by the Gateway determination:

·        Department of Primary Industries – Agriculture

·        Department of Primary Industries – Water

·        Department of Primary Industries - Fisheries

·        NSW Department of Industry – Geological Survey of New South Wales (GSNSW)

·        NSW Rural Fire Service

·        Office of Environment and Heritage

·        Transport for NSW - Roads and Maritime Services

·        Rous Water

 

The submissions from state and other agencies are summarised in Attachment 3 to this report along with staff responses.  A copy of the responses from the agencies is provided at Attachment 4. The key issues that emerged from the stage agency responses were:

·        Loss of regionally significant farmland;

·        Need for a land use conflict risk assessment;

·        Maintaining integrity of and buffers to watercourses on the site;

·        Impact of increased on-site wastewater management systems;

·        Secure water supply for the site;

·        Objection from RMS with request for an updated traffic assessment;

·        Rural fire service raised no issues;

·        Conservation and improvement of threatened species habitat and endangered ecological communities through environmental protection zoning and long term maintenance and rehabilitation measures.

 

Most of the matters have been addressed or are able to be considered further post a Gateway determination or at the development application stage. In addition, agencies will have the opportunity to review the amended planning proposal post Gateway.

 

Amended Planning Proposal

As discussed in the above sections of this report, the presence of threatened species and endangered ecological communities on the site has led to a revision of the original rezoning proposal to reduce the extent of land that will be zoned for village development and include the areas of high conservation significance in an appropriate environmental protection zone.

 

The resulting recommended Planning Proposal comprises the RU5 Village zone covering 15.3 hectares of the site and the E3 Environmental Management zone comprising 19.7 hectares. The minimum lot size for subdivision in the RU5 zone is proposed to be 2500m2 and in the E3 zone a 15 hectare lot size is proposed for the eastern portion to assist with retaining this land in a single lot with the potential for one (1) dwelling. A 40 hectare lot size is proposed for the south western part of the E3 zone. The potential lot yield is estimated to be between 40 and 45 lots, although the ultimate yield is not certain at this stage. The proposed LEP Maps are provided at Figures 10 to 12 below followed by a summary of the Planning Proposal.

 

The height of building map will apply a 8.5 metre limit to buildings in the RU5 Village zone. This is not required in the E3 zone.

 

Figure 10: Proposed Bexhill Zone Map

Figure 11: Proposed Lot Size Map

 

Figure 12: Proposed Bexhill Height of Building Map

 


 

Summary of Planning Proposal

Table 2 below provides an overview of the planning proposal structured in accordance with the DP&E guidelines for planning proposals. Refer to Attachment 5 for the detailed planning proposal report.

 

Table 2: Summary of Bexhill Rezoning Planning Proposal

Part

Requirements

Description of planning proposal

1

OBJECTIVES OR INTENDED OUTCOMES

The objectives of this proposal are:

·   to enable the future expansion of Bexhill Village through the rezoning of part of the land to Zone RU5 Village; and

·   protect, manage and restore areas of the site that have special ecological significance through the application of the E3 Environmental Management zone.

2

EXPLANATION OF PROVISIONS

 

·   Amend Land Zoning Map – Sheets LZN_005 and LZN_005A to include the RU5 Village zone and E3 Environmental Management zone;

·   Amend Lot Size Map – Sheet LSZ_005 so that 2500m2 applies to the RU5 zone and 15 hectares applies to the eastern and north-eastern portion of the E3 zone;

·   Amend Height of Buildings Map – Sheet HOB_005 so that 8.5m applies to the RU5 zone.

3

JUSTIFICATION

Section A – Need for the Planning Proposal

1. Is the Planning Proposal a result of any strategic study or report?

2. Is the Planning Proposal the best means of achieving the objectives or intended outcomes, or is there a better way?

·   Land mapped in Lismore Growth Management Strategy 2015;

·   Land mapped in North Coast Regional Plan Figure 16.

·   Yes, land must be rezoned to enable future village expansion and to provide environmental protection for the areas of high conservation significance.

3

JUSTIFICATION

Section B – Relationship to Strategic Planning Framework

3. Is the Planning Proposal consistent with the objectives and actions contained within the applicable regional or sub-regional strategy?

4. Is the Planning Proposal consistent with the Council's local strategy or other local strategic plan?

5.  Is the Planning Proposal consistent with applicable State Environmental Planning Policies?

6. Is the Planning Proposal consistent with applicable s117 Ministerial Directions?

·   The land is included in the North Coast Regional Plan (NCRP) and shown in Figure 16 - Urban growth area map for the Lismore LGA.

·   Consistent with the Lismore Growth Management Strategy 2015-2035;

·   Consistent with Imagine Lismore’s community vision for increased housing;

·   Consistent with SEPPs (Refer to Attachment 5 for detail);

·   Consistent or justifiably inconsistent with section 117 directions (Refer to Attachment 5 for detail).

3

JUSTIFICATION

Section C – Environment, Social and Economic Impact

7.  Is there any likelihood that critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats, will be adversely affected as a result of the proposal?

8.  Are there any likely environmental effects as a result of the Planning Proposal and how are they proposed to be managed?

 

9.  How has the Planning Proposal adequately addressed any social and economic effects?

·   Yes there will be an adverse effect on the Hairy Joint Grass, which covers large parts of the site. However, following consultation with the OEH, the federal Department of Environment and Energy and the applicant, the proposal provides for more than a third of the site to be included in an environmental protection zone supported by a Threatened Species Management Plan;

·   A preliminary review of the environmental constraints has been undertaken. Refer to environment, social and infrastructure assessment below;

·   Likely environmental effects can be managed. Further reporting is recommended post Gateway determination on land use capability and land use conflict risk.

·   An Aboriginal and European cultural heritage assessment has been provided and referred to the OEH. Ngulingah LALC has advised there is little implication of this proposal for Aboriginal cultural heritage.

3

JUSTIFICATION

Section D – State and Commonwealth Interests

10. Is there adequate public infrastructure for the Planning Proposal?

11. What are the views of State and Commonwealth public authorities consulted in accordance with the Gateway Determination?

·   A preliminary review of the infrastructure requirements has been undertaken. The site can be serviced with appropriate infrastructure. Refer to environment, social and infrastructure assessment below;

·   Consultation with state agencies has occurred on the original planning proposal. Consultation on the amended Planning Proposal is recommended with the following public authorities/organisations: Rural Fire Service; Roads and Maritime Services; Office of Environment and Heritage; Department of Primary Industries and Rous Water.

·   The federal Department of Environment and Energy has been consulted on the implications of the EPBC Act for the planning proposal and subsequent subdivision of the site. The applicant has provided a response, which Council’s Ecologist advises is adequate.

4

MAPPING

·   Refer to LEP Maps in Figures 10-12 above.

5

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION

·   Recommended 28 day exhibition period (Refer to Attachment 5 for detail).

6

PROJECT TIMELINE

·   Recommendation of 12 months for completion Refer to attachment 5 for detail).

7

DELEGATIONS

·   It is likely that Council will receive delegation to finalise the LEP.

 


 

Environmental, social and infrastructure assessment

This section provides an environmental, social and infrastructure assessment of the amended Planning Proposal, some of which remains similar to the original planning proposal. The assessment has also taken into account comments from state and other agencies, where relevant.

 

Biodiversity

As discussed in previous sections of this report and shown on Figure 13 the site contains a number of ecological constraints including several threatened flora species and two (2) endangered ecological communities listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. By area occupied, the presence of a relatively extensive population of the threatened species Hairy Joint-grass (HJG) represents a substantial constraint to future development.

 

The amended planning proposal recognises the ecological significance of parts of the site by inclusion of land in an E3 Environmental Management zone and recommended management measures to assist in the longer term conservation of these areas. While HJG habitat will be removed in the proposed RU5 Village zone, around 33% of the mapped HJG habitat will be retained to provide for a viable population of HJG at the site into the future, provided that appropriate management regimes for this species is incorporated into a threatened species management plan.

 

Other threatened species and endangered ecological communities are to be included in the E3 Environmental Management, including areas supporting koala feed trees (potential koala habitat depicted on Figure 13 below), and a vegetation management plan will be required for the expansion and regeneration of these areas. These plans will be connected to provisions in the Development Control Plan to ensure they are implemented at subdivision stage.

 

Figure 13: Koala habitat map

 

Environmental constraints

Contaminated land

A contaminated land assessment was prepared to support the original Planning Proposal and it found no sources of contamination, though Council staff identified the need for the sampling density to be increased for consistency with the NSW EPA Sampling Guidelines to ensure an appropriate confidence in ‘hot spot’ detection. The additional assessment prepared by Melaleuca Group Pty Ltd included further targeted sampling around an existing slaughter house in the northern part of the property post the Gateway determination.

Consistent with the use of lead based paints in the past, this report found high levels of Lead within the immediate vicinity of the structure (approximately 30 cm from the external walls) and approximately 5m from the north-west corner of the structure. As this sample was within close proximity to the current access track it was surmised that flakes of Lead-based paint were either transported on tyres of vehicles traversing the area or during the painting process paints were spilt in the area.

The report states that, ‘the contaminant of concern is Lead and it is well documented that Lead is found within close proximity of buildings and is usually from Lead-based paints and subsequent delineation of the contamination is usually within close proximity to the external wall (i.e. approximately 30cm from the outside circumference of buildings).

The slaughterhouse is proposed to be removed. Once the structure is removed, soils across the area should occur to a depth of approximately 10cm. The area should encompass an area measuring at least 2-3 m from the eastern and southern walls of the structure and at least 6m from the north-west corner of the structure.

All other metal concentrations in the soils are within expected background levels. No pesticides were present above analytical detection limits in the samples analysed.

Based on the findings of this investigation, it is considered the subject site would not represent a significant risk of harm to end users of the proposed rezoning and a future subdivision development. Appropriate management of the area surrounding the slaughterhouse can be implemented with the area validated in due course’.

 

The old slaughter house is located in the area that is proposed to be included in the E3 Environmental Management zone, which has very limited development potential. The report’s conclusions are supported and further reporting on potential contaminated land issues is not required at this stage.

 

Significant Farmland

Figure 14 shows that a large part of the site is mapped as being regionally significant farmland. This land has been included in an approved local growth management strategy since 1997 (Village Development Strategy), prior to the Northern Rivers Farmland Protection Mapping Project (2005) that designated part of the site as regionally significant farmland. The land was also approved as a release area in the Far North Coast Regional Strategy and is now included in the Lismore LGA Urban Growth Area Map in the North Coast Regional Plan as suitable for urban expansion.

 

The Planning Proposal will lead to the loss of this land from agriculture. However, the inclusion of this land in a land release strategy approved by the Department of Planning and Environment, shows that this will be offset by the development of land for housing adjacent to an existing village and in close proximity to the wide range of employment, recreation and services available in the Lismore urban centre.

 

Potential land use conflicts with other agricultural uses to the east, north and south will be mitigated by the use of the proposed E3 Environmental Management zone which will serve as a buffer between residential and adjoining rural land uses.


 

Figure 14: Farmland classification map

 

Land use conflict

The first planning proposal would have resulted in the creation of an interface between existing rural and proposed village residential land uses which had the potential to generate land use conflict. The Gateway determination did not require a Land Use Conflict Risk assessment (LUCRA), although staff had recommended that one be undertaken. The Department of Primary Industries also commented that a LUCRA should occur.

 

The potential for land use conflict between village residential uses and rural uses is significantly reduced with the use of the proposed E3 Environmental Management zone between the village zone and the rural uses to the east in particular. While the E3 zone is intended to allow for the conservation of threatened species and endangered ecological communities over time, it is noted that extensive agriculture is a permitted use in that zone. It is therefore recommended that a LUCRA is required post Gateway determination consistent with that presented in the publication ‘Living and Working in Rural areas – A handbook for managing land use conflict issues on the NSW North Coast’.

 

Bush Fire Hazard

Part of the land is identified as bush fire prone, shown on Figure 15 below, which is largely contained within the proposed E3 Environmental Management zone. In accordance with s117 Ministerial Direction 4.4, a bush fire risk assessment under Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006 was provided by the applicant with respect to the original Planning Proposal. That Planning Proposal and the bushfire hazard assessment report provided by the applicant post the Gateway determination were referred to the Rural Fire Service. The RFS advised that it had no requirements. It is considered that further reporting on bushfire hazard is not required at this stage although referral of the amended Planning Proposal to the Rural Fire Service will be necessary.

 

Figure 15: Bush fire prone land map

 

 

Geotechnical

A preliminary geotechnical report for the site was undertaken by Coffey Geotechnics for the proponents.  The “High” and “Very High” geotechnical risk areas provided in the slope analysis plan are now contained within the proposed E3 Environmental Management zone. The only development envisaged in this zone would be for the purpose of one dwelling. If necessary, more detailed geotechnical information will be required at development application stage.

