Cr Rhonda Hoban (Mayor)

Cr John Ainsworth

Cr Brian Finlayson

Cr Susan Jenvey

Cr David Jones – entered 5.36 pm

Cr Janine Reed

Cr Anne Smyth

Cr John Wilson

Michael Coulter (General Manager)

Paul Gallagher (AGM Engineering Services)

Lorraine Hemsworth (Minute Secretary)

Scott Norman (AGM Corporate Services)

SUBJECT:   CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Council Meeting 16 November 2017

580/17 RESOLVED:        (Wilson/Jenvey)

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting of 16 November 2017 be confirmed.

ITEM 5.1      SF2303              301117      Notice of Motion - Support for Speed Limits at Emergency Incidents

581/17 RESOLVED:        (Hoban/Ainsworth)

That Council write to the NSW Premier and the Roads and Maritime Minister requesting legislative change requiring a 40kph speed limit at emergency incidents to protect all emergency services personnel.

ITEM 5.2      SF2303              301117      Notice of Motion - Proposal to offer shared Bulky Goods Collection to Local Aboriginal Land Councils

Motion:      (Hoban/Wilson)

That Council approach the Nambucca Heads, Unkya and Bowraville Local Aboriginal Land Councils seeking their interest in providing a one-off bulky goods collection immediately to the residents they are providing housing to, with the costs shared equally between Council and the respective Land Council. Further, that Council seek the assistance of the three Land Councils by issuing reminders to their tenants prior to the annual scheduled collection.

Amendment:       (Jenvey/Smyth)

That Council approach the Nambucca Heads, Unkya and Bowraville Local Aboriginal Land Councils seeking their interest in providing a one-off bulky goods collection immediately to the residents they are providing housing to, with the costs being met by Council. Further, that Council seek the assistance of the three Land Councils by issuing reminders to their tenants prior to the annual scheduled collection.

The Amendment was carried and became the Motion which was:

582/17 Resolved:        (Jenvey/Smyth)

That Council approach the Nambucca Heads, Unkya and Bowraville Local Aboriginal Land Councils seeking their interest in providing a one-off bulky goods collection immediately to the residents they are providing housing to, with the costs being met by Council. Further, that Council seek the assistance of the three Land Councils by issuing reminders to their tenants prior to the annual scheduled collection.

ITEM 5.3      SF2303              301117      Notice of Motion - Petition Requesting Small-Dog Park

583/17 RESOLVED:        (Hoban/Jones)

That Council note the petition and receive a report on the possibility of providing a dedicated small-dog park at one of the suggested locations in Nambucca Heads.

ITEM 5.4      SF2303              301117      Notice of Motion - Flooding White Albatross

584/17 RESOLVED:        (Hoban/Reed)

1        That Council investigate possible grant funding sources including the Voluntary House Raising Scheme under the Floodplain Management Program to assist with the flooding issues at the White Albatross Holiday Centre.

2        That Council investigate the possibility of reducing or redirecting storm water flow from Parkes Street above.

3        That the results of the investigations and a brief overview of the current Council requirements for placement of manufactured homes on flood prone land be reported to Council.

PUBLIC FORUM

RECOMMENDATION:

That the following delegations be heard:

i         Jim Desmond                  Argues Bridge, Maintenance of Taylors Arm Road and telecommunications

ii        Sue Le Maistre                State of Taylors Arm Road, Contractors for maintenance of Burrapine Hall

iii       Ian Turvey                       Taylors Arm Road

iv       John Vassallo                  President Taylors Arm Sports Reserve Committee of Management

v        Michael Krausmann         Garbage concerns and Drainage

i         Jim Desmond - Argues Bridge, maintenance of Taylors Arm Road and Telecommunications

·                Enquiring as to what is the program for Taylors Road maintenance and who do the residents contact regarding the bad condition of the road

·                Argues Bridge – trucks coming out of paddock next door are not able to use the bridge as they are up to 16 tonne.  The School bus also traverses this – when is this bridge going to be replaced?

·                Telecommunications tower in Taylors Arm has been placed in gully which limits effectiveness

·                Requesting support from Council in lobbying for a telecommunications tower and placed closer to the Old Post Office site, Upper Taylors Arm

·                Require bigger booster

ii        Sue Le Maistre - State of Taylors Arm Road, Contractors for maintenance of Burrapine Hall

·                Condition of Taylors Arm Road beyond Sheet O’Bark Road is poor

·                Council trucks and log trucks make a mess of the road

·                Suggest starting at top of the road and work down

·                100km speed limit from Upper Taylors Arm Village to Thumb Creek should be limited to 80km

·                Council Contractors refuse to come to the hall to perform maintenance

·                Kitchen roof has been leaking for 10 years – has been fixed but still leaks

·                Garbage – voucher system does not work and needs to be some other way of providing a service

·                Is it too expensive to have a garbage collection to Burrapine area?

585/17 Resolved:        (Reed/Ainsworth)

That Council explore further options for domestic waste removal from the Burrapine area.

586/17 Resolved:        (Reed/Ainsworth)

That Council assist in a speed review from the Upper Taylors Arm Village to Thumb Creek and include Greenhills Road, Sundowner Road and Bakers Creek Road (within the Shire boundaries).

iv       John Vassallo - President Taylors Arm Sports Reserve Committee of Management

·                Rural Fire Service shed damaged by truck and water pipes damaged

·                Plumbing contractor has not completed job and 20,000 litres of tank of water was lost

·                No water pressure to service toilets in the Reserve

·                Rain tank on side of shed and buckets to flush toilets and has been going on for 8 weeks

·                Meeting last week – dragging on a long time

·                Water tank is serviced by inground bore and prior to accident starting pumping mud

·                Would like bore fixed

·                Septic trenches leaking – tank pumped out

·                Trenches collapsed – don’t know what is happening

·                Up to 20 campers on Reserve over Long Weekend in October and Plan of Management states 8.

·                Campers were riding and driving across oval and were asked to stop.

·                Called the Council Call centre for the Ranger to assist and did not receive assistance

·                Septic trenches require fencing to preserve them

·                 

587/17 Resolved:        (Reed/Ainsworth)

That Council receive a report on the setup of the water and septic at the Taylors Arm Sports Reserve plus the other issues raised by Mr Vassalo.

·                Plan of Management says the reserve needs to be fenced

·                Issue with placement of shade trees recently planted on the Reserve and additional softfall area.

v        Michael Krausmann - Garbage concerns and Drainage

·                Garbage and road conditions as expressed previously

PRF44         Bring Forward Draft Master Plan for Thistle Park

588/17 Resolved:        (Reed/Jones)

That Item 9.2 relating to the Draft Master Plan for Thistle Park be brought forward.

ITEM 9.2      PRF44                301117      Draft Master Plan for Thistle Park

 Motion:     (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

1        Council finalise the Master Plan for Thistle Park with King and Campbell being instructed to:

a.    reduce the floor area and cost of the proposed clubhouse by about 50%

b.    reduce the proposed tree planting in accordance with the suggestions from the Junior and Senior Cricket but still retaining sufficient trees to define the cricket field and provide adequate shade

c.    correct the spelling mistake re “Phillip Hughes Oval”.

2        Subject to the agreement of the Hughes’ family, that Council formally resolve to rename “Thistle Park”, the “Phillip Hughes Oval”.

3        Council offer to lease both the “Phillip Hughes Oval” and that area of the Donnelly Welsh playing fields used for cricket to the junior and/or senior cricket associations for a period of 30 years with an annual rental of $1.00.

4        That Council’s seal be attached to any lease documents as required.

5        That upon completion of the Master Plan, Council submit an Expression of Interest for funding under the Regional Sports Infrastructure Fund.

Amendment:       (Smyth/Jenvey)

1        Council finalise the Master Plan for Thistle Park with King and Campbell being instructed to:

a.    reduce the floor area and cost of the proposed clubhouse by about 50%

b.    reduce the proposed tree planting in accordance with the suggestions from the Junior and Senior Cricket but still retaining sufficient trees to define the cricket field and provide adequate shade

c.    correct the spelling mistake re “Phillip Hughes Oval”

d.    tree planting to be selected from Council’s Street Tree Planting Guidelines

2        Subject to the agreement of the Hughes’ family, that Council formally resolve to rename “Thistle Park”, the “Phillip Hughes Oval”.

3        Council offer to lease both the “Phillip Hughes Oval” and that area of the Donnelly Welsh playing fields used for cricket to the junior and/or senior cricket associations for a period of 30 years with an annual rental of $1.00.

4        That Council’s seal be attached to any lease documents as required.

5        That upon completion of the Master Plan, Council submit an Expression of Interest for funding under the Regional Sports Infrastructure Fund.

