Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - 23 November 2017

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Ordinary Meeting

BUSINESS OF Ordinary Meeting

1. Public Access

2. Apologies

3. Requests for Leave of Absence

4. Declarations of Interest – Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary

5. Tabling of Pecuniary Interest Returns (s450A Local Government Act 1993)

6. Adoption of Minutes from Previous Meetings

6.1 Byron Shire Reserve Trust Committee held on 26 October 2017

6.2 Ordinary Meeting held on 26 October 2017

6.3 Extraordinary Meeting held on 2 November 2017

7. Reservation of Items for Debate and Order of Business

8. Mayoral Minute

9. Notices of Motion

9.1 Parking Permit Fee........................................................................................................... 6

9.2 Adani Contracts............................................................................................................... 10

9.3 Compliance - Belongil and Brunswick Dunes................................................................. 15

9.4 Biosecurity....................................................................................................................... 18

9.5 Trialling Traffic Lights in Key Byron Bay Intersections................................................... 23

9.6 Instant Hotel TV Show..................................................................................................... 27

10. Petitions

10.1 Tyagarah Airfield Plan Management ............................................................................. 28

10.2 No Paid Parking in Brunswick Heads............................................................................. 32

11. Submissions and Grants

11.1 Byron Shire Council Submissions and Grants as at 1 November 2017......................... 33

12. Delegates' Reports

13. Staff Reports

Corporate and Community Services

13.1 Review of Natural Disaster Response Protocols ........................................................... 36

13.2 Meeting Schedule 2018................................................................................................... 44

13.3 Review of Community Donations under Section 356 - new Community Initiatives Program 48

13.4 Council Resolutions Quarterly Review - 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017................ 51

13.5 Code of Conduct Annual Report 1 September 2016 - 31 August 2017......................... 54

13.6 Council Budget Review - 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017........................................ 57

13.7 Council Investments October 2017................................................................................. 67

13.8 Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Membership................................................. 74

13.9 Presentation of 2016/2017 Financial Statements........................................................... 76

13.10 Sunshine Cycles occupation of a site at First Sun Caravan Park (Lot 5 DP 827049)... 79

13.11 North Byron Parklands Regulatory Working Group - Community Representatives...... 90

13.12 Amended resolution - Aquisition of land included in Butler Street Reserve R88993...... 92

Sustainable Environment and Economy

13.13 PLANNING - State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Variations to development standards - 1 July to 30 September...................................................................................................... 95

13.14 PLANNING - Event Sites/ Function Centres in Rural Zones........................................ 100

13.15 PLANNING - 26.2017.5.1 and 26.2017.6.1 Byron Bay Town Centre Masterplan Implementation - Planning Proposals........................................................................................................ 107

13.16 Integrated Pest Management Update........................................................................... 115

13.17 PLANNING - 26.2017.4.1 - Planning Proposal for Rezoning and Reclassifying Part Lot 22 DP 1073165 Mullumbimby.................................................................................................. 118

13.18 Report of the Planning Review Committee Meeting held on 19 October, 2017.......... 131

13.19 PLANNING -10.2017.393.1 Detached Dual Occupancy Dwelling at 31 Pinegroves Road Myocum....................................................................................................................................... 133

13.20 Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Update.................................................................. 153

13.21 PLANNING - Resolution 17-260 Expression of Interest Land for Affordable Housing Update 156

13.22 PLANNING - 10.2017.360.1 Rural Tourist Accommodation Comprising Four (4) Cabins at 75 Rifle Range Road, Bangalow ............................................................................................... 165

13.23 PLANNING - 10.2017.270.1 Multi dwelling housing comprising eight (8) dwellings, Strata Title subdivision to create eight (8) Strata Lots and Common Property and Tree Removal (17 trees) at 6 and 6A Canowindra Court South Golden Beach.......................................................... 178

13.24 PLANNING - Site-specific Planning Proposals considered as part of the Rural Land Use Strategy process.......................................................................................................................... 198

13.25 Further update on Resolution 17-191 Secondary Dwelling Conditions........................ 204

13.26 Review of the Biodiversity and Sustainability Panel..................................................... 207

13.27 Supporting Sustainable Agriculture and Agribusiness in Byron Shire........................... 210

Infrastructure Services

13.28 Mullumbimby Parking Strategy..................................................................................... 220

13.29 Proposed Boundary Adjustment and Sale of Part Council Drainage Reserve Lot 103 DP 842022....................................................................................................................................... 225

13.30 Land purchase for access to Lot 4 Mullumbimby......................................................... 228

13.31 Former Mullumbimby Hospital - Contamination Review.............................................. 230

13.32 Brunswick Heads Parking Strategy.............................................................................. 233

13.33 Tree Removals Railway Park Byron Bay..................................................................... 247

13.34 Bangalow STP Membrane Replacement..................................................................... 256

13.35 Resolution 17-556 Additional information on Railway Park.......................................... 258

14. Reports of Committees

Infrastructure Services

14.1 Report of the Byron Shire Floodplain Risk Management Committee Meeting held on 12 October 2017............................................................................................................................... 263

14.2 Report of the Transport and Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting held on 2 November 2017....................................................................................................................................... 266

15. Questions With Notice

15.1 Lot 2 DP 445771 Coopers Lane West........................................................................... 268

15.2 Sand Quarry.................................................................................................................. 269

15.3 Dangerous Dogs............................................................................................................ 270

15.4 Byron Bypass................................................................................................................ 272

16. Confidential Reports

Infrastructure Services

16.1 Confidential - Tender 2017-0009 Construction of Sewerage Pump Station SPS5004 Ocean Shores........................................................................................................................... 274

16.2 Confidential - Council Tender for the Multi Use of Byron Shire Rail Corridor...... 276

16.3 Confidential - Customer Service Front Foyer Renovation Works........................ 278

Councillors are encouraged to ask questions regarding any item on the business paper to the appropriate Director prior to the meeting. Any suggested amendments to the recommendations should be provided to Councillor Support prior to the meeting to allow the changes to be typed and presented on the overhead projector at the meeting.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Notices of Motion 9.2

Notice of Motion No. 9.2 Adani Contracts

File No: I2017/1722

I move that Council:

1. Notes the Stop Adani campaign event in Byron Bay and events around Australia for the National Stop Adani Day of Action on 7 October 2017 to support the farmers directly affected and the wider community's concerns over this mine.

2. Resolves not to contract or engage in services under any existing contract with Downer EDI or any of its subsidiaries, including the RPQ Group and NSW Spray Seal, until they publicly withdraw from their agreement with Adani to construct and operate the Carmichael mine and publicly renounce any further involvement with Adani and the Carmichael mine.

3. Investigates further companies to which at present or in the future Council may award contracts that may have any involvement in contracting for the development and operation of the Carmichael mine, or otherwise have ties to Adani.

4. Resolves not to award future contracts to those companies identified in point three that are involved with Adani or the construction of the Carmichael mine until they renounce any involvement with Adani and the Carmichael mine.

5. Writes to Downer EDI, the RPQ Group, NSW Spray Seal and any other companies identified in point three alerting them to this motion and similar actions in neighbouring Councils, and urging them to reconsider their involvement with Adani and the construction of the Carmichael mine.

6. Writes to the Prime Minister, the Hon. Mr Malcolm Turnbull and Queensland Premier, the Hon. Annastacia Palaszczuk to express in the most respectful terms our extreme concern about the Adani mine and alert them to the contents of this motion.

Signed: Cr Michael Lyon

Councillor’s supporting information:

If realised, the Adani Carmichael mine in Queensland’s Galilee Basin would become the largest coal mine in Australia, and would irrevocably undermine international efforts to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius. In order to prevent catastrophic climate change, 88% of the world’s coal reserves must remain in the ground for a 50% chance at meeting the 2 degree target. The opening of the Galilee Basin to coal mining would have dire consequences for our planet’s future. If the Carmichael mine went ahead, leading to the development of other mines in the Galilee Basin, their potential combined maximum output would result in an annual output of carbon emissions 1.3 times Australia’s total current emissions. With the planet at a precarious tipping point, the idea of opening up a never-before-mined region to the coal industry is deplorable.

In addition to the massive impact on climate change the development of the Carmichael mine would have, there are also grave concerns surrounding two of Australia’s most precious natural formations: the Artesian Basin, Australia’s largest groundwater system, and the Great Barrier Reef, one of the Seven Natural Wonders of the World. Adani has been awarded a 60-year contract to extract unlimited water from the Artesian Basin, a highly unusual move by the Queensland government, even more so because their application was exempted from public submission and appeals. This puts farmers whose livelihoods are dependent on being able to use water from Artesian bores at risk, as the projected 12 billion litres Adani expects to extract annually runs the serious risk of a significant drop in water pressure. This would not only be ruinous for these farms, but also for the natural desert springs and their unique species, which rely heavily on water pressure from the Artesian Basin to exist. As with any coal mine, there is also a serious risk of contamination of this incredible groundwater source. Additionally, the Adani Carmichael mine is likely to have ruinous effects on the Great Barrier Reef, a national treasure. Coal extracted at the Carmichael mine would pass through the Abbot Point terminal, currently operated by an Adani-owned company that has just been fined for releasing coal-laden stormwater eight times the permissible level opposite from the Reef. Furthermore, proposed dredging to expand the terminal to accommodate for increased output from the Carmichael mine is notoriously awful for coral health, not to mention the fatal impacts of a warming earth for the Great Barrier Reef. These impacts must be taken seriously, because once set into motion, they will be irreversible.

As the Queensland government continues to support the development of this enterprise, it is necessary that we, as a climate-conscious Council, do everything in our power to stave off its realisation. Following motions earlier this year to take action to encourage the big four banks to pledge against supporting Adani financially, it is in our best interest to support the national Stop Adani campaign’s efforts to boycott businesses associated with the building of the Adani Carmichael mine. These companies include NSW Spray Seal, a subsidiary of the RPQ Group, which is owned by Downer EDI, the company engaged by Adani to take the lead in constructing mining and other infrastructure for the Carmichael mine and operating the mine once constructed. Tweed Shire Council and Lismore City Council have advanced similar motions and it is important that we support our neighbouring Councils and take our own strong stance against those that would support the development of this disastrous mine.

Staff comments by Tony Nash, Manager Works, Infrastructure Services Directorate:

(Management Comments must not include formatted recommendations – resolution 11-979)

NOROC Tender

A panel tender was invited for Kyogle, Lismore, Richmond Valley and Byron Council’s for the services of:

1. Bitumen spray sealing

2. Asphalt works

3. Stabilisation works

Tenders were received for each type of work as per Table 1, which has been listed in order of financial benefit to Council with the lowest or most advantageous tender first on the list.

ie, for asphalt works, Fulton Hogan is less expensive than Bitupave (Boral) which is less expensive than Downer.

Table 1:

Spray Seal	Asphalt	Stabilisation
NSW Spray Seal	Fulton Hogan	Downer
COLAS	Bitupave (Boral)	BMR Quarries
Bitupave (Boral)	Downer	Stabilised Pavements Australia
Fulton Hogan

Each Council considered the tenders received and entered in separate contracts applicable to their LGA.

The benefits of the combined tenders were the buying power of 4 Council’s working collaboratively versus individually.

The companies are not located within our Council area and the nearest offices / depots are as follows:

· NSW Spray Seals – Chinderah NSW

· COLAS – Kempsey NSW

· Bitupave – Lismore NSW and Burleigh QLD

· Fulton Hogan - Burleigh QLD

· Downer - Brisbane QLD

· BMR Quarries – Sydney NSW

· Stabilised pavements Australia – Ormeau QLD

Byron has entered onto a panel contract with each company for each of the 3 services of Bitumen spray sealing, Asphalt works and Stabilisation works.

The contract works are activated when staff contact the company, arrange works and raise a Purchase Order.

The panel contract allows staff to use different companies for each service type if the least expensive contractor is not available and the works are urgent and cannot wait.

In practice Byron has been able to undertake all of these works with the least expensive contractors by working collaboratively with them.

The price per type of service depends upon the size and type of the works, eg, for bitumen spray sealing this is the area of works per site, per visit to our area and the type of bitumen binder used.

Table 2 indicates the companies remaining if Downer and any companies they own at this time, either in part of full, were to be excluded.

All percentages are the extra costs to use other than the least expensive contractor if they are Downer or Downer owned companies.

The comparison is based on the scenarios and typical work packages used at the time of tender evaluations.

Table 2:

Spray Seal	Price Effect	Asphalt	Price Effect	Stabilisation	Price Effect
~~NSW Spray Seal~~	N/A	Fulton Hogan	N/A - Fulton Hogan and Boral Cheaper	~~Downer~~	N/A
COLAS	+ 3.1%	Bitupave (Boral)		BMR Quarries	+ 5.7%
Bitupave (Boral)	+ 4.3%	~~Downer~~		Stabilised Pavements Australia	+ 38.9%
Fulton Hogan	+ 7.4%

As an example, the expenditure by Council with NSW Spray Seals in 2016/17 was approximately $630,000, which includes any sealing works for our capital road projects and for our Reseal Program, which had a total budget of $840,600.

Noting that the reseal budget includes preparatory works and the actual bitumen reseal works.

If the panel tender was available in 2016/17, the extra costs for Council to use other than NSW Spray Seals would be as per Table 3

Table 3:

Spray Seal	Price Increase
NSW Spray Seal	$0
COLAS	$19,530
Bitupave (Boral)	$27,090
Fulton Hogan	$46,620

In 2017/18 our Reseal Program has a budget of $1.3M and our roads capital works program is substantially larger than 2016/17, $41.5M v $19M.

Supply of Bitumen Emulsion

Currently Downer supply bulk emulsion to Council for use with our pothole patching truck under Contract 2015-0026.

The tendered prices for emulsion under 2015-0026 were as follows:

Boral: $1.00/L

Downer: $0.98/L

Fulton Hogan: $1.01/L

Note the rates quoted above are GST-inclusive and fixed for the contract term.

In 2016/17 we bought 160,000 Litres of emulsion. This meant we would have spent the following had we engaged alternative suppliers:

Boral: $160,000

Downer: $156,800

Fulton Hogan: $161,600

We are contractually committed to purchasing emulsion from Downer until 1 August 2018. The contract also has another extension option on it.

In regards to the NoM potentially restricting our ability to contract with Downer and related companies in the future, this will potentially undermine the savings we can achieve through procurement. Downer is a major player in the market and their presence helps maintain competitive tension in a somewhat limited market. If Council decides not to contract with Downer et al then it is likely that we will be paying significantly more for our road building activities in the future which will have a direct impact on the savings we are able to deliver through procurement as part of our Financial Sustainability Plan.

Council may wish to consider a review mechanism/sunset provision in the motion should the Adani Mine not proceed.

Financial/Resource/Legal Implications:

The implications are detailed earlier in the report.

Council has existing contracts with Downer and with companies owned in part of full by Downer, some are panel contracts where the use of other companies is more easily achievable, albeit at a higher cost. Other contracts such as the bitumen emulsion supply contract, 2015-0026, are a single company contract with a fixed end date. The ability of Council to cancel this contract and procure from another company needs to be investigated in detail, both contractually and legally, before advice can be provided.

Is the proposal consistent with any Delivery Program tasks?

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Notices of Motion 9.4

Notice of Motion No. 9.4 Biosecurity

File No: I2017/1724

I move:

1. That a report to Council be prepared on the potential impacts of the new Biosecurity Act (2017) on the draft Rural Land Use Strategy (RLUS);

2. That the report pay particular attention to:

a) biosecurity considerations in Land Use Conflict Risk Assessment (LUCRA);

b) the potential for biosecurity risks to agriculture as a result of increased agritourism, and;

c) the potential risk to Byron Shire’s biodiversity as a result of agritourism;

3. That Council consider including biosecurity management as a factor in the RLUS, and

4. That Councillors hold a workshop with a view to developing a Shire-wide Biosecurity Policy.

Signed: Cr Cate Coorey

Councillor’s supporting information:

In April 2017 Council discussed the draft Biosecurity Act 2015.

The 10 Acts being wholly repealed when the Biosecurity Act 2015 commences are:

· Animal Diseases and Animal Pests (Emergency Outbreaks) Act 1991

· Apiaries Act 1985

· Deer Act 2006

· Fertilisers Act 1985

· Non-Indigenous Animals Act 1987

· Noxious Weeds Act 1993

· Plant Diseases Act 1924

· Stock (Chemical Residues) Act 1975

· Stock Diseases Act 1923

· Stock Foods Act 1940

The Acts being partly repealed when the Biosecurity Act 2015 commences are:

· Fisheries Management Act 1994 (Aquatic Biosecurity)

· Stock Medicines Act 1989

· Local Land Services Act 2013 (Part 10 Pests)

· Wild Dog Destruction Act 1921

The Biosecurity Act 2015 came into effect in June 2017 with an update to cattle management provisions in October 2017. In light of the soon to be completed Rural Land Use Strategy, it seems timely to consider biosecurity as an essential issue on rural land.

Additionally, in protecting the biodiversity of our native environment, biosecurity must be considered. Australia’s island status has conferred us an advantage when it comes to biosecurity but there are still threats and the chances of these are increasing.

