NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

29 October 2015

 

Council has adopted the following Vision and Mission Statements to describe its philosophy and to provide a focus for the principal activities detailed in its Management Plan.

 

Our Vision

Nambucca Valley ~ Living at its best.

 

Our  Mission Statement

 

‘The Nambucca Valley will value and protect its natural environment, maintain its assets and infrastructure and develop opportunities for its people.’

 

Our Values in Delivery

·                Effective leadership

·                Strategic direction

·                Sustainability of infrastructure and assets

·                Community involvement and enhancement through partnerships with Council

·                Enhancement and protection of the environment

·                Maximising business and employment opportunities through promotion of economic development

·                Addressing social and cultural needs of the community through partnerships and provision of facilities and services

·                Actively pursuing resource sharing opportunities

 

Council Meetings:  Overview and Proceedings

 

Council meetings are held on the last Thursday of each month AND on the Thursday two weeks before the Thursday meeting.  Both meetings commence at 5.30 pm.  Meetings are held in the Council Chamber at Council's Administration Centre—44 Princess Street, Macksville (unless otherwise advertised).

 

How can a Member of the Public Speak at a Council Meeting?

 

1        Addressing Council with regard to an item on the meeting agenda:

 

Members of the public are welcome to attend meetings and address the Council.  Registration to speak may be made by telephone or in person before 2.00 pm on a meeting day.  The relevant agenda item will be brought forward at 5.30 pm in agenda order, and dealt with following preliminary business items on the agenda.  Public addresses are limited to five (5) minutes per person with a limit of two people speaking for and two speaking against an item. 

 

2        Public forum address regarding matters not on the meeting agenda:

 

Council allows not more than two (2) members of the public per meeting to address it on matters not listed in the agenda provided the request is received before publication of the agenda and the subject of the address is disclosed and recorded on the agenda.

 

Speakers should address issues and refrain from making personal attacks or derogatory remarks.  You must treat others with respect at all times.

 

Meeting Agenda

 

These are available Council’s website: www.nambucca.nsw.gov.au


 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

 

Acknowledgement of Country            (Mayor)

 

I would like to acknowledge the Gumbaynggirr people who are the Traditional Custodians of this Land.  I would also like to pay respect to the elders both past and present and extend that respect to any Aboriginal People present.

 

AGENDA                                                                                                   Page

 

1        APOLOGIES

2        PRAYER

3        DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

4        CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES —

Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 October 2015................................................................................. 6

5        NOTICES OF MOTION

6        Notices of Rescission

6.1     Notice of Rescission - Gumma Shooting Range (LF780)................................................... 17  

 

7        PUBLIC FORUM

i)           Mr David Hall PUBLIC FORUM on behalf of Condition of Main Street

ii)          Mr Lawrence Taylor PUBLIC FORUM on behalf of Condition of Main Street

iii)         Mr Col Thurgood PUBLIC FORUM on behalf of Speed Humps and town water in the future

iv)        Mr Paul Foley PUBLIC FORUM on behalf of Use of the Senior Citizens Hall, Macksville

DELEGATIONS

10.5   Proposed Serviced Apartment Building........................................................................... 63

i)        Mr Scott Riley (Applicant) – Available for questions

10.6   Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range ................................................................... 171

i)        Mr Jeff Unwin—Objector

ii)       Ms Lyn Mackay—Objector

 

8        ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE   

9        QUESTIONS FOR CLOSED MEETING WHERE DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED

10      General Manager Report

10.1   Outstanding Actions and Reports.................................................................................... 18

10.2   Site Inspection - Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads (EJ Biffin Playing Fields)............................................................................................................... 24

10.3   Representations concerning the Stricter Interpretation of the Australian Government's Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements - Response from the Hon. David Elliot MP.................. 26

10.4   Geotechnical Investigation - 2 Nelson Street, Nambucca Heads........................................ 31

10.5   Proposed Serviced Apartment Building--DELEGATION.................................................... 63

10.6   Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range--DELEGATION ............................................ 171

10.7   Rotary Lookout Nambucca Heads - concept improvements............................................ 295

10.8   Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuaries and Coastline Managment Committee Meeting held 17 September 2015....................................................................................................... 308

10.9   Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months,
applications where submissions received
not determined from 16 September 2015 to 20 October 2015.......................................... 312

10.10  New Draft Policy - Local Orders Policy.......................................................................... 316

10.11  Living Coast Festival .................................................................................................... 356

10.12  Proposed 330 Lot Residential Subdivision, Bellwood - Request to Offset Cost of Constructing the Link Road Against Council Contributions............................................................................... 358

10.13  Environmental Levy - Status Report............................................................................... 361


 

11      Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

11.1   Nambucca District Historical Society Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual General Meeting - 15 September 2015....................................................................................................... 368

11.2   Gordon Park Rainforest Committee of Management - Annual General Meeting - 10 September 2015 - Minutes........................................................................................................................ 376

11.3   Warrell Creek Hall Committee of Management AGM - 2 September 2015 - Minutes........... 383

11.4   Taylors Arm Hall Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual General Meeting - 11 December 2013.................................................................................................................................... 390

11.5   Schedule of Council Public Meetings............................................................................. 395

11.6   IPART Assessment Of Fit For The Future Proposals....................................................... 396

12      Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

12.1   Application for Temporary Road Closures - Macksville Gift Procession on 14 November 2015     402    

13      General Manager's Summary of Items to be Discussed in Closed Meeting

13.1   Outstanding Water Account

It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (b) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains a discussion in relation to the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer.

 

13.2   Local Orders Policy - Submissions

It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (e) (g) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains information that would, if disclosed, prejudice the maintenance of law; AND the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

  

            a      Questions raised by Councillors at 9 above

 

       i         MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING

       ii        PUBLIC VERBAL REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING PROPOSAL

     TO CLOSE

       iii       CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS

                   iv       DEAL WITH MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING

14      MEETING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC

15      REVERT TO OPEN MEETING FOR DECISIONS IN RELATION TO ITEMS DISCUSSED IN CLOSED MEETING.

 

TIME

 

DESCRIPTION

 

WHERE

 

Leave Council at 3.00 pm

 

Item 10.6 – Proposed Serviced Apartment Building

Scott Riley will be onsite and attend the Meeting

On site

4.00 pm

Item 10.2 Site Inspection - Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads (EJ Biffin Playing Fields)

 

E J Biffin Playing Fields

5.00 pm

Eungai Hall

 

 

 

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS

 

 

Name of Meeting:

 

Meeting Date:

 

Item/Report Number:

 

Item/Report Title:

 

 

 

I

 

declare the following interest:

          (name)

 

 

 

 

Pecuniary – must leave chamber, take no part in discussion and voting.

 

 

 

Non Pecuniary – Significant Conflict – Recommended that Councillor/Member leaves chamber, takes no part in discussion or voting.

 

 

Non-Pecuniary – Less Significant Conflict – Councillor/Member may choose to remain in Chamber and participate in discussion and voting.

 

For the reason that

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed

 

Date

 

 

 

 

 

Council’s Email Address – council@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

 

Council’s Facsimile Number – (02) 6568 2201

 

(Instructions and definitions are provided on the next page).

 


Definitions

 

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

 

Pecuniary – An interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person or another person with whom the person is associated.

(Local Government Act, 1993 section 442 and 443)

 

A Councillor or other member of a Council Committee who is present at a meeting and has a pecuniary interest in any matter which is being considered must disclose the nature of that interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.

 

The Council or other member must not take part in the consideration or discussion on the matter and must not vote on any question relating to that matter. (Section 451).

 

 

Non-pecuniary – A private or personal interest the council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Act (for example; a friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a financial nature).

 

If you have declared a non-pecuniary conflict of interest you have a broad range of options for managing the conflict.  The option you choose will depend on an assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of your interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with.  You must deal with a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in at least one of these ways.

 

·         It may be appropriate that no action is taken where the potential for conflict is minimal.  However, council officials should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict does not exist.

·         Limit involvement if practical (for example, participate in discussion but not in decision making or visa-versa).  Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.

·         Remove the source of the conflict (for example, relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the conflict or reallocating the conflicting duties to another officer).

·         Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the provisions in section 451(2) of the Act apply (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest).

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

Ordinary Council Meeting

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Council Meeting HELD ON 15 October 2015

The following document is the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held 15 October 2015.  These minutes are subject to confirmation as to their accuracy at the next meeting to be held on 29 October 2015 and therefore subject to change.  Please refer to the minutes of 29 October 2015 for confirmation.

 

 

PRESENT

 

Cr John Ainsworth, Deputy Mayor

Cr Brian Finlayson

Cr Martin Ballangarry OAM

Cr Kim MacDonald

Cr Paula Flack

Cr Anne Smyth

Cr Bob Morrison

Cr Elaine South

 

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Michael Coulter (General Manager)

Scott Norman (AGM Corporate Services)

Keith Williams (Manager Technical Services)

Daniel Walsh (Senior Town Planner)

Monika Schuhmacher (Minute Secretary)

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Cr Rhonda Hoban (Mayor)

Paul Gallagher (AGM Engineering Services)

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

Councillor PF Flack declared a non-pecuniary less significant conflict of interest in Item 11.2 Minutes of NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee meeting 12 August 2015 – Service Level Agreement 2015 under the Local Government Act as Cr Flack is a non-executive member of North Arm Brigade which is proposed to receive a replacement Cat 9 vehicle for $109,000. 

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Council Meeting 24 September 2015

1053/15 RESOLVED:       (South/MacDonald)

 

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting of 24 September 2015 be confirmed.


 

 

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR Morrison

 

ITEM 5.1      SF2049              151015      Notice of Motion - Request for Leave - Cr Bob Morrison

1054/15 RESOLVED:       (Morrison/Finlayson)

 

That Cr Bob Morrison be granted leave of absence in accordance with Section 234(d) of the Local Government Act for the period 16 November 2015 to 7 December 2015 inclusive.


 

 

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR Smyth

 

ITEM 5.2      SF2049              151015      Notice Of Motion - Community Directory On Council’s Website (SF1492)

1055/15 RESOLVED:       (Smyth/Flack)

 

1        That a Local Community Directory page is provided on Council’s website, where locally-based not-for-profit community groups and organisations can have their websites listed.  Where a group does not have a website, but wishes to be listed in the directory, their contact information is to specify the Nambucca Shire Guide. 

 

2        That the directory includes a disclaimer stating that Council does not endorse content of linked sites.

 

3        That the requirements for obtaining a listing on Council’s directory be similar to those listed on the Clarence Valley Council’s Community Directory.


 

 

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR Smyth – LATE

 

ITEM 5.3      SF2049              151015      Notice of Motion - Request for Leave - Cr Anne Smyth (SF1228)

1056/15 RESOLVED:       (Smyth/Flack)

 

That Cr Anne Smyth is granted leave of absence in accordance with Section 234(d) of the Local Government Act for the period 16 October 2015 to 11 November 2015, inclusive.


 

 

DELEGATIONS

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the following delegations be heard:

 

ITEM 9.8      DA2015/103 Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 

          i)       Ms Lyn Mackay on behalf of shooting range

 

1057/15 Resolved:       (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Ms Mackay be granted an extension of time to address Council.

 

          ii)      Mr Jeff Unwin on behalf of shooting range

 

1058/15 Resolved:       (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Mr Unwin be granted an extension of time to address Council.

 

          iii)     Mr Elwin Locke

          iv)      Mr Dallas Dent

 

 

ITEM 9.8      DA2015/103        151015      Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

1059/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/Smyth)

 

That this item be deferred to the next Council meeting which is scheduled for 29 October 2015.


 

 

ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE

 

Questions with notice were received from Cr Flack.

 

ITEM 7.1      SF688                151015      Questions with Notice: Recruitment of the Natural Resources Officer

Motion:      (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Council advertise for a Natural Resources Officer to be engaged for two days per week using the allocated $30,000 from the Environment Levy.

 

The motion was LOST.


 

 

QUESTIONS FOR CLOSED MEETING WHERE DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED

 

There were no questions for the closed meeting where due notice has been received.

 

 

General Manager Report

 

ITEM 9.1      SF959                151015      Outstanding Actions and Reports

1060/15 RESOLVED:       (South/Finlayson)

 

That the list of outstanding actions and reports be noted and received for information by Council.

 

Motion:      (Morrison/South)

 

That the letter regarding item 19 in Outstanding Actions in relation to land at Gordon Park not be sent to the Minister.

 

The motion was LOST.


 

 

ITEM 9.2      SF42                  151015      Fit for the Future - Joint Organisations Emerging Directions Paper

1061/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/MacDonald)

 

1        That this item be noted.

 

2        That Council make a submission to the Office of Local Government in relation to the Emerging Directions Paper outlining the concerns identified in this report and any other matters arising out of the Workshop discussion held on 9 October 2015.

 


1062/15 Resolved:       (Finlayson/MacDonald)

 

That Item 9.15 be brought forward.

 

 

ITEM 9.15    SF42                  151015      Fit for the Future - Joint Organisation Emerging Directions Paper - Report on Councillor Workshop 9 October 2015

1063/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Smyth)

 

That Council include the concerns detailed in this report in the submission to the Office of Local Government in response to the Joint Organisations Emerging Directions Paper.

 


 

 

 

ITEM 9.4      SF821                151015      Nominations to Board and Deputy Board Positions on Gaagal Wanggaan (South Beach) National Park Board of Management

1064/15 RESOLVED:       (Ballangarry/Flack)

 

 

That Councillors Ballangarry and Cr Ainsworth be the two Councillors for the position of Board and Deputy Board members to the Gaagal Wanggaan (South Beach) National Park Board of Management.


 

 

ITEM 9.5      SF979                151015      Shared Services

1065/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Morrison)

 

That based on the Workshop discussion held on 9 October 2015, that Council be a party to a Memorandum of Understanding for the provision of shared services with Bellingen, Kempsey and Gloucester Councils.


 

 

ITEM 9.6      SF2052              151015      Proposed Mosaic - Nambucca Heads Post Office Corner

1066/15 RESOLVED:       (Morrison/Flack)

 

1        That Council note the information concerning the proposal of the Nambucca Heads and Valla Beach Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc. to develop a major piece of public art in Nambucca Heads in the form of a ceramic mosaic and the request for Council assistance being the provision of approvals; the construction of a strip footing and retaining wall; the removal of the existing planter box; and the lifting in of two boomerang bench seats.

 

2        There be a further report to Council on the funding of the project once the grant applications have been determined.


 

 

ITEM 9.7      SF2037              151015      Minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 22 September 2015

1067/15 RESOLVED:       (South/Smyth)

 

1        That the Missed Business Booklet be placed on Council’s website, after updating contact details, and that the Chambers of Commerce be made aware of it so that businesses can maximise the opportunity to cater to clients of all abilities.

 

2        That Council endorse the remaining minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 22 September 2015.


 

Item 9.8 was dealt with under Delegations.


 

 

ITEM 9.9      LF780                 151015      Gumma Shooting Range

1068/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/MacDonald)

 

Council note that the person who is suspected of causing a pollution incident as a result of the operation of the former target shooting range at Lot 215 DP 1022234, 816-846 Gumma Road, Gumma has been issued with a direction to take clean-up action in accordance with section 91 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.  Council has no statutory power to defer determination of development application DA2015/103 until the above clean-up action is undertaken or incorporate such works into any development consent.

 

1069/15 Resolved:       (Flack/Ballangarry)

 

That Council receive a report on other contaminated shooting sites and whether or not they should be listed on Council’s record of contaminated sites.


 

 

ITEM 9.10    SF2066              151015      Bowra Dam - Onsite visit by Council

1070/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/MacDonald)

 

That it be noted that Council attended an onsite visit of the Bowra Dam on Thursday 15 October 2015.


 

 

ITEM 9.11    SF2038              151015      2015 September - Development and Complying Development - Applications Received

1071/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/South)

 

That the Development Applications and Complying Development Applications received in September 2015 be received for information.


 

 

ITEM 9.12    SF1148              151015      Council Ranger's Report September 2015

1072/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Morrison)

 

That Council’s Ranger’s report for September 2015 be received and noted by Council.


 

 

ITEM 9.13    SF2038              151015      2015 September - Construction And Complying Development - Certificates Approved

1073/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Morrison)

 

That the Construction and Complying Development Certificates approved for September 2015 be noted and received for information by Council.


 

 

ITEM 9.14    DA2012/011        151015      Proposed 330 Lot Residential Subdivision, Bellwood - Request to Offset Cost of Constructing the Link Road Against Council Contributions

1074/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Morrison)

 

That this item be deferred.


 

 

General Manager Report – LATE

 

ITEM 9.16    DA2014/098        151015      Modification to Approved Community Facility

1075/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Flack)

 

That Council as the consent authority, pursuant Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, modify development consent DA2014/098 for additions to a community facility at Lot 147 DP 711481, subject to the modified schedule of conditions outlined in attachment 3 of the report to Council: and a further consent condition that no fill be delivered to the site unless the source of the fill has been confirmed and approved by Council staff.

 

For the motion:                         Councillors Ainsworth, South, MacDonald, Finlayson, Smyth, Flack, Ballangarry and Morrison                (Total 8)

Against the motion:         Nil


 

 

Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

 

ITEM 10.1    SF1120              151015      Grant Application Status Report

1076/15 RESOLVED:       (MacDonald/Finlayson)

 

1           That Council receive the list of grant applications to 30 September 2015.

 

2        That Council approve the fixture of the Council’s seal upon future funding agreements which arise from successful grant applications that have been identified in the grant status report.


 

 

ITEM 10.2    SF2116              151015      Investment Report to 30 September 2015

1077/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/MacDonald)

 

That the Accountants’ Report on Investments placed to 30 September 2015 be noted.


 

 

ITEM 10.3    SF251                151015      Schedule of Council Public Meetings

1078/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/MacDonald)

 

That the schedule of dates for public Council meetings be noted and received for information by Council.


 

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

 

ITEM 11.1    SF130                151015      Mid North Weight of Loads Group meeting - 9 March 2015

1079/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Flack)

 

That Council receive and note the minutes of the Mid North Weight of Loads Group meeting held on 14 September 2015.


 

 

ITEM 11.2    SF85                  151015      Minutes of NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee meeting 12 August 2015 – Service Level Agreement 2015

1080/15 RESOLVED:       (Finlayson/Morrison)

 

1        That Council receive, note the report and endorse the minutes for the RFS Liaison Committee Meeting Service Level Agreement – 2015 held on 12 August 2015.

 

2        That Council place an amount of $17,560.00 for the upgrade of the Eungai Brigade amenities upgrade in the draft 2016/17 budget for consideration.

 

3        That Council place an amount of $24,187.00 for plant replacement in the draft 2016/17 budget for consideration.


 

 

ITEM 11.3    SF2071              151015      Concern with World Rally Reconnaissance Sessions

1081/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/South)

 

1        That Council provide feedback to NSW Premier & Cabinet through the Rally Australia 2015 – Traffic and Transport Debrief meeting as follows:

 

a)   Expressing its concern with the severity of accidents involved during the reconnaissance sessions; and

 

b)   That further measures need to be implemented to reduce the likelihood of accidents during future events; and

 

2          That Council receive a further report from the Assistant General Manager Engineering Services regarding the damage to roads and roadside furniture, the compensation offered, and also that the insurance status of the cars be reported on.

 

3          That Council issue a media release concerning the actions it is taking in regard to the World Rally.


 

 

ITEM 11.4    SF95                  151015      Suitability of Nose-to-Kerb Parking within Nambucca Shire

Motion:      (Morrison/Flack)

 

1        That Council note the contents of the report and retains existing rear-to-kerb angled parking arrangements throughout the Nambucca Shire townships, with the exception of

 

·      That, subject to consideration of the Local Traffic Committee and in consultation with the Macksville Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Council endorses a 6 month trial of nose-to-kerb on-street parking arrangements in River Street (West) adjacent to the river bank.

 

2           That after the 6 month trial period of nose-to-kerb on-street parking arrangements in River Street (West) adjacent to the river bank Council receive a further report on the outcome of the trial period.

 

Amendment:       (Smyth/Morrison)

 

1        That, subject to consideration of the Local Traffic Committee and in consultation with the Macksville Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Council endorses a 6 month trial of nose-to-kerb on-street parking arrangements in River Street (West) adjacent to the river bank.

 

2        That after the 6 month trial period of nose-to-kerb on-street parking arrangements in River Street (West) adjacent to the river bank Council receive a further report on the outcome of the trial period.

 

3        That the Nambucca Chamber of Commerce be asked their position as to whether they prefer nose to kerb or rear to kerb parking.

 

The amendment was carried and it became the motion

 

1082/15 Resolved:       (Smyth/Morrison)

 

1        That, subject to consideration of the Local Traffic Committee and in consultation with the Macksville Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Council endorses a 6 month trial of nose-to-kerb on-street parking arrangements in River Street (West) adjacent to the river bank.

 

The motion was carried.

 

Note:           Cr Macdonald recorded her vote against this resolution as she does not support a trial under any circumstances.

Note :          Cr Finlayson recorded his vote against this resolution as he does not support nose to kerb parking under any circumstances.

 

2        That after the 6 month trial period of nose-to-kerb on-street parking arrangements in River Street (West) adjacent to the river bank Council receive a further report on the outcome of the trial period.

 

The motion was carried.

 

Note:           Cr Macdonald recorded her vote against this resolution as she does not support a trial under any circumstances.

Note :          Cr Finlayson recorded his vote against this resolution as he does not support nose to kerb parking under any circumstances.

Note:           Cr Ainsworth recorded his vote against this resolution as he does not support nose to kerb parking.

 

The motion was carried.

 

3        That the Nambucca Chamber of Commerce be asked their position as to whether they prefer nose to kerb or rear to kerb parking.


 

 

ITEM 11.5    T015/2015           151015      Tender T015/2015 Cleaning of Council Buildings for period commencing 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2018

1083/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/Finlayson)

 

That Council accept tender T015/2015 for the cleaning of Council’s buildings submitted by KAMZ Cleaning Services for a three (3) year period commencing on 1 October 2015 and terminating on 1 October 2018.

 

For the motion:                         Councillors Ainsworth, South, MacDonald, Finlayson, Smyth, Flack, Ballangarry and Morrison                (Total 8)

Against the motion:         Nil


 

 

ITEM 11.6    SF90                  151015      Nambucca Shire Traffic Committee Meeting Minutes - 6 October 2015

1084/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Council:

 

1        receive and note the agenda and minutes emanating from the Nambucca Shire Traffic Committee held on the 4 August 2015.

 

          That Council approve a request from the Rotary Club of Macksville to conduct the Nambucca River Festival, noting the following has been received:

 

·      Certificate of Currency for Public Liability Insurance

·      Traffic Management Plan confirming Accredited Traffic Controllers will be on site, and

·      Police and Roads and Maritime Services approval for the road closures.

         

          That Council endorse road closures for the Nambucca River Festival to be held between 6.00am Saturday 28 November to 3pm Sunday 29 November in Macksville as follows:

 

·      River Street (west) - Pacific Highway to Princess Street

·      Princess Street – Mackay Street to River Street

·      McKay Street Car Park

·      Wallace Lane and;

·      River Street (east) - Pacific Highway to Willis Street - 9am Friday 27 November 3pm    Sunday 29 November.

·      Wallace Street and Princess – Ferry Street to Mackay Street -  for 5 minutes between 9.00am to 9.15am Sunday 29 November.

2        That Council approve the installation of NO STOPPING signs on Piggott Street Nambucca Heads, at the entrance Riverside Gardens Retirement Village.

 

3        That Council contact project managers to remind contractors of road rules relating to parking near intersections.

 

4        That Council allocate three (3) NO PARKING spaces on Ridge Street, Nambucca Heads immediately outside the Nambucca Heads Public school gate with the parking restrictions being 8.00am – 9.30am and 2.30pm - 4.00pm school days.

 

5        That Council make the following adjustments to the Medlow Public School Zone:

 

a)       Establish a designated bus zone from 8.30am- 9.15am and 2.30pm - 3.15pm school days;

b)       Remove the school crossing markings and flags; and

c)       Arrange for the installation of dragons teeth road markings and speed patches to be placed within the school zone.

 

6        That Council note the Local Traffic Committee has received the concerns of Council relating to the reconnaissance sessions of the World Rally Championships.

 

7        That Council note that representations will be made by NSW Police to the Rally Traffic and Transport debrief and RMS Traffic Operations will be advised of Council’s concerns.

 

8        That Council does not permanently close two parking bays in the front of the Macksville War Memorial as requested by the Macksville Sub Branch, RSL of Australia.


    

 

 

COUNCIL IN CLOSED MEETING (CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC)

 

Resolved:          (South/Finlayson)

 

1        That Council consider any written representations from the public as to why the Meeting should not be Closed to the public.

 

2        That Council move into Closed Meeting to discuss the matters for the reason(s) listed below.

 

Reason reports are in Closed Meeting:


 

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.1    T015/2015           151015      Evaluation for Tender T015/2015 Cleaning of Council Buildings for period commencing 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2018

It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.


 

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.2    SF2047              151015      Proposed Outdoor Shooting Range - Confidential Attachment - Submissions

It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (g) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.


 

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.3    SF791                151015      Valla Growth Area - Acquisition of Employment Land

It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (c) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.


 

 

CLOSED MEETING

 

The Ordinary Council Meeting's Meeting IN CLOSED MEETING commenced at 8.09 pm.

 


 

 

RESUME IN OPEN MEETING

 

RESOLVED:                   (South/Morrison)

 

That Ordinary Council Meeting resume in Open Meeting. The Ordinary Council Meeting resumed IN OPEN MEETING at 8.17 pm.

 

 

 

FROM COUNCIL IN CLOSED MEETING

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.1    T015/2015           151015      Evaluation for Tender T015/2015 Cleaning of Council Buildings for period commencing 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2018

1085/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/Morrison)

 

That Council note the information on the tender evaluation form for T015/2015 Cleaning of Council Buildings for the period commencing 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2018, and appoint KAMZ Cleaning Services.


 

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.2    SF2047              151015      Proposed Outdoor Shooting Range - Confidential Attachment - Submissions

1086/15 RESOLVED:       (Flack/South)

 

That Council note the confidential attachment to Item 9.6 – submissions to DA2015/103


 

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.3    SF791                151015      Valla Growth Area - Acquisition of Employment Land

1087/15 RESOLVED:       (Smyth/Morrison)

 

That Council note the information concerning the acquisition of employment land at the Valla Growth Area.


 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Deputy Mayor then closed the meeting the time being 8.18 pm. 

 

Confirmed and signed by the Deputy Mayor on 29 October 2015.

 

 

 

 

CR JOHN AINSWORTH

DEPUTY MAYOR

(CHAIRPERSON)

 

     


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

Notice of Rescission

ITEM 6.1      SF794              291015         Notice of Rescission - Gumma Shooting Range (LF780)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    John Ainsworth, Councillor         

 

Summary:

 

I wish to rescind Council’s resolution:

 

               “That Council receive a report on other contaminated shooting sites and whether or not they  should be listed on Council’s record of contaminated sites.”

