Attachments of Ordinary Meeting

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Ordinary Meeting

Public bsc_logo_150dpi_rgb ATTACHMENTS

EXCLUDED FROM THE

Ordinary Meeting AGENDA

OF 11 June 2015

13. Staff Reports

Corporate and Community Services

13.2 Report of the Safe Summer in the Bay PRG meeting 23 April 2015

Attachment 1... Minutes Safe Summer in the Bay meeting 23 April 2015......................... 3

13.3 Report of the Public Art Assessment Panel meetings held 10 April and 7 May 2015

Attachment 1... Minutes Public Art Assessment Panel meeting 10 April 2015................... 6

Attachment 2... Minutes Public Art Assessment Panel meeting 7 May 2015................... 10

Attachment 3... Public Art Small Grants Program - Round 1 April 2015 - Information Sheet 15

Sustainable Environment and Economy

13.5 PLANNING - Amendments to Chapter D2 Development Control Plan DCP 2014

Attachment 1... Extract of DCP 2014 Chapter D2 ........................................................... 18

Attachment 2... Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest................................... 23

13.6 PLANNING - Submissions Report - Planning Proposal to allow Detached Dual Occupancies and Secondary Dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones

Attachment 1... Planning Proposal for Detached Dual Occupancies and Secondary Dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones................................................................................ 25

Attachment 2... Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest................................... 58

13.7 PLANNING - Submissions Report - Planning Proposal to allow multiple occupancy development with consent at 226 Fowlers Lane, Bangalow (Lot 6 DP 261219)

Attachment 1... Planning Proposal to allow multiple occupancy development with consent at 226 Fowlers Lane, Bangalow.......................................................................... 60

Attachment 2... Multiple Occupancy and Community Title Map Sheet......................... 109

Attachment 3... Site Identification Map........................................................................... 110

Attachment 5... Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest................................. 111

13.9 PLANNING - Submissions Report - Planning Proposal to rezone part of Lot 5 DP880917, Shara Boulevard, to RE1 Public Recreation

Attachment 1... Planning Proposal - North Ocean Shores Sports Field......................... 113

Attachment 2... Land Zoning Map................................................................................... 388

Attachment 3... Site Identification Map........................................................................... 389

Attachment 5... Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest Form.................................................. 390

13.11 Request for an Early Implementation Program to supplement Council's Rural Lands Strategy Initiative

Attachment 1... Proposal for early Implementation Program......................................... 392

Attachment 2... Consultants presentation to 7 May 2015 SP Workshop........................ 394

Attachment 3... Consultants Assessment of properties against site selection criteria.... 402

Infrastructure Services

13.13 Consideration of Urgent Road Reconstruction Works Booyong Road, Booyong

Attachment 1... Booyong Road Photos........................................................................... 407

Attachment 2... Yearly Traffic Counts for Booyong Road.............................................. 410

Attachment 3... Traffic Count Data for Booyong Road.................................................. 412

Attachment 4... Reply from Alan Ladd............................................................................ 417

Attachment 5... Reply from Margaret Morrow................................................................ 418

Attachment 6... Excavate Public Road Material Exemption 2014.................................. 420

Attachment 7... Reply from Sheenah Fawns.................................................................. 424

Attachment 8... Reply from Les Dorahy......................................................................... 425

Organisation Development

13.14 Updated Work Health Safety Policy

Attachment 1... Draft Work Health Safety (WHS) Policy .............................................. 426

14. Reports of Committees

Corporate and Community Services

14.1 Report of the Finance Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015

Attachment 1... Minutes 14/05/15 Finance Advisory Committee .................................. 433

14.2 Report of the Internal Audit Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015

Attachment 1... Minutes 14/05/15 Internal Audit Committee Meeting held 14 May 2015 436

14.3 Report of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015

Attachment 1... Minutes of the Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 May 2015............................................................................................................... 439

Infrastructure Services

14.4 Report of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2015

Attachment 1... Minutes Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting 7 May 2015 443

14.5 Report of the Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2015

Attachment 1... Minutes Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting 7 May 2015 446

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.2 - Attachment 1

UNCONFIRMED
REPORT OF THE SAFE SUMMER IN THE BAY PROJECT REFERENCE GROUP MEETING

Date of Meeting:		Thursday 23 April 2015
Time Commenced:		9.00am
PRESENT:	Councillors:		Cr Simon Richardson Cr Rose Wanchap
	Community Representatives:		There are no community representatives.
	Invited Representatives: Guests		Paul Spooner (Byron Community Centre), Tess Cullen (Byron Community Centre), Adrian Nelson (Byron United/ Destination Byron/ Backpacker Group) Brandon Saul (Falls Festival),
	Staff:		Greg Ironfield (Manager Community Development).

1. APOLOGIES:

Peter Wood (Arts Northern Rivers), Michael O’Grady (Byron United/ Destination Byron/ Backpacker Group) Greg Jago (Police) Mouche Phillips (Byron Community Centre),

2. ELECTION OF CHAIR:

Cr Simon Richardson was elected to the position of Chair for the PRG.

3. CONFIRMATION OF A QUORUM:

The revised Terms of Reference (re resolution 15-060) was reviewed and committee members confirmed.

There are 9 members appointed to this group
(not including staff).
Quorum was met.

4. DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS:

Paul Spooner (Byron Community Centre) reinforced a previous declaration, in that he was in attendance as the Community Centre Manager and not a Councillor, and that the Byron Community Centre were selected through the EOI process run to appoint a community organisation to conduct the operations of Soul Street event.

Tess Cullen declared an interest as an employee of the Byron Community Centre.

Cr Rose Wanchap declared that Byron Bay is where she conducts her business management.

5. DISCUSSION AND CONFIRMATION OF STRATEGIES

The PRG confirmed the 9 strategies from Council resolution 15-060 as follows:

1. A family friendly main street event, incorporating activities specifically for youth

2. An event for 18 – 40+ (outside the town centre)

3. A new year’s morning event

4. Policing support

5. Alcohol minimisation campaign

6. Team of volunteers, including strengthening partnerships with educational institutions to provide experience opportunities for students

7. Coordinated sponsorship/ fundraising program

8. Establish a Project Reference Group (PRG)

9. Council NYE Program Support

a. Provide a point of contact for event managers and other stakeholders

b. Communications and media

c. Traffic, compliance, waste and infrastructure services management

Discussion points:

1. Street camping was raised as an important part of the control required for New Year’s Eve to be a continued success. This highlights the importance of the SEPA arrangements and the connection with the New Year’s Eve strategies.

Action: The PRG requested a discussion with Council’s Traffic Planner in future meetings.

2. Cr Wanchap suggested a Trade Expo as an initiative to assist with fundraising for New Year’s Eve activities.

Action: The PRG supports Cr Wanchap developing a project outline/format for the expo and to link the concept with Council’s ‘Making Things Happen’.

3. Budget discussions were held relating to the Council resolution 15-060 and the consideration of a budget of $400,000 over the next 4 years. The PRG identified the $45,000 for the Council’s traffic, compliance, waste and infrastructure provision as part of Council’s core business and required regardless of the other New Year’s Eve activities and events.

4. There was discussion on the traffic and pedestrian management identified in the Council report (I2015/15), and specifically:

a. Close Jonson St to parking near the Community Centre and Railway Park (between Marvel and Byron Streets) at 12noon, with the rest of the street closure remaining at 1pm

b. Consider possible transport issues in getting people out of town after 10pm. There was a suggestion to extend Park and Ride on New Year’s Eve, and to work on the link with the Falls Festival traffic management to look at passenger movement and limiting the number of busses that are required in town.

c. Butler Street Reserve was suggested for a paid parking option for consideration and income generation

Action: The PRG would like to discuss these suggestions with Council’s Traffic Planner.

5. The PRG supports the development of the volunteer aspect of the draft New Years Eve Plan 2015

6. The PRG supports the suggestion in the Council report to commence sponsorship and fundraising activities earlier this year, with the aim of reducing the onus on the creative director for Soul Street, and the aim of having budgets confirmed for August/ September.

Action: The PRG would like to talk to the project manager of Making Things Happen.

7. The impact of changes to the alcohol prohibition was discussed.

Action: The PRG would like input from Council staff on the changes to the law and how this may impact the alcohol confiscation on the night.

8. Although the Ambulance did not use the Emergency Services Hub formed for last year the PRG are keen to have one established again for this year

9. The PRG supports the suggestion from Byron Bay Taxis to have improved signage to the location of the taxi rank for New Year’s Eve and that the location of the taxi rank is known to the information tent in Railway Park.

10. The PRG support the staff suggestion to review the waste management collection on the night and replace the 7pm collection with additional replacement bins to minimise the amount of overflowing bins at the end of the night.

11. The PRG support the temporary lighting of the pedestrian crossing over the railway line and suggested that a permanent lighting solution be considered as part of the Byron Bay Town Centre Masterplan process.

12. The PRG are keen to pursue the festoon lighting suggested in the Council report, which is that there may be scope for a separate project to ‘Light Up Byron Bay’ working with businesses and schools to dress up the town.

6. GENERAL BUSINESS:

Brandon mentioned a proposal being considered by the Falls Festival to disburse patron leaving the Festival during the day to Brunswick Heads and Mullumbimby in addition to Byron. Brandon is researching how this can be achieved with Business Chambers and community organisations, and is looking at contributing to additional cleaning and waste management for the locations. The PRG supports the disbursement option and suggested that the logistic discussion also include Council staff.

ACTION LIST:

· The PRG requested a discussion with Council’s Traffic Planner in future meetings.

· The PRG supports Cr Wanchap developing a project outline/format for the expo and to link the concept with Council’s ‘Making Things Happen’.

· The PRG would like to talk to the project manager of Making Things Happen.

· The PRG would like input from Council staff on the changes to the law and how this may impact the alcohol confiscation on the night.

8. date and time of meetings for the year:		9 – 11am, 25 June 9 – 11am, 20 August 2 – 4pm, 22 October 11am – 1pm, 12 November TBC 9 – 11am, 3 December

Time Meeting Closed:	11:00am
Date Report Confirmed:

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.3 - Attachment 1

Minutes of the Byron Shire Council Public Art Assessment Panel Meeting held on Friday 10 April 2015

E2015/24512

PRESENT: Cr S Richardson

Staff: Joanne McMurtry (Community Policy Officer)

Greg Ironfield (Manager Community Development)

Andy Erskine (Superintendent Parks)

Community: Rick Molloy (Practising Artists Network)

Suvira McDonald (Community Artist member)

Paula Cordeiro (Community Artist member)

Michele Zarro (Community member)

Simon Richardson opened the meeting at 1.30pm and acknowledged that the meeting was being held on Bundjalung Country.