With increasing numbers of travellers to Byron, the increase of food and farm tours (agritourism) and the co-location of agriculture and tourism, there are many new challenges to be met. Some of these are perhaps unique to Byron Shire as we are a high visitation area that is also a highly productive agricultural area and a biodiversity hotspot.

Byron has a name as a centre for premium products and quality, low food production is a growing industry. Council has pesticide free/low pesticde policies but to enable to be low pesticide we have to be vigilant and not allow pests into our farms or forests in the first place.

Myrtle rust is a fungal disease which infects plants in the Myrtaceae family. Common Australian Myrtaceae species include eucalyptus, willow myrtle, turpentine, bottlebrush, paperbark, tea tree and lilly pilly. Severe infections can see plants die. As just one example the further depleting eucalyptus just for koalas is enormous.

Since myrtle rust was first detected in NSW in April 2010 it has spread across the

eastern Australian landscape in bushland reserves, home gardens, commercial operations, parks and street plantings. Over 300 hosts have been recorded so far.

Something as small as a fungus spore can have disastrous consequences.

Agriculture is a high-risk industry in regards to pest, diseases and weeds and the introduction of any of these can decimate an agricultural industry and a farmer’s income for many years. Generally speaking Byron Shire Council has not had as big an agritourism sector as some other LGAs. In other areas businesses engaging in agritourism have been imposed with tighter restrictions than are currently permitted in Byron.

Agritourism was introduced on the rural zoning so that farmers could value add to their existing businesses and create a supplementary income stream. Agritourism is ancillary to the agriculture on the site and generally small groups that can be supervised and managed by the agritourism operator, e.g. 20 school children or groups of 5 -10 tourists being taken through the site of a bee farmer. The tourists are shown the hives and honey extraction techniques, partake in some activities related to the venture i.e making honey bee wax wraps, served a morning tea and then take home some honey.

In most such operations there is a visitor register or log and usually a biosecurity declaration to sign along with some sort of biosecurity awareness education before entering the site. Visitors then either “wash down” their boots/shoes in a “wash down” station area with disinfectant and/or put on clean gum boots provided by the agricultural entity, or put on plastic footwear protectors. If visitors do not meet the requirements for entry then they must be denied entry due to the risks associated.

Any person who deals with biosecurity matter or a carrier and who knows, or ought reasonably to know, the biosecurity risk posed or likely to be posed by the biosecurity matter, carrier or dealing has a biosecurity duty to ensure that, so far as is reasonably practicable, the biosecurity risk is prevented, eliminated or minimised.

The risks to Australian plants and animals from poor biosecutry management is very real as detailed. ‘Australia’s Biosecurity Future – preparing for future biological challenges’. CSIRO, 2014. pp 4-5.

Biosecurity Implications on Agriculture:

· The number of international tourist arrivals for Australia continues to increase

· We continue to see an increase in the movement of goods and vessels around the world, in line with growing global trade

· In a globalised world, bioterrorism (including agroterrorism) is a potential threat

· We are also seeing greater movement of goods across our interstate borders

· Increased travel creates opportunities for infectious diseases, including those resistant to antibiotics and antiviral medications, to enter Australia

· Increased movement of people and goods can help to bring pests or diseases into the country that could impact on our environment or primary industries

· A general disconnection from primary production in Australia is leading to a lack of understanding of biosecurity issues and their impacts

· Changing consumer expectations require new and adaptive biosecurity capabilities

· The ongoing expansion of our cities is changing interactions between people, wildlife, agriculture and disease vectors, increasing risks such as zoonotic disease

· It is important to engage with peri-urban/amateur producers as part of the biosecurity community to improve their understanding of biosecurity risks and their adoption of biosecurity practices …

· An ageing population is leading to a decline in biosecurity specialists and experienced farmers, with a lack of younger talent to fill the gaps created

· Biosecurity investment does not appear to be keeping pace with the growing challenges we face

· A lack of biosecurity specialists and investment could limit our ability to prevent and respond to shocks

Biosecurity Implications on Biodiversity:

· Significant biodiversity loss can decrease the resilience of our natural environment to pests and diseases

· The management of invasive species can be a valuable and cost-effective tool in curbing biodiversity losses

· Biodiversity can provide a number of benefits, such as ecosystem services (e.g. pollination). Understanding the interconnections between biodiversity and biosecurity may therefore prove to be a vital component of biosecurity management

Objects of Biosecurity Act

(1) The primary object of this Act is to provide a framework for the prevention, elimination and minimisation of biosecurity risks posed by biosecurity matter, dealing with biosecurity matter, carriers and potential carriers, and other activities that involve biosecurity matter, carriers or potential carriers.

(2) The other objects of this Act are as follows:

(a) to promote biosecurity as a shared responsibility between government, industry and communities,

(b) to provide a framework for the timely and effective management of the following:

(i) pests, diseases, contaminants and other biosecurity matter that are economically significant for primary production industries,

(ii) threats to terrestrial and aquatic environments arising from pests, diseases, contaminants and other biosecurity matter,

(iii) public health and safety risks arising from contaminants, non-indigenous animals, bees, weeds and other biosecurity matter known to contribute to human health problems,

(iv) pests, diseases, contaminants and other biosecurity matter that may have an adverse effect on community activities and infrastructure,

(c) to provide a framework for risk-based decision-making in relation to biosecurity,

(d) to give effect to intergovernmental biosecurity agreements to which the State is a party,

(e) to provide the means by which biosecurity requirements in other jurisdictions can be met, so as to maintain market access for industry.

Staff comments by Sharyn French, Manager Environmental and Economic Planning, Sustainable Environment and Economy:

(Management Comments must not include formatted recommendations – resolution 11-979)

On 1 July 2017, the Biosecurity Act 2015 and Biosecurity Regulations 2017 commenced providing specific legal requirements for state-level priority weeds and high-risk activities.

Council at the 20 April 2017 meeting considered a report on the then draft Biosecurity Regulations and Resolved 17-141 that Council note:

1. The information contained in this report on the draft Biosecurity Regulation 2016.

2. That Council staff are undertaking an internal peer review of the draft Integrated Weed Strategy March 2016.

3. That Council staff are developing a Directions Document to provide a continued direction for reducing the use of pesticideon Council land in the long term.

4. The potential for the 'Small Steps to Healthy Rural Roadsides' measures to reduce chemical use and improve biodiversity on rural roadsides.

For a copy of the report: http://byron.infocouncil.biz/Open/2017/04/OC_20042017_AGN_605.htm#PDF2_ReportName_3823

In relation to items 1 to 3 of this NOM, the Biosecurity Act 2015 and Biosecurity Regulations 2017 have direct relevance to the development of the Integrated Pest Management Policy and Strategy (Resolution 13-621) and to some degree the review of Council’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (Resolution 14-334). The legislation has less relevance to Council’s Rural Land Use Strategy, which was adopted at the 26 October 2017 meeting (Resolution 17-504).

The social, economic and environmental implications arising from the Biodiversity Act and Regulation will be addressed in the Integrated Pest Management Policy and Strategy and the review of the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy.

The development of both the Integrated Pest Management Policy and Strategy and the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy will respond to major changes in legislation and regional plans and strategies, including but not limited to:

· NSW Biosecurity Act 2015

· NSW Biosecurity Strategy 2013-2021

· Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016

· Australian Weed Strategy and Intergovernmental Agreement on Biosecurity

· North Coast Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017-22

The Integrated Pest Management Strategy will consider all pests as defined by the Biosecurity Act 2015:

Pest means a species, strain or biotype of a plant or animal, or a disease agent, that has the potential to cause, either directly or indirectly, harm to (a) human, animal or plant health or (b) the environment.

A presentation on the review of the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy was provided to the Biodiversity and Sustainability Panel at their 12 October 2017 meeting and can be accessed here:

http://byron.infocouncil.biz/RedirectToInvalidFileName.aspx?FileName=BIO_12102017_ATT_730.HTM*$PDF3_ATTACHMENT_4436_1

Two reports in this meeting agenda provide Council with an update on both the Integrated Pest Management Policy and Strategy and Biodiversity Conservation Strategy.

In relation to item 4 of this NOM, that Councillors hold a workshop with a view to developing a shire-wide Biosecurity Policy, Council has already resolved (Resolution 13-621) to prepare an Integrated Pest Management Policy which will articulate Council’s direction and obligations including those under the Biosecurity Act and Regulation. The development of this Policy will be work shopped with both Council and the Biodiversity and Sustainability Panel as outlined in the accompanying report to this meeting.

Financial/Resource/Legal Implications:

The preparation of the Integrated Pest Management Strategy and the review of the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy are provided for in the existing 2017/18 budget.

Is the proposal consistent with any Delivery Program tasks?

Yes.

EN1.1.1 Protect and enhance our natural environment and biodiversity.

· Prepare a Shire Wide Integrated Pest Management Strategy

· Continue to undertake the Biodiversity Strategy review

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Notices of Motion 9.5

Notice of Motion No. 9.5 Trialling Traffic Lights in Key Byron Bay Intersections.

File No: I2017/1727

I move that Council trial traffic lights at the following locations;

a) the Bayshore Drive/Ewingsdale Road intersection and

b) the Lawson/Jonson Street roundabout,

over the summer months of December 2017, January 2018 and February 2018.

Signed: Cr Jan Hackett

Councillor’s supporting information:

· Residents, workers and visitors who access Bayshore Drive for Sunrise, the Industrial Estate and Elements et al, have had great difficulty exiting that road and turning right onto Ewingsdale Road for almost 12 months, while the Sunrise Boulevarde roundabout was being constructed.

· This has led many to make risky u-turns on Ewingsdale Road to avoid long delays – serious accidents waiting to happen.

· Despite Sunrise Blvd roundabout now being complete, there's little sign of the queues dissipating on Bayshore Drive, and with the summer months coming up, this problem will continue.

· When the construction of the Bayshore Drive roundabout commences in the new year, lights will need to be in place anyway to keep traffic moving, much as they were at the Sunrise Blvd. roundabout for a period of time.

· Residents, workers and tourists who regularly use this intersection need a break from lengthy queues and long delays, particularly over the hot summer months.

· Also, traffick flow at this intersection needs to move well to prevent people using the Sunrise Blvd roundabout instead and trucks and increased traffic travelling through residential streets to find their way in and out of the area.

· These lights also need not be temporary, as after the construction of the roundabout they could still be used at certain times during heavy traffic flows to keep everything moving.. I understand this is the case in Qld at difficult intersections, roundabouts PLUS lights at peak times are now being used.

· With regard to trialling lights at the Lawson/Jonson Streets roundabout - a traffic movement study was conducted and reported back to the BBTCMPLG some months ago, which noted that to keep future traffic flowing in and out of the centre of Byron Bay, lights would ultimately have to be used at this juncture, like it or not.

As we now have increased difficulty seeing traffic leave the town at that point, and the

situation constantly becoming worse, trialling traffic lights over the congested summer

months to see if they work and gauge community response, seems to me to be a no brainer.

Despite the expected costs and approvals necessary from the RMS, I believe our long term

solutions for traffic movements into and out of Byron Bay would benefit greatly from a timely

trial in our peak summer months. The longer we debate this issue and put off any test

actions, the greater our traffic movements and costings will become.

It is unknown when and if we can afford a mini bypass through Butler Street. In the meantime,

something has to be done.

Staff comments by Evan Elford, Team Leader Infrastructure Planning, Infrastructure Services:

(Management Comments must not include formatted recommendations – resolution 11-979)

Advice received to date from traffic consultants suggest that a trial of traffic lights is not able to be done as traffic signal designs and approvals processes are fairly comprehensive in nature including assessments of the safety implications, etc.

Staff are unaware of traffic signal trials being done in the past which is probably due to the strict rules and requirements relating to signal lantern types, locations, numbers, conspicuity etc. which would normally make a trial that expensive as not to be practical.

However, there are certainly temporary traffic signal devices available of the type used in road construction zones and at events although staff and consultants queried to date are not aware of temporary pedestrian signals being installed in those circumstances.

The installation of traffic lights or signals may be considered under 4 categories identified from RMS guidelines for Traffic Signals as follows:

1. Portable Traffic Signals - shared one lane roads for a short-term traffic control application. Their primary use is as a shuttle control where a portion of the roadway has been closed and a single lane is used alternatively by traffic approaching from opposite directions.

2. Temporary Traffic Signals - shared one lane roads - When a road or bridge is under repair for longer than three months and a long stretch of one lane road is used alternatively by traffic approaching from opposite directions, temporary traffic signals can sometimes be used as a control.

3. Standard Traffic Signals – Permanent installation to meet all design requirements to suit a coordinated operation, even if coordination is not required in the first instance. Nevertheless, they should be designed to suit SCATS operation (Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic System). A systems approach should be adopted for all traffic signal designs so that all the implications to a coordinated system are fully taken into account. Consultation with the RMS officers responsible for each activity during the appropriate design stage is essential to ensure that all their requirements are met.

4. Non Standard Traffic Signals - A non-standard design is a design which proposes to use any practice (including the operation of the signals) which is not currently documented within the Traffic Signal Design manual. A nonstandard design would typically be new or unique practice not previously used, or rarely used, in RMS. When considering non-standard designs consultation should be undertaken with the RMS Principal Manager Network Operations, and RMS Network Operations’ Research Officer from the concept development stage through to the final design. Non-standard designs may be prepared by external designers but the external designers must work in close partnership with Road Design Engineering and Network Operations.

The installation of temporary traffic signals at the Bayshore Drive / Ewingsdale Road intersection and Jonson St / Lawson St intersection are considered to fall under item 4 above i.e.. Non Standard Traffic Signals due to their temporary or trial nature.

The approval process for non-standard designs is as follows:

1. An initial concept plan needs to be developed in accordance with the RMS guidelines and requires concurrence from RMS General Manager Road Network Operations, RMS Principal Manager Network Operations and RMS Network Operations’ Research Officer.

2. A detailed design needs to be prepared requiring approval for its technical correctness in accordance with relevant technical manuals and guidelines by an appropriate authorised officer within the design consultancy (or appropriate authority within RMS for RMS prepared designs). During the approval procedure comment/agreement must be sought from authorised RMS officers responsible for the adaptive, electrical and delineation features of the design. The design is recommended for acceptance of its technical correctness by the Traffic Signal Design Manager, Road Design Engineering. During this process comment/agreement must be sought from authorised RMS officers responsible for the civil, electrical and delineation features of the design.

3. The design is recommended for acceptance by an authorised officer within RMS’ Network Operations section (including Regional Network Operations Officers). This recommendation takes into account the impact the design will have on overall network efficiency and compatibility with the surrounding network.

4. The design is accepted by the appropriate RMS officer responsible for implementation of the construction. This acceptance takes into account the constructability of the design and suitability for the particular site and project objectives.

Obviously, to meet these requirements involves a significant amount of time such that any installation or trial would not be possible during December 2017 to February 2018 as proposed.

The analysis for example at Bayshore Drive would need to consider right turning movements into Bayshore Drive and the effect of queuing to the traffic travelling from west as a result, this in turn would need an assessment of the need for additional traffic lane inbound to cater for left turn traffic from Ewingsdale into Bayshore Drive. The additional requirements would form part of the RMS approval.

A further consideration is the potential delay to advertising the construction tender for Bayshore Drive roundabout and the negative impact that timing will have for Council to fulfil requirements for current grant funding arrangements.

Staff have included in the next TIAC meeting (scheduled for 16 November) a discussion on pedestrian movements at Lawson Street, Byron Bay (following a request from Cr Lyon) and staff are in the process of organising a traffic consultant to attend a workshop briefing with Councillors regarding traffic lights and roundabouts, scheduled for 7 December 2017. Temporary Traffic management and controls are also being planned in this location to be implemented over the Christmas period as was the case for last year.

Financial/Resource/Legal Implications:

To delay proceeding with the Bayshore Dr Roundabout and trial traffic lights will put at risk current grant funding arrangements of $2.6M.

No budget has been identified to carry out the trial or engage suitably qualified consultants to design and obtain approval for traffic light installations.

The design, approval and installation works could not be completed within the available time to enable a trial to operate from December 2017 to February 2018.

A road authority may install temporary traffic lights for roadworks but cannot install traffic lights to the standard required to manage these intersections without RMS approval.

Is the proposal consistent with any Delivery Program tasks?

The proposal in not consistent with any Delivery Program tasks.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Petitions 10.1

Petitions

Petition No. 10.1 Tyagarah Airfield Plan Management

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Michael Matthews, Manager Open Space and Resource Recovery

File No: I2017/1508

Theme: Community Infrastructure

Open Space and Recreation

At Council’s Ordinary meeting held on 21 October ordinary meeting a petition was tabled containing 281 signatures which states:

Comments from the Director Infrastructure Services:

1. negotiate a Fly Friendly Agreement (FFA) with surrounding residents and the Aircraft Noise Ombudsman over Tyagarah Airfield.

