Agenda of Ordinary (Planning) Meeting

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

What is a “Conflict of Interests” - A conflict of interests can be of two types:

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

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

Remoteness – a person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to a matter or if the interest is of a kind specified in the Code of Conduct for Councillors.

Who has a Pecuniary Interest? - a person has a pecuniary interest in a matter if the pecuniary interest is the interest of the person, or another person with whom the person is associated (see below).

Relatives, Partners - a person is taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter if:

§ The person’s spouse or de facto partner or a relative of the person has a pecuniary interest in the matter, or

§ The person, or a nominee, partners or employer of the person, is a member of a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter.

N.B. “Relative”, in relation to a person means any of the following:

(a) the parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descends or adopted child of the person or of the person’s spouse;

(b) the spouse or de facto partners of the person or of a person referred to in paragraph (a)

No Interest in the Matter - however, a person is not taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter:

§ If the person is unaware of the relevant pecuniary interest of the spouse, de facto partner, relative or company or other body, or

§ Just because the person is a member of, or is employed by, the Council.

§ Just because the person is a member of, or a delegate of the Council to, a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter provided that the person has no beneficial interest in any shares of the company or body.

Disclosure and participation in meetings

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

§ The Councillor or member must not be present at, or in sight of, the meeting of the Council or Committee:

(a) at any time during which the matter is being considered or discussed by the Council or Committee, or

(b) at any time during which the Council or Committee is voting on any question in relation to the matter.

No Knowledge - a person does not breach this Clause if the person did not know and could not reasonably be expected to have known that the matter under consideration at the meeting was a matter in which he or she had a pecuniary interest.

Non-pecuniary Interests - Must be disclosed in meetings.

There are a broad range of options available for managing conflicts & the option chosen will depend on an assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of the interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with. Non-pecuniary conflicts of interests must be dealt with in at least one of the following ways:

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

§ Limit involvement if practical (eg. Participate in discussion but not in decision making or vice-versa). Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.

§ Remove the source of the conflict (eg. Relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the conflict)

§ Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as of the provisions in the Code of Conduct (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary interest)

RECORDING OF VOTING ON PLANNING MATTERS

Clause 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 – Recording of voting on planning matters

(1) In this section, planning decision means a decision made in the exercise of a function of a council under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

(a) including a decision relating to a development application, an environmental planning instrument, a development control plan or a development contribution plan under that Act, but

(b) not including the making of an order under that Act.

(2) The general manager is required to keep a register containing, for each planning decision made at a meeting of the council or a council committee, the names of the councillors who supported the decision and the names of any councillors who opposed (or are taken to have opposed) the decision.

(3) For the purpose of maintaining the register, a division is required to be called whenever a motion for a planning decision is put at a meeting of the council or a council committee.

(4) Each decision recorded in the register is to be described in the register or identified in a manner that enables the description to be obtained from another publicly available document, and is to include the information required by the regulations.

(5) This section extends to a meeting that is closed to the public.

Ordinary (Planning) Meeting Agenda 19/09/19 Distributed 09/09/19

I2019/1431

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.1

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report No. 13.1 PLANNING -Byron Arts and Industry Estate Draft Precinct Plan

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Isabelle Hawton, Planner

Rob Van Iersel, Major Projects Planner

File No: I2019/692

Summary:

At the ordinary meeting of 13 December 2018, Council resolved to engage consultants HIP V HYPE to facilitate an Enquiry by Design (EbD) process, as a first step in the preparation of a Precinct Plan for the Byron Arts and Industry Estate (Res 18-817).

The two-day EbD workshop was held in April 2019, with eight key community stakeholders attending for the full two days, along with a mix of technical experts, Council staff and Councillors. The process was extremely productive, with great enthusiasm, creativity and intellect shown by the entire group.

Following the EbD, consultants HIP V HYPE compiled the workshop outcomes into the attached Draft Precinct Plan, which documents key issues, and tests and refines the suggested solutions that emerged through the EbD process by the group.

As such the Draft Precinct Plan provides the starting point for further, more extensive community engagement and internal Council investigations that are required to finalise a Precinct Plan for the Estate.

The draft Precinct Plan as presented to Council is structured around five “Themes” that were central to discussions at the EbD:

· Mobility and Access

· Environment and Climate

· Land Use

· Built Form, Density and Character

· Creative Economy

Each theme was used during the EbD process to structure priorities and explore solutions to issues that were identified.

Issues around mobility, access and land use provide the most significant challenges for the Precinct Plan.

Functional issues around traffic and parking management are obvious within the Estate, and the EbD identified and tested a range of potential solutions, noting that traffic flow can be more easily addressed than parking demand, which will require a range of interventions over both short and longer timeframes.

Land use was also explored in some depth at the EbD, noting many positive aspects of the current land use mix; e.g. diversity, vibrancy, etc. It was also noted, however, that there are significant planning challenges regarding the wide range of current land uses, many of which are unauthorised. Finding planning solutions, and a zoning regime, that can maintain the positive aspects of the current land use mix, equitably address unauthorised land uses, and provide a platform for positive future outcomes is likely to require some difficult future decisions.

