NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

14 July 2016

 

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:

 

Nambucca Shire Council believes that the opportunity for any person to address the Council in relation to any matter which concerns them is an important demonstration of local democracy and our values.  Accordingly 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.

 

In relation to regulatory or enforcement matters it needs to be understood that the Council has certain legal obligations which will generally prevent the Council from providing an immediate response to any concerns or grievances which may be raised in the public forum.  In particular the Council has to provide procedural fairness and consider all relevant information.  Generally this cannot be done with matters which have come direct to Council via the public forum.  So the fact that the Council may not immediately agree to the representations and seek a report instead should not be taken to indicate disagreement or disinterest.

 

In the public forum 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 - 14 July 2016

 

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.

 

 

 

TIME

DESCRIPTION

WHERE

Leave Council Chambers at 3.30 pm

Item 9.2

Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11

Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads

 

AGENDA                                                                                                   Page

 

1        APOLOGIES

2        PRAYER

3        DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

4        CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES —

Ordinary Council Meeting - 30 June 2016...................................................................................... 7

5        NOTICES OF MOTION  

6        PUBLIC FORUM

7        ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE   

8        QUESTIONS FOR CLOSED MEETING WHERE DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED

9        General Manager Report

9.1     Outstanding Actions and Reports.................................................................................... 19

9.2     Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads ......... 25

9.3     Code of Meeting Practice - Arrangements for Site Inspections.......................................... 37

9.4     Modification to Development Consent DA2014/198 - Old Coast Road North Macksville..... 40

9.5     Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive................................................. 69

9.6     Minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 28 June 2016.... 103

9.7     Gordon Park Revised Masterplan and Plan of Management............................................ 107

9.8     Policy Review - Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution............................................ 117

9.9     Outstanding DAs greater than 12 months or where submissions received - 21 June 2016 - 5 July 2016.................................................................................................................................... 149

9.10   2016 June - Received Development Applications and Complying Development Applications 151

9.11   2016 June - Approved Construction and Complying Development Certificates................. 155

9.12   DA2015/093 - Use of shed as Depot - Modification - deferral of item.............................. 159

10      Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

10.1   Schedule of Council Public Meetings............................................................................. 162

10.2   EJ Biffin Playing Fields Committee of Management AGM - 7 March 2016 - Minutes.......... 163

10.3   Scotts Head Tennis Club Committee of Management - Minutes of the Annual General Meeting - 16 June 2016............................................................................................................................. 176

10.4   Investment Report To 30 June 2016 .............................................................................. 186


11      Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

11.1   NSW RFS - Amendment to Rural Fire Fighting Fund Allocation Methodology................... 191

11.2   Application for Temporary Road Closure  Drag-Ens Hot Rod Displays - 2016.................. 196

11.3   Bowra Dam - Endorsement of Review of Environmental Factors to support an ammendment to the licence conditions for environmental release................................................................... 198

11.4   Tender No. T008/2016 Construction of Landslip Remediation Structures -  Panel Contract. 263    

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

12.1   Tender T008/2016 - Construction of Landslip Remediation Structures - Panel Contract

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.

 

12.2   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.

  

            a      Questions raised by Councillors at 8 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

13      MEETING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC

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


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 30 June 2016

The following document is the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held 30 June 2016.  These minutes are subject to confirmation as to their accuracy at the next meeting to be held on Thursday 14 July 2016 and therefore subject to change.  Please refer to the minutes of 14 July 2016 for confirmation.

 

 

PRESENT

 

Cr Rhonda Hoban (Mayor)

Cr John Ainsworth

Cr Martin Ballangarry OAM

Cr Brian Finlayson

Cr Paula Flack

Cr Kim MacDonald

Cr Anne Smyth

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Paul Gallagher (Acting General Manager)

Daniel Walsh (Senior Town Planner)

Monika Schuhmacher (Minute Secretary)

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Cr Elaine South

Cr Bob Morrison

Michael Coulter (General Manager)

Scott Norman (AGM Corporate Services)

 

 

PRAYER

 

Pastor Paul Richardson of the Seventh Day Adventist Church offered a prayer on behalf of the Nambucca Minister's Association.

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

Councillor R Hoban declared a non-pecuniary significant conflict of interest in Item 9.7 DA2016/050 Dwelling House and Shed Lot 114 DP 861793 Valla Road, Valla under the Local Government Act as Cr Hoban advised that up until approximately ten years ago her parents owned property adjoining the Rudders’ property.

 

Councillor PF Flack declared a non-pecuniary less significant conflict of interest in Item 9.10 Submissions to the Proposed Environmental Levy Budget 2016/17 under the Local Government Act as Cr Flack is a non-executive member of the Nambucca Valley Conservation Association which had lodged a submission on the proposed Environmental Levy Program. 

 

Councillor A Smyth declared a non-pecuniary less significant conflict of interest in Item 9.10 Submissions to the Proposed Environmental Levy Budget 2016/17 under the Local Government Act as Cr Smyth is a non-executive member of the Nambucca Valley Conservation Association which had lodged a submission on the proposed Environmental Levy Program. 

 

Councillor K MacDonald pecuniary interest in Item 11.4 Tender T009/2016 Panel Tender for the supply of Plant and Truck Hire and Road Maintenance Services under the Local Government Act as a significant number of the tender applicants are supplied fuel by her employer.  Cr MacDonald left the meeting for this item.

 


 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Council Meeting 16 June 2016

 

274/16 RESOLVED:        (MacDonald/Smyth)

 

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting of 16 June 2016 be confirmed.


 

 

DELEGATIONS

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the following delegations be heard:

 

9.4  Dawkins Park Improvements

          i)     Ms Janet Court—Supporting Option 2

 

9.7  DA2016/050 Dwelling house and shed Lot 114 DP 861793 Valla Road, Valla

          i)       Mr Guido Eberding—Architect

          ii)      Ms Monica Heafey—Land owner

          iii)     Mrs Kay Rudder—Objector

 

Ms Court addressed Council making the following points:

·    Supports option 2 - with the islands

·    Keeping birds is good idea

·    Their management is appropriate

·    Water needs to be kept clean

·    Making this whole area attractive is most important

·    Macksville will need to entice travellers to stop once bypass is open

·    Ibis have come here as their area west of the Divide has disappeared

·    People should not leave food around for Ibis to feed on

·    Birds are not the only reason for the poor water quality

·    The edges of the dam are steep (need to be a shallower edge) as there is nowhere for grasses etc to grow on edges to take nutrients out of the water and make water fresher and safer

·    Need a professional to tell Council how to fix the lagoon

·    Asks Councillors to support option 2 with the islands and that water quality and Ibis management is addressed.

·    The islands are there as a sanctuary.  A permanent bridge to the island is not a good idea as it will encourage predator animals. 

 

ITEM 9.4      PRF47                300616      Dawkins Park Improvements

275/16   RESOLVED:      (Flack/Smyth)                 

 

1        That Council endorse Design Option 2, without a permanent pedestrian bridge, to the island within the Dawkins Park Landscape Enhancement Plan dated 21 June 2016 for implementation (Option 2 retains the islands in the centre of the lake).

 

2        That Council seeks expressions of interest from appropriate qualified professionals to prepare an Australian White Ibis Management Plan for Dawkins Park.

 

3        That Council seek expression of interest from appropriately qualified engineering firms to prepare storm water management solutions for the various areas of Dawkins Park including inlets, overland drains, outlets etc. Expressions of interest will also be requested to provide a fee estimate to prepare a management plan for the catchment which includes Hughes Creek (Macksville Drain).  

 

 

 

 

276/16 Resolved:        (Ainsworth/MacDonald)

 

That Council seeks expression of interest from suitably qualified professionals regarding advice on endemic native plantings to improve water quality and to discourage the attraction of flying foxes.

 

277/16 Resolved:        (Hoban/MacDonald)

 

That Council agree to retain the Poinciana Tree planted in memory of Mr Dawkins and include its protection in the Plan of Management


 

 

DELEGATIONS continued

 

Mr Guido Eberding—Architect— addressed Council to a prepared paper which is on file DA2016/050

 

Ms Monica Heafey—Land owner— addressed Council to a prepared paper which is on file DA2016/050

 

Mrs Kay Rudder—Objector—addressed Council to a prepared paper which is on file DA2016/050

 

ITEM 9.7      DA2016/050        300616      DA2016/050 Dwelling House and Shed Lot 114 DP 861793 Valla Road, Valla

Motion:      (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Development Consent be granted for the proposal as applied for, in accordance with the recommended conditions of Development Consent included in this report.

 

Amendment:       (Ainsworth/Hoban)

 

That Development Consent be granted for the proposal as applied for, in accordance with the recommended conditions of Development Consent included in this report with the exception that the house be situated at 80 metres.

 

For the motion:               Councillors Hoban, Ainsworth    Total 2

Against the motion:         Councillors Ballangarry, Flack Smyth Finlayson MacDonald       Total 5

 

The amendment was LOST

 

278/16 Resolved:        (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Development Consent be granted for the proposal as applied for, in accordance with the recommended conditions of Development Consent included in this report.

 

For the motion:               Councillors Ballangarry, Flack, Smyth and Finlayson        (Total 4)

Against the motion:         Councillors Hoban Ainsworth and Macdonald                   (Total 3)

 

Note: Cr Ainsworth requested that his vote be recorded against the motion as he believes there will be possible future conflict with agricultural activities on the adjoining land.

Note: Cr Hoban and Cr MacDonald requested that their votes be recorded against the motion as they believe there will be possible future conflict with agricultural activities on the adjoining land and the legal covenant registered on the title.


 

 

ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE

 

There were no questions with notice.

 


QUESTIONS FOR CLOSED MEETING WHERE DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED

 

There were no questions for Closed Meeting where due notice has been received.


 

 

General Manager Report

 

ITEM 9.1      SF959                300616      Outstanding Actions and Reports

279/16 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

 

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


 

 

ITEM 9.2      SF112                300616      2016 Christmas/New Year Closure - Administration Centre

280/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/MacDonald)

 

1        That the Administration Centre be closed between Christmas and New Year and that affected staff be directed to take leave for the period Wednesday 28 to Friday 30 December 2016.

 

2        That the General Manager be given delegated authority to determine the annual Christmas closure period.


 

 

ITEM 9.3      SF2173              300616      Outstanding DAs greater than 12 months or where submissions received - 8 June 2016 - 21 June 2016

281/16 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

 

That the information be noted by Council.


 

Item 9.4 was dealt with under Delegations.


 

ITEM 9.5      SF1148              300616      Council Ranger's Report May 2016

282/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/MacDonald)

 

That Council’s Ranger’s report for May 2016 be received and noted by Council.

 


 

 

ITEM 9.6      SF2025              300616      Joint Organisations - Operational Arrangements

283/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

1        That Council make a submission to the Office of Local Government (OLG) regarding the Joint Organisation (JO) Model. 

 

·    That the submission be limited to recommending the boundaries of the JO in which Nambucca Shire will be included.

 

·    That the recommendation be that Nambucca Shire is comfortable with membership of the North Coast JO and feels that those boundaries represent a distinct community of interested based around Coffs Harbour as a strong regional centre. 

 

·    However as it is now evident the JO will take on many of the functions of the current Regional Organisation and that the cost of being part of a JO will far exceed the cost of participating in MIDROC; Council would be agreeable to the alternative of being part of a larger JO, comprising the combination of the North Coast and Mid North Coast JO’s. 

 

·    This approximates the membership of MIDROC, an organisation that has functioned successfully for a long time.  Such a membership would include more than one regional centre and more than one corresponding community of interest, Council does not consider this to be a significant hurdle and argues that the topography, demographics and regional issues are more alike than they are different and the combined Joint Organisation would be well placed to deliver the proposed core functions.

 

2        That Council support initially limiting the new JO to the core functions as prescribed by the NSW Government and structuring the new entity so it can effectively deliver these core functions at the minimum cost.

 


Item 9.7 was dealt with under Delegations.


 

 

ITEM 9.8      DA2012/011        300616      Modification DA2012/011 Nambucca Gardens Estate - Lot 2 DP 1119830 Alexandra Drive, Nambucca Heads

284/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That Council supports the following:

 

1        That a 50/50 sharing arrangement for the upgrade of Alexandra Drive in lieu of contributions in accordance with the BLR&TIDP 2009. A Bank guarantee for $500,000 being provided as security

 

2        That the 50% contribution to the upgrading cost of Alexandra Drive will fall due upon the opening of new Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Pacific Highway upgrade and no later than July 2018.

 

3        That no more than 75 lots be created within the approved subdivision before the opening of new Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Pacific Highway upgrade and no later than July 2018.

 

4        That all heavy vehicles required for the construction of the subdivision not be allowed to use Alexandra Drive for access until the road is reconstructed.

 

For the motion:                Councillors Finlayson, Ainsworth, MacDonald and Hoban           (Total 4)

Against the motion:         Councillors Ballangarry, Flack and Smyth                                   (Total 3)


 

 

ITEM 9.9      SF544                300616      Bellwood Local  Roads and Traffic Infrastructure Development Contribution Plan 2009 - withdrawal

285/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That the Bellwood Local Roads and Traffic Infrastructure Plan 2009 be noted as obsolete and be extinguished.

 

For the motion:               Councillors Hoban, MacDonald, Ainsworth, Finlayson, Smyth, Flack and                                              Ballangarry            (Total 7)

Against the motion:         Nil


 


 

ITEM 9.10    SF688                300616      Submissions to the Proposed Environmental Levy Budget 2016/17

286/16 RESOLVED:        (Flack/Ballangarry)

 

1        That Council adopt the amended 2016/17 budget for the Environmental Levy as provided in the body of this report.

 

2        That other income to the general fund be used to subsidise overheads in excess of those funds allocated to the environmental levy budget.


 

 

General Manager Report – LATE

 

ITEM 9.11    SF2195              300616      2016 World Rally - Management of Reconnaissance Stages

motion:      (MacDonald/Finlayson)

 

That Council provide Rally Australia with permission to conduct their reconnaissance stages for the 2016 Rally in accordance with their proposal, including a one way traffic arrangement for each reconnaissance stage.

 

Amendment:       (Finlayson/Flack)

 

That in the interest of public safety each road be totally closed for a period of three hours only and that the reconnaissance be conducted in accordance with the pre-race conditions ie support vehicles run the road in advance of the rally vehicles to ensure all public vehicles are off the road and that Rally Australia undertake the consultation with all property owners and public notification to the same level that applies to Rally Race Day road closures.

 

The amendment was carried and it became the motion and it was:

 

287/16 Resolved:        (Finlayson/Flack)

 

That in the interest of public safety each road be totally closed for a period of three hours only and that the reconnaissance be conducted in accordance with the pre-race conditions ie support vehicles run the road in advance of the rally vehicles to ensure all public vehicles are off the road and that Rally Australia undertake the consultation with all property owners and public notification to the same level that applies to Rally Race Day road closures.

 

Note: Cr Smyth requested her vote be recorded against this motion as she believes that our public have been inconvenienced enough and they should not have to endure further road closures so the drivers can practice their driving skills.


 

 

General Manager Report – LATE

 

ITEM 9.12    SF578                300616      "Caretaker" Arrangements Prior to the 2016 Local Government Election

288/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That the information concerning the “caretaker” arrangements which will commence on Friday 12 August 2016 and end on Saturday 10 September 2016 be received.


 


 

Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

 

ITEM 10.1    SF2130              300616      Making of Rates and Charges 2016/2017

289/16 RESOLVED:        (MacDonald/Ainsworth)

 

1          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act, the annual access charge for water supply services to all properties connected or able to be connected to Council’s water supply in accordance with Section 552(1) of the Act for 2016/2017 is made at one hundred and thirty eight dollars ($138.00) per occupancy for each assessment, for a 20mm or 25mm connection; five hundred and fifty two dollars ($552.00) for a 40mm connection, eight hundred and sixty three dollars ($863.00) for a 50mm connection, two thousand two hundred and eight dollars ($2,208.00) for a 80mm connection and three thousand four hundred and fifty dollars ($3,450.00) for a 100mm connection, to be charged per connection for each assessment; and one hundred and thirty eight dollars ($138.00) for vacant or unconnected land per assessment, and have a short title of “Water Access”; and a consumption charge of two dollars and eighty three cents ($2.83) per kilolitre to apply to all water consumption billed during the financial year and such charge to have a short title of “Water Charge” in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

2          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act the annual access charge for sewerage services to all properties connected or able to be connected to Council's sewer in accordance with Section 552(3) of the Act for 2016/2017 is made at five hundred and ninety eight dollars ($598.00) per occupancy for each assessment for residential connections; for non-residential connections two hundred and eighteen dollars ($218.00)  for 20mm or 25mm connection, eight hundred and seventy two dollars ($872.00) for 40mm connection, one thousand three hundred and sixty two dollars ($1,362.00) for 50mm connection, three thousand four hundred and eighty eight dollars ($3,488.00) for 80mm connection and five thousand four hundred and fifty dollars ($5,450.00) for 100mm connection, per connection for each assessment; and two hundred and eighteen dollars ($218.00) for vacant or unconnected land per assessment, and have a short title of “Sewer Access”; and a sewer usage charge of three dollars and thirty one cents ($3.31) per kilolitre to be calculated on the estimated volume discharged from properties, excluding residential connections, using the total water consumption based on NSW Department of Water and Energy guidelines and such charge to have a short title of "Sewer Usage Charge" and be included on the ‘Water Account’.

 

3          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act, the waste management tip provision charge for 2016/2017 is made at one hundred and forty three dollars ($143.00) per assessment for properties categorised as Business or Farmland, or are Non Rateable, that are not vacant but do not, or have elected not to, receive a commercial waste service or are not on a waste collection route, or vacant land where the service is available; such charge to have the short title of “Tip Provision”.


 

4          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 496 of the Act, the annual charge for 2016/2017 for domestic waste service on all occupied rateable land in the Shire, categorised Farmland or Residential under Section 515 or 516 of the Act, or are Non Rateable properties to which a domestic waste service is provided, is made at five hundred and twenty seven dollars ($527.00) per occupancy for each assessment which contains up to and including five residential occupancies, such charge to have a short title of “Full Domestic Waste Service”, the amount of the annual charge will be the amount derived by applying the formula A = B x $527.00, where “A” equals the annual charge, “B” equals the number of occupancies and $527.00 is the unit price. Residential assessments with six or more occupancies, upon request, may be charged one full service charge of five hundred and twenty seven dollars ($527.00) and sufficient additional bins, at the appropriate charge, to service the waste collection requirements of the assessment, as agreed between the property owner and the Council’s Waste Management Officer.

            A waste management ‘tip provision’ annual charge of one hundred and forty three dollars ($143.00) for the year 2016/2017 is made for properties categorised Farmland or Residential or are Non Rateable, that are not vacant, but do not receive a domestic waste service or are not on a waste collection route.

 

5          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 496 of the Act the annual charge for 2016/2017 for domestic waste on all vacant rateable land in the Shire, categorised Residential (under Section 516 of the Local Government Act 1993) or are Non Rateable and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head and the villages of Taylors Arm Upper, Taylors Arm Lower, Eungai Rail, Eungai Creek, Warrell Creek and Donnellyville and all land within the rural sector with a residential building entitlement, including land categorised as Farmland, where the domestic waste collection service is available, is made at one hundred and forty three dollars ($143.00) per assessment, such charge to have short title of “Vacant Waste Management”.

 

6          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act, the annual charge for 2016/2017 for waste service on all occupied rateable land in the Shire, categorised Business (under Section 518 of the Act) to which a waste service is provided, or is Non Rateable land to which a non-residential waste service is provided, is made at five hundred and twenty seven dollars ($527.00) per occupancy per assessment, such charge to have a short title of “Full Commercial Waste Service”, the amount of the annual charge will be the amount derived by applying the formula A = B x $527.00, where “A” equals the annual charge, “B” equals the number of separate occupancies and $527.00 is the unit price.

 

7          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act the annual charge for waste for 2016/2017 on all vacant rateable land in the Shire, categorised Business (under Section 518 of the Act) or is Non Rateable land, and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head and the villages of Taylors Arm Upper, Taylors Arm Lower, Eungai Rail, Eungai Creek, Warrell Creek and Donnellyville, is made at one hundred and forty three dollars ($143.00) per assessment, such charge to have a short title of “Vacant Waste Management”.


 

8          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2016/2017 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed non strata residential land located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at twenty five dollars ($25.00) per land parcel/assessment, such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Charge".

 

9          Council resolves that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2016/2017 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed strata residential land located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at twelve dollars and fifty cents ($12.50) per lot/assessment, such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Res-Strata ".

 

10         Council resolves that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2016/2017 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed business land and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at twenty five dollars ($25.00) per land parcel/assessment plus an additional twenty five dollars ($25.00) for each 350 square metres or part of 350 square metres by which the area of the parcel of land exceeds 350 square metres, such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Business " and be capped at $100.00 per assessment.

 

11         Council resolves that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2016/2017 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed business strata lots/land and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at an amount equal to twenty five dollars ($25.00) per strata plan land parcel (parent parcel) plus an additional twenty five dollars ($25.00) for each 350 square metres or part of 350 square metres by which the area of the parcel of land exceeds 350 square metres and capped at one hundred dollars ($100.00) then be charged the greater of five dollars ($5.00) or the relevant proportion of the maximum annual charge that would apply to the land subject to the strata scheme (the ‘relevant proportion’ is the proportion that the unit entitlement of that lot in the scheme bears to the aggregate unit entitlement of the scheme), such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Bus-Strata".

 

12         Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero zero five nine two nine dollars ($0.005929) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category of “Farmland”, is made for the year 2016/2017, subject to a minimum rate of five hundred and six dollars ($506.00) per assessment, in accordance with Section 458 of the Act, such rate to apply to all properties categorised as “Farmland”, pursuant to Section 515 of the Act, such rate to a short title of “Farmland” in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

13         Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero zero six zero nine seven dollars ($0.006097) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category “Residential” is made for the year 2016/2017, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and seventy three dollars ($773.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all properties categorised as “Residential”, pursuant to Section 516 of the Act, excluding all properties in the sub categories “Town” and “Village/Estates”, such rate to have a separate short title of “Residential Non-Urban”.