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council rescind the second resolution of Item 9.9 Gumma Shooting Range, namely: That Council receive a report on other contaminated shooting sites and whether or not they should be listed on Council’s record of contaminated sites.

 

 

 

 

 

SIGNED BY:

 

Cr John Ainsworth                            …………………………………………..

 

 

Cr Brian Finlayson                            …………………………………………..

 

 

Cr Elaine South                                   .…………………………………………

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.      


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager

ITEM 10.1    SF959              291015         Outstanding Actions and Reports

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

 

The following table is a report on all outstanding resolutions and questions from Councillors (except development consents, development control plans & local environmental plans). Matters which are simply noted or received, together with resolutions adopting rates, fees and charges are not listed as outstanding actions. Where matters have been actioned they are indicated with strikethrough and then removed from the report to the following meeting. Please note that the status comments have been made one week before the Council meeting.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the list of outstanding actions and reports be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

 

FILE

NO

COUNCIL

MEETING

SUMMARY OF MATTER

ACTION

BY

STATUS

 

MARCH 2011

1

DA2010/234

17/3/11

Council develop a policy as to the cumulative impacts of locating fill on the floodplain at Macksville and also review the matrix in the Floodplain Risk Management Plan

 

GM

Estuary Committee met on 30 October and have recommended the appointment of WMA Water to undertake the Floodplain Risk Management Plan.

At Council’s meeting on 13 November it was resolved that WMA Water to appointed to prepare the Flood Risk Management Plan.

The inception meeting will be held on 5 February 2015 to commence the process.

WMA Water have advised they are identifying properties requiring survey and reviewing the flood model developed for the highway crossing for application to the Council flood risk study.

 

As at 29 May 2015 public consultation on the preparation of the Flood Risk Management Plan had commenced.

 

Council’s Strategic Planner is to organise a meeting of the Estuary Committee, probably on 10 September 2015, where the consultants will make a presentation in relation to engineering options to reduce floodplain risk – flood levies, home raising etc.

 

An Estuary Committee meeting has been arranged for 17 September 2015.

 

JULY 2011

2

SF1031

21/7/11

That the policy for Climate Change Adaption be deferred to allow amendments to be made to the draft policy

 

GM

Update as at 16 April - the project is awaiting the completion of the floodplain risk management matrix which will formally consider the acceptance or otherwise of a forecast climate change induced sea level rise of 900mm by 2100.

 

AUGUST 2013

 

3

SF1031

14/08/13

That the tree policy be again presented after Councillors have had sufficient time to comment on the amendments presented by Councillors and in view of the previous motion of Council, namely “Tree Removal” (SF629) containing the 6D principles.

 

 

AGMES

Report in September 2013.

Deferred to October 2013.

At the request of Cr Morrison this item has been deferred to the first meeting in November 2013.

Cr Morrison has provided information to the Manager Civil Works who will draft a report to the December Council meeting.

Staff on leave during December – deferred until February 2014.

Deferred until April – Staff dealing with landslips.

Deferred until May 2014

Deferred until June 2014

Deferred until September 2014 and a report will be prepared on the outcome of the meeting.

Policy has been redrafted and a new operations procedures manual developed. A memo with the updated policy and procedures will be provided to Councillors for comment at the end of December

Deferred with staff on leave - Guidelines and tree assessment form developed and now being trialled for tree assessment with the Policy and guideline review to be presented to Council for comment after trial – anticipate April.

 

Deferred until September after the budget, restructure and staffing levels settle.

 

Provided to Councillors on 29 October for comment.

 

 

NOVEMBER 2013

 

4

SF642

28/11/13

That Council review both the Pesticides Use Notification Policy and Noxious Weed Policy.

AGMES

Report to April 2014 meeting and will include the State change to Noxious Weeds Act.

Deferred until September – pending outcome of the Noxious weeds review following the Minister of Primary Industries request that the Natural Resources Commission (NRC) conduct a review into the effectiveness and efficiency of weed management in New South Wales.

Report deferred to second meeting in November 2014 pending a meeting with Noxious Weeds Inspector and DPI regarding any changes to the Act.

Deferred with staff on leave. Memo to Councillors now set for end February with other policy review, will be provided to Councillors for comment in accordance with adopted procedure.

Now deferred to April 2015.

 

Deferred until September after the budget, restructure and staffing levels settle.

 

Provided to Councillors on 29 October for comment.

 

DECEMBER 2013

 

5

SF1842

11/12/13

That if Council and IPART support a rate increase above rate pegging, Council provide a quarterly report either through a media release or its rates newsletter to confirm to ratepayers that the additional funds are being spent on roads and bridges as indicated in our community consultation.

 

GM

The first quarterly report would be the rates newsletter to be distributed with the 2014/2015 rates notice.

Report produced.

Media release issued before 13 November Council meeting.

 

Second media release issued 20 May 2015.

 

Third media release planned for an update as of 30 June 2015.

 

AUGUST 2014

 

6

SF595

28/08/14

That Council develop a plan of management for the ongoing maintenance of Hughes Creek.

 

GM

March 2015

Strategic planner seeking funding to engage a consultant to look at the entire system as part of the estuaries committee because of the nature of the creek system and its integration to the river PoM deferred pending funding.

 

OEH Estuary Grant application submitted in March 2015 (project value $20,000).  If successful a plan of management will be developed for Dawkins Lake to the Nambucca River via Hughes Creek.  A funding announcement is expected in 2015/16.

 

 

SEPTEMBER 2014

 

7

SF399

26/09/14

Pending the outcome of the Fit for the Future reform process Council consider reducing the no. of Councillors from 9 to 7 via a referendum.

 

GM

Deferred to late 2015 (next LG general election scheduled for September 2016).

 

OCTOBER 2014

 

8

SF952

16/10/14

Unofficial rest area on Link Road – that a management plan for the future improvement of the site be prepared by Council and the Lions Club who have agreed to maintain the site after the management plan has been placed on public exhibition.

 

AGMES

Report March 2015.

Meeting scheduled with Lions Executive in early March to draft a PoM and provide to Council for comment in April/May.

Meeting with Lions Club on 4 March 2015.

Current projects and staff resources (doing budgets, Fit for the Future and asset revaluation) proposed to work on first draft and present the document to Council and Lions for comment.

Draft PoM to be provided to Councillors and Lions Club for comment towards the end of September 2015

Draft PoM provided to Councillors, Lions Club, Chamber of Commerce, NH Action Group for comment. Submissions close 15 October and report to be presented to Council 29 October 2015.

Meeting held on site with Lions Friday 2 October 2015.

 

Deferred to 12 November 2015 as collation of returns currently being undertaken.

 

 

DECEMBER 2014

 

9

SF929

11/12/14

Council seek expressions of interest from BSC and CHCC on an alliance to operate a regional focussed Visitor Information Centre (VIC) from the proposed highway service centre.

 

GM

Letters sent 18/12/2014

Response received from Bellingen Shire Council on 2 March 2015.  As at 31/3/15 no response from CHCC.

To be reported in June 2015.

 

A tender for the Highway Service Centre has been accepted.  The Manager Business Development has made an enquiry in relation to securing 100m2 of floor space for a Visitor Information Centre and associated retail.  Awaiting advice as to potential cost and will then be reported to Council.

 

 

MARCH 2015

 

10

SF841

12/03/15

Council make representations to the Member for Oxley, both pre and post 28 March 2015, for their support for the proposition that the bridges and major culvert structures which are located on the existing Pacific Highway through the Nambucca Valley should remain State assets and not be handed over to Council.

 

GM

Letter written w/e 20/3/2015.

 

As at June 2015 arrangements are being made for a consultant to assist Council staff in investigating the liability associated with the proposed handover of the existing Pacific Highway to Council.  Data provided by the RMS needs to be reviewed as well as a physical inspection of the road and bridge assets.

 

Mayor and GM met with the Member for Oxley on 18 September 2015.  Details of Council’s previous submissions forwarded to the Member for Oxley with a request that she make representations on behalf of Council.

 

 

APRIL 2015

 

11

SF959

30/04/15

That Council write to our Local Member and respectfully ask her if she could intervene to obtain answers to Council’s questions regarding fishing matters in the Nambucca River … as listed in Council’s letter on 19 February.

 

GM

Letter sent 6/05/2015.

 

Follow up letter sent 30 June 2015.

 

Following the letter from the Minister for Primary Industries the GM has telephoned Fisheries staff in Coffs Harbour seeking their attendance at a Council meeting.  The Fisheries staff member requested that they be provided with a list of the questions to be asked.  The GM has now written to the Fisheries office with a list of questions.  Letter sent 3 September 2015.

 

 

JUNE 2015

 

12

SF639

11/06/15

That a report goes to Council in two months on how the current Ranger is coping and options on enhancing the role.

 

GM

Report August 2015

 

Deferred to September 2015 for reasons of work load.  Also Bellingen Shire Council has expressed an interest in opportunities for sharing ranger and companion animal pound services.

 

Meeting arranged with Bellingen Shire Council on 15 September 2015.  Bellingen SC interested in sharing Council’s pound.  Also discussed covering our Ranger when he is on leave.  Bellingen SC to advise of inspection date.

 

Report in November 2015.

 

 

13

SF2049

25/06/15

Council make a submission to the Dept. of Primary Industry in relation to the proposed changes to the Fisheries Management Act 1994.

 

GM

Submission sent to Dept. on 26/6/15.

 

AUGUST 2015

 

14

PRF72

13/08/15

Council investigate opportunities to assist in the management of the (Kingsworth Lake) reserve and the matter be reported back to Council in 6 months.

 

GM

Report in February 2016

 

15

SF674

13/08/15

Council write to the appropriate Minister drawing attention to the history of the matter (negotiations to extend Council’s Waste Depot) and particularly Council’s investment in studies made in good faith as well as the importance of the facility to the growth and security of our local community.

 

AGMES

Letter to be drafted to appropriate Minister.

 

Letter sent week ending 30 September 2015.

 

16

SF1031

27/08/15

That Council receive a report on the ability of Council to apply for a licence variation to capture a percentage of high flow water at the Bowra Dam for the life of the dam.

 

AGMES

Report in October 2015.

Report to be presented to Council on 29 October 2015.

 

Deferred to 26 November 2015.-

No meaningful report can be provided until advice from the DPI Water.  Two letters have been forwarded. No response received to date.

 

 

SEPTEMBER 2015

 

17

SF2116

10/09/15

That there be a report regarding options to maximise returns on Council’s Invested Funds from Corporate Services and if Council requires a change in the investment portfolio to invite its financial advisers to address Council.

 

AGMCS

Report in November 2015.

 

18

SF959

24/09/15

That Council advise the Minister of its determination in relation to the land at Gordon Park and provide him with a copy of Council’s resolution.

 

GM

Letter sent 22/10/2015

 

19

PRF16

24/09/15

A site inspection be undertaken in relation to the proposed classification of the land and the planned expenditure of the proceeds from the sale of the land for the Health One facility.

 

GM

Inspection to be arranged for Council meeting on 29 October 2015.

 

20

Q17/2015

24/09/15

That Council receive a further report and briefing from Greg Powter Consulting once an independent assessment has been completed (re the Pacific Highway Assets Handover)

 

AGMES

2016

 

OCTOBER 2014

 

21

SF42

15/10/15

Council make a submission to the OLG in relation to the JO Emerging Directions Paper outlining concerns identified at Council’s workshop.

 

AGMCS

Submission sent 16 October 2015

 

22

SF2052

15/10/15

There be a further report to Council on the funding of the Mosaic project at the NH’s Post Office corner once the grant applications have been determined.

 

GM

Determination of grant application anticipated early 2016

 

23

LF780

15/10/15

That Council receive a report on other contaminated sites and whether or not they should be listed on Council’s record of contaminated sites.

 

GM

Report December 2015

 

Subject to the rescission motion in this business paper.

 

24

SF2071

15/10/15

In relation to the 2015 World Rally, that Council receive a further report from the AGMES regarding the damage to roads and roadside furniture; the compensation offered, and also the insurance status of the cars.

 

AGMES

Report November 2015

 

25

SF95

15/10/15

Following the 6 month trial period of nose-to-kerb parking arrangements in River Street adjacent to the river bank, that Council receive a further report on the outcome of the trial period.

 

AGMES

Report late 2016

 

26

LF780

15/10/15

Gumma shooting range – issue of a direction to take clean-up action in accordance with S91 of the POEO Act.

 

GM

Report on progress in December 2015

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.2    PRF16              291015         Site Inspection - Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads (EJ Biffin Playing Fields)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

At its meeting on 24 September 2015 Council resolved to undertake a site inspection in relation to the proposed classification of the land and the planned expenditure of the proceeds from the sale of the land for the Health One facility.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That, as a result of a site inspection on 29 October 2015, Council notes the proposed classification of the land and the planned expenditure of the proceeds from the sale of the land for the Health One facility.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no options as it was a Council resolution to undertake a site inspection of the planned Health One facility.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

As per Council’s report on 24 September 2015

 

The Committee of Management has advised that the proceeds from the sale of the land will be used for the following:

 

1              The eves on the whole building need to be replaced

2              The drain near discuss case needs to be fixed eg dug out and fenced

3              Fencing the building due to excessive damage

4              Security cameras

5              Replace ceiling in one of the storage rooms

6              Build roller door into storage room to house ride-on mower

7              New line marker.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There were no additional consultations held.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

There is no impact on the environment.

 

Social

There is no social impact.

 

Economic

There is no economic impact.

 

Risk

There are no risks involved.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no budget implications as a result of this site inspection.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no variances to working funds as a result of this site inspection.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no changes to resourcing/staff implications as a result of this site inspection.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.3    SF657              291015         Representations concerning the Stricter Interpretation of the Australian Government's Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements - Response from the Hon. David Elliot MP

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

A summary is not required.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information concerning the outcome of representations made by Council in relation to the stricter interpretation of the Australian Government’s Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements be received.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Other than make further representations, there are no identified alternative options.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Following representations made by the Mayor and General Manager to the Member for Oxley, the Member for Oxley has now forwarded a response from the Hon. David Elliot, Minister for Emergency Services.

 

A copy of the Minister’s response is attached.

 

Whilst the response is self-explanatory it is disappointing that there seems to be no awareness or interest in consulting with local government in relation to the NDRRA arrangements.  Local government is the recipient of a large proportion of NDRRA funding and it might be expected that local government would be consulted in the reform proposals, even if they are complex.  But Councils are to be advised of the outcome of the matter “in due course”.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Member for Oxley.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

At this stage there are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The social implications of the changes to the NDRRA funding program have been previously reported on.  There is every likelihood the changes will adversely affect the time it takes Council to undertake road and bridge repairs arising out of declared natural disasters.  This will affect the access that affected community members have to their homes and livelihoods.

 

Economic

 

A slower response to repairing damage to Council’s roads and bridges arising out of declared natural disasters will have a negative impact on the local economy.

 

Risk

 

 

There is a significant risk that the delays in obtaining approvals and procuring contractors to undertake repairs will result on pressure being applied to Council to fund repairs outside the NDRRA arrangements.

 

There is a significant risk to Council’s reputation in not attending to NDRRA repairs in a timely manner, notwithstanding that the delays are not the fault of Council.  There is likely to be limited understanding in the community of the funding arrangements with most assuming that as Council is the responsible roads authority it is accountable for any delays in repairing roads and bridges.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

At this stage the budgetary implications are unknown.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

At this stage the impact on working funds is unknown.  Council will have a better understanding of the impacts following the next declared Natural Disaster.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

At this stage there are no service level implications.  Again, the implications for service levels and resources will be clearer following the next declared Natural Disaster.

 

 

Attachments:

1

32879/2015 - Response regarding Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements (NDRRA)

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Representations concerning the Stricter Interpretation of the Australian Government's Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements - Response from the Hon. David Elliot MP

 




Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.4    LF4225             291015         Geotechnical Investigation - 2 Nelson Street, Nambucca Heads

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

Council has now received the report from Coffey Geotechnics.  There are no observed indications that any action (or lack of action) has directly contributed to failure of the retaining wall which appears to have failed without any specific impact from the mass movement in the slope below.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information from Coffey Geotechnics concerning the geotechnical investigation and stability assessment of site NH44 (2 Nelson Street) be received.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council’s position on the matter as per its resolution of 16 January 2013 is:

 

“That Council advise the Crown Lands Office that it doesn’t generally support the sale of community land however Council does recognise there is a need to reconstruct the failing retaining wall and Council supports the Crown Lands Division advertising the application for public comment”.

 

Beside the recommendation the Council could pursue the following options:

 

1.       Lobby Crown Lands to proceed with the sale of the 290m2 of crown land to Mr & Mrs Leckie for between $10,000 and $70,000 as per the valuation they supplied dated 22 October 2012.

 

2.       Lobby Crown Lands to proceed with the sale of the 290m2 of crown land to Mr & Mrs Leckie for a price to be determined through a valuation obtained by either Council or the Crown Lands Office.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At Council’s meeting on 12 March 2015 it was resolved as follows:

 

1.       That Council engage Coffey and Partners to prepare a preliminary investigation report on the site NH44 being the cliff at the east end of Nelson Street as described in the report by Douglas Partners dated October 2003.

 

2.       That Council pay or reimburse payment for $396.00 for the use of a sewer camera and high pressure water jetter to clear several root blockages in a sewer line.

 

Council has now received the report from Coffey Geotechnics which is attached.  Coffey Geotechnics specialise in geotechnical engineering and have provided Council with many design solutions for sites where there has been or is likely to be mass movement.

 

The report is a consequence of considerable correspondence and discussions between Council, Crown Lands and Mr and Mrs Leckie based partly on an argument that Council is liable for any instability of the land.

 

Council’s position on the matter is as per its resolution of 16 January 2013 being:

 

“That Council advise the Crown Lands Office that it doesn’t generally support the sale of community land however Council does recognise there is a need to reconstruct the failing retaining wall and Council supports the Crown Lands Division advertising the application for public comment”.


In relation to the site generally and the potential for future landslides, Coffey Geotechnics has found that:

 

“Any natural hill slope and colluvium soil (soil derived from mass movement) is susceptible to ongoing failure.  It is neither practical nor expected to undertake attempts to achieve a substantial factor of safety against movement in colluvium.  Measures can be adopted to help maintain the slope.  Critically this will be through control against saturation and erosion of the soil.

 

Superficial drainage should be directed to prevent ingress into the soil and rock, and reduce potential for overflow on to the slope.

 

Maintaining vegetation assists, especially by drawing water from the soil.

 

Collapsed debris helps maintain the new equilibrium and it should not be removed.  It may, however, benefit from minor action to prevent water ponding.

 

Here, there is a buffer zone of about 2.5m between the current landslide head scarp and the damaged retaining wall structure.  Any design for a replacement retaining structure must recognise the geometry of the slope beyond its toe and also the need to control drainage from the wall location to avoid comprising its foundation.”

 

Coffey Geotechnics have found that the primary reasons for the failure of the existing retaining wall are as follows:

 

·      The wall was inadequately designed to support the retained fill materials due to the lateral earth pressure behind it especially on a perhaps with the sloping surface above, against bearing capacity of the foundation beneath the footing; and potentially also water pressure.

 

·      The unreinforced retaining wall has inadequate strength to support the pressures applied from the fill materials located behind the wall.

 

The existing landslide identified on the site is assessed not to have contributed to the failure of the retaining wall above it.  However, future slope movements such as likely ongoing transitional landslides or soil creep could impact on the retaining wall and any construction must not exacerbate disturbance to the equilibrium held by the slope….

 

Coffey has not observed indications that any action (or lack of action) has directly contributed to failure of the retaining wall that appears to have failed without any specific impact from the mass movement in the slope below.

 

A newly constructed retaining wall may reasonably be constructed at the crest of the slope to achieve a sufficient stability without major restoration or remediation of the slope below being necessary, but design must consider the potential to adversely affect its stability”.

 

Coffey Geotechnics state that the report does not offer an opinion as to the level of risk that may be acceptable to current and future stakeholders as this depends on many factors in addition to geological and geotechnical considerations.  They advise that the stakeholders for the site must decide on a level of risk that is acceptable or tolerable to them for both loss of life and property loss.

 

The findings of Coffey Geotechnics are relevant to Council’s previous resolution concerning the reconstruction of the failing retaining wall.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been brief discussion with Council’s Engineering Designer who commissioned Coffey Geotechnics to undertake the work.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The report has no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The report does not directly address social implications.  The report does not offer an opinion as to the level of risk which may be acceptable to current and future stakeholders.

 

Economic

 

Any economic implications relate to the potential for the redevelopment of the land.  This is unknown.

 

Risk

 

The report does not offer an opinion as to the level of risk which may be acceptable to current and future stakeholders.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The preparation of the report was not included in Council’s budget.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The report cost $5,000 to prepare.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There were minor costs to Council in the staff time required to commission the report and follow up its completion.

 

 

Attachments:

1

31344/2015 - Coffey Geotechnical Investigation - 2 Nelson Street

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Geotechnical Investigation - 2 Nelson Street, Nambucca Heads

 






























Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.5    DA2015/115      291015         Proposed Serviced Apartment Building

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Daniel Walsh, Senior Town Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The proposed development includes the construction of a serviced apartment building at Lot 2 DP 1063716 - Back Street, Nambucca Heads. The proposed building contains 44 units, reception area, gymnasium, indoor pool, conference room, vehicular access via the sites Back Street frontage, and 2 underground parking levels.

 

The plans and documentation supporting the development application have been included within attachments 1 to 3 of this report.

 

No submissions were received during the public notification of the development application.

 

For transparency purposes, it is considered appropriate that the development application is referred to Council for determination because more than 10% of the building is above the 14m maximum building height specified for the land under clause 4.3 of the Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010 (NLEP 2010). Please note that concurrence from the Director-General for the proposed variation to clause 4.3 of the NLEP 2010 is assumed in accordance with Planning Circular PS 08-003.

 

After assessment of the proposed development in accordance with the relevant sections of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the act), it is not considered that the proposal will be contrary to any provision of the act or result in any adverse impacts on the natural, social or economic environments of the locality; subject to the inclusion of the recommended conditions of consent contained within attachment 4.

 

NOTE: This matter requires a “Planning Decision” referred to in Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requiring the General Manager to record the names of each Councillor supporting and opposing the decision.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council as the consent authority, pursuant Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, grant consent for Development Application 2015/115 for serviced apartments at Lot 2 DP 1063716 - Back Street, Nambucca Heads, subject to the schedule of conditions outlined in attachment 4 of this report.

 

OPTIONS:

 

(a) Grant consent to the development application, either unconditionally or subject to conditions, or

 

(b) Refuse consent to the development application.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Site Description

The development site is located in Back Street, Nambucca Heads and is legally known as Lot 2 DP 1063716. The site is a vacant lot with an area of 4553m² and is boarded to the south by Nelson Street, east by Fraser Street, north by the existing Woolworths building and east by Back Street. The site is highly modified and is sloped steeply towards the south.

 

Surrounding development is primarily commercial with Woolworths adjoining the site to the north, the Nambucca RSL Club to the south, and tourist and visitor accommodation to the east. However, there are detached residential dwellings located on the opposite side of Back Street to the east of the site.

 

Locality Plan

Description of Proposal

The proposed development includes the construction of a serviced apartment building including:

·   44 units. 24 units are to contain 1 bedroom while the remaining 20 units will contain 2 bedrooms.

·   A reception area, gymnasium, indoor pool, and conference room.

·   Vehicular access via the sites Back Street frontage and 2 underground parking levels.

 

The plans and documentation submitted by the applicant as part of this development application have been included within attachments 1 to 3.

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory with regards to the relevant sections of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as follows:

 

Section 5A  - Significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats

 

Due to the type of the development and the location and modified environment of the site and its surrounds, it is not considered that the proposal will have any significant impacts on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats.

Section 79C (1) - Evaluation

 

In determining a development application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters:

 

(a) the provisions of

 

(i) any environmental planning instruments

 

·      The Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010 (NLEP 2010)

 

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant clauses of the NLEP 2010 in the following table:

 

Clause

Complies

Comments

2.3 - Zone objectives and land use table

Yes

The proposed development is permissible with consent and is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the zone because it is a suitable land use that will serve the needs of the local and wider community by providing employment opportunities and tourist accommodation in an accessible location which will encourage walking and cycling.

4.3 - Height of buildings

No

The maximum building height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map is 14m. The proposed building exceeds this in most parts as a result of sections of the top three floors which step down the sloped site towards the south. This is best illustrated in the submitted drawing ‘Section A-A’ contained within attachment 1.

As can be seen in that drawing, the proposed building will be 2.7m higher than the adjoining Woolworths building, 600mm of which is above the 14m maximum building height at the northern boundary of the site and a maximum of 3.855m above the maximum building height at any one point.

Despite this non-compliance the proposed building is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the clause because:

· It is considered to be compatible with surrounding development due to its scale being consistent with that of the adjoining Woolworths building, with its close proximity (200mm) and design providing an improvement in the existing buildings articulation when viewed from the south and west of the site.  Furthermore, the impacts of the proposed non-compliance with the maximum building height are considered to be relatively minor due to the topography of the land, stepped design of the building, and the separation from surrounding buildings which could be impacted on with regards to views or overshadowing. Additionally, the proposed use is for serviced apartments which the site is considered to be ideal for due to its location on the fringe of the commercial core and proximity to shops, restaurants and community assets offered within Nambucca Heads.

· There is not currently any substantial detached housing within the vicinity of the site which could be impacted by the proposed development.

· Having regard to the matters raised above, it is not considered that the increased building height will result in any significant loss of solar access or privacy to existing surrounding development due to the existing uses and designs of surrounding developments and their separation from the development site.

As such, it is recommended that the proposed minor variance to the maximum building height be approved as outlined in the assessment under clause 4.6 of the NLEP below.

4.6 – Exceptions to development standards

Yes

In accordance with this clause, it is considered that development consent should be granted for the proposal to contravene the 14m maximum building height specified for the land under the development standard within clause 4.3 because:

·    A written request has been made by the applicant that adequately seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard.

·    It is considered that compliance with the 14m maximum building height for the entirety of the building is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case because:

Ø It will not be contrary to the aims of the NLEP.

Ø The proposed variance is the result of a constrained site located in a prime location within Nambucca Heads, the development of which is an important part of the economic development of the area. Given the extent of potential impacts resulting from the variance (views, solar access, privacy) are mitigated to a suitable extent by separation, topography, vegetation, and the existing built form; and that the proposal is consistent with the underlying purpose of the standard and broader planning objectives of the locality; strict compliance with the standard in the subject case is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary.

Ø As outlined above, the proposal will be consistent with the objectives of the B3 Commercial Core zone and the objectives of clause 4.3.

·    It is considered that because the proposed variation to the development standard will only result in minor impacts on existing development within the surrounding area due to its design, separation, and topography of the land; there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

·    Given the proposals consistency with the objectives of the standard and the zone, it is not considered that it is contrary to the public interest.