Discussions at the EbD identified two Council-owned parcels: Lot 12 Bayshore Drive and the current depot site, as key to the future of the Estate.

In relation to the Depot, EbD participants were advised that, while some investigations have commenced regarding the potential for its relocation, there is no formal resolution in place about its future, and that further work is required before any such decision could be made.

Nonetheless, the group noted that this centrally located large parcel of land has the potential to form a significant ‘anchor’ for the future of the Estate, through its redevelopment for a significant community / commercial hub that emphasises the arts and local community creativity.

The EbD participants also recognised the significance of Lot 12 to the Estate for its potential to house an innovation, creativity and sustainability hub. Other examples of this type of development include Lot 14 in South Australia.

Given the above, the zoning and remediated state of Lot 12, it is recommended that Council now accelerate the development of a detailed Structure Plan for this land, concurrent with the Precinct Plan finalisation.

While the stakeholder involvement in the EbD process was extremely useful it was only a small sample of stakeholders, and as such can only be considered as a first step in a larger planning project. It is important, therefore, that a wider community engagement process now be undertaken, based on the draft EbD outcomes document, to further test potential suggestions / solutions leading to finalisation of a Precinct Plan for the Arts and Industry Estate.

Notwithstanding the above, it was the strong desire of the EbD participants that some of the recommended outcomes be used in the short term to drive change throughout the estate, by achieving some “Quick Win” solutions that show tangible changes for the community.

Two such “Quick Win” projects emerged. Council staff have begun planning these projects and suggest that the momentum built from the EbD be carried through with project implementation beginning in the next six months. The two “Quick Win” projects are:

1. A low cost trial of one way vehicle movement on the southern end of Centennial Circuit, between Brigantine and Wollongbar Streets. This would also provide an opportunity to re-arrange the street, bike lanes, signage and an investigation of maximising parking space. It is an opportunity to test the potential for more permanent functional changes in the estate.

2. A ‘pocket park’ at the northern corner of the depot site on Bayshore Drive, where the “greenway” runs at a diagonal alongside the depot, to provide a central usable meeting place for the local community. Again, this pocket park could provide a start for longer term changes to how the currently underutilised public land along the central drainage corridor might be used to leverage a range of wider community benefits.

It is recommended that Council staff continue work to deliver the two “quick win” projects.

For the pocket park, this will involve either grant funding or a combination of partnering with potential community groups, crowdfunding, business sponsorship and sweat equity. It is anticipated that this initiative can be achieved at minimal cost to Council.

For the one way trial, this is likely to involve the procurement of necessary hardware (barriers, signs etc) along with a campaign of advertisement and education for the business owners nearby. Council staff estimate the cost of this action to be up to $30,000. It is recommended that Council allocate funding for this project in the September quarterly budget review.

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:

1. That Council endorse the Draft Precinct Plan, Attachment 1 (E2019/47098) for Byron Arts and Industry Estate for Public Exhibition for a period of six weeks.

2. That Council receive a further report at the close of the exhibition period detailing submissions made and next steps for Plan implementation.

3. That Council endorse Option 1 for the Centennial Circuit one way traffic trial and consider an allocation of up to $30,000 at the September quarterly budget review to achieve the project.

4. That Council request staff to accelerate the preparation of a Structure Plan for Lot 12 concurrent with the finalisation of the Draft Precinct Plan.

Attachments:

1 Hip V Hype Precinct Plan, E2019/47098

2 Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest Form, E2012/2815

REPORT

Background

On February 1 2018, Council resolved (18-041) to:

3. Request staff in the Place Planning Team to commence the preparation of a detailed project plan for the preparation of a comprehensive precinct plan for the Byron Arts and Industrial Estate and wider environs as per 2 above; and that the precinct plan is to include consideration of the following: traffic and parking management, alternate transport options including car share, park and ride, use of the rail corridor, land use mix and density, place activation and beautification, technology needs like NBN, identification of land which links key sites including Cavanbah, Bayshore Drive railway station, future park and ride sites and walking and pedestrian links. The project plan will outline the key stages, milestones, stakeholders and a budget outline for the project.

Subsequently, a Request for Quotation (18-216) was issued to several consulting firms to prepare a draft Precinct Plan through an Enquiry by Design (EbD) Process. The preferred consultant was HIP V HYPE, and at the meeting of 13 December 2018, Council resolved to engage them to undertake the work (18-817).

From its inception in the early 1980s, the Byron Arts and Industry Estate has shifted to a multidisciplinary hub of innovative business, and no longer houses the traditional mix of industry and warehousing it was once intended for. The result is an eclectic mix of businesses, and a myriad of functional issues, not the least of which is transport and mobility.

The Precinct Plan aims to explore solutions to issues that have been identified by the community, and set a cohesive vision to move forward for the estate.

Key Priorities

The two-day EbD workshop was held in April, with the consultants facilitating a mix of community stakeholders, technical experts, Council staff and Councillors in the development of a vision and principals to guide the future of the estate. The process was extremely productive, with great enthusiasm, creativity and intellect shown by the entire group.