 

14         Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero zero six zero nine seven dollars ($0.006097) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category “Residential”, sub category “Town” is made for the year 2016/2017, pursuant to Section 516 of the Act, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and seventy three dollars ($773.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable land located in centres of population described as comprising all properties zoned residential, located in the towns of Nambucca Heads, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville, Scotts Head and Valla Beach and serviced or able to be serviced with water supply, sewerage, or septic tank, such rate to have a separate short title of “Residential Town”.

 

15         Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero zero six zero nine seven dollars ($0.006097) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category “Residential”, sub-category “Village/Estates” is made for the year 2016/2017, pursuant to Section 516 of the Act, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and seventy three dollars ($773.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable land located in the villages of Eungai Rail, Eungai Creek, Warrell Creek, Donnellyville, Taylors Arm – Upper and Lower, and all Estates comprising all residential land within the rural sector with a residential building entitlement and within a subdivision both past and present which results in the concentration of holdings to create an estate of two or more lots, all ribbon development residential lots along rural roads contiguous to developed estates and villages and all ribbon development residential lots along rural roads immediately opposite to developed estates, such rate to have a separate short title “Residential Village/Estates”.

 

16        Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero zero eight two dollars ($0.0082) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category “Business” is made for the year 2016/2017, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and seventy three dollars ($773.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all properties  categorised as “Business”, pursuant to Section 518 of the Act, excluding all properties in the sub categories “Caravan Park”, “CBD” and “Industrial Estate”, such rate to have a separate short title of “Business Ordinary”.

 

17        Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero zero eight nine eight dollars ($0.00898) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category “Business”, sub category “Caravan Park”, is made for the year 2016/2017,  pursuant to Section 518 of the Act, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and seventy three dollars ($773.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable properties categorised as Business sub category “Caravan Park” and have a short title of “Business Caravan Park”.

 

18        Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero one two four seven dollars ($0.01247) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category “Business”, sub category “CBD” is made for the year 2016/2017, pursuant to Section 518 of the Act, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and seventy three dollars ($773.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable properties categorised as “Business”, sub category “CBD” in the towns of Nambucca Heads, Bowraville, Macksville, Valla Beach, and Scotts Head and such rate to have a separate short title of “Business CBD”.

 

19      Council resolves that a rate of zero point zero zero seven seven seven three dollars ($0.007773) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category “Business”, sub category “Industrial Estate” is made for the year 2016/2017, pursuant to Section 518 of the Act, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and seventy three dollars ($773.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable properties categorised as “Business”, sub category “Industrial Estate” in the towns of Nambucca Heads and Macksville, and such rate to have a short title of “Business Industrial”.

 

20    Council resolves that a special rate, pursuant to Section 495 of the Act, consisting of a base amount of twenty one dollars ($21.00) per assessment, with a short title of “Environmental Base” and an ad-valorem amount of zero point zero zero zero one four seven six dollars ($0.0001476) on the land value of all rateable land in Council’s area (refer Section 538 of the Act), with a short title of “Environmental Levy”, is made for the year 2016/2017. The base amount will produce approximately forty nine point three six percent (49.36%) of the total amount payable by the levying of the special rate so as to comply with Section 500 of the Act.

 

21        Council resolves that an annual charge of ninety six dollars ($96.00) for Category 1 (Low Risk) Sewer Trade Waste is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title “Trade Waste Fee–Cat 1”.

 

22        Council resolves that an annual charge of ninety six dollars ($96.00) for Category 1A (Low Risk) Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title “Trade Waste Fee–Cat 1A”, with an additional charge of one dollar and eighty cents ($1.80) per kilolitre for Non-Conforming Usage (if required pre-treatment is not installed or properly maintained), is made for the 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 502 of the Act.

 

23        Council resolves that an annual charge of one hundred and fifty nine dollars ($159.00) for Category 2 (Medium Risk) Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title “Trade Waste Fee–Cat 2”, with a usage charge of one dollar and eighty cents ($1.80) per kilolitre or sixteen dollars and nine cents ($16.09) per kilolitre for Non-Conforming Usage (if required pre-treatment is not installed or properly maintained), is made for the 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 502 of the Act.

 

24        Council resolves that an annual charge of one hundred and fifty nine dollars ($159.00) for Category 3 (High Risk) Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title “Trade Waste Fee–Cat 3”, with an additional charge of one dollar and fifteen cents ($1.15) per kilogram for Excess Mass, is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 502 of the Act.

 

25        Council resolves that an annual charge of ninety six dollars ($96.00) for Category 4 Septic tank Effluent Disposal Sewer Trade Waste is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title “Trade Waste Fee–Cat 4”.

 

26        Council resolves that an annual charge of ninety six dollars ($96.00) for Category 4 Caravan Dump Effluent Disposal, is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title “Trade Waste Fee–Cat 4”, with a charge of one hundred and forty dollars ($140.00) for Disposal at Treatment Works with a maximum of 2,500L, disposals over 2,500L will have an additional charge of fifty one dollars ($51.00) per 1000L, is made for the year 2016/2017 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act.

 

27        Council resolves that an annual charge of one hundred and eighty dollars ($180.00) for On-site Sewer Management Systems (OSSMS) operated in the high risk zone is made for the year 2016-2017 pursuant to Section 68 of the Act and have a short title “OSSMS Zone 1”; properties with less than three OSSMS will be charged one charge unit while properties with three or more OSSMS will be charged two charge units.

 

28        Council resolves that an annual charge of fifty five dollars ($55.00) for On-site Sewer Management Systems (OSSMS) operated in the medium risk zone is made for the year 2016-2017 pursuant to Section 68 of the Act and have a short title “OSSMS Zone 5”; properties with less than three OSSMS will be charged one charge unit while properties with three or more OSSMS will be charged two charge units.

 

29        Council resolves that an annual charge of thirty dollars ($30.00) for On-site Sewer Management Systems (OSSMS) operated in the low risk zone is made for the year 2016-2017 pursuant to Section 68 of the Act and have a short title “OSSMS Zone 10”; properties with less than three OSSMS will be charged one charge unit while properties with three or more OSSMS will be charged two charge units.

 

30        Council resolves that an interest rate of 8.0% per annum is set for the year 2016/2017, pursuant to Section 566 of the Act, and be charged on overdue rates and charges.

 


 

 

ITEM 10.2    SF251                300616      Schedule of Council Public Meetings

290/16 RESOLVED:        (Flack/Ainsworth)

 

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    SF85                  300616      Minutes of the NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee - 10 May 2016

291/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That Council receive, note the report and endorse the minutes from the RFS Liaison Committee Meeting Service Level Agreement - 2015/16 held on Wednesday 10 May 2016.


 

 

ITEM 11.2    SF2080              300616      Pacific Highway Handover Presentation

292/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Flack)

 

That Council receive and note the presentation by Greg Powter Consulting on the progress of Pacific Highway asset hand over and estimated costs to Council.


 

 

ITEM 11.3    SF931                300616      Tender T251516MNC Provision of Linemarking Services 2016 - 2018

293/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Flack)

 

1        That Council award the T251516MNC Provision of Linemarking Services contract as a Panel Source Supplier to allow Council the best opportunity of price and flexibility of services the period 1 August 2016 to 30 June 2018, and

 

2        That a provision be allowed by Council for a 12 month extension based on satisfactory supplier performance, which may take this contract through to 30 June 2019.

 

3        That Council endorse the tender evaluation for the tenders as provided in the confidential report for T251516MNC Provision of Linemarking Services as a Panel Source Tender.

 

For the motion:               Councillors Hoban, MacDonald, Ainsworth, Finlayson, Smyth, Flack and                                              Ballangarry            (Total 7)

Against the motion:         Nil


 

 

Cr MacDonald left the meeting for Item 11.4 at 7.47 pm and returned after the conclusion of Item 11.4 at 7.48 pm.

 

ITEM 11.4    T009/2016           300616      Tender T009/2016 Panel Tender for the supply of Plant and Truck Hire and Road Maintenance Services

294/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Flack)

 

1        That Council accept all twenty-six (26) submissions for Tender T009/2016 for the Supply of Plant and Truck Hire and Road Maintenance Services for the period commencing 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2018 to allow Council the best opportunity of price and flexibility of services.

 

 

2        That a provision be allowed by Council for a 12 month extension subject to contractors satisfying Council’s Performance Assessment Criteria which may take this contract through to 30 June 2019.

 

For the motion:               Councillors Hoban, Ainsworth, Finlayson, Smyth, Flack and Ballangarry                                               (Total 6)

Against the motion:         Nil


    

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.1    SF2182              300616      Tender T251516MNC for the supply of Provision of Linemarking Services

295/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That the report in Closed Meeting be received and noted.


 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Mayor then closed the meeting the time being 8.17 pm. 

 

Confirmed and signed by the Mayor on 14 July 2016.

 

 

 

 

CR RHONDA HOBAN

MAYOR

(CHAIRPERSON)

 

          


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager

ITEM 9.1      SF959              140716         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

The draft Floodplain Risk Management Plan has been circulated to Councillors and the Estuary Committee.

Council has received a preliminary draft of the flood Risk Management Study and Plan which is presently being reviewed. The report will be distributed to Council and the Nambucca Rivers Creeks and Coastline Management Committee after this review is complete.

Council staff and OEH are reviewing the draft.  The draft requires further work before it can be circulated to the Estuary Committee and Councillors.

 

Draft now being circulated to Estuary Committee and Councillors.

 

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

The project is awaiting the completion of the floodplain risk management matrix.

Council has received a preliminary draft of the flood Risk Management Study and Plan which is presently being reviewed. The report will be distributed to Council and the Nambucca Rivers Creeks and Coastline Management Committee after this review is complete.

 

Council staff are still in the process of reviewing the draft document.

 

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.

Not provided to Councillors on 29 October - now propose to provide to Councillors mid December 2015 for comment. 

 

Deferred whilst trialling the International Society of Arboriculture, Tree Hazard Evaluation form which is intended to replace the tree inspection form within the policy. The policy in its present form has shown some issues pertaining to property owners wanting healthy trees removed citing the criteria in the policy, the new form provides greater transparency and clarity   

 

 

DECEMBER 2013

 

4

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 issued 30 November 2015.

 

On-going progress report on Council’s capital works program with a monthly update to be listed on Council’s website.

 

 

MARCH 2015

 

5

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.

The early estimates of annual depreciation for the northern section of the Pacific Hwy (Nambucca Heads to Oyster Creek) assets are proposed to be transferred is approximately $1million per annum.

Council is expecting receiving a written offer from the RMS in relation to the handover.

Council received a briefing from the consultants reviewing the RMS assets to be handed over to Council on 30 June 2016 and a compensation package will not be developed until the transfer of traffic onto the new highway as the pavement can’t be assessed until the traffic is transferred off the old highway.

 

A report on the status of the Bridges is anticipated in August

 

 

AUGUST 2015

 

6

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.

Nil response from the Minister to date, another letter sent 3 December 2015.

Response received from Minister and report to a meeting in March 2016.

 

Minister referred staff to Forests and a meeting is being organised with Forests NSW in 2016 for further discussion with a report to be presented to Council afterwards.

 

 

SEPTEMBER 2015

 

7

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

Council briefing planned for April 2016

Consultants engaged. RMS reviewing data supply.

Still being assessed; report not complete; briefing now scheduled for 28 April 2016.

Consult not available for 28 April, will report to the 26 May 2016 meeting.

Deferred until Council receives expected offer from the RMS.

 

Council received a briefing from the consultants reviewing the RMS assets to be handed over to Council on 30 June 2016 and a compensation package will not be developed until the transfer of traffic onto the new highway as the pavement can’t be assessed until the traffic is transferred off the old highway.

 

 

OCTOBER 2014

 

8

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

Trial date not set as the Coordinator Strategic Planning and Natural Resources has to carry out a further round of public consultation regarding landscaping that includes the design for the roundabout and gauge feedback from effected business.

 

The roundabout is required to slow approaching traffic, and manage vehicles reversing into the carriageway. Design parameters at the bend require greater investigation before changing the parking arrangements.

 

 

9

DA2015/

191

 

29/10/15

That Council take action regarding the unapproved shipping container at 21 George Street, Bowraville.

 

GM

Notice of Intention to Serve an Order has been issued (was issued prior to the Council meeting on 29/10/15).

Letter sent.10 February 2016.

The number of cats was reduced to an acceptable number but an inspection in January indicated that breeding cages were being used.  A notice of intention to serve an order will be served.

Discussed with staff on 6/4/2016.  Final warning to be provided to lodge a DA or receive a fine for undertaking development without consent.  Raised the matter again with staff on 17 June 2016.  Action to be taken.

 

 

10

SF1031

29/10/15

That the General Manager follow up the question of the appropriate number of companion animals at 21 George Street, Bowraville, and the requirement for a DA for the shipping container.

 

GM

Inspection being arranged.  Report to Council in late November/early December.  Proposed to report to second meeting in January 2016.

 

A letter has been sent requiring the lodgement of a DA for the continued use of the container.

 

NOVEMBER 2015

 

11

SF2068

12/11/15

Council receive a future report on the preferred treatment options & procurement process to gain the most economical outcome for the recycled water scheme at the Bowraville STP.

 

AGMES

Report in 2016

 

12

SF1855

26/11/15

That Council receive a report regarding any options for traffic lights at River Street and Cooper Street following the completion of the Macksville by-pass.

 

GM

Report late 2017

 

FEBRUARY 2016

 

13

SF848

11/2/16

That the customer’s progress in reducing the outstanding balance on their water account be reviewed in July 2016 in a report to Council.

 

AGMCS

List for a meeting in July 2016

Report to 14 July 2016 meeting

 

MARCH 2016

 

14

LF7116

31/3/16

That Council receive a report from the Engineer on options for improving water flow through the property (8 Loftus Lane) and the costs of those options.

 

AGMES

Report to June meeting following of assessment by design staff.

A report will be prepared for July after a catchment assessment is undertaken by design staff as there a number of design priorities for Council’s capital works program.

 

Report to 28 July Council meeting

 

 

APRIL 2016

 

15

SF1540

14/4/16

That Council apply to RMS through the Local Government Road Safety Program to have the speed limit from the railway bridge to the western side of Kuta Ave on Valla Beach Road reduced to 40kph.

 

AGMES

Letter sent

 

16

SF2183

14/4/16

That Council includes an annual Sustainable Energy Use and Climate Change Adaptation Program budget in its Environment Levy Program and considers appropriate project opportunities when it considers the draft 2016/17 Environment Levy Program and Budget.

 

GM

Proposals to be included in the 2016-17 Budget papers

Reported to 30 June Council meeting.

 

MAY 2016

 

17

SF251

12/5/16

Council investigate opportunities for securing financial interests in the Gordon Park Tennis Courts and associated buildings.

 

GM

Report in July 2016

 

18

SF818

12/5/16

Council receive a further report at the completion of the exhibition period for the Bowra Dam – request to amend the operating licence.

 

AGMES

Report August 2016

Report in 14 July business paper

 

19

DA2014/198

26/5/16

Modification to DA consent to allow connection between Florence Wilmont Drive and Old Coast Road be deferred to qualify ownership of Right of Way and investigate statements.

 

GM

Report to 16 June 2016.

The matter has been referred to Council’s solicitor but as at the close of the business paper a written opinion has not been obtained.  Consequently it has been necessary to defer the report to the meeting on 30 June 2016.

Report in 14 July business paper

 

20

SF2130

26/5/16

Staff investigate opportunities to develop projects using solar panels and report back with ideas including opportunities to reduce energy costs at the Bowra Dam such as floating solar panels.  Report to look at funding opportunities.

 

AGMES

Report to 11 August 2016

 

 

 

JUNE 2016

 

21

SF2172

16/6/16

That Council staff provide a report on a revised (bulky goods waste) voucher system being:

a. 2 vouchers used for 2 deliveries

b. two vouchers, of which one can be used for collection and the other used for delivery.

 

AGMES

Report to 28 July 2016 following the closure of community survey

 

22

SF2025

16/6/16

There be a further report to Council’s meeting on 30 June concerning Council’s submission on the proposals for Joint Organisations.

 

AGMCS

Report 30 June 2016

Submission forwarded 4 July 2016

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.2      LF968              140716         Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

Council has received representations from residents of Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads who are unhappy about the drainage of their land.  The issues are:

 

1        A table drain issue exists at the vehicular crossings whereby stormwater travels down the driveways of house no’s 7, 9, 10 and 11.

 

2        Overflow of the drainage reserve between no’s 10 and 11 affecting Mr Hussell.

 

3        The drainage of the wetland affecting Mr Hussell.

 

A Council inspection with the affected residents present may assist in reaching an agreement as to the nature, timing and funding of remedial work.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the inspection of stormwater drainage issues pertaining to No’s 7, 9, 10 and 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are a number of potential options in relation to the matter.

 

Council has finite resources to attend to drainage issues.  These are generally prioritised to attend to those matters which affect habitable areas first with other drainage issues being of secondary priority.

 

In relation to the particular drainage problems at Bangalow Drive it is apparent that there are different issues related firstly to the street drainage system and secondly to the low lying nature of some land contained within private property.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has received representations from residents of Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads who are unhappy about the drainage of their land.

 

The most recent correspondence from Mr Hussell of 10 Bangalow Drive is attached together with a response from myself.  Mr Hussell has advised that an inspection by the Council on 14 July would be suitable to him.  Also attached is other correspondence from property owners from 16 October 2015 together with a response from Council’s Assistant General Manager Engineering Services.  The correspondence has been placed in date order.

 

Council’s Manager Infrastructure Services advises that there are a number of drainage issues affecting the residents of Bangalow Drive.  These are:

 

1.       A table drain issue exists at the vehicular crossings whereby stormwater travels down the driveways of house no’s 7, 9, 11 and 10.

 

2.       Overflow of the drainage reserve between no’s 10 and 11 affecting Mr Hussell.

 

3.       The drainage of the wetland affecting Mr Hussell.

 

Council staff did propose to undertake some maintenance activities to the table drain adjacent to house no’s 7, 9, 10, 11 as well as to the drainage reserve at the cul-de-sac head.

 

However any maintenance activity undertaken by Council would only be temporary unless the residents agreed to construct council approved vehicular crossings with appropriate consideration being given to drainage.  In response the residents have indicated that if they were going to contribute funds they would seek a guarantee that the works would resolve their stormwater drainage issues.  In these circumstances the drainage solution would require a detailed design.

 

One option put forward by Council’s Manager Infrastructure Services is that subject to residents’ agreeing to fund the cost of installing new footpath vehicular crossings as per a design, that the crossing replacements be combined with maintenance works which would enable most of stormwater drainage issues to be resolved in one visit of plant and equipment saving on significant establishment costs.

 

A Council inspection with the affected residents present may assist in reaching an agreement as to the nature, timing and funding of remedial work.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Manager Infrastructure Services and the Assistant General Manager Engineering Services.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no significant implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no significant social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no significant economic implications.

 

Risk

 

The major risk pertains to implementing a design solution which will alleviate the issues pertaining to the table drain.  Improving the drainage of low lying private owned land which borders a natural wetland will be difficult.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The budgetary impact is unknown at this stage.  It will require the costing of a completed design.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

At this stage the impact on working funds is unknown.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There will need to be a commitment of time by Council’s Engineering Designer to complete a design for the drainage work.

 

Attachments:

1

32840/2015 - Request for Council to inspect inadequate stormwater drainage

 

2

14536/2016 - Response relating to stormwater drainage issues

 

3

17506/2016 - Complaint regarding lack of response

 

4

20486/2016 - Response from GM

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads

 

Enquiries to:       Paul Gallagher

Phone:              02 6568 0232

Email:                council@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

Our Ref:            LF853 LF4957 LF 6788: 32840/2015

 

 

 

2 May 2016

 

 

 

Ms B Hawkes

11 Bangalow Drive

NAMBUCCA HEADS

 

 

Dear Ms Hawkes

 

RESPONSE RELATING TO STORMWATER DRAINAGE IN BANGALOW DRIVE CUL-DE-SAC

 

I refer to your letter received by Council on 16 October 2015 regarding the drainage issues experienced at the vehicular access to your property and adjoining properties within the Bangalow Drive cul-de-sac and the on-site meeting with Mr Matt Leibrandt Council’s Manager Infrastructure Services and Mr Nurul Amin Assets Technical Officer.

 

I apologise for the time taken time to formally write, however I am aware that at the onsite meeting Mr Leibrandt offered to send a letter outlining the comments outlined within this letter but the consensus of those attending the meeting was to not send anything until the survey investigation and design was completed and a proposal was offered. 

 

Unfortunately the timeframe for completion of this work envisaged by Mr Leibrandt at the time was underestimated due to limited staff resource and priority of competing needs of Council’s current works program and staff availability who are otherwise engaged in the survey and design of Council’s Capital Works Program as well as analysis of the Pacific Highway asset handover and new infrastructure to Council post bypass.

 

Whilst the design work is still to be finalised, Council has completed the survey of the site and Council’s Manager Technical Services, Mr Keith Williams, has advised that two draft design options have been completed but not analysed with respect to drainage capacity.

 

To reaffirm the outcome of the site meeting and discussions with Mr Leibrandt, I would advise that investigations have revealed that Bangalow Drive was originally constructed with unsealed shoulders without the provision of kerb and guttering in the 1980’s to the approved Development Application conditions of the day for a rural residential subdivision.  A drainage easement was provided within the subdivision at the head of the Bangalow Drive cul-de sac to allow stormwater to flow down the easement from the road surface and Bangalow Drive table drains.

 

I am advised that since the construction of the Bangalow Drive cul-de sac there was representation from the residents to a former Councillor and some asphalt was subsequently placed over the unsealed shoulder.