Council Resolved the following on 21 September 2017 (res 17-406)

Resolved that Air Services Australia (ASA), the Aircraft Noise Ombudsman(ANO), non-profit tenants at Tyagarah Airfield, commercial tenants at Tyagarah airfield, Tyagarah Progress Association, land owners within 3km of Tyagarah airfield and interested residents be invited to participate in an initial stakeholder meeting facilitated by Council to consider the development of an FNA agreement in the next three months.

Staff are currently actioning this resolution.

2. require that compliance with this FFA is made a condition of all lease and license agreements and sub-agreements relating to Tyagarah Airfield.

A Fly Neighbourly Agreement (FNA), Fly Friendly Agreement (FFA), Fly Neighbourly Procedure (FNP) are all voluntary code of practises and any mandatory aviation operating and safety procedures (as well as any aviation requirements relevant to the area) have precedence over a FNA, FFA, FNP in all circumstances. If a FNA was Resolved to be established by Council, the contents of such agreement would require legal review as to its use or linkage with existing or future lessee or licensee holders.

3. cease the upgrading of the Tyagarah Airfield and removal of Obstacle Limitation Survey (OLS) penetrations until a full Environmental impact Assessment is carried out and Development Application is approved.

Regarding vegetation management works for OLS: Clause 22 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, provides that development for the purposes of an airport does not require development consent on land zoned RU2 Rural Landscape (i.e. land at Tyagarah), where it is carried out by a public authority. As such, maintenance work that is ancillary to an airport, such as vegetation management, does not require consent in that zone.

As such, the work needs to be assessed under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and a Review of Environmental Factors (REF) was prepared to assist that assessment for the vegetation maintenance works.

In relation to upgrading of the airfield, structure planning work is continuing to examine options to optimise future use of the land. In accordance with a previous resolution of Council, these options will be the subject of a workshop with Councillors, to explore future use of the land.

Removal of Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) penetrations is considered routine maintenance work for the purpose of air user safety and as such, this maintenance works shall continue whilst the facility remains operational.

4. update the Tyagarah Airfield Plan of Management as adopted in 28 March 1995 (#91315) and BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL policy No. 3.45 COMMERCIAL OPERATTONS AT TYAGARAH AIRFIELD in consultation with the surrounding community residents.

It is agreed by staff that an update of the POM is appropriate, like all other POM, public consultation forms part of any substantial update or change to an existing Plan of Management.

5. prepare an Occupational Health and Safety Plan for Tyagarah Airfield and conduct a Social lmpact Assessment regarding the intensification in use of the airfield and its noise impacts on the community.

As above, structure planning work is continuing to examine options to optimise future use of the land. The preliminary results of that will be the subject of a future Councillors workshop to determine the preferred future land use(s). Once that use has been identified, a Social Impact Assessment and Noise Impact Assessment will be undertaken, as required by the previous Council resolution.

6. prosecute any private or commercial helicopter operations into or out of Tyagarah airfield while no Development Application for a Helipad exists.

Helipads and or Heliports are not permitted on the Tyagarah airfield. The unauthorised use of premises as a helipad or heliport is therefore likely to constitute the offence of carrying out development without development consent. This offence may attract an on the spot fine of $3000 for an individual or $6000 for a corporation. In the case of a prosecution the maximum penalty that can be imposed by the Local Court is $110,000 or $1.1 million in the Land and Environment Court. Other enforcement options are also available including notices, orders or injunctions.

7 . be clear in its communications that Aircraft with a maximum take off weight (MTOW) in excess of 5,700kg, or having a main landing gear tyre pressure in excess of 450 kilopascals (65 psi), or seating nine of more passengers, or conducting Air Transport Operations, or any jet powered aircraft or Helicopters are not permitted to land at Tyagarah Airfield.

Councils believes that it is clear which directly relates to requirements of CAPP(92).

Note under CASA regulations RPT operations are not permitted to land or take off unregistered, uncertified airfields.

8. conduct an assessment of airfield use in 2OO7 comparative to current airfield usage levels with the intention of identifying the intensification of airfield uses over this 10 year period.

As an unregistered uncertified airfield, recording of every aircraft movement at the facility is not mandated. Historically payment of fees in accordance with Councils fees and charges utilised a somewhat honesty system. Staff in recent years have invested considerable effort in ensuring that fees are paid by users. For these reasons, staff are not able to calculate a ‘intensification’ figure that has any known level of confidence.

9 . investigate alternative non-airfield related uses of the Council owned land at Tyagarah that will generate greater income and wider community benefits for council and the broader Byron Shire community.

Airfield-related uses of the land can be considered under the provisions of SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007.

Non-airfield related uses would need to be permissible with consent in the RU2 Rural Landscape Zone.

Any other uses would require amendment to the LEP and would need to be consistent with a relevant planning strategy. There is no current strategy that would provide for intensification of non-airfield related uses that are not consistent with the RU2 zoning.

10. investigate the lease of Tyagarah Hall to a commercial Aviation Business without community consultation or negotiations with the Tyagarah Progress Association.

The GIS shows lot 49 DP 881232 as operational land owned by Byron Shire Council in fee simple.

Council has the power to deal with the land as an individual s220 (1) LGA.

Mandatory community consultation does not apply to operational land.

The Tyagarah Hall is currently leased to Aussie Air Charter & Training & terminates on 31/12/2019.

Any further lease must be offered by public tender as required by ICAC direct negotiation guidelines.

The land is zoned RU2 Low Density Residential.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the petition regarding Tyagarah Airfield Plan Management be noted.

2. That the petition be referred to the Director Infrastructure Services.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.1

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services

Report No. 13.1 Review of Natural Disaster Response Protocols

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Jessica Orr, Strategic Risk and Improvement Coordinator

Sarah Ford, Manager Community Development

Anna Vinfield, Manager Corporate Services

James Flockton, Drain and Flood Engineer

File No: I2017/1361

Theme: Corporate Management

Governance Services

Summary:

This Report responds to the Mayoral Minute No. 8.1 – Review of Natural Disaster Response Protocols (RES 17-130) made at Council’s ordinary meeting of 2 April 2017.

Since the March 2017 Ex-Tropical Cyclone Debbie disaster event, Council has undertaken a variety of activities and developed resources to facilitate an improved pre and post event response and recovery, noting that no event is ever the same. Some of the key resources Council has in place include:

· Byron Shire Council Emergency Communications Plan

· Byron Shire Council Fact Sheet: What to do in an emergency or disaster?

· Community relationships, coordination of community organisations or volunteer groups

This report addresses the key points raised in the Mayoral Minute, provides an overview of the SES debrief held with Councillors and articulates Councillor’s role during a natural disaster.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council supports the proposed SES approach to creating a ‘Community Action Team/s’ in the Northern Rivers regional community, and that when the framework for this approach is finalised by the SES, that it be the subject of a further report to Council.

2. That Council note the work that has been undertaken so far in improving Council’s business continuity and disaster recovery efforts.

3. That Council receive a further report on the operations of the South Golden Beach flood pump following the consideration of the Peer Review of South Golden Beach Flood Pump (#E2017/103521) by staff.

4. That Council request that a finalised Business Continuity/Disaster Recovery Plan be reported to Council by Corporate and Community Services by mid 2018.

Attachments:

1 Confidential - Draft Emergency Communications Plan supercedes E2017/64654, E2017/93620

2 Confidential - Fact sheet - what to do in a disaster, E2017/101552

3 Confidential - Peer Review of South Golden Beach Flood Pump (Prepared by Jacobs), E2017/103521

4 SES presentation - recommendations from review of operational response to Norther Rivers floods, E2017/104277 ⇨

5 SES Presentation to Byron Council Nov 2017, E2017/105034 ⇨

6 SES Community Action Teams Presentation, E2017/105036

Report

Background

Byron Shire Council and its residents experienced significant rainfall from Ex Tropical

Cyclone Debbie from 28 March 2017 which resulted in major flooding across the northern sections of the Shire including areas of Billinudgel, Mullumbimby, Ocean Shores, New Brighton and the Hinterland. The impacts were both significant to those communities and to the wider community with significant property damage, social and emotional impacts to residents and businesses. The event raised a number of concerns regarding Council’s and other agencies' effectiveness and responsiveness during and post the event.

Mayoral Minute No. 8.1 – Review of Natural Disaster Response Protocols (RES 17-130) was made at Council’s ordinary meeting of 2 April 2017. The following key issues were raised and addressed below:

· Response to extreme weather and disaster communication protocols

· Review of successes, failings and inefficiencies of Council operated or maintained infrastructure during the April flood event

· Council’s community support protocols and approach

· Review organisational preparedness including

A Notice of Motion was considered by Council at its Extraordinary meeting held on 2 November meeting. Council resolved via Resolution 17-538 as follows:

· Invite the State Emergency Service (SES) to provide a briefing to Council on current efforts to establish ‘Community Action Teams’ (CATs) as part of forward planning and responsiveness to flood events in local communities.

· Determine and provide support to potential CAT formation within the Byron Shire in conjunction with the SES and local communities.

· Develop a response plan as to how Council will respond to flood events with particular focus on the coordination of information and resources required by the community during and in the immediate aftermath of a flood.

· Implement a communications strategy to ensure widespread community understanding of Council’s role during and in response to a flood event.

· Consider funding and resources necessary to support these initiatives and provide a report to Council by the end of 2017.

This report also addresses the key points from the Notice of Motion.

Council wrote to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services seeking support for an independent review of the flood response in Byron Shire following Ex-Tropical Cyclone Debbie.

NSW Police Deputy Commissioner Dave Owens had been engaged to undertake this review of both Lismore City and Tweed Shire Council and Council officers requested that Mr Owen's brief be extended to include Byron Shire Council. The Minister responded that many of the findings of the independent review provide opportunities for improvement to response processes and systems and that the NSW SES could brief Council on these recommendations – these are detailed in section 3: ‘SES debrief’ of this report.

Council is committed to being involved in regional forums and aiming to achieve best practice in disaster response. Officers recently attended a regional forum for ‘Disaster Ready Councils’ hosted by Hunter Joint Organisation of Councils and funded by the State Government’s new Office of Emergency Management (OEM) unit. The forum was highly relevant and practical in delving into the question of “Is your Council disaster ready?” Outcomes for Council in attending the regional forum include continuing to be part of the state wide conversation on disaster planning and response support, ensuring that Byron Shire Council’s voice is heard, awareness of training and resources offered by the OEM in assisting councils to become disaster ready and access to new forms of relief funding.

Response to issues raised in Mayoral Minute

1. Response to extreme weather and disaster communication protocols

Council has developed an Emergency Communication Plan (attached to this report) which outlines in detail how and when it will communicate with the community and staff as an event approaches and unfolds. This includes a detailed list of steps that may be taken including the platform of communication and frequency. For example, posting on social media at regular intervals, working with Customer Service to update after-hours phone messaging, regular updates of the Byron Shire Council website, Council E-news, media releases and SMS messaging alerts.

Council is continuing to investigate the use of SMS messaging to update, inform and alert residents at times of extreme weather events. It is also worth noting that the SES manages this process and is investigating improvements to its system.

As a disaster or emergency event unfolds, Council will continue to liaise with Emergency Services and recognised providers of relevant information such as the SES, RFS, Bureau of Meteorology and ABC radio (as the local emergency services broadcaster), to provide the broadest possible coverage of an event.

To address the high workload in the communications area approaching, during and after a disaster event, Council acknowledges that additional resources may be required. Managers are asked to reallocate their staff where possible to provide customer service or communications assistance during a disaster event, where their core duties are not essential. This will be a decision of the Crisis Management Team (CMT).

The table below establishes Council’s CMT, highlighting the key roles for leadership, decision making and support that will be required to be taken on by Council staff before, during and after a disaster event.

As an emergency or disaster unfolds, the CMT will meet regularly throughout the event, at least once daily to support, coordinate and plan action and response efforts. Role descriptions of each position will be developed with guidance on who communicates with who and responsibilities. Depending on the context of the emergency or disaster unfolding, different key support staff and managers / executive will take a lead role in informing decision-making and directing resources. For example, where the disaster is a cyber terrorism attack, Manager Business Systems & Technology will play a lead role, rather where the disaster is a natural disaster, Infrastructure Services Director and relevant Managers for works, open spaces, utilities and assets, and community development will play a lead role.

2. Review of successes, failings and inefficiencies of Council operated or maintained infrastructure during the April flood event

Council’s road networks and assets performed as designed and received minimal damage in comparison to the size of the event.

Council’s flood pump in South Golden Beach operated and reduced flood water to a degree until it tripped and couldn’t be restarted until safe access was available. Previous discussion has been held around operational issues with the pump and staff recently received a third party review into the pump stations design, operation and capacity. The review raised a number of concerns for operational staff to consider.

The South Golden flood pump report is attached to this report (attachment 3) for information only. Noting that the report has just been received and staff are working through the recommendations. The consultant responsible for the pump station design has previously confirmed to Council that it was built as per the design. Therefore, the likely intention moving forward is to discuss the results of the peer review of the pump station with the designers, before Council considers taking the matter further. Infrastructure Services will present a further report to Council on the outcomes at the earliest opportunity.

Council has investigated the flexibility of increasing the opening hours at the Myocum Resource and Recovery Centre within Environment Protection Agency (EPA) operation licence. The EPA have advised it will be lenient on licence conditions and regulation of waste management facilities in response to flood clean-up operations, thus enabling extended operating hours at the Byron Resource Recovery Centre. Staff will maintain open communication with the EPA in the lead up and recovery phases of future events to facilitate any clean-up operations.

Post the March 2017 flood event, Council staff have undertaken tender processes to establish panels of providers for plant hire (in collaboration with Tweed Council who also had a similar issue in response to the flood) and garden waste/tree clearing services. This provides Council with the ability to immediately engage a number of local contractors, at a predetermined plant hire rate, to conduct clean-up works in a disaster event.

In the lead up to any future potential event, staff will contact contractors to ensure availability and immediate response if required. Experience from the March 2017 flood has shown that contractors will have capacity to provide necessary plant as they generally cannot perform their core construction activities during/post significant wet weather events.

Council’s drainage maintenance crew has been working in the Billinudgel area to remove debris and vegetation from open drains, works to date have been very successful and the local community have been appreciative. Council’s maintenance crew is also planning to remove vegetation and debris from the main drains in South Golden Beach before Christmas, these drains supply the flood pump station. A general green waste collection is being considered as part of this work to help reduce the debris load on the pump station.

Council’s position on the Mud Army

The concept of a Mud Army (as seen in the 2011 Brisbane floods) is one of several community response options that Council is currently considering in terms of involvement, coordination and support during an emergency event. Council is progressing, in conversation with the SES and the Northern Rivers regional community, with investigation of volunteer models that harness the community spirit and eagerness of residents to support their neighbours and local community.

The State Emergency Service (SES) presented to Councillors at the 9 November Strategic Planning Workshop. This presentation outlined community preparedness for future natural disasters including the potential formation of ‘Community Action Teams’ as part of forward planning and responsiveness to flood events in local communities.

It is anticipated that the formation of a ‘Community Action Team’ (CATs) would allow the region to harness the supportive spirit of the community in the preparation and response phase (as is the case with the Mud Army example in the recovery phase) in coordinating volunteers and support initiatives as an event unfolds and in the recovery phase. This is part of a broader community discussion and Council will receive updates as it progresses.

It has been anticipated that the CATs will mature and evolve to deal with all natural disaster situations, not just floods (as seen in NSW near the Victorian border). The CATs would be coordinated by SES community liaison officers with Council involvement. Council is likely to be requested to assist with resourcing certain emergency or disaster equipment, currently being discussed to assist local communities. This is particularly relevant where local communities and residents may not be immediately accessible and to support such communities to be able to assist each other at the local level.

Infrastructure Services will prepare a further report to Council on the proposed CAT framework and resourcing implications once SES have finalised the arrangements.

3. Council’s community support protocols and approach

The Northern Rivers region is still in the flood recovery phase from the March 2017 Ex-Tropical Cyclone Debbie events. Council is in contact with various community and government organisations concerning the ongoing recovery and learning efforts, taking into account scope for improvement and partnering into the future.

A series of regional forums were held in Byron Bay in June 2017, with service providers and the volunteer sector participating three focus groups in the homelessness, community services and mental health sectors. A Regional Action Plan was developed, which assisted in securing Community Recovery Funding from Office of Emergency Management. Two Community Development Officer positions have been funded for twelve months to implement key activities from the Regional Action Plan. Community Development Officers are based in Lismore and Tweed. The Tweed Community Development Officer covers the Tweed, Byron and Ballina Shires, and Council staff are working collaboratively to develop mutually agreed deliverables.

Additional regional Community Recovery Fund projects funded by Office for Emergency Management include:

· Mental health awareness training for government and community agencies

· Mental health awareness workshops for the community

· Disaster preparedness workshops for Community Service Organisations

· Community Engagement Flood Resilience Building Program

A regional learning from the March 2017 flood event is the need for strong coordination of community volunteers in order to maximise the impact of community good will and avoid duplication and ensure residents affected by natural disaster receive clear messaging in relation to assistance. Council is working with key service providers to develop a local community response protocol which will include the development of a mechanism to effectively harness community volunteers in relation to provision of support for disaster affected residents. Delays in this process are being experienced as service providers are still assisting people affected by flood, some of whom are making contact with key service providers for support for the first time. Further, local Councils are responsible for the joint implementation, project planning and oversight of the Community Development positions, as well as taking a lead roll in ensuring the effective delivery of the additional regional recovery project listed above. The CATs proposed by the SES could be the appropriate mechanism for this.