·    Concurrence from the Director-General is assumed in accordance with Planning Circular PS 08-003.

·    With regard to the ‘five part test’ set by the Land and Environment Court, the proposed variance is considered to be acceptable because:

Ø The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

Ø Due to the location and topography of the site, consequential separation from surrounding development/screening of Woolworths building which lacks articulation, the stepped design of the proposed building, and the minor impacts the non-compliant parts of the building will have on the surrounding area; it is not considered that the underlying purpose of the standard is relevant to the subject development and therefore compliance is unnecessary.

Ø While the underlying purpose of minimising impacts on surrounding development would not be thwarted if compliance was required; for the reasons already outlined, it would be considered unreasonable to require compliance with the standard due to the minor impacts of the proposed variation and the negligible benefits requiring compliance with the standard would provide. Particularly when compared to the substantial economic benefits the development will have on the local economy.

Ø It is considered that the above is demonstrating some reasonable flexibility with regards to the circumstances of the case which will not result in Council abandoning or destroying the development standard. This is because the variation is the result of the steep topography of the site and the stepped design trying to maximise the full potential of the land; rather than a complete disregard for the standard such as an additional floor completely above the maximum building height. Furthermore, potential impacts such as overshadowing, privacy, and views are considered to be negligible, with the proposed building being consistent with the bulk and scale of the adjoining Woolworths building.

Ø While it is considered that the zoning of the land is appropriate for the site; having regard to the topography of the land, the proposed land use and surrounding development, it is not considered that the proposed variation would be contrary to the desired character of the land.

5.5 - Development within the coastal zone

Yes

Subject to the conditions of consent, the proposed development will not result in any significant impacts on the coastal environment because:

·      It will not impede or diminish existing public access to and along the foreshore, with opportunities for new public access not available.

·     The site is considered to be suitable for the proposed development due to its consistency with surrounding land uses, location, and that the built form is compatible with the scenic character of the area having regard to the scale and aesthetic appearance of surrounding buildings.

·      There is no built form proposed which would result in any overshadowing on the coastal foreshore or any significant loss of views from a public place to the coastal foreshore.

·      The sites partial screening by vegetation and surrounding buildings, along with its location and consistency in scale compared to the adjoining Woolworths building, will result in the building being compatible with the existing visual amenity and scenic quality of the coast.

·      It will not result in any significant impacts on any native coastal vegetation or wildlife corridors, rock platforms, water quality of coastal water bodies, or native flora or fauna or their habitats.

·      It will not result in any detrimental cumulative impacts on the coastal catchment.

·      Onsite effluent disposal is not proposed.

·    Untreated stormwater will not be discharged into the sea, beach, estuary, lake, creek, or onto a rock platform.

·    The subject site is not subject to coastal hazards and will not impact on coastal hazards or increase the risk of coastal hazards on any other land.

7.4 - Public utility infrastructure

Yes

The proposed development will be connected to reticulated sewer and water, with power and telecommunications available within the road reserve.

7.6 - Earthworks

Yes

The proposed earthworks will not impact significantly on surface water flows, will facilitate the proposed development of the land, will not impact any contaminated soil or the amenity of surrounding properties (construction hours/protection of adjoining properties conditioned), is unlikely to disturb any relics, and appropriate erosion control measures have been included within the recommended conditions of consent to mitigate potential impacts on watercourses.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land

 

The land is not considered to be contaminated because there are no known previous uses or activities on the site that would have resulted in any contamination of the land and the proposal does not include a change of use of the land.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy No 62 - Sustainable Aquaculture

 

It is not considered that the proposed development will result in any adverse effects on oyster aquaculture development or a priority oyster aquaculture area because earthworks and stormwater flows resulting from the development being appropriately managed by conditions of consent.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy No 71 - Coastal Protection

 

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the matters for consideration outlined in Clause 8 and the development controls within Part 4 because it will not contradict the aims of the policy or result in any significant impacts on the coastal environment having regard to scenic qualities, access, archaeological significance, ecosystems, coastal processes, wildlife corridors; water quality; or result in conflict between land-based and water-based coastal activities.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

A valid BASIX certificate, No 645374M, issued on 23 July 2015, was lodged with this application. A condition requiring the development to meet the commitments of this BASIX certificate is included in the conditions of consent.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

 

In accordance with clause 45(1) (b), the application was referred to Essential Energy for comment because the development proposal includes excavation immediately adjacent to an easement for electricity purposes, an electricity substation, and the erection of a building within 5m of an exposed overhead electricity power line. The response received included recommended safety measures which have been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

(ii) any draft environmental planning instrument

 

There are no draft environmental planning instruments applicable to the proposed development.

 

(iii) any development control plan (DCP)

 

·      Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (DCP)

 

The proposed development is assessed against the relevant clauses of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 in the following table:

 

Part

Complies

Comments

Notification and advertising (Part A)

Yes

The application was notified and advertised in accordance with Part A of the DCP. No submissions were received.

Environmental context (Part A)

Yes

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent and as assessed throughout this report, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under clause A5.0.

Car Parking (Part C)

Yes

The proposed development includes 50 onsite car spaces within the two basement levels.

In accordance with table C1, the proposal is classified as ‘(Self-contained) Tourist Accommodation’, meaning parking requirements for the development are as per the ‘Medium Density Housing’ provision in the same table.

Having regard to the above, the following parking requirements apply to the proposal:

·  <85m² GFA = 1 per apartment

·  85-125m² GFA = 1.5 per apartment

·  >125m² GFA = 2 per apartment

·  Plus 1 visitor space per 5 apartments.

With 38 apartments with <85m² GFA and 6 apartments with 85-125m² GFA, 47 onsite car spaces are required plus 9 visitor car spaces. In total, 56 on-site parking spaces are required to comply with this part.

Because only 50 onsite spaces are proposed, the proposal does not comply with this part because it is 6 off street visitor spaces short of the required 9.

However, considering each apartment will have off street parking, that the remaining frontage of the site to Back Street will have sufficient room for 6 parking spaces, the reality that the short term accommodation use of the site will not always be 100% occupied, and having regard to the constraints of the site; it is considered that varying clause C2.1 to allow the 6 visitor spaces within the sites frontage is reasonable.

It is considered that this variation demonstrates flexibility in the application of development standards in accordance with s79C (3A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 by allowing a reasonable alternate solution.

Furthermore, it is worth noting that due to the constraints of the site, the provision of an extra 6 visitor spaces would require the excavation of another basement parking level. Such a requirement would make the development unviable. Given the economic benefits the proposed development will provide to Nambucca, it is considered that these outweigh the potential impacts of the minor non-compliance outlined above.

After consultation with Councils Manager of Technical Services it is considered that the proposed development is capable of complying with all other aspects of this part. Conditions reinforcing such compliance are included within the recommended conditions of consent.

Sediment and erosion control (Part D)

Yes

All works to be undertaken as part of any consent will be subject to a condition of consent requiring the installation of adequate erosion and sedimentation devices which are consistent with Part D of the DCP.

Urban design strategies – Nambucca Heads (Part L)

Yes

While there are no specified controls relating to the subject site under this part, the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant principles for development within the document ‘Urban Design Strategies – Sites in Nambucca Heads’ primarily because:

·     It will improve pedestrian connection from the main street to the foreshore through the establishment of a pedestrian refuge between the subject site and the RSL club (conditioned).

·     It will improve the existing quality of buildings when viewed from the south by screening the Woolworths building. This will result in a built form which addresses the foreshore and provides a better transition from main street to waterfront. It will also assist in creating a more active and iconic main street between the RSL club and Bowra Street.

Waste Minimisation And Management (Part N)

Yes

Conditions have been recommended to be included within the consent regarding the management of waste during construction.

Having regard to the provisions of this part, it is estimated that waste generation from the development during operation will be 2,240 litres of waste and 448 litres of recyclables per week.

In order to ensure the public footpath fronting the development site is not littered with wheelie bins or traffic impeded during waste collection; the applicant has proposed to use bulk bins for the disposal of waste which are to be collected from the driveway of the development. The bins will be moved from the ‘garbage’ room on collection days to a screened holding area where the contractor will empty the bins.

Having regard to the constrained nature of the site it is considered that this option is the most practical as it will ensure multiple bins are not stored with public view and will only impede traffic flows within the development site for a short period (two lane entrance reduce to one).

Having regard to the above estimated waste figures, two 660 litre and two 1,100 litre bulk bins would be needed to service the development (one 660 litre for recyclables and the remaining waste). The proposed ‘garbage’ room is capable of accommodating these bins, as well as at least four green waste wheelie bins which will adequately service the development.

If waste generation were to exceed the estimated volumes, there are other storage areas within the basement which could accommodate the storage of more bulk bins. Alternatively, the owners would be able to engage a contractor to undertake more frequent collections.

 

(iiia) Any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F.

 

There are no planning agreements applying to the subject site.

 

(iv) Any Matters prescribed by the Regulation

 

·      Clause 92(1)(a) – NSW Coastal Policy 1997

 

Matters for consideration to implement the NSW Coastal Policy are provided in Clause 5.5 (Development within the coastal zone) under the NLEP 2010. These are similar to Clause 8 (Matters for Consideration) under SEPP 71. It is considered that the matters for consideration under Clause 5.5 of the NLEP 2010 and Clause 8 of SEPP 71 have been satisfactorily addressed, therefore, satisfying the requirements of the NSW Coastal Policy.

(v) Any coastal zone management plan

 

It is not considered that the nature or location of the proposed development will be contrary to any of the management actions outlined within the Coastal Zone Management Plan for the Nambucca Shire Coastline.

 

(b)        The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality.

 

Issue

Comments

Context and Setting

The development site is located on the fringe of the commercial core at the entrance to the ‘main street’ and is constrained by its topography. Having regard to this and that it is boarded by the Woolworths building to the north and public road to the east, south and west; it is considered that the proposed built form is compatible with its context and setting as it addresses each street frontage, is of a consistent scale with the Woolworths building and provides a more articulated facade.

Access, Transport and Traffic

The proposed access is consistent with the controls outlined within the DCP and considered acceptable by Council’s Manager of Technical Services subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

Public Domain

It is considered that the proposed building will enhance the existing character of the area through its orientation to the street/waterfront, which will provide an improved active streetscape compared to that provided by the existing Woolworths building.

Utilities

The development will have access to all necessary utilities.

Heritage

In accordance with the Due Diligence Code of Practice, there are no relevant confirmed site records or other associated landscape feature information on AHIMS, no other sources of information of which a person is already aware, and the development will not impact on any landscape features that are likely to indicate the presence of Aboriginal objects.

Water

Provision of reticulated water and stormwater drainage infrastructure has been conditioned as part of the consent.

Soils

Conditions requiring the installation and maintenance of erosion and sedimentation controls have been included within the consent.

Furthermore, to prevent potential impacts on adjoining properties with regards to soil stability during excavation of the basement levels; conditions have been included within the consent requiring the preparation of geotechnical engineered reports to ensure the appropriate protection of adjoining properties.

Flora and Fauna

It is not considered that the proposal will have any significant impacts on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats due to the location and disturbed nature of the site.

Waste

As outlined above, there is suitable room on site for the storage of waste containers with conditions for the storage and disposal of waste during construction included within the recommended conditions of consent.

Energy

Conditioned to comply with valid BASIX Certificate.

Noise and Vibration

Construction hours have been conditioned.

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

It is considered that the design of the proposed building is consistent with safer by design principles as it will create an active street frontage with ample sightlines for casual surveillance; which is a marked improvement on the current situation.

Overshadowing

Given the separation of the proposed building from surrounding development, the use of surrounding development, and the stepped nature of the building; it is not considered that the proposal will result in any adverse overshadowing impacts.

Privacy

Having regard to the use and design/screening from surrounding development and the proposed buildings separation, it is not considered that it will result in any adverse privacy impacts.

View Sharing

Due to the topography of the land within the area and the design and orientation of surrounding development; it is considered that the development will result in the minor loss of views from properties to the north/north west of the development site within Ridge and Bowra Streets. Photos from properties in these areas towards the development site can be seen in attachment 5.

The term view sharing refers to a situation where a property enjoys existing views and a proposed development would share that view by taking some of it away for its own enjoyment. This is the case in the proposed development.

In deciding whether or not the proposed view sharing is reasonable, consideration has been made to the planning principle adopted by the Land and Environment Court in Tenacity Consulting v Waringah [2004]. This involves a four step process as follows:

·      Step 1 – Assessment of views to be affected

The views affected from the impacted properties are distant views of the Nambucca River and Pacific Ocean. The views are not considered to be ‘iconic’ and are partially obscured by the existing Woolworths building and vegetation.

·      Step 2 – What part of the properties are the views obtained

Given the orientation of existing buildings towards the south, the elevation of the properties above the development site, and the alignment of allotment boundaries; the majority of affected views are from living areas from the rear and front boundaries. It is expected that both standing and sitting views will be affected from these properties.

·      Step 3 – Extent of the Impact

While the majority of affected views are obtained from living areas, the extent of the view loss is considered to be minor because the affected views are partially obscured, are distant, make up only a small fraction of the total water/land views obtained, and does not impact on the existing uninterrupted primary view of the Nambucca River to the south-west.

·      Step 4 - Reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact

The height of the proposed building does breach the maximum building height set by the NLEP 2010 by 600mm when viewed from the north (direction of affected properties). However, having regard to the minor extent of the views affected by the proposal and that the non-compliance will not significantly alter the minor impacts on existing views compared to what a complying development would; it is considered that the proposed design is the most appropriate for the site as it maximises the potential of a key location within the town while providing every opportunity for the development to remain viable on a constrained site. In short, it is considered that forcing the development to comply would result in negligible benefit for surrounding development.

Having regard to the above, it is considered that because the existing views are distant and partially obscured, do not contain any ‘icons’, only a minor extent will be affected, and that compliance with the maximum building height would result in negligible benefit for surrounding development; the proposed view sharing is reasonable.

Social Impact in the Locality

Having regard to the above and subject to the conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposed development will result in any significant social impacts on the locality.

Economic Impact in the Locality

Considering the minimal social impacts posed by the development it is not considered that it will result in any significant negative economic impacts on the locality. Rather, it is considered that the proposed apartments will attract more visitors to the town due to the type of apartments proposed, aspect and convenient access to services. Such an increase will benefit the local economy.

 

(c)      the suitability of the site for the development

 

Given the location of the site on the fringe of the commercial core, proximity to services and facilities, immediate surrounding land uses, and outlook from the site; it is considered that the site is an ideal location for service apartments. Given that the proposal will not result in any significant impacts on the natural, social, or economic environments of the site or surrounding area (assessed throughout this report); it is considered that the site is suitable for the proposed development.

 

(d)      any submissions made in accordance with the Act or the regulations

 

No submissions were received during the public notification of the development application.

 

(e)      the public interest

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposal is contrary to the public interest because as outlined above; it will not result in any significant impacts on the natural, social, or economic environments.

 

Section 94A - Fixed development consent levies

Contributions are payable in accordance with Councils ‘Section 94A Development Contribution Plan’. Because the value of works exceed $200,000.00; 1% of the value of works are payable in accordance with the contribution plan. With the value of works being $10.5 million, a contribution of $105,000.00 is payable to Council. A condition requiring the payment of this contribution has been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Section 64 – Construction of Works for Developers (Local Government Act 1993)

Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993 enables council to levy developer charges for water supply, sewerage and stormwater. This derives from a cross-reference in that Act to Section 306 of the Water Management Act 2000.

 

Contributions are payable for the proposed development in accordance with Council Water supply and Sewerage Development Servicing Plans as follows:

 

Development Servicing Plan

Contribution Amount

Water Supply

1equivalent tenement (ET) = $12,568.00

0.33ET per 1 bed apartment

0.5ET per 2 bed apartment

24 x 1 bed apartments = 7.92ET

20 x 2 bed apartments = 10ET

= 17.92ET – 1ET for existing site credit

= 16.92ET x $12,568.00

= $212,650.56

Sewerage

1ET = $9,494.00

0.5ET per 1 bed apartment

0.75ET per 2 bed apartment

24 x 1 bed apartments = 12ET

20 x 2 bed apartments = 15ET

= 27ET – 1ET for existing site credit

= 26ET x $9,494.00

= $246,844.00

 

CONSULTATION:

 

As discussed above, the application was notified to adjoining owners in accordance with Part A of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010. No submissions were received.

 

Councils Manager of Technical Services and Essential Energy were also consulted, with recommended conditions contained within attachment 4.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

It is not considered that the proposal will result in any significant impacts on the natural environment because the site is highly modified and located within an urban area, with appropriate pollution mitigation measures included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Social

As outlined in the report above, the proposal will not result in any works or land use which will have any significant impact on the existing amenity or character of the area.

 

Economic

It is considered that the proposal will increase economic development within the area.

 

Risk

Nil.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Nil.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

N/A

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

N/A

 

Attachments:

1

32441/2015 - Attachment 1 - Plans of Proposed Development

 

2

32442/2015 - Attachment 2 - Landscape plans, Statement of Environmental Effects & Geotechnical Report

 

3

32443/2015 - Attachment 3 - BASIX Certificate

 

4

32446/2015 - Attachment 4 - Schedule of Conditions

 

5

32447/2015 - Attachment 5 - Photos from Properties Affected by View Sharing

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Serviced Apartment Building

 














Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Serviced Apartment Building

 























































Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Serviced Apartment Building

 


















Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Serviced Apartment Building

 

Attachment 4 – Schedule of Conditions

 

Development is to be in accordance with approved plans

 

1.       The development is to be implemented in accordance with the plans and document endorsed with the Council stamp, dated TBC, and set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

 

Plan Title

Sheet No

Prepared by

Dated

Basement 2

101

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Basement 1

102

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Ground Floor Plan/Site Plan

103

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Level 1 Plan

104

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Level 2 Plan

105

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Level 3 Plan

106

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Level 4 Plan

107

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Level 5 Plan

108

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Back Street Elevation

109

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Elevations

110

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Section A-A

111

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Section B-B

112

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Section C-C

112

Philip Perrie Architect

12/9/12

Proposed Plant Species

1508-01

Jackie Amos Landscape Architect

-

Ground Floor Landscape Plan

1508-02

Jackie Amos Landscape Architect

-

Level 4 Landscape Plan

1508-03

Jackie Amos Landscape Architect

-

Level 5 Landscape Plan

1508-4

Jackie Amos Landscape Architect

-

Geotechnical Capability Assessment

-

Regional Geotechnical Solutions

25 August 2015

 

In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this development consent and the plans/ supporting document referred to above, the conditions of this development consent prevail.

 

Operation of car parking area

 

2.       All car parking spaces are to be provided and maintained, together with all necessary access driveways and turning areas, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Vehicles using any off-street loading/unloading and/or parking area must enter and leave in a forward direction. All driveways and turning areas must be kept clear of obstructions that prevent compliance with this condition.

 

All customers must have unrestricted access to all nominated car parking spaces on a daily basis.

 

Premises limited to use as tourist accommodation

 

3.       The use of the development is limited to tourist and visitor accommodation. No one person may occupy any of the guest rooms for:

 

§ more than 42 consecutive days with an interval of at least 14 days between occupancies; and/or

§ more than 100 days in any 12 month period.

 

Register of occupiers

4.         A register of occupiers must be kept for each person/group who occupies the tourist and visitor accommodation. The register must include the following:

·      The person’s name, address, and contact number.

·      The dates of arrival and departure.

·      The unit occupied by the person.

The register must be available for inspection by any authorised Council officer without cost during normal working hours.

 

Annual Fire Safety Statement

 

5.         The owner of the premises must provide an annual fire safety statement to Council and the Fire Commissioner. An annual fire safety statement is a statement issued by or on behalf of the owner of a building to the effect that:

(a)   each essential fire safety measure specified in the statement has been assessed by a properly qualified person and was found, when it was assessed, to be capable of performing to a standard no less than that specified in the current fire safety schedule,

(b)  the building has been inspected by a properly qualified person and was found, when it was inspected, to be in a condition that did not disclose any grounds for a prosecution under Division 7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

Pool safety

 

6.       The occupier of the premises must ensure that there is at all times a sign in the immediate vicinity of the swimming pool bearing the words ‘Young children must be supervised when using this swimming pool’. The sign is to be in a prominent position and be otherwise in accordance with Clause 10 of the Swimming Pools Regulation. Fences, gates, walls, etc. enclosing the general swimming pool area are to be maintained in good repair and condition at all times. Depth markers are to be installed 150 mm above the water line of the proposed swimming pool.

 

Swimming pool health requirements

 

7.       The swimming pool water is to be re-circulated, filtered and disinfected in accordance with the requirements of Public Swimming Pools & Spa Pool Guidelines – June 1996 and Public Health (Swimming Pools & Spa Pools) Regulation 2000. The swimming pool water is to be maintained at satisfactory levels of purity for bathing at all times.

 

Swimming pool discharge

 

8.       The discharge of waste water from the swimming pool is to be in accordance with AS/NZS 3500.2.2, Section 10.9 & Figure 10.2.

 

Noise Control

 

9.                The LAeq noise level emitted from mechanical devices associated with the function of the building shall:

(a)  Not exceed 5dB(A) above the background noise level (LA90), between 7am and 10pm on any day, when measured at the boundary of the premises and in the absence of the noise source under consideration.

(b)  Not exceed the background noise level (LA90), between 10pm and 7am on any day, when measured at the boundary of the premises and in the absence of the noise source under consideration.

            Measurements are to be carried out in accordance with the NSW Industrial Noise Policy and corrections are to be made to the above criteria for intermittent, tonal, impulsive and low frequency noise.

 

Separate application required for advertising structures

 

10.     A separate application is to be submitted to, and approved by, Council prior to the erection of any advertisements or advertising structures, other than those permitted without consent by Council.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE FOR BUILDING WORKS

 

Consent Granted For Works within the Road Reserve

 

11.     This development consent includes the works within the road reserve set out in the table below. The work must be carried out in accordance with the standard specified in the column opposite the work. All works are to include the adjustment and/or relocation of services as necessary to the requirements of the appropriate service authorities.

 

Consent from Council must be obtained for all works within the road reserve pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. Three (3) copies of engineering construction plans must accompany the application for consent for works within the road reserve. Such plans are to be in accordance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standard.

 

Work

Standard to be provided

Driveway

The driveway shall be a minimum 5.5 metres wide. Paving to be 125mm thick reinforced with construction joints to suit service trenches. The footpath crossing must be designed to provide a cross-fall of 1 % or 1:100 (maximum 2.5% or 1 in 40) for a width of at least 2.4 metres to provide for pedestrians with access disabilities.

Grading, trimming, topsoiling and turfing of the unpaved footpath area

The surface levels are to be finished flush with adjacent road or kerb levels.

A pedestrian refuge on Nelson Street  between the RSL and the existing Back Street Footpath

The pedestrian refuge is to be designed in accordance with Australian Standard 1742.10 – Manual of Uniform Traffic Controls – Pedestrian Control and Protection and RMS Technical Direction 2011/01a Pedestrian Refuges.

 

The design must position the refuge island to maintain right turn vehicle movements into Nelson Street and Back Street and cater for requisite footpath alterations and kerb ramps. The provision of line marking and night-time delineation shall also be incorporated in the design

Modifications to kerb and gutter, road pavement and associated drainage construction, footpath formation across the full frontage of the site to provide suitable access to the development

Required modifications to provide vehicular access to the development where the existing blister conflicts with the swept path of vehicles

 

On-site stormwater detention approval required

 

12.     Stormwater drainage is to be designed to direct all water to a Council approved drainage system to prevent discharge runoff onto adjoining land. The drainage system is to be designed for 1 in 20 year storm events. On-site stormwater detention is required, restricting stormwater discharge to the pre-development runoff rate, for a 1 in 5 year storm event. This system must be designed in accordance with AS/NZS 3500.3:2003 - Plumbing and drainage, Part 3: Stormwater drainage. All piped drainage lines over adjoining land are to be located within drainage easements. All costs are the responsibility of the proponent.

 

An approval is to be obtained under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 to carry out stormwater drainage work.

 

The engineering plans and specifications are to be designed by a qualified practising Civil Engineer. The Civil Engineer is to be a corporate member of the Institution of Engineers Australia or is to be eligible to become a corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field.

 

Engineering plans and specifications are to be submitted in triplicate and must include details in accordance with Appendix C of AS/NZS 3500.3:2003 - Plumbing and drainage, Part 3: Stormwater drainage.

 

The plans must be in compliance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standards.

 

Driveway details required

 

13.     The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate vehicular access from the site boundary to the proposed car space(s). Vehicular access must be in accordance with AS 2890.1-2004: Parking facilities, Part 1: Off-street Car Parking No 1. Plans are to include the following items:

 

a        site conditions affecting the access;

b        existing and design levels;

c        longitudinal section from the road centreline to the car space(s);

d        cross sections every 20 metres; and

e        drainage (open drains, pipes, etc), including calculations and catchment details.

 

The plans must be in compliance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standards.

 

Car parking plans required

 

14.     The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate access, parking and manoeuvring details in accordance with the plans approved by this consent. The access, parking and manoeuvring for the site are to comply with the requirements of Council’s Development Control Plan. Plans are to include, but not be limited to, the following items:

 

a        pavement description;

b        site conditions affecting the access;

c        existing and design levels;

d        longitudinal section from the road centreline to the car space(s);

e        drainage (pipes, pits, on-site detention, etc.);

f        a physical barrier across the full road frontage of the property suitable to prevent vehicular access at locations other than the approved driveways;

g        a clearance height 2.2m for all internal car parking areas. Where disabled parking is to be provided a minimum clearance height of 2.5m is required. Building elements such as pipes, ducts, conduits and beams are not to encroach below the specified clearance height;

h        turning paths; and

i         linemarking and signs.

 

The engineering plans and specifications are to be designed by a qualified practising Civil Engineer. The Civil Engineer is to be a corporate member of the Institution of Engineers Australia or is to be eligible to become a corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field.

 

The plans must be in compliance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standards. Such plans and specifications must be approved as part of the Construction Certificate.

 

 

Geotechnical Report

 

15.     A detailed Geotechnical Report and accompanying Structural Engineering details prepared by a suitably qualified professional(s) are to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority. The documentation is to address the matters raised in the submitted ‘Geotechnical Capability Assessment’ prepared by Regional Geotechnical Solutions, dated 25 August 2015; certifying that suitable measures/methods will be implemented to ensure the stability of adjoining land and buildings thereon will not be affected by the proposal. 

 

Sediment and erosion measures

 

16.     The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate the measures to be employed to control erosion and loss of sediment from the site. Control over discharge of stormwater and containment of run-off and pollutants leaving the site/premises must be undertaken through the installation of erosion control devices such as catch drains, energy dissipaters, level spreaders and sediment control devices such as hay bale barriers, filter fences, filter dams, and sedimentation basins. The sediment and erosion control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Landcom Manual 2004, “Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction”.  4th Edition 2009.