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads

 

2

 

Ms B Hawkes

29 April 2016

LF853 LF4957 LF 6788: 32840/2015

 

 

I would reaffirm the advice provided by Mr Leibrandt at the onsite meeting that this estate was constructed some 30 years ago as a rural residential estate with minimal infrastructure provided and the blocks were assumed to have been priced accordingly. The actual issue stems back to the original subdivision where an unsealed table drain was provided to deal with road drainage and residents over the years have built up the material in the drain for the purpose of gaining access to their properties without taking into account the drainage ramifications

 

There is further evidence that either existing or subsequent property owners within Bangalow Drive have not constructed Council approved vehicular crossings to access their properties. These driveway conditions were brought into effect by Council to ensure an engineered driveway was constructed that does not impede the stormwater flow within the table drain.

 

At the onsite meeting you conveyed to Council’s Manager Infrastructure Services Mr Matt Leibrandt, and Technical Officer Assets, Mr Nurul Amin, that you believed that the drainage at the cul-de-sac was inadequate and that an engineered solution was required.

 

A search of Council’s records and an assessment of the condition of the vehicle crossing servicing your property indicate that a vehicle crossing constructed to the required specification was never completed and at the site meeting you were advised that the provision of a vehicular crossing and the ongoing maintenance of that crossing is the responsibility of the property owner.  

 

You were advised that you would continue to have drainage issues at your property because the dwelling on your property is situated on the low side of the road and appropriate provisions have not been made to deal with overland stormwater flows. During this conversation you advised the Council officers of a potential drainage concern in Alexandra Drive and how this may be affecting drainage within Bangalow Drive.

 

It was agreed at the onsite that Council would undertake survey, investigation and design work to assess the drainage within the catchment, and advise of an appropriate design of the vehicular crossing servicing your property. It was also indicated by Mr Leibrandt, that if an agreement could be reached by all parties Council may consider undertaking the construction work when works were being performed on the maintenance of the adjacent Council drain. This offer was made on the provision that all costs were to be met by the individual property owners as Council does not provide private access driveways to properties.

 

I have to apologise that the design work has not been finalised, and that Council’s Manager Technical Services, Mr Keith Williams, has advised that the design will be completed within the month and there are two anticipated options, being;

 

1    To maintain the intent of the rural residential intent of the subdivision, construct  a piped culvert access at the driveway of each property (at the property owners expense as per council policy) this then relies on continued maintenance of the table drain and culvert by property owners.

2    underground drainage which minimises the latter in option 1 pertaining to maintenance, a little more expensive but considered a far better solution. Council have a number of higher priority drainages issues across the shire and are unable to provide any funding towards this in the foreseeable future.

 

I understand that the residents have asked Council to consider constructing kerb and gutter as another option. There are a number of higher priority drainages issues across the shire and Council are unable to provide any funding towards this within the foreseeable future and advise that the full cost of the kerb and gutter would be at the property owner’s expense.


3

 

Ms B Hawkes

29 April 2016

LF853 LF4957 LF 6788: 32840/2015

 

 

I will forward further correspondence on the design and cost options have been completed and again apologise for the time taken to respond with the design advice.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

Paul Gallagher

ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES

 

PG:hl

 

Enc   

 

cc      Mr A Unwin

          Mr P Knight


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Stormwater/Drainage Issues - No's 7, 9, 10 & 11 Bangalow Drive, Nambucca Heads

 

 

 

Enquiries to:       Mr Michael Coulter

Phone:              02) 6568 0200

Email:                michael.coulter@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

Mobile:              0409 153 788

Our Ref:            SF2174

 

 

 

16 June 2016

 

 

 

Mr Barry Hussell

10 Bangalow Drive

NAMBUCCA HEADS   NSW   2448

 

 

Dear Hussell

 

STORM WATER/DRAINAGE ISSUES—10 BANGALOW DRIVE, NAMBUCCA HEADS

 

I refer to your letter of 19 May 2016 indicating your frustration with unresolved drainage issues affecting your land.

 

I have also reviewed your letter of 1 November 2015 and Council’s reply of 6 November 2016 and have spoken with Mr Leibrandt in relation to your concerns.

 

It is agreed that the land identified in your letter of 1 November 2015 is within a low lying area below the flood planning level.  I agree with the comments made by Council’s Senior Town Planner, Mr Daniel Walsh, that the requirements for the approval of subdivisions on residential land which contain areas below the flood planning level are to ensure there is a practical building area for a dwelling to be constructed which is the case.

 

There are many, many examples of residential zoned properties in the Nambucca Valley which are affected by stormwater runoff and poor drainage.  Council prioritises its available budget so as to firstly respond to drainage problems which cause the flooding of habitable floors or where there is a risk of flooding to habitable floors.  For example, the Council is currently constructing a major stormwater detention basin in Adin Street, Scotts Head, to alleviate the flooding of adjacent houses. 

 

Whilst I do not believe that Council can prioritise funding to either purchase the affected land as a drainage reserve or to alleviate the problem by implementing drainage works, I understand you are frustrated with not being listened to by Council staff and apparently receiving promises of work which have not been kept.

 

In the circumstances I can offer to arrange an inspection of your land by the Elected Council and for you to have the opportunity to directly address the Council as to your concerns.  Ultimately, it is the Elected Council which determines the Council’s budget and hence spending priorities. 

 

The Elected Council meets on the last Thursday of the month and the Thursday two weeks before that.  Site inspections are generally scheduled around 3.00 pm to 4.00 pm to enable the Council to return to the Council Chambers for the commencement of the Council meeting at 5.30 pm. 


 

2

 

Mr Barry Hussell

16 June 2016

 

 

Future Council meetings will occur on 14 July, 28 July, 11 August and 25 August.  If you could nominate an afternoon on one of those dates which suits you I will organise for the Elected Council to attend your land, look at the problem first hand and to hear from you.

 

If you could either advise myself, or my assistant Monika on 6568 0214, of a suitable date I will arrange the rest.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

Michael Coulter

GENERAL MANAGER

 

MAC:ms

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.3      SF271              140716         Code of Meeting Practice - Arrangements for Site Inspections

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

There has been confusion as to whether or not the provisions of Clause 68 of the Code of Meeting Practice restricting speakers and representatives either for or against a proposal to two speakers in favour and two speakers against apply to site inspections themselves or cumulatively with the following Council meeting which determines the matter.

 

On balance it is considered that Council continue its existing practice whereby the inspections are not part of the Council meeting and the conduct of the inspection and opportunities to speak are not governed by the Code of Meeting Practice.  It is recommended that this arrangement be clarified in the Code of Meeting Practice.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council advertises a proposed amendment to its Code of Meeting Practice being the addition of the following sub-clause to Clause 17 which deals with the Agenda and Business Papers for Council Meetings:

 

7.       By way of clarification, site inspections undertaken by Council prior to the commencement of a Council meeting are not part of the Council meeting and accordingly the provisions of      the Code of Meeting Practice in relation to public addresses, limitation on the number of           speakers and other matters pertaining to the conduct of Council meetings do not apply          (local policy).

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

An option for site inspections which are not part of the Council meeting is that the Council undertake the site inspection with the assistance of a briefing from Council staff but without any members of the public present.  This is a feasible alternative except where it is necessary to access privately owned land, in which case the owner would need to be notified.  In such instances it would be impossible to avoid representations from the applicant and without any opportunity for objectors to make similar timely representations there could be perceptions about a lack of transparency and potential bias.

 

There is the option of not undertaking site inspections.  They are not required by any legislation or codes.  However there are substantial risks associated with determining matters based solely on an Officer’s report compared to the additional perspectives provided by a view of the site and the contemporaneous advice of any affected stakeholders.  There are also substantial risks with individual Councillors undertaking their own site inspections which involve some stakeholders but not others.  Again there is the risk of perceived bias in hearing from some stakeholders but not others and also the problem that information pertinent to decision making may not be shared amongst all decision makers.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council’s Code of Meeting Practice does not make specific provision for the conduct of site inspections and indeed whether or not they are part of a Council meeting.

 

There has been confusion as to whether or not the provisions of Clause 68 of the Code of Meeting Practice restricting speakers and representatives either for or against a proposal to two speakers in favour and two speakers against apply to site inspections themselves or cumulatively with the following Council meeting which determines the matter.

 

There is no “best practice” guide as to the conduct of site inspections.  The Meetings Practice Note issued by the Office of Local Government simply states that providing some form of public participation in council meetings is good practice.

 

“Each council can decide whether its Meeting Code should provide for public participation and how that is to occur.  This would include how and when any questions are to be tabled and discussed at the council meetings.  It would also include deciding if and when members of the public are allowed to speak, and any limitation on the number of speakers or time for speeches.

 

Some councils have a set period during the meeting for members of the public to speak on any matter; others allow the opportunity to speak as the various items of business are debated.  There is no single correct procedure and members of the public should be guided by the advice of the council …”.

 

If site inspections are part of Council meetings then the provisions of Clause 68 apply, meaning speakers either for or against a proposal are limited to two in favour and two against either on-site or cumulatively with the following Council meeting.  If site inspections are not part of Council meetings then the provisions of Clause 68 do not apply, nor indeed do any provisions of the Code of Meeting Practice.

 

The provisions of the Code of Meeting Practice and particularly Clause 16 which lists the order of business suggests that site inspections are not formally part of the Council meeting.  They are not mentioned in the order of business and the only mention of them in the Code of Meeting Practice is in Clause 7 which provides that no unscheduled matters will be considered or on-site inspections carried out by Councillors on Council meeting days unless by agreement of Council and that any such matters will be fully minuted.

 

In terms of the choice as to whether or not site inspections should be included as part of the formal Council meeting there are advantages and disadvantages.

 

Advantages of Site Inspections being part of the Council Meeting

 

·    Eliminates potential duplication of speakers at the site inspection and then again at the Council meeting.

·    Arrangements for the conduct of the inspection/meeting are clearly laid out in the Code of Meeting Practice.

·    If it wished the Council could determine the application on-site rather than in the Council Chambers.

 

Disadvantages of Site Inspections being part of the Council Meeting

 

·    For contentious matters which attract a large gathering, the public’s expectation is that a site inspection should provide an opportunity for those with an interest to be heard.  To “stifle” statements or questions from the public based on Council’s meeting procedures (registered speakers, two for/two against) would not be well received.

·    The site inspection would require a quorum which is not always the case and late notice of the cancellation of a site inspection will create public dissatisfaction.

·    Chairing a large gathering to accord with Council’s meeting procedures is not easy and it can be intimidating for Councillors to express an opinion which is contrary to the views of the gathering.

 

On balance it is considered that Council continue its existing practice whereby the inspections are not part of the Council meeting and the conduct of the inspection and opportunities to speak are not governed by the Code of Meeting Practice.  It is recommended that this arrangement be clarified in the Code of Meeting Practice.

 

Section 363 of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that any amendment to the Code of Meeting Practice must be advertised and the public be provided with a 42 day period for comment.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

The matter has been discussed with the Mayor.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

The risks are discussed in the report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no budgetary implications.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no implications for service levels or resourcing.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.4      DA2014/198      140716         Modification to Development Consent DA2014/198 - Old Coast Road North Macksville

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Daniel Walsh, Senior Town Planner         

 

Summary:

 

A summary is not considered necessary.

 

NOTE:  This matter requires a “Planning Decision” meaning a decision made in the exercise of a function of the Council under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 including a decision relating to a development application, an environmental planning instrument, a development control plan or a development contribution plan.  Under Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 it requires the General Manager to record the names of each Councillor supporting and opposing the decision.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council, as the consent authority, pursuant to Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, modify condition 2 of development consent DA2014/198 in accordance with attachment 6 of the report.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

a)       Approve the application to modify the development consent in accordance with the recommendation.

 

b)       Approve the modification application subject to amendments to the recommendation. Please note that only conditions subject to the modification application can be modified.

 

c)       Refuse the modification application.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Development consent was granted for a 26 lot subdivision of Lot 42 DP 711098 - Old Coast Road, North Macksville on 27 February 2015.

 

On 24 September 2015, Council modified the development consent by permitting the release of one lot with limited road construction works subject to the payment of a bond, the required footpath to be a widened shoulder of the upgraded Old Coast Road (OCR) pavement instead of a concrete path, required the footpath to be constructed as part of the roadwork, clarified the requirements for the provision of services, modified the allotment configuration, and altered the location of the right of carriageway which connects the development to the adjoining public reserve.

 

A copy of the approved plan has been included within attachment 1 and the existing development consent within attachment 2.

 

The subject modification application seeks to amend condition 2 of the consent by permitting the construction and sealing of (OCR) from the development through to Florence Wilmont Drive (FWD) to satisfy Councils access requirements. To do this it is proposed to utilise an existing 20m wide right of carriage way (ROC) located within Lot 64 DP 1167978 which connects OCR and FWD. It is also proposed to remove the requirements to seal the section of OCR between the proposed intersection and the southern boundary of the subject land.

 

A copy of the applicants request to modify the development consent has been included within attachment 3 and the proposed concept plan of the road extension has been included within attachment 4.

 

This application was last considered by Council at its meeting on 26 May 2016. Since that meeting Council staff have obtained legal advice from Council’s lawyers regarding the construction and use of the ROC. The advice received has been included within attachment 5. The advice states that the terms of the ROC enable Council to authorise the construction of a road within the ROC and its use by the public without requiring land owners consent or acquiring the land.

 

The legal advice states that land owners consent would only be required if development consent was required for the construction of the road. However, under clause 94 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (SEPP) the construction or upgrading of a road is permissible without consent on any land if it is carried out by or on behalf of a public authority. As such, Council can construct the road within the ROC or appoint someone to construct it without requiring consent from the owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978.

 

Given the owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978 have not provided owners consent for lodgement of the original development application or the subject modification application; to ensure Council’s actions are lawful, it is recommended that Council not incorporate such works within a modified development consent and remove the existing requirement for a footpath within the ROC.

 

Note: A report separate to this modification application has been referred to Council for consideration addressing the construction and use of the ROC.

 

The requirement for the applicant to provide a continuous bitumen seal to an urban area and seal all frontages to proposed lots is contained within clause B3.4.5 of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (DCP). The applicants suggested amendment to condition 2 does not include the sealing of the sites frontage to OCR which is contrary to this clause. Given that the location of the new Pacific Highway will result in no further lots fronting this section of OCR which can be developed and that this section of OCR provides the shortest route to Macksville (the closest urban area) as well as the new Pacific Highway on and off ramps; it is not recommended that Council waive this requirement due to the increased maintenance costs that would be borne by Council.

 

Having regard to the above and the relevant subsections of section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; it is recommended that condition 2 of the development consent be modified by removing the requirement to construct a footpath within the ROC as outlined within attachment 6 of this report.

 

Please note that 33 submissions were received during the assessment of this application and have previously been reported to Council. Because they are all related to the upgrade of the road through the ROC, it is considered that they are no longer relevant given the road upgrade does not form part of the determination. The submissions received have been addressed in the separate report before Council regarding the road upgrade.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

·      The application was notified in accordance with Part A of the DCP.

·      Manager of Technical Services

·      General Manager

·      Manager Development & Environment

·      Council lawyers

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

The proposal will not result in any greater impacts than that already approved.

 

Social

The recommendation will not result in any adverse social impacts.

 

Economic

The recommendation will not result in any adverse economic impacts.

 

Risk

Nil.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Nil.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

Not applicable

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

Not applicable

 

Attachments:

1

5405/2016 - Approved Plan

 

2

5404/2016 - Existing Consent

 

3

5403/2016 - Applicants Modification Request

 

4

5402/2016 - Concept Road Design

 

5

22966/2016 - DA2014/198 - Legal advice

Confidential

6

23032/2016 - Attachment 6 - Schedule of Conditions

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Modification to Development Consent DA2014/198 - Old Coast Road North Macksville

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Modification to Development Consent DA2014/198 - Old Coast Road North Macksville

 













Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Modification to Development Consent DA2014/198 - Old Coast Road North Macksville

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Modification to Development Consent DA2014/198 - Old Coast Road North Macksville

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Modification to Development Consent DA2014/198 - Old Coast Road North Macksville

 

ATTACHMENT 6 – SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS CONSENT

 

Development is to be in accordance with approved plans

 

1.       The development is to be implemented in accordance with the plans endorsed with the Council stamp, dated 28/9/15, and set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

 

Plan Title

Dwg No

Prepared by

Dated

Site Plan

DA01

De Groot & Benson

August 2015

Cul De Sac Plan

DA02

De Groot & Benson

August 2015

 

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 MUST BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

Engineering Construction Plans

 

2.       Three (3) copies of engineering construction plans and specifications must accompany the Construction Certificate application. Such plans are to provide for the works in the following table in accordance with Council’s current Design and Construction Manuals and Specifications.

 

Required work

Specification of work

Street Name Signs

Street name signs and posts to all proposed new roads. (Note: street/road names proposed for the subdivision must be submitted for Council approval 12 weeks prior to lodgement of the Subdivision Certificate application. A suitable name for any new road/s must be in accordance with Council’s adopted policy).

Full Width Road Construction

Full width road and drainage construction for all proposed roads on the approved plan, minimum 6m seal on an 8m formation.

 

Concrete dish drains are required where table drain gradients are less than 1% or more than 5%. Sealed shoulders shall extend to the table drain. Open table drains are to be turf lined and supplemented with subsoil drainage.

 

The intersection of Old Coast Road and the proposed subdivision road shall be designed in accordance with Austroads Guide to road design – Intersections.

 

Old Coast Road shall be constructed and sealed to public road standards to provide sealed frontages to each lot and a continuous bitumen sealed road to connect each lot to an existing urban area. Council acknowledges that sections of Old Coast Road heading towards Macksville will be sealed as part of the Pacific Highway bypass and is willing to accept design plans that illustrate the sealing of Old Coast Road to the end point of the highway sealing works. Sufficient documentation is required to be submitted as part of the construction certificate application.

 

A bus stop is to be provided at the entrance to the subdivision.

 

The radius of the cul-de-sac head shall be a minimum of 12 m and guide posts shall be installed around the perimeter.

 

A temporary 12m radius gravel turnaround shall be provided at the termination of each stage of road construction.

Footpath Construction

A minimum 1.2 metre wide sealed public footpath from the entrance of the development site to the south-western corner of the right of carriageway contained within Lot 64 DP 1167978.

The footpath is to be located on the eastern side of the Old Coast Road carriageway.

If the footpath is to consist of a widened sealed shoulder of the road carriageway, it is to be delineated by line marking and guide post separation. Any section of the footpath that is not a widened sealed shoulder must be constructed using concrete.

Driveways Rural – sealed roads

Sealed driveways, in accordance with Council’s rural driveway standards, from the edge of the bitumen to 3 metres within the property boundary to each of the proposed new allotments.

 

Minimum 375 RCP and headwalls through the table drain

Service Conduits

Service conduits to each of the proposed new allotments laid in strict accordance with the service authorities’ requirements.

Estate sign and/or structure

Council will not accept ownership or responsibility for any estate sign or structure. Council will need to be satisfied that a Plan is in place that will provide for ongoing maintenance of the sign and/or structure. Council reserves the right to assess the condition of the sign or structure and also its relevance at intervals of 5 years. The Estate name will not be recognised by Council as part of a property address.

Stripping and Stockpiling

Stripping and stockpiling of existing topsoil on site, prior to commencement of earthworks, and the subsequent re-spreading of this material together with a sufficient quantity of imported topsoil so as to provide a minimum thickness of 80mm over the allotments and footpaths and public reserves, upon completion of the development works.

Culverts required across drainage channels or streams

Culvert to be designed to ensure that peak flow rates for the 1 in 10 year storm event are not affected. The applicant is to obtain any necessary approvals from the Department of Natural Resources and/or the Department of Primary Industries, Fisheries, and plans.

Stormwater Outlets

An energy dissipating pit with a suitably installed locked grated outlet to all pipes or any other drainage structures. Grates must be of galvanised weldlock construction.

Stormwater Quality

Stormwater quality must be suitable for discharge in accordance with Department of Land and Water Conservation NSW (1998) The Constructed Wetlands Manual and Landcom (March 2004), Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction.

 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan

 

3.       The plans and specifications to accompany the Construction Certificate application are to include a sediment and erosion control plan to indicate the measures to be employed to control erosion and loss of sediment from the site. The sediment and erosion control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Landcom (March 2004), Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction.

 

The sediment and erosion control plan must be prepared by a suitably experienced person such as a person certified by:

 

·           The Institution of Engineers, Australia, for engineering and hydrology matters.

·           The International Erosion Control Association for soil conservation matters.

·           The Australian Society of Soil Science for collection or analysis of soil data.

 

The plan must incorporate (without being limited to) information on general site management, material handling practices, soil stabilisation, water control, sediment control, wind erosion control and access measures.

 

Traffic Control Plan

 

4.       The plans and specifications to accompany the Construction Certificate application are to include a traffic control plan to indicate the measures to be employed to control traffic during construction of the subdivision. The traffic control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Manual (1998), Traffic Control at Work Sites, and Australian Standard 1742.3 - 1985, Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Part 3, ‘Traffic Control Devices for Works on Roads’.

 

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

 

Splay corner required

 

          5.       A 7.5m splay corner is to be dedicated to Council at no cost to Council.

 

Sewerage and Water Mains

 

6.       Engineering plans of the proposed water supply works shall be submitted for Council’s approval prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

Street Tree Planting Scheme

 

7.       The plans and specifications to accompany the Construction Certificate application are to include a street tree planting scheme which has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Council’s Policy.

 

The Plan must show all services. Plants to be used in the street tree planting scheme must:

 

a        be a minimum size of 2 metres in height and have a minimum mature height of 5m.

b        have a 50mm calliper diameter,

c        be sourced from at least a 25 litre container,

d        be protected by a suitable tree guard (eg a 750mm square tree guard made from a 3m “Acacia” panel painted “Caulfield Green”),

e        be suitably supported by two 2100mm black star picket posts,

f        provided with slow release fertiliser,

g        include the provision of 125mm flexible agricultural pipe filled with 14mm blue metal for watering of the plant, and

h        be mulched with 100mm of native tree mulch.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION WORKS COMMENCING

 

Construction Certificate 

 

8.       Subdivision work the subject of this development consent MUST NOT be commenced until:

(a)  A construction certificate for the subdivision work has been issued by council or an accredited certifier, and

(b)  The person having the benefit of the development consent has appointed a principal certifying authority for the subdivision work, and

(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 Principal Certifying Authority and the date construction work is proposed to commence.