The Amendment was Lost and reverted back to the Motion which was:

589/17 Resolved:        (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

1        Council finalise the Master Plan for Thistle Park with King and Campbell being instructed to:

a.    reduce the floor area and cost of the proposed clubhouse by about 50%

b.    reduce the proposed tree planting in accordance with the suggestions from the Junior and Senior Cricket but still retaining sufficient trees to define the cricket field and provide adequate shade

c.    correct the spelling mistake re “Phillip Hughes Oval”.

2        Subject to the agreement of the Hughes’ family, that Council formally resolve to rename “Thistle Park”, the “Phillip Hughes Oval”.

3        Council offer to lease both the “Phillip Hughes Oval” and that area of the Donnelly Welsh playing fields used for cricket to the junior and/or senior cricket associations for a period of 30 years with an annual rental of $1.00. 

4        That Council’s seal be attached to any lease documents as required.

5        That upon completion of the Master Plan, Council submit an Expression of Interest for funding under the Regional Sports Infrastructure Fund.

ITEM 9.1      SF959                301117      Outstanding Actions and Reports

590/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

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

ITEM 9.3      SF841                301117      On-going Complaints by Valla Residents Concerning Pacific Highway Road Noise

591/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

That Council adopt the motions from the Sub Committee of the Valla Beach Community Association and put motions 2, 3 and 4 to Roads and Maritime Services for a response and in relation to motion 1 request that the Member for Oxley’s office seek a formal response from the Parliament’s Table Office as to why the 700 signature petition was non-compliant.

ITEM 9.4      SF2397              301117      Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

592/17 RESOLVED:        (Reed/Wilson)

That Council engage King & Campbell as per their proposal in their suggested work program to prepare concept plans and a staging and costing schedule for the upgrading of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre.

ITEM 9.5      SF2418              301117      Valla Growth Area Employment Land Stage 1 Engineering Design and Development (Subdivision) Application

593/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Wilson)

1        That Council engage Mr Ben Jedrej of Jed Civil to undertake the preparation of the engineering design and cost estimates for Stage 1 of the Valla Growth Area in accordance with his proposal.

2        That Mr Ben Jedrej of Jed Civil also be engaged to submit a development application for the Stage 1 subdivision and for this application to be lodged following consultation with prospective purchasers as to their land area requirements.

Cr Jones recorded his vote against the Motion as he is opposed to another township the size of Nambucca Heads being located near the Service Centre.

594/17 Resolved:        (Jenvey/Smyth)

That Council receive a report on comparative price and availability of industrial zoned land in the Nambucca Valley and nearby local government areas.

ITEM 9.6      SF2328              301117      Nambucca DCP 2010 - Amendment incorporating Housekeeping Changes and the Valla Urban Growth Area

595/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

1        Council endorse the draft Development Control Plan 2010 (DCP) contained within attachments 1 and 2 and exhibit the draft DCP pursuant to Part 3 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

2        The Draft DCP be exhibited during December 2017 and January 2018 for a period of not less than 28 days.

3        The Draft DCP be reported back to Council following the completion of the exhibition period for consideration of any submissions received.

4        Council seek quotes for the preparation of a developer contributions plan for the Valla Urban Growth Area and engage a consultant in accordance with Councils procurement policy.

For the motion:               Councillors Hoban, Ainsworth, Finlayson, Jenvey, Reed, Smyth, Wilson

                                      (Total 7)

Against the motion:         Councillor Jones

                                      (Total 1)

ITEM 9.7      SF2293              301117      Development Applications greater than 12 months or where submissions received -  to 21 November 2017

596/17 RESOLVED:        (Jones/Wilson)

That the information contained in the report on Development Applications greater than 12 months or where submissions have been received as at 21 November 2017 be noted by Council.

ITEM 9.8      SF2278              301117      Minutes of the Clean Energy Committee Held 8 November 2017

597/17 RESOLVED:        (Jenvey/Ainsworth)

1           That Council endorse the minutes of the 8 November 2017 Clean Energy Committee meeting.

2        That Council undertake the Carbon Leadership module offered by Sustainability Advantage (SA) with a view to setting an emissions target.

3        That the SA energy audit be undertaken at Council’s Administration Building, the Works Depot, libraries and one pump station.

4        That Council investigate installing solar PV systems on other buildings identified in Dr Sobey’s attached report, commencing with the largest consumers, including the Macksville STP River Street Pump Station.

5        That Council investigates a grid connected PV solution for small halls and sporting fields that relies on the feed-in tariff to offset the connection charges, including investigating the availability of grant funding for these systems.

6        That Council investigates options to reduce the peak demands of the pumping stations.

7        That Council investigates the potential savings associated with changing the Breakwall lighting to LEDs.

8        That Council note the attached information concerning floating solar panels and community funded solar energy installed in the Lismore City Council area.

9        That Council defer establishing a Revolving Energy Fund, committing 100% of the identified savings resulting from transitioning to clean energy until after the next Clean Energy Meeting.

10      That the Mayor write to the NSW Minister for the Environment requesting information on when the Climate Change Fund money will be available and expressing concern that this information has not yet been made available.

11      That Council participate in the Cities Power Partnership program, with the five key actions to be determined by the Clean Energy Committee in discussions with Council staff.

598/17 Resolved:        (Reed/Ainsworth)

That the report from Julien Freed Consulting be included in the audit noted in the previous recommendation.

599/17 Resolved:        (Jenvey/Smyth)

That when the minutes of the next Clean Energy Committee Meeting come to Council that Dr Peter Sobey be invited to make a presentation to Council.

ITEM 9.9      SF1148              301117      Council Ranger's Report October 2017

600/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

That Council’s Ranger’s report for October 2017 be received and noted by Council.

ITEM 9.10    SF2369              301117      2017-18 Borrowing Program

601/17 RESOLVED:        (Jones/Ainsworth)

That Council approves the following:

1        New borrowings of $2,500,000 for Infrastructure Works based on the adopted 2017-18 Operational Plan;

2        The execution of a Loan Agreement between Nambucca Shire Council and New South Wales Treasury Corporation;

3        The approved terms of the loan are Credit Foncier Loan for $2,500,000, for a 15 year term with a fixed interest rate and biannual repayments;

4        That the General Manager accepts NSW Treasury Corporation’s interest rate and executes drawdown;

5        The Mayor and/or the General Manager to execute the Loan Agreement,

6        That in the event NSW Treasury Corporation requires the loan agreement to be executed under seal that the Council Seal be affixed to the Loan Agreement.

ITEM 10.1    SF2359              301117      September 2017 Budget Review

602/17 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

1        That the budget review for the quarter ended 30 September, 2017 be received.

2        That the recommended increases and decreases in votes be included as subsequent votes for the financial year 2017/2018.

ITEM 10.2    SF588                301117      Utungun Community Hall Committee of Management - Annual General Meeting - 24 October 2017

603/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

That Council endorse the minutes of the Utungun Community Hall Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 24 October 2017 and thank the outgoing Committee for their work in the past twelve months.

ITEM 10.3    SF306                301117      Burrapine Hall Committee of Management - Annual General Meeting - 31 October 2017

604/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

That Council endorse the minutes of the Burrapine Hall Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 31 October 2017 and thank the outgoing Committee for their work in the past twelve months.

ITEM 10.4    SF323                301117      Nambucca Community and Arts Centre Committee of Management - Annual General Meeting - 11 August 2017

605/17 RESOLVED:        (Smyth/Ainsworth)

That Council endorse the minutes of the Nambucca Community and Arts Centre Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 11 August 2017 and thank the outgoing Committee for their work in the past twelve months.

ITEM 10.5    SF251                301117      Schedule of Council Public Meetings end 2017 and beginning of 2018

606/17 RESOLVED:        (Wilson/Ainsworth)

That the schedule of dates for Council meetings in 2017 and beginning of 2018 be noted and received for information by Council.

ITEM 11.1    SF1676              301117      2017-18 Capital Works Program Monthly Report

607/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Reed)

That Council:

a)   Receive and note the information pertaining to the progress of the 2017/2018 Capital Works Programme;

b)   Reallocate the amount of $80,000.00 from Allgomera Road (WO 1966) to South Bank Road (WO 3090);

c)   Allocate an additional $8,000 from working funds to be transferred into the plant reserve to plumb the necessary hydraulics for the bull blade to be fitted to the Cat grader;

d)   Allocate an additional $10,000 from working funds to be transferred into the plant fund for the purchase of Plant 5119 (water service truck) increasing the allocation to $82,000;

e)   Allocate an additional $20,000 from working funds to be transferred into the plant fund for the purchase a larger Hiab crane for Plant 5127 (Sewer - light rigid truck and Hiab) increasing the allocation to $105,000;

f)    Reduce the allocation for WO 2352 Bowraville STP - upgrade of recycled water system by $500,000 and place the funds into sewer reserve to compliment external grant funding and complete the works within the 2018/19 financial year; and

g)   Note that there is still preliminary design investigation in progress and community consultation required for Lanes Bridge WO 3085 and the full allocation within the 2017/18 capital works program may not be expended this financial year.