 

The sediment and erosion control plan is to be prepared by a qualified practising Civil Engineer. Such plans and specifications must be approved as part of the Construction Certificate.

 

Water and Sewerage Section 68 approval

 

17.     An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 to connect to Council’s Infrastructure for water supply, sewerage and stormwater work must be obtained.

 

Contributions and Certificate of Compliance

 

18.     Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the developer/consent holder will have to be eligible to obtain a Section 307 Certificate of Compliance under the Water Management Act 2000. To be eligible, the developer/consent holder will have to pay the contributions set out in the following table to Council.

 

The contributions payable will be adjusted in accordance with relevant plan and the amount payable will be calculated on the basis of the contribution rates that are applicable at the time of payment.

 

Public service

No of Equivalent Tenements

Contribution Rate (Amount per ET)

Contribution Levied

Date until which Contribution rate is applicable

Water

16.92

$12,568.00

$212,650.56

June 2016

Sewer

26

$9,494.00

$246,844.00

June 2016

TOTAL

$459,494.56

June 2016

 

Development subject to S94A Contribution Plan

 

19.      Pursuant to section 80A(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the Nambucca Shire Council Section 94A Development Contribution Plan, a contribution of $105,000.00  shall be paid to Council.

 

If payment is not made within 12 months of this consent then the amount to be paid is to be adjusted at the time of actual payment based on actual construction costs or revised Quantity Surveyor’s report as appropriate, in accordance with the provisions of the Nambucca Shire Council Section 94A Development Contribution Plan.

 

This condition puts into effect the Nambucca Shire Council Section 94A Development Contribution Plan 2013.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING OR CONSTRUCTION WORKS COMMENCING

 

Construction Certificate

 

20.       The erection of the building the subject of this development consent MUST NOT be commenced until:

(a)     Detailed plans/specifications of the building have been endorsed with a Construction Certificate by:

(i)        the Council, or

(ii)        an accredited certifier, and

(b)     The person having the benefit of the development consent has:

(i)        Appointed a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) for the building work, and

(ii)       Notified Council of the appointment, and

(iii)        Notified the PCA that the person will carry out the building work as an owner-builder; or

Appointed a contractor for the building work who is the holder of a contractor licence if any residential building work is involved, notified the PCA of any such appointment, and notified the contractor of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work.

(c)      The person having the benefit of the development consent has given Council written notice, at least two days prior to work commencing on site, of the name and details of the PCA and the date construction work is proposed to commence.

Structural (Dilapidation) Reports

 

21.       A Structural Report detailing the existing condition of the adjoining Woolworths building, infrastructure and roads shall be prepared and endorsed by a qualified structural engineer.  The report shall be submitted, for approval by Council, prior to the commencement of works.

       A second Structural Report shall be prepared by a suitably qualified person at the completion of the works to ascertain if any structural damage has occurred to the adjoining building, infrastructure or roads.  This report shall also be submitted for approval by Council and should be compared with the earlier report to ascertain if any change has occurred.

If the person preparing the report is denied access to the adjoining building for the purpose of preparing the report, the report may be prepared from an external inspection of the building.

Public Safety Management Plan 

 

22.     Consent from Council must be obtained for a public safety management plan for those works within the road reserve pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. This public safety management plan is to include provision for (but not be limited to):

 

a        a pedestrian barrier, alternative footpaths and ramps as necessary;

b        an awning sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work falling into the road reserve;

c        lighting of the alternative footpath between sunset and sunrise;

d        the loading and unloading of building materials;

e        parking space for tradesman’s vehicles, where such vehicles must be located near the site due to tools and equipment contain within the vehicle.

 

Removal of any such hoarding, fence or awning must be undertaken as soon as the particular work has been completed.

 

 

 

Construction Traffic Management Plan

 

23.     Consent from Council must be obtained for a traffic management plan pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. The plans and specifications are to include the measures to be employed to control traffic (inclusive of construction vehicles) during construction of the development. The traffic control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Manual, Traffic Control at Work Sites Version 2, and Australian Standard 1742.3 - 1985, Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Part 3, ‘Traffic Control Devices for Works on Roads’.

 

The plan must incorporate measures to ensure that motorists using roads adjacent to the development and residents and pedestrians in the vicinity of the development are subjected to minimal time delays due to construction on the site or adjacent to the site.

 

The traffic control plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified and RTA accredited Work Site Traffic Controller.

 

Waste Management Plan

 

24.     A waste management plan is to be submitted to and approved by Council to ensure all waste is collected, stored and disposed of to the satisfaction of Council. The plan must incorporate measures to separate recyclable materials and describe the methods for collection of waste containers from the site.

 

Public safety requirements

 

25.     All care is to be taken to ensure the safety of the public in general, road users, pedestrians and adjoining property. The public liability insurance cover, for a minimum of $20 million, is to be maintained for the duration of the construction of the development. Council is to be nominated as an interested party on the policy. Council is not held responsible for any negligence caused by the undertaking of the works.

 

Erosion & sediment measures

 

26.     Erosion and sedimentation controls are to be in place in accordance with an approved Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.

 

Additionally the enclosed sign, to promote the awareness of the importance of maintenance of sediment and erosion controls, is to be clearly displayed on the most prominent sediment fence or erosion control device for the duration of the project.

 

Note: Council may impose on-the-spot fines of up to $600 for non-compliance with this condition.

 

Erection of Signs

 

27.        A sign must be erected on site in a prominent position containing the information prescribed by Clause 98A (2) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 being the name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority for the work, and name of the principal contractor for the work and telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and stating that unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited.  This sign must be maintained on site while work is being carried out and removed when the work has been completed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH DURING CONSTRUCTION

 

Building Code of Australia

 

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

 

Survey of building floor height required

 

29.     A survey certificate prepared by a registered surveyor is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority upon completion of the floor slab formwork of each level (including basements), before concrete is poured, to ensure the building will not exceed the height levels approved as part of this consent.

 

Shoring and Adequacy of Adjoining Property

 

30.        If the development involves an excavation that extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on adjoining land, the person having the benefit of the development consent must, at the person’s own expense:

(a)        Protect and support the adjoining premises from possible damage from the excavation, and

(b)   Where necessary, underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any such damage.

 

Protection of Services

 

31.     The sewer and stormwater mains are to be relocated clear of the building in accordance with Council's Policy. Where the mains cannot be relocated clear of the building they are to be protected. All costs are the responsibility of the proponent.

 

Public Safety Management Plan

 

32.     The approved Public Safety Management Plan is to be implemented.

 

Traffic Management Plan

 

33.     The approved Construction Traffic Management Plan is to be implemented.

Approved Plans to be On-Site

 

34.       A copy of the approved and certified plans, specifications and documents incorporating conditions of approval and certification shall be kept on the site at all times and shall be readily available for perusal by any officer of Council or the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Construction times

 

35.     Any works involving the generation of noise which extends beyond the boundary of the land, other than works required in an emergency to avoid the loss of life, damage to property and/or to prevent environmental harm, shall only be carried out between 7:00 am and 6:00 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive. No works shall occur on public holidays.

 

The builder/site manager is responsible to instruct and control sub-contractors regarding the hours of work

 

Construction dust suppression

 

36.     All necessary works are to be undertaken to control dust pollution from the site.

 

 

Builders rubbish to be contained on site

 

37.     All builders rubbish is to be contained on the site in a ‘Builders Skips’ or an enclosure. Building materials are to be delivered directly onto the property. Footpaths, road reserves and public reserves are to be maintained clear of rubbish, building materials and all other items.

 

Maintenance of sediment and erosion control measures in accordance with approved plan

 

38.     Sediment and erosion control measures in accordance with an approved Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan must be maintained at all times until the site has been stabilised by permanent vegetation cover or hard surface.

 

Discovery of a Relic

 

39.        The development is to proceed with caution. If any Aboriginal objects are found, works are to stop and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) notified. If human remains are found work is to stop, the site is to be secured and the NSW Police and OEH are to be notified.

 

Essential Energy Requirements

 

40.        No excavation is to occur within the 'easement' area of the existing padmount substation 5-972818.  All works to comply with Essential Energy Design and Construction standards.

 

Advice: The applicant must lodge an application for connection through Essential Energy's portal or contact Essential Energy's Contestable Works Group on 132391.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO OCCUPATION OF THE BUILDING

 

Occupation Certificate

 

41.       The development shall not be used or occupied until an Occupation Certificate has been issued by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Works to be completed

 

42.     All of the works indicated on the plans and granted by this consent, including any other consents that are necessary for the completion of this development, are to be completed and approved by the relevant consent authority/s prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

BASIX Certification

 

43.        The development must be implemented and all BASIX commitments thereafter maintained in accordance with BASIX Certificate No 645374M

 

Fire Safety Certificate

 

44.       A Fire Safety Certificate shall be furnished to the PCA for all the “Essential Fire or Other Safety Measures” forming part of this approval prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.  A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be submitted to Council by the Principal Certifying Authority with the Occupation Certificate.

            In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000:

(a)  A final Fire Safety Certificate shall state that each essential fire safety measure specified in the current Fire Safety Schedule for the building to which the Certificate relates:

(i)        has been assessed by a properly qualified person; and

(ii)   was found, when it was assessed, to be capable of performing to a standard not less than that required by the current fire safety schedule for the building for which the Certificate is issued.

(b)  The assessment must have been carried out within the period of three (3) months prior to the date on which the final Fire Safety Certificate is issued.

(c)  The choice of person to carry out the assessment is up to the owner of the building.

(d)  The person who carries out the assessment:

(i)      must inspect and verify the performance of each fire safety measure being assessed; and

(ii)     must test the operation of each new item of equipment installed in the building premises that is included in the current Fire Safety Schedule for the building.

(e)    As soon as practicable after a final Fire Safety Certificate is issued, the owner of the building to which it relates:

(i)    must cause a copy of the Certificate (together with a copy of the current Fire Safety Schedule) to be given to the Commissioner of New South Wales Fire Brigades; and

(ii)        must cause a further copy of the Certificate (together with a copy of the current Fire Safety Schedule) to be prominently displayed in the building.

 

Car parking areas to be completed and signs to be provided

 

45.     The car parking areas are to be constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Signs are to be erected clearly indicating the availability of off-street parking and the location of entry/exit points, visible from both the street and the subject site.

 

Damage to Council’s Infrastructure

 

46.     Where any damage occurs to Council’s infrastructure during construction, such as kerb and gutter, footpaths, inlet pipes, etc, fronting the development site, the principal contractor shall replace or make good the damaged infrastructure before the occupation certificate is issued.

 

Sewer and water to be connected

 

47.     Sewer and water supply is to be connected to the premises in accordance with an approval granted under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

A Certificate of Compliance and Sewer Service Diagram must be submitted to Council and the owner in accordance with the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2011 and Regulations in the appropriate form within 7 working days of the completed work and prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued.

 

Swimming pool

 

48.        The installation of the swimming pool and all associated safety equipment including (but not limited to) fencing, latches, and signage shall comply with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and AS 1926. The pool is to be maintained in accordance with the above standards for the life of the development.

 

 

REASONS FOR CONDITIONS

 

·      To ensure that the proposed development:

(a)      achieves the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment  Act 1979;

(b)      complies with the provisions of all relevant Environmental Planning Instruments;

(c)      is consistent with the aims and objectives of Council’s Development Control Plans, Codes and Policies.

 

·      To ensure that the relevant public authorities have been consulted and their requirements met, or arrangements made, for the provision of services to the satisfaction of those authorities.

 

·      To meet the increased demand for public amenities and services attributable to the development in accordance with Section 94A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

·      To ensure the protection of the amenity and character of land adjoining and in the locality of the proposed development.

 

·      To minimise any potential adverse environmental, social or economic impacts of the proposed development.

 

·      To ensure that all traffic, car parking and access requirements arising from the development are addressed.

 

·      To ensure the development does not conflict with the public interest.

 

 

 


OTHER APPROVALS

 

The following Section 68 Approvals

have been issued with this consent:        Nil

 

Integrated Development:                          NO

 

 

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Serviced Apartment Building

 

Attachment 5 - Photos from Properties Affected by View Sharing

Description: N:\es\Daniel W\Site Inspections\DA2015.115\20150824_131858.jpg

Photo taken from intersection of Woods Land and Ridge Street towards the development site.

 

Description: N:\es\Daniel W\Site Inspections\DA2015.115\20150824_132626.jpg

Photo taken from rear of 21 Ridge Street (Council library & Australia Post) towards the development site. Units at 6 Bowra Street are seen in the left of the picture.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager

ITEM 10.6    DA2015/103      291015         Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Daniel Walsh, Senior Town Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The proposed development includes the construction of an outdoor target shooting range in a cleared gully located within Lot 262 DP 755549 (132 Morans Road, Missabotti). It is proposed to construct a building containing 25 shooting bays and develop an associated target shooting range with bullet catchment devices which are intended to capture bullets to restrict potential lead contamination.

 

The plans and documentation supporting the development application have been included within attachment 1 of this report and include plans illustrating the proposed development, a flora and fauna report, noise assessments, and bushfire report.

 

54 submissions were received during public notification of the development application; with the most common reasons for objection being potential lead contamination, noise impacts, impacts on fauna, inadequate road access, and that insufficient assessments were submitted regarding the developments emission of noise and impacts on flora and fauna.

 

After assessment of the proposed development in accordance with the relevant sections of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the act), it is considered that there is sufficient information available for Council to determine that the proposal will not be contrary to any provision of the act and that it will not result in any adverse impacts on the natural, social or economic environments of the locality; subject to the inclusion of the recommended conditions of consent contained within attachment 2.

 

The development application is being referred to Council for determination because staff do not have delegated authority to determine the application as it has been “called in” by Council.

 

Note from GM:

 

Council staff endeavoured to arrange a demonstration of the potential noise impacts of the shooting range by Club members undertaking target shooting on the proposed range whilst Councillors attended a nearby property to listen.  The Firearms Registry has now refused a request from the Secretary of the Nambucca Pistol Club Inc. to allow this demonstration to occur.  The Firearms Registry have advised as follows:

 

“As part of the Development Application Council has asked for a noise test to be conducted on the site.  A Commissioners Permit was issued to allow firearm use on the proposed range site for noise testing by a qualified person.  My understanding is that this testing has taken place and a report completed by a qualified person.

 

Should Council dispute such testing they may require additional testing.  This testing must be done by a qualified person (expert) in the field of noise evaluation.  A further Commissioners Permit application would need to be submitted together with an additional fee for such a permit.

 

It is not the case that a large number of Council staff and Councillors’ can simply attend the range and listen to gun shots, nor is it the case that a number of residents would be able to attend.  Whilst on a practical level they would be able to hear gunshots, none would be in a position to scientifically record or explain such noise testing.

 

A Commissioners Permit will not be issued authorising firearm use for such a demonstration.

 

In answer to your specific questions.  No you cannot use hand guns or long arms to satisfy these people nor should there be any firearms present should there be persons protesting or objecting present.

 

Signed

Range Inspector

Firearms Registry

 

As a result, whilst a site inspection will proceed it will not include a demonstration of the potential noise impacts.  Councillors will need to satisfy themselves in relation to noise impacts from the information provided by the applicant and the assessment contained in this report.

 

NOTE: This matter requires a “Planning Decision” referred to in Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requiring the General Manager to record the names of each Councillor supporting and opposing the decision.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council as the consent authority, pursuant Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, grant consent for Development Application 2015/103 for a Recreation Facility (Outdoor): Shooting Range at Lots 262 DP 755549, subject to the schedule of conditions outlined in attachment 2 of this report.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

(a)      Grant consent to the development application, either unconditionally or subject to conditions.

(b)      Request the applicant provide further information prior to determining the development application.

(c)      Refuse consent to the development application.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Determination of this development application was deferred by Council at its previous meeting on 15 October 2015. Since that date, Councillor Flack has requested that the following questions and suggested conditions of consent be addressed by planning staff:

 

Questions:

Firstly, I must state that I am concerned that Council does not have adequate information to make an informed determination.  It is impossible to understand the full extent of the proposal in particular with regard to storm water management, earthworks and environmental impacts, due to the lack of any Statement of Environmental  Effects, storm water management plan or waste water management plan prepared by a suitably qualified expert. Usually these aspects are addressed in the DA with at least a concept plan prepared by a suitably qualified expert and any detailed plans then being submitted after approval prior to issue of the construction certificate. The hand drawn 'Water Control Plan' provided with the application is inaccurate, incomplete, provides no hydrological or engineering information.  It appears to have been prepared by an amateur and as such, is inadequate for purpose and I doubt it would stand up to legal challenge.  I cannot accept that the proposal is 'feasible' without the benefit of a hydrological engineer's advice which would then give me (and Council) an idea of the extent of earthwork, drains and ponds required.

At the on-site inspection, I was advised that storm water would be managed separately to the potentially lead polluted water range runoff, but no information is provided in the DA regarding this. The possibility of the need for two sediment ponds was mentioned, however only one is proposed in the DA.  The existing 'man made pond' referred to in the 'Water Control Plan' drawing appears to have be built in the first order creek line downstream of the proposed development site.  No reference is made as to how overflows will be managed in times of flooding which happen almost every year.  No information is provided as to how storm water is to be delivered subsequently to the second order stream and no-one was able to explain to me on-site how this is to be achieved.  No information is provided as to expected volume of runoff and what scale of earthworks will be required to cope with annual flood events let alone a 1:100 year flood event.  It is difficult to see how appropriate conditions can be applied to this development without knowing the full extent of the work proposed.

The development is proposed across a mapped first order creek with an 8ha catchment. The remains of the creek line can be seen downstream of the proposal site beginning at the man made pond.  I assume the creek was either modified mechanically at some time or has filled with sediment over time due to agricultural and logging activities.  Either way, the catchment size has not changed and I do not have enough information to be satisfied that all channelled rainfall flows, plus the runoff from impervious surfaces (car park), rainwater tank overflow and sediment pond/s will not have water quality consequences downstream, without some serious engineered works.  We have no idea of the extent of works to be required or whether what is proposed will actually work and the Club has no idea of the potential costs.  Expert advice is needed before determination.

 

Planners Comment: The proposed development includes the construction of excavated swale drains around the range perimeter to ensure surface water does not enter the shooting range. It is proposed to direct the water flows to the existing dam located onsite and install ‘flow barriers’ within the swale drains to minimise flow rates. This is illustrated on the ‘Water Control Plan’ and addressed in the applicants written statement submitted with the development application and included within attachment 1 of this report.

 

Given the width and topography of the gully floor on which the range is to be located and the size of the catchment; it is considered that the concept as submitted is feasible subject to detailed construction plans being prepared by a suitably qualified person prior to the issue of a construction certificate. Condition 3 in the recommended conditions of consent addresses this.

 

In addition to the proposed diversion measures, it is considered necessary for all flows within the range to be diverted to filtration devices and sediment pond prior to coming into contact with those waters diverted around the range area. This will enable unlikely contaminated water to be monitored as outlined in condition 33 of the recommended conditions of consent. This has also been addressed in condition 3. Please note that this was not proposed by the applicant. It is considered appropriate by planning staff to be implemented as part of any development consent for the above reason.

 

It is to be noted that there are multiple options available for the above to be achieved. Considering that there is an engineering solution to achieve the outcomes required by condition 3; Council is permitted to include condition 3 within any development consent for the proposal in accordance with section 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

1.         Given the proposed storm water diversion, pollution risks and interference with a creek/s, shouldn't a Review of Environmental Factors or Statement of Environmental Effects have been submitted with the DA?

Planners Comment: The applicant completed Councils standard Statement of Environmental Effects template contained within the development application form and attached a supplementary statement which addressed potential impacts associated with the development. It is considered that the submitted documentation satisfies statutory requirements and enabled planning staff to properly identify and asses those impacts.

2.         Why wasn't a storm water/waste water management concept plan, prepared by a qualified expert, required with the DA?

Planners Comment: Although the submitted ‘Water Control Plan’ was not prepared by a suitably qualified person, it is considered that after review of the plan and the development site that there is an appropriate engineering solution that will result in the proposed concept being appropriate and feasible. As such, condition 3 has been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

Please note that there is no statutory requirement for plans submitted with a development application to be prepared by a qualified expert. When documentation is submitted with a development application and Council is satisfied that such development is appropriate and feasible, Council can either approve the development as proposed or (as in the subject case) implement conditions of consent requiring modifications to the design as well as final design plans to be prepared by a suitably qualified person. It should also be noted that the required modifications do not substantially alter the development as originally proposed.

3.         Was DPI advised of the full extent or the possible full extent of the drainage works ie sediment pond/s and or a drainage channel draining directly into a 2nd order stream when it determined that a controlled activity approval was not required?

Planners Comment: DPI were provided with all documentation submitted with the application, including the ‘Water Control Plan’. DPI reviewed that information as well as the 1:25000 topographic map of the area. Planning staff spoke to the officer from DPI after receiving their advice. During this conversation the full proposal was clarified with DPI who reiterated their advice.

4.         Is it standard to cover an entire shooting range surface with synthetic covers now or is this being required because of the high rainfall and high risk nature of the site?

Planners Comment: In the past, it has not been standard practice for outdoor shooting range surfaces to be covered with synthetic covers. This is evident in an array of literature relating to shooting ranges located all over the world and the prevalence of lead contamination as a result of spent lead bullets corroding in soil.

There are measures available to minimise potential lead impacts associated with shooting ranges by adjusting soil conditions to restrict vertical and horizontal movement of lead contaminants. However, it is considered that with the availability of synthetic materials and due to the location of the development site within Councils drinking water catchment; capturing all spent lead bullets prior to coming into contact with soil is the most appropriate method to eliminate lead contamination.

5.         How much vegetation clearing is required to achieve the necessary APZ?

Planners Comment: It is recommended that a 30m wide asset protection zone (APZ) be created and maintained around the perimeter of the proposed shooting bays. Vegetation to the east and west of the building will be required to be removed to accommodate the APZ. As outlined in the submitted flora and fauna report, this vegetation consists of open forest that has a modified vegetation structure due to previous logging and grazing activities. No threatened or endangered species are located within the affected areas.

6.         I note that the 'Water Control Plan' was prepared by the Nambucca Valley Pistol Club.  What qualifications did the person who prepared the drawing have?

Planners Comment: Please refer to response to question 2.

7.         What 'filtration devices' are proposed or required for the storm water filtration and lead catchment bay bund water filtration?

Planners Comment: The applicant did not propose any filtration devices. It is recommended that filtration devices be implemented as part of any development consent as a further safeguard against potential lead pollution. This is reflected in condition 3 of the recommended conditions of consent which require the diversion of all water from the range area to filtration devices and the specifications of the devices to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

8.         There is no indication on any map provided as to where the septic tank and trench is to be sited.  Can adequate distances from the creek lines be achieved? What about inundation?

Planners Comment: Council’s Plumbing and Drainage inspector has concluded that there are sufficient areas on site which are suitable for an on-site sewerage management system so long as it is designed by a suitably qualified person in accordance with AS 1547:2012 - on site domestic wastewater management. As such, condition 4 has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring a separate section 68 application be submitted to and approved by Council for the operation of a system of sewerage management prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

9.         What happens if the DA is approved and legal access to the site has not been finalised?

Planners Comment: Legal access will be available to the site via Morans Road and over Lots 263 & 264 DP 755549. While there are works associated with realigning sections of Morans Road to within the road reserve and creating a right of carriageway (ROC) over Lots 263 & 264 DP 755549, conditions 8 and 11 have been included within the recommended conditions of consent which require the necessary road design plans to be submitted to Council for approval and the ROC to be created prior to the commencement of works. Please note that owners consent has been given for the proposed site access over Lots 263 & 264 DP 755549 and all road works are required to be completed prior to use of the development as per condition 26.

10.        What risk is there for Council if the DA is approved and all conditions met, but flooding occurs and causes significant flood damage to the range surface or infrastructure or downstream property from debris washed from the range? 

Planners Comment: In order to meet all conditions of consent the range will have to be constructed so not to be impacted by a 1:100 ARI flood event in accordance with a design prepared by a suitably qualified Hydrological Engineer. In this regard, the potential for damage as referred to is considered unlikely. As such, in accordance with section 733 of the Local Government Act 1993, it is not considered that Council would be liable for any damage as it will be acting in good faith.

11.        Despite the proposed used of sight baffles there is no guarantee that stray bullets will not leave the range, how will they be managed?

Planners Comment: The only potential for bullets to leave the range is if someone shoots from outside the shooting bay or the eyebrow baffles are not appropriately adjusted. Given the strict operating procedures with regards to handling guns on the range, it is considered unlikely that shots will be fired from outside the shooting bays.

The eyebrow baffles are to be adjusted so that each shooter will not have a line of sight above the lead entrapment trays. Please note that the lead entrapment bays are 1.8m high and are to have 4m high earth mounds located behind them. Having regard to this and that the proposed activity is to shoot targets no greater than 1.8m off the ground; it is considered highly unlikely that bullets would be shot out of the range.

12.        Has advice been sought from Mr Brendon Hooper the specialist engaged by MIDROC regarding the risk of lead pollution to town water supply as recommended by the EPA in its submission to Council?

Planners Comment: Advice was sought from Mr Hooper who supported the mitigation measures included within the recommended conditions of consent.

13.        Why weren't all the guns proposed to be used at the range tested during the noise assessment, while other guns not proposed to be used were? 

Planners Comment: The loudest of the types of guns listed in the recommended conditions of consent were tested on site. As referred to within the assessment below, it is not considered that the proposed development will result in any noise impacts on the closest dwellings in a manner which would be deemed as ‘offensive’ as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 or contrary to the noise limits set by the Industrial Noise Policy.

14.        I note the condition relating to fencing and signage of the entire range.  What distance is the fence from the actual range? Will the fence be located a sufficient distance to allow for maximum distance of a bullet fired from the most power gun proposed to be used?  This is important to protect any unwary bushwalkers who may have strayed onto private property or children who have snuck through the bush to see the range/shooting and are positioned outside of the fence assuming they are safe from any stray bullets.

Planners Comment: The range perimeter as referred to within condition 38 is the area forward of the shooting bays within the inner side of the diversion drains. Conditions are recommended to be implemented to restrict shooters line of sight from outside the range. Having regard to this and the topography of the land, it is considered that the measures within the recommended conditions of consent are adequate to protect any members of the public that have entered the land without prior permission.

15.        Will the sediment ponds be within the fenced area?

 Planners Comment: No.

Proposed additional draft conditions or amendments to existing ones for consideration:

1.         The pond collecting potentially lead contaminated water should be fenced to exclude cattle AND wildlife and signs place warning of potentially contaminated water.

Planners Comment: No objection. Condition 38 modified to meet request.

2.         Regarding Condition 3 -Any 'raising of range level' must stipulate that evidence as to the origins and quality of the fill including testing results is to be provided BEFORE placement of the fill.  This is especially important because the fill is likely to be inundated during flooding.

Planners Comment: Condition 24 adequately addresses this issue. Requiring fill certification prior to the issue of a construction certificate is not considered to be reasonable as it is not essential for the determination of a construction certificate and in many instances; the source of fill material is unknown until closer to when it is required.