Section 138 Consent

 

9.       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.

 

Erosion & Sediment Measures

 

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

 

Note: Council may impose on-the-spot fines for non-compliance with this condition.

 

Public Liability Insurance

 

11.     The developer and/or contractor must produce evidence to the Principal Certifying Authority of public liability insurance cover for a minimum of $20 million. Council is to be nominated as an interested party on the policy. The public liability insurance cover is to be maintained for the duration of the period of the works and during any maintenance period.

Erection of Signs

 

12.     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

 

Maintenance of sediment and erosion control measures

 

13.     Sediment and erosion control measures must be maintained at all times until the site has been stabilised by permanent vegetation cover or hard surface.

 

Inspection of Public Works

 

14.     Development works on public property are not to proceed past the following hold points without inspection and approval by Council. Notice of required inspection must be given 24 hours prior to inspection. You must quote your construction certificate number and property description to book your inspection.

 

i         prior to commencement of site clearing and installation of erosion control facilities;

j         at completion of installation of erosion control measures;

k        at completion of installation of traffic management works;

l         at the commencement of earthworks;

m       before commencement of any filling works;

n        when the sub-grade is exposed and prior to placing of pavement materials;

o        when trenches are open, stormwater/water pipes and conduits jointed and prior to backfilling;

p        at the completion of each pavement (sub base/base) layer;

q        before pouring of concrete for kerb and guttering;

r         prior to the pouring of concrete for sewerage works;

s        on completion of road gravelling or pavement;

t         during construction of water infrastructure;

u        prior to sealing and laying of pavement surface course.

 

All works at each hold point are to be certified as compliant, in accordance with Council’s current Design and Construction Manuals and Specifications, prior to proceeding to the next hold point. Council will undertake random audits of work sites to verify compliance of public works as required.

 

Construction times

 

15.     Construction works must not unreasonably interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood. In particular construction noise, when audible on adjoining residential premises, can only occur:

 

a        Monday to Friday, from 7.00 am to 6.00 pm.

b        Saturday, from 8.00 am to 1.00 pm.

 

No construction work is to take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

 

Builders rubbish to be contained on site

 

16.     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.

 

An ecological consultant must supervise works

 

17.     A suitably qualified and experienced ecological consultant must inspect all native trees that have been approved for removal before they are felled. If there are any koala or other fauna species in the tree, work in the vicinity is to cease until the animal has moved from the area. If it is likely that hollows are providing habitat for native species, traps are to be set for several nights and any native species found must be relocated to an appropriate nearby location.

 

Standards for demolition work

 

18.     All demolition works are to be undertaken in accordance with the provision of Australian Standard AS 2601-2001 “The Demolition of Structures”.

 

 

 

 

Discovery of a Relic

 

19.     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.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

 

Plan of Subdivision

 

20.     An application for a Subdivision Certificate must be made on the approved form. The Subdivision Certificate fees, in accordance with Council's adopted schedule of fees and charges, must accompany such application. Three (3) copies of the plan of subdivision are to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate. The location of all buildings and/or other permanent improvements including fences and internal access driveways/roads must be indicated on 1 of the copies.

 

Plan of Subdivision and Section 88B Instrument Requirements

 

21.     The final plan of subdivision and an instrument prepared under section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 are to provide for the items listed in the following table. Nambucca Shire Council shall be nominated as the sole party with the power to vary or remove the required covenants.

 

Item for inclusion in Plan of Subdivision and/or Section 88B Instrument

Details of Item

Dedicated Public Road Access

Dedication of suitable public road accesses to all proposed allotments.

Dedicated Corner Splays

Dedication of 7.5m corner splays at all street junctions and intersections.

Dwelling Envelope

Restrictions to limit the erection of dwellings to the nominated dwelling envelopes. The dwelling envelopes on lots 1 and 26 are to be located at least 21m from the north-western boundary for compliance with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.

Drainage Easements

The creation of easements for drainage of water over all drainage pipelines and structures located within the proposed allotments in accordance with Council’s policy.

Right of Carriageway

The creation of a right of carriageway for emergency access from the proposed road over adjoining  Lot 101 DP 755550 as identified in Figure 2, titled ‘Proposed Emergency Access’, prepared by Clarke Dowdle & Associates and shall be in favour of proposed Lots 1 to 26. The right of carriageway shall extend over the access handle of lot 25. 

Right of Carriageway

In order to provide access for all allotments to the adjoining public open space, provide a right of carriageway 5m wide, or of such width as approved by Council, over proposed Lot 8 or 9 to benefit the owners of Lot 40 DP 711098 (Council). The right of carriageway is to extend from the proposed road to the boundary of Lot 40 DP 711098.

Boundary Adjustment

The boundary between proposed Lot 9 and Lot 40 DP 711098 is to be adjusted to ensure that a 1.5m access way between the dam and the allotment boundary is available for public access within the adjoining reserve. A survey plan demonstrating compliance with this condition is to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.

Asset Protection Zone

A restriction on the land shall be placed on all lots shown on the approved plan, burdening them with the provision of an Asset Protection Zone (APZ) for future dwellings that fall outside their boundaries.

The restriction is to be worded to benefit adjoining allotments and enable future dwellings on them to obtain a bushfire attack level of at least BAL 29. These APZs shall be maintained by the owners of those lots benefited as outlined within Section 4.1.3 and Appendix 5 of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 and the NSW Rural Fire Services document Standards for Asset Protection Zones. This restriction can be extinguished upon commencement of any future proposed residential development on the adjacent lots but only if the hazard is completely removed during the course of undertaking approved works.

Hazard Reduction

A restriction to the land use pursuant to section 88B of the 'Conveyancing Act 1919' shall be placed on proposed Lots 1 to 25 and land within 60m of the dwelling envelope on Lot 26 which specifies that the proposed lots cannot be sold until they are hazard reduced with vegetation managed as an outer protection area (OPA) as outlined within section 4.1.3 and Appendix 5 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006' and the NSW Rural Fire Service's document 'Standards for asset protection zones'.

Easement for Services

Where necessary, the creation of suitable easements for services.

 

Lot Sizes

 

22.     All lots are to be no less than 1ha in area. Lot 26 is to have a minimum of 1ha of R5 Large Lot Residential zoned land and all land within the parent lot zoned RU2 Rural Landscape.

 

Completion of All Works

 

23.     All works required by this development consent and associated Construction Certificate (excluding the extension of reticulated water) are to be completed prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.

          In the event that the proposed allotments are released in stages, each lot being released must have sealed access to an urban area as required by this consent and frontage to a sealed road, with temporary turning heads provided where necessary. Relevant services are to be provided to each lot being released.

         

Notwithstanding the above, this development consent permits Council to approve a subdivision certificate for the release of no more than 1 additional lot (either lot 1 or 26) on the approved plan without the required sealing, intersection, or footpath works being undertaken. This provision is subject to the applicant paying Council a $100,000 bond for future extensions to the Old Coast Road bitumen seal and providing a dual entrance off Old Coast Road designed in accordance with Councils engineering standards to service the two allotments (either lot 1 or 26 and residue lot).

          Note: Should subdivision works be physically commenced, the bond figure is subject to review by Council after five years from the date of this consent.

 

Erection of Street Signs

 

24.     Street signs are to be erected showing the approved street name in accordance with this development consent and the Construction Certificate approval.

 

 

 

Rural House Numbering

 

25.     Prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate, apply for and obtain a rural address number for each lot from Council.

 

Redundant Infrastructure

 

26.     Any irrigation pipes or redundant electricity wires within the road reserve to be dedicated to Council are to be removed.

 

Certificates for Engineering Works

 

27.     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

 

28.     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.

 

Certificate for Pipes, Access Driveways, etc. Within Easements

 

29.     A certificate from a registered surveyor is to be submitted to Council certifying that all pipelines, structures, access driveways and/or services are located wholly within the relevant easements/road reserve.

 

Maintenance Bond

 

30.     A maintenance bond of 10% of the value of the works constructed is to be lodged with Council. A copy of the contract construction cost of the subdivision works is to be submitted with the bond. The maintenance period is 12 months and will commence from the date of issue of the final Compliance Certificate. The security may be provided, at the applicant's choice, by way of cash bond or a satisfactory bank guarantee. An application in writing for the release of the bond must be made at the satisfactory completion of the maintenance period.

 

Record of Infrastructure

 

31.     A record of infrastructure coming into Council ownership, upon registration of the final plan of subdivision, is to be submitted to Council.

 

Bushfire Protection

 

32.     In accordance with Section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 the following conditions are required to be consistent with the General Terms of Approval issued by the Rural Fire Service under section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997:

(a)    Asset Protection Zones

A restriction to the land use pursuant to section 88B of the 'Conveyancing Act 1919' shall be placed on proposed Lots 1 to 25 and land within 60m of the dwelling envelope on Lot 26 which specifies that the proposed lots cannot be sold until they are hazard reduced with vegetation managed as an outer protection area (OPA) as outlined within section 4.1.3 and Appendix 5 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006' and the NSW Rural Fire Service's document 'Standards for asset protection zones'.

(b)   Water and Utilities

Water and electricity are to comply with Section 4.1.3 of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’.

(c)    Access

i.    Public road access shall comply with Section 4.1.3 (1) of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’. A temporary turning circle is to be incorporated as part of any staging of the release of allotments.

ii.    The proposed emergency access road on adjoining Lot 101 DP 755550 as identified in Figure 2, titled ‘Proposed Emergency Access’, prepared by Clarke Dowdle & Associates shall:

·      Be pursuant to section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 and in favour of proposed Lots 1 to 26.

·      Be constructed in accordance with Section 4.1.3 (2) of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’.

 

 

Electricity Supply Certificate

 

33.     Written evidence from an electricity supply authority is to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate stating that satisfactory arrangements have been made for the provision of underground electricity supply throughout the subdivision.

 

Telephone Supply Certificate

 

34.     Written evidence from Telstra is to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate stating that satisfactory arrangements have been made for the provision of underground telephone supply throughout the subdivision.

 

Section 94 Contributions

 

35.     Contributions set out in the following schedule are to be paid to Council prior to the release of the subdivision certificate. The following contributions are current at the date of this consent. The contributions payable will be adjusted in accordance with the relevant plan and the amount payable will be calculated on the basis of the contribution rates that are applicable at the time of payment.

 

Schedule of Contributions pursuant to Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

Public amenity or service

Unit type

No of Units

Contribution Rate (Amount per Unit)

Contribution Levied

Date until which Contribution rate is applicable

Community Facilities and Open Space

Lot

25

$1,956

$48,900

June 2015

Surf Life Saving Equipment

Lot

25

$110

$2,750

June 2015

Section 94 Administration Charge

10 % of above contributions

$206.60

$5,165

June 2015

TOTAL

$2,272.60

$56,815.00

June 2015

 

 

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 meet the increased demand for public amenities and services attributable to the development in accordance with Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

·      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.

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.5      RF312              140716         Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Daniel Walsh, Senior Town Planner         

 

Summary:

 

Council has received a request to upgrade the existing road that connects Old Coast Road (OCR) and Florence Wilmont Drive (FWD). The road (link road) is located within a right of carriageway (ROC) within Lot 64 DP 1167978 with Nambucca Shire Council being the authority benefited by the ROC. The link road was originally required to be constructed and dedicated to Council as part of the release of stage three of the Kingsworth Estate development. However, due to the uncertainty of the location of the Pacific Highway bypass at the time, Council settled for the existing temporary arrangement.

 

The link road is currently below standard and has existed for many years despite Councils previous attempts to restrict access. Due to the continual removal of gates and signage by the community, Council resolved in 2006 for the link road to be constructed by the developer of Lot 64 DP 1167978. Since then, Lot 64 DP 1167978 has not been developed to its full potential.

 

The upgrade of the link road is consistent with standard subdivision design principles contained within the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 and Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 which require inter-connected roads rather than a network of cul-de-sacs and no through roads.

Legal advice has been received from Council lawyers which reaffirms Council staff opinion that the terms of the ROC enable Council to authorise the upgrade of the link road and its use by the public without requiring land owners consent or acquiring the land.

 

Given the importance of this link for emergency purposes, it would be inappropriate for Council to block this access off altogether. Furthermore, the existing condition of the road is not adequate for evacuation in the event of an emergency for residents in the surrounding area. Given the historic problems Council has had with limiting access in the past, coupled by the link road serving as a short cut for Kingsworth Estate residents to the new on and off ramps of the Pacific Highway; it is considered that introducing such measures would meet the same fate as those previously attempted by Council.

As such it is recommended that Council authorise the upgrade of the link road by or on behalf of Council and its use by the public. Further consultation between Council staff and the owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978 will occur during the final design stage of the proposed upgrades prior to any works commencing.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council:

1.       Authorise the connection of Florence Wilmont Drive and Old Coast Road by upgrading the existing road to meet Council design standards. The works must be done by or on behalf of Council.

2.       Authorise the use of the road by the general public once upgrade works are complete.

3.       Provide delegation to the General Manager to appoint others to undertake the works on Councils behalf.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1.   Authorise the upgrade of the existing road and its use by the public as per the recommendation.

 

2.   Not permit the upgrade of the existing road and specify what people are authorised to use the road.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council received an application to modify development consent DA2014/198 which included the connection of Old Coast Road (OCR) and Florence Wilmont Drive (FWD) through the existing right of carriageway (ROC) located on Lot 64 DP 1167978. A copy of the proposed concept plan has been included within attachment 1.

 

The modification application was most recently considered by Council at its meeting on 26 May 2016 where it was resolved:

 

“That Council qualify the ownership of the land and Mrs Butler’s statements in relation to the advice she received from Council staff.”

 

Since that meeting Council staff have obtained legal advice from Councils lawyers regarding the construction and use of the ROC. The advice received has been included within attachment 2. The advice states that the terms of the ROC enable Council to authorise the upgrade of the road within the ROC and its use by the public without requiring land owners consent or acquiring the land.

 

The legal advice states that land owners consent would only be required if development consent was required for the construction of the road. However, under clause 94 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (SEPP) the construction or upgrading of a road is permissible without consent on any land if it is carried out by or on behalf of a public authority. As such, Council can construct the road within the ROC or appoint someone to construct it without requiring consent from the owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978.

 

Given the owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978 have not provided owners consent, it is recommended that Council authorise the upgrade of the existing road and its use by the public as a separate matter to development consent DA2014/198. Please note the approved subdivision under development consent DA2014/198 is not reliant on access via Florence Wilmont Drive.

 

Mrs Butlers address to Council on 26 May 2016 has been included within attachment 3. In response to the comments made, Council staff provide the following advice:

 

·      Mrs Butler stated that the construction of a road within the ROC on her land (Lot 64 DP 1167978) requires her consent or Council to acquire the land. This was based on advice she received that the road would be an excessive user of the original intended purpose of which the ROC was created. To be clear, the ROC was not created over Mrs Butlers land with the intended purpose to only provide access to emergency and service vehicles. Her statements contrary to this are based off the email attached to her letter which has been taken out of context, which I accept is the result of the wording of the email.

 

To summarise the history of the ROC, it was created under section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (the Act), with Nambucca Shire Council being the authority benefited by the ROC. The instrument created under section 88B of the Act which accompanied the registration of DP 1049360 did not contain any specific terms. Therefore, in accordance with clause 181A(1) the terms for a ROC contained within Part 1 of Schedule 8 of the Act apply. These are:

 

Full and free right for every person who is at any time entitled to an estate or interest in possession in the land herein indicated as the dominant tenement or any part thereof with which the right shall be capable of enjoyment, and every person authorised by that person, to go, pass and repass at all times and for all purposes with or without animals or vehicles or both to and from the said dominant tenement or any such part thereof.

 

As you can see in the above terms, the ROC is not restricted to be used only for emergency or service vehicles. Due to the unsuitable standard of the existing track, Council has previously erected signs stating that it is only to be used by emergency or service vehicles and have gated the track. However, the gates and signs were promptly removed by members of the public. This resulted in Council making a resolution in 2006 that “Council proceed with a link road to be provided by the developer”. That resolution refers to future subdivision of Mrs Butlers land (the residue lot of Kingsworth Estate) including the connection of OCR and FWD as part of any consent.

 

These directions by Council are in line with its lawful ability to authorise ‘every person’ to use the ROC as stated in the above terms from Part 1 of Schedule 8 of the Act.

 

·      Mrs Butler stated that Council staff have been contradictory in their advice to her regarding the construction of the link road. Prior to Mrs Butler purchasing her property in 2014, Council staff responded to an enquiry made by Mrs Butler by letter dated 23 January 2014 stating that FWD and OCR would need to be connected by a sealed road as part of any two lot subdivision of her land. On 3 February 2014 Council staff responded to a further enquiry by Mrs Butler stating that the erection of a single dwelling house and a two lot subdivision of her land would not require the connection of OCR and FWD as previously advised. This was reflected in the development consents issued for the erection of a dwelling house and subdivision of her land (DA2014/205 & DA2015/009) which do not require her to construct the road. The reasons for this were that it wasn’t considered reasonable for her to construct it at that stage due to the scale of the development proposed and that it would be more reasonable for her to construct it when the larger residue lot is developed. As such, it was conditioned that Mrs Butler fence the track due to its unsuitable nature, that it was not wholly located within the ROC and that its use in its current condition may result in dust impacts on her dwelling. It was also conditioned that Mrs Butler dedicate the ROC to Council as a public road as part of her subdivision so that it would be in the sole control of Council as was its original intention (as per the original Kingsworth Estate subdivision consent S1B-3-6) and to alleviate public liability concerns raised by Mrs Butler. These conditions and the reasons for them were raised in meetings between Council staff and Mr & Mrs Butler regarding the assessment of their development applications. Mrs Butler subsequently modified her dwelling design so that it would address the future link road and not a cul-de-sac.

 

Having regard to the above, I disagree with Mrs Butlers comments as it is considered that Council have been consistent in their advice to her.

 

·      Council staff held discussions with Mrs Butler regarding Councils intention for the link road to be constructed in January 2015, with both of her development applications being determined by the end of January 2015. Given that the applicant for development consent DA2014/198 first approached Council regarding the construction of the link road in August 2015, Mrs Butlers assertions that Council has changed its mind based on pressure from the applicant is false.

 

·      Since this matter was last considered by Council on 26 May 2016, Council has received legal advice which supports Councils ability to construct the link road within the ROC and authorise it to be used by the public without having to acquire land or require owners consent from Mrs Butler. Given that the ROC has been registered on the land since 1992, Council has had the legal right to construct the road since that date and will continue to do so as long as the ROC is in place. As such, the uncertainty regarding the construction of the road referred to by Mrs Butler existed prior to her purchasing her property.

 

Discussion regarding the connection of OCR and FWD

 

Having regard to the issues relating to the proposed connection of OCR and FWD, the following comments are made:

 

·      The existing road reserves of OCR and FWD are linked by a 20m wide ROC illustrated as ‘C’ on deposited plan (DP) 1049360 contained within attachment 4. The ROC was created under the Conveyancing Act 1919 (the act), with Nambucca Shire Council being the authority benefited by the ROC.

 

The instrument created under section 88B of the act which accompanied the registration of DP 1049360 did not contain any specific terms. Therefore, in accordance with clause 181A(1) of the act the terms for a ROC contained within Part 1 of Schedule 8 of the Act apply. These are:

 

Full and free right for every person who is at any time entitled to an estate or interest in possession in the land herein indicated as the dominant tenement or any part thereof with which the right shall be capable of enjoyment, and every person authorised by that person, to go, pass and repass at all times and for all purposes with or without animals or vehicles or both to and from the said dominant tenement or any such part thereof.

 

In the subject case, Nambucca Shire Council is in favour of the easement. As such, Council has the ability to permit the construction of a vehicular access road over the easement and authorise members of the public to use the access. This has been confirmed in the legal advice contained within attachment 2.

 

·      Council’s intention for FWD to be connected to OCR is illustrated on the former deposited plans which created Kingsworth Estate. These are included within attachment 4. The existing residential allotments within Kingsworth Estate were created in three stages. The first stage is illustrated within DP 711098. The second stage is illustrated in DP 816018 and included an extension of FWD and the creation of a ROC to connect the end of FWD with OCR through the residual allotment. The third stage is illustrated within DP 1049360 and included the extension of FWD (20m wide) along the ROC (20m wide) to service the development and the retention of the remainder of the ROC within the residual lot 3. Please note lot 3 is now known as Lot 64 DP 1167978 due to the creation of a lot to accommodate Councils water reservoir.

 

Furthermore, condition 21 of the development consent for stage three required the connection of OCR and FWD as part of the subdivision works. However, proposed lots 3, 4, 36, and 37 were within the study area of the Pacific Highway bypass. Given the uncertainty at the time regarding the future route of the highway bypass, those lots were not approved as part of the consent (condition 18).

 

When the developer was finalising subdivision works in order to obtain a subdivision certificate for stage three, 10 years after development consent was granted; the developer questioned the reason why the connection had to occur given the potential impact of the future Pacific Highway route. Council sought clarification from the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) who responded by stating that a final design route had not been selected and that the road may be impacted. As such, Council agreed to modify the development consent by deleting condition 21 and requiring the applicant to construct a temporary cul-de-sac within Lot 64 DP 1167978 (current cul-de-sac at the end of FWD). Documentation outlining the above has been included within attachment 5.

 

The intent was that the developer would make the connection between FWD and OCR as part of the development of lot 3 (Lot 64 DP 1167978) once the route of the Pacific Highway had been finalised.

 

An informal track evolved over the years and was frequently used by the public. After receiving complaints from nearby residents, Council fenced the track and erected signs stating that it was only to be used by emergency and service vehicles. However, the gates and signs were promptly removed by members of the public which resulted in Council making a resolution in 2006 that “Council proceed with a link road to be provided by the developer”. However, the developer has since sold the land and the development of Lot 64 DP 1167978 has not yet eventuated to its full potential.