 

Flooding

Approximately 3.5 hectares of the south western portion of the site are within the flood planning area under LEP 2012. Under the original planning proposal, this area was to remain in the RU1 Primary Production zone. This area is now proposed to be included in the E3 Environmental Management zone due to the presence of Hairy Joint Grass and the Freshwater Wetlands EEC. A minimum lot size of 40ha is proposed for this part of the E3 zone.

 

Social and Cultural Impacts

Aboriginal and European Cultural Heritage

An Aboriginal and European cultural heritage assessment prepared by Everick Heritage Consultants has been provided by the applicant. With respect to Aboriginal cultural heritage, the report concludes:

‘As a result of the desktop study and field inspection the following conclusions were established with Noel King, the Ngulingah LALC Sites Officer.

·        No Indigenous cultural heritage sites or relics were identified within the Project Area.

·        No areas have been identified that are considered to contain potential archaeological deposits of significant Aboriginal heritage.

·        All of the Project Area has been disturbed in a manner which constitutes ‘disturbance’ within the meaning of the Due Diligence Code and is consistent with the Due Diligence Code.

Ngulingah Local Aboriginal Land Council has also formally advised that there is little likelihood the proposal will impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage.

 

With respect to ‘historic cultural heritage’, the report advises that, a number of historic features were located during the survey including a former Abattoir Shed and Corralling Yard Complex, vehicular tracks, yard infrastructure and dumped brewery tanks. The significance assessment in Section 10 confirmed that these features do not meet the threshold for local significance. As such, no further recommendations for historic heritage are required.

 

No further reporting on cultural heritage is required at this time.

 

Social Impact

A social impact assessment (SIA) was submitted in accordance with Council’s Policies which require an SIA for rezoning proposals that will enable the creation of 20 or more lots. The SIA concludes that the positive impacts associated with the proposal suggest that the rezoning is worthwhile pursuing.

 

Infrastructure

On-site wastewater disposal

Effluent disposal for the existing residences in Bexhill village are via individual on-site treatment systems, most commonly septic tanks and trenches. The amended Planning Proposal includes a minimum lot size of 2500m2 to incorporate the on-site disposal of wastewater for the proposed expanded area of RU5 Village zoned land. A land use capability assessment is required post Gateway determination to assess the capacity of the land for the disposal of wastewater. This assessment is supported by the DPI (Water)

 

Traffic

An updated traffic assessment was submitted by the applicant on 20 April 2017 following the objection from the RMS to the original Planning Proposal and Council staff support for the assessment. Council’s Strategic Engineer has advised that the report assessed traffic impacts from a possible 64 lot development, access to which is from Withers Street and Clunes Street. The report concluded:

·        The proposed rezoning plan allows for approximately 64 residential allotments with road connections to Withers Street and Clunes Street. This scale of development is significantly lower than that previously considered under a previous application which allowed for up to 167 lots and a relatively large commercial/retail use.

·        Since the previous rezoning application was approved, the Bangalow Road/Withers Street intersection has been upgraded to include a right turning lane for traffic approaching Withers Street from the north. The provision of this right turn lane was recommended by the previous traffic report prepared by Ardill Payne and Partners.

·        A capacity analysis using up to date traffic count data indicates that the Bangalow Road/ Withers Street intersection will function satisfactorily under projected future traffic conditions with the inclusion of traffic generated by the proposal.

·        The Northern Rivers Buslines provide a regular service along Bangalow Road between Lismore and Byron Bay, Mullumbimby and Brunswick Heads. Buses stop near the existing pedestrian crossing located just north of Withers Street. The location of the site in relation to Bangalow Road and the Bexhill Public School, together with the scale of the proposal, is such that additional public bus services will not be warranted.

 

Council’s Strategic Engineer has concluded that the technical report submitted for assessment confirms the existing road network and external road infrastructure has sufficient capacity to accommodate the development of the area to be rezoned. The traffic assessment’s conclusions are supported and has not identified issues that cannot be addressed through the development application process.

 

Water

Council staff have had a number of discussions with Rous Water and now Rous County Council (RCC) regarding the future water supply for an expansion of the Bexhill village. The water supply function of RCC was formerly known as Rous Water. These discussions are summarised in Attachment 3 to this report.

 

Council’s Strategic Engineer, Water and Wastewater has advised as follows:

 

There are two options available for providing a sustainable water supply to proposed development at Bexhill. One of these options would be the provision of on-site water supply, such as rainwater tanks. The other would be to connect with the existing Bexhill reticulated water supply.

 

The current water reticulation within Bexhill is connected to trunk water mains owned and operated by RCC. Owners of properties connected to this reticulation are currently customers of RCC, which remains the water supply authority for this area.

 

RCC have stated that further connection of properties to the Bexhill water supply would be contingent on additional infrastructure being constructed that would enable all customers to be connected to a reticulation separate from their trunk main system. This would require the construction of a new reservoir and trunk mains, in addition to amendment of the existing reticulation. A new metering point would also need to be installed at the offtake from the trunk mains to the new reservoir. Following completion of this work, it would then be likely that RCC would seek to transfer all reticulation assets, located downstream of the new metering point, to Lismore City Council.

 

As an initial stage of preparing an Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP), RCC have commissioned a report that identifies the preferred option for the provision of new infrastructure. However, a final IDP that identifies how these assets are to be provided is yet to be completed by RCC.

 

At present, if developers wish to connect to the existing Bexhill water supply, they must make suitable arrangements with Rous Water. If a development application was lodged that proposed connection to this water supply, the applicant would need to demonstrate that satisfactory arrangements with Rous Water were in place.

 

In summary, the development is capable of being supplied with water, either on-site via rainwater tanks, or by connecting to the reticulated supply at Bexhill. The latter option may not be economically feasible for the developer. 

 

Stormwater Management

The site is drained by several gullies which direct water to an intermittent water course near the western boundary. The lower portions of the site are inundated during a major flood event. The report submitted by the proponents with the original planning proposal proposes that stormwater quantity can be addressed by a sequence of at source detention ponds or tanks and larger detention ponds in a now superseded proposed sporting field area. Staff did not consider this would be sufficient particularly in light of the geotechnical risk profile, and recommended a detailed stormwater management plan post Gateway Determination.

 

As the areas of high geotechnical hazard are now proposed to be included in the E3 Environmental Management zone, more detailed stormwater management assessment is not required for the Planning Proposal but can be addressed at the subdivision development application stage. At that stage, stormwater management will need to be integrated throughout the site and based on water sensitive urban design principles.

 

Structure Plan for Future Subdivision

It is recommended that the proponent prepare a Structure Plan and site specific provisions to be included in the Development Control Plan. The purpose of a Structure Plan is to guide the future residential subdivision of a site in a way that addresses the broad constraints of the land and, in this instance, ensures the ongoing conservation of threatened species and endangered ecological communities.

 

A Structure Plan is not intended to specify lot layouts, as this is subject to more detailed site survey and constraints analysis. Preparation of a Structure Plan at the rezoning stage allows the broad constraints to be identified and responded to through future subdivision layout. As this land is proposed to be in the Village zone, the Structure Plan would become part of Chapter 6 of the DCP.

 

Council has adopted three (3) urban residential structure plans to date: one at North Lismore Plateau as part of the North Lismore Plateau site specific Development Control Plan, and two (2) in the Pineapple Road Precinct. Stage 1 of the Pineapple Road Precinct development has been approved in accordance with the Structure Plan adopted for that land.

 

Rather than prepare more site specific DCPs that will ultimately replicate many of the subdivision and infrastructure requirements contained in Chapter 6, it is proposed that Structure Plans for new village and large lot residential areas become part of the new Village, Large Lot Residential and Rural Subdivision Chapter. The proposed structure plan will be prepared in accordance with the provisions of section 74C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). Under section 79C of the EP&A Act, the consent authority is required to take into consideration, among other things, the relevant provisions of a DCP that applies to the land in determining a development application.

 

The proposed structure plan will be required to include partial indicative road and pathway networks. The structure plan will also identify revegetation areas and will link to the Threatened Species Management Plan and Vegetation Management Plans to be prepared before this LEP amendment is finalised. Development consent for future subdivision would be conditional upon, among other things, the implementation of these Plans. Site specific provisions will also be included in DCP Chapter 6.

 

Strategic Alignment
The Planning Proposal is indifferent to the Imagine Lismore 10 Year Plan because it assumes that land within the LGMS will be subject to planning proposals.

Community Vision:  Affordable Housing

“Through the implementation of the Lismore Housing Strategy and the Growth Management Strategy we will ensure that Lismore provides housing options that are affordable, appropriate and accessible to the different economic and social needs of the community.”

Service:  Strategic Planning, Assessment and Construction

“The Growth Management Strategy will be completed in 2014. The implementation of the Strategy will see the values of the community enshrined in Lismore’s planning framework.”

 

 

There are no costs associated with the planning proposal as the applicant reimburses Council for the processing of the proposal. If this progresses through the Gateway stage and beyond, the benefits of the proposal include the provision of additional village lots adjacent to Bexhill and close to Lismore, increased diversity of housing stock and conservation of threatened species through environmental protection zoning.

 

At this early Gateway stage of the Planning Proposal the risks relate to whether the Department of Planning and Environment will issue an amended Gateway determination to enable the proposal to progress to referral to relevant state agencies and public exhibition.

 

Comments

Finance

Not required at the Gateway stage of the Planning Proposal.

 

Other staff comments

Council staff have assessed the proposal as required and their assessment is incorporated into Environmental, Social and Infrastructure Assessment in a forgoing section of this report.

 

Public consultation

Community engagement for a planning proposal should normally comprise an exhibition period of not less than twenty eight (28) days.  Community consultation will be commenced by giving notice of the public exhibition of the planning proposal:

·        in Council’s Local Matters newsletter that circulates in the area affected by the planning proposal,

·        on the web-site of the Lismore City Council and the Department of Planning and Environment, and

·        in writing to affected and adjoining landowners.

 

The timing for community consultation will be when the Department of Planning and Environment has advised of its requirements for supporting information and the studies have been undertaken to the satisfaction of Council. 

All submissions will be reported back to Council with a planning comment and recommended response or change to the planning proposal, if required.

 

LEP delegations

Council resolved at its Ordinary meeting of 11 December 2012 to accept the delegations which enable Council to process the final stages of a planning proposal (LEP amendment). The Department of Planning and Environment had given Council delegation to process the original Bexhill Planning Proposal and it is expected that this will occur with this amended Planning Proposal.

 

Conclusion

This report recommends that Council endorse an amended Planning Proposal for the rezoning of land at Bexhill to part RU5 Village part E3 Environmental. This is a significant change from the proposal endorsed by Council at its meeting on 12 May, 2012 Council for a rezoning to RU5 Village and R5 Large Lot Residential. The change is a response to the presence of threatened flora species and endangered ecological communities across the site and has been developed in consultation with the applicant and the Office of Environment and Heritage and with reference to the federal Department of Environment and Energy.

The amended planning proposal represents a reduction in the area suitable for future development by close to 50%. This proposal aims to enable the development of part of the site for village housing, with a potential for 40-45 lots, while supporting the conservation of habitat for threatened species and endangered ecological communities.

 

The amended rezoning Planning Proposal now requires endorsement by Council before it is referred to the Department of Planning and Environment for a new Gateway determination.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Council Report 12 May 2015 Bexhill Planning Proposal

(Over 7 pages)

2.

Bexhill Planning Proposal May 2015

(Over 7 pages)

3.

Summary of state agency comments May 2015 Bexhill PP

 

4.

Attachment 4 State and Other Agency Submissions to May 2015 Bexhill Planning Proposal

(Over 7 pages)

5.

Bexhill Planning Proposal June 2017

(Over 7 pages)

  


Summary of state agency comments May 2015 Bexhill PP

Attachment 3

 

Attachment 3: Summary of Agency Comments - 12 May 2015 Bexhill Planning Proposal

State Agency

Comment Summary

Staff Response

Department of Primary Industries - Agriculture

The subject site contains a large contiguous area of regionally significant farmland. This land is considered a highly important agricultural resource for the North Coast region identified due to its inherent qualities.

It is acknowledged that a large portion of the subject site has been identified as part of local strategic planning processes and as a proposed future urban release area in the Far North Coast Regional Strategy. Whilst this is recognised and therefore noted as being inconsistently justified in the planning context, the cumulative removal of important agricultural resources in perpetuity within Lismore LGA is a growing concern.