A key learning regionally from Ex-Tropical Cyclone Debbie was the complexity of facilitating community donations and administering and awarding donations to businesses and individuals. Council referred community to Mullumbimby and District Neighbourhood Centre (MDNC) to make donations for Ex-Tropical Cyclone Debbie. MDNC has deductible gift recipient status and an online donation tool. MDNC donates 100% of donations to community and was seen as a strong and trusted community to administer donations.

If Council wishes to take carriage of natural disaster donations, a robust system of criteria will need to be established prior to any community donations received. This can be achieved by working with other Local Council’s to learn from their experiences.

Council is committed to participating in the development of a Regional Community Recovery Plan, anticipated to be completed by December 2018. One of the tasks involved in the development of the Regional Community Recovery Plan will be establishing agreement between key service organisations in relation to recovery plan development, implementation and annual review.

SES debrief

SES representatives attended the Councillor’s strategic planning workshop on 9 November to present on key lessons learnt arising from Ex-Tropical Cyclone Debbie weather event and the ongoing recovery efforts in the region. The SES highlighted a number of local, regional and state outcomes that have been realised out of this event and that action is being taken on. SES held nine post-flood forums across the region.

The presentation is attached to this report.

Key SES outcomes from the forums and the Independent Review of the NSW State Emergency Service Operational Response - Northern Rivers Floods March 2017 report from Dave Owens include:

· Review operational readiness, including local and regional resources, training, skills register and availability for deployment;

· Consider implementation of a triage procedure for flood rescues, in consultation with other Emergency Services for a standardised risk based approach to flood rescue;

· Formalise new process for the issuing of Evacuation Orders into Policy;

· Liaise with the appropriate NSW Government Agencies to ensure stronger linkages are forged at a local level between emergency responders, local councils and community development professionals; and

· Become a recognised authority for land use planning purposes, having greater involvement in floodplain development with Local Councils and that their input is mandatory before any consent by council is given in flood planning areas.

Role of Councillors

A learning from the March event was to identify specific role for Councillors during an event.

During an event, Councillors will receive regular updates from the CMT as information becomes available (this is articulated in the internal fact sheet on ‘what to do in an emergency’). The Emergency Communications Plan highlights that during an event or emergency, the media spokespeople for Council are the Mayor, General Manager and Council’s Local Emergency Management Officer.

Council staff, particularly members of the CMT, may be reallocated to undertake specific duties, other than their regular responsibilities, to support the community and Council’s service provision during an emergency or disaster.

It is anticipated that a workshop be held with Councillors at the January 2018 strategic planning workshop to develop a detailed fact sheet, as well as share key information from the CMT, on the role of Councillors in supporting the community and Council operations, before, during and in the recovery of an event.

Next steps

Council is continuing to develop its business continuity / disaster recovery resources internally for the organisation and externally to support the Byron Shire community and the Council services during an emergency or disaster. Council is currently investigating software options to support a business continuity and disaster preparedness framework. At the time of writing this report, a presentation with Council managers and key staff is taking place on 13 November from Continuity2, presenting their business continuity management system software as an option for Council to consider in terms of the most appropriate process and system.

Council will take a lead role and work with Office of Emergency Management to develop a data collection tool and will support the community service sector to understand and utilize the tool as soon as a natural disaster is declared.

Council will continue to play a lead role in advocating for community payments and grants in the wake of natural disasters and will, where appropriate, submit grant funding applications, or support key organisations to do so.

As noted staff will hold a workshop with Councillors in early 2018 to articulate ‘what to do in an emergency’.

Council staff are reviewing the recommendations of the South Golden Beach flood pump peer review report and will prepare a further report on progressing the implementation of the reports recommendations.

A Regional Community Recovery Plan will be delivered by December 2018.

Financial Implications

Where Council seeks to further develop its business continuity and disaster recovery plan framework and software, this may require additional funding from across business units – this isn’t currently allocated in the 2017/18 budget.

In relation to national disaster relief funding, the Office of Emergency Management has recently confirmed that mitigation and betterment funding will form a part of the new arrangements. Under the new system the “like for like” requirement will be removed and councils will be able to add their own funding for betterment to reconstruction and repair projects. This was previously not permitted. The criteria for spending these funds are still being clarified with the Commonwealth. The Policy for how NSW will distribute this funding is still under consideration.

The resourcing requirements of CATs are still being determined as the SES has not finalised their preferred model.

It is anticipated that the implementation of the emergency communications plan will be accommodated within existing budget allocations.

The resource implications of the South Golden Beach flood pump report are being reviewed by staff.

While the financial impact on affected residents and businesses was significant, the financial implications on Council were minor. Only a small number of Council assets and infrastructure were impacted and these were covered by flood insurance.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

Local Government NSW actively represents council interests in dealing with the NSW and Australian Governments on the range of issues concerning emergency management.

The State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989 (NSW) outlines emergency management obligations at the local level in Division 3 of the Act. This includes outlining the functions of the Local Emergency Management Committees and providing for where 2 or more local government areas agree (with the approval of the Minister) they will be permitted to combine their emergency management arrangements, such is the case with the combined Tweed-Byron Local Emergency Management Committee.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.2

Report No. 13.2 Meeting Schedule 2018

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: David Royston-Jennings, Corporate Governance and Strategic Planning Officer

File No: I2017/1497

Theme: Corporate Management

Governance Services

Summary:

The proposed schedule of dates, times and places for Council’s Ordinary Meetings, Strategic Planning Workshops, Advisory Committees and Panels in 2018 is recommended for adoption.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council adopts the following schedule of Ordinary Meetings and Strategic Planning Workshops (SPW) for 2018:

Date (2018)	Meeting/Workshop (Thursday 9am)
25 January	SPW
1 February	Ordinary
8 February	SPW
22 February	Ordinary
8 March	SPW
22 March	Ordinary
5 April	SPW
19 April	Ordinary
10 May	SPW
24 May	Ordinary
7 June	SPW
21 June	Ordinary
2 August	Ordinary
9 August	SPW
23 August	Ordinary
6 September	SPW
20 September	Ordinary
4 October	SPW
18 October	Ordinary
8 November	SPW
22 November	Ordinary
6 December	SPW
13 December	Ordinary

2. That Council adopts the following schedule of Advisory Committee and Panel meetings for 2018:

Meeting	Date (2018)
Advisory Committees
Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding (Thursday 9.00am)	1 March 31 May 13 September 1 November
Finance (Thursday 2.00pm)	15 February 17 May 16 August 15 November
Audit, Risk and Improvement (Thursday 11.30am) * Extraordinary	15 February 17 May 16 August 11 October 15 November*
Transport and Infrastructure (Thursday 9.00am)	15 March 17 May 16 August 15 November
Water, Waste and Sewer (Thursday 11.30am)	1 March 31 May 13 September 1 November
Byron Shire Floodplain Risk Management (Thursday 2.00pm)	1 March 31 May 13 September 1 November
Panels
Biodiversity and Sustainability (Thursday 11.30am)	29 March 28 June 30 August
Coastal Estuary Catchment (Thursday 2.00pm)	15 March 3 May 27 September 29 November
Communications (Thursday 9.00am)	29 March 28 June 30 August
Heritage (Thursday 2.00pm)	29 March 28 June 30 August
Public Art (Thursday 9.00am)	15 February 3 May 9 August 29 November
Sustainable Economy (Thursday 11.30am)	15 March 3 May 27 September 29 November

3. That Council endorses the following schedule of Planning Review Committee meetings for 2018:

Planning Review Committee

Thursday 4.30pm

18 January

15 February

15 March

12 April

17 May

14 June

9 August

13 September

25 October

15 November

29 November

4. That Council endorses the following schedule of Local Traffic Committee meetings for 2018:

Local Traffic Committee

Tuesday 10.00am

16 January

20 March

15 May

17 July

18 September

20 November

5. That the Ordinary Meetings be held in the Council Chambers, Mullumbimby with a start time of 9.00am.

6. That the Code of Meeting Practice be amended to reflect the adopted meeting schedule and times.

Attachments:

1 Council Meeting Matrix 2018, E2017/102958 ⇨

Report

The schedule has been prepared with consideration to events, such as public holidays and conferences. Listed below is the proposed 2018 Meeting Schedule:

Date (2018)	Meeting/Workshop (Thursday 9am)
25 January	SPW
1 February	Ordinary
8 February	SPW
22 February	Ordinary
8 March	SPW
22 March	Ordinary
5 April	SPW
19 April	Ordinary
10 May	SPW
24 May	Ordinary
7 June	SPW
21 June	Ordinary
Mid-year recess
2 August	Ordinary
9 August	SPW
23 August	Ordinary
6 September	SPW
20 September	Ordinary
4 October	SPW
18 October	Ordinary
8 November	SPW
22 November	Ordinary
6 December	SPW
13 December	Ordinary

· The 2018 National General Assembly of Local Government will not affect the meeting dates as it is scheduled to be held from 17-20 June 2017 in Canberra.

· The date for the LGNSW Annual Conference 2018 has not yet been determined however based on previous Conference dates, it will most likely not affect the proposed meeting dates.

· Easter public holidays will not affect the meeting dates as they fall during the dates 31 March -2 April 2018.

As the proposed schedule includes two February meetings, a Strategic Planning Workshop is required during the January recess period.

Financial Implications

Should Council resolve to hold evening Council meetings, extra financial implications for meetings would include payment of overtime for staff below the level of senior management should they be required to answer questions during the meeting, as well as for minute taking staff (one minute taker per evening meeting).

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

Point 4.1 of Councils Code of Meeting Practice will require amending to reflect the adopted meeting schedule and times, specifically that meetings will not be held once every 3 weeks. Schedule B will also require amending at point 1 under the heading of Planning Review Committee.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.3

Report No. 13.3 Review of Community Donations under Section 356 - new Community Initiatives Program

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2017/1526

Theme: Society and Culture

Community Development

Summary:

Council currently holds three policies where applications can be made for community donations. In assessing applications in 2016, a number of inequities and inefficiencies in the process were identified. In recognition that a more strategic approach will provide better community outcomes, Community Development staff have undertaken a review of Section 356 policies and revised them into one new policy renamed ‘Community Initiatives Program (Seciton 356)’, and developed Guidelines for applicants.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the draft Community Initiatives Program (Section 356) Policy be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

2. That in the event:

a) that any submissions are received on the draft Community Initiatives Program (Section 356) Policy, that those submissions be reported back to Council prior to the adoption of the policy;

b) that no submissions are received on the draft Community Initiatives Program (Section 356) Policy, that the Policy be adopted and incorporated into Council’s Policy Register.

3. That the contents of the accompanying Community Initiatives Program Guidelines be noted.

4. That in the event that no submissions are received and the Community Initiatives Program (Section 356) Policy is adopted, that advertising commence in January 2018 to call for applications to the new Program for the 2017/18 financial year.

Attachments:

1 Draft Policy Community Initiatives Program (Section 356), E2017/104974 ⇨

2 Community Initiatives Program Guidelines (Community Donations under section 356), E2017/104976 ⇨

Report

Council currently holds three policies where applications can be made for community donations:

· Policy 3.13 Donations to Community Organisations, Other Groups and Persons

· Policy 14/002 Section 356 Donations – Assistance for Festivals and Community Functions

· Policy 12/011 Section 356 Donations to Community Groups – Reimbursement of Council Application Fees

Typically, Council advertises to call for applications to these three policies around June/ July each year, an assessment of applications is undertaken and recommendations to Council are made to allocate the funds available in the Section 356 budget. A total of $45,200 is allocated in the 2017/18 budget.

During the 2016/17 round of community donations, 44 requests for donations were received which equalled 388% of the available budget allocation.

In assessing applications in 2016, many issues and concerns with the current policies were noted including:

· Donations were not linked to Council’s strategies or objectives as outlined in the Community Strategic Plan;

· Individuals could apply, e.g. ‘to assist appropriate private groups or person to achieve their objectives’;

· Applications could be made under three different policies which was confusing for community members and staff;

· Applications could be made under each policy by one person or organisation creating an opportunity for multiple application by one individual or organisation;

· There was no upper limit resulting in the funds being significantly oversubscribed;

· There was no acquittal process in place, meaning Council did not know what the actual donation was spent on and the community outcome or benefit.

In recognition that a more strategic approach will provide better community outcomes, Community Development staff have undertaken a review of Section 356 policies and revised them into one ‘Draft Community Initiatives Program (Section 356) Policy’.

The review considered what other Councils do and other best practice community development programs.

Best practice community development programs assessed included:

· the Seattle Neighbourhood Matching Fund (Jim Diers) http://www.neighborpower.org/;

· David Engwicht http://www.creative-communities.com/;

· Peter Kenyon and the Bank of Ideas http://bankofideas.com.au/;

· Harwood Institute http://www.theharwoodinstitute.org/.

Based on best practice, success of community programs is achieved when people have buy in and ownership, they are accountable for achieving an outcome, and the outcome is related to an overall community strategic goal.

The new draft policy includes:

· Relation to Council’s Community Strategic Plan strategies and objectives (related to a community goal);

· A provision for a matching contribution, either in-kind or financial (buy in / ownership);

· An acquittal process (accountability);

· The application must note an incorporated association or other appropriate legally structured organisation to receive the funds and that organisation will be required to hold $20 million public liability insurance;

· Commercial organisations or individuals are ineligible to apply;

· Applicants can apply for a donation up to a maximum of $5,000;

· The policy and guidelines outline eligible and ineligible projects and activities and the assessment criteria that will be used

The acquittal process will allow the Community Development team to measure outcomes of the Community Initiatives Program against Council’s CSP strategies and share outcomes from Council’s investments with the wider community.

If Council adopt this new approach to managing Section 356 Community Initiatives, staff will conduct an information session/ workshop for potential applicants to begin a valuable dialogue about community projects across the Shire. It will also allow for cross-collaboration and capacity building for community organisations in applying for grant funds from a variety of sources.

The goal of the new Draft Community Initiatives Program (Section 356) Policy is to be broad enough to enable a range of future community activities and projects to assist Council meet the community needs as described in the Community Strategic Plan. The new draft also carries forward some of the key features of the three policies it replaces.

If Council adopts the new draft policy, it will become one of two policies related to Section 356 donations, the other policy currently in place related to Section 356 is the Policy 12/008: Section 356 Donations – Rates, Water and Sewerage Charges.

In addition to reviewing the policy, the Community Development team have devised the Community Initiatives Program Guidelines, an application form and an acquittal report template. Please find a copy of the Guidelines in the attachments to this report.

Financial Implications

Council’s budget allocation for Section 356 unallocated funds include:

Donations to Community Organisations, Other Groups and Persons	$36,200
Assistance for Festivals and Community Functions	$7,000
Donations to Community Groups – Reimbursement of Council Application Fees	$2,000
Sub-Total	$45,200
Resolution 17-381*	-$3,000
TOTAL unallocated amount for 2017/18	$42,200

*Resolution 17-381 in part states: “Allocate $3,000 of Council’s Community Development Program’s unallocated S356 donations in the 2017/18 budget to support international relations”.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

Section 356 of the Local Government Act.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.6

Report No. 13.6 Council Budget Review - 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance

File No: I2017/1559

Theme: Corporate Management

Financial Services

Summary:

This report is prepared to comply with Regulation 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and to inform Council and the Community of Council’s estimated financial position for the 2017/2018 financial year, reviewed as at 30 September 2017.

This report contains an overview of the proposed budget variations for the General Fund, Water Fund and Sewerage Fund. The specific details of these proposed variations are included in Attachment 1 and 2 for Council’s consideration and authorisation.

Attachment 3 contains the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework (IP&R) Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS) as outlined by the Division of Local Government in circular 10-32.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council authorise the itemised budget variations as shown in Attachment 2 (#E2017/104035) which includes the following results in the 30 September 2017 Quarterly Review of the 2017/2018 Budget:

a) General Fund – $161,900 decrease to the Estimated Unrestricted Cash Result

b) General Fund - $1,651,500 increase in reserves

c) Water Fund - $110,000 decrease in reserves

d) Sewerage Fund - $15,000 decrease in reserves

2. That Council adopt the revised General Fund Estimated Unrestricted Cash Result of $940,600 for the 2017/2018 financial year as at 30 September 2017.

Attachments:

1 Budget Variations for General, Water and Sewerage Funds, E2017/104033 ⇨

2 Itemised Listing of Budget Variations for General, Water and Sewerage Funds, E2017/104035 ⇨

3 Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework (IP&R) required Quarterly Review Statement, E2017/104034 ⇨

Report

Council adopted the 2017/2018 budget on 22 June 2017 via Resolution 17-268. It also considered and adopted the budget carryovers from the 2016/2017 financial year, to be incorporated into the 2017/2018 budget at its Ordinary Meeting held on 24 August 2017 via Resolution 17-322. Since that date, Council has reviewed the budget taking into consideration the 2016/2017 Financial Statement results and progress through the first quarter of the 2017/2018 financial year. This report considers the September 2017 Quarter Budget Review.