 

As outlined earlier, it is the intention of Council staff to require the current owner of Lot 64 DP 1167978 to construct the link road as part of any further subdivision of the land. This is consistent with Councils previous resolution as well as the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 and Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.

 

It should be noted that the former informal track has been decommissioned by the owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978 for the reasons outlined earlier in this report. The owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978 have subsequently constructed a new realigned track within the ROC without development consent which was required prior to undertaking the works. The owners stated to Council that this was done to avoid conflicts with those members of the community who use the track.

 

More recently, Councils intention to connect FWD and OCR is evident in its requests to the NSW Roads and Maritime Service to construct the road as part of the Pacific Highway upgrade.

 

·      A plan showing the new access arrangements along OCR as a consequence of the highway upgrade is shown on attachment 6.  In summary the existing Old Coast Road will end in a cul-de-sac to the north of FWD and the through route connection between Wirrimbi Road and the existing Pacific Highway will instead be provided by a new service road located to the west of the new highway alignment.  Without any changes to the existing arrangements, the existing Old Coast Road on the eastern side of the highway alignment will become a 2.8km long cul-de-sac north of Mattick Road, whilst Florence Wilmont Drive will remain a 2.1km long cul-de-sac.

 

Providing the connection between FWD and OCR will provide improved egress from the area in the event of a flood or a bushfire. As can be seen in the flood map included within attachment 7, the proposed connection is the only flood free egress from the Pelican Caravan Park, The Nambucca Motel, Kingsworth Estate, a church, and future development within the 12ha of business park zoned land which includes the former Kennwal Ford dealership.

 

The proposed connection will also provide an alternate egress from Kingsworth Estate in the event its eastern entrance was cut as a result of a bushfire originating in the State forest to the north and from the development site if a bushfire were to be approaching from the south.  There are also about 5 houses along Old Coast Road north of Mattick Road which would similarly benefit.

 

The NSW Rural Fire Service publication, Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006 contains a performance criteria that public road widths and design allow safe access for firefighters while residents are evacuating an area.  A section on acceptable solutions provides, “all roads are through roads.  Dead end roads are not recommended, but if unavoidable, dead ends are not more than 200 metres in length, incorporate a minimum 12 metres outer radius turning circle, and are clearly signposted as a dead end and direct traffic away from the hazard”.  The proposed connection will result in Kingsworth Estate becoming compliant with the access provisions within Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.

 

·      Besides the advantages for emergency access in times of fire and flood, the proposed connection would potentially improve emergency response times (fire, police, ambulance) by allowing emergency vehicles access via either Old Coast Road or Florence Wilmont Drive.  The proposed connection would also provide time and cost benefits for public utilities and publicly funded services such as school busing, Australia Post, Essential Energy, as accessing properties along a “through” route will be more efficient that two x 2km plus cul-de-sacs.

 

·      Part B2.1 of the DCP contains general design principles which require subdivisions to provide inter-connected roads rather than a network of cul-de-sacs and no through roads to promote pedestrian access, bicycle use, public transport and to reduce the energy required for transportation purposes. The proposed connection of OCR and FWD will ensure this common planning principle is adopted to the existing Kingsworth Estate development and will improve the proposed developments connectivity and consistency with this clause by not increasing the amount of no through roads within the locality.

 

·      The new Pacific Highway bypass will result in OCR becoming a dead end road 700m north of the proposed connection to FWD by the end of July 2016. Plans of the bypass currently under construction have been included within attachment 6. In order to travel north along OCR from the proposed connection with FWD post July 2016 you will need to travel 1.8km south, cross the highway overpass at Mattick Road, then travel north along OCR towards Nambucca Heads. This will result in the travel times for residents in surrounding areas to the west of OCR (Wirrimbi) being shorter if they were to travel north to the Nambucca Heads town centre/Plaza then it would be to travel to those areas via FWD.

 

The same applies for residents living south of Mattick Road, as it will be shorter/faster for them to travel via the existing highway to Nambucca Heads then it would be via FWD. As such, it is considered that travel times to and from the commercial areas within Nambucca Heads will only be shorter/faster for the residents in Mattick Road (9), residents of the development approved under DA2014/198 (26), and residences in between (3). It should also be noted that it will be shorter for all of those residences to travel to the Macksville town centre than it would be to travel to the Nambucca commercial areas. In addition to this, it will not only be shorter/faster for these residents to access the new highway via the Mattick Road on ramp (no need to use FWD) but will improve accessibility for many residents within the western section of Kingsworth Estate to access the new highway.

 

Please note that the connection discussed in this report relates to the upgrade of an existing road which is currently in use and has been, despite Council efforts, for many years. Having regard to this and the above design changes to OCR as part of the highway works, it is reasonable to say that the upgrade of the track will not result in increased traffic within FWD than what already occurs. While it may be argued that Council should close the road, this has been attempted in the past by Council with no success due to the community removing blockages. Demand for the use of the ROC by Kingsworth Estate residents will only increase as a result of the new on and off ramps to the Pacific Highway. As such, any similar attempts to restrict traffic flows to emergency vehicles only are even more likely to remain unsuccessful.

 

It is to be noted that the new highway will have an interchange to access Nambucca Heads adjacent to the Valla urban release area. Given that it will be considerably shorter for motorists to exit at this interchange to access Nambucca Heads than it would be to exit at the off ramp to OCR (south bound only), it is not considered that additional traffic from the new highway would be directed through the proposed connection.

 

Furthermore, given that it is shorter and faster to travel from the entrance to FWD along the existing highway to Macksville and the on ramp to the Pacific Highway bypass; it is not considered that the proposed connection will generate additional west bound traffic along FWD.

 

Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed connection will primarily benefit the residents of Kingsworth Estate and 38 surrounding residents in providing increased connectivity and shorter travel distances/times.

 

·      An ecological assessment, prepared by a suitably qualified person, which addresses the extent of disturbance required for the proposed road upgrade has been prepared and previously circulated to Councillors. The report found that the works will not result in any significant impacts on threatened species, populations, communities or their habitats.

 

·      Due to the steep topography of the land, flooding/flora and fauna constraints, construction costs, and additional road maintenance costs for Council; it is not considered appropriate or reasonable to require any developer to connect Lumsden Lane with OCR to provide connectivity within the locality instead of connecting OCR and FWD.

 

·      FWD has a carriageway width of 7m, verges in excess of 4m, will serve less than 170 lots if the proposed connection is approved (144), and has a speed limit of 50km/h. In this regard, the design of FWD is in accordance with the local road provisions of Councils design standards outlined in clause B2.3.3 of the DCP. Furthermore, given that the link road has been open for many years and that FWD was designed to accommodate through road traffic, it is not considered that the life of the pavement of FWD will deteriorate any faster than what would already occur.

 

·      33 submissions were received during notification of the application to modify DA2014/198 with the following reasons for objection raised regarding the connection of OCR and FWD:

 

Ø The increase of traffic flow will not benefit the already compromised conditions of FWD bringing increased noise and hazardous safety issues for road users due to there being no footpath.

 

Comment: As outlined earlier, an access track has connected OCR and FWD for many years and has continually been used by the community despite Councils efforts to restrict traffic. Having regard to the changed traffic conditions on OCR imposed by the Pacific Highway upgrade and that the works associated with formalisation of the connection will be an upgrade of the existing track, it is reasonable to say that the proposed connection will not increase traffic volumes along FWD. Furthermore, the connection results in 38 residential lots (existing and proposed) with shorter access to Nambucca Heads. With Macksville being closer than Nambucca Heads to all of those 38 lots as well as Pacific Highway access being obtained via OCR, the use of FWD by residents of those lots for all vehicular trips is highly unlikely.

Having regard to the above, it is not considered that the connection will adversely increase noise pollution within the locality. Although there are no constructed footpaths, FWD currently has sufficient width of road pavement and substantial verges for pedestrian movement which are compliant with the design standards of Councils DCP.

 

Ø Kingsworth Estate was sold as a land locked estate with the right of carriageway over private property at the end of FWD for emergencies. The right of residents to a quiet enjoyment of this estate would be totally changed and property prices will drop.

 

Comment: The ROC was not created for emergency use only and having regard to the above, it is not considered that the traffic flows on FWD would be substantially altered. As such, it is considered unlikely that the proposal would significantly impact property prices within the area.

 

Ø The track to Old Coast Road and cycle ways off Jacks Ridge Road are more than adequate for pedestrians and cyclists.

 

Comment: The current access track was relocated from a position outside the ROC by the owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978 during works associated with the erection of the newly constructed house on that lot. Council staff have been informed that this was due to the continued desire for people to drive through to and from OCR.

 

The use of this track by both vehicles and pedestrians is considered to be unsafe in its existing condition due to its narrow width, no shoulders and blind corners. Given that previous attempts to block the track to vehicles in the past have failed due to people removing obstructions and trespassing outside the ROC; it is considered unlikely that Council or the landowner could effectively close off potential vehicular access without undertaking substantial works which would eliminate it as an emergency egress route.

 

As such, construction of a formalised connection will ensure the safety of the ROC is improved and liability minimised.

 

Ø   An alternate route via Lumsden Lane to the Pacific Highway would cause less impact to the residents of the Kingsworth Estate.

 

Comment: Connection of OCR to Lumsden Lane would result in substantial environmental disturbance and construction cost, as well as increased road maintenance costs to Council due to the additional road length dedicated to Council control. Having regard to this and that Lumsden Lane is flood prone, it is considered that the upgrade and use of existing roads in the control of Council is the most appropriate option.

 

Ø The removal of trees will increase noise from the new highway on Kingsworth Estate.

 

Comment: Approximately 30 regrowth trees (<200mm diameter) and 4 mature trees will be required to be removed to upgrade the existing track. However, the existing vegetation between Kingsworth estate and the new highway cannot be relied on as a road noise buffer as vegetation does not provide a continuous barrier to reduce noise levels. 

 

Ø There is an unknown about the future development which will occur on Lot 64 DP 1167978 (lot with connector road proposed) and the adjoining lot to the north of that (Lot 187 DP755550). The future subdivisions on these lots will only increase traffic further.

 

Comment: Lot 64 DP 1167978 is the 20ha residue lot to the Kingsworth Estate development and is the only other lot which can be subdivided which would utilise FWD as its access. Given the constraints of the lot, achieving 20 x 1ha allotments is considered to be unachievable. With this in mind and the design standards contained within the DCP, it is considered that FWD is capable of accommodating future traffic generation.

 

Ø The road verge along OCR is a wildlife corridor and contains Koala feeding trees.

 

Comment: Environmental studies have identified that the area contains Koala feeding trees, however is not core koala habitat.

 

Ø FWD does not comply with DCP design standards and will deteriorate faster as a result of increased traffic.

 

Comment: Addressed earlier in this report.

 

Ø The ROC is in private property and Council can only authorise employees and contractors to use it, not a third party.

 

Comment: As outlined earlier, Council is benefited by a ROC and can authorise it to be used by any persons and upgraded to accommodate those users.

 

Ø The connection of FWD to OCR will only encourage people leaving the new highway at OCR to take the “back way”.

 

Comment: As outlined earlier, it will be faster and a shorter distance for motorists to travel via the existing highway form the new Pacific Highway off ramp compared to using OCR/FWD.

 

Ø OCR will remain unsealed which will add maintenance/upgrade costs to Council.

 

Comment: A combination of the requirements within the development consent DA2014/198 and the Pacific Highway upgrade works will result in OCR being sealed from the ROC through to Macksville.

 

Ø Council staff have previously advised that FWD would not be required to be connected to OCD as a result of development on Lot 64 DP 1167978.

 

Comment: Addressed earlier in this report.

 

Ø The owners of Lot 64 DP 1167978 have invested money in constructing their new home adjacent to the ROC. Council has not considered the effects on them having regard to liability and costs associated with driveway, fencing and losing frontage to the cul-de-sac.

 

Comment: Addressed earlier in this report.

 

Ø The connection should be made using asphalt and kerb/gutter to match the existing FWD and not spray seal and gravel shoulders.

 

Comment: The use of asphalt and installation of kerb/guttering within FWD is recommended to promote consistency with the existing streetscape. This will be addressed as part of detailed designs which will be prepared in consultation with the owner of Lot 64 DP 1167978.

 

Ø The bicycle/pedestrian path should be located on the northern side of the ROC instead of the southern side.

 

Comment: It is considered that the most practical side of the road for a path is on the southern side of FWD as requiring a crossing on OCR increases safety hazards.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Ø Manager of Technical Services

Ø General Manager

Ø Manager Development & Environment

Ø Council lawyers

Ø The application was notified in accordance with Part A of the DCP.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

Having regard to the extent of works associated with the proposed road upgrade and location within a predominantly modified area; it is not considered that it will result in any adverse environmental impacts.

 

Social

Given the expected traffic movements addressed earlier in this report, it is not considered that the proposal will have any adverse social impacts.

 

Economic

Having regard to the above, it is not considered that the proposal will have any adverse economic impacts on the locality.

 

Risk

Once the road is upgraded by or on behalf of Council and Council authorises its use by the public, Council will assume potential liability claims the same as it would for a public road. It is not considered that Council is currently liable for the existing below standard road as it was constructed by the owner of Lot 64 DP 1167978 without development consent and Council has never authorised its use.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Nil. Works will be undertaken by an external party on Councils behalf.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

N/A

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

N/A

 

Attachments:

1

23123/2016 - Attachment  1 - Concept Road Design

 

2

23122/2016 - Attachment 2 - Legal Advice

Confidential

3

23121/2016 - Attachment 3 - Mrs Butlers Address to Council

 

4

23120/2016 - Attachment  4 - Former Deposited Plans

 

5

23119/2016 - Attachment  5 - Documentation from stage 3 development consent

 

6

23118/2016 - Attachment 6  - Highway Upgrade Plans

 

7

23117/2016 - Attachment 7 - Flood Map

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive

 







Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive

 





Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive

 










Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive

 





Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Connection of Old Coast Road & Florence Wilmont Drive

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.6      SF2172            140716         Minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 28 June 2016

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Coral Hutchinson, Manager Community Development         

 

Summary:

 

The minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held Tuesday 28 June 2016 are attached for Council’s endorsement. 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council endorse the minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 28 June 2016.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option of not endorsing the minutes or making additional or alternative resolutions.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council is advised that the Access Committee will be preparing a submission to the Legislative Assembly Committee on Community Services inquiry into the access to transport for seniors and disadvantaged people in rural and regional NSW. The timing requires the Committee members to act quickly as submissions close Thursday, 21 July 2016. The submission will be a collection of views which are well known in the community and some of the key issues which form the basis of the Access Committee’s submission are noted in the minutes. 

 

The Committee on Community Services will inquire into and report on access to transport for seniors and disadvantaged people (including but not limited to Aboriginal persons, persons with disability, and social housing tenants) in rural and regional NSW. Matters to be considered include:

(a) Specific issues relating to the transport needs of seniors and disadvantaged people in rural and regional NSW;

(b) Accessibility of current public transport services in rural and regional NSW;

(c) Potential strategies to improve access, including better alignment between different modes of transport, available routes and timetabling generally;

(d) Support that can be provided to seniors and disadvantaged people to assist with the costs of private transport where public transport is either unavailable or unable to meet the needs of these groups; and

(e) Any other related matters.

 

Submissions can be lodged via the Committee's website at

·      https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/communityservices,

·      emailed to communityservices@parliament.nsw.gov.au, or

·      mailed to: The Chair, Legislative Assembly Committee on Community Services, Parliament House, Macquarie Street, Sydney NSW 2000.

 

 

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 is no 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

21316/2016 - Minutes - Access Committee - 28 June 2016

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 28 June 2016

 

PRESENT

 

 Mr Peter Shales (Chairperson)

Cr A Smyth

Ms Lee-anne Funnell

Ms Alba Sky

Mr Les Small

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

Mr Keith Davis

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Ms Coral Hutchinson

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Ms Jenny Adams

Ms Fiona Henwood (Guide Dogs)

Cr E South

 

 

 

Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

ITEM 3.1      SF2172              280616      Confirmation of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting held  24 May 2016

Recommendation: (davis/small)

 

That the Committee confirm the minutes of the meeting held 24 May 2016.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.2      SF2172              280616      Business Arising from Previous Meeting held 24 May 2016

Recommendation: (hutchinson/small)

 

That the matters arising, including the future report on a revised voucher system, be noted.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.3      SF2172              280616      Correspondence to the Access Committee meeting 28 June 2016

Recommendation: (funnell/sky)

 

That the correspondence be noted.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.4      SF2172              280616      Report on General Business to the Access Committee 28 June 2016

Recommendation: (davis/funnell)

 

1          That the reports on the Macksville Aquatic Centre and Council’s new website be noted.

2          That Cr Smyth collect the Committee members’ views and prepare a submission to the Legislative Assembly Committee on Community Services (regarding its inquiry into the access to transport for seniors and disadvantaged people in rural and regional NSW, closing 21 July 2016); noting key issues such as access to trains (timetables, access to night trains), transport issues for our demographic, connections to school and university and connections south. 

 

   

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday 26 July 2016 commencing at 2.00 pm.

 

Note:  Following a discussion under General Business regarding the Pacific Highway upgrade and towns being by-passed, the need to update the Brochure – “Access and Disability Information for Visitors”, catering for the travel needs Grey Nomads and people with disabilities; the Committee decided to devote time at the next meeting to more thoroughly consider these matters and the potential for a Committee project.

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting the time being 3.30 pm. 

 

 

………………………………

Peter Shales

(CHAIRPERSON)


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.7      SF1092            140716         Gordon Park Revised Masterplan and Plan of Management

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Grant Nelson, Coordinator Strategic Planning & Natural Resources         

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the results of the exhibition of the revised Masterplan and Plan of Management for Gordon Park Nambucca Heads.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council endorse the revised Masterplan for Gordon Park Nambucca Heads.

 

2        That Council adopt the amended Plan of Management for Gordon Park Nambucca Heads.

 

3        That Council target grant funding opportunities to prepare a flying fox Plan of Management for Gordon Park.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council may choose to add to, amend or make specific requirements for staff to consider as the detail design is prepared to reflect the amended masterplan.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

General

 

Council was successful in receiving grant funding under the Boating Now Program for a number of projects in the Nambucca LGA.  The largest of these projects relates to Gordon Park. Council has previously resolved to match $287,000 of funds offered by Transport NSW towards Gordon Park which included cash and in-kind support.  The total cash budget for this project is $487,900.

 

The first part of this project is to review the Nambucca River Master Plan as it relates to Gordon Park.

 

It is noted that Council has applied for a large grant ($600,000) under the Crown Lands Management Fund, to fully complete the majority of work shown in the masterplan.  This grant application was made using the existing budget and inkind support as leverage.

 

On the 17 March 2016 Council resolved to exhibit the revised Nambucca River Master Plan and Plan of Management for the area.  These documents were on exhibition from Thursday 2 June 2016 to 4.00 pm Thursday 30 June 2016.

 

Prior to the formal exhibition a number of local residents and business owners also raised concerns to Council and these persons were engaged on site to discuss the matters raised and the overall context of the project.  The outcome of this meeting was positive and these persons were generally satisfied with the location and aspect of the new amenities block which was a major concern.  No further correspondence has been received from these persons during the exhibition period.

 

During the exhibition period Council received 3 submissions from the following persons or community groups,

 

-     Barry Duffus OAM;

-     Nambucca Heads Lions;

-     Gordon Park Tennis Club and Rainforest Committee (joint submission)

At the time of preparing this report a submission was expected from the Offshore Fishing Club and if a submission is forthcoming the comments will be reported through an amended report.

 

The summary of the matters raised in the submissions were as follows:

 

-     Nambucca River is priority issue;

-     Retain Large open spaces – revised plan may limit scope of events and festivals;

-     More emphasis should be Gordon Park Rainforest;

-     Not too much vegetation - will remove open spaces and attract bats;

-     Something needs to be done about the bats;

-     Historical significance of the rainforest should be maintained;

-     Materials should be low maintenance and not present risks;

-   What do we do about recreational, commercial fishermen and marine rescue who also use the ramp

-     Existing BBQ’s should not be removed and should be retained in their existing position;

-     New shelters should be erected over existing BBQ’s

-     Provide 2 electricity power boxes to accommodate events/festivals;

-     What is the purpose of the raised accessible car parks;

-     Advertise the location of Gordon Park - as it would be an ideal rest stop;

-   Overall the Lions Club of Nambucca Heads considers the draft plan an extremely worthwhile intention by Council. However it could be counterproductive if the bat camp is not addressed; and suggest the signature tree in the roundabout should be replaced with a species less attractive to bats;

-   The existing car parks near the tennis courts are to narrow and the proposed parking on both sides of the entrance area is only 45cm wider.

-     The stage 2 of the tennis club parking should be 1m wider than stage 1;

-   Proposed stormwater management and bio retention structures and accesses would need further consideration

-   It is agreed that the Rats of Tobruk walk needs attention, reduced grades, additional seating and low planting west of the path would be of benefit;

 

Some matters above are self-explanatory where these are not planning comments are provided below:

 

Nambucca River: staff are progressing with a number of programs in respect to the Nambucca River – Priority actions included within Councils Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan are being targeted for grant funding as it becomes available. For instance, Councils bank stabilisation program has been progressing over the last couple of years with the support of Fish Habitat Grants, OEH and Councils Environmental Levy.

 

Retain large open spaces: This was highlighted by the community groups during Councils initial stakeholder meeting. The landscape design has incorporated a number of large spaces which would be appropriate for activities such as markets, festivals and kicking a ball around.

 

The boat shaped pedestrian path is protected from vehicle access by a removal bollard, which will allow vehicles to access councils pump station and also allow stall holders to drive into the park unload market stall materials etc. Vegetation will generally be retained to the permitter areas as shown in the plan this will mean that newly planted vegetation will need to be relocated as appropriate.

 

It should be noted that the original Masterplan for the area contained a mixed use precinct centrally within the park which consumed a large amount of open space.

 

Gordon Park Rainforest: The significant natural and historic attributes of Gordon Park Rainforest is acknowledged as is its connection with the remainder of Gordon Park. It is not proposed to undertake any improvements or modifications to the rain forest as part of this plan.