ITEM 11.2    SF24                  301117      Support requested for the 2018 Australia Day Event to be held in Gordon Park Nambucca Heads

608/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Reed)

That Council provide an amount up to $500.00 from working funds to cover staff wages and advertising fees associated with the support requested from the Australia Day Organising Committee and assistance for the Australia Fun Day being held on 26 January 2018 at Gordon Park by providing the following:

·           Provide 10 “wheelie bins” prior to and removal after the event

·           Electricity

·           Provide bollards

·           Provide safety tape

·           Assistance to erect signage

·           Waiving of the Application and Advertising Fees

ITEM 11.3    SF843                301117      Minutes of the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee - 10 November 2017

609/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Wilson)

That the minutes of the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee meeting held on Friday 10 November 2017 be received and noted.

610/17 Resolved:        (Ainsworth/Reed)

That the next Beach Access Committee meeting receive a report on where Council is up to regarding the replacement/upgrade of beach access signage.

ITEM 11.4    SF1631              301117      Water Quality Risk Management for water sourced from both the bores and Bowra Dam

611/17 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Reed)

1        That Council seek a fee proposal from Water Futures and Bligh Tanner and another suitable consultant to prepare:

a)     A sampling and testing regime to validate the effectiveness of chlorine disinfection for water from Bowra Dam and;

b)    Provide Council with an Options Report for appropriate infrastructure treatment that can manage the water quality and mitigate any risk associated with the supply of water from both the bores and Bowra Dam.

2        That Council provide an amount of up to $50,000 from the water reserves to fund the consultants brief in recommendation No.1.

3        That Council provide delegated authority to the Assistant General Manager Engineering Services to engage the preferred consultant to complete the work.

4        That Council prepare and submit an Expression of Interest for funding of the business case phase of the project through the Safe and Secure Water Program.

ITEM 11.5    SF1621              301117      Bowra Dam River Monitoring Committee - Record of discussion held on 15 November 2017

612/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

That Council:

1        Receive and note the record of discussions of the attendees at the NDWS BORS River Monitoring Committee meeting held on Wednesday 15 November 2017.

2        Give delegated authority to the Assistant General Manager Engineering Services to engage Urban Water Services to complete dam modeling to investigate the effects of capturing storm water runoff in accordance with their fee proposal dated 25 October 2017.

3        Defer a decision on further pursuing a licence amendment to allow capture of a portion of rainfall runoff until the information received from the dam modeling report has been received and reviewed.

4        Receive and note the information in the GHD Aquatic Ecology Monitoring report dated July 2017.

5        Engage GHD to undertake another river monitoring survey in December this year excluding sampling works to locate the salt water wedge and prepare a report on the findings.

6        Note that the two real time monitoring stations have been installed on the Nambucca River to collect data on salinity concentrations and water levels and that the data can be correlated with times Council is pumping water to assess any impact that may be occurring.

7        That a trigger point be determined for “cease pumping” based on the salinity level at the upstream monitoring point.

ITEM 11.6    SF2257              301117      Application for Temporary Road Closure - High Street Bowraville for Bowraville Children’s Christmas Party and Carols By Candlelight 2017

613/17 RESOLVED:        (Jones/Wilson)

That Council approve a temporary road closure for the following event:

Event:         Bowraville Children’s Christmas Party and Carols by Candlelight 2017

Date:           14 December 2017

Street:         High Street, Bowraville between Young and Belmore Streets

Time:          2.45 pm and 9.30 pm

noting that the following documentation has been received by Council:

·           Certificate of Currency for Public Liability Insurance

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

·           Police approval granted

·           Confirmation advertising will be carried out 7 days prior to the event by Nambucca Shire Council.

That Council advise the Bowraville Lions Club and Chamber of Commerce that they must make an application three months prior to the event in accordance with the guidelines for events on public land to ensure adequate consultation and approvals are obtained.

ITEM 11.7    SF2080              301117      Warrell Creek to Urunga Pacific Highway Handover - Proposed Arrangements

614/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

That Council receive and note the information on the progress of negotiations pertaining to the Nambucca Heads to Urunga (NH2U) section of the old Pacific Highway.

ITEM 12.1    SF2418              301117      Valla Growth Area Employment Land Stage 1 Engineering Design - Comparison of Quotations

615/17 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Reed)

That Council note the information concerning the quotations for engineering design for the Valla Growth Area employment land Stage 1 and the Contracts Register be updated.

Summary:

I request leave for the period Friday 15 December 2017 to Wednesday 17 January 2018, inclusive, for personal reasons.

Recommendation:

That Cr Anne Smyth be granted leave of absence in accordance with Section 234(d) of the Local Government Act for the period 15 December 2017 to 17 January 2018 inclusive.

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

JULY 2011

1

SF1031

21/7/11

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

GM

31/05/17 Now that the Floodplain Management Study and Plan are completed this policy can be referred to the next Estuary Committee meeting for consideration.

AUGUST 2015

2

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.

22 March 2017: AGMES has contacted Forestry and a further meeting to be arranged to consider sites for offset forestry.

OCTOBER 2015

3

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

4/12/17 – awaiting effect of highway closure

JANUARY 2017

4

SF2208

12/01/17

Council engage a qualified person to undertake an assessment of flora and fauna on Lot 701 Boronia Street, Nambucca Heads to determine impact of required APZ’s.

GM

Report May 2017

15/05/17 – Ecologist has been engaged and a report has been prepared. It will be included/ considered in the housekeeping amendment going to the next council meeting.

01/06/17 – Housekeeping amendment planned to be finalised by end of 2017.

MARCH 2017

5

SF2230

16/03/17

Council assess the appropriateness of the Water & Sewerage restricted reserves after the completion of the review of the Water Cycle Management Plan

AGMCS

18/3/17 – Report late 2017

06/12/17 – Report to be presented in 2018 following receipt of draft WCMP.

MAY 2017

6

SF1541

25/05/17

That the review of the local environmental plan include consideration and a subsequent report on the creation of more residential land near Macksville and more industrial land (including land for bulky goods) near Macksville.

GM

31/05/17 – Report in October 2017

18/10/17 - Deferred to December due to workload.

06/12/17 - Deferred to 2018 due to workload.

JUNE 2017

7

SF2303

15/06/17

In consultation with Finance staff the GM & AGMCS conduct a review of the capacity of the Finance Section to meet reporting requirements.  Consider matters such as skill sets, training needs, capacity to backfill critical positions, workload spread & opportunities for efficiencies in process & removal of duplication.

GM & AGMCS

Report in July 2017

15/7/17 - Delayed due to EOFY priorities.  Report in August 2017

/8/17 – Due to statements further delayed until September 2017.

20/09/17 Report in October 2017.

14/10/17 Deferred to return of AGMCS from leave.

8

SF2290

15/06/17

That Council revise the Plan of Management for Gordon Park in consultation with the Section 355 Committee of Management.

GM

Report in November 2017.

22/11/17 Deferred to January 2018 due to workload.

AUGUST 2017

9

SF979

17/8/17

Council receive advice from Council’s planning staff on whether the declaration of a Great Koala National Park would have any impact on the permissible uses of adjoining land.

GM

Report in September 2017

17/09/17 - Deferred due work load.  Will be reported in October

18/10/17 – Deferred to December due to workload.

06/12/17 – Deferred to 2018 due to workload.

10

SF2303

31/8/17

That consideration of the Rainbow Walk be deferred until after the contentious Same Sex Marriage plebiscite has been determined by the Australian Government with information to be provided in relation to the legal ramifications and risk of painting the footpath and there be a further report to Council.

GM

Depending on outcome of plebiscite and the Government’s actions.  Estimate report in December 2017.

20/11/17 Announcement of plebiscite outcome, legislation imminent.

4/12/17 – awaiting finalisation of legislation

SEPTEMBER 2017

11

DA2017/179

14/09/17

Council determine this DA (Optus mobile base station) & that a site inspection take place.

GM

Report to meeting in October.

18/10/17 – Anticipate report to Council in November or December 2017.

20/11/17 – to be reported to Council’s meeting on 14/12/17.

12

SF2293

28/09/17

Council approach the Hon Melinda Pavey and request that the control of Casey Drive be handed to Council and further that Minister be asked to reconsider handing control of the Soccer field adjacent Casey at no cost.