3.         Regarding Condition 8 - All road works and road maintenance must use gravel appropriately sourced from a hard rock quarry with evidence of purchase being kept for compliance auditing purposes.  NO use of river gravel should be stipulated.

Planners Comment: Councils Engineers will specify suitable materials as part of the required section 138 consent.

4.         Regarding condition 13 - the Life expectancy of the synthetic covering must be noted.  The Club must supply regular evidence of maintenance and condition report of the covering.  Covering is to be replaced at first evidence of end of life breakdown and evidence provided of such.

Planners Comment: It is considered that noting a life expectancy within the consent is too prescriptive as the life expectancy of different materials will vary. The life expectancy of the material selected by the applicant will be noted when the applicant submits details of the selected material. It is considered that requiring the applicant to maintain the integrity of the cover for the life of the development and compliance inspections by Council staff is adequate to meet the intent of the suggested condition. Please note that the requirements for the applicant to line the range with a synthetic cover will enable a simple visual inspection by staff to ensure compliance with the consent (maintenance of cover/collection of bullets).

5.         Regarding Condition 38 - The distance of the perimeter fence from the range should be specified and protect public from stray bullets

Planners Comment: The intended location of the perimeter fencing has been clarified within condition 38.

6.         Regarding Condition 39 (c) - It is good that any noise complaint from specified residences will trigger noise monitoring to be undertaken, but it is not appropriate that the club get to have control of this.  Such noise complaints should trigger a random noise monitoring from the complainant's residence WITHOUT notification of the club.  This work should be commission by Council or undertaken by Council (if Council has the equipment) or an independent acoustic consultant and at the Club's expense.

Planners Comment: Condition 39 (c) enables Council to instruct the applicant to undertake noise monitoring as a result of complaints received from the public. As part of this request, Council staff can be present during monitoring. This will enable testing to be undertaken by a suitably qualified person at the expense of the applicant, not Council. The imposition of this condition does not preclude Councils ability to undertake its own noise monitoring without notification of the club.

7.         Regarding Condition 47 - Any alteration to operating hours or number of shooters will require a modification consent and should be exhibited for public comment

Planners Comment: Any alteration to the hours of operation or numbers of shooters will require the applicant to lodge an application to modify the development consent and receive approval from Council. Any application would be notified in accordance with Part A of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010.

8.         Regarding Condition 51 - Need to stipulate that access does not require prior notification.

Planners Comment: Condition 51 has been amended.

 

Assessment Report

 

Site Description

The development site is located at 132 Morans Road, Missabotti and is legally known as Lot 262 DP 755549. The site has an area of approximately 39ha and is part of a large rural holding (approximately 636ha) which is accessed off the end of Morans Road. This site contains heavily vegetated undulating slopes with cleared areas within the gully floor which is currently used as grazing land in association with the remainder of the cleared areas within the holding. There are no existing buildings on the site.

 

The surrounding area is comprised of a mixture of thick forested vegetation on steep undulating slopes, grazing land and scattered dwelling houses. The closest dwelling to the development site is approximately 960m to the south.

 

Locality Plan

 

Description of Proposal

The proposed development includes the construction of an outdoor target shooting range in a cleared gully located within the development site. The proposal includes:

·           A building containing 20 pistol shooting bays, 5 rifle shooting bays, a meeting room, storage room and toilet.

·           A 25m, 50m and 100m target shooting range containing bullet catchment traps and earth mounds behind the targets and a sequence of timber rails located between the targets and the shooting bays which are designed to restrict the shooters vision of the ground.

·           Adjustable timber eyebrow baffles in each shooting bay to restrict the shooters ability to shoot above the bullet catchment traps.

·           Excavation of diversion drains around the range area to restrict stormwater flows entering the range area.

·           Use of the range three days per week between:

Ø  10am-5pm on Saturdays (max 20 attendees)

Ø  10am-2pm on Tuesdays (6 attendees)

Ø  10am-4pm on Wednesdays (10 attendees)

It is proposed to use the range on other days of the week only when the range cannot be used on the nominated days due to weather conditions.

·           Car parking bays.

·           Access off Morans Road over Lots 263 and 264 DP 755549.

·           Erect convex mirrors on Morans Road and reduce speed limit to 20km/h to improve road safety.

 

The plans and documentation submitted by the applicant as part of this development application have been included within attachment 1.

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory with regards to the relevant sections of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as follows:

 

Section 5A  - Significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats

 

This section requires Council to be satisfied that the proposed development will not result in any significant effects on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats and provides a range of matters to be considered when determining the significance of any impacts.

A Flora and Fauna Report prepared by a suitably qualified person was submitted with the development application. No threated or endangered flora species were detected or are considered likely to occur within 100m of the proposed shooting range. Furthermore, the shooting range is to be located within a cleared area historically used for logging and agriculture; meaning there will be negligible disturbance to flora species as part of the proposal.

Threatened fauna species were not recorded on site by the author of the Flora and Fauna Report. However; assessment was made on the potential impacts of the proposed development on the 13 threatened fauna species recorded with 10km of the proposed shooting range.

Due to the mitigation methods included within the recommended conditions of consent, which will ameliorate potential lead impacts on fauna species, and that the proposal will not result in any significant disturbance to vegetation on site; the main consideration with regards to impacts on local fauna species as a result of the development is noise from gunfire within the proposed shooting range.

The area within 100m of the proposed shooting range does not contain suitable breeding habitat for the known or likely to occur threatened species within the locality. However, it does contain foraging habitat for 6 of the recorded threatened species. All of these species are nocturnal except for the Glossy Black Cockatoo, meaning they are unlikely to be impacted by the daylight use of the proposed shooting range. Given the low density of feed trees within 100m of the shooting range, foraging activity by Glossy Black Cockatoos is likely to be minimal in that area.

The submitted Flora and Fauna Report states that many fauna species are known to become habituated to noise sources; that is, the animal investigates the noise and determines that it is not a threat. This is reaffirmed in a Species Impact Statement (SIS) prepared for the shooting range approved off Scotts Head Road in 2004. In that SIS (which received concurrence from the Department of Environment & Conservation), it was concluded that habituation to gun fire noise was a key reason why it was not considered that the shooting range would have any significant impacts on the recorded threatened species. These included many of the species likely to occur on the subject site, including the Glossy Black Cockatoo. Other factors in this determination was the proximity of habitat, topography of the land and the infrequency of shooting activity. Given the potential habitat for threated fauna species is at a greater distance than that identified in the SIS, the topography of the subject site is more favourable with regards to noise compared to the Scotts Head range and the conditioned infrequent use of the proposed shooting range; it is not considered that the proposal will have any greater effects on threatened species than that identified in the SIS.

As part of the above mentioned SIS, short term studies were commissioned to gather information on the occurrence of fauna in the vicinity of operational shooting ranges in Wingham, Kempsey and Dairyville to support the justification of fauna habituation to gun fire noise. A number of the threatened fauna species that could occur at the subject site were recorded at the shooting ranges which had been operational for significant periods of time. It was also noted that Glossy Black Cockatoos had been observed at the former Scotts Head shooting range even when firearms were being discharged, which further reaffirmed their ability to habituate to noise. Furthermore, after commencement of use of the Scotts Head shooting range, an investigation was undertaken to detect the presence of Yellow Bellied Gliders and Squirrel Gliders which were found to still be occupying the site.

Having regard to the above, it is considered that sufficient information is available to satisfy Council that the proposed development will not be contrary to the matters for consideration outlined in this section subject to the recommended conditions of consent. As such, it is not considered that the proposal will have any significant effects on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats.

Section 79BA - Consultation and development consent—certain bush fire prone land

 

Due to the intermittent use of the development it is considered that ensuring the development is not used on high risk fire days and the provision of sufficient emergency evacuation measures, property access from Morans Road, defendable space, water supply and communication; will ensure the development is consistent with the provisions of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006. As such, conditions addressing the above matters have been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Section 79C (1) - Evaluation

 

In determining a development application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters:

 

(a) the provisions of

 

(i) any environmental planning instruments

 

·           The Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010 (NLEP 2010)

 

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant clauses of the NLEP 2010 as follows:

 

Clause

Complies

Comments

2.3 - Zone objectives and land use table

Yes

The development site is within the RU2 Rural Landscape zone.

The proposed shooting range is classified as a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) under the NLEP 2010 and is permissible with development consent within the RU2 Rural Landscape zone.

The proposed shooting range is not considered to be contrary with the objectives of the zone as follows:

•        Objective: To encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base.

Comment: The location of the range is located within a small cleared gully which is isolated by thick vegetation and the topography of the land. Having regard to this and the recommended conditions of consent which will mitigate any off site impacts; it is not considered that the proposal will discourage primary industry production.

 

•        Objective: To maintain the rural landscape character of the land.

Comment: Having regard to the scale of the works associated with the development and their location, it is not considered that the proposal will have a significant impact on the existing rural landscape character of the land.

 

•        Objective: To provide for a range of compatible land uses, including extensive agriculture.

Comment: Surrounding land uses consist of agriculture and residential accommodation. Having regard to the separation of the development from these surrounding land uses and the recommended conditions of consent (discussed later in this report), it is not considered that the proposed development will result in any adverse impacts that would render the proposed use incompatible with surrounding land uses.

•        Objective: To control development which could have an adverse impact on the Council’s urban water supply.

Comment: The development site is located on the fringe of Councils drinking water catchment. Potential contamination of ground/surface water has been addressed later in this report. Given that suitable controls have been included within the recommended conditions of consent to ensure the proposed development will not have an adverse impact on Councils urban water supply, the proposal will be consistent with this objective.

5.9AA - Trees or vegetation not prescribed by a development control plan

Yes

The Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (NDCP) is the only Development Control Plan applicable to the proposed development. The NDCP does not prescribe for the purposes of clause 5.9 any tree or other vegetation. As such, development consent is not required for the removal of any trees associated with the development.

7.3 – Flood Planning

Yes

The location of the proposed shooting range is within a gully which has a steep yet heavily vegetated 8ha catchment. As such, the location of the development site on the gully floor is considered to be below the flood planning level (FPL).

 

Given the width and topography of the gully floor on which the range is to be located, there is no defined flow path for existing surface water flows. However, it is proposed to redirect surface water flows around the shooting range via excavated swale drains to ensure surface water does not enter the shooting range or impact on the proposed buildings. Having regard to the nature of the catchment it is considered that such a concept is feasible. A condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the applicant to provide detailed stormwater management plans prepared by a Hydrological Engineer or other suitably qualified person to Council for approval prior to the commencement of works. The plans would need to demonstrate that the drainage measures are designed to accommodate FPL flows and include measures to ensure the works will not result in adverse erosion and sedimentation impacts.

 

The applicant has also advised Council that the shooting range will not be used when it is raining; meaning no one will be at the facility during a flood event. A condition restricting the use of the facility during rain events has been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Having regard to the above, the proposed development is consistent with this clause because:

•        The works required as part of the recommended conditions of consent and the use of the range will ensure it is not incompatible with the flood hazard of the land.

•        It will not adversely affect flood behaviour in a manner which would increase flood affection of other development or properties.

•        While the access way does traverse a gully/floodplain with a large catchment area, restricting the use of the facility during rain events and redirecting water around the range is considered to be an appropriate measure to manage the risk of life from a flood event.

•        The conditioned stormwater management plan will ensure the development will not adversely affect the environment.

•        It is not likely to result in unsustainable social or economic costs to the community as a consequence of flooding.

7.4 - Public utility infrastructure

Yes

It is not considered that there is any essential public utility infrastructure required for the development.

7.6 - Earthworks

Yes

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposed/conditioned earthworks are considered to be consistent with the matters outlined in this clause because:

•        The proposed redirection of flows around the range will not adversely affect existing drainage patterns or soil stability.

•        They will not adversely affect the future use of the land due to their location and scale.

•        The existing site is not considered to be contaminated, with all excavated material to be used on site suitable for the proposed use.

•        They will not affect the existing amenity of adjoining properties.

•        A condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring any excess fill to be disposed of at a licensed facility; with any imported fill to be certified as virgin excavated natural material (VENM) prior to being brought onto the development site.

•        Having regard to the modified nature of the site and its location, the disturbance of relics is considered to be unlikely.

•        Appropriate measures will be in place to ensure there will be no adverse impacts on any watercourse, drinking water catchment or environmentally sensitive area resulting from the proposed earthworks.

 

·           State Environmental Planning Policies

 

The proposed development is assessed against the relevant State Environmental Planning Policies in the following table:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy

Complies

Comments

SEPP 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

Yes

A flora and fauna report prepared by a person with appropriate qualifications and experience in biological science and fauna survey and management was submitted with the development application. Having regard to the findings of the report the site is not considered to be core koala habitat as defined by this policy. As such, in accordance with clause 8, Council is not prevented by this policy from granting consent to the development application.

SEPP 55 - Remediation of Land

Yes

Having regard to the information submitted by the applicant regarding the historical use of the site, inspection of the site, and review of Councils records; the development site is not considered to be contaminated because there are no known previous uses or activities on the site that would have resulted in any contamination of the land.

SEPP 62 - Sustainable Aquaculture

Yes

It is not considered that the proposed development will result in any adverse effects on oyster aquaculture development or a priority oyster aquaculture area because of the sites location from any of these areas and subject to the inclusion of the recommended conditions of consent.

SEPP – (Rural Lands) 2008

Yes

For the reasons outlined throughout this report, it is not considered that the proposal will contradict any of the Rural Planning Principles outlined in clause 7 of the SEPP.

 

(ii) any draft environmental planning instrument

 

There are no draft environmental planning instruments applicable to the proposed development.

 

(iii) any development control plan (DCP)

 

·           Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (DCP)

 

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant clauses of the DCP as follows:

 

NAMBUCCA DCP 2010

Complies

Comments

Notification and advertising (Part A)

Yes

The application was notified and advertised in accordance with Part A of the DCP. 54 submissions were received and are addressed later in this report.

Environmental context (Part A)

Yes

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent and as assessed throughout this report, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under clause A5.0.

Car Parking and Traffic (Part C)

Yes

The DCP does not set parking requirements for the proposed development as they are to be justified at DA stage. The applicant proposes to provide room for 22 car parks on site for the development. Given that the maximum number of people on site at any one time is 20 (recommended condition of consent), it is considered that sufficient car parking will be available on site for the proposal.

The existing vehicular entrance to the site at the end of Morans Road appears to cross sections of Lot 132 DP 755549. Because no legal right of access exists across this section of land (owner’s consent not provided), a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the entrance to the development site to be relocated so that vehicular access is obtained directly from Morans Road.

Furthermore, a condition has also been included to ensure internal access is constructed to comply with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.

Sediment and erosion control (Part D)

Yes

Conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent that will ensure adequate erosion and sedimentation devices which are consistent with Part D of the DCP are installed prior to the commencement of works and maintained for the life of the development.

Rural and environmental development (Part F)

Yes

Based on the level of noise impacts outlined in the submitted acoustic reports and the levels experienced by the assessing officer during the testing (addressed later in this report), it is considered that there is a sufficient buffer in place between the development site and surrounding residential land uses (only one dwelling within 1km).

It was originally considered that the proposed development was located within 40m of a watercourse. As such, the application was referred to the NSW Department of Primary Industries - Water (DPI) for general terms of approval in accordance with section 91 of the act. DPI responded by stating that despite the topographic map of the site, no feature that could be described as a river exists on the site.

Having regard to this advice, it is not considered that the proposed development will be located within any nominated buffer to sensitive natural resources.

Waste Minimisation and Management (Part N)

Yes

Conditions have been recommended to be included within the consent regarding the management of waste during construction and operation of the development which will ensure the development will comply with this part.

 

(iiia) Any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F.

 

There are no planning agreements applying to the subject site.

 

(iv) Any Matters prescribed by the Regulation

 

There are no matters prescribed by the regulation. 

 

(v) Any coastal zone management plan

 

The Coastal Zone Management Plan for the Nambucca Shire Coastline does not apply to the subject site.

 

(b)        The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality.

 

Context and Setting

Given the location of the proposed shooting range will be screened from the surrounding area by the topography of the land and thick vegetation, it is not considered that it will result in any significant impacts on the existing rural character of the area. While there are a range of potential environmental and social impacts resulting from the development, it is considered that the measures incorporated into the recommended conditions of consent can adequately mitigate these potential impacts which are addressed below.

 

Access, Transport and Traffic

Access to the development site is via an entrance off the end of Morans Road, which connects to Missabotti Road.

 

The traffic which will be generated by the proposed development will lift the classification of Morans Road to a Class 4c which caters for traffic movements in the range of 10 – 50 traffic movements a day.

 

A Class 4c road provides access to low use areas and has a minimum traffic lane width of 3m + (2 x 1.5m shoulders) = minimum carriageway width of 6m, in flat terrain where the minimum meeting sight distance is 180m. Where sight distance is less than 180m two traffic lanes are required.

 

The existing condition of Morans Road is well below the above standard. In this regard, it is not considered appropriate that the proposed development be approved without any road upgrades being undertaken to improve road safety as it will result in an increase in the number of vehicles using the road.

 

Given the condition of the existing road, the level of traffic generated by the proposed development and its intermittent use; it is not considered reasonable to require the applicant to upgrade the full length of Morans Road to comply with the above standard. Rather, it is considered reasonable to require the applicant to widen blind crests and corners to allow two way traffic where sight distance to oncoming vehicles is less than 180m. Furthermore, it is also recommended that passing bays at minimum 200m intervals be provided on Morans Road to facilitate appropriate clearances for vehicles to pass as well as guide posts on Morans Road and signage at the approaches to the bridge. Conditions requiring these works have been included within the recommended conditions of consent. It is considered that with the implementation of these conditions, road safety on Morans Road will not be adversely impacted by the proposal.

 

The applicant has suggested as part of the development application that in order to reduce impacts on road safety the following measures should be implemented instead of undertaking any road upgrades:

·          Reduce the speed limit on Morans Road to 20km/h.

·          No passing be permitted on the bridge.

·          Convex mirrors be erected on blind corners to increase vision.

 

While it has been conditioned that signage and line marking be installed to restrict passing on the bridge; the proposed reduction in speed limit and convex mirrors cannot be supported for the following reasons:

 

·           Default speed limits in NSW, which are statutory speed limits that apply in the absence of speed limit signage, is 100km/h in rural areas.  Speed limits are introduced at ‘risk locations’ where factors such as crash history, traffic volumes and frequency of access points are considered. Given 20km/h is not a recognised speed limit in NSW and that a such a reduction in speed limit cannot be introduced where there is little likelihood of compliance; a reduced speed limit cannot be supported.

 

·           The use of traffic mirrors are not considered to be an adequate means of traffic management as they offer a distorted view of on ground conditions and due to variable driving conditions, will not be visible at all times. Furthermore, Council may be legally liable for a negligence claim where a person has been injured through reliance on a convex mirror installed on a road under its care.

 

After review of Councils GIS, it appears that the existing site entrance off Morans Road relies on the adjoining property (Lot 132 DP 755549) for access. Furthermore, it is also apparent that sections of Morans Road are located within Lots 42 & 43 DP 755549. There are no easements for access over any of these allotments. The developments reliance on these sections of road is not considered to be lawful, which could result in a liability for Council should reliance on them for access to the development be approved.

 

As such, conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the Morans Road pavement to be surveyed by a registered surveyor, with any sections not located within the road reserve to either be relocated or acquired at the applicant’s expense prior to the commencement of use.

 

Heritage

In accordance with the Due Diligence Code of Practice, there are no relevant confirmed site records or other associated landscape feature information on AHIMS, no other sources of information of which a person is already aware, and the development will not impact on any landscape features that are likely to indicate the presence of Aboriginal objects due to the disturbed nature of the development site. As such, a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring works to proceed with caution.

 

Water & Soils

As addressed earlier in this report, it is proposed to redirect surface water flows around the shooting range via excavated swale drains to ensure surface water does not enter the shooting range or impact on the proposed buildings. Conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent ensuring the proposed drainage system will not result in water flows entering the shooting range and will not result in adverse erosion or sedimentation impacts.

 

Contamination

Lead contamination occurs at target shooting ranges as a result of spent lead bullets corroding once coming into contact with soil. While lead is insoluble in pure water, it is relatively soluble in the soil environment (predominantly those with pH levels outside 6.5-8.5). When the corroding lead is dissolved into the soil it can become mobile through surface and subsurface water flows, as well as airborne particles due to wind action and ground disturbing activities of contaminated soil. Soil lead concentrations greater than 10,000mg/kg of soil are commonly reported at shooting ranges around the world. Such concentrations greatly exceed the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) guideline limit of 300mg/kg before further investigation is required.

 

At target shooting ranges, the majority of lead projectiles are concentrated in the areas surrounding the targets. The proposed development includes the provision of weather proof bullet entrapment devices which are to be located behind the targets. These devices are designed so that bullets pass through the targets and become trapped within the devices in a bed of sand. The applicant proposes to regularly remove/replace the sand within the devices.

 

It is also proposed to install adjustable eye brow baffles which restrict the shooter from shooting above the bullet entrapment devices, ground level timber baffles which restrict the shooters view of the ground, as well as a stop butt mound. Please refer to the plans and documentation within attachment 1 for illustrations of proposed bullet entrapment devices and baffles.

 

Due to the potential contamination of the site and surrounding environment that may result from the proposed shooting range, it is considered that ensuring sufficient measures are in place to enable capture of all bullets shot at the range without them coming into contact with soil is essential as part of any development consent. It is considered that such measures will ensure contamination is unlikely to occur and an appropriate application of the precautionary principle.

 

It is to be noted that the applicant’s intent in providing the above mentioned devices is to ensure that all lead is captured and removed from the site. However, these devices on their own are considered to be inadequate because the ground baffles (consisting of a series of timber beams progressing up the range to the targets) will still permit spent bullets to come into contact with the ground. Furthermore, the proposed measures do not restrict shooting to the sides of the bullet entrapment devices.

 

As such, in addition to the proposed measures, it is recommended that side baffles are installed within each shooting bay to restrict the shooters ability to shoot beside the bullet entrapment devices. It is also recommended that the ground surface of the range be covered with a synthetic covering. This will not only ensure bullets will not come into contact with soil, but will enable stray bullets to be easily identified for collection and disposal. Details of the proposed synthetic covering will be required to be submitted to Council for approval prior to the commencement of works. They are to be prepared by a suitable qualified person and are to demonstrate that soil will not penetrate the cover, as well as providing storm water management measures and filtration devices to control flows within the range. Furthermore, conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the maintenance of the synthetic layer and ensuring that it is clear of stray bullets after each session.

 

As outlined earlier, the proposal includes the redirecting of upslope water around the shooting range. This will ensure surface water flows within the range will be from the surface of the range only. The connection of the drainage from the range surface to filtration devices and a sediment pond has also been conditioned. As a final measure to ensure lead contamination is not resulting from the development, a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring water and soil samples from the sediment pond to be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of use and every five years during operation. In the unlikely event lead contamination is detected in any samples, use of the site would need to cease until the extent of contamination is established and affected areas remediated.

 

While it is acknowledged that the majority of bullets shot at the range will end up in the bullet entrapment devices, it is considered that the above measures will ensure the development does not result in contamination of the site or surrounding area and will enable Council Officers to be easily satisfied of compliance during inspections.

 

Noise

An Acoustic Report (dated 30 December 2014) prepared by a suitably qualified person was submitted with the development application. The report was prepared in addition to the original report dated 26 June 2014 which was also submitted with the application. The new report was commissioned at the request of Council in order to assess the levels of noise at the closest dwellings to the south of the range in addition to the existing dwelling located at 132 Morans Road which was assessed as part of the original report. Both reports have been included within attachment 1.

 

Council staff were onsite to witness the acoustic testing on 19 December 2014. The testing consisted of 2 sessions of shooting so acoustic testing could be undertaken at both dwellings. 9 people participated during the first session and 8 during the second. During both sessions, each participant simultaneously shot 5 rounds each on four separate occasions.

 

Noise levels recorded at both dwellings were well below the limits set by the Industrial Noise Policy. This was also the case for the existing dwelling at 132 Morans Road which was tested as part of the original report. Having regard to the use of the site 3 days a week and the noise levels recorded, the proposal is also considered to be capable of complying with the EPA guidelines.

 

Because a maximum of 20 people will be shooting at the proposed range at any one time and only 9 guns were shot during the sound testing, consideration also needs to be given to any potential increase in noise levels.

 

For the noise of a gunshot to be made louder by an additional gun shot, the noises have to reach the receiver at the simultaneous moment. This means that the noises (gunshots) must not be separated by a period greater than a fraction of a second (milliseconds).

 

Having regard to the varying guns to be used and the different styles/methods of shooting that could be expected on the range (as witnessed during noise testing); it is considered highly unlikely that all 20 guns would be shot within a fraction of a second of each other. Having regards to this, it is considered the number and type of guns used during the testing period is appropriate as it provides a fair representation of the noise level with regards to the shooters timing of shots as well as the variety of guns which would be used during operation of the range. It is to be noted that each member owns their own guns. As such, any expectation that all 20 shooters would use the loudest guns at the same time is considered to be unrealistic due to cost, preference, ability, and licencing.

 

The noise levels recorded during the testing are as follows:

 

Location

Measured Operational Noise Level dB(A)

LAeq, 15min

Compliance Noise Limit dB(A)

LAeq, 15min

20-62 Morans Road (Dwelling 1)

35.7 (including additional 2 dB(A) for impulsive adjustment)

39

20-62 Morans Road (Dwelling 2)

30.6

39

132 Morans Road

32.1

39

 

It is to be noted that gun noise was not recorded at dwelling 2 or 132 Morans Road. Gun noise was audible at dwelling 1, however; the average gun noise recorded was below the compliance noise limit, even with the 2 dB(A) impulsive adjustment penalty. No gun shots were louder than wildlife recorded at dwelling 1 during the testing. It should also be noted that as a general rule of thumb, an increase in noise by 2dB is hardly perceivable.

 

Furthermore, even if the noise levels from the 9 guns shot were doubled, the addition of 3dB as per the below acoustic summing graph would still result in noise levels being below the 39dB noise limit.

 

Having regard to the above, it is not considered that the proposed development will result in any noise impacts on the closest dwellings in a manner which would be deemed as ‘offensive’ as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 or contrary to the noise limits set by the Industrial Noise Policy. To further ensure this, a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the rear and side elevations of the shooting bays to be fully enclosed prior to the commencement of use. This will result in a reduction of noise leaving the site by approximately 10dB. It is also considered that the minor levels of noise which will be experienced will be considerably lower at other dwellings within the locality due to their increased distance from the proposed shooting range.

 

A condition requiring the applicant to undertake noise monitoring at the commencement of operation to ensure compliance with the maximum levels has been included within the recommended conditions of consent. Failure to comply with the stipulated levels will require the applicant to modify the use of the range or incorporate further mitigation measures to ensure compliance. It is considered that compliance with the stipulated noise levels is feasible. For this reason, such a condition is considered to be appropriate.