 

Nevertheless, Council should be aware that funding is soon to be made available through a competitive grant process to prepare Flying Fox Management Plans to address local issues. Staff have received a indicative costing from ECOsure to prepare a management plan ($15,000). It is recommended Council target this round of grant funding for an amount of $15,000, for which Council would need to contribute 50% of the fee. If successful a management plan would guide Council through legislative requirements and management protocols associated with flying foxes. The plan would also provide implementation costs for Councils consideration.

 

Ramp Users:  The proposed plan provides a number of trailer parking spaces for the enhancement of river users which are presently not existent within the car park area.

 

Council is presently in the process of preparing shoaling investigation report. Staff have provided comment on the draft study and are awaiting the final report which will be presented to Council.

 

Existing BBQ’s should be retained:  The draft plan relocates the BBQ’s to the fringes of the park area to allow for larger open spaces as requested by the community groups at the stakeholder meeting. They are also placed to provide direct access from the pathways and disabled parking spaces.

 

Although still functional the existing structures are dated and it is anticipated that grant funding would present opportunities to upgrade the existing facilities. The actual BBQ may be re-used if it is still in good working order. It is recommended that council maintain the integrity of the plan and move the BBQ facilities to the fringe of the park with access to the pathways and disabled spaces.

 

Power access: having access to power is noted and will be considered in the design of power plans for the site

 

Raised accessible Parking Bays: These have provided disabled access directly to the pathways and have been strategically located to enable access to all facilities in the park.

 

Parking Bays: Staff will ensure parking meets relevant guidelines and standards during the design phase of the project.

 

Stormwater Management: Stormwater management will be given further consideration during the design phase of the project.

 

Other Matters Staff have been examining options for the placement of the proposed amenities and the community appear to be content with the proposed location shown within the plan, however discussions are presently progressing with Level 1 electrical contractors and staff are awaiting cost estimates in respect to a number of options for the area which include underground services and bundling some existing electrical cables. Upon receipt of the information from the contractor, further detail will be reported to Council with respect to the preparation of an electrical design for the area.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

Local residents surrounding Gordon Park

Nambucca Heads Lions Club;

Gordon Park Tennis Club and Rainforest Committee)

Offshore Fishing Club

Chamber of Commerce

Assistant General Manager – Engineering Services

Manager Assets

Design Engineer

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

There are environmental implications with the management of the reserve to maintain its natural and unique integrity of this reserve and adjoining rainforest. The Masterplan for Gordon Park and amended Plan of Management addresses these issues to retain its integrity with the use recycled products and planting of native trees and plant species

 

Social

There are social implications with the management of the reserve with a vast number of recreational and community stakeholders who use the reserve and adjoining water way area. The Masterplan for Gordon Park and amended Plan of Management addresses these issues to retain its integrity with a combination of new amenities, open space and the use of native trees and plant species

 

Economic

 

There are no economic issues associated with this report.

 

Risk

 

There are potential risk issues associated with the shared community and recreational use and management of the area to maintain its natural and unique integrity and Masterplan for Gordon Park and amended Plan of Management addresses these issues.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Council was successful in receiving grant funding under the Boating Now Program for Gordon Park. Council has previously resolved to match $287,000 of funds offered by Transport NSW towards Gordon Park which included cash and in-kind support. The total cash budget for this project is $487,900.

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

External grants funds under the Boating Now Program matched with Council working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

There are service level changes with the upgrading of Gordon Park with new amnesties and facilities as contained in the Masterplan as well as staff resources associated with the management and implementation of the project

 

Attachments:

1

22249/2016 - Submission from Nambucca Heads Lions Club

 

2

21997/2016 - Submission from Barry Duffus OAM

 

3

22753/2016 - Submission from Tennis Club and Rainforest Committee

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Gordon Park Revised Masterplan and Plan of Management

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Gordon Park Revised Masterplan and Plan of Management

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Gordon Park Revised Masterplan and Plan of Management

 

                                                                             Nambucca Shire Council

                                                                             Gordon Park Tennis Centre

                                                                  Committee of Management

                                                                             PO Box 9

                                                                 Nambucca Heads NSW 2448

                                                                             Tel: 6569 4445

                                                                  Email: mjtait@westnet.com.au

                                   25 June 2016

Nambucca Shire Council

P O Box 177

Macksville NSW 2447

Att: Mr Michael Coulter - General Manager

 

Dear Mr Coulter

 

                            Draft Plan of Management - Gordon Park

 

Just a few comments on the plan, which overall looks pretty good and takes into account all of the comments made at the on-site consultation meeting with stake holders.

 

1.The new carpark east of the tennis courts is about 1 metre too narrow, a fact really emphasised when 4WD and vans are parked there. I measured the width of the road parallel to the river that is to become "end in" carparking both sides and it is about 45 cms wider than the carpark east of the tennis courts: better but not good - and the cars parked on both sides will have cars and fishing boat trailers passing up between them, heading to and from the boat ramp. If any van or large 4WD are parked there then dings are bound to happen sooner or later.

 

2. Part two of the carpark east of the tennis courts needs to be 1 metre wider than part one.

 

3. I'm not sure what the structures number 12 (bridge over stormwater flowpath) are doing where they are located on the Detail Plan on page 6. In times of heavy persistent rain, town stormwater enters the forest at about 7 locations along Wellington Drive, eventually forming one spread of water too voluminous for the underground pipe and for the four grates east of the tennis courts. The excess water heads above ground to the river along a path to the east of the pump station, not west where one of the bridges is shown. The second bridge (east of the tennis courts) may be in the right area but in fact the whole path from the carpark to the tennis clubhouse would be under water so this bridge doesn't seem to be serving any purpose.

 

4. I have to admit to being puzzled as to how the various bio retention basins have been positioned to receive the stormwater but I guess that your drainage engineers have that well in hand.

 

5. To save a further letter from the Gordon Park Rainforest Committee of Management which would have commented similarly as in 1-4, I make the additional comment that the committee was pleased to see the Rats of Tobruk Walk included for much needed attention. We reiterate that the walk needs to be terraced to reduce the gradient of the path for the elderly and infirm. Seating appears on the Site Plan as we asked, but when the time comes, low plantings from ground level to say 4 metres should be included west of the path. This is an area which is not utilised by the community because of its steepness but still requires mowing. The terracing plus seating at various stages plus plantings not so high as to block the river views from the path nor from the businesses in Fraser Street, would effectively reclaim this area of the park for some community use additional to walking from Fraser Street to the river front while cutting the cost of regular lawn maintenance.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

John Tait

Treasurer - Gordon Park Tennis Centre Committee of Management

Secretary/Treasurer - Gordon Park Rainforest Committee of Management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.8      SF1031            140716         Policy Review - Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Lisa Hall, Technical Officer - Development and Environment         

 

Summary:

 

In December 2015 the NSW Ombudsman released updated “Enforcement Guidelines for Councils” which contained a model Enforcement Policy. At Council’s meeting of 28 January 2016 Council resolved to review its Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution Policy based on these guidelines and model Policy.

 

A new draft policy has been completed and exhibited and is now reported to Council for adoption.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council adopt the attached Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution Policy.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1        Council can elect to modify the draft Policy prior to placing it on public exhibition.

2        Council can elect to keep their current Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution Policy.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The staff of Council’s Development and Environment Section have been undertaking a review of all policies for which they are responsible.  The Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution Policy is the last one to be reviewed.

 

On 26 May 2016, Council resolved as follows:

 

230/16 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/MacDonald)

 

That Council publicly exhibit the Draft Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution Policy, which is attached to the report, for a period of 28 days with a view to adopting the draft policy once any public submissions are considered.

 

The policy was exhibited from Friday 3 June 2016 until Friday 1 July 2016. No submissions were received.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Manager Development & Environment

Senior and Area Health & Building Surveyors

Senior Town Planner

Ranger

Plumbing & Drainage Inspector

The public

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

If the policy is implemented it should lead to better protection of the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no direct social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic considerations.

 

Risk

 

The Ombudsman’s Guidelines and Council’s policy are concerned with implementing good administrative practices. But ultimately the implementation of good administrative practice is about minimising financial and reputational risks to Council in undertaking enforcement action. Whilst there will always be some subjectivity in relation to the application of such Guidelines, using best practice will reduce reputational and financial risk.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no budgetary implications

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no implications for working funds

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

If the draft policy is adopted, it will provide information and guidance to the public, Councillors and staff as to how Council’s resources will be used to respond to investigating alleged unlawful activities.

 

Attachments:

1

1554/2016 - Draft Policy - Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Policy Review - Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution

 

 

 

 

 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

COMPLIANCE, ENFORCEMENT AND PROSECUTION DRAFT POLICY

 

 

 

Function: Development and Environment

 

 

Adopted: 18 March 2009

Last reviewed: 20 October 2010

May 2016

 

 

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.’

 

 

1     Introduction

 

Council’s regulatory responsibilities are applicable to actual unlawful activity, as well as a failure to take action (in order to be compliant with certain legal requirements). For simplicity, this policy refers to both an act and/or an omission by an alleged offender as ‘unlawful activity’.

 

This policy distinguishes between a ‘report alleging unlawful activity’ and a ‘complaint’.

 

For the purposes of this policy, a report alleging unlawful activity is where an individual expresses concern in relation to alleged unlawful activity, or they request service from Council about such matters. Council considers that a response or resolution to a report alleging unlawful activity is explicitly or implicitly expected by the individual, or may be legally required.

 

A complaint is where an individual expresses dissatisfaction about Council services, staff or the handling of a previous complaint. Therefore, a complaint may arise where an individual claims that Council staff have failed to take action in relation to a report alleging unlawful activity. A complaint will be recorded separately and responded to in accordance with Council’s complaints management policy and procedures.

 

 

2     Purpose and scope

 

This policy provides information for all internal and external stakeholders and interested parties about Council’s position on compliance and enforcement matters in the local government area.

 

The purpose of this policy is to provide structure for consistency and transparency in decision making, and to facilitate a proportional approach to compliance and enforcement. It is also intended to assist Council staff to act promptly, effectively and consistently in response to allegations of unlawful activity.

 

This policy outlines matters to be considered at the various stages of the enforcement process from the receipt and investigation of reports alleging unlawful activity, through to what enforcement option Council will choose and whether to commence criminal or civil proceedings.

 

In certain circumstances Council will have shared enforcement responsibilities with other regulatory authorities. This policy sets out a collaborative and cooperative approach to such matters. Advice and guidance is also provided on the role of Council in building and construction compliance matters where there is a private certifier, and the role of Councillors in enforcement.

 

Responsible Council staff are not limited by this policy in their use of discretion and exercise of official functions. The full circumstances and facts of each case need to be considered and a decision made on the merits.

 

 

3     Organisational approach

 

Council undertakes compliance and enforcement for the following reasons:

•        to prevent or minimise harm to health, welfare, safety, property or the environment

•        to improve the safety and amenity of residents and visitors to the area

•        for the collective good, the welfare of the community or the public interest

•        to promote social policies (eg to preserve or protect the environment)

•        to manage risks

•        to uphold social order

•        to meet the expectations of the community

•        to encourage reports about possible unlawful activity from the community

•        to make the regulated community aware of their legal obligations and how to comply

 

The objects section of an Act will often list the specific nature of the harm that is being addressed and explicitly state the regulatory purposes of the legislation. For example, under section 8 of the Local Government Act 1993 Councils are obliged to ensure that regulatory functions are exercised consistently and without bias.

 

Council has the authority to regulate many activities, including (but not limited to):

•        development and building control

•        pollution control

•        environmental health

•        public health and safety

•        noxious weeds

•        water and sewer

•        septic systems

•        control over animals

•        food safety

•        fire safety

•        parking and traffic matters

 

Council undertakes both proactive and reactive compliance and enforcement activities, including

•        regular inspections of food premises, skin penetration premises, pool barriers and onsite sewage management systems

•        the provision of information about compliance issues

•        audits of commercial properties to check compliance issues

•        assessing and investigating reports alleging unlawful activities

•        educating people at risk of non-compliance

•        issuing warnings, notices, orders and penalty infringement notices

•        taking legal action

 

 

4     Definitions

 

The following are the definitions of key terms in this policy:

Term Meaning

Complaint

A complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction made about Council services, staff or the handling of a previous complaint, where a response or resolution is explicitly or implicitly expected or legally required.


For the purposes of this policy, a complaint does not include:

•       a report alleging unlawful activity (see definition below)

•       a request for information about a Council policy or procedure

•       a request for an explanation of actions taken by Council

•       a request for internal review of a Council decision.

 

Enforcement

Actions taken in response to serious or deliberate contraventions of laws.

 

Regulation

Using a variety of tools and strategies to influence and change behaviour to achieve the objectives of an Act, Regulation or other statutory instrument administered by Council.

 

Report alleging unlawful activity

An expression of concern or a request for service in relation to alleged unlawful activity, where a response or resolution is explicitly or implicitly expected or legally required.

 

Unlawful activity

Any activity or work that has been or is being carried out contrary to the below and/or failure to take required action in order to be compliant with:

•       terms or conditions of a development consent, approval, permit or licence

•       an environmental planning instrument that regulates the activities or work that can be carried out on particular land

•       a legislative provision regulating a particular activity or work

•       a required development consent, approval, permission or licence.

 

5     Policy objectives

 

The intent of this policy is to establish clear guidelines and protocols for Council staff in the management of Council’s regulatory activities.

 

It provides workable guidelines on:

•        responding to reports alleging unlawful activity

•        assessing whether reports alleging unlawful activity require investigation

•        deciding on whether enforcement action is warranted

•        options for dealing with confirmed cases of unlawful activity

•        taking legal action

•        implementing shared enforcement responsibilities.

 

The policy also provides advice and guidance on:

•        the role of the Principal Certifying Authority and

•        the role of Councillors in enforcement.

 

 

6     Application

 

This policy applies to regulatory issues within Council’s area of responsibility including, but not limited to:

•        development and building control

•        pollution control

•        environmental health

•        public health and safety

•        noxious weeds

•        water and sewer

•        septic systems

•        control over animals

•        food safety

•        fire safety

•        parking and traffic matters

7     Compliance and enforcement principles

 

The following are the principles that underpin Council actions relating to compliance and enforcement:

Principle Action

Accountable and transparent

·           acting in the best interests of public health and safety and in the best interests of the environment

·           ensuring accountability for decisions to take or not take action

·           acting fairly and impartially and without bias or unlawful discrimination

·           providing information about compliance and enforcement priorities and reasons for decisions to improve understanding and certainty and promote trust by the regulated community

·           ensuring meaningful reasons for decisions are given to all relevant parties, particularly when there is a departure from this policy

·           acting on any complaints or concerns about the conduct of compliance officers in accordance with Council’s complaints management policy and procedures

·           advising people and organisations subject to enforcement action of any avenues available to seek an internal or external review of a decision

 

Consistent

·           ensuring all compliance and enforcement action is implemented consistently

·           encouraging reports about possible unlawful activity by acting reasonably in response to the circumstances and facts of each matter.

 

Proportional

·           ensuring the level of enforcement action is proportionate to the level of risk and seriousness of the breach

·           making cost-effective decisions about enforcement action

·           taking action to address harm and deter future unlawful activity.

 

Timely

·           ensuring responses to reports alleging unlawful activity and decision making in relation to those is timely

 

 

8     Responsibility

 

Council receives information about alleged unlawful activity from members of the public, contact from other government agencies and information gathered by its officers during proactive inspections.

 

All Council staff who deal with reports alleging unlawful activity are responsible for implementing this policy. Council staff are also responsible for ensuring that any other possible unlawful activity identified as a result of an inspection, proactive enforcement or other activity is brought to the attention of the appropriate business unit of Council.

 

Council staff are required to:

•        treat all relevant parties with courtesy and respect

•        communicate with all relevant parties and provide feedback on the progress of an investigation and any reasons for delay without compromising the integrity of the investigation

•        make full and proper records in relation to the assessment and investigation of reports alleging unlawful activity, including reasons for any decisions

•        inform all relevant parties of reasons for decisions

•        provide as much information as possible to all relevant parties about the outcomes of investigations to show that adequate and appropriate action was taken and/or is proposed to be taken in response to a report of alleged unlawful activity

•        provide information to all relevant parties about any avenues to seek an internal or external review of a decision.

 

All reports alleging unlawful activity are to be entered into Council’s customer service request system and directed to the appropriate officer in a timely manner by Council’s Business Services Unit.

 

Only Council staff with appropriate delegations from the general manager can undertake investigations or compliance and enforcement action in relation to this policy.

 

 

9     Responding to concerns about unlawful activity

 

How reports alleging unlawful activity will be dealt with by Council

 

Council will record and assess every report alleging unlawful activity.

 

Council will respond to every such report unless the person raising the matter has indicated they do not wish to receive a response about Council’s handling of the matter, or the report is anonymous.

 

Generally speaking, Council’s objectives when dealing with reports alleging unlawful activity are to:

•        maintain the collective good and welfare of the community

•        prevent or minimise harm to health, welfare, safety, property or the environment

•        consider the broader public interest having regard to Council’s priorities and any resource limitations

•        consider the report fairly and impartially.

 

Not all reports will need to be investigated. A preliminary assessment of all matters will be made to determine the priority for a response, and whether investigation or other action is required.

 

An investigation of alleged unlawful activity may take a significant amount of time to complete, particularly where the issues are complex. If Council decides to investigate, staff will give the person who reported the alleged unlawful activity regular feedback on the progress of the investigation, and any reasons for delay. This does not mean that the individual can expect to be given details about every aspect of the investigation or information that would compromise the integrity of the investigation.

 

Decisions about what action should be taken by Council are made at the Council’s discretion. This means the objective is that reports alleging unlawful activity will be resolved to the satisfaction of Council, not necessarily the person raising the matter. Council will generally try to resolve matters as quickly and informally as possible so as to avoid the need to take formal action.

 

Council staff will endeavour to manage the expectations of people who report alleged unlawful activity, and in particular explain that in the absence of sufficient evidence of unlawful activity, Council may be unable to take further action. They will also explain that Council does not have unlimited resources and powers to deal with reports alleging unlawful activity. If Council is unable to fully investigate or take action on a matter because it is restricted by any legal or resource limitations this will be explained to the individual.

 

While there are certain statutory requirements that must be met in relation to notices and orders, Council staff will ensure that all explanatory communications are made in plain English and explain any technical language the law requires to be used.

 

Confidentiality of people who report allegations of unlawful activity

 

People who report allegations of unlawful activity should not expect that their identities will remain confidential from the subject of their report in all circumstances. Council may have to disclose information that identifies them in the following cases:

•        the disclosure is necessary to investigate the matter

•        their identity has already been disclosed to the subject of their report directly or in a publicly available document

•        the individual was consulted following receipt of a Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 application and did not object to the disclosure

•        the individual consents in writing to their identity being disclosed

•        the disclosure is required to comply with principles of procedural fairness

•        the matter proceeds to court.

 

Council will take seriously any concerns an individual may have about their physical safety being endangered as a result of making a report. However, this may limit Council’s ability to investigate the matter.

 

What Council expects from people who report allegations of unlawful activity

 

Council expects that people who report allegations of unlawful activity will cooperate and act in good faith in respect of any investigations conducted by Council. This includes:

•        providing a clear description of the problem (and the resolution sought, if relevant)

•        giving all available and relevant information to Council, including any new information about the alleged activity that may become known to the person following the making of their report

•        not giving any information that is intentionally misleading or wrong

•        cooperating with Council’s inquiries and giving timely responses to questions and requests for information

•        treating Council’s staff with courtesy and respect

•        allowing the investigation to be completed without prematurely taking the matter to other agencies unless referred to by Council.

 

If these expectations of the individual are not met, Council may need to set limits or conditions on the continuation of the investigation or may need to restrict any further communications with the individual.

 

Any unreasonable conduct will be dealt with in accordance with the principles of the NSW Ombudsman’s Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct Manual 2012 and any applicable Council policy.

 

What parties can expect from Council staff

 

People who report alleged unlawful activity, as well as individuals or businesses that are subject to investigation and any enforcement action, can expect that Council staff will:

•        treat them with courtesy and respect

•        advise them of the outcome of the allegation reported, including a full explanation of the reasons why that outcome was considered to be reasonable in the circumstances

•        clearly explain decisions in plain English

•        provide information about any relevant internal and external appeal processes that may be available

•        carefully assess any new information provided by any party after a decision has been made and advise whether further action will be taken.

 

Complaints about Council’s enforcement actions

 

Any complaints about Council’s handling of reports alleging unlawful activity will be recorded separately and handled in accordance with Council’s complaints management policy and procedures.

 

Where a person or organisation subject to enforcement action merely disputes Council’s decision to take enforcement against them, they will be directed to make representations in accordance with any relevant internal and external appeal processes.

 

Council staff will act on any complaints about the conduct of compliance officers in accordance with Council’s complaints management policy and procedures and the code of conduct.

 

Anonymous reports

 

Anonymous reports will be recorded and assessed in accordance with the above requirements. However, because it is not possible to seek clarification or additional information about a matter, it may be more difficult to evaluate the allegations and therefore these reports are less likely to warrant investigation.

 


Unlawful activity outside business hours

 

Unlawful activity can occur outside business hours. In particular, Council may receive reports about matters such as offensive noise and failure to comply with limitations on hours of operation during nights and weekends.

 

Due to resource and operational capability restraints on Council, investigations into alleged unlawful activity outside business hours will be assessed on the basis of risk of harm to health, welfare, safety, property or the environment or if it is in the public interest to take such action.

 

Neighbour disputes

 

Council will at times receive reports from parties involved in neighbour disputes seeking Council’s involvement. When a dispute between two neighbours is a civil matter, Council will often have no authority to resolve the issue in dispute. Some reports will raise several matters, some of which will require Council’s involvement and some of which will be personal to the parties.

 

Council staff will thoroughly assess such reports to determine whether there is evidence of any possible unlawful activity requiring action by Council. Care will be taken to explain which aspects of a report Council can deal with and which cannot be dealt with and why. Where possible, individuals will be provided with information about how to resolve neighbour disputes including referral information resources such as LawAccess NSW and Community Justice Centres.