APOLOGIES: Cr P Spooner, Peter Wood (Arts Northern Rivers), Gavin Brown (Bundjalung of Byron Bay Aboriginal Corporation (Arakwal), Tracey Whitaker, Denise Napier

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST – PECUNIARY AND NON-PECUNIARY

Suvira McDonald declared an interest in item 6.3, being that he is one of the main proponents in the project.

Paula Cordeiro declared an interest in item 6.4, being that she is on the Ocean Shores Community Centre Section 355 committee.

UPDATED TERMS OF REFERENCE

Council resolved (15-061) to appoint two community members to replace Belinda Smith – Michele Zarro and Denise Napier. Michele was welcomed as a new member. Denise is an apology for this meeting.

CONFIRMATION OF A QUORUM:

There are ten people on the Panel. Quorum numbers were met.

CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES:

That the minutes of the Public Art Assessment Panel meeting held on 6 November 2014 be adopted. (Molloy/McDonald)

BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES (Verbal updates)

6.1 Unity Pole

Council has been contacted by the Unity Pole owners as they would like to revisit placing the pole in a public place, however laying horizontally. The place they have nominated is “near the pathway on the right hand side of the surf club (when facing the beach). It would act as a cool sculpture, plus make a great seat for people to sit and contemplate the ocean view. The artist can easily create custom bases for the pole so the complete design stays authentic.”

Points discussed:

· Beachfront has slow growing grass which means it will be easy to maintain

· Byron Bay Masterplan will cover this area, however sculpture can be moved if needed

· Will need to meet Australian Standards with regards to bench seats in a public place

Action:

· Andy to meet with them on site to discuss best site

· Generally supportive, however could the PAAP see designs at the next meeting

6.2 Memorial Seat, Brunswick Heads

Suvira met with the artists and there seemed to be some changes and delays to the project.

Action:

· Joanne to contact and request further information and detailed designs.

6.3 Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk

Suvira reported that the team have been busy with community consultation. They also were successful in obtaining a Creative Partnerships Australia grant which requires dollar for dollar funding. So they have begun a crowd funding campaign with the goal of reaching $10,000 by 28 May. See http://www.mullumsculpturewalk.com.au/

Action:

· Creative Mullumbimby to submit a proposal for Council funds towards the project at next PAAP meeting on 7 May.

6.4 Ocean Shores Community Centre Public Art Proposal

The artist (Wendy) overseas so not available to come to a PAAP meeting, may be able to attend August meeting. The Ocean Shores Community Centre S355 committee have identified other priorities at the moment.

6.5 Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk

Through investigations with Council staff, it has been discovered that probably only two of the many sculpture sites will require any approval from Council (ie temporary licences on Council managed land). Staff are currently working through the most appropriate way to ensure public safety and amenity of the event and are looking into a similar process for all public art, however simplified for the many sculptures that will be part of this event.

Action:

· An update will be provided to the next PAAP meeting.

6.6 Public Art Small Grants Program

The program will be advertised from 22 April, closing 6 May in order to provide proposals at the 7 May PAAP meeting. A media release will be prepared and the PAAP are requested to circulate widely to their networks.

Action:

· PAAP members circulate to networks

· Proposals received will be tabled at next meeting

6.7 Judy Cassab Paintings - update

The paintings are currently on loan to Lismore City Council for inclusion in the Judy Cassab exhibition at the Lismore Art Gallery which closes on 23 May 2015. Following their return, they will be hung in the Byron Bay Library.

6.8 Public Art Budget

If the PAAP members are aware of, or would like to fund any projects before June 2015, please email these to Joanne for inclusion in discussion at the next PAAP meeting.

PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS

7.1 Public Art Commission – Electricity Padmount Substations (Byron Bay and Mullumbimby)

The PAAP reviewed the five submissions collated from the expression of interest process:

· Bridget Perry

· Teazer/ Davey/ Stay Gold/ Nitsua

· Karma Barnes and Inscribe Youth Street Art

· Daniel Hend

· Renee Gorsuch

Two artists were shortlisted to contact for further information and concept designs – Karma Barnes and Teazer/ Davey/ Stay Gold/ Nitsua.

Action:

· Joanne to contact shortlisted artists for further information, including:

o Concept designs

o PAAP are interested in fresh, original designs, showing a different part of the community, something people will want to take photo’s of and send around the world (iconic)

o Paint the top of the padmounts?

o Possibly work together

· Joanne to contact other artists thanking them for their submissions, however due to the high standard of submissions, they are unsuccessful on this occasion.

7.2 Public Art Proposal – Mural Outside Cool Beans Café, Mullumbimby

The PAAP considered the proposal and made the following comments:

· Concern about ‘sameness’ of mural artwork in Mullumbimby within a short distance

· Suggest looking at the Mullumbimby padmount submission and work up a concept design from this base (as this is quite different to other artworks nearby), liked the brighter, different colour palette and the fact that it’s a bit more abstract/ surrealist.

Action:

· Contact artist with these comments and ask for a revised concept design to be submitted for next PAAP meeting

7.3 Public Art Locations

Rick Molloy has researched the populations of different areas in the Byron Shire and the amount of public artwork in those areas. Suffolk Park and Ocean Shores seem to have less public art than other areas of the Shire.

Possible locations include:

· Roundabouts

· Water Lilly Park

· Community Centre (Ocean Shores)

· Highway walls near Ocean Shores

Action:

· Rick to present information re existing public art in Ocean Shores and Suffolk Park to bring to the next meeting

· Andy offered to photograph some places for public art to bring to next meeting.

8. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Public Art Assessment Panel will be 9.30 – 11.30am 7 May 2015.

There being no further business the meeting concluded at 3.40pm.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.3 - Attachment 2

Minutes of the Byron Shire Council Public Art Assessment Panel Meeting held on Thursday 7 May 2015

E2015/29334

PRESENT: Cr P Spooner, Cr S Richardson

Staff: Joanne McMurtry (Community Policy Officer)

Greg Ironfield (Manager Community Development)

Andy Erskine (Superintendent Parks)

Community: Peter Wood (Arts Northern Rivers)

Rick Molloy (Practising Artists Network)

Suvira McDonald (Community Artist member)

Paula Cordeiro (Community Artist member)

Tracey Whitaker (Community member)

Denise Napier (Community member)

Michele Zarro (Community member)

Paul Spooner opened the meeting at 9.30am and acknowledged that the meeting was being held on Bundjalung Country.

APOLOGIES: Gavin Brown (Bundjalung of Byron Bay Aboriginal Corporation (Arakwal))

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST – PECUNIARY AND NON-PECUNIARY

Suvira McDonald declared an interest in item 6.3 re Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, being that he is one of the main proponents in the project.

Paul Spooner declared an interest in item 7.2 Public Art Small Grants Program, being that the Byron Community Centre, of which he is the General Manager, submitted an application.

CONFIRMATION OF A QUORUM:

There are ten people on the Panel. Quorum numbers were met.

CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES:

That the minutes of the Public Art Assessment Panel meeting held on 10 April 2015 be adopted.

(Richardson/Molloy)

BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES (Verbal updates)

6.1 Unity Pole

Following an update and discussion at the 10 April meeting, Andy Erskine met the artwork owners on site for discuss the best location for a horizontal placement of the artwork.

· The image below shows the approximate location and length of the installation

· Concrete plinths will be made (sympathetic to the artwork) for the pole to sit on

· They will consult with the Bundjalung of Byron Bay (Arakwal) re the best siting direction of the snake that is carved on the pole

· They are aware that the pole may need to be relocated at a later date depending on the outcome of the Byron Bay Town Centre Masterplan

· They are agreed that the cost of installation will be covered entirely by themselves.

art spaces 002

RECOMMENDATION 6.1:

That the Public Art Assessment Panel recommend to Council that the Unity Pole be installed in Denning Park east of the Byron Bay Surf Club not far from the current pedestrian path overlooking the beach as agreed with the owner and artist of the artwork.

Council note that:

1. All installation costs will be born by the proponents

2. That a vote of thanks be made to the organisers of the Uplift Festival where the Unity Pole was carved, and the artist for their generosity in donating this artwork to the Byron Shire community.

(Whittaker/Wood)

6.2 Identification of appropriate public art locations

Rick Molloy has researched the populations of different areas in the Byron Shire and made a comparison of the number of public artworks in different areas. It has been identified that there is imbalance in the distribution of public art around the Shire compared to the population of different towns and areas. Two areas identified as having no public artworks, but a high percentage of the population are Suffolk Park and Ocean Shores.

RECOMMENDATION 6.2:

That the Public Art Assessment Panel recommend to Council that:

1. Two priority areas have been identified for future public art in the Shire – Ocean Shores and Suffolk Park

2. Local groups in Ocean Shores and Suffolk Park be notified that Council would be pleased to receive applications to donate or loan artwork to the community in these locations.

(Molloy/ Cordeiro)

Action:

· identify who owns the land in key locations in Ocean Shores and Suffolk Park and provide information to the next PAAP meeting about constraints that may exist re approval of any public artworks

· identify possible funds from the open space budget that may contribute to public artworks in the identified locations

· note other areas identified by Andy Erskine that may benefit from public art eg Butler St Reserve toilets. Paul Spooner happy to talk to the market organisers about suggesting a project here. These may be possible locations to suggest to Inscribe Youth Street Art project.

6.3 Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk

A letter was received by Council from Creative Mullumbimby with a request for a contribution towards the Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk from Council of $5,000. (letter S2015/5252)

Suvira McDonald left the meeting for this item.

RECOMMENDATION 6.3:

That the Public Art Assessment Panel recommend to Council that a donation of $5,000 be made from the public art budget to the Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk for the following reasons:

1. Council has previously supported a Development Application for this project;

2. There is evidence of strong community support for the project

3. A recent crowd funding exercise conducted by Creative Mullumbimby (supported by Creative Partnerships Australia with matched funds) has been very successful.