Agriculture is a significant land use in the Lismore LGA providing considerable input to the local economy. Maintaining access to important agricultural resources into the future is necessary to ensure agricultural industries continue to grow, contribute to the local and state economy and provide food security. Protection of large contiguous parcels of farmland is important for biosecurity purposes, reducing land use conflict potential, and to allow farmers to upscale. Therefore, the extent of regionally significant farmland to be removed from RU1 zoning as a result of this planning proposal is not supported. A reduction in the scale of rezoning is suggested, particularly in consideration of the land constraints.

Consideration should also be given to extending the residual RU1 area within the proposal to incorporate some higher ground for flood refuge purposes given that the residual area is flood liable land.

The NSW Government recently released the NSW Right to Farm Policy that provides actions the NSW Government has committed to in order to reduce land use conflict between agricultural and non-agricultural land use. The absence of a Land Use Conflict Risk Assessment (LUCRA) at this important stage of a planning proposal does not assist with the objectives of this policy. It is recommended that a LUCRA should be completed given the regional significance of the site and surrounding land.

This land has been included in an approved local growth management strategy since 1997 (Village Development Strategy), prior to the Farmland Mapping Project that designated part of the site as regionally significant farmland. The land was also approved as a release area in the Far North Coast Regional Strategy and is now included in the Lismore LGA Urban Growth Area Map in the North Coast Regional Plan as suitable for urban expansion.

 

The Planning Proposal will lead to the loss of this land from agriculture. However, the inclusion of this land in a land release strategy approved by the Department of Planning and Environment, shows that this will be offset by the development of land for housing adjacent to an existing village and in close proximity to the wide range of employment, recreation and services available in the Lismore urban centre.

 

Potential land use conflicts with other agricultural uses to the east, north and south will be mitigated by the use of the proposed E3 Environmental Management zone which will serve as a buffer between residential and adjoining rural land uses.

 

The amended planning proposal that is discussed in the Council report reduces the extent of land proposed for future housing although it is recommended to be included in an environmental protection zone.

With respect to the flood prone land, the area proposed to be excluded is consistent with the flood planning area in the Local Environmental Plan.

Council staff concur with the DPI with respect to a land use conflict risk assessment (LUCRA). The Gateway determination did not support the provision of a LUCRA; however, it is recommended that it be provided for the amended/ new rezoning planning proposal.

Department of Primary Industries – Water

DPI Water recommends Council carefully consider the water supply to service this area to ensure there will be a secure (quality and quantity) reliable and manageable water supply for any future developments.

Aerial photographs and maps of the site show a watercourse traversing the site, which could be impacted by future development on the site. It is recommended that Council incorporate appropriate buffers to maintain the integrity of the watercourse on the site.

Council should consider the impacts of future developments on the site on groundwater. In coastal areas the groundwater is quite shallow and there is the potential for contamination. Council should consider locating future settlement intensification (in particular new subdivisions) away from vulnerable groundwater resources and existing groundwater users.

DPI Water notes that where landholdings are subdivided, creating new basic landholder rights for water extraction, there is the potential to impact on existing water users, including the environment.

Council should give consideration to the potential increase in basic landholder rights (BLRs) and the impacts on other users and the environment.

Whilst the planning proposal outlines any future developments will be supplied by town water supply, it is recommended that a clause be included in the LEP to prevent the proliferation of BLRs resulting from the subdivision of land, along the frontage of waterways and over vulnerable aquifers.

Consideration should be given to the potential increase of effluent disposal systems as a result of additional dwellings. There is the potential for groundwater impacts if onsite sewerage disposal systems are used.

Water supply for the proposed development has been and will continue to be considered by Council. A reticulated supply via a new reservoir may prove not to be financially viable for the developer. However, water supply can be achieved through provision of rainwater tanks.

The comments regarding watercourses are noted and impact on these especially through buffers to on-site wastewater systems will be managed. Staff recommend that the applicant provide further information with respect to this issue.

Department of Primary Industries - Fisheries

The present proposal includes rezoning of an area adjacent to a 3rd order waterway which is considered a Key Fish Habitat. It is acknowledged that the waterway is in a degraded state with no over-storey of riparian vegetation. The waterway generally satisfies the criteria for type 3, class 3 Minimal Key Fish Habitat categories using the criteria in DPI Fisheries Policy and Guidelines. DPI Fisheries recommends riparian buffer zones measured from the top of the bank be applied to rezoning proposals and new subdivisions. Based on the type of habitat and class of waterway a minimum 10 metre buffer of native endemic riparian vegetation is recommended.

The class 3 waterway is located in the area that is also subject to flooding, which was to remain in the RU1 Primary Production zone in the first Planning Proposal. This area is recommended to be included in the E3 Environmental Management zone in the amended Planning Proposal discussed in the following sections of the report. A 10 metre buffer is achievable and will need to be nominated on the Structure Plan to be provided by the applicant following the receipt of a Gateway determination.

NSW Department of Industry – Geological Survey of New South Wales (GSNSW)

The GSNSW has no concerns to raise in regards to the proposal as there are no current mineral, coal or petroleum titles over the site and the proposal should have no impact upon mineral, coal or petroleum resources.

Comments noted. If adopted, it is recommended that the amended planning proposal does not need to be referred to this agency.

NSW Rural Fire Service

The Service has reviewed the plans and documents received for the proposal and subsequently raise no concerns or issues in relation to bush fire.

Noted. The amended Planning Proposal will be referred to the RFS as there may be implications with respect to proposals for vegetation regeneration in the north and north-eastern parts of the site.

Office of Environment and Heritage

OEH provided formal responses in two (2) letters dated 3 May 2016 and October 2016.

 

In the 3 May 2016 letter OEH advised that, it had no concerns about NPWS estate or flood management, a number of issues are apparent with respect to the assessments for biodiversity and Aboriginal cultural heritage. In summary, the OEH recommended that:

1.   Applicant to clarify whether the vegetation in the north-east of the site meets the definition for the Lowland Rainforest endangered ecological community (EEC).

2.   The parts of the site in the north-east, east and south-east should not be zoned for more intensive land uses. These areas should be considered for environmental protection zoning or the application of a biodiversity overlay to improve or maintain their biodiversity values. These parts of the planning area and the low-lying land associated with the watercourse in the south-west, could also provide suitable on-site offsets for biodiversity impacts of future development.

3.   A smaller RU5 and R5 zone will need to be considered to reduce the impacts on the biodiversity values of the planning area.

4.   Suitable onsite offsets should be rehabilitated and secured in the planning area as part of the Planning Proposal. The offset areas should incorporate an appropriate proportion of the identified biodiversity values of the planning area.

5.   The comments from the Ngulingah Local Aboriginal Land Council should be provided to the OEH for review.

 

The OEH was provided with a proposed revised rezoning plan and in response sent a further letter dated 30 November 2016. The OEH advised that it had reviewed the updated planning proposal which responds to our previous letter dated 3 May 2016 and recommended that prior to finalising the planning proposal for a revised Gateway Determination the council should:

1. Update the planning proposal to discuss and potentially include the description and mapping of the Lowland Rainforest EEC.

2. Consider applying the environmental protection zone to the northern patch of trees currently proposed for the residential zone.

3. Rationalise the zone boundary line work to reduce complexity in determining where the different zones are on the ground and to align the zone boundaries with future property boundaries.

4. Consider avoiding split zones over lot parcels to reduce complexity in managing the different zones on a property.

5. Apply the E2 (Environmental Conservation) rather than the E3 (Environmental Management) zone to the proposed environmental protection areas.

6. Identify and apply a suitable mechanism to ensure the rehabilitation and in-perpetuity protection of the environmental protection area is achieved. The OEH looks forward to another opportunity to comment on the planning proposal before it is finalised.

 

OEH also noted that the hairy-joint grass is listed as a threatened species on the Australian Government Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Although the planning proposal does not trigger the EPBC Act, it is possible that the future subdivision may be considered a controlled action under that Act. It may be useful to better understand the likely position of the Australian Government on this matter at the rezoning stage to inform the rezoning process. We understand that the council has contacted the Australian Government in relation to this proposal.

Council’s Ecologist advised that the applicant had mostly addressed the issues raised by OEH in the first response (May 2016) and requested further revisions which the applicant has since accepted and a revised plan submitted as the basis of an amended planning proposal. The changes made incorporated:

·     The discrepancy between Figure 1 of the report where the community in the NE section of the site is named as “Lowland Rainforest (disturbed)”, and the Issues and Responses section of the report where it is discussed as not being consistent with the Lowland Rainforest EEC was clarified.

·     The proportion of mapped HJG habitat proposed for retention was increased from 22.19% of the area to around 33% of the mapped HJG habitat to provide for a viable population of HJG at the site into the future.

·     The primary management objective in Area B4 should be to undertaken rainforest plantings to buffer and enhance threatened flora habitat and adjacent (offsite) Lowland Rainforest EEC.

·     Potential HJG conservation area on Council Land was excluded from the report and maps.

·     An indication was provided of the proposed environmental protection zoning.

·     Correction of grammatical errors. 

 

In response to the second letter from the OEH:

·     The comment regarding the Lowland Rainforest EEC is noted. Council staff do not agree with this determination.

·     The E3 zone is recommended for the areas that meet the criteria in the Department of Planning and Environment’s section 117 direction for E zoning.

·     The zone boundary referred to was proposed by the applicant. This area has been ‘smoothed’ to reduce complexity.

·     It is agreed that split zones should be avoided.

·     Council staff consider that the areas proposed for the E3 zone meet the criteria for E zoning and this zone has been agreed to by the landowners.

·     The mechanism proposed at this stage will connect rehabilitation works with subdivision development approval.

 

EPBC Act

Staff discussed the implications of the EPBC Act with the Department of Environment and Energy and advised the applicant of the implications of this legislation at subdivision stage. The applicant submitted an EPBC Act Assessment of Significance for Hairy Joint Grass (Arthraxon hispidus). Council’s ecologist has confirmed that the assessment is adequate and prepared in accordance with the EPBC Act significant impact guidelines (EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1).

 

Cultural Heritage

Ngulingah advised ‘Upon review of maps and report we recommend that there is little chance of Aboriginal object being impacted by the proposed land use’.

 

 

It is recommended that the amended planning proposal is referred to the OEH post any Gateway determination.

Transport for NSW - Roads and Maritime Services

The proposed land release accesses the Bangalow Lismore Road at Withers Street and Clunes Street in Bexhill. Both these intersections have limitations in terms of sight distance and capacity. The offset stagger of Clunes Street and Corndale Road means there is limited opportunity to provide storage for turning vehicles without creating conflict with through traffic. Sight distance to the north is limited. The Withers Street intersection with the Bangalow Lismore Road is located just north of a crest and right hand curve limiting sight distance to the south. The right hand curve to the south of Withers Street creates sight problems for vehicles using rear view mirrors to merge. This precludes this intersection from being upgraded to a seagull type treatment to increase right turn capacity. The suitability of Withers Street as a main access for the land release is further complicated by access to Bexhill Public School and the need to provide a safe road environment in and around the school.

Therefore, at this time Roads and Maritime Services objects to the proposal due to the safety implications of increasing traffic through the Withers Street and Clunes Street intersections with the Bangalow Lismore Road. Mitigation of safety risks and capacity constraints needs to be considered before the land release proceeds.

It is suggested an updated traffic impact statement be prepared to identify suitable locations for increased traffic generated by the land release to safely and efficiently access the Bangalow Lismore Road. It will also be essential for the study to identify viable intersection treatments that will be able to be constructed in the constrained road environment through Bexhill.

Staff agree with the RMS regarding the need for a traffic impact assessment. At the 12 May 2015 meeting, Council had resolved that the applicant provide an updated traffic assessment, in particular considering the changed nature of the Bangalow Road traffic and providing further information on the Bangalow/Clunes/Corndale staggered “T” intersection. However, as the Gateway determination did not require this assessment, it was not sought from the applicant.

 

While the amended Planning Proposal discussed in the Council report includes a much reduced area for future housing, staff and the RMS considered that an updated traffic assessment was still necessary. The applicant was advised of this and has provided this assessment, which is discussed in the Council report.

 

The amended Planning Proposal will be referred to the RMS for comment along with the updated traffic assessment.

Rous Water

Rous Water has no comment on the planning proposal for the rezoning of land at Bexhill at this stage.

Since 2013 Council staff and the proponents have had a number of discussions with (then) Rous Water regarding water supply to service the proposed expansion of Bexhill Village. The ‘no comment’ response simply reflects that there has been a number of options considered. Rous provided commentary to Lismore City Council regarding the original planning proposal, which included an anticipated lot yield of 167 lots. Council’s approval of a planning proposal with a 2500m2 minimum lot size more than halved the original proposed lot yield.