 

It is possible that one party will provide further information about a matter which changes Council’s decision about whether it will become involved. In such circumstances, Council staff will carefully consider the matter before taking action and document reasons for the new decision. Relevant parties will be advised about the reasons Council has changed its position on a matter. Council staff will not change a decision about whether or not Council should be involved purely as a response to the conduct of an individual such as persistent demands or threats.

 

Please refer to Council’s website for information on how Council will typically respond to common reports, including overgrown properties and stormwater runoff issues.

 

 

10   Investigating alleged unlawful activity

 

Not all reports alleging unlawful activity will warrant investigation. A preliminary assessment of all matters will be made to determine whether investigation or other action is required. Council will prioritise matters on the basis of risk to public safety, human health and environment.

 

Please refer to Appendix 3 – Prioritising Council’s response for information about how Council categorises reports about various activities.

 

If there is insufficient information in the report to undertake a preliminary assessment, further information may need to be sought from the person who made the report or an inspection undertaken. Staff may also need to consult Council records and other internal business units to understand the relevant history and context of a matter.

 

Circumstances where no action will be taken:

 

Council will take no further action if, following a preliminary assessment, it is identified that:

•        Council does not have jurisdiction to investigate or is not the appropriate authority to take action on the issues raised. Where there is another appropriate authority or course of action, Council may bring the matter to the attention of the authority or provide information and contact details to the individual. For example NSW WorkCover for workplace safety matters, the NSW Environment Protection Authority for possible environmental offences and Community Justice Centres NSW for personal disputes

•       
the report relates substantially to a matter previously determined by Council and no new or compelling information is presented which would cause Council to change its earlier decision. In this case, staff will acknowledge the report and advise that no further action will be taken as no new information had been provided (other than where the person has previously been advised they would receive no further response)

•        the allegations relate to a lawful activity (eg where there is an existing approval or the activity is permissible without Council approval or consent being required)

•        the report is not supported with evidence or appears to have no substance

•        the relevant manager, director or the general manager determines that investigation or other action would have an unreasonable impact on resources and/or is unlikely to achieve an outcome sufficient to justify the expenditure of resources.

 

Relevant factors guiding decisions as to whether to take action:

 

When deciding whether to investigate, Council will consider a range of factors including whether:

•        the activity is having a significant detrimental effect on the environment or it constitutes a risk to public safety

•        the report is premature as it relates to some unfinished aspect of work that is still in progress

•        the activity or work is permissible with or without permission

•        all conditions of consent are being complied with

•        much time has elapsed since the events the subject of the report took place

•        another body is a more appropriate agency to investigate and deal with the matter

•        it appears there is a pattern of conduct or evidence of a possible widespread problem

•        the person or organisation reported has been the subject of previous reports

•        the report raises matters of special significance in terms of the Council’s existing priorities

•        there are significant resource implications in relation to an investigation and any subsequent enforcement action

•        it is in the public interest to investigate the report.

 

The above are factors for Council to consider and weigh in making a determination. Council staff are not limited in their use of discretion by these considerations and may decide to investigate based on these and other factors.

 

The objective of the processes Council staff use when investigating incidents of alleged unlawful activity is to:

•        determine the cause of the incident

•        determine if there has been a contravention of law, policy or standards

•        gather evidence to the required standard to support any required enforcement action

•        determine any necessary action to mitigate the possibility of reoccurrence of similar incidents.

 

Any decision not to investigate an allegation of unlawful activity will be recorded and the reasons for that decision clearly stated.

 

 

11   Taking enforcement action

 

When deciding whether to take enforcement action in relation to a confirmed case of unlawful activity, Council will consider the full circumstances and facts of the matter and the public interest. The following common considerations will assist Council staff in determining the most appropriate response in the public interest:

 

Considerations about the alleged offence and impact:

 

•        the nature, extent and severity of the unlawful activity, including whether the activity is continuing

•        the harm or potential harm to the environment or public health, safety or amenity caused by the unlawful activity

•        the seriousness of the breach, including whether the breach is merely technical, inconsequential or minor in nature

•        the time period that has lapsed since the date of the unlawful activity.

 

Considerations about the alleged offender:

 

•        any prior warnings, instructions, advice that was issued to the person or organisation reported or previous

•        enforcement action taken against them

•        whether the offence was committed with intent

•        whether the person or organisation reported has been proactive in the resolution of the matter and assisted with any Council requirements and instructions

•        any mitigating or aggravating circumstances demonstrated by the alleged offender

•        any particular circumstances of hardship affecting the person or organisation reported.

 

Considerations about the impact of any enforcement action:

 

•        the need to deter any future unlawful activity

•        whether an educative approach would be more appropriate than a coercive approach in resolving the matter

•        the prospect of success if the proposed enforcement action was challenged in court

•        the costs and benefits of taking formal enforcement action as opposed to taking informal or no action

•        what action would be proportionate and reasonable in response to the unlawful activity

•        whether Council is prevented from taking action based on earlier advice given, ie whether an estoppel situation has been created.

 

Considerations about the potential for remedy:

 

•        whether the breach can be easily remedied

•        whether it is likely consent would have been given for the activity if it had been sought

•        whether there is a draft planning instrument on exhibition that would make the unauthorised use legal.

 

A further explanation of the above considerations is provided in Appendix 1.

 

Legal or technical issues

 

Where legal and/or technical issues are in question, Council staff will consider whether legal advice or professional advice from duly qualified staff or other experts should be obtained and considered. Council may also require a person subject to possible enforcement action to obtain professional advice in relation to issues of concern to Council for assessment as to whether further action is required.

 

Requirements of Council staff considering enforcement action

 

Prior to taking enforcement action, Council staff will take into account the above considerations as well as the evidence gathered during their investigation. Council staff must act impartially, be mindful of their obligations under Council’s code of conduct and not act as a decision-maker in relation to any matter in which they have a personal interest. Enforcement action will not be taken purely as a response to the conduct of an individual such as persistent demands or threats.

 

Council staff are required to maintain records about critical thinking and decision-making processes in relation to reports alleging unlawful activity and any enforcement action, as well as records of interactions with relevant parties.

 


Council staff will take steps to ensure that any enforcement action is taken against the correct person or organisation. Where there are multiple possible parties to an alleged unlawful activity, it will generally not be appropriate to take enforcement action against every person who may be liable for the alleged unlawful activity. In such circumstances, Council staff will be guided by legal advice in determining the appropriate persons to pursue.

 

Please see Appendix 2 for information about what type/s of enforcement action is likely to be undertaken for particular activities. Please note that each case will be dealt with on its merits and different actions may be taken by Council as a result.

 

 

12   Options for dealing with confirmed cases of unlawful activity

 

Council will try to use the quickest and most informal option to deal with unlawful activity wherever possible unless there is little likelihood of compliance with such options. Council staff will use discretion to determine the most appropriate response to confirmed cases of unlawful activity and may take more than one approach. Any enforcement action taken by Council will depend on the full circumstances and facts of each case, with any decision being made on the merits.

 

At all times, Council’s key concerns are:

•        to prevent or minimise harm to health, welfare, safety, property or the environment

•        to influence behaviour change for the common good and on behalf of the community.

 

The following enforcement options to be considered by Council are ordered to reflect an escalation in response that is proportionate to the level of risk, the seriousness of the confirmed breach or the need for a deterrent:

Level of risk Enforcement options

Very low:          taking no action on the basis of a lack of evidence or some other appropriate reason; and/or

providing information/advice on how to be compliant.

Low:                 negotiating with the person to obtain voluntary undertakings or an agreement to address the issues of concern; and/or

issuing a warning or a formal caution.

Medium:           issuing a letter requiring work to be done or activity to cease in lieu of more formal action; and/or

issuing a notice of intention to serve an order or notice under relevant legislation, and then serving an order or notice if appropriate.

High:           issuing a penalty notice; and/or

carrying out the works specified in an order at the cost of the person served with the order.

Very high:         seeking an injunction through the courts to prevent future or continuing unlawful activity; and/or

commencing legal proceedings for an offence against the relevant Act or Regulation.

Please refer to Appendix 2 for examples of how these categories may be applied.

 

Following up enforcement action

 

All enforcement action will be reviewed and monitored to ensure compliance with any undertakings given by the subject of enforcement action or advice, directions or orders issued by Council. Reports alleging continuing unlawful activity will be assessed and further action taken if necessary. If the unlawful activity has ceased or the work has been rectified, the matter will be resubmitted for follow up action to ensure compliance outcomes are met. Should initial enforcement action be found to have been ineffective, Council staff will consider other enforcement options.

 

 

13   Taking legal action

 

The Council and its delegated staff will be guided by legal advice in deciding whether to commence criminal or civil proceedings and will consider the following:

•        whether there is sufficient evidence to establish a case to the required standard of proof

•        whether there is a reasonable prospect of success before a court

•        whether the public interest warrants legal action being pursued.


Whether there is sufficient evidence to establish a case to the required standard of proof

 

Council considers the decision to take legal action a serious matter, and as such will only initiate and continue proceedings once it has been established that there is admissible, substantial and reliable evidence to the required standard of proof.

 

The basic requirement of any criminal prosecution is that the available evidence establishes a prima facie case. The prosecutor is required to prove the elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

 

In civil enforcement proceedings, Council will require sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that an actual or threatened breach has occurred on the balance of probabilities.

 

Whether there is a reasonable prospect of success before a court

 

Given the expense of legal action Council will not take legal action unless there is a reasonable prospect of success before a court. In making this assessment, Council staff will consider the availability, competence and credibility of witnesses, the admissibility of the evidence, all possible defences, and any other factors which could affect the likelihood of a successful outcome.

 

Whether the public interest requires legal action be pursued

 

The principal consideration in deciding whether to commence legal proceedings is whether to do so is in the public interest. In making this determination, the same factors to be considered when taking enforcement action apply.

 

The following considerations relate more specifically to the decision to commence legal proceedings and will assist Council and its delegated staff in making this determination:

•        the availability of any alternatives to legal action

•        whether an urgent resolution is required (court proceedings may take some time)

•        the possible length and expense of court proceedings

•        any possible counter-productive outcomes of prosecution

•        what the effective sentencing options are available to the court in the event of conviction

•        whether the proceedings or the consequences of any resulting conviction would be unduly harsh or oppressive

 

Time within which to commence proceedings

Council staff must be aware of legislative time limits in which enforcement proceedings must be commenced. Sometimes legal action will be statute barred despite good evidence that unlawful activity has occurred.

 

14   Shared enforcement responsibilities

 

Some reports will raise matters involving shared regulatory responsibilities between Council and other authorities including the Environment Protection Authority, the NSW Police Force, the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing, NSW Fair Trading, NSW Food Authority and Crown Lands.

 

Council recognises that collaboration and cooperation between authorities to address issues of shared regulatory responsibility is the best approach. To this end, where there are shared legislative responsibilities, Council staff will liaise with relevant authorities to establish:

•        which authority will take the leading role on any joint investigation

•        which activities each authority will carry out

•        responsibilities for updating an individual where relevant

•        protocols for exchanging confidential information between the relevant authorities.

 

Council will reasonably endeavour to respond to requests for information or assistance on joint regulatory matters in a timely manner.


15   Role of Council where there is a private certifier

 

Council retains its regulatory role and enforcement powers where a private certifier has been appointed the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA). However, if a private certifier is appointed the PCA, it is not Council’s responsibility to ensure building and construction compliance.

 

Private certifiers have limited enforcement powers as the PCA. They have the power to issue a notice of intention to issue an order to the owner or builder to comply with the conditions of consent or rectify any breaches. A copy of any notice of intention issued by a private certifier must be provided to Council for assessment as to whether Council will enforce the notice by issuing an order.

 

Council and private certifiers will work together to resolve any issues when they arise to achieve compliance with the development consent or complying development certificate. Council staff will take steps to ensure individuals are clear about which agency performs which role.

 

 

16   Role of Councillors in enforcement

 

Decision-making relating to the investigation of reports alleging unlawful activity and taking enforcement action is the responsibility of appropriately authorised Council staff or the Council itself.

 

Individual Councillors do not have the right to direct Council staff in their day-to-day activities. Councillors can help individuals who raise concerns with them by satisfying themselves that their Council’s policies are being carried out correctly, however they cannot ignore or alter a policy in order to satisfy the demands of special groups.

 

The general manager may present certain decisions to be ratified by the elected Council if this is necessary or desirable, and the Councillors may also have the right to call for a report about particular issues to a Council meeting.

 

 

17   Delegations

 

Council staff delegations for taking action under this policy are included in Council’s Delegation Register

 

 

18   Other resources

 

The NSW Ombudsman website has the following helpful resources at www.ombo.nsw.gov.au:

•        Managing unreasonable complainant conduct – a model policy and procedure

•        Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct Manual 2012

•        The Rights Stuff – Tips for making complaints and solving problems

•        Effective complaint handling guidelines – 2nd edition

•        Managing information arising out of an investigation – Balancing openness and confidentiality

•        Reporting of progress and results of investigations

•        Good Conduct and Administrative Practice

•        Options for Redress

•        Investigating Complaints – A manual for investigators

•        Enforcement guidelines for councils

•        Better Service and Communication for Council

 

See also:

•        Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (2014), Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth: Guidelines for the making of decisions in the prosecution process

•        NSW Planning (2010), Prosecution Guidelines.

•       

Appendix 1

 

Taking enforcement action

 

When deciding whether to take enforcement action in relation to a confirmed case of unlawful activity, Council will consider all the circumstances of the matter. The section below is intended to assist staff by providing a further explanation of matters to be taken into consideration when deciding whether to take enforcement action.

 

 

Considerations about the alleged offence and impact:

 

The nature, extent and severity of the unlawful activity including whether the activity continued

The harm or potential harm to the environment or public health, safety or amenity caused by the unlawful activity

 

Consideration should be given to the nature, extent and severity of any actual or potential impact of the unlawful activity. If there is actual or potential detriment to the natural or built environment, to the health or safety of residents or the amenity of an area, this would normally warrant a decision to take action to remedy or restrain the breach. It is also important to consider whether the unlawful activity is ongoing or has ceased.

 

The seriousness of the breach, including whether the breach is merely technical, inconsequential or minor in nature

The costs and benefits of taking formal enforcement action as opposed to taking informal or no action

 

Consideration should be given to whether the likely costs and benefits of any enforcement action is justifiable where breaches result in no material impacts upon any other party or the health, safety and amenity of the environment and community. A breach of a technical, inconsequential or minor nature, in the absence of any other aggravating factor, will generally not warrant a decision to take action to remedy or restrain the breach.

 

The time period that has lapsed since the date of the unlawful activity.

 

Legislation may provide time limits in which to commence proceedings and take enforcement action, and sometimes prosecution will be statute barred despite good evidence that unlawful activity has taken place.

 

In addition, consideration should be given to the time which the offence or breach occurred and the ‘reasonableness’ of taking enforcement action if a significant time has lapsed since the time of the offence or breach.

 

 

Considerations about the alleged offender

 

Any prior warnings, instructions, advice that was issued to the person or organisation reported or previous enforcement action taken against them

 

Consideration should be given to the previous history of the offender. If prior warnings, instructions or advice has been issued to the person or organisation reported which was not followed, a more formal and coercive enforcement approach would appear more appropriate.

 

Whether the offence was committed with intent

 

Consideration should be given to whether the offence was committed deliberately, recklessly or with gross negligence. It may be appropriate that cases of this nature are more likely to result in prosecution. Where an offence was committed as a result of an accident or genuine mistake, providing education and guidance or a formal warning may be more suitable in achieving desired outcomes.


Whether the person or organisation reported has been proactive in the resolution of the matter and assisted with any Council requirements and instructions

 

Where the offender has been proactive in the resolution of the matter and has assisted Council in the resolution of the matter, it may be that the public interest would not be best served by prosecuting the offender, especially if the offending conduct or work has been rectified. If the offender has demonstrated a lack of contrition and is uncooperative with the investigation or remediation, a prosecution or monetary penalty would appear more appropriate.

 

Any mitigating or aggravating circumstances demonstrated by the subject of the report

Any particular circumstances of hardship affecting the person or organisation reported.

 

Consideration should be given to any genuine mitigating circumstances of the offender such as age, physical or mental health, disability and any financial hardship of the offender resulting in an inability to pay.

 

 

Considerations about the impact of the enforcement action

 

The need to deter any future unlawful activity

 

Consideration should be given to the deterrent effect, both on the offender and others. Prosecutions, because of their great stigma if a conviction is secured, may be appropriate even for minor unlawful activity where they might contribute to a greater level of overall deterrence.

 

Whether an educative approach be more appropriate than a coercive approach in resolving the matter

 

When deciding whether to take an educative approach or enforcement approach, consideration should be given to the following matters:

•        the reasonable likelihood that the person may have known or should have known the relevant requirements or rules

•        the level of contrition shown by the responsible person

•        whether the parties have previously been advised of the regulatory requirements or provisions

•        whether or not any previous warnings or instructions have been provided

•        the apparent level of intent shown by the responsible person.

 

The prospect of success if the proposed enforcement action was challenged in court

 

It may not be appropriate to take enforcement action if the chances of success, in the event of an appeal or hearing, are unlikely. In such situations, you would need to identify the causes of that likelihood and address them in the particular case or as a general issue.

 

The costs and benefits of taking formal enforcement action as opposed to taking informal or no action

 

Legal proceedings are expensive. When doing a cost-benefit analysis, costs and benefits should be assessed broadly and indirect costs and benefits should also be considered.

 

What action would be proportionate and reasonable in response to the unlawful activity?

 

Consideration should be given to what is reasonable in the particular circumstances that apply. This includes a reasonable proportionality between the ends to be achieved and the means used to achieve them.

 

Consideration is to be given to what is reasonable in the circumstances and ensure the action is not disproportionate to the level of harm or damage arising from the breach.

 


Whether the Council has created an estoppel situation.

 

Estoppel is a legal rule which prevents a person from later denying something which may have previously been relied on, and acted upon by another person.

 

Consideration should be given to whether the actions of Council have created a reasonable expectation that no enforcement action would be taken.

 

 

Considerations about the potential for remedy

 

Whether the breach can be easily remedied.

 

If there is evidence of a significant issue of unlawful activity and that matter can be easily remedied by some action on the part of the person the subject of the report, there is a less compelling case for enforcement action, depending on the other circumstances of the case such as the conduct of the offender.

 

Whether it is likely consent would have been given for the activity if it had been sought.

 

If retrospective approval is possible, it may be reasonable to allow an opportunity to obtain this prior to taking other enforcement action. In some cases, compliance by informal means may be the most efficient way to resolve the matter and other enforcement action may not be necessary.

 

This needs to be balanced with other considerations such as the public interest in enforcing the law.

 

Whether there is a draft planning instrument on exhibition that would make the unauthorised use legal.

 


 

Appendix 2

 

Compliance Guideline

 

Purpose

This appendix is designed to give the public and Council stakeholders a broad outline of the way different enforcement powers may be used by Council in different circumstances. It aims to make more transparent the work that Council undertakes and assist officers in achieving consistent outcomes. 

 

The document is a guide only and each case is considered and determined on its merits. Where justified in the individual circumstances of the matter Council is not bound by the Guideline and can depart from it at any time.

 

This compliance guideline is built on and is consistent with the higher level principles contained within Council’s Compliance Enforcement and Prosecution Policy.

 

 

Scope

This Compliance Guideline has been drafted to cover the range of works undertaken by Council which includes the following:

 

-     Food safety, including both temporary and permanent food businesses

-     Fire safety and essential services

-     Compliance with planning legislation, including compliance with conditions of development consent and unapproved works and uses

-     Public health matters including skin penetration and swimming pools

-     Pollution incidents, including noise and water pollution

-     Unsafe structures and unhealthy premises

 

Responses to issues relating to companion animals, parking offences and abandoned vehicles will be dealt with in accordance with the Companion Animals Act, the Roads Act, the Impounding Act, associated Regulations and other relevant legislation. Accordingly, they are not covered in this Appendix.

 

Unauthorised building works

 

Council uses the principles contained within its Compliance Enforcement and Prosecution Policy to address non-compliance. Some examples of how Council officers may decide to act in particular circumstances are outlined below. This table is not comprehensive and each matter will be dealt with following an assessment of the individual circumstances.

 

Compliance options

Example scenario

Warning

 

Minor issues such as a small sign.

Advisory letter

Issued for minor non-approved works which have no impact on the amenity of surrounding occupiers.  This may include matters in the following categories, assuming there is no ongoing risk to public health or safety:

-     Pergola that does not present an over shadowing/loss of solar access/loss of view etc.

-     Non-issue of an Occupation Certificate for a residential house where there is no safety issue or need for Annual Fire Safety Statement.

Penalty Notice

May be issued for any breach where the Officer is satisfied that there has been an intent to knowingly undertake works which would require consent or where the breach is so significant as to require an educative approach for the community to acknowledge that there has been a breach.

 

This does not prevent Council from issuing NOI/Orders in order to prevent ongoing unlawful activity.

Notice of intention to give an Order (NOI) and subsequent Order

Issued for unauthorised works which would not be supported and would not be permitted to remain.

Likely threat to the general public.

Unapproved works to heritage item where the Officer would seek to have the matter returned to its original or improved state (heritage input is required in these matters.)

Works being undertaken without Construction Certificate/Complying Development Certificate.

Emergency Order (without NOI)

Structure is compromised and likely to cause imminent threat to the general public e.g. façade failure.

Activities without consent which have an immediate environmental impact affecting the safety and amenity of the area (Stop Work Order).

 

In general Council will not take action on the following matters:

 

·      Encroachment issues

·      Easement disputes

·      Dividing fence issues

·      Matters within a residential property that do not impact on the surrounding environment or neighbourhood

·      Matters which may be better resolved by Civil actions such as damage to common (private) property or damage to neighbouring properties caused by issues which are present or created by issues on another property.

 

Role of the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA)

 

In relation to assessing and approving certain construction works Council is not the only consent authority. Principal Certifying Authorities (PCA) can issue approvals and certification for certain classes of building and construction works. Principal Certifying Authorities can include the Council or an accredited certifier. 