(Richardson/ Whittaker)

6.4 Public Art Budget

Budget allocations were made at the meeting for the following projects:

· Electricity Padmount substations project ($3,000)

· Public Art Small Grants ($2,000)

· Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk donation ($5,000)

RECOMMENDATION 6.4:

That the Public Art Assessment Panel recommend to Council that $5,000 of public art budget from 2014/15 be carried over to the 2015/16 budget to fund a significant public art project in Ocean Shores. Suggested sites to consider for public art include the main roundabouts at Ocean Shores, the Ocean Shores Community Centre, Water Lilly Park or the new Shara Boulevard Sports Fields.

(Wood/ Cordeiro)

6.5 Memorial Seat, Brunswick Heads

Following further contact with the organiser of this project, and further information supplied to the PAAP, the following suggestions were made:

Action:

· Andy to liaise with the organiser of the project re more suitable locations

· Suggest the idea of working with the Brunswick Heads Chamber of Commerce ‘Ten Seats Project’

· As the seat will be placed on public land, the committee require final designs to be submitted including, but not limited to:

o 3D or 2D drawings showing dimensions of the FINAL design

o Colour palette to be used

o Sample of the curved mosaic to ensure public safety

· Suggest the mosaic artist could assist with these final designs

· See also item 7.2

PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS

7.1 Public Art Commission – Electricity Padmount Substations (Byron Bay and Mullumbimby)

The submissions from the two shortlisted artists were considered.

RECOMMENDATION 7.1:

That the Public Art Assessment Panel recommend to Council that following on from an expressions of interest process, to award the commission of the artwork on the two electricity padmount substations as follows:

1. The Mullumbimby padmount to Karma Barnes and Inscribe Youth Street Arts Project ($1,500)

2. The Byron Bay padmount to Stay Gold/ Nitsua team ($1,500)

(Wood/ Richardson)

Action:

· The PAAP will require firm concept designs to be approved prior to work commencing. These concept designs will also need to be approved by Essential Energy.

· A small group of PAAP members was selected to work with the artists – Peter Wood, Tracey Whittaker and Simon Richardson.

7.2 Public Art Small Grants Program

Three submissions were received by the closing date of (strictly 12 noon) 6 May.

Paul Spooner left the meeting for this item.

RECOMMENDATION 7.2:

That the Public Art Assessment Panel recommend to Council that:

1. Three successful projects to be funded for $500 each include:

a. ‘Simpsons Sofa’ artwork (to be installed for the Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk) subject to point 3 below

b. Fishtales – ceramic fish mosaic (to be installed for the Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk)

c. Fletcher Street entrance to the Byron Community Centre murals – Inscribe Youth Street Arts Project

2. That a further $500 be awarded to the Brunswick Heads Memorial Seat project to assist them to provide proper formatted designs showing the resolved construction methods for the project.

3. The ‘Simpsons Sofa’ project will receive the funding described in 1 above subject to:

a. satisfactory ongoing maintenance of the sculpture

b. Final concept designs being submitted to the PAAP for a permanent art installation donated to Council.

(Molloy/ Cordeiro)

Action:

· Request that the Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk liaise with Andy Erskine re park and open space requirements for the Simpsons Sofa and other sculptures if required.

· That for the next round of funding, a grant application form be developed to make it clearer what the application for funds will be used for.

8. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Public Art Assessment Panel will be 1.30 – 3.30am 6 August 2015.

There being no further business the meeting concluded at 11.40am.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.3 - Attachment 3

Public Art Small Grants Program – Round 1 April 2015

Introduction

The proposed Public Art Small Grants Program came about due to some sports groups in the Shire wanting to upgrade their public amenities and kiosk buildings.

Description

Public Art Small Grants are available of up to $500 per project (two projects per annum) to deliver against one of the public art priorities listed below. The grants are available to fund small public art projects within the Byron Shire.

Projects that can identify a third party partnership in either supporting the project or assistance with the delivery of the project will be highly regarded.

Public Art Priorities

· Projects that reflect the community core values and enable visitors to easily interpret the message.

· Projects that:

o respect and enhance the identity and sense of place,

o reflect the cultural diversity of the community,

o respects the history of the place and community, and

o recognises Aboriginal cultural heritage.

· Projects that are educational, meaningful and aesthetically stimulating.

· Projects that combat graffiti in areas where graffiti is an ongoing problem.

· Projects that support local creative industries.

Objectives and Anticipated Outcomes

1. Provide a process to deal with small public art proposals where there is currently no provision;

2. Provide Council with an opportunity to assess public art proposals on sports fields and other public buildings/ public areas;

3. Provide an opportunity for community members/groups to strengthen links and increase community involvement in public art activities;

4. Priority groups, areas and issues can be directly targeted through the guidelines and terms of reference.

5. Council strengthens its relationship with the artistic community in the Shire through engagement and recognising and valuing their participation in Council business.

6. To increase the number and type of partnerships in delivering public art projects in the Byron Shire.

Program Evaluation

· Quality and number of activities delivered successfully;

· Value for money;

· Impact of activities on wellbeing indicators (such as increased participation in community activities, increased sense of belonging, reduction in harmful behaviours, reduction in crime);

· Partnerships and support networks that are developed and encouraged through this process;

· Artwork that is created in a professional manner;

· Relevance and appropriateness of the work to the site;

· Improved image and perception of public art in the Shire;

· Improved knowledge amongst the community of Council’s support of public art in the Shire.

Essential Criteria

· The project meets one or more of the public art priorities listed above.

· The project meets one or more of the objectives of this program as listed above.

· Project able to be completed within the strict 12-month time-frame.

· The project represents artistic quality delivered in a professional manner.

· The project demonstrates a strong partnership element in terms of funding and delivery.

· The artist or organisation has provision for insurance and other liabilities and a risk management plan is provided.

· The project represents good value for money in furthering public art outcomes.

Preferred Criteria

· Will involve community members in the project delivery (shows capacity building).

· Are inter-generational and multi-cultural

· Shows income (cash and/ or in-kind) from sources other than Byron Shire Council.

· Maintenance of the artwork will not be onerous.

What will not be funded

· Money for personal use, capital or equipment purchases

· Public Art projects outside the Byron Shire

· Ongoing projects

· Projects that have already been commenced (funds will not be supplied retrospectively)

Application and approvals process

Applications need to be made on the application form(s) provided and supplied to Council prior to a scheduled Public Art Assessment Panel meeting. In all cases, a Public Art Application Form is to be submitted. If the artwork is exposed to the weather and in a public place with likely risks to the public, a ‘maintenance manual’ and a ‘risk assessment’ will also be required.

The closing date for this round is strictly 12noon Wednesday 6 May 2015.

The Public Art Assessment Panel will assess the application against the criteria and make a recommendation to Council about the grant project proposal. If Council endorses the recommendation, the applicant will be notified in writing that their project has been approved for grant funding.

Once the project has been approved, work can commence. The grant will be paid in two instalments – one instalment at the commencement of the project, and one instalment at the conclusion of the project to the satisfaction of Byron Shire Council. A one-page report will be required to receive the final instalment of funds which can be used to summarise the project, the purpose of the project, who was involved, the outcomes, how the money was spent and including at least one photo. Projects will preferably be no longer than a maximum of 9 months duration, and need to be completed within twelve months of commencement.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.6 - Attachment 1

Introduction.. 2

Purpose 2

Property details and existing zones. 2

Background 2

Part 1 Objectives and intended outcomes. 5

Objective and intended outcome. 5

Part 2 Explanation of provisions. 5

Part 3 Justification.. 7

Section A Need for the planning proposal 7

1 Is the planning proposal a result of any strategic study or report?. 7

2 Is the planning proposal the best means of achieving the objectives or intended outcomes, or is there a better way?. 7

3 Is there a net community benefit?. 7

Section B Relationship to strategic planning framework. 7

1 Is the planning proposal consistent with the objectives and actions contained within the applicable regional or sub-regional strategy (in this case the Far North Coast Regional Strategy)?. 7

2 Is the planning proposal consistent with the local Council’s Community Strategic Plan, or other local strategic plan?. 7

3 Is the planning proposal consistent with the applicable State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs)?. 8

4 Is the planning proposal consistent with applicable Ministerial Directions (s117 Directions)? 10

Section C Environmental, social and economic impact 27

1 Is there any likelihood that critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats will be adversely affected as a result of the proposal?. 27

2 Are there any other likely environmental effects as a result of the planning proposal and how are they proposed to be managed?. 27

3 How has the planning proposal adequately addressed any social and economic effects? 27

Section D State and Commonwealth interests. 27

1 Is there adequate public infrastructure for the planning proposal?. 27

2 What are the views of State and Commonwealth public authorities consulted in accordance with the gateway determination?. 27

Part 4 Mapping.. 30

Part 5 Community consultation.. 30

Part 6 Project timeline. 30

Summary and conclusions. 31

Introduction

Purpose

At the Byron Shire Council meeting of 13 June 2013, Council discussed the need to amend its new LEP and resolved as follows:

“2. Permissibility of dual occupancies (detached) and secondary dwellings in the RU1, RU2 and RU5 zones be considered in a Planning Proposal to amend the Byron LEP 2012 after the plan’s gazettal.”

This resolution affects two different types of land, being the RU1 Primary Production and RU2 Rural Landscape land that are the predominant zones for the non-urban parts of Byron Shire, and the RU5 Village land that affects Billinudgel, Federal and Main Arm villages only.

Given the different impacts of this resolution on a rural area compared to an urban area, the planning proposal will be split into two parts. This planning proposal deals only with the amendment of Byron LEP 2014 in relation to the RU1 and RU2 zones. A separate planning proposal will deal with the RU5 zone component of the resolution.

Property details and existing zones

The planning proposal directly affects all land zoned RU1 Primary Production and RU2 Rural Landscape under Byron LEP 2014.

Background

Byron LEP 2014 and its predecessor Byron LEP 1988 both prohibit detached dual occupancy in rural zones. This prohibition related to a clause in the North Coast Regional Environmental Plan (REP) that restricted dual occupancy on rural land to attached dwellings only. With the making of LEP 2014, the REP no longer applies, which means it is possible to pursue an amendment to the LEP. The objective of the REP in relation to rural housing was to ‘ensure that any opportunities for rural housing are available only as part of a planned strategy for rural living areas’. Although the REP no longer applies, considering opportunities for rural housing as part of a planned strategy is good planning practice because it allows Council and the community to fully explore and debate the implications of increasing the amount of housing in rural areas, where it should occur and under what circumstances.