 

Flora and Fauna

As outlined earlier in this report, it is not considered that the proposal will have any significant effects on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

Waste

Conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent regarding the management of construction and operational waste.

 

The proposed development included the use of two portable chemical toilets to service the development. It was proposed to dispose the effluent by emptying the portable 17 litre cassettes on a weekly basis at off site Council disposal facilities.

 

The use of removal cassettes from portable wastewater management systems can create inherent problems with proper disposal of wastewater. Furthermore, Council’s Plumbing and Drainage inspector has carried out a desktop site audit and has concluded that the site is suitable for an on-site sewerage management system so long as it is designed by a suitably qualified person in accordance with AS 1547:2012 - on site domestic wastewater management.

 

Given the location of the development site, the difficulty in ensuring effluent is disposed of in the correct manner and that the site is capable of supporting a permanent on-site sewerage management system; the proposed use of portable chemical toilets to service the development is not considered appropriate. This type of system is not considered suitable for the life of the proposed development. As such, a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring an application pursuant to the Local Government Act 1993 be made to Council for a system of sewage management and approval granted under section 68 prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

Bushfire

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposed development is considered to be consistent with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.

 

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

In order to prevent the unlikely event of someone unknowingly entering the shooting range (as well as  livestock) a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the range perimeter to be fenced with rural style wire fencing with warning signs placed every 20m advising the use of the site. A sign is also to be placed on the access road at the approach to the range. It has also been conditioned that no firearms or ammunition is stored on site.

 

Having regard to the above, it is not considered that the proposal will result in any adverse impacts on the natural or built environments or any adverse social or economic impacts on the locality.

 

(c)      the suitability of the site for the development

 

The proposed development is to be located within the base of a gully and will not be visible from the surrounding area. As outlined throughout this report, it is not considered that the proposal is contrary to any planning controls, with no adverse impacts resulting from the development subject to the inclusion of the recommended conditions of consent.

 

(d)      any submissions made in accordance with the Act or the regulations

 

54 public submissions were received during the notification of the development application. 52 oppose the proposal and 2 support it. Additionally, 2 petitions opposing the development were received by Council.

 

The following is a summary of matters raised in the submissions received:

 

Summary of Matters Raised in Submissions

Reporting Officers Comment

Council should reject outright DA2015/103 and honor their Mission Statement.

The application is required to be considered by Council under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the act). It is considered that assessment of the proposal in accordance with the act is consistent with Councils mission statement.

There has been no valid study submitted or seemingly any concern for the unique, endangered and rare flora and fauna on the property; including a large variety of birds. 

The impacts of the proposed development on flora and fauna have been addressed earlier in this report. As discussed, it is considered that the submitted information and other reputable source referenced provides adequate information to determine that the proposal will not result in any significant effects on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

Council should initiate and install, as procedure, a mandatory process of community consultation between developers and impacted residents of any proposed development.

Notification of development applications is undertaken in accordance with Part A of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010. The subject application was publicly notified in accordance with that part. There is no statutory requirement for developers to consult with the community during the development assessment process.

Council should immediately establish a moratorium on the approval of developments in the catchment of the Bowra dam and any catchments that supply water to the dam, that risk contaminating the rural and domestic water supply.

Any development that requires works to be undertaken has the potential to contaminate water supply. The determination of the acceptability of the potential risk is subject to consideration as part of the development assessment process which requires consideration of a proposal on a case by case basis.

The road surfaces of Bellingen Rd, Missabotti Rd and Morans Rd are sub-standard and poorly maintained, unable to cope with the burden of the extra traffic generated by the proposal. The applicants suggestions to mitigate impacts will result in costs to ratepayers and will be insufficient.

There are already people driving in a very hazardous manner along these roads and adding more traffic to them increases the chance of a serious accident. The intersection of Missabotti and Moran’s road is blind and on a bend in Missabotti road.

The condition of roads leading to the development site from Bowraville are considered to be adequate for the proposed development, except for Morans Road and its intersection with Missabotti Road. Conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent ensuring the applicant undertakes road upgrades to provide an appropriate standard of road to cater for the additional traffic volumes generated by the development prior to commencement.

The noise pollution and significant decrease in property values that accompany this development are unacceptable to the community.

The noise testing was not extensive enough as there were residences that did hear gunshot. You have to realise that we live in a valley and sound echoes around it.

The noise assessments were commissioned by the NVPC which brings doubt as to the impartiality of the assessor. We still find it strange that they would source an assessor from QLD instead of finding a local company. Did NVPC actually attempt to find anyone local or did they ‘know’ someone who would do the assessment for them?

If further testing is required we suggest they must commission two companies to carry out assessments simultaneously. One company chosen by them and the other chosen by the Council both at the expense of the NVPC.

As discussed earlier in this report, it is not considered that the noise emissions from the proposed development would be classified as offensive due to recorded/anticipated levels being below the maximum levels outlined within the NSW Industrial Noise Policy.

Council staff were on site during the noise testing and concur with the submitted report that weather conditions were acceptable for the undertaking of acoustic testing and the noise levels stated in the report are accurate.

It is considered that due to the low/negligible levels of noise recorded at the three closest dwellings to the range; it is not reasonable to request the applicant to undertake further testing at dwellings located at a greater distance from the range, nor is it appropriate to spend Council funds seeking further testing.

There are no effective measures that can be implemented to guarantee the prevention of lead contamination and consequently the rural and domestic water supply of the Nambucca shire.

No testing or information regarding soil pH of the site has been submitted. There is a scientifically established ideal pH range for shooting ranges and the soil at the site must be tested for compatibility. Acidic soils are renowned for dissolving metals like lead.

The Nambucca shires water supply is sourced from Missabotti via the Bowraville bore-fields. Any location of the development upstream from the bore-fields cannot be considered. If lead does get into the water table we will all be exposed to it. I don't feel that NVPC can guarantee no lead will get into the aquifers.  Lead leaches vertically and horizontally through the soil toward the water table. There needs to be hydraulic tests carried out to determine these factors.

As discussed earlier in this report, it is considered that sufficient measures can be implemented as part of any development consent which will ensure the development will not result in soil or water contamination.

The applicant did not submit soil test results for the site as it is proposed to capture all spent lead bullets and remove them from the site to ensure that lead contamination does not impact the locality. It is considered that this is achievable subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Gun ownership should be discouraged by all levels of government and better regulated, especially in these times of the growing awareness and prevalence of mental health issues.

The proposed use is a recognised sport and is permissible on the land under the NLEP 2010. Furthermore, it is not Councils role to regulate the use of guns as this is the role of the NSW Police Force Firearms Registry who has strict licencing/handling requirements for firearms.

I feel that my children are in danger from people attending the club and from the activity that will occur there.

 

Alcohol should be prohibited on site.

 

The safe storage and transportation of weapons and ammunition has not been properly addressed.

 

Guns and ammunition transported in private vehicles by an increasing Shooters Club membership with no restriction on local stop-offs i.e. supermarket, bank, Pub etc.

People who use the shooting range are required to abide by the requirements of the NSW Police Force Firearms Registry. This includes strict requirements regarding the handling/storage of weapons at the site and during transit. As such, the only danger in relation to firearms on the site are from unauthorised people entering the range area.

Conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the range to be fenced and signposted. Given this and the location of the site from surrounding uses, it is not considered that the public will be at risk from the firearms to be use on the site as part of the proposal.

The applicant has stated that alcohol will not be consumed by people using the range and weapons/ammunition will not be stored on site. This has been reinforced within the recommended conditions of consent.

Higher chance of fires due to the activities occurring at the site.

The proposed development will be located within a cleared/managed area, with all shots fired to remain within the range. As such, it is not considered that the proposal presents any adverse risk of bushfire.

Concern regarding the image it will create and the type of precedence it will set for the region. It is important to consider how this development will be perceived by others; it will generate interest, but is it the right type of interest for a Council that actively promotes the natural beauty and family friendly nature of the area.

The development site is not visible from the surrounding area; with conditions mitigating potential impacts such as contamination, noise and traffic to acceptable levels included within the recommended conditions of consent.

The proposed removal of effluent from site is unsuitable, it requires being transported by a licensed operator not a committee member and we feel that as a rate payer we do not want to pay for the disposal of effluent from the site to the disposal site in Macksville.

A condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring an onsite system of sewerage management to be installed prior to the commencement of use. As such, no effluent will be disposed of offsite.

The large majority of “local residents” that the proposal says will benefit from this do not live in the area.

This is not a relevant consideration as part of the development assessment process as it is the suitability of the development for the site which is of concern.

The NVPC’s former site at Gumma is currently listed as polluted, it was never correctly maintained and is yet to be cleaned up or even properly assessed. Their track record is very poor and approval of the proposal would be irresponsible of council.

Council granted approval for a shooting range at Gumma in the 1980’s. As part of that development consent, there were no measures required to be implemented to mitigate lead contamination. As a result, the range was used without any consideration of potential lead contamination.

The proposed development includes the capture of spent lead bullets and removal from site without coming into contact with soil. This is considered feasible subject to the recommended conditions of consent. Furthermore, the measures included within the recommended conditions will make it easier to identify any noncompliances during regulatory inspections.

From statements made by the applicant in local media, it is assumed that funds to remediate the Gumma site will be forthcoming subject to Council approval of the subject DA. Has this not put Council in a compromised position of having to approve the DA in order to have the Gumma site remediated?

The source of funds for the applicant to remediate the former Gumma range is unknown to Council and not relevant to the subject application.

There is already a well-equipped shooting range at Scotts Heads that is underutilised and would welcome the members of the NVPC.

Council has no power to force people to use the Scotts Head shooting range and is required to assess the application on its merits. If it is deemed that the development is suitable for the site, the fact that there is an existing range within the shire is not a valid reason for refusal.

There will be an increase in dust pollution.

Having regard to the anticipated traffic generated by the proposal, it is not considered that it will significantly increase dust generation on local roads than what would already occur.

Bushfire emergency access/evacuation and lack of water storage to allow for fire protection. Will the NSW Sports and Recreation require building insurance that covers bushfires. How will the applicant stop a fire that starts on site or alert the Rural Fire Service without sufficient fire fighting facilities or reliable communication out of the valley.

Conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent ensuring the development will comply with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 which includes the provision of communication and a water supply. Insurance is not relevant to the proposed development.

How will enforcement on any restrictions be undertaken.

The applicant will be required to maintain the range and submit regular monitoring results in accordance with the recommended conditions of consent. Council staff will make regular inspections of the site and will respond to any complaints made by members of the public.

With regards to noise complaints, if Council deem it to be required; the applicant will be required to undertake noise monitoring at their expense and provide reports to Council.

The impact of flooding on the development.

As discussed earlier in this report, a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the applicant to provide detailed stormwater management plans prepared by a Hydrological Engineer or other suitably qualified person to Council for approval prior to the commencement of works. The plans would need to demonstrate that the drainage measures are designed to accommodate flood planning level flows and include measures to ensure the works will not result in adverse erosion and sedimentation impacts. Having regard to this and that the range will not be used during rain events, it is not considered that the range or people using the site will be impacted by flood waters.

The documentation submitted is inadequate and the development application form has been incorrectly completed.

It is considered that there is sufficient information submitted to determine that the proposed development will not result in any adverse impacts on the natural, social or economic environments of the locality subject to the implementation of the recommended conditions of consent. Having regard to this, it is not considered reasonable to require the applicant to spend considerable amounts of money on further plans and reports which can be prepared post consent prior to the commencement of works.

Having regard to the development application form, there are sections of the form not required to be completed which has made some people objecting to the development confused. Sections of the statement of environmental effects made generalised statements which, because the potential impacts have been easily identifiable by the assessing officer and those who have lodged submissions, request for clarification is not considered warranted.

It is not considered that the submitted development application form precludes Council granting development consent.

As part of the previous development application (DA2014/158) Council requested a number of items to be submitted for assessment which have not been submitted by the applicant.

Councils letter dated 22 January 2015 requested information regarding flora and fauna, bushfire, toilet facilities, site plan, the payment of fees, and the potential impacts of lead and stormwater flows/flooding.

The application as submitted contains sufficient information for Council to be satisfied (subject to conditions) that matters related to lead, stormwater flows/flooding, bushfire, and toilet facilities can be managed through appropriate measures professionally designed and implemented post development consent.

It is to be noted that as part of the subject development application, it is proposed to capture all bullets before coming into contact with soil rather than rely solely on earth mounds as previously proposed. Furthermore, the applicant has stated that use of the range will not occur during forecast rain events; meaning evacuation during a flood is highly unlikely. Given that the range area can be designed so as not to be impacted by flood waters and that evacuation through the floodwaters of a large catchment area (which the range area will not be subjected to) will no longer be required; it is considered appropriate to condition that detailed designs of the proposed hydrological works be submitted prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

The application was accompanied with the requested fees and a site plan adequately illustrating the location of the development; while discussed earlier in this report, Council has access to sufficient information to determine that the development will not result in significant effects on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

No allowance for a person with a disability has been put forward.  All clubs, halls, recreational venues should have facilities for disabled persons.  

The development is considered to be capable of providing disability access without resulting in any significant design changes. This is all that needs to be considered as part of the development application as disability access requirements are triggered as part of the construction certificate when compliance with the Building Code of Australia is required to be demonstrated.

The majority of residents near & far are opposed to this development and many Valley residents have signed a petition to add their voices to our opposition.

All submissions received have been considered during the assessment of this development application. The number of objections alone is not a valid reason for refusal of the application.

People will be deterred from hiring the Missabotti Community Centre if they can hear gun fire, which will result in a loss of revenue for the council owned building.

It is not considered that there will be any significant increase in noise levels experienced at the hall.

The development seems incredibly under costed; the resulting structure would have to be substandard.

The construction of the proposed building will be required to comply with the Building Code of Australia which will be assessed as part of the construction certificate application, with mandatory inspections undertaken during construction as per any other building subject to a development application.

Hours of operation and the scale of the proposal is excessive. We would like to know what the operating hours of the shooting range are.

This is very confusing they say that hours will be Tuesday   10am    2pm

Wednesday 10am   4pm

Saturday   10am    5pm

Other days this would depend on weather conditions of the previous nominated days. What does that mean.

The proposed hours of operation are as what is stated to the left. The applicant also proposes to use the range on other days if the weather conditions are not favourable for use on the nominated days.

 

It is considered that the proposed flexible arrangement will impede effective regulatory compliance by Council officers during operation of the development with regards to obtaining sufficient evidence in relation to what days it had been in use.

 

As such, a condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent restricting the use of the development to no more than the proposed hours of operation.

With a membership of 37 and the intent of permitting the air cadets to use the range, it appears that there is intent to increase the usage of the range that what is proposed. It is therefore still unclear as to the exact proposed days and hours of operation of the facility over time. How many additional visitors will there be and will there be a cap placed on membership numbers?

It is not considered that the pistol club increasing its membership is an issue because conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent regarding the maximum number of people who can use the range per day and the maximum number of days/hours per week the range can be used. Any alteration to these restrictions would require further development consent from Council.

As advised by the applicant, not all members attend each day the shooting range is open.

The proposal is designated development under schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 because it is a chemical storage facility.

The proposed development is defined as a recreational facility which is not listed in schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. Storage of waste from the development prior to removal from site is an ancillary component and cannot be classified as a form of designated development.

Impacts on Cultural Heritage as it is disrespectful to the local indigenous community to be using this land in this manner will cause conflict from local indigenous people. The Local Aboriginal Land Council was not consulted.

There are no known Aboriginal objects or places within proximity of the development site and the proposal is not considered to be contrary to the Due Diligence Code of Practice. The Bowraville and Nambucca Local Aboriginal Land Councils were notified of the proposed development with no submissions received.

It is inappropriate to locate a shooting facility within a quiet rural location where only intermittent agricultural and forestry activities otherwise occur.

The suitability of the site has been assessed as satisfactory throughout this report.

It is important that in the event of the applicant closing the facility or ceasing activities, a process and sufficient funds are agreed at DA stage for the clean up and restoration of the site. Particularly important will be removal of spent and unexploded ammunition.

Regular removal of spent bullets from the site during and post operation have been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

If Council is minded to approve the application appropriate S.94 contributions for road and Missabotti community facilities (e.g. hall, bush fire brigade etc) should be sought.

There are no section 94 contribution plans applicable to the proposed development.

The fact that Council has allowed the submission of a new DA to be considered for the shooting range is totally irresponsible.

Everyone has the right to lodge a development application. It is Councils role to assess any development application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

We see no legitimate reason to reject the application and there are several advantages in locating it at Missabotti. The Nambucca Valley Pistol Club has always had a very credible record of activity at their Gumma site, where they have been for over 30 years. During this time, there have been no complaints and houses of considerable value have continued to be built in the area.

Noted.

The NVPC cannot afford to complete this project. Do they also have the money to ensure their last establishment is cleaned of lead.

The financial position of the applicant is not a relevant matter for consideration as part of the assessment of the development application.

Appropriate conditions mitigating impacts should be included within any consent.

Such conditions have been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

As the club is an owner builder a licence is required from the department of fair trading. Are the club applying for a construction certificate or complying development certificate or can they just build and no one is accountable.

Whether or not the applicant has an owners builders licence is not relevant to the assessment of the development application. The applicant has not applied to Council for a construction certificate; however, one will be required to be obtained prior to the commencement of works (conditioned).

 

(e)      the public interest

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent and as assessed throughout this report, it is not considered that the proposal is contrary to the public interest because it will not result in any significant impacts on the natural, social, or economic environments.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

·           Public consultation in accordance with Part A of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010.

 

·           NSW Department of Primary Industries: Water – The application was referred to the NSW Department of Primary Industries: Water (DPI) for general terms of approval in accordance with section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 because it was considered that the development was integrated development. DPI responded by stating that despite the topographic map of the site, no feature that could be described as a river exists on the site. For that reason, DPI believes that for the purposes of the Water Management Act 2000, a controlled activity approval is not required. DPI’s response has been included within attachment 3.

 

·           NSW Police – The NSW Police Force have previously advised Council that members from the Firearms Registry (ranges section) have attended the site; however, will not give their approval until development consent has been granted. As such, a deferred commencement condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring approval from the NSW Police Force Firearms Registry (ranges section). This will ensure the range is not used without the required licencing. The NSW Police Forces response has been included within attachment 4.

 

·           NSW Environment Protection Authority – The development application was referred to the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) for advice regarding any potential methods that could be implemented to ensure that lead does not escape from the site. The EPA’s response has been included with attachment 5, with measures regarding containment of potential contamination addressed earlier in this report.

 

·           Engineering - Council’s Manager of Technical Services (MTS) provided comments with regards to the sufficiency of road access to the development site which have been incorporated into the body of this report.  The MTS has no objections to the proposed development subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

 

·           Health and Building - Council’s Senior Health and Building Surveyor (SHBS) provided comments with regards to the disposal of effluent which have been incorporated into the body of this report. The SHBS has no objections to the proposed development subject to the recommended conditions of consent.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

As outlined above, it is not considered that the proposal will result in any adverse impacts on the natural environment subject to the recommended conditions being incorporated into any development consent.

 

Social

As outlined above, it is not considered that the proposal will result in any adverse social impacts on the locality subject to the recommended conditions being incorporated into any development consent.

 

Economic

Given the mitigation measures which can be implemented to ensure that the proposal will not have any adverse impacts on the natural, social or built environments; it is not considered that the proposal will have any significant economic impacts.

 

Risk

Subject to the implementation of the recommended conditions of consent, it is considered that any risk posed by the development can be appropriately managed.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Nil.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

N/A

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

N/A

 

Attachments:

1

31076/2015 - Attachment 1 - Documentation Lodged with Development Application

 

2

31077/2015 - Attachment 3 - Response from DPI-Water

 

3

31079/2015 - Attachment 4 - NSW Police Response

 

4

31080/2015 - Attachment 5 - EPA Response

 

5

33453/2015 - Attachment 7 - Late Submission received on 21.10.15

 

6

33475/2015 - Attachment 2 - Recommended conditions of consent

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 


















































































Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 


 

Community Sentiment

 

The Sentiment of the Missabotti Community is overwhelmingly opposed to the development  of this shooting range (DA 2015/103). The attached Community Sentiment Map demonstrates this conclusively.

We have used the radial distance of 2.5km from the proposed site and termed it the primary impact zone as shots were heard by residents living at this distance from the proposed shooting range site during the sound assessment tests.

 The assessment did not consider the complex topography of the area. The hills and ridges act as a natural amphitheatre and reflect noise back across the valley towards residences .

Within a 2.5km radius of the proposed site there are, to our estimates, 32 properties with 35 residences.

30 of the 32 properties impacted in this zone have documented their opposition to this proposed shooting range by either lodging a submission of objection and/or signing the petition or signalling their intention to do so. 2 properties were not contacted due to their personal circumstances.

NONE of the 30 properties contacted support the shooting range.

70% of the 32 properties have at least one senior citizen in residence. Many are long term residents , having resided in Missabotti for over 30 years.

They have raised families here.

Many have grand children now

Some properties have 3 generations in residence.

 Council has before it conclusive documented community sentiment that opposes this development.

There are 54 submissions . 52 opposing and 2 supporting.

In addition to this there have been approximately 300 paper petition signatures and 542 online petition signatures lodged.

This is around 900 people opposing this development and ONLY 2 supporting it.

We believe it is the Councillors responsibility to represent our community and REJECT this development outright. The residents of Missabotti do not want this ill-conceived and inappropriate development in our valley

EVERY impact of this proposed development is NEGATIVE. There is not ONE positive aspect.. It does not benefit the community or valley of Missabotti in any way.

   It threatens to devalue our properties , devastate our environment  and clash with the existing amenity of Missabotti.

 

The people of Missabotti seek your support by voting to reject  DA 2015/103 next Thursday.

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Proposed Outdoor Target Shooting Range

 

Attachment 2 – Recommended Conditions of Consent

 

DEFERRED COMMENCEMENT CONDITIONS

 

Deferred Commencement Consent

 

1.         This consent will not operate unless within 12 months from the date of this notice of determination, evidence is provided to the satisfaction of Council that the following matters have been resolved:

i.   Approval is obtained from the NSW Police Force Firearms Registry (Ranges Section).

 

This consent will operate, subject to the following conditions, upon satisfactory compliance with the deferred commencement condition. Written confirmation from Council, of compliance, is required.

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS CONSENT

 

Development is to be in accordance with approved plans

 

2.       The development is to be implemented in accordance with the plans endorsed with the Council stamp, dated TBC, and set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

 

Plan Description

Sheet/Dwg No

Prepared by

Dated

Floor Plan

1

Nambucca Valley Pistol Club

Undated

Elevations

2

Nambucca Valley Pistol Club

Undated

Lead Catchment Bay

3

Nambucca Valley Pistol Club

Undated

Water Control Plan

4

Nambucca Valley Pistol Club

Undated

Site Plan

5

Nambucca Valley Pistol Club

Undated

Line of Sight

DA-01

Nambucca Valley Pistol Club

Undated

Locality Plan

DA-02

Midcoast Building and Environmental

Undated

 

In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this development consent and the plans referred to above, the conditions of this development consent prevail.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE FOR BUILDING WORKS

 

Storm Water Management Plans

 

3.       Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, detailed plans of the proposed diversion drains around the perimeter of the range are to be submitted to and approved by Council. The plans are to be prepared by a suitably qualified Hydrological Engineer and are to be designed to accommodate flows/velocity of water from the upstream catchment so as to exclude outside flows from entering the range area during a 1:100 ARI flood event. Raising the range level is permitted to assist achieve compliance with this condition.

 

The plans are to demonstrate that the range surface is designed to ensure surface flows are directed to a filtration device(s) and sediment pond prior to coming into contact with outside flows. Specifications of filtration devices must be submitted to Council with the plans. Consideration must be given to the impacts of the synthetic range cover (which is to be provided as part of this consent) in the preparation of the above plans.

 

          Plans are also to be submitted illustrating the soil back stops and lead catchment bays with concrete bunding. Each bund is to have its own drainage collection well/filtration device which is to treat water prior to entering the range area.

 

Water sensitive design measures are to be incorporated to mitigate erosion and sedimentation impacts. Details are to be provided as part of the above plans.

 

 

 

 

Operate a System of Sewage Management

 

4.       Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, an approval under section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 to operate a system of sewage management to service the development shall be obtained from Council.

The application must be accompanied by a report prepared by a suitably qualified professional with demonstrated experience in effluent disposal matters, which addresses the site specific design of sewage management.

 

Access and facilities for persons with access disabilities

 

5.       The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate access and facilities for persons with access disabilities to and within the development in accordance with Disability (Access to premises – Building) Standards 2010, AS 1428.1 - Design for Access and Mobility and Part D3 of the Building Code of Australia.

Such plans and specifications must be approved as part of the Construction Certificate.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ANY WORKS COMMENCING

Construction Certificate

 

6.         The erection of the buildings the subject of this development consent MUST NOT be commenced until:

(a)     Detailed plans/specifications of the building have been endorsed with a Construction Certificate by:

(i)        the Council, or

(ii)        an accredited certifier, and

(b)     The person having the benefit of the development consent has:

(i)        Appointed a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) for the building work, and

(ii)       Notified Council of the appointment, and

(iii)        Notified the PCA that the person will carry out the building work as an owner-builder; or

Appointed a contractor for the building work who is the holder of a contractor licence if any residential building work is involved, notified the PCA of any such appointment, and notified the contractor of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work.

(c)      The person having the benefit of the development consent has given Council written notice, at least two days prior to work commencing on site, of the name and details of the PCA and the date construction work is proposed to commence.

 

Survey of the location of the existing road carriageway

 

7.       The location of the Morans Road carriageway and the site entrance in relation to the road reserve is to be determined by a registered surveyor. A survey plan showing the location is to be submitted to Council.

 

Where the road carriageway is not within the road reserve, a detailed plan (1:1000 scale) is to be submitted to Council showing the existing road formation and the existing fences and improvements in relation to the boundaries of the road reserve.

 

Works within the Road Reserve

 

8.       This development consent requires the road works set out in the table below to be undertaken on Morans Road. The work must be carried out in accordance with the standard specified in the column opposite the work. All works are to include the adjustment and/or relocation of services as necessary to the requirements of the appropriate service authorities.

 

Consent from Council must be obtained for all works within the road reserve pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. Three (3) copies of engineering construction plans must accompany the application for consent for works within the road reserve. Such plans are to be in accordance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standard.

 

Plans must be prepared by a qualified practising Civil Engineer. The Civil Engineer is to be a corporate member of the Institution of Engineers Australia or is to be eligible to become a corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field.

 

Work

Standard to be provided

Morans Road shall be widened locally at blind crests and horizontal curves where sight distance to oncoming vehicles is less than 180m.

 

Passing bays at minimum 200m intervals are to be provided along Morans Road.