 

Where a breach or issue has been identified in relation to a development approved by a PCA, the initial enforcement action is taken by the PCA. This may include the issuing of warnings or a notice of intention to serve an order. Accredited Certifiers are not authorised to issue orders, penalty notices or initiate court action.

 

PCAs are required to advise Council of any notice of intention they issue. Council will then undertake its own investigation into the matter and, if required may issue an order or take such other action as it considers appropriate.

 

Compliance options

Example scenario

Warning

Minor ancillary issues not giving rise to public health or safety issues.

Advisory letter

Occupation of a property without issue of occupation certificate where all works safety completed.

Change of use that is not exempt but is of minor impact and requires no upgrade.

Penalty Notice (no further action)

Proven breach which would not require any further action or modification such as;

Operation out of hours on one occasion.

One off function

Notice of intention to give an Order (NOI) and subsequent Order

Uses which would not be supported on planning grounds.

Where Occupation Certificate is not issued and occupation is less than 12 months (such as an Order 15 if development consent is clear on the need for occupation certificate an Order 1 to pursued the issue of the occupation certificate.

Non-approved boarding house/backpacker or other short term tourist style accommodation where the risk to the residents or amenity effect on the immediate surrounding is high.

Emergency Order (without NOI)

 

Where life safety is a concern relating to the use, such as a premises being operated for an unauthorised use without appropriate essential fire safety measures.

 

 

Food Premises Inspection (including mobile and temporary premises)

 

Council is an enforcement agency under the Food Act 2003 and conducts regular inspections of retail food businesses in its local government area to ensure food safety standards are being maintained. 

 

What action may be taken if non-compliance is found?

 

Compliance options

Example scenario

Warning

 

·      Restock dispenser with single use hand towels (first offence).

·      Minor cleaning issues for non-food contact surfaces (first offence).

·      Minor structural issues (first offence)

Improvement notice

·      Significant cleaning issues across premises.

·      Significant temperature control issue (>6 degrees outside of legal requirement.

·      Cross contamination of ready to eat food.

Local Government Act Notice and Order

·      Issued where cleanliness or pest issues extend outside of the premises e.g. common areas, rear yards.

Prohibition order

·      Non-compliance with an improvement notice and/or;

·      Gross hygiene issues throughout premises contributing to pest issue or cross contamination of food.

·      Severe pest infestation in premises.

·      Serious temperature control issue.

Penalty notice

 

·      May be issued in conjunction with a notice or order for serious food safety breach or where there has been a history of non-compliance for the same or similar breach.

·      May also be issued against food handlers for some personal hygiene breaches.

Seizure

·      Evidence of unsafe food – microbial, chemical or physical contamination  e.g. pest contamination of food

·      Unsafe food e.g. deliveries left unattended and likely to be contaminated or have been contaminated.

Court attendance notice

 

·      Where there has been an extensive history of serious non-compliance within a food business and notices/orders etc have been previously issued the matter will be referred to Council’s Solicitor for the consideration of the commencement of proceedings.

·      Proceedings may be recommended in the absence of a history of non-compliance for very serious offences such as gross hygiene, temperature abuse, contamination of food and pest issues without a prior history being present.

·      Matters relating to non-compliance with a prohibition order and obstruction of officers will also be referred for the consideration of proceedings.


 

Supreme Court Injunction

·      Unsafe/defective equipment leading to serious sanitation or cross contamination risks will lead to a recommendation being made to Council’s Solicitor for an urgent injunction to be sought in the Supreme Court.

 

In general Council is not the appropriate regulatory authority for the following matters in relation to food regulation;

·      Food borne illness outbreaks (more than 1 person/family)

·      Non retail food businesses

The above matters are regulated by the NSW Food Authority

 

 

Swimming Pools – Water quality

 

Council’s role as an enforcement agency under the Public Health Act 2010 includes a responsibility to protect public health and safety in relation to the water quality of public swimming pools and take action against non-compliance.

Council conducts a regular inspection and testing program to ensure commercial pool operators maintain their swimming pools and spas to a standard that does not pose a risk to public health.

 

What action may be taken if non-compliance is found?

The table below gives a guide to pool water quality levels and likely enforcement action:

Type of organism

 

Maximum Count Allowable

Action to be taken if greater than allowable levels

Heterotrophic Plate Count     

100 Colony Forming Units (CFU) per ml

 

·      Warning letter if levels between 100 and 1000 CFU/mL.

·      Prohibition order if levels greater than 1000 CFU/mL.

Thermotolerant coliforms

Nil per 100mL

·      Warning letter if levels between 0 and 10 CFU/mL.

·      Prohibition order if levels greater than 10CFU/mL and re-testing.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa       

Nil per 100mL

·      Warning letter if levels between 0 and 10 CFU/mL.

·      Prohibition order if levels greater than 10 CFU/mL and re-testing.

 

NB: Businesses served with a prohibition order cannot re-open their pool for use by the public until the required works have been done, a reinspection by Council has been requested and Council’s officer has re-sampled the pool and a compliant water sample has been obtained. Council will then issue a Certificate of Clearance and the pool can be reopened for public use.

 

 

Swimming pools – fencing and barriers

 

Under the Swimming Pools Act 1992 Council officers have a number of compliance options available to deal with non-compliance.

The below table provides some examples of how Council may exercise its compliance options in particular circumstances.

Compliance options

Example scenarios

Warning

Minor issues that do not yet create an issue but may in near future e.g. fading yet still legible signage, vegetation growth, furniture within climb zone

Notice of Directive

·      Non-maintained self-closing mechanism on gate.

·      Vegetation removal required.

·      Minor penetration issue.

Directive

Most breaches will result in Directive due to risk to child safety e.g.

·      Gate failing to latch.

·      Non-compliant fencing/window opening.

·      Lack of resuscitation signage.

Penalty notice

Issued for more serious breaches or where previous warnings given. Can be issued in conjunction with a Directive:

·      Fail to register pool (warning previously given).

·      Failure to maintain pool barrier.

·      Fail to keep the pool secure.

·      Fail to have resuscitation signage (warning previously given).

·      Fail to comply with a Directive.

Court attendance notice

For numerous serious breaches and/or where there has been history of non-compliance and directives/penalty notices have not achieved compliance the matter will be referred to Council’s Solicitor for the consideration of the commencement of proceedings.

 

 

Noise Compliance

 

Council is responsible for the investigation of most noise related matters in its Local Government Area. Other agencies that have some responsibility for noise complaints include the Environment Protection Authority (EPA), the Police and the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing.

 

What action may be taken if non-compliance is found?

 

Compliance options

Example scenarios

Warning

Generally issued for most offences in the first instance. E.g. noisy air conditioning unit, pool pump, amplified music, domestic alarms.

Noise Abatement Direction

Issued where offensive noise is being or has been emitted from a premises e.g. noisy stereo or amplified music from a residential premises.

A penalty notice may be issued for a subsequent failure to comply with Noise Abatement Direction.

Prevention notice

Issued for ongoing issues e.g. mechanical plant and equipment or deliveries or pick-ups which cause offensive noise due to time or nature of the noise.

Can also be issued for entertainment noise e.g. concerts, night club music. 

A penalty notice may be issued for a subsequent failure to comply with Prevention Notice.

Penalty notice

Generally issued for failure to comply with prior warnings or a direction or notice.

Noise control notice

Issued to prohibit the carrying on of an activity or use of an article where noise is a systemic issue e.g. continued loud music constituting offensive noise.

A penalty notice may be issued for a subsequent failure to comply with Noise Control Notice.


 

Court attendance notice

Where there has been ongoing failure to comply with prior notices/directions or penalty notices the matter will be referred to Council’s Solicitor for consideration of the commencement of proceedings.

Injunction/Court Order (Land and Environment Court)

Where works specified in Prevention Notice have not been carried out the matter will be referred to Council’s Solicitor for consideration of the commencement of proceedings.

 

 

Pollution incidents (air, land and water)

 

Council is not responsible for the investigation of all pollution incidents in its local government area; it shares this responsibility with the Environment Protection Authority (EPA).

 

In general the EPA is responsible for incidents on Crown Land or major industrial or commercial sites which hold an EPA license.

 

What action may be taken if non-compliance is found?

 

Compliance options

Example scenarios

Warning

Generally issued for most minor offences in the first instance.

Clean up notice

Paint spills and short term pollution such as dust and spillages.

Local Government Act Notice or Order

Sewer leaks.

Prevention notice

Issued for ongoing issues such as industrial air pollution (non-licensed premises), noise, and large construction site environmental management.

Penalty notice

Generally issued for failure to comply with prior warnings or notice or where there is prior history for the same or similar offence or a deliberate act which has resulted in land, water or air pollution.

Court attendance notice

For ongoing failure to comply with prior notices/directions and/or matters resulting in significant environmental damage the matter will be referred to Council’s Solicitor for consideration of the commencement of proceedings.

 

 

Unhealthy Land or Premises

 

Nambucca Shire Council has a role under the Local Government Act 1993 to investigate complaints received in relation to unhealthy living conditions, public health and/or safety in relation to land or premises.

 

What action may be taken if non-compliance is found?

 

Compliance options

Example scenario

Warning

Generally issued for most minor offences in the first instance.

Local Government Act Notice and Order

Issued where a risk to public health/safety has been identified:

·      Accumulation of garbage or other items which are likely to be a harbourage for vermin.

Local Government Act Emergency Order

Issued where risk to public health and safety is very high and it is not appropriate to issue a notice of intention in the circumstances:

·      Sewer line is damaged or blocked and sewage is discharging onto public land.

·      Serious cleanliness/sanitation issues e.g. boarding houses.

Penalty notice

Generally issued for failure to comply with a notice/order or where there is prior history for the same or similar offence.


Court Order

Where non-compliance with an order has occurred and the risk to public health/safety requires an Order of the court requiring clean up works to a premises or property the matter will be referred to Council’s Solicitor for consideration of the commencement of proceedings. In some circumstances Council may seek an order that enables it to enter premises to undertake works itself when the owner or occupier fails to do so.

Court Attendance Notice

Where there has been a history of non-compliance with previous enforcement action for the same or similar offences the matter will be referred to Council’s Solicitor for consideration of the commencement of proceedings.

 

1

Fire safety and essential fire services

 

To ensure a safe urban environment, Council investigates and takes appropriate action against reported fire safety breaches and fire safety design deficiencies within existing buildings.

 

Council’s building surveyors inspect premises whenever a fire safety issue is raised and, in addition, inspects buildings as part of its proactive fire safety inspection.

 

Council also manages annual fire safety certification for new or altered buildings. All premises on the Register must provide to Council an Annual Fire Safety Statement (AFSS) at least once within every twelve months, certifying that a properly qualified person has inspected the building, assessed the fire safety measures, and found that the measures are capable of performing to the relevant standards.

 

What action may be taken if non-compliance is found?

The Council officer will take into account a number of factors in determining any compliance action that needs to be taken. “Risk and cause” are two considerations used in determining the enforcement options taken in the circumstance:

 

Compliance options

Example scenario

Warning

 

Minor issues, such as poor housekeeping practices; momentary failure of required fire systems.

Penalty Notice and an action plan

Issued in cases of blatant lack of fire safety management practices:

 

o              Blocking of exits.

o      Failure to lodge, or late lodgement of an Annual Fire Safety Statement.

o      Fire safety systems incapable of performing to required standards of performance.

Notice/Order

 

Premises have inadequate provisions for fire safety and require building work to be carried out.

Court Attendance Notice

On expiration of the timeframe given under the Order the Council officer may refer the matter to Council’s Solicitor for consideration of the commencement of proceedings for failure to comply with the Order.

 

 


Appendix 3

 

Prioritising Council’s response

 

Timeframes for responding to reports about unlawful activities may vary, however, every effort will be made to ensure that all reports about unlawful activity are actioned within a timely manner and the complainants are given appropriate feedback on the progress of their report.

 

Council will prioritise notifications of potential non-compliance on the basis of risk to public safety, human health and the environment. The risk category will determine priorities for allocation of Council resources to investigate matters and will also determine response times to complainants.

 

Examples are as follows, however all cases will be prioritised based on their specific circumstances

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 July 2016

Policy Review - Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution

 

 

DESCRIPTION

REPONSE TIME

VERY HIGH

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

VERY LOW

Same day

Within 2 Working Days

7-14 Working Days

15-28 Working Days

Information Only **

BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT

 

 

 

 

 

Dangerous structure adjoining public land, eg dilapidated awnings

 

ü

 

 

 

Swimming pool fencing complaint on private land

 

ü

 

 

 

Non-compliance with development consent or construction works – direct environmental impact

 

ü

 

 

 

Development not in accordance with consent

 

 

ü

 

 

Development carried out without consent / construction certificate

 

 

ü

 

 

Right of way and covenant complaints, other than conditions of consent

 

 

 

ü

Building works carried out which previously required development consent but to which Exempt and Complying Development SEPP now applies

 

 

ü

 

Boundary fence and retaining wall issues where the Dividing Fences Act applies - Community Justice Centre and the Local Court

 

 

 

 

ü

Work on the river bank without consent

 

 

ü

 

 

COMPANION ANIMALS

 

 

 

 

 

Dog attacks Major - (eg imminent risk to public, where a person has been bitten or serious injury to other animals, or assistance to Police)

ü

 

 

 

 

Dog attacks minor (after an event is reported - minor or no injury to persons or animals or risk to public safety)

 

ü

 

 

 

Dog - Dangerous, Menacing or Restricted Breed as per Companions Animal Act, no imminent risk to public safety, eg dog contained

 

ü

 

 

 

Pick up of seized Dogs contained (Pound operating hours only)

 

ü

 

 

Domestic roaming dogs - general complaint after the event.

 

 

ü

 

 

Dog barking (complaints from 2 or more premises)

 

 

ü

 

 

Barking Dogs Anon or one resident complainant only

 

 

ü

 

Breach of Dangerous Dog Regulations

 

ü

 

 

 

Impounding of Cats - Council provides pound facility but no collection service

 

ü

 

Keeping of non-stock animals (refer Local Orders Policy for more information)

 

 

ü

 

 

Breach of Companion Animals Act - identification, registration

 

ü

 

 

FOOTPATH OBSTRUCTIONS

 

 

 

 

 

Footpath obstruction (immediate safety hazard - 8am - 5pm, 7 days per week - after hours Police matter)

ü

 

 

 

 

Footpath obstruction, eg builder's material obstructing pedestrian access

 

ü

 

 

 

Footpath obstructions, minor or nuisance

 

 

ü

 

 

LANDFORM

 

 

 

 

 

Landform modification involving potential flooding impacts or potential property damage

 

ü

 

 

 

Landform modification without consent

 

 

ü

 

 

NOXIOUS WEEDS

 

 

 

 

 

Noxious weeds

 

 

ü

 

 

OTHER ANIMAL COMPLAINTS

 

 

 

 

 

Wild dogs and foxes on Council own land

 

 

ü

 

 

Stock on Main Arterial Roads

ü

 

 

 

 

Stock on non-arterial sealed roads

ü

 

 

 

Stock on dirt rural roads

 

ü

 

 

Stock Complaints General trespassing - Horses, Cattle, Sheep, Donkeys

 

 

ü

 

 

OVERGROWN LAND 

 

 

 

 

 

Overgrown land which exceeds the following criteria on urban/village/commercial zoned land:
a) The average height of grass on the land exceeds 600mm for over 50% of the block, and
b) The site has an accumulation of vegetation, rubbish or materials, which may harbour vermin.

 

 

ü

 

 

Overgrown land which does not meet the above criteria

 

 

 

ü

PARKING AND VEHICLE OFFENCES

 

 

 

 

 

Parking traffic hazard (8am - 5pm, 7 days per week - after hours Police matter)

ü

 

 

 

 

Parking - general complaints

 

 

ü

 

 

Abandoned motor vehicles (posing immediate safety hazard, 8am - 5pm, 7 days per week - after hours Police matter)

ü

 

 

 

 

Abandoned motor vehicles and articles (public place)

 

 

ü

 

 

Road Offences illegal works general – no immediate safety hazard

 

 

ü

 

 

POLLUTION

 

 

 

 

 

Air Pollution - from commercial or industrial premises – non-scheduled: immediate threat

ü

 

 

 

Air Pollution - from commercial or industrial premises – non-scheduled: non-immediate threat

 

ü

 

 

Air Pollution - burning of prohibited items eg tyres, coated wire, paint and solvent containers

ü

 

 

 

 

Air Pollution - Prohibited Lighting of Fires: No Burn areas

 

ü

 

 

Nuisance from domestic smoke - BBQ's, domestic wood heaters, residential burning off

 

 

ü

 

Rural and Agricultural nuisances including but not limited to burning of vegetation, noise, soil and erosion control issues (not entering waterways)

 

 

ü

Land Pollution - significant accumulation of waste, dumped or deposited waste on private land

 

 

ü

 

 

Land Pollution public lands - rubbish dumping, littering

 

ü

 

 

Odours - Residential and commercial garbage complaints: location of garbage bins, dog faeces, domestic odours

 

 

 

ü

Noise Pollution - commercial and industrial impacting on residential areas of significant public interest

 

 

ü

 

 

Neighbour to neighbour impact associated with domestic noise pollution complaints - e.g. air conditioners, heat pumps, amplified sound equipment, musical instruments, power tools, lawn mowers, leaf blowers, swimming pool pumps and motor vehicles/trail bikes

 

 

ü

 

Water Pollution Incidents having an effect on waterways
- Environmental degrading substances into waterways e.g. oil, paint
- Failing Onsite Sewerage Management System into waterways

ü

 

 

 

PUBLIC HEALTH

 

 

 

 

 

Urgent Response requests from other Agencies (i.e. NSW Police, HAZMAT, EPA, Ministry of Health, NSW Food Authority), relating to Food Poisoning Outbreak, Major Pollution Incidents, Notifiable Disease Outbreaks and Clandestine Drug Laboratories.

ü

 

 

 

Complaints relating to regulated premises (food premises, skin penetration/hairdressers, beauty salons, cooling towers/ warm water systems, public swimming and spa pools, caravan parks, water carters)

 

 

ü

 

 

Public swimming pool water quality

ü

 

 

 

Unhealthy Condition of Premises - breeding of mosquitoes, vermin and pests, significant accumulation of waste, failing OSSM

 

 

ü

 

 

Domestic green/unclean pools - no evidence of mosquito larvae

 

 

ü

 

 

Unsanitary motels including bed bugs

 

 

ü

 

 

Unsightly premises - condition of property not deemed a public health risk

 

 

ü

 

 

Mould in private residences

 

 

 

 

ü

SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL

 

 

 

 

 

Inadequate Sediment & Erosion Control, direct flow into waterway

 

ü

 

 

Inadequate Sediment & Erosion Control not in accordance with consent

ü

 

 

 

Inadequate Sediment & Erosion Control not direct flow into waterway but nuisance to public place

ü

 

 

 

Inadequate Sediment and Erosion Control causing nuisance between adjoining neighbours (works not requiring consent)

 

 

ü

SEWER/WATER/STORMWATER

 

 

 

 

 

Urgent Response requests - sewer overflows - private line

ü

 

 

 

 

Urgent Response requests - sewer overflows, Council reticulated service

ü

 

 

 

 

Overland stormwater flow nuisances (private property) – see fact sheet for criteria for investigation

 

 

ü

 

Overland stormwater flow nuisances (Council owned property)

 

 

ü

 

Overland stormwater flow nuisances associated with development consent

 

 

ü

 

Stormwater nuisance (diversion / downpipes / guttering) – see fact sheet for criteria for investigation

 

 

ü

 

 

Water Restriction Breaches

 

ü

 

 

 

Trade Waste Agreements - Compliance with conditions of approval

 

 

ü

 

 

Water Backflow Agreements - Compliance with conditions of approval

 

 

ü

 

 

Private Sewer Pump Station Agreements - Compliance with conditions

 

ü

 

 

Building in Vicinity of Sewers - Compliance with Council Policy for matters not requiring consent

 

 

ü

 

 

Connection to Council's Water, Sewer or Stormwater infrastructure

 

ü

 

 

Water Carters Agreements - Compliance with conditions

 

 

ü

 

 

Water Restriction Hours breaches

ü

 

 

 

 

UNAUTHORISED USE OF PUBLIC LANDS

 

 

 

 

 

Illegal Camping public lands

 

ü

 

 

Public reserve breaches

 

 

ü

 

 

Public land licence breaches (fitness, outdoor dining, surf school)

 

 

ü

 

 

Illegal signage public place

 

 

ü

 

 

USE OF PREMISES

 

 

 

 

 

Unauthorised use of premises (requiring consent)

 

 

ü

 

 

Holiday Letting without consent or where prohibited

 

 

ü

 

Strata property disputes

 

 

 

ü

VEGETATION REMOVAL

 

 

 

 

 

Non-compliance with development consent governing biodiversity protection (operation machinery)

ü

 

 

 

 

Non-compliance with development consent governing biodiversity protection (works ceased)

 

 

ü

 

 

Tree Disputes Between Neighbours (not prescribed vegetation under Preservation of vegetation controls)

 

 

 

ü

 

Tree removal - public lands (removal in progress)

ü

 

 

 

Tree removal - public lands (removal completed)

 

ü

 

 

ROAD APPLICATION COMPLIANCE

 

 

 

 

 

Road Opening Permits - works without a permit or non-compliance with permit

 

ü

 

 

Driveway Applications - works without a permit or non-compliance with permit

 

 

ü

 

 

Damage to local roads/kerb/footpath during construction

 

 

ü

 

 

** Note:  Very Low consists of:
                  - Referral to Council/Government/Industry website
                  - Posting a pamphlet/information sheet or letter providing information


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                     14 July 2016

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.9      SF2173            140716         Outstanding DAs greater than 12 months or where submissions received - 21 June 2016 - 5 July 2016

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Lisa Hall, Technical Officer - Development and Environment         

 

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 shows 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

 

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

STATUS:

Applicant has received a letter giving them until 25 July to supply information required or withdraw DA, otherwise it wil