A major factor in the content of LEP 2014 was that it would largely transition the 1988 planning controls into the Standard LEP format without too many policy changes. Consequently, even though the issue of detached rural dual occupancy was raised during the public exhibition it was not in the exhibited draft LEP and staff recommended that it be dealt with as a planning proposal after gazettal of the new LEP.

Lismore City Council amended its LEP to permit detached rural dual occupancy in its rural zones in late 2013. At the time it considered the following table of advantages and disadvantages:

Advantages	Disadvantages
Additional dwellings can allow farmers and others approaching or at retirement age to remain on their farm/rural land but not within the same dwelling as a new farmer takes over. This creates opportunity for physical (workers), social and financial support, and can assist with succession planning.	Increase in dispersed rural settlement. This will occur gradually as long as subdivision of the second dwelling is not supported. Pressure for subdivision will occur if substantial dual occupancy dwellings are erected.
Potential to legitimise unapproved dwellings and structures, and receive financial contributions from such buildings that may otherwise be occupied illegally. Section 94 contributions apply to detached dual occupancy (not to secondary dwellings).	Potential increase in land use conflict, which can impact adversely on existing farming operations. The potential for conflict can be mitigated to some extent by requiring dwellings to have the same vehicle access from a public road and to be within a prescribed radius of each other.
Increasing the number of residents in rural areas can provide increased support for rural halls and schools.	Potential for fragmentation and alienation of land from farming. This can be minimised if locational criteria are used. The inability to subdivide the dwellings will also assist.
Providing for an additional housing option on existing rural land may reduce the need to subdivide larger allotments for new rural residential estates.	As with any form of dispersed settlement, there is the potential for increased vehicle traffic, especially if employment is not available in the immediate area. Not only will this increase the cumulative impact on rural roads but it raises questions about long term environmental sustainability, for example, increased vehicle emissions. Section 94 contributions provide some financial response; however they cannot address the longer term maintenance impacts.
Additional dwellings can provide farm income to subsidise the agricultural activity and provide additional rental housing to the market.	Impact on rural character. An increase in dispersed dwellings will impact on the rural landscape. This can be managed to some extent through the development assessment process but there will still be an impact over time.

Lismore Council was successful in amending its LEP to permit detached rural dual occupancy. In first 12 months of operation the provisions resulted in 10 applications (although seven were for conversion of existing structures such as “studios”). With these applications there has been minimal concern over the requirement for a shared driveway, but some pressure to extend the 100 metre maximum separation distance. Lismore Council staff consider the LEP amendment has been a positive one. Lismore Council also deleted the standard rural workers dwelling clause from its LEP because it was not being used. It was considered the test was too difficult to achieve on relatively small farms. The option of an attached rural dual occupancy remains in Lismore LEP, but this has only generated four applications in the previous 10 years.

In Byron LEP 2014 the current definitions and controls apply:

dual occupancy means a dual occupancy (attached) or a dual occupancy (detached).

dual occupancy (attached) means 2 dwellings on one lot of land that are attached to each other, but does not include a secondary dwelling.

dual occupancy (detached) means 2 detached dwellings on one lot of land, but does not include a secondary dwelling.

secondary dwelling means a self-contained dwelling that:

(a) is established in conjunction with another dwelling (the principal dwelling), and

(b) is on the same lot of land as the principal dwelling, and

(Note: See clause 5.4 for controls relating to the total floor area of secondary dwellings.)

Also Clause 5.4 of LEP 2014 currently states:

“If development for the purposes of a secondary dwelling is permitted under this Plan, the total floor area of the dwelling (excluding any area used for parking) must not exceed whichever of the following is the greater:

(a) 60 square metres,

(b) 35% of the total floor area of the principal dwelling.”

Part 1 Objectives and intended outcomes

Objective and intended outcome

This planning proposal will:

§ Permit detached dual occupancy dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones with Council consent;

§ Permit secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones with Council consent;

§ Establish a 4000 square metre minimum lot size for detached dual occupancy development in the RU1 and RU2 zones; and

§ Set out consent considerations for development of detached dual occupancies and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones to address matters such as access, siting, land suitability and potential impacts.

This should provide for an additional form of rural housing for rural land owners that when correctly implemented should have limited negative impacts on agriculture and other rural land uses.

Part 2 Explanation of provisions

The intended outcomes are to be achieved by an amendment to Byron Shire Council LEP 2014 as follows:

§ Amend the Land Use Table in Part 2 of LEP 2014 for the RU1 and RU2 zones to delete the word “(attached)” following “Dual occupancies”, and add the words “secondary dwellings”. This has the effect of permitting both attached and detached dual occupancy development and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones.

§ Amend Clause 4.1E to include an additional row in the table to the clause for ‘Dual occupancy (detached)’ (Column 1) in the RU1 Primary Production and RU2 Rural Landscape zones (Column 2) that specifies a 4000 square metre area for that purpose (Column 3). This is necessary to ensure consistency with minimum lot size provisions for “Dual occupancy (attached)” in this clause.

§ Amend Clause 4.2A to delete the word “attached” wherever it occurs. This has the effect of permitting both attached and detached dual occupancy development on RU1 and RU2 land wherever you can currently undertake an attached dual occupancy.

§ Add a new provision that states:

4.2D Erection of dual occupancies (detached) and secondary dwellings in Zones RU1 and RU2

(1) The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a) to provide alternate accommodation for rural families and workers,

(b) to ensure development is of a scale and nature that is compatible with the primary production potential, rural character and environmental capabilities of the land,

(c) to set out consent considerations for development of detached dual occupancies and secondary dwellings to address matters such as access, siting, land suitability and potential impacts.

(2) Development consent must not be granted to development for the purpose of a dual occupancy (detached) or secondary dwelling on land in the RU1 Primary Production or RU2 Rural Landscape zones unless the consent authority is satisfied that:

(a) the development will not impair the use of the land for agriculture or rural industries, and

(b) each dwelling will use the same vehicular access to and from a public road, and

(c) dwellings will be situated within 100 metres of each other, and

(d) the land is physically suitable for the development, and

(e) the land is capable of accommodating the on-site disposal and management of sewage for the development, and

(f) the development will not have an adverse impact on the scenic amenity or character of the rural environment.

This provision provides some guidance on what must be addressed in an application for a detached dual occupancy development or secondary dwelling.

One of the key aspects of the proposed clause is the 100m distance between the two dwellings. Specifying a distance will ensure the dwellings are clustered, which will assist to minimise land use conflict and reduce impact on the rural landscape and character. The existing attached dual occupancy control in the Shire wide DCP prescribes an 80m circle within which two dwellings must be located. The 100 metre standard provides more opportunity for privacy between dwellings and variations in the topography of rural properties. It is a useful starting point for consideration of detached dual occupancy and as it would be a development standard, it can be varied under clause 4.6 of the LEP where the applicant demonstrates:

(a) that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and

(b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

In relation to clause 4.6 Council also has to be satisfied, ‘that the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out’.

If the Department gives a Gateway Determination to proceed with the planning proposal, the standard will be subject to public consultation and changes can be made in light of comments from the community.

Part 3 Justification

Section A Need for the planning proposal

1 Is the planning proposal a result of any strategic study or report?

No. The planning proposal is an amendment to LEP 2014 that came up at a Councillor workshop during discussion of submissions relating to the draft Shire-wide LEP. The resolution then came from the Council.

2 Is the planning proposal the best means of achieving the objectives or intended outcomes, or is there a better way?

A planning proposal is considered to be the only way to change the land use tables and local provisions for the RU1 and RU2 zones.

3 Is there a net community benefit?

The Net Community Benefit Criteria is identified in the NSW Government’s publication The Right Place for Business and Services. Assessment against the Net Community Benefit Assessment Criteria is not appropriate for a planning proposal that deals with rural housing issues.

Section B Relationship to strategic planning framework

1 Is the planning proposal consistent with the objectives and actions contained within the applicable regional or sub-regional strategy (in this case the Far North Coast Regional Strategy)?

The planning proposal is largely consistent with the outcomes and actions contained within the Far North Coast Regional Strategy (FNCRS). In particular, the actions related to Settlement and Housing and Environment and Natural Resources. The proposal specifically responds to the following actions:

§ Councils will plan for a range of housing types of appropriate densities, location and suitability that are capable of adapting and responding to the ageing of the population.

§ Local government will consider a range of affordable housing strategies, including forms of low cost housing.

§ Local environmental plans will:

- include minimum subdivision standards for rural and environment protection zones;

- include provisions to limit dwellings in the rural and environmental zones.

2 Is the planning proposal consistent with the local Council’s Community Strategic Plan, or other local strategic plan?

In 2012 Council adopted a 10 year + Community Strategic Plan 2022 (CSP). The plan is based on five key themes being Corporate Management, Economy, Environment, Community Infrastructure, Society and Culture. The planning proposal is generally consistent with the following relevant Goals:

EN3.6 Support initiatives that enhance socio-economic prosperity and resilience at the local level

Permitting additional rural housing options can enhance the social outcomes for extended families that want to live on the land as well as providing rental income for a rural property that may allow it to stay in production.

On this basis the planning proposal is generally consistent with Council’s CSP.

3 Is the planning proposal consistent with the applicable State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs)?

The State Environmental Planning Policies relevant to the planning proposal are identified in Table 1 and discussed in the following section.