The vision for the precinct, developed as a part of the EbD process is:

“The BA&IE celebrates diversity and has stayed true to its rich history of making, testing and experimenting. It has cemented its reputation as the birthplace of sustainable, globally relevant businesses and actively nurtures future generations of entrepreneurs.

There is a harmonious relationship between the economic, natural and built environment through prioritising people over cars, greening and a significant investment in renewables.

The spirit of the Northern Rivers Region is encapsulated in the Estate - fascinating businesses, a beautiful natural environment and a genuine, unique culture. All sorts of people are drawn to the Estate to live, work and play.”

During the EbD process, five key themes were developed to capture issues, ideas and potential solutions. These themes are:

· Mobility and Access

· Environment and Climate

· Land Use

· Built Form, Density and Character

· Creative Economy

The table below summarises the key priorities developed by EbD participants in relation to these themes. The “code” preceding each initiative relates back to the theme to which it belongs (i.e. CE1 = Creative Economy initiative 1).

While the stakeholder involvement in the EbD process was extremely useful, it involved a relatively small sample of the wider community. It is important, therefore, that a wider community engagement process now be undertaken, based on the EbD outcomes documented in the attached draft Precinct Plan, to further test the key priorities below, leading to finalisation of a Precinct Plan for the Arts and Industry Estate.

Theme	Key Priorities
Land Use	LU1 Facilitate the creation of multi-purpose blue-green corridors within the BA&IE LU2 Develop and deliver a Planning Implementation Plan LU3 Develop an inclusive visual gateway for the BA&IE Blue-green infrastructure is about combining the green elements of urban spaces with good water management (the blue). Often “green” assets (trees, parks, gardens) and “blue” assets (Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD), drainage areas and flood storage) are planned separately. However, often the same asset can provide multiple outcomes that benefit both “green” and “blue” objectives. On the ground this can mean using storm water to boost soil moisture to help plants survive during dry periods and using plants to slow runoff through infrastructure like rain gardens.
Built form, character and Density	BCD1 Improve the connection between building frontages and the street BCD2 Review and implement new density controls for the BA&IE BCD3 Develop an exemplar built form outcome for Council Lot 12 and Council Depot Site
Mobility and Access	MA1 Develop a network of shared paths and transport hubs to support bikes and alternate transport MA2 Build footpaths throughout the BA&IE MA3 Establish an integrated traffic and car parking approach for BA&IE
Environment and Climate	EC1 Establish and deliver a unifying landscape vision for the BA&IE (Delivered in conjunction with LU1 and MA2) EC2 Develop a clear strategy for the BA&IE to become a 100% renewable and zero waste precinct
Creative Economy	CE1 Deliver an inclusive identity and branding strategy for the BA&IE, which leverages ‘Brand Byron’ and can promote businesses regionally, nationally and internationally CE2 Develop and deliver a strategy for selling or long term lease of Lot 12 to deliver a sustainability and innovation hub CE3 Develop and deliver a regional car free cultural centre for the BA&IE precinct on the Depot site

The EbD also explored a series of solutions to issues of traffic, parking, lack of public space, active transport, design and development, built form and density requirements and climate change impacts.

Headline Ideas

A series of headline ideas, guiding the way the Precinct Plan might be delivered, were developed as a part of the EbD:

· Experiment Now

· Change the way we get around

· Leverage Council assets to build the future

· A future ready precinct

· Local and global business identity and leadership

Wider community engagement of the draft Plan will provide an opportunity to further test whether these headline ideas can be the key principles on which the future planning framework for the Estate can be built.

Key Issues

Issues around mobility, access and land use provide the most significant challenges for the Precinct Plan.

Functional issues around traffic and parking are obvious within the Estate, and the EbD identified and tested a range of potential solutions, noting that traffic flow can be more easily addressed than parking, which will require a range of interventions over both short and longer timeframes.

Rationale for the Quick Wins

The ‘quick win’ projects were identified due to their relatively straightforward nature and their capacity to catalyse change in other areas of the Estate.

1. The pocket park, is an opportunity to create a truly public space in an otherwise privatised precinct. It allows for a reconnection with nature, and could help to change viewpoints that might solve some environmental issues. There is well documented research that indicates that green public spaces provide a myriad of psychological and physical health benefits. It also links to an action that looks at using the drainage corridors as an opportunity for active transport linkages through the estate.

The pocket park will work in conjunction with a current Council project to improve outflows from the West Byron STP, through integration with stream rehabilitation and the construction of a shared path.

2. Meanwhile, the one-way trial for Centennial Circuit offers a chance to tackle some of the traffic flow and safety issues that are prevalent across the Estate, in a controlled environment. By removing one lane of traffic, the road space is significantly expanded, allowing for improved access for vehicles, creating better active transport links and an opportunity to re-orientate and maximise parking space.

Pocket Park at the Depot Site

Staff have begun investigating the methods of delivery for a public space project on this site. It is recommended that Council support this project for application for a Stronger Country Communities Grant in order to fund public space and activation on the site.