GM

04/10/17 – Pending

31/10/17 – further representations made to the Member for Oxley and Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight

13

SF2397

28/09/17

Proceed with submission of an EOI for the Hennessey Tape Sporting Precinct in Bowraville

GM

EOI Registered - concept plan is being reviewed by Committee of Management

14

SF2319

28/9/17

A reviewed policy on fleet replacement be provided to Council which considers electric cars.

AGMES

04/10/17 – Report will be presented to Council in January 2018.

OCTOBER 2017

15

SF2329

12/10/17

That Council further consider funding a business centres revitalisation under the $1.3 billion Regional Growth Fund.

GM

Report in November 2017.

20/11/17 – Application for $10,000 in funding from an OEH “mainstreet” heritage funding program closes on 29/11/17.  Council will be submitting an application for the maximum program funding which is $10k from OEH but with Council having to meet it $ for $.

16

SF2381

26/10/17

Council staff prepare a planning proposal to make horticulture permissible with consent in the R5 zone et al.

A report come back on a revision of the DCP to incorporate appropriate standards for horticulture in the R5 zone et al.

GM

Planning proposal for gateway determination to be prepared.

17

SF2329

26/10/17

There be a report on amending Council’s policy on Urban and Rural Road Naming to incorporate the recommendation of the Business Advisory Committee for dual road naming.

AGMES

7/11/2017 - Policy to be reviewed and reported back to Council in March 2018 with other policy reviews

18

SF2329

26/10/17

Council staff provide a report on the form of a program and the assistance to be provided to property owners  (under a “Main Street” business centre revitalisation program.

GM

Report in December 2017

20/11/17 - Application for $10,000 in funding from an OEH “mainstreet” heritage funding program closes on 29/11/17.  Council will be submitting an application for the maximum program funding which is $10k from OEH but with Council having to meet it $ for $.  Details of the program will be reported following lodgement of the application.

NOVEMBER 2017

19

SF134

16/11/17

Council receive a report on options for improving public relations documents including but not limited to Council’s Annual Report.

GM

Report in January 2018

20

SF1575

16/11/17

Council place the AMP’s for unsealed roads, footpaths, and stormwater drainage on exhibition for 28 days and note that a further report will be presented to Council following the completion of the exhibition.

AGMES

Report in January 2018

21

SF1575

16/11/17

Council place the revised Asset Management Policy on public exhibition for 28 days and note that a further report will be presented to Council following completion of the exhibition.

AGMES

Report in January 2018

22

SF1631

16/11/17

Advice to (41) residents connected to the transfer main upstream of the balance tank that Council is investigating options to either subsidise or provide some funding to assist with the cost of upgrading or changing their water supply arrangements.

AGMES

Letters have been sent to residents in accordance with Council resolution.  Report in March 2018 following Consultants advice. 

23

SF839

16/11/17

Council engage a suitably qualified consultant prior to the next GM’s performance review due in April 2018 to assist Council with the review and to review the process and KPI template for the ensuing year.

MHR

Consultant to be engaged prior to April 2018.

24

SF2303

30/11/17

Council write to the NSW Premier and RMS Minister requesting legislative change requiring 40kph speed limit at emergency incidents to protect all emergency services personnel.

AGMES

Letter sent 8/12/17

25

SF2303

30/11/17

Council approach the three LALC’s seeking their interest in providing a one off bulky goods collection to their housing residents with the costs being met by Council.  Further that Council seek the assistance of the LALCs by issuing reminders to their tenants prior to the annual scheduled collection.

AGMES

Letter sent 8/12/17

26

SF2303

30/11/17

Council receive a report on the possibility of providing a dedicated small dog park at one of the suggested locations in Nambucca Heads.

GM

Report February 2018

27

SF2303

30/11/17

Council investigate grant funding to assist with the flooding issues at the White Albatross Holiday Centre.  Council investigate the possibility of reducing or redirecting storm water flow from Parkes Street above.  That the results of the investigations and a brief overview of the current Council requirements for placement of manufactured homes on flood prone land be reported to Council.

GM

Report February 2018

28

30/11/17

Council explore further options for domestic waste removal from the Burrapine area.

AGMES

Report February 2018

29

30/11/17

Council receive a report on the setup of water supply and septic at the Taylors Arm Sports Reserve and include other issues raised by Mr Vassalo.

AGMES

Report March 2018

30

SF841

30/11/17

Council adopt the motions from the VBCA and put motions 2, 3 and 4 to the RMS for response and in relation to motion 1 request the Member for Oxley’s office seek a formal response from the Parliament’s Table Office as to why the 700 signature petition was non-compliant.

GM

Letters sent

31

SF2418

30/11/17

Council receive a report on comparative price and availability of industrial land in neighbouring councils.

GM

Report in February 2018

32

SF2278

30/11/17

Minutes of Clean Energy Committee

GM

Report in March 2018

33

SF843

30/11/17

That for the next Beach Access Committee meeting there be a report on where council is up to regarding the replacement/upgrade of beach access signage.

AGMES

Report drafted for VABC in February 2018.

Summary:

Ms Lesley Flanders has requested that she and her family be provided with title to land immediately to the west of the Bowraville racecourse.  She requests this because it is a very sacred place to the Flanders family culturally, spiritually as well as historically.

The land is an unused section of the Grassy Road reservation which she maintains has been the home of the Flanders family since 1922.  In or about the 1960’s, there were three houses on the land, occupied by the Donovan, Kelly and Flanders’ families, who were direct descendants of John Flanders (grandfather).  The families raised their children on the land.  In 1977 a flood destroyed the houses.  The family did not have the money to pay for the repairs.  Thereafter, Lesley’s mother lived in a caravan on the land until approximately 1983 when she became too ill to stay on the property.

Lesley’s mother was the last member of her family to reside on the land.  A nephew, Michael Flanders (son of Christine) also resided on the land until the early 1980’s.

There has been consultation with Ms Flanders in relation to her request and in October 2016 the General Manager responded advising that Council was unable to subdivide the land to create a lot.

Council has now received further representations from David Shoebridge MLC and Ms Anne Gillin from Nambucca Valley Legal requesting that Council reconsider the matter and support a site specific amendment to the local environmental plan to allow the requested transfer.  As the General Manager dealt with the request in the first instance, the elected Council should undertake a review of that decision.

Recommendation:

1        That Council note the General Manager’s letter of 7 October 2016 and resolve to take no further action in relation to the request from Ms Lesley Flanders for the reasons listed in the report.

2        That Ms Lesley Flanders, Mr David Shoebridge MLC and Ms Anne Gillin of Nambucca Valley Legal be advised of Council’s decision for the reasons listed in the report.

3        That Council further consider the matter when it has “ownership” of the land and can deal with it exclusively.

1

32518/2016 - Request for meeting with GM

2

34957/2016 - General Manager's response

3

38137/2017 - Letter from David Shoebridge MLC

4

41240/2017 - Representations from Nambucca Valley Legal

5

41542/2017 - Crown Land West of Lot 75 DP 755549

6

41616/2017 - Grassy Road Aerial Cadastral Map

7

41618/2017 - Grassy Road Flood Affectation

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Request by Lesley Flanders to Purchase Land West of the Bowraville Racecourse

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Request by Lesley Flanders to Purchase Land West of the Bowraville Racecourse

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Request by Lesley Flanders to Purchase Land West of the Bowraville Racecourse

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Request by Lesley Flanders to Purchase Land West of the Bowraville Racecourse

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Request by Lesley Flanders to Purchase Land West of the Bowraville Racecourse

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Request by Lesley Flanders to Purchase Land West of the Bowraville Racecourse

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Request by Lesley Flanders to Purchase Land West of the Bowraville Racecourse

Summary:

A summary is not required.

Recommendation:

That the information concerning the announcement by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) of a rate cap of 2.3% for 2017/18 be received.

Summary:

The proposal is to modify Development Consent DA2006/143 which relates to a 14 lot subdivision of the subject site including one lot as a public reserve. 

The modified application plan will maintain the same number of lots but will reconfigure the layout providing a connection from Teleaven Street to The Glen.

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 development consent DA2006/143 subject to conditions provided as Attachment 4.

SECTION 96(1A)

Council may on application being made by the applicant or any other person entitled to act on a consent granted by Council, modify the development if:

Complies

Comments

(a) It is satisfied that the proposed modification is of minimal environmental impact,

Yes

The proposed modification of the development will reduce the extent of earthworks required and is to be undertaken with the existing approved development footprint. On this basis the proposed modification is considered to result in minimal environmental impact.

(b) It is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all),

Yes

The development remains as a residential subdivision comprising 13 residential lots and a public reserve lot.  The proposed modified road configuration is similar to the originally approved layout, and represents a superior design to the layout (as presently modified) as it reduces the extent of earthworks and provides connectivity to The Glen.  In this regard the proposed modification will increase evacuation routes from the site and surrounding areas in the event of a bushfire.