Table 1: Consistency with SEPPs

State Environmental Planning Policy	Consistency
SEPP No 1 – Development Standards	N/A (repealed for BSC)
SEPP No 4 – Development Without Consent and Miscellaneous Exempt and Complying Development	N/A
SEPP No 6 – Number of Storeys in a Building	N/A
SEPP No 10 – Retention of Low Cost Rental Accommodation	N/A
SEPP No 14 – Coastal Wetlands	N/A
SEPP No 15 – Rural Landsharing Communities	N/A
SEPP No 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas	N/A
SEPP No 21 – Caravan Parks	N/A
SEPP No 22 – Shops and Commercial Premises	N/A
SEPP No 26 – Littoral Rainforests	N/A
SEPP No 29 – Western Sydney Recreation Area	N/A
SEPP No 30 – Intensive Agriculture	N/A
SEPP No 32 – Urban Consolidation (Redevelopment of Urban Land)	N/A
SEPP No 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development	N/A
SEPP No 36 – Manufactured Home Estates	N/A
SEPP No 39 – Spit Island Bird Habitat	N/A
SEPP No 41 – Casino Entertainment Complex	N/A
SEPP No 44 – Koala Habitat Protection	N/A
SEPP No 47 – Moore Park Showground	N/A
SEPP No 50 – Canal Estate Development	N/A
SEPP No 52 – Farm Dams and Other Works in Land and Water Management Plan Areas	N/A
SEPP No 53 – Metropolitan Residential Development	N/A
SEPP No 55 – Remediation of Land	Consistent. See additional comment below.
SEPP No 59 – Central Western Sydney Regional Open Space and Residential	N/A
SEPP No 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture	N/A
SEPP No 64 – Advertising and Signage	N/A
SEPP No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development	N/A
SEPP No 70 – Affordable Housing (Revised Schemes)	N/A
SEPP No 71 – Coastal Protection	N/A
SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009	N/A
SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004	N/A
SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008	N/A
SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004	N/A
SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007	N/A
SEPP (Kosciuszko National Park – Alpine Resorts) 2007	N/A
SEPP (Kurnell Peninsula) 1989	N/A
SEPP (Major Development) 2005	N/A
SEPP (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007	Consistent. See additional comments below.
SEPP (Miscellaneous Consent Provisions) 2007	N/A
SEPP (Penrith Lakes Scheme) 1989	N/A
SEPP (Rural Lands) 2008	Consistent. See additional comments below.
SEPP (Transitional Provisions for SEPP 53) 2011	N/A
SEPP (State and Regional Development) 2011	N/A
SEPP (Sydney Drinking Water Catchment) 2011	N/A
SEPP (Urban Renewal) 2010	N/A
SEPP (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006	N/A
SEPP (Miscellaneous Consent Provisions) 2007	N/A
SEPP (Western Sydney Employment Area) 2009	N/A
SEPP (Western Sydney Parklands) 2009	N/A
SEPP (Three Ports) 2013	N/A
SEPP (North Coast Regional Environmental Plan 1988)	N/A (repealed for BSC)

SEPP No 55 – Remediation of Land

SEPP 55 (Remediation of Land) recognises that land which is known to be contaminated by past land uses can still be zoned for development as long as:

“(a) the planning authority has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

(b) if the land is contaminated, the planning authority is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for all the purposes for which land in the zone concerned is permitted to be used, and

(c) if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for any purpose for which land in that zone is permitted to be used, the planning authority is satisfied that the land will be so remediated before the land is used for that purpose.“

In this case no land is actually being rezoned and the detached dual occupancy or secondary dwelling will only be permissible where a dwelling is already permitted on the land.

Because the planning proposal is not significantly increasing the range of sensitive land uses on the site and past land use will still be addressed in any development application, it is consistent with the SEPP.

SEPP (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007

Nothing in this planning proposal will alter the permissibility of mining or extractive industries on the subject land.

The planning proposal is consistent with the SEPP.

SEPP (Rural Lands) 2008

This SEPP identifies rural planning principles (clause 7) that must be taken into account when a Council prepares a planning proposal. These are brought into effect through a s117 Direction. This is dealt with in more detail in the following section.

It also identifies matters to be considered in determining development applications for rural subdivision and rural dwellings (clause 10). These are the matters that Council must take into account if it receives an application for a detached dual occupancy or a secondary dwelling, should the planning proposal succeed in amending Byron LEP 2014.

The planning proposal is consistent with the rural planning principles and any application arising from this planning proposal will only be approved if it is consistent with the matters in clause 10. On balance it is consistent with the SEPP.

4 Is the planning proposal consistent with applicable Ministerial Directions (s117 Directions)?

Consistency with the s117 Directions is assessed in the following Table 2.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.6 - Attachment 1