Prior to receipt of the Planning Proposal for comment, Rous Water had commissioned an Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) report, which was reported to Rous County Council in June 2015. Rous resolved that ‘it does not consider it is the long-term water reticulator for Bexhill and that staff initiate communication with Lismore City Council regarding Bexhill reticulation supply and report back to Council in due course. Concerning the provision of water supply to the proposed subdivision in Bexhill, Council does not consider itself to be the long-term water reticulator for Bexhill nor does the development require connection to the Rous Water system.’

 

As an initial stage of preparing an Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP), RCC commissioned a report that identifies the preferred option for the provision of new infrastructure. However, a final IDP that identifies how these assets are to be provided is yet to be completed by RCC.

At present, if developers wish to connect to the existing Bexhill water supply, they must make suitable arrangements with Rous County Council. If a development application was lodged that proposed connection to this water supply, the applicant would need to demonstrate that satisfactory arrangements with Rous County Council were in place.

The report to Rous Water noted that water supply can also be provided on-site, that is, through rain water tanks.

It is suggested that the amended Planning Proposal is referred to Rous County Council for any further comments.

 

 


Matters Arising

Matters Arising

Subject

Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017-2020

TRIM Record No

BP17/580:EF09/95

Prepared by

Partnering & Community Engagement Officer

Reason

To obtain Council's endorsement of the Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017-2020

 

Executive Summary

Under the NSW Disability Inclusion Act 2014, Council is required to undertake disability inclusion action planning and have an adopted plan in place by 1 July 2017. In order to meet this obligation, Council staff have worked with other North Coast Councils and, additionally, have conducted community consultation and engagement within the Lismore Local Government Area (LGA).

 

The draft Disability Action Plan went on Public Exhibition for 28 days and there were no formal submissions received.  It was included as agenda item at the April Access and Inclusion Committee. 

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       Council adopt the Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017-2020 as attached.

 

 

Background

Under the Disability Inclusion Act 2014, Lismore City Council is required to develop a Disability Inclusion Action Plan.  This plan outlines the strategies and actions that Council will put in place, over a four year period, to ensure it continues to recognise and respond to the rights, needs and values of people with a disability.  It details how the organisation will make targeted and continual efforts to reduce the barriers that people with a disability face when living, working and visiting the Lismore LGA and improve inclusion and accessibility for all.

 

The four focus areas of the plan are:

 

1.       Developing positive community attitudes and behaviours

2.       Creating liveable communities

3.       Supporting access to meaningful employment

4.       Improving access to mainstream services through better systems and processes.

 

The strategies and actions developed through the plan will be reflected in Council’s Community Strategic Plan and also embedded in the related 4 year Delivery Program documents, thereby becoming integrated into Council’s Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework.

 

Strategic Alignment
This report aligns with the objectives of Council’s 2013-2017 Imagine Lismore: Community Strategic Plan through its objective of ‘an inclusive and aware community’.

 

 

It is acknowledged that actions contained within the draft Disability Inclusion Action Plan will be subject to funding availability.  Identified funding will be known following Council’s 2017/2018 budget process.

 

The NSW Disability Inclusion Act 2014 (the Act) requires NSW public authorities to develop a Disability Inclusion Action Plan to address the barriers that prevent people with disabilities from fully accessing NSW government services.  Local governments are required to have plans developed and endorsed by 1 July 2017 to ensure compliance.

 

Comments

Finance

Not required.

 

Public consultation

The draft Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017-2020 has been informed and developed through extensive consultation with the Lismore community. This process commenced in February 2015.

 

The consultation process has included:

 

·        Ongoing Regional Working Party meetings (collaboration with Ballina, Richmond Valley, Clarence Valley, Byron Shire, Kyogle and Coffs Harbour councils)

·        April-October 2016 - Community Consultation (online regional wide survey, targeted workshops with service providers, advocacy organisations and the Lismore Access Committee)

 

The overall response rate for the regional wide survey was high with 540 respondents.  Lismore City Council received 143 responses. Further information regarding the consultation process is available within the draft Disability Inclusion Action Plan (refer page 11).

 

The draft plan went on public exhibition from the 13th April 2017 to the 10th May 2017 and was included on the agenda at Access and Inclusion Committee’s April 2017 meeting.  Minimal feedback was received at the committee meeting but feedback that was deemed appropriate was included in the final plan.

 

Conclusion

The Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017-2020 underpins Council’s policies and fulfills its legislative and regulatory requirements. It will be positioned within Council’s core business through its embedding into Council’s Integrated Planning and Reporting cycle. The development of this plan addresses the barriers that prevent people with disabilities from fully accessing services in our City and details tangible steps Council will take in working toward improved access and inclusion across the LGA.

 

Attachment/s

1.

Final Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017-2020

(Over 7 pages)

   


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reports

 

 


Report

Report

Subject

Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. - Request for Financial Assistance

TRIM Record No

BP17/173:EF17/61

Prepared by

Manager - Finance

Reason

Northern United Rugby Legue Club has requested Council to waive or donate the outstanding seasonal ground hire fees

 

Executive Summary

The Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. has requested the Council to waive their outstanding ground hire fees totalling $16,484.94.

 

The Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. finds itself experiencing declining revenues, an experience common to many sporting clubs in these difficult economic times. It should be noted that the Northern United Rugby League Football Clun Inc. has never approached Lismore City Council for assistance in the past and that any financial consideration offered in this matter, would definitely be viewed as a one-off instance.

 

Based on the financial information provided, it unlikely that the Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. will be able to repay the liabilities reported including the amount owed to Council.

 

While debt recovery action is an option, it is unlikely that the action would result in any financial return to the Council.

 

It is recommended that Council agrees to the request and this would have an unfavourable impact of ($16,484.94) on Council’s Net Operating Result for 2016/17.

 

To minimise any future impacts, it is also recommended that if Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. seek readmission into the local league competition and plan to use Council’s sportsgrounds, they be required to provide evidence of their ability to pay the ground hire fees as well as make regular payments towards those costs throughout the season.

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       Council write off the ground hire fees totalling $16,484.94 owed by the Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc.

2.       If the Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. submit an application to use Council’s sportsgrounds they be required to:-

a)      Provide evidence prior to use of their ability to pay the ground hire fees; and

b)      Make regular payments towards ground hire fees throughout the playing season.

 

 

Background

The Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. (NURLFC) have requested the Council to waive their outstanding ground hire fees totalling $16,484.94.

 

In their letter to Council it states that ‘NURLFC finds itself experiencing declining revenues, an experience common too many sporting clubs in these difficult economic times. It should be noted that NURLFC has never approached Lismore City Council for assistance in the past and that any financial consideration offered in this matter, would definitely be viewed as a one-off instance’. A copy of the NURLFC’s letter is attached.

 

The outstanding ground hire fees relate to NURLFC use of Crozier Field and Oakes Oval in the 2014 ($2,309.83 net amount), 2015 ($6,100.76) and 2016 ($8,074.35) seasons.

 

The Council has been working with the NURLFC for some time to put in place a payment arrangement for the outstanding debt. In 2016 it was agreed that the net proceeds from the 2016 Aboriginal Knockout Carnival held at Oakes Oval would be used to pay off the debt. While the event was successful, unfortunately, the agreement to pay the outstanding debt was not maintained.

 

Considerations

The NURLFC were requested to provide the latest two years financial reports so their capacity to pay the outstanding amount could be assessed. The NURLFC has provided unaudited financial information for 2014/15 and 2015/16 and these are provided as separate attachments.

 

The following information is taken from the Financial Report 30 November 2015/2016:-

 

·    Total Income for the year                                                    $71,847

·    Total Expenses for the year                                      ($69,647)

·    Current Assets (Bank Account)                                          $0

·    Non-current Assets (Property, Plant & Equipment)            $10,000

·    Current Liabilities (Player Payments & Council)                 ($21,450)

·    Non-current Liabilities (Loans from other persons)             ($17,000)

 

The NURLFC has a significant accumulated deficit of ($28,450) which includes the outstanding amount owed to Council of $16,484.94. Based on the Total Income and Total Expenses for the year, an operating profit of $2,200 was generated in the 2015/16 year. If this result could be guaranteed to be repeated annually, it would take approximately 13 years for the NURLFC to pay all existing liabilities.

 

The NURLFC is not participating in the local rugby league competition in 2017.

 

Options

The Council has the following options:

1.   Agree to the request; or

2.   Decline the request.

 

For Option 1, this would have an unfavourable impact of ($16,484.94) on Council’s Net Operating Result for 2016/17.

 

If the NURLFC were to seek readmission into the local league competition and plan to use Council’s sportsgrounds, they could be required to provide evidence of their ability to pay the ground hire fees upfront, as well as make regular payments towards those costs throughout the season. 

 

For Option 2, debt recovery action would be taken to recover the outstanding amount. After considering the financial information provided by NURLFC, it is unlikely that the action would result in any financial return to the Council. When that action is completed, a further report would be submitted to Council.

 

Option 1 is preferred.

 

Strategic Alignment
This report is consistent with the requirements of the Imagine Lismore 4 Year Plan for Civic Leadership/ Management.

 

Public consultation

Not required.

 

Conclusion

The Northern United Rugby League Football Club Inc. have advised that due to declining revenues from the continuing financial downturn, they request Council to waive the outstanding ground hire fees of $16,484.94.

 

Based on the financial information provided, it unlikely that they will be able to repay the liabilities reported including the amount owed to Council.

 

It is recommended that Council agree to the request.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Northern United RLFC Inc - Request for financial assistance

 

2.

2014 - 2015 Income and Expenditure Statement and Other Financial Information

(Over 7 pages)

3.

2015 - 2016 Financial Report

(Over 7 pages)

  


Northern United RLFC Inc - Request for financial assistance

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


Report

Report

Subject

Nominations Aboriginal Advisory Group

TRIM Record No

BP17/405:EF16/96

Prepared by

Manager Integrated Planning

Reason

To seek Council endorsement of the membership of Council's Aboriginal Advisory Group.

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek the appointment of 6 (six) Aboriginal community members who have expressed interest in becoming members of Council’s Aboriginal Advisory Group (AAG).

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       That Council approve the appointment of the following Lismore residents to the Aboriginal Advisory Group as per the attached terms of reference:

1.       James Speeding

2.       Mickey Ryan

3.       Laurel Rogers

4.       Maryanne Brown

5.       Patricia King

6.       Tina Williams

 

 

Background

The continuation of an AAG is a key initiative of Council’s Reconciliation Action Plan. It is identified within the Relationships Focus Area: Community Engagement. This group is the mechanism through which Councillors and staff engage and consult with Lismore’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) community members. In particular, its policies, strategies and services affecting ATSI people living in the Lismore Local Government Area. The attached Terms of Reference (TOR) for this group details the groups:

 

·        Purpose

·        Lismore LGA boundary

·        Role

·        Membership criteria

·        Mechanisms for replacement of members

·        Meeting guidelines

·        Code of Conduct

·        Travel Assistance

·        Processes for review of the TOR

·        Group reporting and accountability processes

 

The TOR will be reviewed at the first meeting of the new group. The following 6 (six) Aboriginal Community members have expressed interest in joining the AAG:

 

1.       James Speeding

2.       Mickey Ryan

3.       Laurel Rogers

4.       Maryanne Brown

5.       Patricia King

6.       Tina Williams

 

 

Strategic Alignment
Imagine Lismore Community Strategic Plan – An inclusive and healthy community: We recognise our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community and cultures, and Leadership and Participation: We engage and communicate with our community.

 

 

Comments

Finance

Not required.

 

Public consultation

An expression of interest process was undertaken from 3 February to 17 April 2017 to recruit new members of Council’s Aboriginal Advisory Group. Additional members may be recruited over time.

 

The EOI was distributed through the Lismore Interagency email listing and an information session was held in the Council Chambers on 22 March 2017.

 

Conclusion

All 6 (six) nominations have been assessed by Council staff and are deemed appropriate for appointment to the AAG.

 

Advice has been taken from AAG Members, Councillors and senior LCC staff members of the AAG.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Nominations Aboriginal Advisory Group

(Over 7 pages)

2.

Nominations Aboriginal Advisory Group Form

 

  


Nominations Aboriginal Advisory Group Form

Attachment 2

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Report

Report

Subject

Approval to appoint new members to the Nimbin Advisory Group

TRIM Record No

BP17/518:EF11/435

Prepared by

Partnering & Community Engagement Officer

Reason

To ensure community representation on the Nimbin Advisory Committee

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the appointment of ten Nimbin residents who have expressed their interest in filling vacancies of the Nimbin Advisory Group (NAG).