The details of the budget review for the Consolidated, General, Water and Sewer Funds are included in Attachment 1, with an itemised listing in Attachment 2. This aims to show the consolidated budget position of Council, as well as a breakdown by Fund and Principal Activity. The document in Attachment 1 is also effectively a publication outlining a review of the budget and is intended to provide Councillors with more detailed information to assist with decision making regarding Council’s finances.

Contained in the document at Attachment 1 is the following reporting hierarchy:

Consolidated Budget Cash Result

General Fund Cash Result Water Fund Cash Result Sewer Cash Result

Principal Activity Principal Activity Principal Activity

Operating Income Operating Expenditure Capital income Capital Expenditure

The pages within Attachment 1 are presented (from left to right) by showing the original budget as adopted by Council on 22 June 2017 plus the adopted carryover budgets from 2016/2017 followed by the resolutions between July and September and the revote (or adjustment for this review) and then the revised position projected for 30 June 2018 as at 30 September 2017.

On the far right of the Principal Activity, there is a column titled “Note”. If this is populated by a number, it means that there has been an adjustment in the quarterly review. This number then corresponds to the notes at the end of the Attachment 1 which provides an explanation of the variation.

There is also information detailing restricted assets (reserves) to show Council estimated balances as at 30 June 2018 for all Council’s reserves.

A summary of Capital Works is also included by Fund and Principal Activity.

Office of Local Government Budget Review Guidelines:-

The Office of Local Government on 10 December 2010 issued the new Quarterly Budget Review Guidelines via Circular 10-32, with the reporting requirements to apply from 1 July 2011. This report includes a Quarterly Budget Review Statement (refer Attachment 3) prepared by Council in accordance with the guidelines.

The Quarterly Budget Review Guidelines set a minimum standard of disclosure, with these standards being included in the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting as mandatory requirements for Council’s to address.

Since the introduction of the new planning and reporting framework for NSW Local Government, it is now a requirement for Councils to provide the following components when submitting a Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS):-

· A signed statement by the Responsible Accounting Officer on Councils financial position at the end of the year based on the information in the QBRS

· Budget review income and expenses statement in one of the following formats:

o Consolidated

o By fund (e.g General, Water, Sewer)

o By function, activity, program etc to align with the management plan/operational plan

· Budget Review Capital Budget

· Budget Review Cash and Investments Position

· Budget Review Key performance indicators

· Budget Review Contracts and Other Expenses

The above components are included in Attachment 3:-

Income and Expenditure Budget Review Statement by Type – This shows Councils income and Expenditure by type. This has been split by Fund. Adjustments are shown, looking from left to right. These adjustments are commented on through the last 16 pages of Attachment 1.

Capital Budget Review Statement – This statement identifies in summary Council’s capital works program on a consolidated basis and then split by Fund. It also identifies how the capital works program is funded. As this is the first quarterly review for the reporting period, the Statement may not necessarily indicate the total progress achieved on the delivery of the capital works program.

Cash and Investments Budget Review Statement – This statement reconciles Council’s restricted funds (reserves) against available cash and investments. Council has attempted to indicate an actual position as at 30 September 2017 of each reserve to show a total cash position of reserves with any difference between that position and total cash and investments held as available cash and investments. It should be recognised that the figure is at a point in time and may vary greatly in future quarterly reviews pending on cash flow movements.

Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) – At this stage, the KPI’s within this report are:-

o Debt Service Ratio - This assesses the impact of loan principal and interest repayments on the discretionary revenue of Council.

o Rates and Annual Charges Outstanding Ratio – This assesses the impact of uncollected rates and annual charges on Councils liquidity and the adequacy of recovery efforts

o Asset Renewals Ratio – This assesses the rate at which assets are being renewed relative to the rate at which they are depreciating.

These may be expanded in future to accommodate any additional KPIs that Council may adopt to use in the Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP.)

Contracts and Other Expenses - This report highlights any contracts Council entered into during the July to September quarter that are greater then $50,000.

CONSOLIDATED RESULT

The following table provides a summary of the overall Council budget on a consolidated basis inclusive of all Funds budget movements for the 2017/2018 financial year projected to 30 June 2018 but revised as at 30 September 2017.

2017/2018 Budget Review Statement as at 30 September 2017		Original Estimate (Including Carryovers) 1/7/2017	Adjustments to 30 Sept 2017 including Resolutions*	Proposed 30Sept 2017 Review Revotes	Revised Estimate 30/6/2018 at 30/9/2017
	Operating Revenue	76,828,000	0	2,530,900	79,358,900
	Operating Expenditure	79,542,600	155,000	3,072,500	82,770,100
	Operating Result – Surplus/Deficit	(2,714,600)	(155,000)	(541,600)	(3,411,200)
	Add: Capital Revenue	27,790,000	66,000	(1,897,700)	25,958,300
	Change in Net Assets	25,075,400	(89,000)	(2,439,300)	22,547,100
	Add: Non Cash Expenses	12,939,400	0	0	12,939,400
	Add: Non-Operating Funds Employed	2,160,000	0	2,516,000	4,676,000
	Subtract: Funds Deployed for Non-Operating Purposes	(64,587,000)	(400,000)	1,287,900	(63,699,100)
	Cash Surplus/(Deficit)	(24,412,200)	(489,000)	1,364,600	(23,536,600)
	Restricted Funds – Increase / (Decrease)	(24,419,500)	(439,000)	1,526,500	(23,332,000)
	Forecast Result for the Year – Surplus/(Deficit) – Unrestricted Cash Result	7,300	(50,000)	(161,900)	(204,600)

GENERAL FUND

In terms of the General Fund projected Unrestricted Cash Result the following table provides a reconciliation of the estimated position as at 30 September 2016:

Opening Balance – 1 July 2017	$1,145,200
Plus original budget movement and carryovers	$7,300
Council Resolutions July – September Quarter	(50,000)
Recommendations within this Review – increase/(decrease)	($161,900)
Forecast Unrestricted Cash Result – Surplus/(Deficit) – 30 June 2018	($204,600)
Estimated Unrestricted Cash Result Closing Balance – 30 June 2018	$940,600

The General Fund financial position overall has decreased by $161,900 as a result of this budget review. The proposed budget changes are detailed in Attachment 1 and summarised further in this report below.

Council Resolutions

Resolution 17-269 for the Mullumbimby Hospital Acquisition in part 3 stated “That a budget of $50,000 be approved by the Council to fund the independent peer review and that any remaining funds be used for the forward planning process”. There was no suggested funding source for this resolution and at this point no funding source has been identified.

Budget Adjustments

The budget adjustments identified in Attachments 1 and 2 for the General Fund have been summarised by Budget Directorate in the following table:

Budget Directorate	Revenue Increase/ (Decrease) $	Expenditure Increase/ (Decrease) $	Accumulated Surplus (Working Funds) Increase/ (Decrease) $
General Manager	0	0	0
Corporate & Community Services	134,900	111,500	23,400
Infrastructure Services	3,721,300	3,847,200	(125,900)
Sustainable Environment & Economy	209,100	268,500	(59,400)
Total Budget Movements	4,065,300	4,227,200	(161,900)

Budget Adjustment Comments

Within each of the Budget Directorates of the General Fund, are a series of budget adjustments identified in detail at Attachment 1 and 2. More detailed notes on these are provided in Attachment 1 but in summary the major additional items included are summarised below by Directorate and are included in the overall budget adjustments table above:

Corporate and Community Services

· In the General Purpose Revenues Program an additional $42,400 in revenue has been recognised as the allocation for Council’s 2017/2018 Financial Assistance Grant is more than budgeted.

· In the Governance Services Program it is proposed to increase expenditure by $15,000 for grant management costs. This can be funded through the Grants Management reserve.

· In the Sandhills program, it is proposed to increase the budget for the installation of solar panels ($12,600). This has no net effect on the result as all movements are taken up through the Childrens’ Service reserve.

· In the Pubic Libraries program, it is proposed to increase the budget for the installation of solar panels ($60,000) and costs for concept plans for Brunswick Heads library ($5,300).

Infrastructure Services

· In the Projects & Commercial Development program, it is proposed to increase capital income due to the sale of land at Station Street Mullumbimby for $1,300,000. This can be transferred to the Property Development reserve.

· In the Local Roads and Drainage program, there are a number of adjustments outlined under Note 14 in the Budget Variations explanations section of Attachment 1. Further disclosure is included in the second page of Attachment 2 under the budget program heading Local Roads and Drainage.

· In the Roads and Maritime Services program (RMS) it is proposed to increase operating income and expenditure by $1,742,700 to account for Natural disaster works from June 2016 ($945,000) and March 2017 ($797,700).

· In the Open Space and Recreation program, operating expenditure increased by $21,600 due to a request for a budget for Shara Boulevard sportsfield maintenance of $60,000, reductions of $40,100 against various park and reserve maintenance budgets and a support service cost adjustment of $1,700. There are a number of capital expenditure adjustments outlined under Note 16 in the Budget Variations explanations section of Attachment 1. Further disclosure is included in the third page of Attachment 2 under the budget program heading Open Space & Recreation.

· In the Waste & Recycling program It is proposed to increase operating income by $182,100 due to the receipt of the Better Waste and Recycling grant ($74,500) and a grant for the enhancement of the Resource Recovery Centre ($107,600). It is proposed to increase operating expenditure by $245,000 for the Waste Management Strategy ($130,000) and the Waste Compliance program ($114,000). It is also proposed to make a support service adjustment of $2,500. It is proposed to allocate a budget of $1,216,000 for capital income due to the sale of land at Dingo Lane. This will be transferred to the Waste Management reserve.

· In the Cavanbah Centre program, it is proposed to decrease capital expenditure overall by $217,000 due to estimated grant revenues for projects such as AFL Barrier Netting and Grandstands and Aquatic Centre project as explained in Attachment 1 at Note 18.

· In the First Sun and Suffolk Beachfront Holiday Parks program, it is proposed to increase the budget by $20,000 at each site to continue painting for the year and $40,000 at First Sun for Western Beach access. All adjustments are through the Holiday Park reserve.

· In the Facilities Management program it is proposed to increase operating expenditure by $96,800. This is the excess that Council must pay relating to the flood damage from March 2017

Sustainable Environment and Economy

· In the Development and Certification program, it is proposed to increase income and expenditure by $13,000 to budget for the Information and Technology Service fee. This will fund the Process Improvement Officer. It is propose to add an additional $35,000 to the DA fees received.

· In the Planning Policy and Natural Environment Program, It is proposed to increase income and expenditure to accommodate the Byron Habitat Corridors grant ($64,600), an increase to the Employment Land Strategy ($20,000), an increase to Coastline Beach Scraping ($61,000 – to match grant funding) and an increase for the Integrated Weed management Strategy ($20,000).

· In the Environment & Compliance program it is proposed to increase the budget for licence plate recognition costs of $87,600. This can be funded through the Paid Parking reserve.

WATER FUND

After completion of the 2016/2017 Financial Statements the Water Fund as at 30 June 2017 has a capital works reserve of $4,953,000 and held $6,692,100 in section 64 developer contributions.

The estimated Water Fund reserve balances as at 30 June 2018, and forecast in this Quarter Budget Review, are derived as follows:

Capital Works Reserve

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2017	$4,953,800
Plus original budget reserve movement	1,539,000
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2016/2017	(124,800)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	(40,000)
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2017/2018 – Increase / (Decrease)	1,374,200
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2018	$6,328,000

Section 64 Developer Contributions

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2017	$6,692,100
Plus original budget reserve movement	(1,874,000)
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2016/2017	(2,645,300)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	(70,000)
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2017/2018 – Increase / (Decrease)	(4,589,300)
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2018	$2,102,800

Movements for Water Fund can be seen in Attachment 1 with a proposed estimated decrease to reserves (including S64 Contributions) overall of $110,000 from the 30 September 2017 Quarter Budget Review.

SEWERAGE FUND

After completion of the 2016/2017 Financial Statements the Sewer Fund as at 30 June 2017 has a capital works reserve of $7,372,800 and plant reserve of $827,800. It also held $9,583,600 in section 64 developer contributions.

Capital Works Reserve

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2017	$7,372,800
Plus original budget reserve movement	(1,008,100)
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2016/2017	(102,200)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	24,000
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2017/2018 – Increase / (Decrease)	(1,086,300)
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2018	$6,286,500

Plant Reserve

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2017	$827,800
Plus original budget reserve movement	0
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2016/2017	0
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	(12,300)
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2017/2018 – Increase / (Decrease)	(12,300)
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2018	$815,500

Section 64 Developer Contributions

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2017	$9,583,600
Plus original budget reserve movement	(188,800)
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2016/2017	(1,949,600)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	(26,700)
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2017/2018 – Increase / (Decrease)	(2,165,100)
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2018	$7,418,500

Movements for the Sewerage Fund can be seen in Attachment 1 with a proposed estimated overall decrease to reserves (including S64 Contributions) of $15,000 from the 30 September 2017 Quarter Budget Review.

Legal Expenses

One of the major financial concerns for Council over previous years has been legal expenses. Not only does this item represent a large expenditure item funded by general revenue, but can also be susceptible to large fluctuations.

The table that follows indicates the allocated budget and actual legal expenditure within Council on

a fund basis as at 30 September 2017.

Total Legal Income & Expenditure as at 30 September 2017

Program	2017/2018 Budget ($)	Actual ($)	Percentage To Revised Budget
Income
Legal Expenses Recovered	0	0	0%
Total Income	0	0	0%

Expenditure
General Legal Expenses	201,000	84,328	41.9%
Total Expenditure General Fund	201,000	84,328	41.9%

Note: The above table does not include costs incurred by Council in proceedings after 30 September 2017 or billed after this date. At the time of writing this report, Council has incurred an additional $57,247 of expenditure in October and November 2017.

Byron Railway Precinct Projects

The adopted 2017/2018 Budget Estimates currently provides an allocation of $500,000 funded from the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve for projects related to the Byron Bay Master Plan – Railway Precinct. The 30 September 2017 Quarter Budget Review contains a proposal to reduce this allocation by $260,700 to enable Council to match its contribution to the projects funded by the $260,700 Tourism Demand Driver Infrastructure (TDDI) grant provided to Council.

A summary of the current projects with proposed funded budgets associated with the Byron Railway Precinct should Council adopt this Quarterly Budget Review are outlined in the table below:

Job No	Project	Proposed Budget 2017/2018 $	Funding from TDDI Grant $	Funding from Infrastructure Renewal Reserve $	Funding from Section 94 $
44283.014	Byron Bay Masterplan – Railway Precinct	239,300	0	239,300	0
4835.188	Byron St Connection Upgrade	139,000	69,500	69,500	0
4835.189	Railway Park Upgrade	237,500	118,700	118,700	0
4835.190	Visitor Centre Refurbishment	130,000	50,000	50,000	30,000
4835.191	Visitor Centre Technology Project	45,000	22,500	22,500	0
	Total	790,800	260,700	500,000	30,000

With the addition of the TDDI grant revenue to Council’s existing budget allocation of $500,000, there is now $790,800 available towards projects in the Byron Railway Precinct.

In relation to any further projects relating to the Byron Railway Precinct in terms of budget allocation, these will be reported to Council for consideration through the Budget Review process as they arise.

Financial Implications

The 30 September 2017 Quarter Budget Review of the 2017/2018 Budget has decreased the overall budget result by $161,900. As a result there is a reduction of $161,900 to the estimated unrestricted cash balance attributable to the General Fund, with this becoming an estimated $940,600 at 30 June 2018. This is below the adopted target of Council of $1,000,000. It is recommended that Council will need to recover the 2017/2018 budget result to at least a balanced outcome over the remainder of the 2017/2018 financial year and be conscious of this when considering matters with financial implications.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

In accordance with Regulation 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 the Responsible Accounting Officer of a Council must:-

(1) Not later than 2 months after the end of each quarter (except the June quarter), the responsible accounting officer of a council must prepare and submit to the council a budget review statement that shows, by reference to the estimate of income and expenditure set out in the statement of the council’s revenue policy included in the operational plan for the relevant year, a revised estimate of the income and expenditure for that year.

(2) A budget review statement must include or be accompanied by:

(a) a report as to whether or not the responsible accounting officer believes that the statement indicates that the financial position of the council is satisfactory, having regard to the original estimate of income and expenditure, and

(b) if that position is unsatisfactory, recommendations for remedial action.

(3) A budget review statement must also include any information required by the Code to be included in such a statement.

Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer

This report indicates that the short term financial position of the Council is still satisfactory for the 2017/2018 financial year, having consideration of the original estimate of income and expenditure at the 30 September 2017 Quarter Budget Review.

This opinion is based on the estimated General Fund Unrestricted Cash Result position and that the current indicative budget position for 2017/2018 outlined in this Budget Review is recovered during the remainder of the 2017/2018 financial year. It is most important this occurs and the current projected budget deficit of $204,600 does not deteriorate further.