Table 2: Consistency with S117(2) Directions

S117 Direction	Application	Relevance to this planning proposal	Consistency with direction
1. Employment and Resources
1.1 Business and Industrial Zones	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will affect land within an existing or proposed business or industrial zone (including the alteration of any existing business or industrial zone boundary).	This planning proposal will not affect business or industrial zones.	N/A
1.2 Rural Zones	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will affect land within an existing or proposed rural zone (including the alteration of any existing rural zone boundary). Under this direction a planning proposal must: (a) not rezone land from a rural zone to a residential, business, industrial, village or tourist zone. (b) not contain provisions that will increase the permissible density of land within a rural zone (other than land within an existing town or village).	This planning proposal will not alter the zone of any rural land. Attached dual occupancy is already permitted in the RU1 and RU2 zones. Permitting detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings will allow the additional dwelling to be located away from the primary dwelling on the land. This will be more attractive for land owners but will not actually increase the permitted density.	Consistent.
1.3 Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that would have the effect of: (a) prohibiting the mining of coal or other minerals, production of petroleum, or winning or obtaining of extractive materials, or (b) restricting the potential development of resources of coal, other minerals, petroleum or extractive materials which are of State or regional significance by permitting a land use that is likely to be incompatible with such development.	Nothing in this planning proposal will prohibit or restrict exploration or mining.	N/A
1.4 Oyster Aquaculture	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares any planning proposal that proposes a change in land use which could result in: (a) adverse impacts on a Priority Oyster Aquaculture Area or a “current oyster aquaculture lease in the national parks estate”, or (b) incompatible use of land between oyster aquaculture in a Priority Oyster Aquaculture Area or a “current oyster aquaculture lease in the national parks estate” and other land uses.	Priority Oyster Aquaculture Areas (POAA) exist in the Brunswick River however there is minimal likelihood the planning proposal will have adverse impacts on POAA as an environmental assessment will be required on a case by case basis. Also most land in the vicinity of the POAA is already zoned for environmental protection or within the national parks estate.	Consistent.
1.5 Rural Lands	Applies when: (a) a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will affect land within an existing or proposed rural or environment protection zone (including the alteration of any existing rural or environment protection zone boundary), or (b) a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that changes the existing minimum lot size on land within a rural or environment protection zone. A planning proposal to which clauses (a) and (b) apply must be consistent with the Rural Planning Principles listed in State Environmental Planning Policy (Rural Lands) 2008. A planning proposal to which clause (b) applies must be consistent with the Rural Subdivision Principles listed in State Environmental Planning Policy (Rural Lands) 2008.	This planning proposal will affect land zoned RU1 and RU2. It is consistent with the Rural Planning Principles listed in State Environmental Planning Policy (Rural Lands) 2008 as follows: (a) the promotion and protection of opportunities for current and potential productive and sustainable economic activities in rural areas – the proposed amendment is not intended to undermine or create conflict with agriculture or other rural land uses. Applications will be required to address this as it will be a head of consideration in the LEP clause. (b) recognition of the importance of rural lands and agriculture and the changing nature of agriculture and of trends, demands and issues in agriculture in the area, region or State – the need for detached dual occupancy or a secondary dwelling is in response to the changing nature of agriculture in Byron Shire including the need for part-time labour and additional income to keep the farm viable. (c) recognition of the significance of rural land uses to the State and rural communities, including the social and economic benefits of rural land use and development – Byron Shire has a sustainable agriculture strategy and understands the benefits of maintaining rural land uses. The proper application of detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings will not undermine this. (d) in planning for rural lands, to balance the social, economic and environmental interests of the community – the nature of rural land use is changing and the socio-economic interests of the Byron Shire community will be best served by permitting this form of rural housing. The Lismore experience suggests it is happening by stealth through the use of rural studios and unauthorised structures. This change to the LEP will permit it to happen openly and to be better controlled. (e) the identification and protection of natural resources, having regard to maintaining biodiversity, the protection of native vegetation, the importance of water resources and avoiding constrained land – the LEP amendment will require consideration of the physical environment in which the development will be located as well as its visual impact. (f) the provision of opportunities for rural lifestyle, settlement and housing that contribute to the social and economic welfare of rural communities – detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings will allow additional rural residents to contribute to the rural communities of Byron Shire. (g) the consideration of impacts on services and infrastructure and appropriate location when providing for rural housing – on-site sewage management will be a key matter in assessing applications and will influence the location of the development. A shared driveway will reduce impacts on public roads. Keeping the dwellings close (within 100 m) should allow sharing of electricity and telephone connections as well. (h) ensuring consistency with any applicable regional strategy of the Department of Planning or any applicable local strategy endorsed by the Director-General – the Far North Coast Regional Strategy applies to Byron Shire and this planning proposal is consistent with it, particularly in relation to providing for a range of housing types including affordable housing. The sustainable small house design competition recently run in the Northern Rivers area has provided a number of designs that would be applicable to rural localities when this planning proposal has been implemented.	Consistent.
2 Environment and Heritage
2.1 Environment Protection Zones	A planning proposal must include provisions that facilitate the protection and conservation of environmentally sensitive areas. A planning proposal that applies to land within an environment protection zone or land otherwise identified for environment protection purposes in a LEP must not reduce the environmental protection standards that apply to the land (including by modifying development standards that apply to the land). This requirement does not apply to a change to a development standard for minimum lot size for a dwelling in accordance with clause (5) of Direction 1.5 “Rural Lands”.	The planning proposal does not alter or remove any environment protection zone.	Consistent.
2.2 Coastal Protection	Direction applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that applies to land in the coastal zone. A planning proposal must include provisions that give effect to and are consistent with: (a) the NSW Coastal Policy: A Sustainable Future for the New South Wales Coast 1997, (b) the Coastal Design Guidelines 2003, (c) the manual relating to the management of the coastline for the purposes of section 733 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the NSW Coastline Management Manual 1990).	Certain land affected by this proposal is located within the coastal zone, which affects the eastern half of Byron Shire. It is consistent with the NSW Coastal Policy as there is minimal likelihood of physical impact on the environment and it will require an assessment of the visual impact on a case by case basis. RU1 and RU2 land does not currently apply to any land in Byron Shire affected by coastal erosion issues. If this is the case in the future then Council will consider the management of the coastline should it be relevant to an application it receives.	Consistent.
2.3 Heritage Conservation	A planning proposal must contain provisions that facilitate the conservation of: (a) items, places, buildings, works, relics, moveable objects or precincts of environmental heritage significance to an area, in relation to the historical, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic value of the item, area, object or place, identified in a study of the environmental heritage of the area, (b) Aboriginal objects or Aboriginal places that are protected under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, and (c) Aboriginal areas, Aboriginal objects, Aboriginal places or landscapes identified by an Aboriginal heritage survey prepared by or on behalf of an Aboriginal Land Council, Aboriginal body or public authority and provided to the relevant planning authority, which identifies the area, object, place or landscape as being of heritage significance to Aboriginal culture and people.	Byron LEP 2014 currently contains provisions that are consistent with this Direction. This planning proposal will not alter those provisions and they will apply to any future applications for detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings.	N/A
2.4 Recreation Vehicle Areas	A planning proposal must not enable land to be developed for the purpose of a recreation vehicle area (within the meaning of the Recreation Vehicles Act 1983): (a) where the land is within an environment protection zone, (b) where the land comprises a beach or a dune adjacent to or adjoining a beach, (c) where the land is not within an area or zone referred to in paragraphs (4)(a) or (4)(b) unless the relevant planning authority has taken into consideration: (i) the provisions of the guidelines entitled Guidelines for Selection, Establishment and Maintenance of Recreation Vehicle Areas, Soil Conservation Service of New South Wales, September 1985, and (ii) the provisions of the guidelines entitled Recreation Vehicles Act, 1983, Guidelines for Selection, Design, and Operation of Recreation Vehicle Areas, State Pollution Control Commission, September 1985.	The proposal does not enable land to be developed for the purpose of a recreation vehicle area.	N/A
3. Housing, Infrastructure and Urban Development
3.1 Residential Zones	This direction applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will affect land within: (a) an existing or proposed residential zone (including the alteration of any existing residential zone boundary), (b) any other zone in which significant residential development is permitted or proposed to be permitted. A planning proposal must include provisions that encourage the provision of housing that will: (a) broaden the choice of building types and locations available in the housing market, and (b) make more efficient use of existing infrastructure and services, and (c) reduce the consumption of land for housing and associated urban development on the urban fringe, and (d) be of good design. A planning proposal must, in relation to land to which this direction applies: (a) contain a requirement that residential development is not permitted until land is adequately serviced (or arrangements satisfactory to the council, or other appropriate authority, have been made to service it), and (b) not contain provisions which will reduce the permissible residential density of land.	The planning proposal does not affect residential zoned land or a zone that permits significant residential uses.	N/A
3.2 Caravan Parks and Manufactured Home Estates	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal. In identifying suitable zones, locations and provisions for caravan parks in a planning proposal, the relevant planning authority must: (a) retain provisions that permit development for the purposes of a caravan park to be carried out on land, and (b) retain the zonings of existing caravan parks, or in the case of a new principal LEP, zone the land in accordance with an appropriate zone under the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006 that would facilitate the retention of the existing caravan park. In identifying suitable zones, locations and provisions for manufactured home estates (MHEs) in a planning proposal, the relevant planning authority must: (a) take into account the categories of land set out in Schedule 2 of SEPP 36 as to where MHEs should not be located, (b) take into account the principles listed in clause 9 of SEPP 36 (which relevant planning authorities are required to consider when assessing and determining the development and subdivision proposals), and (c) include provisions that the subdivision of MHEs by long term lease of up to 20 years or under the Community Land Development Act 1989 be permissible with consent.	This proposal does not seek development for the purposes of a caravan park or manufactured homes estate, nor does it impact upon any land that does permit development for the purposes of a caravan park or manufactured homes estate.	N/A
3.3 Home Occupations	Planning proposals must permit home occupations to be carried out in dwelling-houses without the need for development consent.	This proposal does not alter home occupation provisions in Byron LEP 2014.	N/A
3.4 Integrating Land Use and Transport	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will create, alter or remove a zone or a provision relating to urban land, including land zoned for residential, business, industrial, village or tourist purposes. A planning proposal must locate zones for urban purposes and include provisions that give effect to and are consistent with the aims, objectives and principles of: (a) Improving Transport Choice – Guidelines for planning and development (DUAP 2001), and (b) The Right Place for Business and Services – Planning Policy (DUAP 2001).	The planning proposal does not affect urban land.	N/A
3.5 Development Near Licensed Aerodrome	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will create, alter or remove a zone or a provision relating to land in the vicinity of a licensed aerodrome. The main requirements of the Direction are that Council takes into consideration the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) as defined by that Department of the Commonwealth for residential purposes, and does not increase residential densities in areas where the ANEF, as from time to time advised by that Department of the Commonwealth, exceeds 25.	The planning proposal will alter provisions on RU1 and RU2 land in the vicinity of the Tyagarah aerodrome. This facility, however, is mainly a grass strip and is lightly used. It will create some opportunity for new dwellings in proximity to existing dwellings but will not increase density overall as dual occupancy is already permitted. Council manages this facility and any potential for conflict will be assessed at the application stage.	Consistent.
4. Hazard and Risk
4.1 Acid Sulfate Soils	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will apply to land having a probability of containing acid sulfate soils as shown on the Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Maps. A council shall not prepare a draft LEP that proposes an intensification of land uses on land identified as having a probability of containing acid sulfate soils on the Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Maps unless the council has considered an acid sulfate soils study assessing the appropriateness of the change of land use given the presence of acid sulfate soils.	There are significant areas of RU1 and RU2 land in Byron Shire that are affected by acid sulfate soils. The planning proposal will not necessarily lead to intensification of land uses proposed on land identified on the Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Maps. Council will consider acid sulfate soils if it receives an application in these locations in accordance with cl. 6.1 of Byron LEP 2014.	Consistent.
4.2 Mine Subsidence and Unstable Land	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that permits development on land that: (a) is within a mine subsidence district, or (b) has been identified as unstable in a study, strategy or other assessment undertaken: (i) by or on behalf of the relevant planning authority, or (ii) by or on behalf of a public authority and provided to the relevant planning authority.	This proposal does not impact on any mine subsidence area.	N/A
4.3 Flood Prone Land	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that creates, removes or alters a zone or a provision that affects flood prone land. A planning proposal must include provisions that give effect to and are consistent with the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy and the principles of the Floodplain Development Manual 2005 (including the Guideline on Development Controls on Low Flood Risk Areas). A planning proposal must not rezone land within the flood planning areas from Special Use, Special Purpose, Recreation, Rural or Environment Protection Zones to a Residential, Business, Industrial, Special Use or Special Purpose Zone. A planning proposal must not contain provisions that apply to the flood planning areas which: (a) permit development in floodway areas, (b) permit development that will result in significant flood impacts to other properties, (c) permit a significant increase in the development of that land, (d) are likely to result in a substantially increased requirement for government spending on flood mitigation measures, infrastructure or services, or (e) permit development to be carried out without development consent except for the purposes of agriculture (not including dams, drainage canals, levees, buildings or structures in floodways or high hazard areas), roads or exempt development. A planning proposal must not impose flood related development controls above the residential flood planning level for residential development on land, unless a relevant planning authority provides adequate justification for those controls to the satisfaction of the Director-General (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General). For the purposes of a planning proposal, a relevant planning authority must not determine a flood planning level that is inconsistent with the Floodplain Development Manual 2005 (including the Guideline on Development Controls on Low Flood Risk Areas) unless a relevant planning authority provides adequate justification for the proposed departure from that Manual to the satisfaction of the Director-General (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General).	The planning proposal will not rezone any land. Byron LEP 2014 already contains a flood planning clause that would apply to detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings if they were proposed on land that is flood prone. Given that attached dual occupancy is already permitted in the RU1 and RU2 zones, the planning proposal will not permit significant development on flood prone land (beyond that already permitted). Detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings will require Council consent. Their inclusion in Byron LEP 2014 as a permitted use in the RU1 and RU2 zones is consistent with the Floodplain Development Manual 2005, and there is unlikely to be a net increase in demand for flood rescue services for sites where it is approved.	Consistent.
4.4 Planning for Bushfire Protection	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will affect, or is in proximity to land mapped as bushfire prone land. In the preparation of a planning proposal the relevant planning authority must consult with the Commissioner of the NSW Rural Fire Service following receipt of a gateway determination under section 56 of the Act, and prior to undertaking community consultation in satisfaction of section 57 of the Act, and take into account any comments so made. A planning proposal must: (a) have regard to Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006, (b) introduce controls that avoid placing inappropriate developments in hazardous areas, and (c) ensure that bushfire hazard reduction is not prohibited within the APZ. A planning proposal must, where development is proposed, comply with the following provisions, as appropriate: (a) provide an Asset Protection Zone (APZ) incorporating at a minimum: (i) an Inner Protection Area bounded by a perimeter road or reserve which circumscribes the hazard side of the land intended for development and has a building line consistent with the incorporation of an APZ, within the property, and (ii) an Outer Protection Area managed for hazard reduction and located on the bushland side of the perimeter road, (b) for infill development (that is development within an already subdivided area), where an appropriate APZ cannot be achieved, provide for an appropriate performance standard, in consultation with the NSW Rural Fire Service. If the provisions of the planning proposal permit Special Fire Protection Purposes (as defined under section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997), the APZ provisions must be complied with, (c) contain provisions for two-way access roads which link to perimeter roads and/or to fire trail networks, (d) contain provisions for adequate water supply for fire fighting purposes, (e) minimise the perimeter of the area of land interfacing the hazard which may be developed, (f) introduce controls on the placement of combustible materials in the Inner Protection Area.	Large parts of the land zoned RU1 and RU2 in Byron Shire are identified as bushfire prone land. This will be a consideration in any application for a dual occupancy or secondary dwelling. Consultation with the Commissioner of the NSW Rural Fire Service following receipt of a gateway determination under section 56 of the Act will take place when the gateway determination has been received. Given the precedent set by Lismore City Council it, is assumed that any concerns they may have can be addressed.	Consistent.
5. Regional Planning
5.1 Implementation of Regional Strategies	Planning proposals must be consistent with a regional strategy released by the Minister for Planning.	The planning proposal is largely consistent with the outcomes and actions contained within the Far North Coast Regional Strategy (FNCRS). In particular, the actions related to Settlement and Housing and Environment and Natural Resources. The proposal specifically responds to the following actions: Councils will plan for a range of housing types of appropriate densities, location and suitability that are capable of adapting and responding to the ageing of the population. Local government will consider a range of affordable housing strategies, including forms of low cost housing. Local environmental plans will: - include minimum subdivision standards for rural and environment protection zones; - include provisions to limit dwellings in the rural and environmental zones. The planning proposal includes criteria to limit the location and impact of detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings.	Consistent.
5.2 Sydney Drinking Water Catchments	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that applies to the hydrological catchment.	The proposal is not within this catchment.	N/A
5.3 Farmland of State and Regional Significance on the NSW Far North Coast	The planning proposal must not rezone land mapped as State or regionally significant farmland under the Northern Rivers Farmland Protection Project for an urban use.	No land is proposed to be rezoned by this planning proposal. It is a minor change to the land use controls. Council, however, will consider farmland issues when an application is made.	N/A
5.4 Commercial and Retail Development along the Pacific Highway, North Coast	A planning proposal that applies to land located on “within town” segments of the Pacific Highway must provide that: (a) new commercial or retail development must be concentrated within distinct centres rather than spread along the highway, (b) development with frontage to the Pacific Highway must consider the impact the development has on the safety and efficiency of the highway. (c) For the purposes of this paragraph, “within town” means areas which, prior to the draft local environmental plan, have an urban zone (eg “village”, “residential”, “tourist”, “commercial”, “industrial”, etc) and where the Pacific Highway speed limit is less than 80 km/hour. A planning proposal that applies to land located on “out-of-town” segments of the Pacific Highway must provide that: (a) new commercial or retail development must not be established near the Pacific Highway if this proximity would be inconsistent with the objectives of this Direction, (b) development with frontage to the Pacific Highway must consider the impact the development has on the safety and efficiency of the highway. (c) For the purposes of this paragraph, “out-of-town” means areas which, prior to the draft local environmental plan, do not have an urban zone (eg “village”, “residential”, “tourist”, “commercial”, “industrial”, etc) or are in areas where the Pacific Highway speed limit is 80 km/hour or greater.	This planning proposal does not affect commercial or retail uses in proximity to the Pacific Highway.	N/A
6. Local Plan Making
6.1 Approval and Referral Requirements	A planning proposal must: (a) minimise the inclusion of provisions that require the concurrence, consultation or referral of development applications to a Minister or public authority, and (b) not contain provisions requiring concurrence, consultation or referral of a Minister or public authority unless the relevant planning authority has obtained the approval of: (i) the appropriate Minister or public authority, and (ii) the Director-General of the Department of Planning and Environment (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General), prior to undertaking community consultation in satisfaction of section 57 of the Act, and (c) not identify development as designated development unless the relevant planning authority: (i) can satisfy the Director-General of the Department of Planning and Environment (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General) that the class of development is likely to have a significant impact on the environment, and (ii) has obtained the approval of the Director-General of the Department of Planning and Environment (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General) prior to undertaking community consultation in satisfaction of section 57 of the Act.	The planning proposal will not include provisions that require the concurrence, consultation or referral of development applications to a Minister or public authority.	N/A
6.2 Reserving Land for Public Purposes	A planning proposal must not create, alter or reduce existing zonings or reservations of land for public purposes without the approval of the relevant public authority and the Director-General of the Department of Planning and Environment (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General).	The planning proposal does not create, alter or reduce land reserved for a public purpose.	N/A
6.3 Site Specific Provisions	Applies when a relevant planning authority prepares a planning proposal that will allow a particular development to be carried out. A planning proposal that will amend another environmental planning instrument in order to allow a particular development proposal to be carried out must either: (a) allow that land use to be carried out in the zone the land is situated on, or (b) rezone the site to an existing zone already applying in the environmental planning instrument that allows that land use without imposing any development standards or requirements in addition to those already contained in that zone, or (c) allow that land use on the relevant land without imposing any development standards or requirements in addition to those already contained in the principal environmental planning instrument being amended. A planning proposal must not contain or refer to drawings that show details of the development proposal.	The planning proposal does not seek to allow a particular development to be carried out. The planning proposal does not contain schematic drawings.	N/A