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.   Council approve the appointment of the following new members to the Nimbin Advisory Group:

·    Ian Brooke

·    Megan James

2.   Council approve the reappointment of the following current members to the Nimbin Advisory Group:

·    Susana Stock

·    Gwen Trimble

·    Natalie Myer

·    Diana Roberts

·    Sue Edmond

·    Sabina Brady

·    Max Pike

 

 

Background

At the February Nimbin Advisory Group meeting, members agreed to transition the group to a community panel model.  It was agreed that a formal membership process will be maintained and membership should be no more than 15 people. During March and April 2017, an Expression of Interest (EOI) was undertaken for nominations to fill vacancies on the NAG. There are currently nine members in the group.  The aim was to choose community members that provide the broadest perspective and range of skills and knowledge.

 

The scope of this Advisory Group is:

·        The prioritisation and implementation of actions established by the Group

·        Working in partnership with local community groups; building networks to assist in delivering on identified projects

·        Providing input into the delivery plan process

·        Identifying potential funding and partnership opportunities

·        Identifying emerging community issues for Nimbin which are relevant to the strategic plan

·        Advising on methods of consultation with consideration to constraints

·        Making submissions to the annual budget through the delivery plan

·        Any other matters as requested and considered appropriate

 

The Nimbin Advisory Group’s Terms of Reference will be reviewed at the August 2017 meeting, once new members have been appointed.

 

Strategic Alignment
Community Vision: An inclusive and aware community and community participation in decision making.

 

 

Comments

Finance

Not required

 

Public consultation

An Expression of Interest was undertaken between March and April 2017 to fill the vacant positions.  This was advertised in Local Matters, Lismore City Council website and Facebook page and Nimbin Good Times.

 

Conclusion

The nominations have been assessed by Council staff and previous NAG members and are deemed appropriate.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Nimbin Advisory Group Nominations

(Over 7 pages)

  


Report

Report

Subject

Tender T2017-15 Plant Replacement - 24-27 Tonne Excavator

TRIM Record No

BP17/571:EF16/228

Prepared by

Fleet Optimisation Officer

Reason

To report the outcome of plant tender T2017-15 for the purchase of one, 24-27 tonne excavator for the Waste Facility, and seek approval for the recommended purchase and sale via auction of the current plant item.

 

 

Executive Summary

Tender T2017-15 for the supply of one, 24-27 tonne excavator was advertised in April 2017 under the Local Government Procurement (LGP) tender process.

 

The new excavator will replace Plant Item 2411, a Hitachi excavator, which is 7.44 years old with 7,755 engine hours, averaging an annual utilisation of 1,042 hours, which is 30% higher than the Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia (IPWEA) average of 800hrs.

 

The primary function of this machine is to turn over approximately 40,000 tonne of compost and landfill annually at the Waste Facility.

 

Ten tender submissions were received, ranging in price from $229,000 to $312,150. As price was weighted at 45%, competitively priced tenderers placed themselves in the best position to win the tender.

 

Details of the tender submissions and valuation summary sheets are attached. After assessing the tenders, the preferred supplier is Komatsu Australia for a Komatsu PC220LC_8MO excavator at a cost of $272,800 (ex GST).

 

The 2016/17 Budget allows $319,924 for the replacement of this plant item, with an estimated resale value of $53,588.

 

As delivery of the new excavator will not take place until the 2017/18 financial year, it is also recommended that the 2016/17 Budget for Plant Replacement be reduced by $219,200. The 2017/18 Budget for Plant Replacement will be recommended to increase as part of the September 2017 Quarterly Budget Review Statement report.

 

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.   Council accept the offer from Komatsu Australia for the supply of one, Komatsu PC220LC_8MO excavator at a cost of $272,800 (ex GST).

2.   Council sell via auction one, Hitachi excavator, being Plant Item 2411.

3.   The 2016/17 Budget for Plant Replacement be reduced by $219,200 and $219,200 be held in Plant Reserves for application in 2017/18.

 

 

Background

Tenders were called during April 2017 from suitably qualified companies for the supply of one, 24-27 tonne excavator. The Request for Tender (RFT) was advertised through the Local Government Procurement (LGP) web site. Tender submissions have now been evaluated and are reported below.

 

The tender was conducted under the Local Government Procurement (LGP) process. Councils in NSW are required to invite tenders before entering into certain contracts under Section 55 of the Local Government Act, 1993. However, Councils can utilise supply arrangements procured by LGP without the need to go to tender in their own right. In conducting the tender process LGP aims to undertake processes which reflect best practice in Local Government Procurement and address relevant probity considerations.

 

Excavator working on compost oad at Waste Facility

 

Plant Replacement Plan

The 10-Year Rolling Plant Replacement Plan has been developed to ensure the timely replacement of plant and equipment. This is achieved by establishing optimum replacement period targets for each plant type and establishing reserves to fund this replacement via internal hire rate charges. Such a program maximises fleet availability, efficiency and environmental performance. 

 

Deferring replacements compounds costs by increasing maintenance costs and reduces efficiency of services through downtime due to mechanical failure. Optimal replacement times are based on industry standards such as those recommended by the Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (IPWEA).

 

Details of the plant to be replaced in the 2016/17 Budget by this tender are:

 

·    One Hitachi excavator, Plant Item 2411.

 


 

Leasing Option

Staff have not considered leasing options for this item as the last time we assessed leasing options there was no clear benefit of leasing versus purchase. This was largely due to the low cost of capital (interest rates) in the current economic climate. In a broader sense we need to look at our entire plant replacement program in relation to leasing options. While there may be short term benefits from leasing there are also risks associated with not building reserve funds for replacement if the decision is made to purchase again instead of leasing in the future.

 

Tender Evaluation

The tender evaluation panel (comprised of Fleet, Workshop and operational staff) used the following criteria as the basis for the comparative evaluation of the tenders:

 

          CRITERIA WEIGHTING (%)

          Total Price                                                        45%

          Capability and Past Experience                       35%

          WH&S, Risk Management and Quality             0%

          Environment and Community                            0%

          Local Content                                                   20%

 

The WH&S and environment aspects of the purchase are covered by Australian Standards for machinery sold in Australia and by specific safety aspects within the tender. Any tender not conforming to these requirements is not accepted for consideration. 

 

Tender Assessment Results

Submissions were received from:

 

1.       CJD Equipment Pty Ltd - Volvo EC250DL

2.       CJD Equipment Pty Ltd – Volvo ECR235CL

3.       Tutt Bryant Equipment – Sumitomo SH250 LC-6

4.       Kobelco Construction – Kobelco SK260LC-10

5.       Komatsu Australia – Komatsu PC270LC_8

6.       Komatsu Australia – PC220LC_8MD

7.       JCB Construction Equipment Australia – JCB JS220LC

8.       CNH Australia – Case CX250C

9.       Westrac – Cat 326FL

10.     JCB Construction Equipment Australia – JCB JS240 PB9142

 

Submissions were assessed in the following manner:

 

·    An initial assessment was undertaken to determine compliance with the compulsory selection criteria.

·    Conforming submissions were scored against the selection criteria.

 

Tenders were given a raw score out of 10 for each of the assessment criteria which was then adjusted by the criteria weighting to provide a total score out of 100.

 

1.  Total Price

Prices presented ranged from $229,000 to $312,150. As price was weighted at 45%, competitively priced tenderers placed themselves in the best position to win the tender.

 

2.  Capability and Experience

Each tender was assessed against After Sales Service, General Performance History and Fit for Purpose in this section. 

 

After Sales Service:  The ratings for this criteria resulted in four submissions rated as “Marginal”, three rated as “Good”, and three rated as “Very Good”, being the two Komatsu models and one Westrac. These submissions received the highest rating in this criteria due to the availability of parts as they are serviced in the Lismore local government area (LGA) and offered extended warranty period.

 

General Performance History:  Each submission was rated against Council’s experience with the brand of machine. All but three were rated as “Good” as Council has no previous experience with Sumitomo, Kobelco, or Case. Therefore these submissions rated as “Marginal” as there is some element of risk.

 

Fit for Purpose:  From the 10 submissions received, four were rated as “Very Good”, three submissions were rated as “Good”, and three submissions were rated as “Marginal”; workable but may be limited in some areas; some element of risk.

 

Considered in the fit for purpose scoring were; slew speeds, travel speeds, weight of machine (higher weight enables good reach and lift capacity), and stability (larger footprint increases stability).

 

3.  Local Content

This section addressed whether the equipment was sold, built or serviced in the Lismore LGA.

 

Only three of the submissions received any rating for Local Content. This rating applied for the machines being serviced in the Lismore LGA, being the two Komatsu models and one Westrac.

 

None of the submissions included excavators being sold or built in the Lismore LGA.

 

Strategic Alignment

To maintain and develop the fleet services to maximise plant efficiencies for operational activities is identified as a key item under the Transport and Infrastructure section of Imagine Lismore: Imagine Our Services.

 

Comments

Finance

The recommendations are supported on the basis an open tender process is likely to achieve the best value outcome for Council.

 

As reported, the 2016/17 Budget includes $319,900 for the replacement of this plant item and an estimated resale value of $53,600. The cost of the recommended plant item is within the budgeted replacement cost.

 

As delivery of the plant item takes place in 2017/18, it is logical that budget adjustments be processed to the 2016/17 and 2017/18 financial years as recommended.

 

 

 

 

Other staff comments

Acting Operations Manager

The primary function of this machine is to turn over compost on a daily basis at the Waste Facility, a requirement of the composting process to aerate the material which in turn promotes break down of raw material into compost. Without this happening the stockpiles become anaerobic (sour) and cannot then be sold as compost and particularly not as certified organic compost, which is how we market our compost.

 

The Waste Facility currently accepts green waste and organic material from Byron, Ballina and Richmond Valley Councils as well as the Lismore local government area. This equates to approximately 40,000 tonne of material processed each year.

 

In addition, the excavator is also utilised on the landfill site to prepare new cells, capping operations and landfill cell closures, as well as other construction activities at the Waste Facility.

 

The machine averages at more than 1,000 hours per year in a highly corrosive environment, resulting in a number of rebuilds on the undercarriage. It is approaching end of use of life and repair costs are increasing. A replacement machine of the same size is sought to undertake this work.

 

Public consultation

No required.

 

Conclusion

The assessment process indicates that the Komatsu PC220LC_8 offered by Komatsu Australia provides the best value for Council’s requirements and is the optimum plant to replace the existing Plant Item 2411.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Tender Evaluation T2017-15 - 24T-27T Excavator - Waste Facility (2412)

 

  


Tender Evaluation T2017-15 - 24T-27T Excavator - Waste Facility (2412)

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


Report

Report

Subject

Tender No T2017/4 Transaction to Interaction - Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Project

TRIM Record No

BP17/579:EF14/129

Prepared by

Regional Library Manager

Reason

In February 2016 the RTRL Committee resolved to accept the $200,000 Public Library Infrastructure Grant for the RTRL project entitled 'Transaction to Interaction'.  At the May 2017 RTRL Committee Meeting new councillors were briefed on the status of the project. The Request for Quotation for Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) project moved forward to a tender process through the Local Procurement Vendor Panel.

 

Executive Summary

A Tender T2017/4 Transaction to Interaction Technology - Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) was issued on 28 February 2017. Two vendors responded:

1.  FE Technologies

2.  3M/Bibliotheca

There are very few Library RFID suppliers in Australia large enough to respond to the RTRL project. A third quote was not received through the vendor panel process for this reason.

 

The project will see installation of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) in service points across the four LGAs of Richmond Tweed Regional Library (RTRL) which has a combined population of 210, 545 (ABS Estimated resident population 2014).

 

RFID will improve customer and staff satisfaction in an overloaded manual handling environment, where dealing with high stock numbers and loans is the focus.  This will free staff up to assist patrons more to meet needs and be deployed to programs. In 2012/13 NSW Public Library Statistics RTRL issued 1,901,786 loans, second highest in the state with circulation per staff member at 25,699; 7,003 more than the NSW Median 18,696.

 

Simultaneous scanning, self-check and return, will mean less repetitive work, minimising injury.  Benefits include; reduced queues, exposure to newer technologies, improved records, increased literacy programs and events, staff time to assist both physical and on-line collection awareness. Improved efficiencies will also see expanded services within budget when and where needed.

 

An improved collection will be achieved by a clean-up of stock at conversion and will continue with access to simplified and rapid stocktaking processes.

 

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.   Council accept the tender and award the contract for T2017/4 Transaction to Interaction Technology (RFID) to FE Technologies Pty Ltd for the sum of $236,550 excluding GST.

2.   Council delegate authority to the General Manager to negotiate any necessary minor amendments or variations to finalise the contract.