One way trial for Centennial Circuit

It is expected that a one way trial for Centennial Circuit would run for six months. The trial would involve changing the traffic and parking management conditions in place to improve the flow through a congested part of the estate. It would also include the introduction of an on-road cycle lane.

Council staff have commenced early engagement work on the two “quick win” projects. This includes some public consultation on the preferred direction and scope of the one way trial.

Three options were proposed to the public and are shown below:

../../../EPS/Arts%20and%20Industry%20Photos/Maps%20for%20Trial/Option%203%20Centennial%20Cct-01.png

A survey was conducted on Council’s Your Say page to seek the feedback from the public. The preferred options were Option 1 followed by Option 2.

It is recommended based on the feedback from the early community consultation that Council endorse Option 1 for the trial. This is consistent with the recent Local Traffic Committee resolution.

The costs for the trial relate to the procurement of necessary hardware (barriers, signs etc) along with a campaign of advertisement and education for the business owners nearby. Council staff have estimated the cost of this action to be up to $30,000. It is recommended that Council consider an allocation of funding in the September quarterly budget review to realise this project.

Lot 12 and the Depot Site

It is also suggested that Council staff accelerate the preparation of a Structure Plan for Lot 12. Budget is currently available for this work, which can consider a range of land use options for the site including the potential to house an innovation, creativity and sustainability hub. The work would also examine the options available to Council to deliver the desired outcomes in a way that leverages the value of the property for the best community outcomes.

Staff will also continue to investigate the potential relocation of Council’s depot. Some work has commenced on this project and this will need to be further advanced to provide sufficient information to allow Council to make a fully informed decision on the future of the site.

Next steps

The next step is to publicly exhibit the Draft Byron Arts and Industry Estate Draft Precinct Plan to seek the feedback of the wider community. It is recommended that this take place over six weeks through web-based information, in person, and written opportunities.

At the close of the exhibition period, a further report will be put to Council to relay outcomes of the public exhibition period and the next steps for implementation of the Plan.

In addition, staff will continue work on the coordination and delivery of the quick win projects, particularly the one way traffic trial.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 4: We manage growth and change responsibly	4.1	Support the visions and aspirations of local communities through place-based planning and management	4.1.1	Develop, implement and update Place Plans that promote place-based forward planning strategies and actions	4.1.1.4	Prepare a precinct plan for the Byron Arts and Industrial Estate

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

The Byron Arts and Industry Estate Draft Precinct Plan will likely require changes to the Byron LEP 2014 and DCP for implementation; however these will be considered at a later date as a part of individual projects and reported back to Council in due course.

Financial Considerations

Council has currently allocated budget to complete the Precinct Plan. However, further funding will be required in order to implement the “quick win” projects and further projects that emerge into the future.

Council has funding allocated within the draft budget (#2605.137) for Lot 12 and Lot 107 (Depot Site) that may provide the basis for funding some actions on those sites and in surrounding areas like a structure plan for Lot 12.

In order to achieve the quick win projects, Council will need to consider an allocation of funding during the September quarterly budget review (or seek grant or other funding) for these projects.

Consultation and Engagement

It is recommended that the Draft Precinct Plan be put on exhibition for a period of six weeks. During this period, Council staff will seek the feedback from the wider community and will undertake in person and web-based canvassing for ideas and comments.

It should be noted that some community engagement has already occurred through the YourSay Page on Council’s website, the ‘launch day’ held at Habitat on 4 March and through the Enquiry by Design that included local stakeholders.

Further community consultation and engagement has already been undertaken as a part of the “Quick Win” projects. It is recommended that further consultation for these happen during and beyond the wider exhibition of the plan.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.2

Report No. 13.2 Proposed RU6 Transition Zone - Outcome of Public Exhibition

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Steve Daniels, Project Officer - Planning Reforms

File No: I2019/755

Summary:

The E Zone review and the Rural Land Use Strategy engagement processes identified a need for a suitable replacement zone to the 7(d) Scenic Escarpment Zone (LEP 1988) in order to:

· align with community values and Council policy (i.e. by ensuring that visually prominent areas are not eroded by inappropriate land uses that are otherwise permitted in the rural RU1/RU2 Zones);

· avoid delays for landowners who have already agreed to an E Zone on part of their land, but cannot proceed without a comparable zone in LEP 2014 for the remaining 7(d) Zone LEP 1988; and

· avoid the prospect of other 7(d) zoned land remaining as Deferred Matter due to the absence of a comparable LEP 2014 zone.

The proposed RU6 Transition Zone (LEP 2014) seeks to maintain, as much as possible the existing permissible land uses in the current 7(d) Scenic Escarpment Zone. This report presents the outcomes of an informal public exhibition of the proposed RU6 zone undertaken in late 2018, and provides recommendations based on feedback from the community and the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE).

Community feedback was generally supportive of the proposed RU6 zone objectives and land use table, however the majority of submissions advocated for the inclusion of dual occupancies (detached) / secondary dwellings as permitted with consent.