There needs to be an awareness that any modifications proposed for Council’s budget are not approved without consideration of funding if additional expenditure is proposed through either reallocation of existing budgets, additional revenue or available reserves.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.7

Report No. 13.7 Council Investments October 2017

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance

File No: I2017/1565

Theme: Corporate Management

Financial Services

Summary:

This report includes a list of investments and identifies Council’s overall cash position for the month of October 2017 for Council’s information.

This report is prepared to comply with Regulation 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report listing Council’s investments and overall cash position as at 31 October 2017 be noted.

Report

In relation to the investment portfolio for the month of October 2017, Council has continued to maintain a diversified portfolio of investments. At 31 October 2017, the average 90 day bank bill rate (BBSW) for the month was 1.70%. Council’s performance to 31 October 2017 is 2.45%. Council’s performance is again higher than the benchmark. This is largely due to the active ongoing management of the investment portfolio, maximising investment returns through secure term deposits and purchasing floating rate notes with attractive interest rates.

The table below identifies the investments held by Council as at 31 October 2017:

Schedule of Investments held as at 31 October 2017

Purch Date	Principal ($)	Description	CP*	Rating	Maturity Date	No Fossil Fuel ADI	Type	Interest Rate Per Annum	Current Value
24/03/17	1,000,000	NAB Social Bond (Gender Equality)	N	AA-	24/03/22	N	B	3.44%	1,011,100.17
28/10/16	650,000	Teachers Mutual Bank	P	BBB+	28/10/19	Y	FRN	3.17%	653,642.89
31/03/17	1,000,000	CBA Climate Bond	N	AA-	31/3/22	N	FRN	3.25%	1,000,000.00
23/08/17	2,000,000	NAB	P	AA-	23/11/17	N	TD	2.47%	2,000,000.00
08/08/17	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	06/11/17	N	TD	2.45%	2,000,000.00
09/10/17	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	09/01/18	N	TD	2.51%	1,000,000.00
30/08/17	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	30/11/17	N	TD	2.23%	2,000,000.00
08/08/17	2,000,000	Bank of Queensland	P	BBB+	05/02/18	Y	TD	2.60%	2,000,000.00
02/08/17	2,000,000	Police Credit Union	P	NR	02/11/17	U	TD	2.55%	2,000,000.00
15/08/17	2,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	15/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	2,000,000.00
08/08/17	2,000,000	ME Bank	P	BBB	08/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	2,000,000.00
04/07/17	1,000,000	Bananacoast Credit Union	P	NR	04/01/18	Y	TD	2.70%	1,000,000.00
18/09/17	2,000,000	AMP Bank	P	A	18/12/17	N	TD	2.40%	2,000,000.00
08/09/17	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	08/12/17	N	TD	2.52%	2,000,000.00
30/08/17	2,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	30/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	2,000,000.00
27/09/17	1,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	27/03/18	Y	TD	2.50%	1,000,000.00
04/10/17	2,000,000	Beyond Bank	P	BBB	21/12/17	Y	TD	2.40%	2,000,000.00
13/10/17	1,000,000	Auswide Bank Ltd	N	BBB-	15/01/18	Y	TD	2.50%	1,000,000.00
05/10/17	1,000,000	Police Credit Union	N	NR	05/04/18	U	TD	2.56%	1,000,000.00
15/08/17	1,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	12/01/18	Y	TD	2.55%	1,000,000.00
06/09/17	1,000,000	Bananacoast Credit Union	N	NR	07/03/18	Y	TD	2.60%	1,000,000.00
23/08/17	1,000,000	The Capricornian Credit Union	P	NR	23/11/17	Y	TD	2.50%	1,000,000.00
30/10/17	2,000,000	Beyond Bank	N	BBB	07/02/18	Y	TD	2.42%	2,000,000.00
04/10/17	2,000,000	Police Credit Union	N	NR	04/04/18	U	TD	2.70%	2,000,000.00
03/05/17	1,500,000	Auswide Bank Ltd	P	BBB-	08/11/17	Y	TD	2.68%	1,500,000.00
10/05/17	1,000,000	Auswide Bank Ltd	N	BBB-	15/11/17	Y	TD	2.70%	1,000,000.00
02/06/17	1,500,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	04/12/17	Y	TD	2.67%	1,500,000.00
05/06/17	1,000,000	Intech Bank Ltd	P	NR	05/12/17	Y	TD	2.80%	1,000,000.00
08/06/17	2,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	08/12/17	Y	TD	2.65%	2,000,000.00
05/07/17	1,500,000	Hunter United Employees Credit Union	P	NR	06/11/17	U	TD	2.85%	1,500,000.00
17/10/17	1,000,000	Police Credit Union	N	NR	17/04/18	U	TD	2.55%	1,000,000.00
17/07/17	1,000,000	Police Credit Union	N	NR	17/11/17	U	TD	2.65%	1,000,000.00
30/10/17	2,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	30/01/18	Y	TD	2.42%	2,000,000.00
03/08/17	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	P	NR	03/11/17	Y	TD	2.50%	1,000,000.00
15/08/17	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	15/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
17/08/17	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A	17/11/17	N	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
17/08/17	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	17/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
17/08/17	1,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	19/02/18	Y	TD	2.55%	1,000,000.00
23/08/17	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	23/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
24/08/17	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	24/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
30/08/17	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	28/11/17	Y	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
31/08/17	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	12/12/17	N	TD	2.50%	2,000,000.00
31/08/17	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	18/12/17	N	TD	2.50%	2,000,000.00
01/09/17	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	02/01/18	N	TD	2.52%	1,000,000.00
05/09/17	1,000,000	Bananacoast Credit Union	N	NR	06/03/18	Y	TD	2.60%	1,000,000.00
15/09/17	1,000,000	Auswide Bank Ltd	N	BBB-	15/12/17	Y	TD	2.40%	1,000,000.00
15/09/17	1,000,000	Peoples Choice Credit Union	P	NR	15/03/18	Y	TD	2.55%	1,000,000.00
28/09/17	2,000,000	Rural Bank	P	BBB+	29/01/18	Y	TD	2.50%	2,000,000.00
28/09/17	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	29/12/17	N	TD	2.51%	1,000,000.00
04/10/17	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	05/03/18	N	TD	2.55%	1,000,000.00
04/10/17	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	04/01/18	N	TD	2.50%	1,000,000.00
04/10/17	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	05/02/18	N	TD	2.52%	1,000,000.00
11/10/17	1,000,000	Auswide Bank Ltd	N	BBB-	11/01/18	Y	TD	2.50%	1,000,000.00
20/10/17	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	20/01/18	N	TD	2.48%	1,000,000.00
23/10/17	1,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	23/04/18	Y	TD	2.55%	1,000,000.00
26/10/17	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	24/01/18	Y	TD	2.42%	1,000,000.00
N/A	1,567,714	CBA Business Online Saver	N	A	N/A	N	CALL	1.40%	1,567,714.21
Total	76,717,714						AVG	2.45%	76,732,457.27

Note 1.	CP = Capital protection on maturity
	N = No Capital Protection
	Y = Fully covered by Government Guarantee
	P = Partial Government Guarantee of $250,000 (Financial Claims Scheme)

Note 2.	No Fossil Fuel ADI
	Y = No investment in Fossil Fuels
	N = Investment in Fossil Fuels
	U = Unknown Status

Note 3.	Type	Description
	B	Bonds	Principal can vary based on valuation, interest payable via a fixed interest, payable usually each quarter.
	FRN	Floating Rate Note	Principal can vary based on valuation, interest payable via a floating interest rate that varies each quarter.
	TD	Term Deposit	Principal does not vary during investment term. Interest payable is fixed at the rate invested for the investment term.
	CALL	Call Account	Principal varies due to cash flow demands from deposits/withdrawals, interest is payable on the daily balance.

Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing

An additional column has been added to the schedule of Investments above, to identify if the financial institution holding the Council investment, has been assessed as a ‘No Fossil Fuel’ investing institution. This information has been sourced through www.marketforces.org.au and identifies financial institutions that either invest in fossil fuel related industries or do not. The graph below highlights the percentage of each classification across Councils total investment portfolio in respect of fossil fuels only.

The notion of Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing is much broader than whether a financial institution as rated by ‘marketforces.org.au’ invests in fossil fuels or not. Council current Investment Policy defines Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing at Section 4.1 of the Policy. Council’s Investment Policy can be found at the following link:

http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/files/publications/council_investments_policy_2017.pdf

In this regard Council has an additional two investments that are with financial instituions that invest in fossil fuels but the purposes of the investments are in accord with the broader definition of Environmentall and Socially Responsible investments as indicated below:

1. $1,000,000 investment with the National Australia Bank maturing on 24 March 2022 known as a Social Bond that promotes Gender Equity.

2. $1,000,000 investment with Commonwealth Bank maturing on 31 March 2022 known as a Climate Bond.

For the month of October 2017, as indicated in the table below, there is a dissection of the investment portfolio by investment type:

Dissection of Council Investment Portfolio as at 31 October 2017

Principal Value ($)	Investment Linked to:-	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
72,500,000.00	Term Deposits	72,500,000.00	0.00
1,650,000.00	Floating Rate Note	1,653,642.89	3,642.89
1,567,714.21	Business On-Line Saver (At Call)	1,567,714.21	0.00
1,000,000.00	Bonds	1,011,100.17	11,100.17
76,717,714.21		76,732,457.27	14,743.06

The current value of an investment compared to the principal value (face value or original purchase price) provides an indication of the performance of the investment without reference to the coupon (interest) rate. The current value represents the value received if an investment was sold or traded in the current market, in addition to the interest received.

The table below provides a reconciliation of investment purchases and maturities for month of October 2017 on a current market value basis.

Movement in Investment Portfolio – 1 to 31 October 2017

Item	Current Market Value (at end of month) $
Opening Balance at 30 September 2017	76,230,039.91
Add: New Investments Purchased	19,000,000.00
Add: Call Account Additions	0.00
Add: Interest from Call Account	2,417.36
Less: Investments Matured	18,000,000.00
Less: Call Account Redemption	500,000.00
Less: Fair Value Movement for period	0.00
Closing Balance at 31 October 2017	76,732,457.27

Investments Maturities and Returns – 1 to 31 October 2017

Principal Value ($)	Description	Type	Maturity Date	Number of Days Invested	Interest Rate Per Annum	Interest Paid on Maturity $
2,000,000.00	Beyond Bank	TD	03/10/17	124	2.65%	18,005.48
2,000,000.00	Beyond Bank	TD	04/10/17	92	2.65%	13,358.90
2,000,000.00	Police Credit Union	TD	04/10/17	184	2.80%	28,230.14
1,000,000.00	Police Credit Union	TD	05/10/17	92	2.60%	6,553.42
1,000,000.00	NAB	TD	09/10/17	98	2.44%	6,551.23
1,000,000.00	Hunter United Credit Union	TD	10/10/17	92	2.65%	6,679.45
1,000,000.00	Auswide Bank	TD	13/10/17	122	2.60%	8,690.41
1,000,000.00	Bananacoast Credit Union	TD	13/10/17	122	2.60%	8,690.41
1,000,000.00	Police Credit Union	TD	17/10/17	104	2.60%	7,408.22
2,000,000.00	ME Bank	TD	23/10/17	108	2.55%	15,090.41
2,000,000.00	Beyond Bank	TD	30/10/17	103	2.65%	14,956.16
2,000,000.00	ME Bank	TD	30/10/17	94	2.45%	12,619.18
18,000,000.00						146,833.41

The overall ‘cash position’ of Council is not only measured by what funds Council has invested but also by what funds Council has retained in its consolidated fund or bank account as well for operational purposes. In this regard, for the month of October 2017 the table below identifies the overall cash position of Council as follows:

Dissection of Council Cash Position as at 31 October 2017

Item	Principal Value ($)	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
Investments Portfolio
Term Deposits	72,500,000.00	72,500,000.00	0.00
Floating Rate Note	1,650,000.00	1,653,642.89	3,642.89
Business On-Line Saver (At Call)	1,567,714.21	1,567,714.21	0.00
Bonds	1,000,000.00	1,011,100.17	11,100.17
Total Investment Portfolio	76,717,714.21	76,732,457.27	14,743.06

Cash at Bank
Consolidated Fund	1,409,410.27	1,409,410.27	0.00
Total Cash at Bank	1,409,410.27	1,409,410.27	0.00

Total Cash Position	78,127,124.48	78,141,867.54	14,743.06

Financial Implications

Council uses a diversified mix of investments to achieve short, medium and long-term results.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

In accordance with Regulation 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, the Responsible Accounting Officer of Council must provide Council with a monthly report detailing all monies Council has invested under section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993.

The Report must be presented at the next Ordinary Meeting of Council after the end of the month being reported. In this regard, the current Council Meeting cycle does not always allow this to occur, especially when investment valuations required for the preparation of the report, are often received after the deadline for the submission of reports for the meeting. Endeavours will be made to ensure the required report will be provided to Council and this will for some months require reporting for one or more months.

Council’s investments are carried out in accordance with section 625(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 and Council’s Investment Policy. The Local Government Act 1993 allows Council to invest money as per the Ministers Order – Forms of Investment, last published in the Government Gazette on 11 February 2011.

Council’s Investment Policy includes the objective of maximising earnings from authorised investments and ensuring the security of Council Funds.

Council at its Ordinary Meeting held 8 October 2015 resolved through resolution 15-515 to insert a new objective into its adopted Investment Policy, which gives a third tier consideration by Council to Environmental and Socially Responsible Investments, when making investment decisions.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.10

Report No. 13.10 Sunshine Cycles occupation of a site at First Sun Caravan Park (Lot 5 DP 827049)

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Ralph James, Legal Counsel

File No: I2017/1684

Theme: Corporate Management

Governance Services

Summary

On 2 November 2017 Council resolved that a report be brought to the next meeting of Council on the trial incubation project at First Sun Caravan Park.

On 16 December 2016 Council granted a licence to Luke Young trading as Sunshine Cycles Pty Ltd to occupy land at Lot 5 DP 827049 being a site within the visitor area of the First Sun Caravan Park.

The licence term commenced on 16 December 2016 and expired six months thereafter. The term of the license has been extended, by Council resolution, to a non-defined date.

As at the date of Council’s meeting Sunshine Cycles will have been in occupation of a site at the First Sun Caravan Park for 11 months and 1 week (16 December 2016 to 23 November 2017).

The recommendation made to Council would see the term of Sunshine Cycles occupation being 1 year and 1 week (16 December 2016 to 23 December 2017).

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That this report be noted.

2. That pursuant to clause 4.3 of the Licence for occupation of Council land between Byron Shire Council and Luke Young, Council terminate the license effective as at 23 December 2017.

3. That notice of termination be provided to Luke Young forthwith.

Report

On 2 November 2017 Council resolved as follows:

1. “That Council support the progression of a Byron Innovation Incubation Program including the models and list of potential sites identified in the report for further investigation.

2. That part of this work include:

i. scope the ‘types’ of businesses that would fit this model and research their needs

ii. Develop the financial business case for the models.

iii. Develop project plan and budget to deliver the BIIP.

3. That staff present a further report to Council on point 2 above in early 2018.

4. That upon the establishment of the Strategic Business Panel, this program be listed for their consideration, advice and input.

5. That a report be brought to the next meeting of Council on the trial incubation project at First Sun Caravan Park.”

This report addresses part 5 of Council’s resolution.

The Licence

On 16 December 2016, Council granted a licence to Luke Young trading as Sunshine Cycles Pty Ltd to occupy land at Lot 5 DP 827049 being a site within the visitor area of the First Sun Caravan Park. The site is depicted the site is depicted in the following map.

The licence term commenced on 16 December 2016 and expired six months thereafter. As is outlined in the body of this report the term of the license has been extended to a non-defined date.

The licence provides that occupation of the licensed area continues after the expiry of the term on a month-to-month basis which either party may terminate on one months notice at any time.

The licence provides that the licensee acknowledges that the licence does not contain any option for the licensee to extend the licence beyond the term.

The licences granted in consideration of the licensee paying $1 per month on demand.

To date Council has not made demand for payment and consequently no payments have been made.

Occupation of the First Sun Caravan Park site

As at the date of Council’s meeting Sunshine Cycles will have been in occupation of a site at the First Sun Caravan Park for 11 months and 1 week (16 December 2016 to 23 November 2017).

The recommendation made to Council would see the term of Sunshine Cycles occupation being 1 year and 1 week (16 December 2016 to 23 December 2017)

History

Sunshine Cycles, in all its dealings with Council, is represented by its founder, Luke Young. Throughout this document, where the context permits, a reference to Sunshine Cycles is a reference to a communication to or from Mr Young.

Sunshine Cycles made an application to the 2016 Byron Bay Town Centre Placemaking Seed Fund.

That program was said to be a launchpad initiative to quickly progress key strategies of the Masterplan relating to revitalisation, beautification and activation that will result in a higher level of connectedness for locals, opportunities for home grown enterprise and inspiring visitor product.