3.   The seal of Council be affixed to any documents necessary to finalise the contracts.

 

Background

In July 2016 Richmond Tweed Regional Library (RTRL) issued a request for Expression of Interest Transaction to Interaction Technology - Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). The purpose of the EOI was to determine the current state of the market in RFID Technology systems. RTRL is looking to do the following if possible:

 

1.   Introduce a comprehensive current technology solution to enable self-checkout in our high loans branches.

 

2.   To be able to create a staff concierge environment in all branches minimising the use of traditional loans desks.

 

3.   Improve the transaction focus on returns to decrease manual handling while also easily identifying reservation and branch transfer alerts.

 

4.   Have the ability to carry out high speed stock taking of individual collections or a whole branch.

 

5.    Easily incorporate portable technology to provide the full loans, registration and reference services outside of the Library.

.

6.    Comply with industry best practice standards and NSW Government legislative requirements.

 

The following possible scenarios were outlined:

 

1.    At least the patrons utilising the four largest branches at Tweed Heads, Lismore, Ballina and Byron Bay will be able to utilise the self-checkout and check-in, ideally medium size branches with high volume loans will also have a self-checkout and check-in.

 

2.    Smart bin returns would be an advantage in high loan branches. Staff currently sort items for branch transfer or reservations which are identified through the Spydus circulation module.

 

3.    A majority of staff interaction with patrons is done from behind the circulation desk. Staff will utilise portable technology to provide a mix of concierge service and patron assisted loans stations. Some circulation desks will reduce in size with the possibility of removing the circulation desk in smaller branches to be investigated.

 

4.   Staff ability to scan books without removing from shelves utilising a hand-held reader to move rapidly across a shelf of items to read all of the unique id information for stocktake and identify items out of order.

 

5.   Staff to utilise portable technology for outreach visits or pop-up libraries to carry out loans, catalogue access, joining members.

 

The total project budget is $336,800 with the funding sources being a $200,000 grant and $136,800 from the RTRL’s RFID reserve. A majority of the project funds will be allocated to the RFID Supplier contract with the remainder allocated to project management, additional staffing hours for tagging all items in the collection, circulation desk configurations, cabling and electrical costs. Any vendor price cost savings will be allocated to provide hand held mobile devices for staff to provide a roving customer service model.

 


 

Utilising the Local Government Procurement Vendor Panel process two initial responses were received. Both were likely to meet all of the RTRL needs. In February 2017 RTRL moved forward to a tender process through Local Government Procurement Vendor Panel, the vendor who responded was:

         

·   FE Technologies

 

To ensure FE Technologies provided a fair and reasonable quote details from the initial EOI for 3M/Bibliotheca was used as a comparison, please see attached.

 

Project Scope

The RFID technology must be able to provide the following basic functionality:

·    Complies with NSW legislation and standards.

·    Seamless functionality with Spydus Library Management System.

·    Patron self-check-out and check-in.

·    Portability for concierge and outreach.

·    Support for mobile devices such as smart tablets.

·    Rapid stocktake.

·    Some automation of returns to reduce manual handling.

 

The minimum requirements for a signing/endorsement solution for LCC are that it must be compatible with Microsoft Office 2010, 2013 and Spydus Version 10 and above. The key quantities involved are as follows:

 

Specific Requirements                            

Quantity

 

RFID Tags

Books (Credit Card Size)

Non Books (Small Disc Tags)

 

350,000

  40,000

Staff Stations

Circulation Pad

Free Standing Self Loan Station with EFTPOS 

 

42

8

Security Gates

2 Column

3 Column

 

6

3

Mobile scanning unit cost to hire

 

RFID onsite training for tagging 

 

Onsite training for equipment

 

Installation/Delivery

 

3 year annual maintenance

 

 

 

RTRL would be interested in any opportunities for buy back or trade-in arrangements at the point of upgrading equipment if appropriate.

 

Funding Options

The Tender (and original EOI) also asked each vendor to provide options for funding the equipment required, in particular the option to lease the equipment over a 3 year term or outright purchase.

 

Project Schedule

The key project milestones are as follows:

·    EOI Closed August 2016

·    Sight visits by vendors July 2016

·    RTRL Management team selected infrastructure and tagging requirements

·    New RTRL Committee support for continuation of project May 2017

·    RFQ Closed April 2017

·    Contract Awarded end of June

·    Vendor visit to discuss role of project

·    Tags ordered and retrospective tagging of collection begins

·    Staff awareness and training from August 2016 to December 2017

·    Planned gradual roll out of infrastructure and self-checkout kiosks throughout the region September 2017 to March 2018.

 

Procurement Process

RTRL called for EOI for the Transaction to Interaction RFID in June 2016 through the Local Government Procurement Vendor Panel. This closed in August 2016.

 

The intention of the EOI was to understand where the market was at and what the current technology was. As there were only two vendors available these vendors also were the only two vendors who submitted a full quote in April 2017.

 

The RTRL Management Team were the evaluation team who considered the responses received and scored the vendors based on the assessment criteria as advertised in the quotation documents.

 

Tender Assessment

The assessment criteria and the respective weightings were;

 

                   SELECTION CRITERIA                                   WEIGHTING (%)

 

1.

Total Price

40%

2.

Capability and Experience

30%

3.

WH&S, Risk Management and Quality

5%

4.

Environment and community

5%

5.

Local Content (min 20%)

20%

 

 

Overall the assessment team felt that FE Technologies proposal provided the best overall functionality for RTRL’s needs. Having said that both proposals provided strong capability. Discussions with existing customers of FE Technologies confirmed the expectations of the RTRL Management Team.  In terms of cost FE Technologies provided the best overall solution.  The team also considered the fact that Richmond Upper Clarence Regional Library recently launched their Self Service checkouts utilising FE Technologies which could assist with any future resources sharing arrangements.

 

Strategic Alignment
Although not a specific Imagine Lismore project, this is a significant initiative based on maximising staff efficiencies, value adding to the existing community experience and minimising risks.

 

The introduction of this technology and the ongoing costs will be funded by identifiable RTRL Reserves and the Public Library Infrastructure Grant. This project aligns with the RTRL strategic intent which is cantered on the end user. RTRL goals relevant to this project include: A staff culture that supports flexible and adaptable service delivery using new technologies to deliver content and services any time, any place. We are reaching, engaging and connecting with our communities.

 

 

A summary of key risks associated with this contract has been extracted from the detailed risk assessment for the project as follows:

 

Risk

Consequence

Risk

Mitigation

Equipment fails to deliver expected performance

 

Availability of added customer service and staff efficiencies will not be realised 

Low

Ensure appropriate selection of vendor and ensure vendor rollout plan and appropriate testing are completed.

Cost overrun

Project not delivered to budget.

Low

Ensure project reporting and cost control is implemented as per Project Plan.

 

Comments

Finance

The RTRL successfully applied for a NSW State Government Public Library Infrastructure grant of $200,000 towards the introduction of technology assisted services. The project is to install radio frequency identification (RFID) at key service points to assist the shift from a transaction based culture, where dealing with high stock numbers and loans is the focus, to an interaction based culture. One of the key financial outcomes from this project will be improved staffing efficiencies which provides an option to deliver more services.

 

The total project budget is $336,800 with the funding sources being a $200,000 grant and $136,800 from the RTRL’s RFID reserve.

 

Due to the timing of this project changes will be required to be made to the 2016/17 and 2017/18 Budgets. The changes to the 2017/18 Budget will be incorporated into the September 2017 Quarterly Budget Review Statement report to Council.

 

Other staff comments

Not applicable.

 

Public consultation

Not applicable.

 

Conclusion

The RTRL successfully applied for a NSW State Government Public Library Infrastructure grant of $200,000 towards the introduction of technology assisted services. The project is to install radio frequency identification (RFID) at key service points to assist the shift from a transaction based culture, where dealing with high stock numbers and loans is the focus, to an interaction based culture.

 

This project is a major game changer for the RTRL service. The RTRL service is already great as judged by patrons. This project will transform our great service to exceptional. One of the key financial outcomes from this project will be improved staffing efficiencies which provides an option to deliver more services.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

RTRL Transaction to Interaction Tender Scoring sheet

 

  


RTRL Transaction to Interaction Tender Scoring sheet

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


Report

Report

Subject

Lismore Flood Appeal Funds Allocation Process

TRIM Record No

BP17/604:EF17/202

Prepared by

Manager Integrated Planning

Reason

To provide Council with an overview of the Lismore Flood Appeal and to confirm Lismore Flood Appeal eligibility criteria and funds allocation processes.

 

Executive Summary

The Lismore Flood Appeal opened on the 28 April 2017 and closed 31 May 2017. 385 applications were received (excluding late & withdrawn applications). Council staff worked with the Lismore Flood Appeal Steering Committee to develop all administrative and management processes necessary to transparently and equitably allocate funds to eligible applicants. Advice was taken from not for profit organisations experienced in the administration of such appeals and, additionally, legal probity advice was sought to confirm the legality of the structure of the appeal.

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       Council adopt the Lismore Flood Appeal Eligibility Criteria and Allocation Process as outlined in the report to enable the distribution of funds to all eligible Flood Appeal applicants.

 

Background

During late March and early April 2017, Lismore and surrounding areas were severely affected by a damaging flood in the wake of Cyclone Debbie.

 

A community steering group co-chaired by Jenny Dowell (Lismore’s Former Mayor) and Councillor Eddie Lloyd (current Lismore Councillor) set up the Lismore Flood Appeal on 4 April 2017. This group utilised the fundraising site Go Fund Me and a Council bank account, enabling members of the public to donate quickly and efficiently to assist those affected by the flood and enduring hardship. The Lismore Flood Appeal Steering Committee was established to provide guidance in regards to the appeal strategy and to oversee the distribution of funds. 

 

The Steering Committee comprised elected Councillors, and representatives of business and community sector.

 

 

Cr Eddie Lloyd (Co-Chair)

Lismore City Councillor

Jenny Dowell (Co-Chair)

Former Mayor of Lismore

Cr Isaac Smith

Mayor of Lismore

Cr Gianpiero Battista

Lismore City Councillor

Brent McAlister

Executive Director Sustainable Development, Lismore City Council

Deborah Benhayon (resigned from the committee)

President, Lismore Chamber of Commerce & Industry President

Tony Davies

CEO, Social Futures

David Kirkpatrick

Editor, Northern Star

Stewart Prins

Vice President, Men & Family Centre

 

To Date

On 28 April 2017, applications for financial assistance opened to residents, business owners and ‘others’ (people who were homeless, primary producers, sporting and community organisations etc.).  A number of communication channels were used to publicise this opportunity, these included a letterbox drop in flood affected suburbs, media alerts, Lismore City Council’s Facebook page and website and promotions through the Steering Committee’s existing networks. Information and staff assistance to complete application forms was also made available at the Lismore Recovery Centre, Lismore Library and the Visitor Information Centre. 

385 applications were submitted by the closing date (excluding 1 application that was withdrawn). 

·    284 from residents (tenants and owner/occupiers)

·    74 from business owners (including home businesses)

·    27 from applicants categorised as ‘other’ (see above)

This fund closed on 31 May 2017. The amount of donations in Council’s Flood Appeal bank account total approximately $441,600.

 

Guiding Principles

·   All donated funds were committed to be used to assist community members and businesses impacted by flood waters.

·   All appeal funds will be provided to residents, business owners and ‘others’, and will focus on “filling the gaps” in existing flood recovery support – in line with the public commitment made by the Mayor.

·   The Appeal will endeavour to stimulate the local economy by encouraging spending in local businesses.

·   Funds will be distributed to respond to both immediate and emerging needs of individuals and communities, recognising that the recovery process will take time.

·   All management and administration costs associated with the Appeal will be met by Lismore City Council or partner organisations and not deducted from donated funds.

·   All appeal processes and funding allocation processes will be transparent, well publicised and accessible.

·   Confidentiality will be maintained by all participants, particularly in regards to sharing and disclosing personal information in accordance with relevant privacy legislation.

·   The Appeal funds will be distributed in accordance with the decisions of the Lismore Flood Appeal Steering Committee.

·   Documentation will be retained by Council should the Australian Taxation Office wish to audit the process for legal compliance and probity.

 

Application Process

·    Applicants were required to complete a simple one page application form and provide proof of address.

·    Applicants were asked to briefly describe their flood damage and specific needs and, additionally, any special hardship that they may have experienced.

·     Applicants were required to detail any financial flood relief they had received from other agencies.

·    Applicants were asked to provide their bank details to enable funds to be deposited directly into their bank accounts.

 

 

 

 

Eligibility Criteria

Successful applicants must:

·    Provide proof of address for house/business located in flood affected area, as identified on Council’s mapping.

·    Have not received financial or other types of funding from other support agencies.

·    Only receive one allocation from this appeal.