Council staff wrote to the DPIE requesting comment on the preparation of a planning proposal to introduce the RU6 Transition zone to LEP 2014. The letter outlined the proposed zone objectives and land use table, and included secondary dwellings as permitted with consent in response to community feedback and previous correspondence with the Department.

In response, the DPIE have advised that unlike the existing 7(d) Scenic Escarpment zone, the proposed RU6 Transition zone should not restrict the permissible land uses, and should instead allow for land uses normally permitted in a rural zone while relying on DCP controls to manage any impacts on the Shire’s scenic amenity.

Staff do not support a reliance on DCP controls, instead of LEP controls, as the primary means for protecting scenic values, mainly because DCP controls do not have statutory weight and therefore cannot ensure specific land use outcomes. The Shire’s scenic escarpments are a significant economic and cultural asset to the community and should be protected with the full weight of LEP land use controls.

In light of the DPIE’s inflexible position regarding the use of zones to manage scenically important landscapes this report recommends that Council retains the existing LEP 1988 zone, 7(d) Scenic Escarpment, in locations that do not qualify for an environmental zoning, until such time as a suitable replacement LEP 2014 zone is supported by the Department. This is consistent with the approach previously resolved by Ballina Council (Attachment 1) in response to the Department’s position regarding their 7(d) Environmental Protection (Scenic/Escarpment) Zone

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Maintain the existing LEP 1988 zone, 7(d) Scenic Escarpment, in locations that do not qualify for an environmental zoning, until such time as a suitable replacement LEP 2014 zone is supported by the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment.

2. Place the preparation of a planning proposal to introduce a new LEP 2014 zone, RU6 Transition, on hold pending further discussions with the DPIE and other Councils within the region.

Attachments:

1 Ballina Council Res 270417/11 - RE 7(d) Scenic Escarpment & Proposed RU6 Zone, E2019/64143

2 Proposed Template for RU6 Zone Transition (exhibition version), E2018/12601

3 Submissions RU6 feedback, E2019/63938

4 DPIE Preliminary Advice 20/3/18, E2019/63319

5 Letter to DPE to confirm position RE Proposed RU6 Zone and Updated Land Use Table, E2019/46771

6 Letter from DPIE responding to proposed RU6 Transition zone 14/8/19, S2019/6588

REPORT

Protection of the rural landscape values, including scenic amenity, was one of the key messages expressed by the community in the Rural Land Use Strategy Discussion Paper. Under BLEP 1988 the 7(d) Scenic Escarpment Zone largely covers most escarpment land in the Shire, as well as other visually important areas. During preparation of the shire wide LEP, areas within the 7(d) zone were proposed to be zoned either E2 Environmental Conservation or E3 Environmental Management in accordance with the Byron Shire Local Environmental Study 2008. This is partly because there is no equivalent zone provided in the ‘Standard Instrument LEP Template’ to accommodate such areas.

All 7(d) areas deferred from LEP 2014 have been assessed against the State Government’s
E zone Review Final Recommendations Report and related criteria for applying E Zones. Under the Final Recommendations Report, councils on the Far North Coast are not permitted to use scenic or aesthetic values as an attribute for the application of an E2 or E3 Zone or mapped planning controls. Whilst some vegetated areas in the 7(d) Scenic Escarpment Zone meet the criteria for applying environmental zones, other areas do not and require an alternative rural zone.

The E Zone review and the Rural Land Use Strategy engagement processes identified a need for a suitable replacement zone to the 7(d) Scenic Escarpment Zone in order to:

· align with community values and Council policy (i.e. by ensuring that visually prominent areas are not eroded by inappropriate land uses that are otherwise permitted in the rural RU1/RU2 Zones);

· avoid delays for landowners who have already agreed to an E Zone on part of their land, but cannot proceed without a comparable zone in LEP 2014 for the remaining 7(d) Zone LEP 1988; and

· avoid the prospect of other 7(d) zoned land remaining as Deferred Matter due to the absence of a comparable LEP 2014 zone.

At its Ordinary Meeting of 22 March 2018, Council resolved (18-188) among other things to:

4. Endorse the introduction of a new LEP 2014 zone, RU6 Transition, to be applied to land currently zoned 7(d) Scenic Escarpment LEP 1988 that does not meet the criteria for an environmental zoning.

5. Subject to Council’s endorsement of the proposed RU6 Transition Zone, prepare and undertake an informal exhibition of the related RU6 provisions for feedback from affected land owners who have not already agreed to this zone, and report the outcomes back to Council.

6. Receive a report on draft Planning Proposal #3: (PP3) for:

i. …

ii. …

iii. remaining LEP 1988 7(d) zoned land to be zoned RU6 Transition (subject to Council endorsement). as soon as practical after Council’s adoption of Planning Proposal #2.

The proposed RU6 Transition Zone seeks to maintain, as much as possible the existing permissible land uses in the current 7(d) Scenic Escarpment Zone. Although the RU6 land uses have been prepared on this basis they are not an exact translation of all land uses in the 7(d) zone, mainly due to differences between LEP 1988 and LEP 2014 land use definitions.

A comparison between the existing 7(d) and proposed RU6 zones (as exhibited) is provided in Attachment 2.