It was said to allow council and the community to activate the town centre and create a more vibrant public realm and will encourage innovation and entrepreneurial partnerships by allowing quick implementation and small scale activation, to test concepts for larger scale implementation.

The objectives of the program, inter-alia, were to:

- inspire the use of underutilised and inactive spaces, such as laneways, shared zones, streets, parks and reserves.

- Beautify the town centre, which could include public art installations, laneway beautification, pavement treatments, plantings, street furniture etc.

Sunshine Cycles was one of 28 applicants for funding. The application was unsuccessful. Sunshine Cycles was advised of this on 16 June 2016.

Sunshine Cycles made contact with Council’s Economic Development team.

Sent: Wednesday, 24 August 2016 11:47 AM

“It was good to touch base about our Sunshine Cycles solar powered electric business model for the Byron shire.

We have been busy acquiring components and developing the idea and almost have our first prototype ready to go. We are developing a fully automated, solar powered, locally manufactured, electric bike share system that works from off grid, free energy, fully automated via smart app pods.

We really want to show you what’s possible and to introduce the concept so you get to experience what we are all trying to achieve. We will have the bikes and container ready for the first pod in October. With the solar system to follow shortly. We hope to launch, self funded, the first pod over summer to see how the system goes and develop the automation and functionality to cater for users expectations. Following this we will launch the next pod at another location out of town such as the Cavanbah Centre in the new year. The third phase will be the fully automated app that lets members access bikes as they need when they want. This will co-incide with the third pod. Probably down towards suffolk park within the first 2 years.

I have been working with the BZE Transport group looking into zero emission transport options for other forms too however I believe if this is successful it will be a great asset for the Shire. We will be continually developing to bring a new user friendly transport system to our great community.

Our first priority is to obtain the necessary permits to operate in town centre. We would be seeking a trial temporary pop-up shop permit to test the system over summer and see whats needed to develop it further. I will be on hand to operate this from 8-6 daily. We will have a full callout availability for any bike issues and be complying with all relevant codes and practices for electric bike rental.

The requirements for the first pods location to give us the best shot of succeeding would be somewhere right in town where there is a lot of thoroughfare and accessibility to the public. Somewhere with high visibility, security and direct northern exposure for maximum sunshine for the solar system. The Pods look great and serve as a visual creative site with artwork on each one.

The best options we feel would be;

1. east of the surf club in the park next to carpark.

2. in the carpark (taking 2 carparks) around the pool area, either Northside or Southside with visibility from the top of Johnson Street

3. near the visitor centre carpark either north or south side with maximum sun exposure

4. near the round about on the train reserve opposite the police station

These sites would give us maximum exposure to showcase what we are doing and gain public interest and support. The sites give great sun coverage, secure parking and street accessibility for potential customers.

If non of these sites are suitable we could look at potentially another site however it must have the exposure we need to make the trial feasible. The pods are fully relocatable so we could trial different locations as we develop.

I have included some maps showing the locations we request. The red and yellow squares show possible locations we feel would work well for the initial trial. We would be happy to discuss the pro’s and con’s with council and come to an agreement with the best initial trial location.

It would be great to come and do a presentation of our business model and discuss council requirements to proceed.”

Staff considered the concept and acted on Sunshine Cycles’s overture in to make a presentation to Council. It should be noted that the meeting was set up to allow Luke Young to present his model – which was proposed as a trial.

Sent: Tuesday, 20 September 2016 6:34 PM

Subject: FW: Sunshine Cycles - Proposal for pod locations

“As you know Council has been perusing a bike hire solution in Byron Bay for some time. Originally we were looking at running something similar to Brisbane and Melbourne however upon some research found that these initiatives have been heavily underwritten by the Councils in those areas and probably not a viable option for us.

Luke Young from Sunshine Cycles approached us through the Placemaking Seed Fund program process with a very innovative bike program solution and one that I believe will encourage a shift to bike use and provide a positive impact on the town centre.

I would like to propose that we invite Luke in to present his project to us and for us to look at how we could support the venture with no cost or low cost lease space for the first 12-18 months during the start up and trial phases.

I suggest this as given own desire to bring this type of product to the Shire and our own research discovery making us more aware of the business case challenges that it could be a win win to support Luke’s venture.

This project would also work well in terms of its integration with the Stone & Wood bike racks project.

Please let me know if you are open to a presentation from Luke in the first instance and I will arrange this for mid October.”

Off the back of this email a meeting was held on 17 October 2016 with the following staff members.

· General Manager

· Director Infrastructure Services

· Manager and Open Spaces

· Economic Development Coordinator

· Tourism officer

· Luke Young and his wife

Sunshine Cycles made a power point presentation and ran through its business model. It also brought in a bike to demonstrate.

One of the outcomes of the meeting was that consideration was to be given to leasing spaces to Sunshine Cycles on a trial basis. Councils Infrastructure Services directorate was tasked with this looking at what open spaces were available and suitable.

Thereafter various emails were exchanged between Sunshine Cycles and Council staff.

By 5 December 2016 discussions had reached the point that appropriate sites had been identified and narrowed to 3 in number and consideration was being given to drawing an agreement between Council and Sunshine Cycles in respect of the trial.

It emerged that the preferred site was one within First Sun visitor car park.

On 16 December 2016 Council issued Luke Young trading as Sunshine Cycles Pty Ltd a licence to occupy the site with was more particularly described as Lot 5 DP 827049. The period of the agreement was six months.

The licence stipulated that its context was:

“to allow Young to occupy certain Council land for the purpose of providing public transport (bicycles) to the Byron Shire community on a trial basis (emphasis added).”

The consideration payable was $1 per month on demand.

Vacation of the site

As the end of the trial period approached Sunshine Cycles made an unsolicited approach to Council staff (1 June 2017). That approach included the words

“we would love to maintain our position as we gear back up for the tourist season at the end of the year. We would like to have the opportunity to discuss options as we would not be able to afford a lease until things pick up again. At this time we would be happy to negotiate our continued residence at this location as well as another location out of town for Park and ride availability.”

The staff attitude to this request was that Sunshine Cycles would be advised that Council is unable to extend the trial further and that he should provide the information it had gathered from the trial so that it could be compiled for reporting purposes.

On 9 June 2017 Sunshine Cycles was advised in the following terms:

“Executive Management have advised that Byron Shire Council is unable to extend the trial beyond the agreed period as direct negotiations cannot be justified in this case in relation to guidelines around competitive processes.”

In response, on 12 June 2017, Sunshine Cycles requested an extension of his occupancy of the site until after the Splendour in the Grass Festival being 21 July–23 July 2017.

On 16 Jun 2017, at 9:17 am, the Mayor wrote to all Councillors and to nominated senior staff:

‘Hi all. I’ve been thinking about the space we have provided for the electric bike guys in the front of First Sun Holiday Park. We absolutely need to be fair and transparent when supporting new businesses for locals and also need to have in place strict criteria for selecting businesses that we wish to support, including not adversely affecting other local businesses.

I think we have stumbled onto something pretty cool. It is in a great location that could highlight a new local business and give them a great kick start whilst providing 'reputational' benefit for us.

Is there any appetite for the following model:

1. Providing this space for business support for young locals?

2. Providing 12 month peppercorn leases for start ups, with no capacity to extend or double up or repeat.

3. The business required to front up all establishment and infrastructure costs that need to be update all year

4. We advertise each year and Sasha Graham and the Economic Development Officer select each years business. “

On 16 June 2017 Sunshine Cycles was advised that

“Executive Management have advised that Council is unable to extend the trial period beyond the license period which expires today, and operations are not to continue beyond today also.

Please remove the pod as soon as possible and please advise us of the removal date and time so that we can advise management of First Holiday Park.”

The same day Sunshine Cycles responded to staff. It requested information as to Council exercising an option to enable it to remain on the site.

The following is a notation made by staff on 21 June 2017 in respect of contact with Sunshine Cycles on 19 June 2017:

“I followed up this response (the response of 16 June 2017 set out above) with a phone call on Monday, 19 June 2017 and was advised that Mr Young would like to elevate his request to extend his tenure and had made application for Public Access at tomorrow’s Council meeting”.

At 10:56am on 19 June 2017 the Mayor forwarded the following email to all Councillors and nominated senior staff:

Sent: Monday, 19 June 2017 10:35 PM

“Hi all. I will be moving an urgency on this matter. I will move that we develop and create a program for business support.

I consider it important that we create the transparent and clear process as described already ….and establish spaces both on this site, and on other identified sites-we could investigate opportunities in railway square, the rail corridor, sandhills area, and other areas etc.

I believe we could also do more and actually help businesses, with incubation support whilst they are there and all of this could be developed by (staff).

This will cost council next to nothing but it will be a terrific leg up to those who secure each years support.

I also believe, that if we agree with this, providing the current site users the site until we are ready to replace them with the next business would be appropriate. i’m not sure moving someone on and having an empty space for a few months when we know we will refill it would be a waste. I don’t believe 12 months is an overly long time to support incubating a business.”

On 22 June 2017 Luke Young made a Public Access submission to Council.

On 22 June 2017 the Mayor moved a Matter of Urgency - Innovative Business Incubation

Program which resulted in the following being resolved:

1. “That council prepare a report to outline the establishment of an Innovative Business Incubation Program.

2. That this report consider the following:

i. Providing set term leases for start ups, with no capacity to extend or double up or repeat

ii. The business required to front up all establishment and infrastructure costs that need to be relocatable, or possibly Council purchasing a temporary space charge a low rate to pay back purchase costs

iii. The advertising for expressions of interest on a cyclical basis for projects and businesses to utilise council spaces to develop their innovative businesses

iv. Creation of a criteria to adjudicate on applications, possibly including sustainability, innovation, potential for scalability or employment growth

v. Identification of possible sites for incubation spaces

vi. Possible mentoring and incubation support

vii. Liaisons and relationships with permanent businesses

viii. Levels of subsidisation

3. That the current business utilising the Council space at First Sun Holiday park continue its operation until the program commences and the next recipient of support takes its place and that the General Manager receives delegated authority to negotiate a temporary lease. (emphasis added)

4. That the report authors consult mentoring and business incubation groups and chambers to assist the formulation of the program. (Richardson/Ndiaye)”

Part 3 of the motion sought to continue the operation of Luke Young and Sunshine Cycles on the site for an undetermined period.

Sunshine Cycles continues to be in occupation of the site.

Legal nature of current occupation

The provisions of the existing licence which are applicable to the continued occupation (in the absence of a lease) are:

3. Grant of Licence

3.1 In consideration of $1 per month payable by the Licensee on demand, Council grants and the Licensee accepts a licence of the Licensed Area for the Permitted Use for the Term, subject to any rights of early termination contained in this Licence.

3.2 This Licence confers no right of exclusive possession of the Licensed Area to the Licensee and Council may at any time exercise any of its rights as owner or controller of the Licensed Area.

3.3 The rights conferred by this Licence shall rest in contract only and shall not create or confer upon the Licensee any tenancy, estate or interest in or over the Licensed Area.

3.4 The Licensee is not permitted to use for the purpose of the Licence any part of the Land other than the Licensed Area.

4 Term and holding over

4.1 The Licence Term:

a) Commences on the date both parties have executed the Licence (Agreement Date); and

b) Expires six months from the Agreement Date.

4.2 Council does not need to provide any notice to the Licensee that the Licence will expire at the end of the Term.

4.3 If, with Council’s consent, the Licensee continues to occupy the Licensed Area after the Term, the Licensee will occupy the Licensed Area on a month-to-month basis which:

a) Either party may terminate on one month’s notice at any time; and

b) Is on the same terms as this Licence.

4.4 The Licensee acknowledges that the Licence does not contain any option for the Licensee to extend the Licence beyond the Term.

Financial Implications

A certified practicing valuer was engaged on 4 September 2017 to prepare a commercial market valuation for the use of the site. The agreed timeframe for completion of the valuation was 4 October 2017. Subsequent to numerous follow up enquiries by staff, the valuer advised on 3^rd November that the report will be completed by 8 November 2017.

The intention of the valuation is to ascertain an appropriate amount for the site. Mr Young was informed by email on 29 June 20/17, that when a value is determined it is intended to back date payments to 17 June 2017.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

An Unsolicited Proposal is an approach to Council from a Proponent with a proposal to deal directly with Council over a commercial proposition, where Council has not requested the proposal. For present purposes the approach of Sunshine Cycles is an unsolicited proposal.

There is no doubt that unsolicited proposals may be pursued in justifying circumstances. Generally, unsolicited proposals and direct negotiations with an individual or organisation would be considered where the proposal has unique attributes such that others could not deliver with the same value for money outcome.

Relevant to the present circumstances is the Guideline produced by the NSW Government which provides that a proposal is not unique and/or would be unlikely to be progressed where:

· The proponent has an existing license to provide goods or services and seeks to bypass a future tender process.

· The proposal embodies a significant extension to an existing arrangement (or the next stage of a staged project) on the basis that the proponent is already “on-site” or has some other claimed advantages, absent of other “uniqueness” criteria.

The Guideline in respect of unsolicited proposals refers to a method of assessment.

The guideline identifies an assessment of value for money as a criterion. In assessing value for money relevant questions are:

Does the proposal deliver value for money to Council?

A proposal is value for money if it achieves the required project outcomes and objectives in an efficient, high quality, innovative and cost effective way with appropriate regard to the allocation, management and mitigation of risks.

While Value for Money will be tested appropriately in the context of each specific proposal, factors that will be given consideration are likely to include:

· Quality of all aspects of the proposal, including: achievable timetable, clearly stated proposal objectives and outcomes, design, community impacts, detailed proposal documentation and appropriate commercial and/or contractual agreements (including any key performance targets), and a clearly set out process for obtaining any planning or other required approvals.

· Innovation in service delivery, infrastructure design, construction methodologies, and maintenance.

It is more than a reasonable interpretation of the circumstances of the licence granted to Sunshine Cycles, that a trial period was appropriate to enable Council to assess its value for money in the above context.

It is clear that the intention of Council in implementing the trial was to enable Council to assess the project’s ability to contribute to the activation of the Byron town centre and the creation of a more vibrant public realm. The project was seen as being innovative and entrepreneurial. It was a small scale activation. Council wished to assess its potential.

It was intended that the period of occupation would be no more than the six months trial.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.13

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report No. 13.13 PLANNING - State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Variations to development standards - 1 July to 30 September

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Chris Larkin, Manager Sustainable Development

Noreen Scott, EA Sustainable Environment and Economy

File No: I2017/969

Theme: Ecology

Development and Approvals

Summary:

This report has been provided as a requirement of the NSW Department of Planning Circular PS-08-014, as amended by agreement to enable the quarterly reporting of all development applications, where SEPP 1 variations have been granted under delegated authority. SEPP 1 only applies to development applications submitted under Byron Local Environmental Plan 1988. The report also provides an update where a variation has been granted under Clause 4.6 of Byron LEP 2014.

The report is for information and noting purposes.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

In accordance with the provisions of S375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a Division is to be called whenever a motion for a planning decision is put to the meeting, for the purpose of recording voting on planning matters. Pursuant to clause 2(a) under the heading Matters to be Included in Minutes of Council Meetings of Council's adopted Code of Meeting Practice (as amended) a Division will be deemed to have been called by the mover and seconder of all motions relating to this report.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council note the report.

Report

In accordance with the NSW Department of Planning Circular PS-08-014, all development applications where SEPP 1 variations have been granted under delegated authority are to be reported to Council for information. The report also includes development applications where a variation has also been granted to development standards under Clause 4.6 of Byron LEP 2014.