The following table provides a summary of the relevant public authorities, which were specifically consulted in accordance with the Gateway Determination:

Public authority/stakeholder	Issue requiring comment
NSW Rural Fire Service	Section 117 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Ministerial Direction 4.4 to consult with the Commissioner of the NSW Rural Fire Service.
Department of Primary Industries	Impact of rural housing on farming and rural industries.

NSW Rural Fire Service

The RFS does not object to the planning proposal. It suggests that if a detached dual occupancy or secondary dwelling is proposed on bushfire prone land then a Section 79BA assessment is required.

Comment: The advice is noted. Council will require this assessment if the locality is bushfire prone. It can be a reason for refusal if the matter has not been properly dealt with. It may also result in conditions of approval that relate to bushfire buffers and building construction.

Recommendation: No change.

NSW Department of Primary Industries

The DPI raises a number of concerns about the planning proposal as follows:

· The planning proposal does not consider the long term implications or cumulative impacts on agriculture and resources

· The planning proposal is not consistent with the objectives of the RU1 zone

· The planning proposal is not well justified by an independent study or evidence

· The planning proposal is not consistent with the Governments position on affordable housing

· The decision for additional housing is not reversible

· The planning proposal does not address land use conflict, increased land values, or sterilisation of resources in the long term

· A Landscape of houses will make it difficult for new agribusiness to occur in the Shire

Comment: Long term implications are always difficult to gauge when applications are dealt with on a merits basis at a single point in time. Cumulative impacts are also difficult to gauge for the same reason. However, there is a requirement that the development “will not impair the use of the land for agriculture or rural industries.” Council can refuse an application if this requirement cannot be achieved. There is no assumption that all properties will be suited to additional dwellings.

The objectives of the RU1 zone are broad and include protecting the natural resource base, encouraging primary industries, minimise land fragmentation, minimise land use conflict, encourage lot consolidation, enable rural tourism, and protect scenic landscapes. Additional dwellings could be either consistent or inconsistent with these objectives depending on the circumstances. The six matters for consideration to be included in the LEP amendment are specifically aimed at ensuring any additional dwellings are consistent with the objectives of the RU1 (and RU2) zones. This is a reasonable position for Council to take.

Council has not undertaken an independent study of this issue. The idea came from a Councillor workshop. However, both Lismore City and Kyogle Shire LEP’s permit rural detached dual occupancy dwellings. This is a significant precedent and it is difficult to understand how it will be different in Byron Shire. The Lismore experience is that it received about ten DA’s in the first twelve months with seven of these being for existing unapproved structures. Byron may get more than this, but many will also be existing structures. The number Byron gets may be influenced by the charges and fees that apply including S.94 contributions.

Affordable housing is best placed in an urban environment with access to facilities and services and less car dependence. However, there is a case that in some circumstances ( eg family members, those that want to remain on the farm after retirement and farm workers) where detached dual occupancy (or secondary dwellings) can actually be more affordable than moving off the land. It is a way that someone who is asset rich but cash poor can provide accommodation at considerably less cost than buying a house with land in an urban area in Byron Shire where average house prices (or rents) are not very affordable. One submission pointed out that the recent parliamentary inquiry into affordable housing did recommend that SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 be amended to apply to rural land. This may be an indication of a shift in Government policy.

The decision to amend the LEP is reversible if Council over time considers it is not working. Any dwellings legally approved will be able to remain but this is the same for all approvals. Importantly the additional dwellings do not come with an expectation of future subdivision.

The potential for land use conflict is real and is a problem in Byron Shire. This will be a matter that Council should consider in assessing any applications. It is a consideration for attached Dual occupancy in chapter D2 of Byron DCP 2014 – “The development must be located so that it does not create potential conflict with adjoining agricultural activities or other legitimate land uses.” This chapter will be amended to also apply to rural detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings.

Council does not anticipate a “landscape of houses” as a result of this LEP amendment. It is expected that there will be an initial surge of interest and many of these will be existing structures. It is also anticipated that the requirement for a shared vehicular access and a location of 100 metres from the primary dwelling should minimise the excessive sterilisation of rural land from future rural industries.

Recommendation: No change.

Part 4 Mapping

The planning proposal does not involve any map amendments.

Part 5 Community consultation

Council undertook community consultation in accordance with the Gateway Determination. For the purposes of public notification, the planning proposal is not considered to be low impact as outlined in the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s, A guide to preparing local environmental plans, and a 28 day public exhibition period is recommended.

The planning proposal was exhibited from 25 November 2014 until 16 January 2015. The extended exhibition period was to allow for public holidays over the Christmas New Year period.

Notification of the exhibited planning proposal included:

§ a newspaper advertisement that circulates in the Byron LGA, which is the area affected by the planning proposal

§ the website of Byron Shire Council and the Department of Planning and Environment.

Forty seven submissions received from the public. Two agency submissions (NSW Rural Fire Service and NSW Department of Primary Industries). Forty two submissions were in favour of the planning proposal (some conditionally). Five were opposed to the planning proposal. The issues raised are addressed in the Council planning report.

No amendments are recommended as a result of these submissions. It is recommended that the planning proposal proceed to finalisation.

Part 6 Project timeline

The proposed timeline for the completion of the planning proposal is as follows:

Estimated completion	Plan making step
November 2014	Gateway determination issued by Department of Planning and Environment.
November 2014 – January 2015	Public exhibition of planning proposal. Government agency consultation.
February 2015	Analysis of public submissions. Preparation of Council report.
April 2015	Public submissions report to Council.
May 2015	Endorsed planning proposal submitted to Department of Planning and Environment for finalisation.

Summary and conclusions

Byron Shire Council has initiated a planning proposal to modify its 2014 LEP to permit detached dual occupancy and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zones.

The preferred method to achieve this will be to:

§ Add a new provision (cl 4.2D) that provides some guidance on what must be addressed in an application for a detached dual occupancy development or secondary dwelling in the RU1 and RU2 zones.

§ Amend Clause 4.1E to establish a 4000 square metre minimum lot size for detached dual occupancy development in the RU1 and RU2 zones.

The planning proposal is broadly consistent with the Far North Coast Regional Strategy and SEPPs. It is also consistent with section 117 Directions.

The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition from 25 November 2014 until 16 January 2015. Forty seven submissions received from the public and two agency submissions (NSW Rural Fire Service and NSW Department of Primary Industries).

No amendments are recommended as a result of these submissions. It is recommended that the planning proposal proceed to finalisation.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Organisation Development 13.14 - Attachment 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................................... 2

2. WHO IS A ‘WORKER’.................................................................................................................. 2

3. POLICY STATEMENT................................................................................................................. 2

4. RESPONSIBILITIES.................................................................................................................... 3

5. COMPLIANCE WITH WORK HEALTH SAFETY REQUIREMENTS....................................... 4

6. CONSULTATION......................................................................................................................... 4

7. SUSTAINABILITY........................................................................................................................ 5

Policy No. ??

POLICY TITLE

WORK HEALTH SAFETY (WHS)

1. OBJECTIVES

Council’s commitment is to the provision of a safe and healthy work environment for all our employees, volunteers, contractors, visitors and persons that may be affected by works undertaken by Council, through the elimination or minimisation of workplace risks.