 

The sections of the Morans Road pavement which are identified by a registered surveyor as not being located within the road reserve, either need to be relocated within the existing road reserve or acquired (at the applicant’s expense); unless other lawful means of access over the affected parts can be demonstrated.

The minimum width of blind crests and horizontal curves is to be:

·      6m with pavement depth of 150mm

Minimum Passing bay:

·  width 6m

·  length 20m

·  pavement depth of 150mm

Signage and line marking at the Morans Road bridge

Approaches are to be upgraded to provide give way restrictions allowing northbound vehicles priority and signage shall be installed in accordance with AS 1742.2-2009 Figure 4.12.

Guide posts are to be installed along Morans Road

In accordance with AS 1742.2-2009 Table 4.1.

 

Intersection of Morans Road and Missabotti Road

Warning signage shall be installed at the Missabotti Road approaches to the intersection in accordance with AS 1742.2-2009 and to Councils satisfaction.

 

Vegetation obscuring sight distance to the intersection shall be removed.

 

Construction Traffic Management Plan

 

9.       Consent from Council must be obtained for a traffic management plan pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. The plans and specifications are to include the measures to be employed to control traffic (inclusive of construction vehicles) during construction of the development. The traffic control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Manual, Traffic Control at Work Sites Version 2, and Australian Standard 1742.3 - 1985, Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Part 3, ‘Traffic Control Devices for Works on Roads’.

 

The plan must incorporate measures to ensure that motorists using roads adjacent to the development and residents and pedestrians in the vicinity of the development are subjected to minimal time delays due to construction on the site or adjacent to the site.

 

The traffic control plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified and RTA accredited Work Site Traffic Controller.

 

Driveway details required

 

10.     Prior to the commencement of works, design plans and specifications that indicate vehicular access from Morans Road to the proposed car space(s) are to be submitted to and approved by Council. Vehicular access widths must be in accordance with section 4.1.3 (2) of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’. Plans are to include the following items:

 

a        Minimum 4m wide 150mm compacted two wheel drive all weather pavement with 6m wide passing bays at 200m intervals

b        site conditions affecting the access;

c        drainage (open drains, pipes, etc), including calculations and catchment details.

 

The plans must be in compliance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standards.

 

 

Right of Carriageway

 

11.     Create a covenant by way of section 88B instrument, under the Conveyancing Act 1919, providing right of carriageway 10m wide, or of such width as approved by Council, to contain all road formation and associated drainage works, over Lots 263 & 264 DP 755549 to benefit Lot 262 DP 755549. The alignment of the right of carriageway shall be in accordance with the design plans of the internal road required to be approved as part of this consent. Nambucca Shire Council shall be nominated as the sole party with the power to vary or remove the required covenant.

          Alternatively, consolidation of the above mentioned allotments will satisfy this condition.

 

Car parking plans required

 

12.     The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate access, parking and manoeuvring details within the proposed car park. The access, parking and manoeuvring for the site are to comply with the requirements of Council’s Development Control Plan. Plans are to include, but not be limited to, the following items:

 

a        pavement description;

b        site conditions affecting the access;

c        turning paths including dimensions

 

The engineering plans and specifications are to be designed by a qualified practising Civil Engineer. The Civil Engineer is to be a corporate member of the Institution of Engineers Australia or is to be eligible to become a corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field.

 

The plans must be in compliance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standards. Such plans and specifications must be approved prior to the commencement of works.

 

Covering of Range Surface

 

13.        The entire ground surface of the range must be covered with a synthetic covering. Plans and specifications of the proposed covering must be submitted to Council for approval prior to the commencement of works. It is to be demonstrated that soil will not penetrate the underside of the cover once installed.

 

Sediment and Erosion Measures

 

14.     Plans and specifications that indicate the measures to be employed to control erosion and loss of sediment from the site are to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the commencement of works. Control over discharge of stormwater and containment of run-off and pollutants leaving the site/premises must be undertaken through the installation of erosion control devices such as catch drains, energy dissipaters, level spreaders and sediment control devices such as hay bale barriers, filter fences, filter dams, and sedimentation basins. The sediment and erosion control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Landcom Manual 2004, “Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction”.  4th Edition 2009.

The sediment and erosion control plan is to be prepared by a qualified practising Civil Engineer.

All measures contained within the approved plan are to be undertaken in place in accordance with the approved plan prior to the commencement of works. 

Note: Council may impose on-the-spot fines for non-compliance with this condition.

 

Waste Management Plan

 

15.       A Waste Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to the commencement of works. The plan shall address, but not be limited to, the following matters:

(a)      Details of waste to be generated by the works to be undertaken as part of this development consent, as well as waste generated during use of the development.

(b)      Arrangements for removal of waste material from site. This is to include details of how spent bullets are to be removed from site.

(c)      Destination of all waste materials being removed from the site. All waste materials shall be disposed of at an approved waste disposal facility.

Erection of Signs

 

16.     A sign must be erected on site in a prominent position containing the information prescribed by Clause 98A (2) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 being the name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority for the work, and name of the principal contractor for the work and telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and stating that unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited.  This sign must be maintained on site while work is being carried out and removed when the work has been completed.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH DURING CONSTRUCTION

 

Building Code of Australia

 

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

 

Approved Plans to be On-Site

 

18.     A copy of the approved and certified plans, specifications and documents incorporating conditions of approval and certification shall be kept on the site at all times and shall be readily available for perusal by any officer of Council or the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Soil back Stops

 

19.        The soil back stops are to be constructed using moderately alkaline soil with pH levels between 7-8.5 and are to be certified by a NATA accredited laboratory. Evidence is to be provided to Councils satisfaction.

 

Construction times

 

20.     Any works involving the generation of noise which extends beyond the boundary of the land, other than works required in an emergency to avoid the loss of life, damage to property and/or to prevent environmental harm, shall only be carried out between 7:00 am and 6:00 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive. No works shall occur on public holidays.

 

The builder/site manager is responsible to instruct and control sub-contractors regarding the hours of work.

 

Builders rubbish to be contained on site

 

21.     All builders rubbish is to be contained on the site in a ‘Builders Skips’ or an enclosure. Building materials are to be delivered directly onto the property. Footpaths, road reserves and public reserves are to be maintained clear of rubbish, building materials and all other items.

 

Maintenance of sediment and erosion control measures in accordance with approved plan

 

22.     Sediment and erosion control measures in accordance with an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan approved by Council must be maintained at all times until the disturbed areas have been stabilised by permanent vegetation cover or hard surface.

 

Discovery of a Relic

 

23.     The development is to proceed with caution. If any Aboriginal objects are found, works are to stop and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) notified. If human remains are found work is to stop, the site is to be secured and the NSW Police and OEH are to be notified.

 

Fill

 

24.     Any excess fill is to be disposed of at a licensed facility. Prior to the importation of any fill onto the site, suitable evidence is to be provided to the satisfaction of Council demonstrating that all fill is virgin excavated natural material (VENM) as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. This will require the material to be sampled and analysed for potential contaminants by a NATA accredited laboratory.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO OCCUPATION OF THE BUILDING/COMMENCEMENT OF USE

 

Occupation Certificate

 

25.     The development shall not be used or occupied until an Occupation Certificate has been issued by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Works to be completed

 

26.     All of the works indicated on the plans and required to be undertaken as part of this consent, including any other consents that are necessary for the completion of this development, are to be completed to the satisfaction of Council prior to the issue of an occupation certificate/commencement of use of the development.

 

Damage to Council’s Infrastructure

 

27.     Where any damage occurs to Council’s infrastructure during works associated with the development, the principal contractor shall replace or make good the damaged infrastructure before the occupation certificate is issued.

 

Install System of Sewage Management

 

28.     Prior to occupation/use of the development, install an approved system of sewage management in accordance with an approval obtained from Council under section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993. The system is not to be used and/or operated until a Council Officer has inspected the system and authorised its use.

 

Baffles

 

29.        ‘Adjustable eyebrow baffles’, ‘side baffles’ and ‘ground baffles are to be installed within each shooting bay to restrict the shooters ability to shoot out of the range or directly into the range surface.

 

Certificates for Engineering Works

 

30.     The submission of all test certificates, owners manuals, warranties and operating instructions for civil works, mechanical and/or electrical plant, together with a certificate from a suitably qualified engineer certifying that all works have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and Council’s Adopted Engineering Standard.

 

Works-As-Executed Plans

 

31.     Works-as-executed plans, certified by a suitably qualified engineer or a registered surveyor, are to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate. Where the design is carried out utilising computer aided design CAD, all cad computer files are required to be provided on CD (Compact Disc) with the final drawings. The CAD files must include all lot and road boundaries, lot numbers and easements. The data is to be supplied in accordance with the requirements of Council’s GIS Officer.

 

In the case where development involves filling of flood prone land, an additional copy of the works-as-executed plan relating to earthworks and final plan of subdivision must be submitted detailing the 1% flooding contour.

 

Record of Infrastructure

 

32.     A record of infrastructure coming into Council ownership must be submitted to Council.

 

Soil and Water Monitoring

 

33.     Water and soil monitoring of lead, antimony, arsenic and nickel contaminants within the sediment pond receiving waters from the range surface area is to be undertaken and submitted to Council prior to the commencement of use. The monitoring is to be carried out by a suitably qualified environmental consultant, with samples analysed by a NATA accredited laboratory.

 

Further monitoring is to occur within the first year of commencement of the development and every five years thereafter for the life of the development. Such monitoring is to include the soil back stops.

 

In the event that lead, antimony, arsenic or nickel contaminants are detected above the maximum levels stated in the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) guideline, use of the site must cease until the extent of contamination is established and affected areas remediated.

 

Enclosure of Shooting Bays

 

34.     Prior to the commencement of use, the rear and side elevations of the shooting bays are to be fully enclosed (from the ground to the underside of the roof line) and internally lined with noise attenuating acoustic materials. All openings are to be closed during operation.

 

Fire Safety Certificate

 

35.       A Fire Safety Certificate shall be furnished to the PCA for all the “Essential Fire or Other Safety Measures” forming part of this approval prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.  A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be submitted to Council by the Principal Certifying Authority with the Occupation Certificate.

            In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000:

(a)  A final Fire Safety Certificate shall state that each essential fire safety measure specified in the current Fire Safety Schedule for the building to which the Certificate relates:

(i)        has been assessed by a properly qualified person; and

(ii)   was found, when it was assessed, to be capable of performing to a standard not less than that required by the current fire safety schedule for the building for which the Certificate is issued.

(b)  The assessment must have been carried out within the period of three (3) months prior to the date on which the final Fire Safety Certificate is issued.

(c)  The choice of person to carry out the assessment is up to the owner of the building.

(d)  The person who carries out the assessment:

(i)      must inspect and verify the performance of each fire safety measure being assessed; and

(ii)     must test the operation of each new item of equipment installed in the building premises that is included in the current Fire Safety Schedule for the building.

(e)    As soon as practicable after a final Fire Safety Certificate is issued, the owner of the building to which it relates:

(i)    must cause a copy of the Certificate (together with a copy of the current Fire Safety Schedule) to be given to the Commissioner of New South Wales Fire Brigades; and

(ii)    must cause a further copy of the Certificate (together with a copy of the current Fire Safety Schedule) to be prominently displayed in the building.

 

Bushfire Protection

 

36.       The following conditions are required for compliance with Section 79BA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

(a)  Asset Protection Zones

At the commencement of building works and for the life of the development, the area around the shooting bays shall be managed for a distance of 30m as an Inner Protection Area as outlined within Section 4.1.3 and Appendix 5 of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’ and the NSW Rural Fire Service’s document ‘Standards for Asset Protection Zones’.

 

(b)   Water and Utilities

Water, electricity and gas are to comply with Section 4.1.3 of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’.

(c)    Access

The width of property access roads shall comply with Section 4.1.3(2) of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’.

(d)   Landscaping

Any landscaping to the site is to comply with the principles of Appendix 5 of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’.

(e)   Emergency and Evacuation

An emergency/evacuation plan is to be prepared consistent with the NSW Rural Fire Service document Guidelines for the Preparation of Emergency/Evacuation Plan. The plan is to be developed in consultation with the Local Emergency Management Committee detailing fire risk days when the facility should not be used and should incorporate a method of communication from the site. The plan is to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the commencement of use.

Detailed plans of all Emergency Assembly Areas including “on site” and “offsite” arrangements as stated in Australian Standard AS 3745-2002, are to be clearly displayed, and an annual (as a minimum) trial emergency evacuation is conducted.

 

Rural Numbering

 

37.     The Rural Address Number for the property is 132. The rural address number must be displayed at the main driveway entrance off Morans Road approved for the property.

 

Fencing and Signage

 

38.     The range perimeter (forward of shooting bays and along the inner side of the diversion drains) is to be fenced with durable warning signs placed every 20m advising the use of the site. A sign is also to be placed on the access road at the approach to the range.

Fences shall be constructed using non-electrified plain wire.

The sediment pond referred to in condition 3 shall be fenced to exclude cattle and wildlife, with signs installed warning of potentially contaminated water.

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES

 

Noise Control

 

39.              The applicant shall,

 

a)  Ensure the LAeq noise level emitted from the development shall not exceed 5dB(A) above the background noise level (LA90) within 30m of any dwelling when measured in the absence of the noise source under consideration.

 

b)  Within 3 months after the use has commenced, undertake compliance noise monitoring at dwellings located on Lot 132 DP 755549 and Lot 23 DP 601572 to verify compliance with the above. The monitoring is to be undertaken by a qualified acoustic consultant, with a copy of the report outlining the results submitted to Council within 1 month of the initial 3 month period. The report is to state the number of each type of gun used during the monitoring tests.

The numbers of guns used during the operation of the shooting range (life of development) at any one time is to be limited to the numbers used during the monitoring tests.

 

c)  Unless otherwise agreed to by Council, respond to any complaint from a resident at Lot 132 DP 755549, Lot 23 DP 601572 or Lot 63 DP 755554 by undertaking noise level monitoring and provide a copy of the report on the results to Council within 3 months of receiving the complaint.

 

d)  Identify and implement additional mitigation measures at the applicants cost or modify operations if the results of the noise monitoring identify that the noise criterion is exceeded at any residence. Use of the development is to cease until continuous compliance with the above criteria is achieved.

All measurements are to be carried out in accordance with the NSW Industrial Noise Policy and the application note for assessing noise compliance prepared by the NSW Environment Protection Authority.

 

Limitation on Guns

 

40.     Only the following guns are permitted to be used at the shooting range:

·      .22 calibre pistol

·      .22 calibre rifle

·      .44 calibre rifle

·      .357 calibre rifle

·      .357 magnum pistol

 

Baffles

 

41.        ‘Adjustable eyebrow baffles’, ‘side baffles’ and ‘ground baffles are to be maintained for the life of the development to ensure bullets cannot be shot out of the range or directly into the range surface.

 

Prior to the commencement of shooting, eyebrow baffles are to be adjusted so that the shooter is unable to shoot above the level of the ‘lead catchment bays’.

 

Synthetic Cover

 

42.        The integrity of the synthetic cover of the range approved as part of this consent is to be maintained for the life of the development.

All spent bullets are to be removed from the range surface at the completion of each operating day.

 

Storage of Firearms and ammunition

 

43.     No firearms or ammunition are to be stored on site.

 

Alcohol

 

44.     The consumption of alcohol is not permitted during use of the development.

 

Use of Range

 

45.        No more than 6 people on a Tuesday, 10 people on a Wednesday or 20 people on a Saturday are permitted to use the shooting range.

Shooting within the range is only permitted from within the designated shooting bays. No approval is given to the use of the facility during rain events.

 

Lead Catchment Bays

 

46.        The ‘lead catchment bays’ are to be maintained in a weather proof condition and are to be covered when not in use. The level of sand is to be maintained in the bays so as to ensure bullets do not ricochet out of the bay.

 

Restricted hours of operation

 

47.     The hours of operation of the shooting range are restricted to the times set out in the following table:

 

Period

Start Time

Finish Time

Tuesday

10am

2pm

Wednesday

10am

4pm

Saturday

10am

5pm

 

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

 

Waste

 

48.        Spent bullets captured on site are to be removed at least every 6 months. Evidence of disposal at a licenced waste facility is to be provided to Council within 2 weeks of disposal.

 

Operation of car parking area

 

49.     All car parking spaces are to be provided and maintained, together with all necessary access driveways and turning areas, to the satisfaction of Council.

All vehicles connected with the premises are to be parked within the premises at all times.

 

Annual Fire Safety Statement

 

50.       The owner of the premises must provide an annual fire safety statement to Council and the Fire Commissioner. An annual fire safety statement is a statement issued by or on behalf of the owner of a building to the effect that:

(a)   each essential fire safety measure specified in the statement has been assessed by a properly qualified person and was found, when it was assessed, to be capable of performing to a standard no less than that specified in the current fire safety schedule,

(b)  the building has been inspected by a properly qualified person and was found, when it was inspected, to be in a condition that did not disclose any grounds for a prosecution under Division 7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

Access must be permitted to Council officers

 

51.     Authorised Council Officers must be permitted access to the property during normal business hours and without notice for the purpose of ensuring compliance with consent conditions.

 

 

REASONS FOR CONDITIONS

 

·      To ensure that the proposed development:

(a)      achieves the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment  Act 1979;

(b)      complies with the provisions of all relevant Environmental Planning Instruments;

(c)      is consistent with the aims and objectives of Council’s Development Control Plans, Codes and Policies.

 

·      To ensure the protection of the amenity and character of land adjoining and in the locality of the proposed development.

 

·      To minimise any potential adverse environmental, social or economic impacts of the proposed development.

 

·      To ensure that all traffic, car parking and access requirements arising from the development are addressed.

 

·      To ensure the development does not conflict with the public interest.

 

 

 


OTHER APPROVALS

 

The following Section 68 Approvals

have been issued with this consent:        Nil

 

Integrated Development:                          NO

 

 



Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.7    PRF30              291015         Rotary Lookout Nambucca Heads - concept improvements

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner         

 

Summary:

 

This report provides Council with an opportunity to comment on a concept landscape design for the Rotary Lookout at Parkes Street Nambucca Heads and seeks Council’s support to implement the improvements.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council endorse the draft concept for staged implementation as funding becomes available.

 

2        That Council note that the Crown does not permit the transfer of $30,000 Crown Reserve grant funds from the pedestrian bridge to the Rotary Lookout improvements.

 

3        That Council note the contribution of $3500 cash and $3500 in-kind support being offered  by Rotary towards the project.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

·      Council may request changes to the draft concept;

·      Council may suggest alternative ways to fund the project;

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Existing Lookout

 

Images of the existing Rotary Lookout are shown below:

 

 

 

Landscape Plan preparation

 

Early in 2015 Council received a request from Nambucca Heads Rotary to permit some improvements to the Rotary Lookout at Parkes Street Nambucca Heads. Council’s Assistant General Manager Engineering Services organised for Rotary to Meet with Councils Manager of Infrastructure Works, Coordinator Green Spaces and Council Strategic Planner to discuss the matter.

 

At the on site meeting it was agreed that prior to implementing works a plan was required to give direction to the works and the function of space surrounding the lookout.

 

Staff engaged Red Belly Landscape Architecture and Urban Design to prepare a draft plan for the area. After further discussions and a meeting with Rotary the first draft of the plan was forwarded to Rotary Nambucca for comments. Based on feedback from staff and Rotary a second draft has now been prepared and is attached for Council’s consideration [Attachment 1].

 

The plan includes an analysis of the site and surrounds including: constraints, highlights and function of the area. Based on the analysis a plan has been prepared which focuses on:

 

-     Maximising the opportunity to capture the spectacular views of the site;

-     Consideration to view sharing from private land in Parkes Street;

-     Enhancing existing connectivity between the site and surrounding pedestrian networks;

-     Improving the integration between vehicles and people; and

-     Providing opportunities for passive recreation;

 

Some key components of the plan are to:

 

-     Set back the parking from the lookout and extend the lookout (different materials to be used to define transition from vehicle to people space);

-     Provide turfed embankment to adjoin the lookout;

-     Seating and a shelter;

-     Interpretative signage board – on the western edge of the platform;

-     Connections to other walkways west and to Captain Cook lookout east; and

-     Mass plantings of native vegetation in place of mown grass (low in areas to maintain views)

 

 Implementation of Plan

 

It is proposed to implement the plan in stages as funding is made available. However the following is noted:

 

-     Rotary Nambucca Heads were pleased with the draft plan and have offered $3500 in cash and $3500 in in-kind funding to support the improvements.

 

-     Last year Council was successful in receiving $30,000 from the NSW Crown Land Public Reserves Management Fund to replace a bridge in the pedestrian link between Parkes Street and Wellington Drive. In the period between making the application and receiving the funds, the bridge was repaired as it was unsafe. The repairs have extended the life of the bridge substantially.

 

It was proposed to transfer the funds from this grant to the improvements of the Rotary Lookout, which is located in the same crown reserve approximately 150m from the bridge. Council’s Grants Officer is investigated this with the Crown. The Crown Lands Department has indicated that if Council does not want to use the funds for the bridge it must be returned.

 

-     Council may wish to consider alternative options to fund the project.

 

-     Should Councils endorse the plan it will be used to guide future maintenance, grant applications and other works on the site.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Assistant General Management Engineering Services

Manager infrastructure Services

Grants and Contributions Officer

Coordinator Green Spaces

Nambucca Heads Rotary

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The project will have positive benefits to the natural environment in this area through the increase in vegetated buffers between managed lawn and bushland in the form of mass plantings. This will also decrease Council’s, costs via a reduction in the area required to be mown.

 

Social

 

The current lookout is tired looking and functions poorly.  The view at this location is arguably one of the most spectacular views of an estuary in the mid north coast. The lookout is popular with residents and visitors to the shire.

 

The presentation of this area reflects on Council and the community as a whole and it important to offer facilities that appeal to our residents and hopefully encourage positive feedback and discussion among tourists. The work will significantly improve the amenity and function of the area for residents and visitors

 

Economic

 

Appropriate design and construction of this lookout along with improvements to other popular open space areas will begin to offer the tourism industry a suite of attractive open spaces with matching facilities that contribute to the marketability of the Nambucca Valley as a tourist destination and a place in which people want to reside.

 

 

Risk

 

NIl

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

-     The plan has been prepared within Engineering Services Budget

-     Rotary have offered financial and inkind support to the project;

-            Council has been requested to consider transferring $30,000 from a Crown Land Public Reserve Management grant to the improvements at Rotary Lookout, this has not been approved.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

NIL

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

NIL

 

 

Attachments:

1

33226/2015 - Rotary Lookout Draft Concept 16 Oct 2015

 

2

31602/2015 - Letter of appreciation for upgrade of Rotary Lookout and advice of acceptance of plans provided by Council with recommendations regarding change of parking angles and information regarding Rotary financial input into venture

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Rotary Lookout Nambucca Heads - concept improvements

 









Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Rotary Lookout Nambucca Heads - concept improvements

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.8    SF1496            291015         Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuaries and Coastline Managment Committee Meeting held 17 September 2015

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuaries and Coastline Management Committee held Thursday 17 September 2015 are attached for Council’s endorsement. 

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council endorse the minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuaries and Coastline Management Committee held Thursday 17 September 2015

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option of not endorsing the minutes or making additional or alternative resolutions.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Nothing required. 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nothing required

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

Nothing identified

 

Social

Nothing identified

 

Economic

Nothing identified

 

Risk

Nothing identified

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

There are is impact on budgets resulting from this report.

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

Nil

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

Nothing identified

 

Attachments:

1

32477/2015 - Minutes - 17 September 2015

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuaries and Coastline Managment Committee Meeting held 17 September 2015

 

PRESENT

 

Cr John Ainsworth (Chairperson)

Cr Bob Morrison

Anna Sedlack (NSW Maritime)

Richard Barrie

Jim Hallam (Farmers Association)

Fay Lawson (Flood Affected Landowner)

Theresa Spens-Black (Oyster Farmers)

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Peter Shales (SES)

Moira Ryan (Scotts Head Dune Care)

Michael Stubbs (SES)

Craig Smith (NPWS)

Mark Batister (WMA Water)

Monique Retalik (WMA Water)

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Mayor, Rhonda Hoban

Max Osborne (LLS)

John Schmidt (OEH)

Kate Browning (OEH)

Pat Dwyer (NSW Fisheries)

Cr Paula Flack

Tim Ryan (Nambucca Valley Landcare)

Robert Kennedy (Tourism Association)

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

RESOLVED:          (Spens-Black/Morrison)

 

That the Committee note the adoption and endorsement of the recommendations of the Minutes of the Meeting held on 23 April 2015.

 

 

 

 

Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

 

ITEM 5.1      SF1496              170915      Report on Outstanding Items

RESOLVED:          (Lawson/Spens-Black)

 

The list of outstanding actions be noted and received by the committee. 

 

 

 


 

ITEM 5.2      SF1496              170915      Flood Risk Management Study and Plan for Deep Creek and Nambucca River

RESOLVED:          (Spens-Black/ Lawson)

 

1        That the Committee receive the presentation from WMA water.

 

2        At the conclusion of the presentation from the WMA Water the Committee resolve to take appropriate action.

 

i)        The consultants investigate the existing gauge system relevant to Nambucca and Deep Creek Systems which includes:

-      Location of existing gauges

-      Status and ownership of existing gauges

-   Identification of data gaps in the existing system particularly in relation to flood warning capabilities.

 

ii)       Council write a formal letter to the local member regarding the inadequacies of the existing gauge system and the affects this may have on flood management and response – the letter should identify the benefits of a centralised reporting system all the existing gauges.

 

iii)      A full investigation into levees at Macksville not be undertaken. This is a response to previous community reaction to potential levees in Macksville. The consultant shall still estimate a required height for an effective levee at Macksville, so the community and Council will be aware of the potential implications of such a structure. The consultant examine the potential benefits of levees at Bowraville.

 

iv)      In respect to Kings Point, Councils consultant investigate the effects that wilson road bridge approaches and the north coast rail levee has on flood levels/ velocities;

 

v)       The consultants investigate evacuation routes to major populated areas and localities kings point in particular;

 

vi)      The consultants investigate local road improvements which could improve the communities resilience to flooding; this could include low points in roads, causeways and bridges.

 

vii)     The consultants identify potential early warning systems or improvements that could be made to to provide the community with greater response time and more accurate information.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3      SF2081              170915      Nambucca River Shoaling Investigation and Dredging Strategy

ReSOLVED:          (Spens-Black/Morrison)

 

1        The committee note the content of this report.

 

2        Committee members may take the time to mark areas of concern on the aerial photos available in the Council chambers.

 

3        The Coordinator Strategic Planning and Natural Resources (Grant Nelson) to investigate Council’s resolution in respect to the Nambucca River mouth being included in the investigation.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.4      SF1496              170915      Coast and Estuary Program Update

ReSOLVED:          (Smith/Lawson)

 

The Committee note the current status of Councils Coast and Estuary Program

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.5      SF1496              170915      Nambucca River Oyster Farmers - Environmental Management System

ReSOLVED:          (Lawson/Shales)

 

That the committee note that Environmental Management System for the Nambucca River Oyster Farmers has been prepared and is available at Council Offices for review.