 

Allocation process

·    Confirmation of eligibility will be established through reference to Council’s flood plain impact mapping.

·    Funds will be divided and allocated equitably to all eligible applicants.

·    A small number of applicants have requested specific amounts for the purchase of small items and these requests will be funded to the limit of the cost of that particular item.

·    It is hoped that all funds will have been allocated to eligible applicants by close of business Friday 16th June 2017.

 

Probity

·    To ensure probity in relation to the processes governing the administration of the Lismore Flood Appeal and the deliberations of the Appeal Steering Committee, Council staff took probity advice from Maddocks Legal Services, Sydney.

·    This advice confirmed that:

The proposed criteria and funds allocation process are consistent with public statements made to the community and those detailed on the Flood Appeal application form.

The proposed criteria and funds allocation processes are consistent with those commonly used by Local Government and Not for Profit entities when allocating funds from similar disaster recovery appeals.

·    Council’s flood appeal was endorsed as a deductible gift recipient retrospective to the start of the event which was 28 March 2017.

·    A separate bank account was established for donations to the flood appeal.  All funds are maintained in this separate bank account and will only be available for direct distribution to those most in need.

·    That the adoption of both the proposed criteria and funds allocation process by Council is necessary. This will happen at the June 13 Ordinary Council meeting.

·    The access to the details of the Flood Appeal processes and the opportunity to provide comment through Public Access opportunities at the 13 June 2017 Council meeting will reinforce the intentions of the Appeal Guiding Principle detailed above.

 

Strategic Alignment
The Lismore Flood Appeal aligns with the following Imagine Lismore Community Strategic Plan themes:

1.   A prosperous and vibrant city.

2.   An inclusive and healthy community.

3.   Leadership and participation.

 

 

 

Comments

Finance

The adoption of the Lismore Flood Appeal Eligibility Criteria and Allocation Process as reported is supported.

 

Conclusion

Adoption of both the Lismore Flood Appeal Eligibility Criteria and Funds Allocation Process by Council will enable the allocation of funds to eligible Lismore community members and business owners thereby concluding this highly successful community initiative.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Lismore Flood Appeal Application Form

 

  


Lismore Flood Appeal Application Form

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Report

Report

Subject

Annual Remuneration Fees for Mayor and Councillors

TRIM Record No

BP17/606:EF09/643

Prepared by

Council Secretary

Reason

For the Council to determine the maximum fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for 201718

 

Executive Summary

The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal each year determines the range of annual fees to be paid to Mayors and Councillors. Council needs to determine within the category range the fees to be paid

 

        Recommendation

That:

1.       Council determine the maximum fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for 2017/18.

 

 

Background

Pursuant to Section 241 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal has determined the annual fees to be paid to Mayors and Councillors during the period 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2018.  The Tribunal has determined that there will be an increase of 2.5 percent for all minimum and maximum fees for Councillors.

 

Lismore City Council is categorised as a Regional Rural Council and Council needs to determine the annual fee to be paid within the minimum and maximum range as determined by the Tribunal.  If Council does not fix a fee, the amount defaults to the minimum.

 

Councillor Fee

The Councillor fee for Regional Rural Councils is a minimum fee of $8,750 and a maximum fee of $19,310.  The fee determined by Council for the 2016/17 financial year was the maximum amount of $18,840.

 

Mayoral Fee

The Mayoral fee for Regional Rural Councils is a minimum fee of $18,630 and a maximum fee of $42,120.  The fee determined by Council for the 2016/17 financial year was the maximum amount of $41,090.

 

Strategic Alignment
This matter is not specifically identified within Imagine Lismore but fits within the Civic Leadership/Management category.

 

An annual amount is included within the budget for this expense.

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Finance

The 2017/18 Budget includes Councillor Fee of $211,000 ($19,181 per Councillor) and a Mayoral Fee of $41,700.

 

Based on Council’s decision, any variation to the 2017/18 Budget will be reported as part of the September 2017 Quarterly Budget Review Statement.

 

Other staff comments

Not required.

 

Public consultation

Not required.

 

 

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.  


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Committee Recommendations

 

 


Committee Recommendation

Committee Recommendation

Traffic Advisory Committee - Minutes of meeting of 17 May 2017.

 

 

 

        Recommendation

That the minutes be received and adopted and the recommendations contained therein be adopted.

 

 

Attachment/s

1.

Traffic Advisory Committee - Minutes of meeting of 17 May 2017

 

  


Traffic Advisory Committee - Minutes of meeting of 17 May 2017

Attachment 1

 

 

MINUTES OF THE Traffic Advisory Committee HELD IN THE Gordon Pavilion, Oakes Oval Complex, Dawson Street, Lismore, ON Wednesday, 17 May 2017 AT 10.00am.

 

Please note:   These minutes are subject to confirmation at the next Council meeting.

 

Present

 

 

Councillor Neil Marks (Acting Chairperson) and Bronwyn Mitchell (on behalf of Thomas George MP, Member for Lismore).

 

Note:  Comments and voting provided via email by Tara McAuley (Manager Network & Safety) for NSW Roads and Maritime Services.

 

 

 

In Attendance

 

 

Barry Goodwin (Design Services Engineer) and Jason Mumford (City Centre Manager) Items 4.2 and 4.3.

 

 

 

Apologies

 

TAC20/17

Apologies for non-attendance was received on behalf of Councillor Bill Moorhouse, Thomas George, MP (Member for Lismore), Alan Eichmann (NSW Roads and Maritime Services) and Sgt Steve Fuhrmann (Lismore Police).

 

 

 

Confirmation of Minutes

 

TAC21/17

There was no Traffic Advisory Committee meeting held in April 2017 due to the flood event.

 

 

 

Disclosure of Interest

 

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part ‘A’ – Committee Recommendations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    22 Keen Street - Request for 2 hour Parking Restriction

Request received from Keen Street Private Clinic at 22 Keen Street for timed 2-hour parking restrictions be implemented.

                                                                                                  (CI17/6060:EF17/12)

 

A request has been received from the Practice Manager of Keen Street Private Clinic at 22 Keen Street, that the area in front of their business be restricted to 2-hour limits to allow patrons closer access to the medical centre.

 

These parks are currently being utilised for long term parking, presumably by employees that work in and around the CBD.

 

The existing parking in Keen Street is zoned as unrestricted angle parking for the majority of the street. There is one dedicated Accessible Parking Space adjacent to 22 Keen Street which provides access to the medical centre. There is also a 1-hour parking restriction adjacent to the Keen Street Vet Clinic at 38 Keen Street.

 

There is a mixture of commercial and residential premises on the eastern side of Keen Street with varying needs for parking options.

 

 

TAC22/17

RECOMMENDED that the onstreet area in front of 20 Keen Street, extending north to 14 Keen Street, revert to 2-hour parking restriction.

 

Voting for:            Councillor Marks, Bronwyn Mitchell and Tara McAuley (via email)

Voting Against:     Nil

Absent:                 Sgt Fuhrmann

 

 

 

 

2.   Request for Formalised Pedestrian Crossing - Kadina Street, Goonellabah

Request received for the installation of a formalised pedestrian crossing on Kadina Street from Kadina High School P&C Committee.

                                                                                                                   (R6469)

 

Kadina High School is located at Kadina Street, Goonellabah. Kadina Street is located between Ballina Road (Bruxner Highway) to the north and Oliver Avenue to the south. Both roads experience high levels of traffic volumes and Kadina Street is used as a link road either to access the Bruxner Highway or the commercial precinct and Government buildings situated on Oliver Avenue.

 

It is estimated that up to 250 students would either cross Kadina Street to parental pick-up or continue their journey via footpath to their destination.

 

A request has been received from the school to install a pedestrian crossing or a formalised pedestrian refuge crossing south of the bus bay turnaround area, to provide a safer crossing location. Council has recently installed a pedestrian safety fence on the existing centre concrete median (full length) to direct pedestrians to the pedestrian crossing or refuge.

 

There is a reasonably high incidence of school children crossing adhoc on Kadina Street between bus movements and through traffic. The Installation of the fence directs them to a safe crossing point to the north via a pedestrian refuge or to the south where this treatment has been requested.

 

This crossing location provides a link to a proposed shared cycleway/footpath planned for 2017/2018.

 

A pedestrian crossing warrant in a School zone requires P>30 pedestrians crossing the location and vehicle movements V>200. Pedestrian movements are in the volume of 160-180 during peak times and approximately 200 during the school term in the afternoon peak time period.

 

 

TAC23/17

RECOMMENDED that:

 

1.   A formalised pedestrian crossing be installed on Kadina Street, south of the bus bay turnaround area for Kadina High School, in accordance with TD02-12c Stopping and Parking Restrictions at Intersections and Crossings, pending investigation that site and pedestrian movements meet relevant requirements set out in Section 7 of Australian Standard AS1742.

2.   Community consultation be undertaken with nearby residents who may be impacted by loss of onstreet parking.

3.   The proposal be referred to Council’s Design Services Team to provide plans for construction, pending funding.

 

Voting for:            Councillor Marks, Bronwyn Mitchell and Tara McAuley (via email)

Voting Against:     Nil

Absent:                 Sgt Fuhrmann

 

 

 

 

 

3.   Lismore Lantern Parade - Traffic Management Plan

Request for approval of the Traffic Management Plan for the annual Lismore Lantern Parade planned for Saturday, 24 June 2017.

                                                                                                                (EF17/220)

 

The Lismore Lantern Parade is an annual community arts festival being held this year on 24 June 2017. The Lantern Parade attracts in excess of 25,000 people each year and celebrates community, art and nature with arts, crafts, workshops, regional cuisine, and a spectacular parade including lanterns, carnival dancers and illuminated puppets. There is also street theatre, bands and music planned for the event.

 

There have been no traffic issues arising from this event in previous years. A Traffic Management Plan was reviewed at the meeting.

 

 

TAC24/17

RECOMMENDED that:

1.   Council endorse the proposal to hold the annual Lismore Lantern Parade on Saturday, 24 June 2017 and

2.   The traffic management plan be approved.

3.   The organisers gain necessary approvals from NSW Roads & Maritime Services and NSW Police Local Area Command, and that emergency services agencies be notified of the road closures.

 

Voting for:            Councillor Marks, Bronwyn Mitchell and Tara McAuley (via email)

Voting Against:     Nil

Absent:                 Sgt Fuhrmann

 

 

Part ‘B’ – Determined by Committee

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.  Request for Partial Lane Closure - Club Lane, Lismore CBD

Request received from Council’s City Centre Manager for consideration of a partial lane closure of Club Lane for the purpose of pop-up dining areas and events.

                                                                                                                     (R7305)

 

A request has been received from Council’s City Centre Manager, Jason Mumford, to commence the process of closing Club Lane on a permanent basis to allow activation through outdoor dining and public spaces.

 

The process of closing Club Lane includes:

-     historical search

-     newspaper advertisements

-     consultation with affected parties

-     report to Council on objections

-     Crown Lands and fees

-     survey plan prepared and endorsed by Crown and registration

-     Crown gazette of proposed road closure.

 

Club Lane has limited thoroughfare traffic with several commercial premises. Access would need to be provided to these premises via Glasgow Lane.

 

Jason Mumford addressed the Committee and discussed the following options:

 

1.   The temporary partial closure of Club Lane for laneway activation; pop-up green space and other activities plus outdoor dining; effective immediately or soon thereafter.

2.   The long term partial closures of Club Lane and Nesbitt Lane to establish permanent pop-up spaces and outdoor dining.”

 

 

TAC25/17

AGREED that:

 

1.   Adequate consultation be undertaken with business owners.

2.   Adequate community consultation be undertaken and reported back to the Committee for further discussion.

3.   A detailed Traffic Flow plan be provided for review.

4.   A plan be provided to indicate pedestrian travel paths including delineation between diners and pedestrians.

 

Voting for:            Councillor Marks, Bronwyn Mitchell and Tara McAuley (via email)

Voting Against:     Nil

Absent:                 Sgt Fuhrmann

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.    Request for Partial Lane Closure of Nesbitt Lane, Lismore CBD

Request received from Council’s City Centre Manager for consideration of a partial lane closure of Nesbitt Lane for the purpose of pop-up dining areas and events.

(R7323)

 

This item was withdrawn upon the request of Council’s City Centre Manager, Jason Mumford and not discussed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.   Little Uralba Street - Lane Closure

Request for closure of part of Little Uralba Street and road realignment and change of traffic flows.

                                                                                                                    (R6043)

 

The Committee agreed that the matter be deferred to a future meeting.

 

 

TAC26/17

AGREED that the matter be deferred to a future meeting.