(c) It has notified the application in accordance with:

(i) the regulations, if the regulations so require, or

(ii) a development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a development control plan that requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent,

Yes

The application was notified in accordance with Part A of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 and no submissions were received.

(d) It has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within any period prescribed by the regulations or provided by the development control plan, as the case may be.

N/A

N/A

SECTION 96 (3)

(3) In determining an application for modification of a consent under this section, the consent authority must take into consideration such of the matters referred to in section 79C (1) as are of relevance to the development the subject of the application. The matters referred to in section 79C (1) are as follows:

Complies

Comments

a  the provisions of:

Yes

The proposed modified layout remains consistent with the relevant development standards and controls within the relevant environmental planning instruments including the minimum lot size of Nambucca LEP 2010.

The site is partially mapped as flood prone land. Proposed Lot 11 is affected by an area identified in the Nambucca Shire Floodplain Risk Management Study as H2-H2 flood risk category. 

An additional condition has been included to ensure that the building envelope within proposed Lot 11 is constructed at a level above the 1:100 year flood level and that an 88B instrument is registered requiring the minimum habitable floor level to be at or above the flood planning level (which incorporates 500mm freeboard above the 1:100 year event).

(i)  any environmental planning instrument, and

(ii) any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject of public consultation under this Act and that has been notified to the consent authority (unless the Director-General has notified the consent authority that the making of the proposed instrument has been deferred indefinitely or has not been approved), and

Yes

The proposal is consistent with the relevant draft EPIs.

(iii) any development control plan, and

Yes

The development remains compliant with the relevant controls contained within the Nambucca DCP 2010.

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

N/A

N/A

(iv) the regulations (to the extent that they prescribe matters for the purposes of this paragraph), and

Yes

The proposal remains consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Plan for the Nambucca Shire Coastline.

(v) any coastal zone management plan (within the meaning of the Coastal Protection Act 1979),

Yes

Refer above

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

Yes

The proposed modification is unlikely to result in additional adverse impacts compared to the originally approved development.

c   the suitability of the site for the development,

Yes

The site remains suitable for the proposed development.

d   any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations,

N/A

N/A

e   the public interest.

Yes

The modification, which reduces earthworks and increases connectivity in the public road network is in the public interest.

1

46206/2017 - Attachment 1 - DA2006/143 Originally Approved Development Plan

2

46207/2017 - Attachment 2 - DA2006/143 Approved Development Plan (as modified)

3

46208/2017 - Attachment 3 - DA2006/143 Proposed Modified Application Plan

4

46213/2017 - Attachment 4 - Proposed Modified Conditions of Consent

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Modification of DA2006/143 14 Lot Subdivision at Treleaven Street, Hyland Park

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Modification of DA2006/143 14 Lot Subdivision at Treleaven Street, Hyland Park

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Modification of DA2006/143 14 Lot Subdivision at Treleaven Street, Hyland Park

Summary:

In accordance with Council's 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’s 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 contained in the report on Development Applications greater than 12 months or where submissions have been received as at 6 December 2017 be noted by Council.

DA NUMBER

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

ADDRESS

2017/179

3 August 2017

Telecommunications Facility (Mobile Phone Tower)

Lot 3 DP 1147417, 1079 Scotts Head Road, Scotts Head

Thirty-seven submissions have been received within the specified notification period – thirty-four oppose the proposal, one does not object but offers an alternative site and two support the proposal.

·           Proposed development is unsightly and will spoil the bushland views and visual amenity

·           It will threaten existing native fauna and impact habitat of native fauna – comprehensive impact study required

·           Concerned about electromagnetic energy impacts on nearby residents and the school

·           No evidence that the local community will benefit from it

·           Exceeds height limit for site – tower is much too high – over 20m above the tree line

·           In Acid Sulphate Soils Class 2 area

·           Located in an area of “threatened Remnant Coastal Wetland” and the site floods

·           This would be better situated on the other side of Scotts Head Road

·           More suitable sites should be investigated

·           Could be bad for people’s health

·           Properties will be devalued

·           If a red light is placed on top of the tower, residents should receive compensation or blinds to reduce the impact

·           Too close to the school, the oval, yarning circle and adjoining residences

·           Low-lying site will not provide for optimal effectiveness of the tower

·           Will have a detrimental impact on lifestyle and tourism for Scotts Head

·           Does not comply with relevant planning principles set by the NSW Land & Environment Court, including impacts on neighbouring properties, including amenity, reasonableness, loss of reasonable development potential and poor design

·           Does not comply with Visual Impact Minimization principles as provided within the NSW Telecommunications Facility Guideline - it does not respond appropriately to its rural landscape setting

·           Exact location of tower not clear from information provided

·           Proposal is not visually aesthetic – too close to neighbouring residences

·           Too much vegetation will need to be cleared.

·           Not required as homes with broadband internet can make and receive calls using the NBN

·           A visual montage should be provided by the applicant

·           Council should conduct a site visit

·           Causing stress and anxiety in the local community

·           Would like it to be considered at a public council meeting

·           Could pose a catastrophic risk to residents in the event of a bushfire

·           More property owners should have been notified and the local community consulted with more thoroughly

·           Appears to be a cost savings exercise by Optus

·           Area is of significance to the Gumbaynggirr people

·           Should be a more suitable colour to blend in with the surrounding landscape

·           Does not comply with Clause 5.5 objectives of the Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010 – Coastal Policy

·           Owner of Lot 106 DP 251748 would be happy to have the tower on their property and believes this would have less of an impact as it would be close to main power transmission lines

·           The tower will provide better reception for Scotts Head which is important in emergency situations

·           Mobile phone reception is now an essential service and many parts of Scotts Head do not have mobile phone coverage

STATUS: Being reported to this Council meeting.

DA NUMBER

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

ADDRESS

2017/238

18 October 2017

2 Lot Subdivision & Change of Use to Dwelling

Lot 3532 DP 793199, 349 Newee Creek Road, Newee Creek

One submission has been received – it opposes the development

·           Development will add to dust nuisance of Newee Creek Road unless sealing is undertaken

STATUS: Being assessed – waiting for response from RFS

DA NUMBER

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

ADDRESS

2017/249

24 October 2017

Dwelling-House

Lot 575 DP 1226125, Wirrimbi Road, Newee Creek

One submission has been received – it opposes aspects of the development

·           Objector believes there are restrictions on title as to house size, roof pitch and dwellings required to be new.

STATUS: Being assessed

DA NUMBER

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

ADDRESS

2017/256

7 November 2017

Dual Occupancy

Lot 7 DP 1033603, 3 Sea Breeze Place, Way Way

Two submissions have been received – they oppose the proposal

·           A dual occupancy would not be compatible with the locality and environment and would detrimentally impact on the environment

·           Two driveways would create a safety hazard – collection of waste and access to corner properties would be compromised

·           Four storey dwelling is incompatible with adjacent, smaller dwellings

·           Dual occupancy would set a precedent which could lead to over-development of the locality.

·           One dwelling should have its driveway from Scotts Head Road

·           Proposed dwellings are lower in value than current dwellings – will detract from scenic beauty and will affect amenity of Sea Breeze Place.

STATUS: Being assessed

Summary:

Council previously made a submission to the Inquiry into Preference Counting in Local Government Elections in NSW.  The report of the Joint Standing Committee has now been published and the recommendations support Council’s position.  In particular it recommends that random sampling of ballots when transferring preferences be discontinued and the Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method be introduced.

Recommendation:

That Council note the Report from the inquiry into Preference Counting in Local Government Elections in NSW.

1

34678/2017 - Media release - Inquiry into preference counting

2

38110/2017 - SUBMISSION TO THE INQUIRY INTO PREFERENCE COUNTING IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS IN NSW

3

47354/2017 - The Weighted Inclusive Gregory System  Extract from Report into Preference Counting in Local Government Election in NSW

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Report into Preference Counting in Local Government Elections in NSW

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Report into Preference Counting in Local Government Elections in NSW

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Report into Preference Counting in Local Government Elections in NSW

Summary:

The minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held Tuesday 28 November 2017 are attached for Council’s endorsement. 

The minutes contain 2 recommendations for Council’s attention.

·      New boardwalk construction or future upgrades is to consider passing bays on the land side as the current width does not allow for passing by 2 people using mobility aids, prams etc; and designs must consider the location of the mangroves and head-height for pedestrians.

·      Designs for new boardwalks or upgrades be referred to the Access Committee for its consideration and comment before construction.