Overview of Engagement

Informal Public Exhibition

Following the above resolution, staff undertook an informal public exhibition to gather feedback from affected land owners on the proposed zone and land use table. Exhibition ran from 12 September – 5 October 2018 with advertisements placed in local newspapers and details about the proposed zone provided on Councils website to maximise the potential for community understanding. The public was invited to provide feedback via written submissions.

Letters were also issued to affected land owners inviting them to attend drop in sessions with Council planning staff. The drop in sessions provided an opportunity for land owners to ask questions and discuss property specific issues, thus enabling them to prepare an informed submission.

Although the public exhibition period officially closed on 5 October 2018, staff have continued to accept any additional feedback provided since this time.

Community Response

A total of 56 written submissions were received by Council (Attachment 3), with the majority being generally supportive of the proposed zone change and the objectives of the proposed zone.

The majority of submissions also advocated the introduction of detached dual occupancies / secondary dwellings as being permissible with consent in the RU6 zone, with many submitters disputing the merit of existing zone 7(d) boundaries. The key submission issues are discussed below:

Table 1: Key Submission Issues

Submission Issue	Staff Response
Dual occupancies (detached) or secondary dwellings should be permitted with consent in the proposed RU6 Transition Zone.	Only dual occupancies (attached) are currently permitted with consent in the 7(d) zone. However, the take‐up rate of attached dual occupancies has been very low. The visual impact of dual occupancies (attached) is potentially greater (due to bulk and scale) than two detached dwellings, as the latter can be more flexibly sited so as to minimise the impact. However, the cumulative impact of allowing for dual occupancies (detached) throughout visually sensitive escarpment areas is likely to be significantly greater over time than for dual occupancies (attached). This is mainly due to the noticeably higher demand and take-up rate for dual occupancies (detached) in our rural zones, as reflected in the consultation feedback for the proposed RU6 zone. Rather than allowing both ‘attached’ and ‘detached’ dual occupancies as permitted with consent, it is considered that only allowing for secondary dwellings (i.e. a size‐limited dual occupancy) represents a more reasonable approach and one that will achieve a more manageable outcome in terms of visual impact.
The existing 7(d) zone boundaries are inappropriately located and do not reflect areas of scenic value. A more appropriate, less restrictive zone should be applied in these areas.	It is noted that many land owners questioned the merit of existing 7(d) Scenic Escarpment zoning on their land, generally due to the land being located below ridge lines and lacking visual prominence. Rather than being rezoned to RU6, many of the landowners argued that a more appropriate rural zoning be applied in these locations. The 7(d) zone was introduced with the 1988 LEP, and staff agree that a consistent methodology does not appear to have been applied when the zone boundaries were delineated. The scope of this informal exhibition was to gather community feedback and make recommendations on the proposed land uses that should apply in the RU6 zone. Although there is merit in undertaking a future review of the current 7(d) zone boundaries, this constitutes a significant body of work beyond the scope of this project and would need to be considered in the DP/OP and budget process.
Landowners should retain the right to clear land, conduct bushfire hazard reduction works and conduct drainage works.	These land uses are currently permitted with consent in the 7(d) Scenic Escarpment zone; however they have not been included in the proposed RU6 Transition zone land use table. This is chiefly due to differences between LEP 1988 and LEP 2014 land use definitions. These land uses are no longer defined under the new LEP standard Instrument, which all NSW councils must use as the basis for preparing their LEP. However, this does not prevent such activities from being undertaken in the proposed RU6 zone via other overriding legislation.
No development should be permitted on scenic escarpments.	It is recognised that visual amenity on the scenic escarpments is sensitive to over development and/or inappropriate types of development. It is also recognised that the Shire’s scenic escarpments are a significant economic and cultural asset for the community that warrant robust protection in a local environmental plan To date, the restricted range of land uses in the 7(d) zone has proven effective in maintaining scenic amenity in these locations while allowing options for land owners to carry out appropriate development with minimal impact. The proposed RU6 zone seeks to replicate these land uses as closely as possible.

Consultation with Department of Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE)

Council received preliminary advice (Attachment 4) from the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment on 20 March 2018 regarding the introduction of a new LEP 2014 zone, RU6 Transition, to be applied to land currently zoned 7(d) Scenic Escarpment LEP 1988 and not meeting criteria for an E2/E3 zone. This advice suggested that Council consider including additional land uses as ‘permissible with consent’ in the proposed RU6 zone, and also suggested using DCP controls as the primary means for protecting scenic values at the development application stage.

Once the outcomes of the informal exhibition had been considered, staff then wrote a letter to the DPIE requesting feedback on a revised RU6 land use table that included a minor change in response to community feedback discussed above, and the previous DPIE feedback. A copy of the letter is contained in Attachment 5.

The changes made to the proposed RU6 Transition Zone included the introduction of secondary dwellings as being permissible with consent. The rationale for this change is discussed above in Table 1.