2. WHO IS A ‘WORKER’

“Worker” is defined in the WHS legislation as a person who carries out work in any capacity for a person conducting a business or undertaking, including work as:

(a) an employee;

(b) a contractor or subcontractor;

(d) an employee of a labour hire company who has been assigned to work in the person’s business or undertaking;

(e) an outworker;

(f) an apprentice or trainee;

(g) a student gaining work experience;

(h) a volunteer;

(i) a person of a class prescribed in the legislation.

3. POLICY STATEMENT

Council’s commitment will be demonstrated by:

(a) Allocating necessary resources to meet commitments and/or meeting commitments through design/redesign of services and projects within allocated resources.

(b) Promoting a culture where harm to our people through work is unacceptable.

(d) Adopting a risk management approach to achieve compliance and ensure the health and safety of employees, contractors, volunteers and visitors to Council workplaces.

(e) Ensuring that plant, equipment and substances are safe and without risk to health, safety of personnel.

(f) Investigating all accidents, incidents, and occurrences with control measures implemented and reviewed to ensure elimination of initial breakdown.

(g) Communicating WHS through instruction, training and supervision to improve individuals’ understanding of workplace hazards, including safe work practices and emergency procedures.

(h) Consulting between management, employees, volunteers, visitors and contractors on WHS issues.

(i) Ensuring that employees, volunteers, visitors and contractors comply with appropriate WHS standards, codes of conduct and workplace directions to ensure their own and others health and safety at work.

(j) Providing adequate systems and resources to effectively manage rehabilitation and return to work processes.

(k) Implementing, maintaining and reviewing Health and Safety Management Systems in all operational areas.

(l) Establishing measurable objectives and targets to ensure continuous improvement.

4. RESPONSIBILITIES

While the obligation for each person is different, all persons must ensure that the way they carry out their work does not interfere with the health and safety of themselves and other persons at the place of work.

4.1. Council’s Responsibilities

Council must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of:

(i) Workers engaged, or caused to be engaged by the person, and

(ii) Workers whose activities in carrying out work are influenced or directed by the person, while the workers are at work in the business or undertaking.

The Council has ultimate responsibility for allocating budgets and must ensure that sufficient allowance is made in budget allocation to address WHS.

The General Manager has ultimate responsibility for the implementation of Council’s WHS Protocol, reviewing overall organisational health and safety performance and health and safety performance review of executive management.

4.2. Officer’s Responsibilities

Officers of Council have a duty to exercise ‘due diligence’ to ensure that Council complies with its duty to reasonably ensure health and safety. The definition of Officers includes anyone:

“who makes, or participates in making decisions that affect the whole or a substantial part of a business or undertaking.”

Council will fulfil these responsibilities through the appointed General Manager, Directors, Managers and senior staff who are responsible and accountable for the safety of workers including contractors, volunteers and Council property under their control or management.

4.3. Workers’ Responsibility

For the purposes of this Policy, ‘worker’ has the same definition as in the WHS Act 2011 and includes:

· Council staff

· trainees, apprentices and cadets

· work experience students and volunteers

· contractors and sub-contractors

· employees of contractors and sub-contractors

· employees of a casual labour hire company

All workers have responsibility for:

(i) Taking reasonable care for their own health and safety;

(ii) Taking reasonable care that their acts or omissions do not adversely affect the health and safety or other persons;

(iii) Following all WHS legislation, Council safety requirements and relevant codes of practice;

(iv) Co-operating with management in the support of promotion of Health and Safety in the workplace;

(v) Not undertaking any task without the relevant induction, training or competency;

(vi) Promptly reporting all hazards, injuries and safety incidents;

(vii) Presenting for work in a fit state that does not prevent them carrying out their duties in a safe and responsible manner.

5. COMPLIANCE WITH WORK HEALTH SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

Councillors, Council employees, contractors, sub-contractors, volunteers and visitors to Council workplaces must observe Council’s health and safety policies, protocols, procedures and instructions. If a breach occurs, it may result in disciplinary action in accordance with procedures under the Local Government (State) Award, action under the Council’s Code of Conduct and/or expulsion or future exclusion from Council workplaces.

6. CONSULTATION

6.1. Consultation between:

(a) Council and its staff;

(b) Council and volunteers and visitors; and

is an essential part of effectively managing health and safety in the workplace.

Council is committed to meeting its obligations to consult so that everyone can contribute to decisions about safe systems of work, policies and procedures designed to ensure the health, safety and welfare of everyone in Council workplaces.

6.2. Involvement of Workers (which includes contractors and volunteers) at all levels is critical for ensuring a safe workplace. Council will:

(a) Share relevant information about WHS with Workers.

(b) Ensure that Workers are given the opportunity to express their views and to contribute in a timely fashion to the resolution of WHS issues at Council workplaces; and

6.3. Council is committed to continuing with its WHS Committee/s, as they form an important part of the consultative process. These Committee/s provide a forum for discussion and formulation of possible recommendations for the resolution of issues brought before or identified by the Committees.

7. SUSTAINABILITY

Council’s commitment to WHS supports social, economic and governmental sustainability by reducing risks to workers, minimising the economic impacts to individuals, the community, the local economy and Council that can arise from workplace injuries and through Council leading by example in promoting the health and safety of its workforce and community.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Reports of Committees - Corporate and Community Services 14.3 - Attachment 1

Minutes of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting held on Thursday, 14 May 2015

File No: Error! Unknown document property name.

PRESENT: Cr S Richardson (Mayor), Cr P Spooner

Staff: Greg Ironfield (Manager Community Development)

Belle Arnold (Indigenous Projects Officer)

Phil Warner (Manager Major Projects) Reports 5.1 and 5.2

Nikki Bourke (Capital Project Officer) Report 5.1

Joylene McNamara (Minute Taker)

Community: Gavin Brown, Delta Kay

Cr Spooner (Chair) opened the meeting at 2.36pm and acknowledged that the meeting was being held on Bundjalung Country.

Apologies:

There were no apologies.

Declarations of Interest – Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary

There were no declarations of interest.

Adoption of Minutes from Previous Meetings

Committee Recommendation:

That the minutes of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting held on 25 February 2015 be confirmed.

(Richardson/Spooner)

The recommendation was put to the vote and declared carried..

Business Arising from Previous Minutes

There was no business arising from previous minutes.

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services

Report No. 5.1 South Byron Sewerage Treatment Plant Update

File No: I2015/351

Committee Recommendation:

1. That the Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee note the progress on the demolishing of the South Byron Sewerage Treatment Plant.

2. That further consultation with Arakwal be required for Stage 2 of the project.

(Richardson/Spooner)

The recommendation was put to the vote and declared carried.

Report No. 5.2 Byron Bay Bypass Aboriginal Consultation Report May 2015

File No: I2015/361

Committee Recommendation:

1. That the Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee note the Aboriginal Consultation Process involved in the Byron Bay Bypass project to date.

2. That the Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee provide any further comments to Council staff regarding the Byron Bay Bypass Project.

3. That the Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee request consultation concerning replanting, beautification and revegetation along the road alignment.

(Richardson/Spooner)

The recommendation was put to the vote and declared carried.

Procedural Motion

Committee Recommendation:

That the order of business be changed to receive presentations on Other Business Items 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 next on the Agenda.

(Spooner/Richardson)

The recommendation was put to the vote and declared carried.

6. OTHER BUSINESS

6.1 Rural Land Strategies (Natalie Hancock, Senior Planner)

Meeting Notes:

· Natalie provided a presentation entitled Rural LS Discussion Paper Presentation 2 (#E2015/31007)

· Gavin Brown to follow up with Natalie on items raised.

6.2 Welcome Signage Update (Donna Johnston, Media and Communications Officer)

Meeting Notes:

· Donna provided a handout of proposed welcome sign (#E2015/3103)

· This is in addition to the existing timber sign.

· That the existing Arakwal sign remain in its current position .

· Surfboard totem be located near the existing timber sign.

· Proposed welcome sign be located near the Visitor’s Information Centre.

6.3 Coastal Zone Management Plan Byron Bay Embayment Update (Catherine Knight, Coastal Officer)

Meeting Notes:

· Catherine Knight provided a presentation entitled Update Coastal Zone Management Plan Byron Bay Embayment (#E2015/30337)

· Gavin to follow up with Catherine to discuss cultural heritage issues.

Procedural Motion

Committee Recommendation:

That the committee return to the next item on the Agenda.

(Richardson/Spooner)

The recommendation was put to the vote and declared carried.

Report No. 5.3 Ti Tree Lake Aboriginal Place Project Report

File No: I2015/372

Committee Recommendation :

1. That the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Committee (MoU) note the report on the Ti Tree (Taylor’s) Lake Aboriginal Place Plan of Management.

2. That the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Committee (MoU) endorse the Council’s participation in the Ti Tree (Taylor’s) Lake Aboriginal Place Plan of Management project.

(Brown/Kay)

The recommendation was put to the vote and declared carried..

Cr Richardson left at 4.28pm.

Other Business Items

6.4 Broken Head Quarry Development Appeal in Land and Environment Court
(Belle Arnold)

Meeting Notes:

· No conciliation conference – no amicable solution

· Arakwal to formulate a statement to Council regarding position

6.5 Bangalow Weir Signage (Gavin Brown)

Meeting Notes:

· That the Arakwal MoU Committee bring to Council’s attention the recognition of Arakwal signage at the Bangalow Weir.

There being no further business the meeting concluded at 4.36pm.

Date Adopted by Council		Resolution No.
Policy Responsibility	Organisation Development
Review Timeframe	3 years
Last Review Date:	May 2015	Next Scheduled Review Date	May 2018

Doc No.	Date Amended	Details Comments eg Resolution No.
DM629061	September 2009	09-634
E2012/14879	November 2012	12-863
E2015/32312	May 2015

Venue	Conference Room, Station Street, Mullumbimby
Date	Thursday, 14 May 2015
Time	2.00pm

Venue	Conference Room, Station Street, Mullumbimby
Date	Thursday, 14 May 2015
Time	11.00am

Venue	Meeting Room 1, Council Administration Building, Station Street, Mullumbimby
Date	Thursday, 14 May 2015
Time	2.30pm

Venue	Executive Team Meeting Room, Station Street, Mullumbimby
Date	Thursday 7 May 2015
Time	2.00pm