 

Voting for:            Councillor Marks, Bronwyn Mitchell and Tara McAuley (via email)

Voting Against:     Nil

Absent:                 Sgt Fuhrmann

 

 

 

 

 

7.   Request for Extension of Bus Service - Halls Country Buses

Request received from D & J Hall, owners/operators of Halls Country Buses, to extend their existing bus service to include a pick-up/drop off location at South Lismore Public School in Wilson Street.

                                                                                            (CI17/11037:EF09/1993)

 

 

The bus service currently provides a service from Richmond River High School to Our Lady Help of Christians in Rhodes Street via Bridge Street and Union Street. The proposed service will include the South Lismore Public School via Kyogle Street, Wilson Street and Casino Street.

 

 

TAC27/17

AGREED that the Committee endorse the request by Halls Country Buses to extend its bus service to include South Lismore Public School via Kyogle Street, Wilson Street and Casino Street.

 

Voting for:            Councillor Marks, Bronwyn Mitchell and Tara McAuley (via email)

Voting Against:     Nil

Absent:                 Sgt Fuhrmann

 

 

 

Closure

This concluded the business and the meeting terminated at 10.43am.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Documents for Signing and Sealing

 

 


Document for Signing and Sealing

Document for Signing and Sealing

 

The following documents have been prepared in accordance with previous resolutions of the Council and/or the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and other relevant statues.

 

It is now proposed that the Council authorise the signing and sealing of these documents.

 

 

        Recommendation

That the seal of Council be affixed to the following documents:

 

P26242-03           Renew Licence Agreement for a period of two years with Lismore Toy Library Inc comprising an area of approximately 45m2 on the ground floor of the Lismore Library at 110 Magellan Street, Lismore, being part of Lot 14, DP 867281 for an annual licence fee of approximately $1,152.00 plus CPI.

 

P10331                New Outdoor Dining Licence Agreement for a period of two years with Sarah Jones comprising an area of approximately 29.1m2 over the footpath adjacent to the business known as Flock Espresso at 49 Woodlark Street, Lismore, being Lot 1, DP 516552 extending in front of the neighbouring “Discount Drug Store” (subject to the business operator’s consent), for a Tier 3 annual licence fee of approximately $2,226.15 in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges.

 

P5622                  New Outdoor Dining Licence Agreement for a period of two years with Jodie Rook comprising an area of approximately 5.84m2 over the footpath adjacent to the business known as Golden Crust Hot Bread Bakery at 157 Keen Street, Lismore, being Lot 2, DP 305137 for a Tier 2 annual licence fee of approximately $210.00 in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges.

 

P29355                New Outdoor Dining Licence Agreement for a period of two years with Mary Bryant comprising an area of 13.8m2 over the footpath adjacent to Lismore Arcade to compliment the business known as Coffee Shots at Shop 6, 106 Molesworth Street, Lismore, being part Lot 1, SP 76140 for a Tier 2 annual licence fee of approximately $496.80 in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges.

 

P6305                  Renew Outdoor Dining Licence Agreement with Baxter Enterprises (NSW) Pty Ltd for a period of two years comprising an area of 10.75m2 over the footpath adjacent to the business known as Leo’s Food Bar at 54 Magellan Street, Lismore, being Lot 17, DP 1862 for a Tier 2 annual licence fee of $376.00 in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges.

 

 

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.  


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial Assistance – Section 356

 

 


Financial Assistance – Section 356

Financial Assistance – Section 356

 

 

 

a)   Mayor’s Discretionary Fund (GL390.485.15)

Budget: $3,000                    Spent to date: $2,250

 

CI17/10289

Mayoral sponsorship of $100.00 to resident Ms Lily Folpp, to assist with fundraising to study at the Central School of Ballet in London.

 

                                                                                                                                            $100.00

CI17/14001

Mayoral sponsorship of $400.00 to the light’n up ‘Lismore Lantern Parade 2017’, to assist with the development of their building.

 

                                                                                                                                             $400.00

 

 

        Recommendation

In accordance with Section 356(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, the assistance to persons as listed above is hereby approved.

 

 

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.     


 

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting of the Council of the City of Lismore HELD IN Council Chambers ON Tuesday, 9 May 2017 AT 6.00pm

 

 

Please note:   These minutes are subject to confirmation at the next Council meeting. Decisions recorded in the draft minutes are subject to the Council’s Code of Meeting Practice in relation to rescinding decisions.

 

 

Present

 

 

Mayor, Councillor Smith;  Councillors Battista, Bennett, Bird, Casson, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks and Moorhouse, together with the General Manager, Executive Director-Sustainable Development, Executive Director-Infrastructure Services,  Manager-Finance, Media and Community Relations Coordinator, Manager Information Services, Manager Development and Compliance, Strategic Property Projects Manager, Senior Development Assessment/Heritage Planning Officer, Council Secretary and General Manager’s Executive Assistant.

 

 

 

Minutes of Previous Meeting

 

 

68/17

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Lismore City Council held on 11 April 2017 be confirmed.

 

 

(Councillors Marks/Battista)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bennett, Bird, Casson, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Nil

 

 


 

Disclosure of Interest

 

 

Disclosure of Interest

69/17

RESOLVED that:

 

Councillor Guise declared a Significant Pecuniary Conflict of Interest for the following item:

8.1 Northern Rivers Rail Trail.

Nature: Lives next to railway line.

 

(Councillors Marks/Moorhouse)

 

 

Public Access Session

 

Prior to dealing with the circulated reports and associated information, a Public Access Session was held at which Council was addressed by the following:

 

 

 

Notices of Motion

 

At this juncture, Councillor Guise left the meeting.

 

8.1 Northern Rivers Rail Trail

 

AGAINST

Lydia Kindred

AGAINST

Alan McGregor – Equitable Transport & Disabilty Support Network

 

FOR

Geoff Meers - Northern Rivers Rail Trail Assocation

 

 

 

Matters Arising

Nil.

 

Report

Nil.

Leave of Absence

 

Leave of Absence

70/17

RESOLVED that:

 

A leave of absence from Councillor Casson from 12 June 2017 to 25 July 2017 be accepted.

 

A leave of absence from Councillor Moorhouse from 16 May 2017 to 2 June 2017 be accepted.

 

A leave of absence from Councillor Lloyd from 21 June 2017 to 30 June 2017 be accepted.

 

(Councillors Marks/Casson)

 

Notice of Motions

 

 

8.1 Northern Rivers Rail Trail

 

At the request of the mover the MOTION was WITHDRAWN.

 

That Council:

 

In the event that the Expression of Interest for the Casino-Lismore-Eltham (CLE trail) section of the Northern Rivers Rail Trail (NRRT) is successful, and the NRRT Association Inc. are invited to prepare a business case for funding under the Rebuilding NSW grants for Regional Growth - Environment and Tourism Fund, then Council commits $50,000 (for the 2016/17 financial year) in funding toward producing the supporting business case.

 

 

At this juncture, Councillor Guise returned to the meeting.

 

At this juncture, Councillor Cook left the meeting.

At this juncture, Councillor Cook returned to the meeting.

 

 

 

8.2 Infrastructure Contributions Discount Policy

 

A MOTION WAS MOVED that Council

 

Amend Map 2 of the Infrastructure Contributions Discount Policy (5.2.32) to reflect the adopted B3 - Commercial Core Zone as shown in the Lismore Local Environmental Plan 2012.

 

(Councillors Battista/Moorhouse) (BP17/471)

 

On submission to the meeting the AMENDMENT was APPROVED and became the MOTION.

 

That:

1.   Map 2 of the Infrastructure Contributions Discount Policy (5.2.32) be amended to reflect the adopted B3 - Commercial Core Zone as shown in the Lismore Local Environmental Plan 2012.

2.   The abovementioned proposed amendment to Map 2 of the Infrastructure Contributions Discount Policy be placed on public exhibition for 28 days and any public submissions received be reported to Council.

 

 

(Councillors Battista/Marks) (BP17/471)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bird, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Councillors Bennett and Casson

 

71/17

RESOLVED that

:

1.       Map 2 of the Infrastructure Contributions Discount Policy (5.2.32) be amended to           reflect the adopted B3 - Commercial Core Zone as shown in the Lismore Local           Environmental Plan 2012.

2.       The abovementioned proposed amendment to Map 2 of the Infrastructure           Contributions Discount Policy be placed on public exhibition for 28 days and any           public submissions received be reported to Council.

 

(Councillors Battista/Marks) (BP17/471)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bird, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Councillors Bennett and Casson

 

  


 

Matters Arising

 

 

10.1 Investments - April 2017

72/17

RESOLVED that the report be received and noted.

 

 

(Councillors Cook/Bird) (BP17/5)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bird, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Councillors Bennett and Casson

 

 

At this juncture, Councillor Casson left the meeting.

At this juncture, Councillor Casson returned to the meeting.


 

Reports

 

 

11.1 March 2017 Quarterly Budget Review Statement

73/17

RESOLVED that :

1.       Council adopts the changes to the 2016/17 Budget as shown in the March 2017 Quarterly Budget Review Statement.

 

(Councillors Cook/Moorhouse) (BP17/443)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bird, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Councillors Bennett and Casson

 

 

 

11.2 Section 96(1A) Application to Modify Development Consent 2016/111 for the Re-development of the former Lismore High School C Block for the Lismore Regional Art Gallery

74/17

RESOLVED that :

1.     The Section 96(1A) Application to Modify Development Consent 5.2016.111.2 be approved as follows:

a)      delete Condition E5; and

b)      amend Condition E11 to read:

E11. Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate CCTV is to be installed at the approved premises and is to incorporate recording equipment and cameras that are of a high grade digital quality capable of identification and facial recognition. The CCTV cameras are to cover all areas of risk (both internal and external), particularly the following areas:

·   all entrances and exits to the building;

·   all areas within the building occupied by the public (excluding toilets); and

·   the area within a radius of 25m external to the building.

 

CCTV recorded footage must be kept for a minimum of 31 days and must be able to be downloaded and a copy provided to the Police or Council within 12 hours of a request being made.

 

Note: Additional lighting is to be installed if required to capture images at night.

 

Reason: To enhance the safety and security of the premises

AND

2.     Council’s Sustainable Development Directorate undertake a review of the merits of Council Policy No. 1.8.5 Undergrounding of Power Lines – Central Business District and report back to Council within 12 months of the date of this resolution.

 

(Councillors Battista/Marks) (BP17/404)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bird, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Councillors Bennett and Casson

 

 


 

Documents for Signing and Sealing

 

 

13.1 Documents for Signing and Sealing

75/17

RESOLVED that the seal of Council be affixed to the following documents:

         

R6008        Licence Agreement with Colin Jeffrey Britton and Valerie Ann Britton who have received approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act, 1993  to carry out works in a public road being the erection of a shade sail on Council road reserve in Brown Street. A shade sail covering the existing driveway to the property has been installed and protrudes partly onto the road reserve. The approval is conditional upon a formal licence arrangement being entered into with Council. The proposed licence period is five years commencing 1 May 2017 and expiring 30 April 2022 with an annual licence fee is $132.50 including GST being the minimum annual licence/lease fee and this shall increase annually in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges.

 

P5593         Outdoor Dining Licence Agreement with Julieanne Maree Krieg and Stephen Timothy Krieg comprising an area of 29.6m2 over the footpath adjacent to the premises known as La Baracca, situated at 29 Keen Street, Lismore, being Lot A in DP 152684 for the lease period of 1 March 2017 to 28 February 2019 at a Tier 2 annual rental according to the 2015/16 Annual Fees and Charges, CPI indexed annually.

 

 

(Councillors Marks/Bird) (BP17/394)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bennett, Bird, Casson, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Nil

 

 


 

Financial Assistance – Section 356

 

 

14.1 Financial Assistance – Section 356 Report

76/17

RESOLVED that:

 

In accordance with Section 356(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, the assistance to persons as listed above is hereby approved.

 

(Councillors Marks/Cook) (BP17/482)

 

Voting for:                   Councillors Battista, Bennett, Bird, Casson, Cook, Ekins, Guise, Lloyd, Marks, Moorhouse and Smith

Voting against:           Nil

 

 

 

 

Urgency Motion (Cr Greg Bennett)

 

MATTER OF GREAT URGENCY, MOTION put forward by Councillor Bennett:

 

That Council writes to the Hon Kevin Hogan MP Member for Page and relevant Minister to request that businesses which receive the small business recovery grant in relation to the Cyclone Debbie event and subsequent flooding be granted exempt income status for those grants.

 

At the request of the mover the MOTION was WITHDRAWN.

 

 

 

Closure

This concluded the business and the meeting terminated at 7:40 pm.

 

CONFIRMED this > of >  201> at which meeting the signature herein was subscribed.

 

 

 

 

 

______________________________

 

MAYOR