In response to the DPIE’s preference for using DCP controls instead of LEP controls as the primary means for protecting scenic values, staff asserted that the DCP is not a suitable mechanism for controlling land use. Because the DCP is a guideline document that does not carry statutory weight, it cannot ensure a specific land use outcome. Furthermore, relying primarily on DCP controls over LEP controls can place the zone objectives at greater risk of being eroded over time via court challenges and the subsequent implications of precedent.

State Government Response

Council received a letter from the DPIE on 14 August 2019 (Attachment 6) responding to Council’s request for the Department’s position on supporting a planning proposal to replace the 7(d) Scenic Escarpment zone with the proposed RU6 Transition Zone under LEP 2014.

Despite general support from the community for the proposed RU6 land uses and zone objectives, and despite correspondence from Council staff highlighting the inadequacy of DCP controls as a primary means for protecting the scenic amenity of the Shire’s escarpments, the DPIE maintains it’s position that:

· an expanded list of land uses (more akin to the RU1 and RU2 zones) should be permissible with consent in the proposed RU6 zone, and

· that DCP controls should be relied on to maintain scenic amenity.

This position is articulated in the following extract from the Department’s response:

The E Zone final recommendations note that matters of scenic protection are best assessed and managed at the development application stage when the final details of proposed developments are known. The primary controls relating to scenic protection should therefore be contained in Council's development control plan.

I note Council's advice that it does not intend to permit a range of land uses that would normally be permissible in a rural zone. Council's reasons for excluding these land uses appear to be based on the potential scenic impact of such developments. The Department is unlikely to support this approach.

The Department's position remains that the scenic impact of a development is to be assessed at the development application stage. Should Council pursue the inclusion of the RU6 zone, I encourage you to reconsider permitting an appropriate range of land uses with development consent.

Staff Response and Recommendation

The economic and cultural significance of the Shire’s scenic escarpments warrants greater protection than can be delivered via DCP controls alone. The Department’s position advocating a widely expanded list of permissible land uses in these areas is considered at odds with the vision of the DPIE North Coast Regional Plan which seeks to achieve:

The best region in Australia to live, work and play thanks to its spectacular environment… The natural beauty of its environment continues not just to enrich the lives of its residents, but also to sustain a thriving tourism and lifestyle economy…. The region’s natural environment is safeguarded and enhanced to deliver a prosperous future and to ensure that it remains one of the most beautiful parts of the State.

The Department’s position is also at odds with the Northern Rivers Regional Economic Development Strategy 2018 -2022, which states among other things that:

“… the Northern Rivers is shown to have an exceptionally diverse economy. Its key endowments include its coastal, riverine and hinterland amenity; access to South East Queensland; and generally excellent quality infrastructure.”

For the reasons discussed above, it is recommended that Council retains the existing LEP 1988 zone, 7(d) Scenic Escarpment, in locations that do not qualify for an environmental zoning, until such time as a suitable replacement LEP 2014 zone is supported by the Department. This is consistent with the approach previously resolved by Ballina Council (Attachment 1) in response to the Department’s position regarding their 7(d) Environmental Protection (Scenic/Escarpment) Zone.

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 4: We manage growth and change responsibly

4.2

Support housing diversity in appropriate locations across the Shire

4.2.1

Establish planning mechanisms to support housing that meets the needs of our community

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

The relevant legal/statutory/policy considerations have been noted above.

Financial Considerations

The matter does not incur any additional costs if Council chooses to retain the existing 7(d) Scenic Escarpment zone.

If the preparation of a planning proposal to introduce an equivalent LEP 2014 zone becomes a viable option in the future, the associated costs will be borne by Council. This action would be subject to a future Council report and the financial implications would be considered at the time.

Consultation and Engagement

The relevant consultation and engagement considerations and outcomes for the proposed RU6 zone have been noted above.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.3

Report No. 13.3 Draft Mullumbimby Masterplan

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Isabelle Hawton, Planner

File No: I2019/885

Summary:

Council resolved in 2015 to prepare a ‘Masterplan for Mullumbimby’ through a collaborative process involving a community Guidance Group representing the wider Mullumbimby community.

The Group was established with 16 community members and worked with Councillors and staff to identify the key values of Mullumbimby, key issues that need to be addressed and suggested initiatives and ideas for the future.

The process was put on hold in 2017 for resource reasons, recommencing in late 2018. As a result, community participation in the Guidance Group reduced and the final stages of development of the draft Masterplan was guided by a smaller number of community representatives.

The draft Masterplan adopts the following Vision:

Mullumbimby is a diverse, dynamic, creative and caring country town that fosters innovation, sustainability and a funky verve for life.

It embraces its history and confidently strides forward with a foundation of resilience, strong community spirit and a desire to be “good-different”.

To achieve this Vision, the draft Masterplan presents five principles to guide future actions and initiatives:

Principle 1: Balance the need for housing with the desire to retain Mullumbimby’s country town feel.

Principle 2: Maintain and enhance Mullumbimby’s high level of self sufficiency.

Principle 3: Ensure Mullumbimby is accessible and well connected.

Principle 4: Protect and enhance Mullumbimby’s green and leafy character and reconnect with the river.