RECOMMENDATION:

1        New boardwalk construction or future upgrades is to consider passing bays on the land side as the current width does not allow for passing by 2 people using mobility aids, prams etc; and designs must consider the location of the mangroves and head-height for pedestrians. 

2        Designs for new boardwalks or upgrades be referred to the Access Committee for its consideration and comment before construction.

3        That Council endorse the minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meetings held 28 November 2017.

1

45013/2017 - Minutes - Access Committee - 28 November 2017

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meetings held 28 November 2017

Mr Peter Shales (Chairperson)

Cr Anne Smyth

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Cr Susan Jenvey

Mr Mark Bettini

Mr Lewis Parkins

Mr Michael Porter

Ms Lee-anne Funnell

Mr Les Small

Ms Fiona Henwood (Guide Dogs)

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

Mr Keith Davis

Ms Alba Sky

ITEM 3.1      SF2292              281117      Business Arising from Previous Meetings

Recommendation: (parkins/bettini)

That the report from the river side walk from the October meeting be noted, and that Council be advised of the following recommendations from the Committee:

1.  New boardwalk construction or future upgrades is to consider passing bays on the land side as the current width does not allow for passing by 2 people using mobility aids, prams etc; and designs must consider the location of the mangroves and head-height for pedestrians. 

2.  Designs for new boardwalks or upgrades be referred to the Access Committee for its consideration and comment before construction.

ITEM 3.2      SF2292              281117      Correspondence to the Access Committee meeting 28 November 2017

ReSOLVED:

That correspondence was noted.

ITEM 3.3      SF2292              281117      Report on General Business to the Access Committee 28 November 2017

Recommendation:

A short report on proposed work at Rotary Lookout Nambucca Heads was noted; and the following priorities were identified for 2018: complete site inspections of remaining boardwalk to break wall, River Street Macksville and Scotts Head; look more closely at “Shared Zones” and how they work.

Summary:

The proposed development includes the construction of a 47.3m high telecommunications tower at Lot 3 DP 1147417 - 1079 Scotts Head Road, Scotts Head. A copy of the statement of environmental effects has been included within attachment 1 and proposed plans in attachment 2.

The application has been notified and assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the act). It is considered that the proposal is contrary to a number of matters required to be considered under the act prior to determining the development application and as such, it is recommended that the application be refused.

The development application is being referred to Council for determination because it has been ‘called in’ by Council.

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 Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the act), refuse consent for Development Application 2017/179 for the construction of a telecommunications facility at Lot 3 DP 1147417 - 1079 Scotts Head Road, Scotts Head for the following reasons:

1    After consideration of section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the act, the proposal is considered to be contrary to clauses 2.3 and 5.5 of the Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010, clause 8 of the State Environmental Planning Policy No 71 – Coastal Protection, clause 115 (3) of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 and clause 8 of the State Environmental Planning Policy No 44 – Koala Habitat Protection because:

·      It is contrary to principles 1(b), 1(e), 1(g) 2(b) 4(k) and 4(l) contained within the ‘NSW Telecommunications Facilities Guideline Including Broadband, July 2010’ as there are alternative locations for the proposed monopole which would minimise its visual impact by eliminating views of it from residents to the south and reducing its prominence when viewed from the north. This would enable the proposal to better respond to its rural landscape setting and to minimise its obstruction of the vista obtained from the Scotts Head township. These alternate locations would also minimise the disturbance of threatened flora and fauna species and communities.

·      Such inadequate design/location does not minimise the visual impacts on surrounding properties or the scenic quality of the coast; or minimise land use conflict with land uses in adjoining residential zones as required by the objective of the RU1 Primary Production Zone.

·      Insufficient information has been provided to determine the extent of ecological impacts of the proposed development and the applicant has notified Council that the information will not be provided.

·      Insufficient information has been provided to Council to determine if the land is core koala habitat in accordance with clause 8 of the State Environmental Planning Policy No 44 – Koala Habitat Protection. In accordance with clause 54(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the applicant has notified Council that the information will not be provided.

2    Insufficient information has been provided to Council which demonstrates that the proposal will not result in any significant impacts on threatened species, populations, or ecological communities or their habitats in accordance with section 5A of the act. In accordance with clause 54(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the applicant has notified Council that the information will not be provided.

3    After consideration of section 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the act the proposal is considered to be contrary to the draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2016 and the review of State Environmental Planning Policy 44 – Koala Habitat Protection because:

·      The submitted ecological assessment fails to confirm whether or not the land is core koala habitat or the extent of ecological impacts of the proposed development; and

·      It does not minimise the visual impacts on surrounding properties or the scenic quality of the coast as there are alternative locations for the proposed monopole which could further reduce its visual impact.

4    After consideration of section 79C(1)(b) of the act it is considered that the proposal will result in unreasonable social and economic impacts on the locality due to its inability to minimise the extant of visual impacts when viewed from the surrounding area and because an archaeological assessment undertaken by someone with expertise in locating and identifying Aboriginal objects has not been provided to ascertain potential impacts of the development on cultural heritage. Furthermore, insufficient information was provided with the application to determine the level of impact of the proposal on the natural environment.

5    After consideration of section 79C(1)(c) of the act the site is not considered to be suitable for the proposed development because an alternate location would minimise the visual impacts associated with the proposal and insufficient information was provided to determine if the proposal will result in any significant impacts on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats.

6    After consideration of section 79C(1)(e) of the act the proposal is considered to be contrary to the public interest because it will result in unreasonable impacts on the natural, social, and economic environments of the site and locality which can be minimised by relocating the proposal.

NAMBUCCA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 2010

Clause

Complies

Comments

2.3 - Zone objectives and land use table

No

The proposed development is permissible with consent. However, it is not considered to be consistent with one of the objectives of the zone which reads as follows:

To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones.

The proposal is considered to be inconsistent with the above zone objective because its location does not minimise the visual impacts on surrounding properties as well as it would if it were located on another area of the site or on another location within the surrounding area. While it is acknowledged that the presence of telecommunication monopoles has become a regular occurrence within the rural landscape throughout the country in response to the increasing technological advances and expectations of society; it is considered that the proposal can be relocated so as to minimise the extent of visual impacts.

5.5 - Development within the coastal zone

No

Under this clause, Council must not grant development consent to the proposal unless it has considered:

(b)  the suitability of the proposed development, its relationship with the surrounding area and its impact on the natural scenic quality, taking into account:

(i)  the type of the proposed development and any associated land uses or activities (including compatibility of any land-based and water-based coastal activities), and

(ii)  the location, and

(iii)  the bulk, scale, size and overall built form design of any building or work involved, and

(d)  how the visual amenity and scenic qualities of the coast, including coastal headlands, can be protected, and

(e)  how biodiversity and ecosystems, including:

(i)  native coastal vegetation and existing wildlife corridors, and

(iv)  native fauna and native flora, and their habitats,

can be conserved, and

Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposal can be relocated on the site and to other locations within the surrounding area which will minimise its impacts on the scenic quality of the coast. Furthermore, insufficient information has been provided to determine the extent of ecological impacts of the proposed development.

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

Yes

The Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (NDCP) is the only Development Control Plan applicable to the proposed development. The NDCP does not prescribe for the purposes of clause 5.9 any tree or other vegetation.

7.1 – Acid sulfate Soils

Yes

An acid sulfate soils management plan was submitted with the application. It is considered that the proposal can be undertaken in a manner which will not result in adverse environmental damage as a result of acid sulfate soil exposure.

7.3 – Flood Planning

Yes

The Flood Planning Level (FPL) for the site is 5.002m AHD. The development footprint will be located within the FPL as it is approximately 2m AHD. To mitigate potential impacts on the infrastructure during a flood event it is proposed to raise the services above the FPL on elevated platforms.  Having regard to this, the infrequent occupation of the development and the low hazard risk (flood fringe); it is not considered that the proposal is inconsistent with the flood hazard of the land, will not significantly adversely affect flood behaviour, will not pose significant risk to human life, will not result in any adverse environmental damage, and will not result in unsustainable social or economic impacts on the community.

7.4 - Public utility infrastructure

Yes

Power will be extended to serve the development.

7.6 - Earthworks

Yes

The proposed earthworks will not impact significantly on surface water flows, will not result in any significant impacts on the future uses on the land or redevelopment, will not impact any contaminated soil or the amenity of surrounding properties, and appropriate erosion control measures could be included within any consent.

State Environmental Planning Policy

Complies

Comments

SEPP 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

No

In accordance with clause 7 of the SEPP, the applicant has provided an ecology report which was prepared by a suitably qualified person which identifies the site as ‘potential koala habitat.