The period of reporting is for the 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017. The following DA’s are outlined below:

DA No.	10.2017.79.1
Development	Consolidation of Two (2) Existing Flats into One (1) Dwelling and Construction of a New Dwelling to Create a Dual Occupancy (Attached) Demolition of Detached Garage, Tree Removal and Strata Subdivision
Property:	2 Bower Street BRUNSWICK HEADS
Lot and DP:	LOT: 12 SEC: 27 DP: 758171
Zoning:	R2 Low Density Residential
Development Standard being varied:	Clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.1E of Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 – 800m² minimum lot size for dual occupancies (attached) in the R2 Low Density Residential Zone.
Justification	· The allotment already contained an attached dual occupancy dating to the 1970’s; · Allowing a variation enables rejuvenation of out dated housing stock in the area; · The site attributes are conducive to a dual occupancy (attached).
Extent of variation	40.4m² (5%)
Concurrence	Delegated to Council
Determined Date	11 July 2017

DA No.	10.2016.425
Development	Subdivision to Create Three (3) Lots and Change of Use of Existing Dwelling House and Rural Workers Dwelling to Dual Occupancy (Detached)
Property:	149 Federal Drive EUREKA NSW 2480
Lot and DP:	LOT: 22 DP: 1014053
Zoning:	RU1 Primary Production/RU2 Rural Landscape/PART DM Deferred
Development Standard being varied:	Clause 4.6 Variation subclause 4.2D(2) of Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 -
Justification	The proposed location of the dual occupancy (detached) dwelling at the entrance to the subject site had greater merit than trying to demolish and relocate one of the dwellings 36m closer to the other to be within 100m of the existing dwelling onsite. Reasons for this: · Located in a previously cleared area – thereby minimising the disturbance on the site; · Each of the structures exists onsite already; · The dual occupancy dwellings accessed via a single driveway which minimises any upgrades required for the existing access driveway through the site and/or loss of mature macadamia trees as a result of any access upgrades.
Extent of variation	The extent of the variation to the 100m development standard is therefore 36%.
Concurrence	Delegated to Council
Determined Date	28 September 2017

DA No.	10.2017.245.1
Development	New Dwelling to Create Dual Occupancy (Detached), New Garage and Swimming Pool
Property:	1026 Friday Hut Road BINNA BURRA NSW 2479
Lot and DP:	LOT: 9 DP: 610194
Zoning:	RU2 Rural Landscape
Development Standard being varied:	Clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.2D of Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 – requirement for dual occupancies and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zone to utilise a shared vehicular access and be no more than 100m apart.
Justification	· The allotment is bisected by a gully and already contains two vehicular access points. Creating a shared vehicular access would involve substantial earthworks and engineering, potentially resulting in adverse environmental and/or visual impacts. · Strict compliance with the 100m separation standard is impractical due to the presence of a gully and other topographical constraints. A condition was imposed requiring a 110m separation between the two dwellings.
Extent of variation	· Two vehicular access points instead of one (utilise existing access points). · 110m separation (10%).
Concurrence	Delegated to Council
Determined Date	20 September 2017

DA No.	10.2016.818.1
Development	Use of a Building as a Dwelling to Create Dual Occupancy (Detached), Demolition of Movie Room and use of a Building as an Art Studio
Property:	150 Tandys Lane BRUNSWICK HEADS NSW 2483
Lot and DP:	LOT: 5 DP: 863320
Zoning:	RU1 Primary Production / PART RU2 Rural Landscape / PART DM Deferred Matter
Development Standard being varied:	Clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.2D of Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 – requirement for dual occupancies and secondary dwellings in the RU1 and RU2 zone to utilise a shared vehicular access.
Justification	· The allotment is bisected by Andersons Lane. The existing buildings have frontages to different roads, making strict compliance impractical in the circumstances.
Extent of variation	· Two vehicular access points instead of one.
Concurrence	Delegated to Council.
Determined Date	9 August 2017

DA No.	10.2017.200.1
Development	Dwelling-house and swimming pool and demolition of existing buildings (two SEPP 1 variations)
Property:	119 Possum Shoot Road COORABELL NSW 2482
Lot and DP:	LOT: B DP: 386324
Zoning:	7(d) (Scenic/Escarpment Zone) DM Deferred Matter
Development Standard being varied:	Clause 27 - Building lines along arterial roads & Clause 31 - Development on ridgetops – Byron Local Environmental Plan 1988
Justification	Clause 27 · The proposed dwelling-house appropriately ensures the retention and enhancement of rural character and amenity along this road corridor by ensuring appropriate setbacks and not significantly impacting on the rural character, amenity and scenic qualities from the road perspective. · The proposed dwelling-house will not be visible from Coolamon Scenic Drive due to the existing landscaped earth berm, the vertical separation of the dwelling from Coolamon Scenic Drive, and the proposed setback. · The proposed setback would not be out of character when compared with the variety of other setbacks along the nearby stretch of Coolamon Scenic Drive. · It is unlikely that this road would be subject to road widening in the near future that would be adversely affected by the proposed setback. · The development application includes landscaping to visually soften the proposed development. · Compliance with the standard would push the development, including the bush fire mitigation inner protection area, further down the slope into the site towards vegetated areas leading to likely vegetation removal. Clause 31 · The proposed dwelling-house is set down below the crest of the ridgeline. · The proposed dwelling-house will not be overtly visible in the broader lower areas below this part of the ridgeline, being only of low-key visibility to a confined part of Myocum. · The proposed dwelling-house does not have an excessive scale in the overall context of the range associated with the ridgeline. · The visibility of the dwelling-house will be softened landscaping and sympathetic colours and building materials · No significant tree or vegetation removal is proposed.
Extent of variation	· Clause 27 is 69% and Clause 31 100%
Concurrence	Delegated to Council
Determined Date	9 August 2017

DA No.	10.2017.236.1
Development	Strata Subdivision of an existing tourist facility (10 motel units and 4 serviced apartments) to create fourteen (14) Strata Lots and Common Property
Property:	18-20 Bay Street BYRON BAY NSW 2481
Lot and DP:	LOT: 1 DP: 1076677
Zoning:	B2 Local Centre
Development Standard being varied:	Clause 4.1 2014 Byron Local Environmental Plan
Justification	· The proposal produces a better planning outcome than one that strictly complies with the development standard because requiring strict compliance would result in lot sizes that are not in keeping with the approved and long established built form. The circumstances of the case warranted a more flexible approach to application of the lot size development standard.
Extent of variation	· the extent of the variation ranges from 18% to 44.5%
Concurrence	Delegated to Council
Determined Date	8 September 2017

Financial Implications

Not applicable.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

The report is provided as a requirement of NSW Department of Planning circular PS-08-014. This circular can be viewed at http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/planning-system-circulars.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.14

Report No. 13.14 PLANNING - Event Sites/ Function Centres in Rural Zones

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Rob Van Iersel, Major Projects Planner

File No: I2017/1485

Theme: Ecology

Planning Policy and Natural Environment

Summary:

The recent public consultation undertaken for the draft Rural Land Use Strategy highlighted a number of issues that were considered by the community to be a priority for action. The appropriateness of wedding sites in the rural area was one of these priority issues.

In recent years Council has received complaints regarding a number of unauthorised wedding venues in the rural parts of the Shire, resulting in a variety of compliance actions. A number of development applications have also been dealt with, the majority of which have been withdrawn or refused.

Under the current provisions of Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014, wedding venues, which are defined as functions centres for the purpose of the LEP, are prohibited in both the RU1 Primary Production Zone and the RU2 Rural landscape Zone.

Previous development applications have therefore been lodged under Clause 2.8 of the LEP, which allows consideration of any use on land on a temporary basis, even if that use is otherwise prohibited, subject to a range of merit considerations, including the potential for adverse amenity impacts.

A recent Land & Environment Court judgement in relation to a wedding venue approval in Hawkesbury Shire has highlighted the absolute nature of the controls included in Clause 2.8 (which is a Standard Template LEP provision).

Council cannot approve a temporary use under that clause unless it is satisfied that (amongst other things) there will not be any adverse impacts on the amenity of the neighbourhood [emphasis added].

The key finding of the judgement was that this is absolute, i.e. Council cannot turn its mind to whether a potential adverse impact might be acceptable in the circumstances; if an adverse impact is identified, Council is prevented from granting approval.

The wedding industry in Byron Shire is very large; estimated to generate a total expenditure of $54M per annum; total wages of $21.6M per annum and support 392 direct full-time and 314 indirect employees.

Weddings are the main type of rural functions, but demand also exists in the rural area for other small commercial events, which would also fall within the function centre definition.

Consultation with industry representatives, and with rural residents previously impacted by unauthorised events, suggests that, on appropriate sites, the adverse impacts of rural events can be managed, through an approval process that combines a range of site location and event management criteria.

A draft LEP provision is recommended that would allow Council to support rural events in appropriate locations, where there is clear separation between the event site and nearby dwellings, and with strict operational and management controls that would ensure that individual events would be managed to minimise noise and traffic.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council prepare a draft Planning Proposal to amend Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 to insert a clause permitting function centres with consent in zones RU1 and RU2, subject to a range of controls which will manage impacts on existing residents.

Attachments:

1 Attachment 1 Discussion Paper - Event Sites in Rural Area, E2017/104995 ⇨

Report

Overview

The draft Rural Land Use Strategy (RLUS) has been prepared as part of a staged process that commenced in early 2015. The draft RLUS will guide the future zoning and use, protection and/or development of our rural lands over the next 20 years.

At the Ordinary Meeting of 20 April 2017 Meeting Council resolved (Resolution 17-126) to:

1. Exhibit for further community feedback and discussion the draft Rural Land Use Strategy, supporting 'Policy Directions Paper', 'Site Suitability Criteria and Mapping Methodology' and the draft 'Rural Land Use Strategy Implementation Plan' for 28 days.

2. As part of the exhibition process encourage guidance from the community on priorities for the 'Rural, Land Use Strategy Implementation Plan'.

3. That Council commence actioning priorities confirmed following the exhibition process prior to the winter recess.

4. That a public communication and engagement strategy be created in consultation with the Communications Panel to guide the exhibition process.

The exhibition of the draft RLUS was undertaken and reported to the October meeting of Council. That report noted that the community has identified rural wedding venues as one of the key policy issues for Council.

The community response is a result of the increase in functions held in the rural parts of the Shire over recent years, primarily involving weddings.

The wedding industry has grown steadily within Byron Shire, and rural venues continue to be in high demand.

An Economic Assessment Report, prepared by RPS Australia East Pty Ltd, for a recent applicant, provided a summary of the industry:

§ Typical cost of a wedding: $36,000-$39,000

§ Peak seasons: spring and autumn

§ Approx. 30 to 35 venues available for weddings in the Shire (include restaurants and halls)

§ Estimated that between 600 and 700 weddings in the Shire annually

§ Up to 20 weddings per weekend in peak season

§ Estimated that typical wedding guest spends $200 per day

§ Direct annual local expenditure attributed to destination weddings in the Shire: estimated to be $25.4 million

§ Expenditure by guests while staying in Shire: estimated to be $28.6 million

§ Total estimated expenditure: $54 million (13% of all tourist expenditure)

§ Total (direct) wages estimated to be $21.6 million

§ Estimated to support 392 direct EFT (equivalent full time) employees & 314 indirect EFT employees (6.5% of Shire workforce)

Rural Wedding Venues:

In recent years, Council has received a substantial number of complaints regarding a variety of unauthorised wedding venues in the rural parts of the Shire, resulting in a variety of compliance actions. A number of development applications have also been lodged and assessed, the majority of which have been withdrawn or refused. Compliance action has also been undertaken in a number of cases, resulting in fines and orders under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

An analysis of known rural venues indicates that there is significant variety in both location and in the distance to adjoining and nearby dwellings. Correlating separation distance with complaints received does not show any discernible pattern.

There are sites, for example, where there is a reasonably large separation distance (closest neighbour approx. 225m away), that have been subject to numerous complaints from neighbours. Conversely, there are venues where there are reasonably close neighbours (approx. 125m away), where Council has no record of complaints.

Sites with no history of complaints have an average of approx. 250m to the nearest neighbouring dwelling (minimum: 115m; maximum: 350m) whereas sites where there is some history of complaints have an average of approx. 160m (minimum: 55m; maximum: 330m).

This assessment indicates that, while separation from neighbours can be an important aspect, protection of neighbourhood amenity requires additional controls, relating primarily to the management of weddings and events.

Existing Planning Provisions:

Wedding venues are defined as functions centres under Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014, and are prohibited in both the RU1 Primary Production Zone and the RU2 Rural landscape Zone.

Previous development applications have been lodged under Clause 2.8 of the LEP, which allows consideration of any use on land on a temporary basis, even where that use if otherwise prohibited, subject to a range of merit considerations, including the potential for adverse amenity impacts.

Noise and traffic are the key issues associated with events on rural properties and have formed the basis of the majority of complaints. Assessment of the complaints, and an overview of previous development applications, indicates that it is exceedingly difficult to find a situation where noise from a wedding event would not result in any adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood.

Only two applications have been approved, one at Myocum and one at Ewingsdale, and in both cases, detailed acoustic assessments demonstrated that event noise was not likely to be audible above the background noise at the nearest dwellings.

Given the settlement pattern in the rural area, however, the clause 2.8 provisions are likely to continue to prevent approval for event sites in most locations within the RU1 and RU2 zones.

Preliminary Consultation:

In the preparation of this report, staff met with concerned rural land owners and residents, at individual meetings, during consultation events for the RLUS and by way of telephone conversations.

Residents routinely reported frustration with unauthorised wedding events where noise resulted in serious disturbance. The ongoing frequency of events was also a significant area of concern. A number of rural residents were of the view that a smaller number of well managed events, appropriately located, could be acceptable.

Staff have also had preliminary discussions with wedding industry representatives who indicated a view that management of individual events is key to minimising impacts on neighbours.

Participants within the industry have been coming together in recent times, to form the Byron Wedding and Event Industry Association. One of the aims of this association is to develop an industry Code of Practice to guide the management of events.

The operators expressed a desire to work collaboratively with Council in addressing issues around rural events and in developing and refining their Code of Conduct.

Planning Options:

There are three options for Council:

1. Status quo – rely on the provisions of clause 2.8 of the LEP as the only mechanism to consider individual applications for rural events; or

2. Prohibit rural events in RU1 and RU2 – amend clause 2.8 such that it cannot apply to the temporary use of land in zones RU1 and RU2 for function centre; or

3. Permit function centres, subject to development consent, in RU1 and RU2 – this could be achieved by a stand-alone rural function centres provision or by adding function centre to the list of development permissible with consent in the zoning tables for those zones.

The demand for weddings and other functions in Byron Shire is growing and is unlikely to decline in the foreseeable future.

Continuing to rely on the existing temporary use provisions of the LEP for events in the rural zones will be problematic. The absolute nature of the cl.2.8 controls provides a difficult hurdle. In many cases, depending on the site, the frequency of events and the management arrangements in place, it could be reasonable to conclude that potential adverse amenity impacts could be acceptable, but it will remain difficult to conclude that events would not have any adverse amenity impacts.

This status quo situation will continue to require significant investigation and compliance resourcing associated with unauthorised and uncontrolled venues in the Shire.

Similarly, given the ongoing industry demand, prohibiting rural events completely is unlikely to stop unauthorised rural events and will continue to require significant resourcing from Council.

A new provision in the LEP addressing rural events would have the benefit of establishing a range of criteria around the location, frequency and management of rural events, with the key aim of managing potential amenity impacts.

Council could work with both the industry and with rural residents to ‘fine-tune’ the LEP provisions to ensure that events can only occur where the community can be assured that the events would be well managed and that the resultant amenity impacts would be acceptable in the circumstance of the particular site and its locality.

The following preliminary draft LEP clause is recommended:

Function Centres in Rural Zones:

(1) Despite any other provision of this Plan, development may be carried out with development consent for the purposes of a function centre on land in Zones RU1 Primary Production and RU2 Rural Landscape.

(2) Development consent must not be granted unless the consent authority is satisfied that:

(a) no more than 20 events will occur at the site in any one calendar year and that events will not occur over more than 2 consecutive weekends;

(b) events will occur in a location that is a minimum of 500m from an existing dwelling house on an adjoining property not in the same ownership;

(c) if the land is zoned RU1 Primary Production, the property is used for an existing agricultural purpose and will be continued to be used for farming;

(d) the use of the site for events will not result in unacceptable adverse impacts on any adjoining land or the amenity of the neighbourhood, particularly in relation to noise and traffic; and

(e) the use of the site for events will not result in any land use conflict in relation to adjoining or nearby farming activities.

(3) Applications for development consent for a rural function centre must include an Events Management Plan, which contains (as a minimum) provisions that:

(a) ensure that the majority of event attendees will be transported to and from each event by bus; and

(b) require all amplified activities (music, speeches, etc.) to be undertaken within a temporary or permanent structure after 7.00pm; and

(d) ensure that all event attendees will be off-site no later than 10.30pm; and

(e) outline measures that will be in place to ensure predicted noise levels are not exceeded at nearby dwellings; and

(f) provide for the monitoring of noise generated at events and six-monthly reporting of results to Council; and

(g) provide for the notification of nearby residents prior to each event, including contact details for an appropriate management person who can be contacted during each event.

A Planning Proposal will need to be prepared to implement this clause, and further community consultation would be undertaken before any amendment to the LEP could be finalised.

Financial Implications

The cost of preparing a draft planning proposal would be met by Council.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

The recommendation will provide an approval framework for rural events that allow Council to approve applications where it can be demonstrated that the proposed use will not result in unacceptable impacts on rural amenity.

The NSW Department of Planning & Environment recently released a discussion paper relating to Primary Production and Rural Development, signalling an intention to consolidate a range of existing planning policies and provisions into a new State Environmental Planning Policy for Rural Land.

Two of the key objectives of this policy update are to protect good quality agricultural land, to ensure that it is retained for framing, and to strengthen ‘right to farm’ legislation and minimise rural land use conflict.

The recommended draft LEP provision (above) is consistent with this approach in that it includes:

· a requirement in relation to RU1 land (i.e. ‘best’ farm land), that a rural events approval can only be considered where the property is actively being used, and will continue to be used, for farming/ agriculture; and

· a provision to ensure that a rural events use will not result in unacceptable amenity impacts or other land use conflicts, particularly in relation to adjoining and nearby farming activities.

These provisions ensure that the recommended approach will be consistent with a new Rural SEPP.

Requested funds from funding bodies	14,794,817
Council cash contribution	9,053,932
Council in-kind Contribution	190,748
Other contributions	10,575,562
Funding applications submitted and awaiting notification (total project value)	34,615,059