 

 

   

 

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on … commencing at ….

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chair then closed the meeting the time being 11.00 am. 

 

 

 

 

CR JOHN AINSWORTH

(CHAIRPERSON)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.9    SF2038            291015         Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months,
applications where submissions received
not determined from 16 September 2015 to 20 October 2015

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Lisa Hall, Technical Officer Planning         

 

Summary:

In accordance with Council resolution from 15 May 2008 meeting, the development applications listed below are in excess of 12 months old (Table 1).

 

Table 2 is development applications which have been received but not yet determined due to submissions received. In accordance with Minute 848/08 from Council meeting of 18 December 2008, should any Councillor wish to “call in” an application a Notice of Motion is required specifying the reasons why it is to be “called in”.

 

If an application is not called in and staff consider the matters raised by the submissions have been adequately addressed then the application will be processed under delegated authority. Where refusal is recommended the application may be reported to Council for determination.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information be noted by Council.

 

 

 

TABLE 1: UNRESOLVED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IN EXCESS OF 12 MONTHS OLD

 

Please note that there are no unresolved Development Applications in excess of 12 months old.

 

TABLE 2: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS NOT YET DETERMINED WHERE SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED

 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

2015/067

27/05/2015

Two Lot Subdivision

Lot 10 DP 584683, 9 Richards Road, Newee Creek

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/STAFF COMMENTS

One public submission has been received – it opposes the development

·        The development would further contribute to a dust problem, therefore Newee Creek Road should be sealed from the end of the current bitumen to the furthest edge of the proposed subdivision.

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

2015/099

2 July 2015

132 Lot Residential Subdivision

Lot 1 DP 1119830, Marshall Way, Nambucca Heads

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/STAFF COMMENTS

Two public submissions has been received – they oppose the development

·        The increase in expected traffic raises major concerns re safety (particularly for the elderly and the young), congestion, parking within the Plaza and speeding.

·        Concerned that there isn’t enough local infrastructure and services to support new residents eg doctors.

·        A community forum should be held to gauge dissatisfaction with the proposal

·        Spring Street isn’t wide enough to cope with the increased traffic

·        Stormwater in Spring Street and surrounding areas is already a problem

·        Concerned about the safety of turning out of Spring Street, when Marshall Way is a through road

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

2015/097

30 June 2015

Environmental Protection Works

Lot 7 DP 248676 & Lot 3 DP 817508, 250 & 412 Gumma Rd Gumma

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/STAFF COMMENTS

One public submission has been received – it opposes the development

·           The structures will lead to a build-up of storm and flood water on their property

·           Marine and aquatic creatures will not be able to access waterways to breed

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

2015/103

6 July 2015

Recreational Facility (Outdoor) – Shooting Range

Lots 262, 263 & 264 DP 755549, 132 Morans Road, Missabotti

 

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/STAFF COMMENTS

Fifty-three public submissions have been received – Fifty-one oppose the proposal and two support it. Additionally, two petitions have been lodged with Council – a paper petition, with approximately 256 signatures and an online petition, with 542 signatures. Both petitions oppose the proposal.

 

Oppose

·           Council should honour their Mission Statement and Community Strategic Plan and reject the application

·           A more thorough and comprehensive environmental assessment should be carried out physically on site – what has been provided lacks sound research

·           A mandatory process of community consultation should be initiated and installed, as procedure, between developers and impacted residents of any proposed development

·           A moratorium should be immediately established on the approval of developments in the catchment of the Bowra Dam and any catchments that supply water to the dam, that pose a risk of contaminating the rural and domestic water supply

·           No guarantees that lead and other metals will not end up in the water supply or will not otherwise affect flora and fauna – no containment system will be 100% effective

·           Regular heavy rain events could wash away the lead catchment mound

·           Safe transportation and storage of weapons have not been addressed

·           Property owner is neither a resident of Missabotti nor the Nambucca Shire

·           There is a well-equipped and under-utilised shooting range at Scotts Head, plus others at Kempsey and Bellingen

·           There is a large amount of local opposition – see objections, Facebook page and online petition

·           Bellingen, Missabotti and Morans Road unsuitable for the increase in traffic. Mirrors at the blind spot are unlikely to be maintained by the Pistol Club

·           Noise pollution will be unacceptable

·           No mobile phone reception in the area, therefore any emergency response to life-threatening situations will be limited

·           Development will reduce property values, possibly by 15 – 20%, as valued by real estate agent

·           Proposed effluent disposal method is inadequate

·           Gun ownership should be discouraged by all levels of government

·           Gun owners from outside the Shire will use the facilities with firearms other than pistols

·           There are large numbers of wildlife who will be negatively impacted by the proposal

·           Children living nearby will be in danger from the people attending the club and the activities carried out

·           Inadequate access to the site is of concern particularly if fires occur

·           The activities at the site increase fire risk

·           Cost of works on the DA form seems under-valued

·           Proposed range is sited within an intermittent water course

·           Missabotti Hall will be under- utilised as patrons will be able to hear gunfire

·           70% of residents in the Missabotti Valley are aged 60 or over and want a peaceful and safe rural lifestyle – approving the DA would only lead to stress and anxiety for them

·           The development is in opposition to a stronger, more sustainable image for the Nambucca Shire

·           Council needs to demonstrate that it is committed to protecting the environment and not compromising natural assets

·           Evacuating the site during an emergency is problematic

·           Current site used at Gumma is polluted and has not been correctly maintained or cleaned up

·           It would have a detrimental effect on the amenity of the area

·           Clearing topsoil and removing natural bush would have a detrimental environmental impact

·           Residents do not support activities which could detract from the tranquillity and beauty of the hinterland region

·           Previous sound tests were inadequate – need to be carried out in a variety of situations and seasons

·           How is security to be addressed? Will the entire site be fenced off?

·           Guns may be stolen from vehicles which stop at local shops along the way to Missabotti

·           Is an appropriate authority able to ensure the development, if approved, complies with all requirements in an ongoing way, eg pollution, unapproved weapons, littering, numbers of shooters, etc?

·           Request that the DA be tabled and considered by all Councillors at a Council meeting

·           Roads have deteriorated further since the previous DA was lodged – these need to be addressed and additional bitumen laid to the proposed shooting range

·           Where will shooters be accommodated if there is a flash flood?

·           Flora and fauna report unacceptable – it has been peer reviewed and found wanting

·           Previous noise test was carried out with members using smaller calibre weapons than would ordinarily be used and firing fewer shots. The noise on properties on the flat was not surveyed. The noise test should be redone

·           Water Control Plan and Line of Sight Plan are not of a high enough quality for submission in a DA

·           Information submitted with DA is inadequate and contradictory

·           No provisions for access for people with disabilities

·           Better suited to an industrial site

·           Cattle will be disturbed by the noise

·           Hours of operation and scale of proposal are both excessive

·           Moran’s Bridge is a popular swimming hole in the summer – people there could be endangered by the extra traffic

·           Bowraville LALC were not consulted – they are the elders and protectors of the area and claim it is an area of significance

·           There is no benefit to the people of Missabotti from the development

·           Section 94 contributions should be charged if the DA is approved

·           This is a remote site that is difficult to police

·           Safety concerns if alcohol is consumed – alcohol should be banned from the site.

·           Information that was required and not submitted with their previous DA (subsequently withdrawn) has not been adequately addressed in this application either.

·           If approved, local relationships will be damaged

·           Wildlife may be accidentally shot

·           Despite the property being 1500 acres, the proposed site for the range is very close to the boundary of the property – probably because the property owners don’t want it close to their homes

·           Distances and other data on the maps provided seem inaccurate

·           Doesn’t comply with the objectives of the RU2 land use zone

·           Any Councillors or staff members involved in shooting clubs should not be involved in assessing this DA

 

Support

·             Young people will be able to be taught professionally about firearms at the range.

·             One adjoining owner has no concerns about the range being next door.

·             The club has a very credible record of activity at Gumma with no complaints from surrounding landowners

·             Pistol shooting is a longstanding Olympic sport

·           Club is well structured and teaches members how to use firearms safely. They have a culture of concern for safety. All activities comply with the National Firearms Safety Code

·           Proposed site has a logging permit that addresses issues of flora and fauna protection

·           Only three properties are adjacent to the property and one of those is State Forest. Therefore, noise will be a minimal concern and will be less than that created by logging operations

·           Strategy for lead capture is entirely adequate and conforms to current best practice

·           No noticeable increase in traffic will occur and any traffic generated will do far less damage than logging trucks

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

2015/133

26 August 2015

Use of Shipping Container

Lot 4 Section 18 DP 758150, 33 George Street, Bowraville

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/STAFF COMMENTS

One submission has been received by Council – it opposes the proposal

·           The shipping container has structurally unsafe footings/foundations and loading zone issues

·           Concerned about the deterioration of the surface of Aston Lane due to increased usage, as well as loading/unloading issues

·           Decreased scenic views, blocking the south westerly breezes and decreased street appeal

·           Increased health issues, due to increased dust on Aston Lane

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

2015/138

4 September 2015

Shed (Shelter for plants and storage)

Lot 3 DP 1015406, 180 Coronation Road Congarinni North

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED

Two submissions have been received by Council – both oppose the proposal

·           Applicant hasn’t complied with conditions of previous DAs eg fences, operating hours, landscaping, car parking (customers are blocking the driveway of a nearby resident on occasion)

·           Construction has already commenced without consent

·           The shed covers an already rebuilt dog shed that is being used as a residence

·           Have all septic systems been approved and properly installed?

·           Building is too close to the main road

·           Existing buildings shown on the plan were all constructed without consent

·           There is no builders’ signage on site

·           Four separate lots of people are living on site

·           Companion animals are not confined to the property, but wander on the road

·           Drawings submitted with DA are sub-standard

·           Mature trees have been removed even though the original DA requested that they stay

·           Large excavation is being undertaken at the rear of the property – no details about this with the DA

·           All illegal buildings should be removed

·           The kennels should be closed as they are operating outside of approved DA conditions

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.  


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                               29 October 2015

General Manager

ITEM 10.10  SF1031            291015         New Draft Policy - Local Orders Policy

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Lisa Hall, Technical Officer Planning         

 

Summary:

 

A new draft Policy titled Local Orders Policy has been prepared as a result of a review of Council’s Local Approvals Policy – Keeping of Animals.

 

As well as providing updated criteria for Council officers to consider before issuing a Notice or Order in relation to the keeping of animals, the draft Policy provides criteria in relation to all possible Orders that Council officers can issue under the Local Government Act 1993.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council adopt the Local Orders Policy as amended.

 

2        That those people who made submissions to the draft policy be advised of Council’s decision.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1        Council may adopt the draft Policy without amendment.

 

2        Council may choose to amend the draft Policy differently – this may require the draft policy going back on exhibition.

 

3        Council may choose not to adopt the draft Policy and to keep using the current Policy.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At Council’s meeting of 30 July 2015, Council resolved to place the draft Local Orders Policy on public exhibition. The public exhibition period was from Friday 21 August 2015 until Friday 18 September 2015 with submissions accepted until 4.30 pm Friday 2 October 2015.

 

A total of two submissions, signed by eight individuals, were received by Council and are listed in a confidential report. Both submissions raise concerns with the total recommended numbers of companion animals. The draft Policy recommends that each residential property may have up to four cats and up to four dogs if they are desexed and up to two cats and two dogs if they are entire. The current policy recommends up to two cats and up to two dogs regardless of whether they have been desexed or not.

 

The signatories of both submissions live in close proximity to a property in Bowraville that is the subject of an ongoing investigation by Council regarding companion animals.

 

The objections raised by the submissions are as follows:

 

·        There should be no increase in the number of companion animals in residential areas

·        Previous complaints about companion animal issues remain unresolved

·        Council is unable to control the number of companion animals under its current policy – increasing numbers will only lead to an influx of animals

·        Two dogs per household is more than enough as there are already enough loose and unleashed dogs in the community

·        There is a high number of unwanted puppies and kittens going to Council’s pound and being dumped

·        An increase in numbers will increase problems already faced in the community – smell, noise, etc

·        The policy should be for two desexed dogs and two desexed cats per household

·        The Nambucca Valley is a low socio-economic area with some people struggling to pay all the costs involved with caring for their companion animals. Doubling the cat and dog intake for each household will only lead to more euthanized and dumped animals as people will not be able to afford to look after them properly.

 

Staff comments

 

Council staff have considered the submissions and, in response, are recommending an amendment to the draft policy. Under the recommended number of cats and dogs, the following statement has been added:

 

“NB: Where a property has cats and dogs, the total number of cats and dogs combined should be four or fewer.”

 

This proposed amendment means that the total recommended number of companion animals (cats and dogs) at each property remains the same as the current policy - four – but provides more flexibility to households concerning the makeup of that number. Given that Council’s current policy already recommends four companion animals per property, it is considered that the combination of cats and dogs which make up this number is not, of itself, significant.

 

It must be remembered that Council is unable to be prescriptive about the numbers of companion animals that people may own, that is, Council is unable to issue an order for people to remove a companion animal from premises simply because there are a certain number of animals on those premises. Council must be able to demonstrate that the number of animals is inappropriate or that the animals are being kept inappropriately. For some properties, an order may be issued where there is only one companion animal because it is being kept inappropriately eg roaming, barking, etc. For another property, the owners may be able to keep four or more animals appropriately because they are not having any impact on adjoining properties or the community.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Management Development and Environment

Business Services Officers

Senior Health and Building Surveyor

Area Health & Building Surveyors

Ranger

Plumbing & Drainage Inspector

The public

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Having a Local Orders Policy will enable Council officers to efficiently and effectively deal with matters which may be having a negative impact on the environment.

 

Social

 

The draft policy identifies a consistent set of criteria in protecting amenity and safety of the neighbourhood at a local level and also promotes consistency in the decision making process, by providing guidance to Council officers. It makes Council’s policies and requirements for orders readily accessible and understandable to the public and establishes a system which can effectively resolve disputes and conflicts as they arise.

 

Economic

 

The draft Policy contains criteria to assist Council officers in issuing Notices and Orders so that activities which may be having a negative impact on adjoining businesses will cease and/or be better controlled.

 

Risk

 

The draft Policy will reduce risk in the areas of compliance and enforcement by enabling consistency and fairness in issuing orders.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

With the exception of the advertising fee, there is no impact on the current or future budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not applicable.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Having a Local Orders Policy provides greater certainty for Council officers when considering issuing a Notice or Order and should streamline Council’s responses to various issues. Accordingly, adoption of the draft Policy is likely to result in a positive effect on both service levels and resourcing, by enabling issues to be dealt with more quickly. It will also assist new staff to quickly adapt to Council’s culture.

 

Attachments:

1

35564/2014 - Draft Local Orders Policy

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 29 October 2015

New Draft Policy - Local Orders Policy

 

 

 

Description: nambucca valley nsc

 

 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

DRAFT LOCAL ORDERS POLICY

 

 

Our Vision

 

Nambucca Valley ~ Living at its best

 

Our Mission Statement

 

‘The Nambucca Valley will value and protect its natural environment, maintain its assets and infrastructure and develop opportunities for its people.’

 

 

What is the name of this Policy?

This Policy (“the Policy”) is called the Nambucca Shire Council Local Orders Policy 2015.

 

Where does the Policy apply?

It applies to the whole of the Nambucca Shire Council local government area.

 

What is the purpose of this Policy?

The Policy aims to:

·        Make the Council’s policies and requirements for orders readily accessible and understandable to the public.

·        Ensure consistency and fairness in the manner in which the Council deals with issuing orders.

·        Establish a system which can effectively resolve disputes and conflicts as they arise.

 

When will the Policy be revoked?

The Policy is automatically revoked at the expiration of 12 months after the declaration of the poll for the next general election, unless the Council revokes it sooner.

NOTE: Automatic revocation of the Policy is provided for by Section 165 of the Local Government Act (“the Act”).

Section 163 of the Act requires that the Policy is void if it is inconsistent with the Act and associated Regulations. Section 164 of the Act requires that the Policy cannot impose a more onerous criterion than does the Act or associated Regulations in relation to a specified aspect of anything for which an order may be given.

 

Department:

Development & Environment

Last Reviewed

Resolution Number

Author:

Technical Officer Planning

 

 

Document No.

35564/2014

 

 

First Adopted:

 

 

 

Resolution No:

 

 

 

Review Due:

 

 

 

 


 

PART 1 – CRITERIA Council MUST CONSIDER... 3

Order No 1 (d) 3

Order No 3 (c) 3

Order No. 5 (a) (b) (d) (e) and (f) – Various matters. 4

Order No. 5 (g) & (h) – Water meter on premises and water and sewerage supply systems. 4

Order No. 7 – Fence land.. 5

Order No. 8 – Identify premises. 5

Order No. 9 - Water body. 6

Order No. 10 - Articles. 6

Order No. 11 – Environmental damage. 7

Order No.12 – Control surface water. 7

Order No.15 – Not conduct an activity. 8

Order No.16 – Cease use or evacuate premises. 9

Order No.17 – Leave or not enter premises. 9

Order No.18 - Animals. 9

Order No. 19 – Tennis court 10

Order No. 20 - Food.. 10

Order No. 21 – Safety and health.. 11

Order No. 22 – Waste. 12

Order No. 22A – Removal of waste. 13

Order No. 23 – Connect to water supply. 14

Order No. 24 – Connect to sewerage system... 14

Order No. 25 – Human waste. 15

Order No. 27 – Public place, remove object or matter. 15

Order No. 28 – Public place, prevent or repair damage. 16

Order No. 29 – Public place, alter or repair work or structure. 16

Order No.30 – Comply with an approval 17

Order under Section 125 of the Local Government Act 1993. 17

PART 2 – OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO ORDERS.. 18

1        What must Council consider before giving an order?.. 18

2        What must be done before an order is served?.. 18

3        Who can make representations?.. 18

4        How should representations be made and considered?.. 18

5        What does Council do after hearing representations?.. 18

6        Are there any exemptions to these procedures?.. 18

7        What information should the order contain?.. 19

8        How long does Council have to consider whether the proposed works meet the standards specified in an order?   19

9        Can Council recover any expenses involved in this process?.. 19

10      How do orders affect heritage items?.. 19

11      How is an order given and when does it take effect?.. 19

12      Does Council have the power to give an order under another act?.. 20

13      What happens when a person fails to comply with an order?.. 20

14      Is an approval necessary for work to be undertaken?.. 20

15      Must an occupier of land permit an owner to carry out work?.. 20

16      Can Council carry out the works?.. 20

17      What rights of appeal does a person have against an order or part of an order?.. 20

18      Does the appeal prevent the order from operating?.. 20

19      Is a building owner entitled to any compensation from Council for expenses involved in complying with an order?   20

20      Overview of legal process to issue an order. 21

21      Dictionary. 22


 

PART 1 – CRITERIA Council MUST CONSIDER

Local Government Act 1993

There are various statutory criteria that Council must consider when giving an order, as imposed by the Local Government Act 1993, as well as standards derived from the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. This Policy also adopts additional criteria for consideration.

 

Details of the various types of orders are provided under the respective headings below, including:

a)  To do what? What types of action can be required to be taken?

b)  In what circumstances? These contain restrictions on the particular circumstances in which an order may be given.

c)  To whom? Whom must the order be issued to?

 

Order No 1 (d)

To demolish or remove a building

In what circumstances?

Building is erected in a catchment district and causes or is likely to cause pollution of the water supply

To whom?

Owner of building

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration, where relevant:

a)   Whether there is a change (through an act or omission) to the physical, chemical or biological condition of the waters as a result of any pollution;

b)   Whether (through an act or omission) refuse, litter, debris or other matter, whether solid or liquid or gaseous, makes, or is likely to make, the waters unclean, noxious, poisonous or impure, detrimental to the health, safety, welfare or property of persons, undrinkable for farm animals, poisonous or harmful to aquatic life, animals, birds or fish in or around the waters or unsuitable for use in irrigation; and

c)   The type and/or extent of controls in place to prevent spills and/or water pollution.

Order No 3 (c)

To repair or make structural alterations to a building

In what circumstances?

Building is erected in a catchment district and causes or is likely to cause pollution of the water supply

To whom?

Owner of building

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration, where relevant:

a)  Whether there is a change (through an act or omission) to the physical, chemical or biological condition of the waters as a result of any pollution;

b)  Whether (through an act or omission) refuse, litter, debris or other matter, whether solid or liquid or gaseous, makes, or is likely to make, the waters unclean, noxious, poisonous or impure, detrimental to the health, safety, welfare or property of persons, undrinkable for farm animals, poisonous or harmful to aquatic life, animals, birds or fish in or around the waters or unsuitable for use in irrigation; and

c)  The type and/or extent of controls in place to prevent spills and/or water pollution.

 

Order No. 5 (a) (b) (d) (e) and (f) – Various matters

To do what?

To take such action as is necessary to bring into compliance with relevant standards or requirements set or made or under this Act:

a)  a camping ground, caravan park or manufactured home estate

b)  a moveable dwelling or manufactured home

c)  (Repealed)

d)  a place of shared accommodation

e)  a hairdressers shop or beauty salon

f)   a mortuary

In what circumstances?

Failure to comply with relevant standards or requirements set or made by or under this Act

To whom?

Owner, occupier or manager

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration, where relevant:

a)  The provisions of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005. See Clause 82 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

b)  Schedule 2, Part 1-“Standards for Place of Shared Accommodation” in the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. See Clause 83 of the regulation.

c)  Schedule 2, Part 2-“Standards for Hairdresser Shops” in the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. See Clause 84 of the regulation.

d)  Schedule 2, Part 3 “Standards for Beauty Salons” in the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. See Clause 85 of the regulation.

e)  Schedule 2, Part 4 “Standards for Mortuaries” in the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. See Clause 86 of the regulation.

 

Order No. 5 (g) & (h) – Water meter on premises and water and sewerage supply systems

To do what?

To take such action as is necessary to bring into compliance with relevant standards, or requirements set or made or under this Act:

a)  a water meter, water supply or sewerage system on premises, but only in relation to any work that is not plumbing and drainage work within the meaning of the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2011.

In what circumstances?

Failure to comply with relevant standards or requirements set or made by or under this Act. Also see Clause 88 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

To whom?

Owner, occupier or manager or, in the case of a water meter, water supply or sewerage system in respect of which a defect occurs in work due to faulty workmanship of, or defective material supplied by, a licensed contractor (being the holder of a licence in force under the Home Building Act 1989 authorising the holder to contract to do the work) within 12 months after the work is carried out or the material is supplied, the licensed contractor.

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration, where relevant:

a)  Whether the circumstances have arisen within 12 months of work being undertaken on the affected part of a water meter, water supply or sewerage system by a licensed contractor;

b) Whether an order has been made, or is being considered, by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal under the Home Building Act 1989 against a licensed contractor;

c)  Whether the circumstances are unrelated to the work of a licensed contractor.

 

Order No. 7 – Fence land

To Do What?

To fence land

In What Circumstances?

Public health, safety or convenience renders it necessary or expedient to do so and there is no adequate fence between the land and a public place

To Whom?

Owner or occupier of land

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration:

a) Whether the condition, location or use of the land poses a threat to the health, safety and convenience of the public.

 

Order No. 8 – Identify premises

To Do What?

To identify premises with such numbers or other identification in such a manner as is specified in the Order

In What Circumstances?

Premises have a frontage to or entrance from a road and there are no markings that can readily be seen and understood from the road

To Whom?

Owner or occupier of land

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration:

a)   Whether there is unauthorised use of, or duplication of, numbers;

b)   Whether numbers are not in accordance with the street patterns;

c)   Whether there is potential for confusion in the identification of premises; and

d)   Whether the owner/occupier had not complied with Council’s request for rectification.

 

Order No. 9 - Water body

To Do What?

To fence, empty, fill in or cover up a hole or waterhole in the manner specified in the Order

In What Circumstances?

Hole or waterhole is or may become dangerous to life

To Whom?

Owner or occupier of land

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration:

a)   The hole or waterhole is located within or adjoining/adjacent to an urban area and is directly accessible from a public place or another private property, and/or

b)   The hole or waterhole is not adequately covered or fenced to the minimum requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 to prevent direct access to it from a public place or any other private property, and/or

c)   The nature, location and depth of the hole or waterhole are considered to be dangerous to life.

Criteria Does Not Include:

Any hole or waterhole that falls under the definition of a swimming pool as defined in the Swimming Pools Act 1992, or one that is located outside of an urban area except for a) above.

 

Order No. 10 - Articles

To Do What?

To remove or stack articles or matter, to cover articles or matter, to erect fences or screens or to plant trees

In What Circumstances?

Land is in the immediate vicinity of a public place and is used for the storage of articles or matter so as to create or be likely to create unsightly conditions

To Whom?

Owner or occupier of land

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration:

a)   Definition of “article” or “matter” includes but is not limited to:-

I. Disused motor vehicles, caravans, trailers, boats or associated parts;

II. Disused machinery, equipment and appliances;

III.      Old, used or second-hand materials (including building materials);

IV.      Sand, soil, rock, blue metal and any other material derived from any extraction or dredging process;

V.      Any organic or vegetative material;

VI.      Any industrial or commercial waste products;

VII.     Any household rubbish or waste;

VIII.    Any recycled or composted material;

IX.      Furniture.

b)   Definition of “Land in the immediate vicinity of a public place” is any land that immediately adjoins a public place.

c)   The article(s) or matter must be visible from the public place.

 

Order No. 11 – Environmental damage

To Do What?

To do or to refrain from doing such things as are specified in the order to prevent environmental damage, to repair environmental damage or to prevent further environmental damage

In What Circumstances?

Work carried out on land has caused or is likely to cause environmental damage, being damage to the physical environment that is caused by:

a)   drainage; or

b)   drainage works; or

c)   obstructing a natural watercourse other than by a work constructed or used under a water management work approval granted under the Water Management Act 2000,

not being environmental damage arising from premises, works or equipment the subject of a licence issued under the Protection Of the Environment Operations Act 1997 or the subject of a notice or direction issued by a regulatory authority under that Act

To Whom?

Owner or occupier of land

Criteria

When determining whether a Notice of Proposed Order or Order is to be given, the following criteria are to be taken into consideration:

Physical environmental damage must be as a result of the flow of water over any land, discharged from the following sources:

a)   Drainage, being a drain or system of drains, whether artificial or natural, which are designed for the carrying of water other than sewerage and which includes a natural water course, or;

b)   Drainage works, being any part of the on-site process involved in the construction of a drain or drainage system and which includes, but is not limited to site excavation, materials, compiling and any associated buildings works, or;

c)   Obstruction of a natural water course, being the carrying out of building works or the deposition of any material in such a position as to block or restrict the flow of water within or to redirect the flow of water away from a natural water course.

 

Order No.12 – Control surface water

To Do What?

To do such things