In accordance with clause 8 of the SEPP, before council can grant consent to the proposal it must satisfy itself whether or not the land is a core koala habitat. Council may satisfy itself as to whether or not land is a core koala habitat only on information obtained from a person with appropriate qualifications and experience in biological science and fauna survey and management. The submitted ecology assessment was prepared by such a person; however, it fails to confirm whether or not the land is core koala habitat. Instead, it states that further targeted surveys would be required to assess the occurrence of koalas.

Having regard to the above, insufficient information has been provided to Council to determine if the land is core koala habitat in accordance with clause 8 and the applicant has advised that further information will not be provided. As such, it is not considered that Council is in a position to grant any consent to the proposal as it is contrary to clause 8.

SEPP 55 - Remediation of Land

Yes

The land is not considered to be contaminated because there are no known previous uses or activities on the site that would have resulted in any contamination of the land and the proposal does not include a change of use of the land as referred to in clause 7.

SEPP 62 - Sustainable Aquaculture

Yes

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

SEPP 71 – Coastal Protection

No

The matters for consideration outlined in clause 8 of the SEPP are similar to those within clause 5.5 of the NLEP 2010. For the reasons outlined earlier in this report when addressing clause 5.5; it is not considered that the proposal is consistent with clause 8 of the SEPP.

SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007

No

In accordance with clause 115 (3) of the SEPP, Council must take into consideration the site selection, design, construction and operating principles contained within the ‘NSW Telecommunications Facilities Guideline Including Broadband, July 2010’ (the guideline). The guideline states that telecommunication facilities must be consistent with the four principles which have been included within attachment 4. The proposal is assessed against the four principles from the guideline as follows:

Principle 1: A telecommunications facility is to be designed and sited to minimise visual impact

The proposal is considered to be contrary to principle 1(b), (e), and (g) which require:

·      The visual impact of telecommunications facilities to be minimised.

·      A telecommunications facility to be located and designed to respond appropriately to its rural landscape setting.

·      A telecommunications facility is to be located so as to minimise or avoid the obstruction of a vista or a panorama, whether viewed from public or private land.

It is acknowledged that for any telecommunications monopole to be effective, it must extend above the surrounding landscape in order to provide coverage to the area. With this being the case, a telecommunications monopole will always be visible from somewhere within the surrounding area. However, having regard to the above components of principle 1, it is considered reasonable to expect that the location of a new telecommunications monopole will be in the least obtrusive position as possible given their visual prominence. With regards to Scotts Head and the information provided by the applicant in relation to their identified search area, it is considered that there are alternative locations for the proposed monopole which would minimise its visual impact by eliminating views of the monopole from residents to the south and reducing its prominence when viewed from the north (Scotts Head urban area). It is considered that by locating the monopole approximately 150m towards the south-western corner of the development site from the proposed location, it will not be visible by residents to the south and it will sit below the skyline of the surrounding hills when viewed from the north.

While the applicant agrees that this location would result in reduced visual impacts, they discounted this site due to civil costs and design works which would be required.

While the applicants position is contrary to principle one as their proposed siting does not minimise visual impacts; the applicant has the ability to locate the proposal on an adjoining lot at 987 Scotts Head Road which has the potential to result in less civil costs, environmental damage, visual and flooding impacts then the proposed location. The applicant has discounted this site due to it being outside the identified search area by a “minimal distance”. This is despite stating in section 4 of the statement of environmental effects that the objective is to locate a monopole “within or adjacent to the identified search area in order for the facility to be feasible”. It is also considered that the applicant only investigated the area of the site suggested by the owner; as there are other areas of the site which are within the same proximity to Scotts Head as other locations identified as suitable by the applicant. The land owner has advised that he is willing for further investigations to be undertaken.

It is also noted that the applicant has not appropriately considered locating the development on Lot 2 DP 231485 – Vista Way, Scotts Head on which Councils existing water tower is located. The site is as high as the proposed monopole. The applicant has confirmed that a 15m high monopole would be required at this location which would not be incompatible with the height and bulk of the existing water tower. The applicant has discounted this site as they consider it will result in strong community pushback and because they believe that it would not be compliant with the principles of the guideline. However, it is not considered that an assumption of potential community pushback is a sufficient reason not to investigate this option. Given the extent of community objection to the previous and current proposal, it could be the case that there is less community objection to the use of the water tower site. Furthermore, it is considered that the use of the water tower site would result in a proposal which is more compliant with the guidelines principles than the proposed site.

Principle 2: Telecommunications facilities should be co-located wherever practical

The proposal is considered to be contrary to principle 2(b) which requires:

·      Overhead lines, antennas and ancillary telecommunications facilities should, where practical, be co-located or attached to existing structures such as buildings, public utility structures, poles, towers or other radio communications equipment to minimise the proliferation of telecommunication facilities and unnecessary clutter.

The proposed development is considered to be contrary to this principle as there is the opportunity to mount/co-locate the development on the water tower at Vista Way, Scotts Head or erect a new tower adjacent to it to avoid water tower maintenance issues. Such colocation would result in less visual and environmental impacts compared to the current proposal, would result in lower civil costs, and would comply with the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) Electromagnetic Energy (EME) exposure limits.

Principle 3: Health standards for exposure to radio emissions will be met

ARPANSA is the Commonwealth body charged with the responsibility for establishing standards that protect the health and safety of the community. ARPANSA has established a radiation protection standard specifying limits for general public exposure to radio frequency transmissions at frequencies used by wireless base stations. The Australian Communication and Media Authority (ACMA) mandates the exposure limits of the ARPANSA standard.

An EME Environmental Report has been submitted with the development application which demonstrates that the proposed development will comply with the ACMA limits for electromagnetic radiation exposure levels. The report indicates that the proposal will not exceed more than 0.2% of the maximum exposure limits.

It is not considered that the proposal is contrary to this principle.

Principle 4: Minimise disturbance and risk, and maximise compliance

The proposal is considered to be contrary to principle 4(k) and (l) which requires:

·      Disturbance to flora and fauna should be minimised and the land is to be restored to a condition that is similar to its condition before the work was carried out.

·      The likelihood of impacting on threatened species and communities should be identified in consultation with relevant state or local government authorities and disturbance to identified species and communities avoided wherever possible.

In response to this principle, the applicant has stated that there are no threatened species which will be impacted by the proposal. However, as outlined earlier in this report, the submitted ecological assessment identifies that the development will impact on threatened species and communities. Given that there are alternate locations which would result in reduced impacts on these species, the proposal is considered to be contrary to this principle.

Part

Complies

Comments

Notification and advertising (Part A)

Yes

The application was notified and advertised in accordance with Part A of the DCP. 46 submissions were received and have been included within attachment 5.

Environmental context (Part A)

Yes

All relevant matters for consideration under this part have been considered elsewhere in this report.

Car Parking (Part C)

Yes

This part does not specify minimum parking requirements for the development. However, given the size of the site and the proposed use, it is considered that there is sufficient room on site for the parking of all vehicles associated with the development.

Given the increased usage of the existing entrance, any consent should include a condition requiring the existing entrance to be sealed in accordance with Council standards.

Sediment and erosion control (Part D)

Yes

All works to be undertaken as part of any consent could be subject to a condition of consent requiring the installation of adequate erosion and sedimentation devices which would ensure consistency with Part D of the DCP.

Rural and environmental development  (Part F)

Yes

The proposal is not considered to be contrary to any provision of this part.

Waste Minimisation And Management (Part N)

Yes

Conditions could be included within any consent for the development to comply with this part.

Complies

Comments

Clause 92(1) (a) - For the carrying out of development on land to which the Government Coastal Policy applies, the provisions of that Policy.

No

Matters for consideration to implement the NSW Coastal Policy are provided in Clause 5.5 (Development within the coastal zone) under the NLEP 2010. These are similar to Clause 8 (Matters for Consideration) under SEPP 71. Having regard to the above and the comments made in relation to the proposals inconsistency with the above mentioned environmental planning instruments earlier in this report; it is also considered that the proposal is inconsistent with the coastal policy.

Issue

Comments

Context and Setting

As outlined earlier in this report, it is considered reasonable to expect that the location of a new telecommunications monopole will be in the least obtrusive position as possible given their visual prominence. Given that there are alternative locations for the proposed monopole which would minimise its visual impact by eliminating views of the monopole from residents to the south and reducing its prominence when viewed from the north; it is not considered that the proposal is appropriate with regards to its context and setting.

Electromagnetic Energy (EME)

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) is the Commonwealth body charged with the responsibility for establishing standards that protect the health and safety of the community, including the Radiation Protection Standard. ARPANSA states that the standards which protect people from EME exposure do not set any distances between mobile base station locations and areas which may be considered to be sensitive because arbitrary distances do not necessarily reflect a precautionary approach.

The Radiation Protection Standard 2002 prescribes ‘fundamental limits designed to ensure that known health effects do not arise from exposure to radiofrequency fields.’

The considered scientific opinion about possible health effects from the proposed development is that ‘the weight of national and international scientific opinion is that there is no substantiated evidence that radio frequency emissions associated with living near a mobile phone base station or telecommunications tower poses a health risk’.

The above originates from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency and the Committee on Electromagnetic Energy Public Health Issues Fact Sheet No.9 – What about base stations and telecommunications towers – are there any health effects?

ARPANSA has undertaken a number of surveys of environmental radiofrequency EME levels arising from mobile phone base station antennas. The most recent ARPANSA coordinated survey was undertaken in 2007–08. Results show that actual measured values, including ‘cumulative’ effect were much lower than levels permitted by the Radiation Protection Standard. As outlined earlier in this report, the proposed telecommunications facility will not exceed more than 0.2% of the maximum exposure limits.

Reference is also made to Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council 2006 148 LGERA 124. This case dealt with the application of the precautionary principle in the case of emission of radiofrequency EME. Telecommunications carrier, Telstra, proposed to address inadequate mobile coverage in the suburb of Cheltenham by building a mobile base station. Council refused the application and Telstra appealed to the Land & Environment Court of NSW and the Court upheld the appeal.

Access, Transport and Traffic

Sufficient access is available for the proposed development.

Utilities

Electricity will be extended to the site, with the proposal resulting in greater telecommunication coverage within the locality.

Heritage

In accordance with the Due Diligence Code of Practice (the code), there are no relevant confirmed site records or other associated landscape feature information on AHIMS, and no other sources of information available where a person is already aware of Aboriginal objects.

However, the location of the proposed development is identified as a landscape feature under step 2 of section 8 of the code as it is within 200m of waters and is not disturbed land as defined by the code. In accordance with steps 3 and 4 of section 8 of the code, alternate locations away from the landscape features need to be considered and if it is proposed to retain the proposal within proximity to the landscape feature; an archaeological assessment needs to be undertaken.

Having regard to the above, the proposal can be relocated to an area which will not impact on any landscape features as specified by the code. Furthermore, an archaeological assessment undertaken by someone with expertise in locating and identifying Aboriginal objects has not been provided. In this regard, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the code and clause A5.6 of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010. Given an assessment has not been specifically requested from the applicant, clause A5.6 has not been listed as a reason for refusal.

Soils

The installation and maintenance of erosion and sedimentation controls could be included as part of any consent.

Flora and Fauna

Addressed earlier in this report.

Waste

The storage and disposal of waste during construction could be suitably undertaken as part of any consent.

Noise and Vibration

Construction hours and operational noise could be maintained at a suitable level.

Natural Hazards

Sufficient access and defendable space could be provided as part of any consent. The proposal has been appropriately designed to mitigate flooding impacts.

Social Impact in the Locality

Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposal will result in negative social impacts as its location and design does not minimise the visual impacts of the proposal compared to alternate locations. Furthermore, sufficient information has not been provided to demonstrate that the proposal is unlikely to impact any Aboriginal objects.

While the proposal will provide a positive social impact on the locality by providing increased mobile phone coverage; it is not considered that this outweighs the above two matters, which is supported by legislation as referred to elsewhere in this report.

Economic Impact in the Locality

The proposal will provide positive economic benefits to the locality due to the increased opportunities expanded and reliable mobile phone coverage provides.

However, a proposal of this nature has the potential to reduce property values. Having regard to the above mentioned social impact resulting from a location which does not minimise the visual prominence of the proposal; it is considered that any property value impacts as a result of the proposal would be unreasonable as the visual impacts which would cause the reduction can be minimised.

Summary of Matters Raised

Reporting Officers Comment

The tower will interrupt the landscape. It will be unsightly and visible to all visitors and locals of the region. The area is well known for its uninterrupted beach and bush landscapes. The retention and enhancement of this landscape is vital for the town to thrive. The tower is not compatible with the local environment.

As addressed earlier in this report, it is acknowledged that for any telecommunications monopole to be effective, it must extend above the surrounding landscape in order to provide coverage to the area. With this being the case, a telecommunications monopole will always be visible from somewhere within the surrounding area. However, it is considered reasonable to expect that the location of a new telecommunications monopole will be in the least obtrusive position as possible given their visual prominence. It is not considered that this is the case for the proposed development.

The development will threaten existing native fauna and impact the habitat of native fauna.

As addressed earlier in this report, insufficient information has been provided to determine whether or not the proposal will result in any significant impacts on threatened species, populations, or ecological communities or their habitats as required by section 5A(1) of the act.

The location is close to residential premises, the local school, a playground, an oval and workplaces, which are actively occupied. The level and effect of exposure to EME emitted from telecommunications towers remains subject to debate. The long-term impacts of exposure (including leukaemia, cancer, increased rate of miscarriages etc) remains unproven and yet to be fully studied. These concerns cannot be dismissed as they relate to feelings and perception, not just science.

The proposals EME levels will be less than 0.2% of the maximum exposure limits set by ASPANSA. Having regard to this and the case law presented in Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council 2006 148 LGERA 124, it is not considered that Council would be successful defending any decision to refuse the application based on EME levels.

There is no evidence that enhanced telecommunications services are essential to the liveability of the surrounding communities or that the residences and local economies will benefit from improved communication services.

Improved communications coverage provided by the proposal is becoming a community expectation during everyday life and emergency situations. The general consensus during public notification of this and previous proposals is that the community wants improved coverage; however, wants it with minimal impacts.

There is no detailed consideration of alternative sites, or discussions re avoiding community sensitive locations; minimising exposure to public; availability of land and public utilities; radio interference of the planned service to other services.

The applicant responded to Councils request for additional information during the assessment process with a document which addressed the potential of alternate sites. This has been included within attachment 3. As addressed earlier in this report, there are alternate locations which are considered more suitable for the proposed development.

The proposed structure will exceed by more than 3 times, the building height limit as set out in NLEP 2010 for RU1 zoning and is considered to be a heavy industry which is prohibited on the land.

There is no maximum building height specified for the land under the NLEP 2010. Furthermore, the proposal is defined as a ‘telecommunications facility’, not ‘heavy industry’.

The proposed development is located in a stated Acid Sulphate Soil, class 2 area

Addressed earlier in this report.

Many houses will lose value as the tower will impede their view. There are many houses that have the oval as an amphitheatre and their views look towards the proposed location. The tower will impact on their view which is an important aspect in house valuation.

Having regard to the social impact resulting from a location which does not minimise the visual prominence of the proposal; it is considered that any property value impacts as a result of the proposal would be unreasonable as the visual impacts which would cause the reduction can be minimised.

The tower is too close to Scotts Head Public School and Buz Brazel Oval.

It is not considered that Council can refuse the development application based on EME levels at either of these locations as they will be well below the maximum exposure limits. However the proposal will be visible as addressed elsewhere in this report.

The proposal is inconsistent with the planning principle created by the NSW Land and Environment Court in Davies v Penrith City Council [2013] NSWLEC.

It is agreed that this planning principle which sets criteria for assessing impact on neighbouring properties is relevant, with the proposal being inconsistent with the majority of them. This principle would be used by Council in any appeal to the recommendation.

A site plan showing the correct location of the tower has not been submitted.

A site plan illustrating the correct location of the proposed development on the site was submitted with the application.

The tower could potentially pose a catastrophic risk to residents in the event of a bushfire.

The proposed tower would increase communications during an emergency which will aid in prompt evacuation. Given the tower will be earthed; it may reduce the number of lightning strikes which hit the earth which would minimise bushfire ignition.

There has not been any information given to the local community regarding this development.

Outlined earlier in this report.

Support the proposal as except for a few parts within Scotts Head, there is no reliable mobile phone service in the area. 

There is a growing need for mobile communication, most importantly as a means of contact during emergencies such as fire and storm events. 

Community Service people have a legal requirement that mobile phone service be available when they are giving in-home support to their clients.  That means some of our residents cannot be assisted at home.

Twenty years ago, a mobile phone was a handy back-up.  These days, it is becoming more of a necessity. 

Agreed. However, an alternate location which better addresses the issues raised throughout this report can still provide sufficient coverage.

1

47329/2017 - Attachment 1 - Statement of Environmental Effects

2

47328/2017 - Attachment 2 - Development Plans

3

47327/2017 - Attachment 3 - Corospondance During Assessment

4

47326/2017 - Attachment 4 - Guideline Principles

5

47325/2017 - Attachment 5 - Submissions

6

47324/2017 - Attachment 6 - Draft Conditions of Consent

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Development Application DA2017/179

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Development Application DA2017/179

Ordinary Council Meeting - 14 December 2017

Development Application DA2017/179