Principle 5: Enhance and Celebrate Mullumbimby’s existing eclectic character, spirit of entrepreneurship and identity and make the future of Mullumbimby as fun as its people.

Within this framework of Vision and Principles, the draft Masterplan outlines a range of actions and initiatives, presented across six (6) town precincts. An Implementation Plan is also included, identifying the key priority actions identified in the draft Plan.

It is recommended that comprehensive community engagement now be undertaken to get the wider input of the Mullumbimby community and to test the key principles, actions, initiatives and priorities suggested in the draft Masterplan.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Endorse the exhibition of the Draft Mullumbimby Masterplan as shown in Attachment 1 (E2019/61908) for six weeks; including coordinating a range of community engagement activities during that period to maximise the community’s input into finalisation of the draft Plan.

2. Receive a further report at the close of the exhibition period detailing the engagement undertaken and the community response received to the Plan.

Attachments:

1 Mullumbimby Masterplan PUBLIC EXHIBITION VERSION, E2019/61908

2 Communication Plan Table - Mullumbimby Masterplan, E2019/61853

3 Response to the Suggestions of Guidance Group, E2019/61852

4 Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest, E2012/2815

REPORT

Background

In October 2015, Council resolved to “establish a PRG to develop a draft brief, delivery plan and process for a Mullumbimby Masterplan” (RES 15-555). The Group was subsequently established, through an Expression of Interest process, to include 16 community representatives.

The Guidance Group worked with Councillors and staff through a series of facilitated workshops to define the key values of Mullumbimby, identify a range of issues to be addressed for its future. This work also provided a start to the development of a vision for the town and a set of key principles to guide its future.

Work on the Mullumbimby Masterplan was put on hold in 2017 due to internal resourcing issues, and recommenced in late 2018.

The delay resulted in a significant reduction in the number of community representatives on the Group.

Since that time, Council have been working with the smaller group to review previous workshop outcomes and finalise a draft Masterplan.

Scope and Purpose of the Plan

The draft ‘Our Mullumbimby Masterplan’ is a place plan to set out Council and the community’s visions and ideas for the town. It will guide future change and provide a framework for the sustainable development of Mullumbimby over the next 10 years (from 2019 to 2029).

The draft Masterplan adopts the following Vision:

Mullumbimby is a diverse, dynamic, creative and caring country town that fosters innovation, sustainability and a funky verve for life.

It embraces its history and confidently strides forward with a foundation of resilience, strong community spirit and a desire to be “good-different”.

To guide future actions and initiatives, the draft Masterplan adopts the following five principles:

Principle 1: Balance the need for housing with the desire to retain Mullumbimby’s country town feel.

Principle 2: Maintain and enhance Mullumbimby’s high level of self sufficiency

Principle 3: Ensure Mullumbimby is accessible and well connected.

Principle 4: Protect and enhance Mullumbimby’s green and leafy character and reconnect with the river

Principle 5: Retain and celebrate Mullumbimby’s existing eclectic character and identity and make the future of Mullumbimby as fun as its people

The draft Masterplan covers the town centre, and surrounding areas, broken into six precincts, as identified in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Precincts as they are divided for the purposes of the plan

Each precinct has a specific set of actions.

A Snapshot of the Plan

The draft Masterplan has been structured around:

Where we’ve come from

Where we are

Where we’re going

How we’ll get there

This framework is intended to guide the actions of Council over the life of the Masterplan, but also to provide opportunities for the community to deliver placemaking projects, be involved in Council-led actions and initiatives, and contribute to Council policy development as it relates to the future of Mullumbimby.

Priority Projects

The draft Plan highlights three priority projects, identified through the Guidance Group workshop process. These were suggested by community representatives as being the most ‘value for money’ actions that could provide significant and visible positive change, and therefore create community momentum for continues implementation of the Masterplan. These key priority projects are:

1. Stuart Street Green Spine – creating a boulevard that acts as the primary town centre walking/cycling route, linking the river to the community gardens.

2. Alternate vehicle routes around Town Centre – formalising alternate routes north and south of Burringbar Street to reduce traffic in the Town Centre.

3. Placemaking seed projects – similar to initiatives undertaken for the Byron Town Centre Masterplan, supporting community groups in grant applications and potentially providing small community grants that the community can access to undertake projects in the Town Centre that are consistent with the Vision and Principles of the draft Masterplan.

These projects are intended to be ‘enabling projects’ for the larger scale initiative for the Burringbar Talking Street – which will see Burringbar Street become a shared zone, a more people friendly place and the ‘living space’ of the town.

Implementation

An Implementation Plan is included as a component of the draft Masterplan, highlighting priorities for the identified actions and initiatives and identifying potential funding sources.

Governance of the implementation will involve Council and the community, with the nature of that governance mechanism yet to be determined.

Consultation and Engagement

Extensive consultation was undertaken with the members of the Guidance Group, who were able to share the process with a wider audience through their individual community networks.

The Place Planning Team also undertook visits to schools, put a survey out to the wider community and held a ‘parklet’ in the main street in order to gain feedback from a wide range of community members. The feedback has been reflected in the draft Masterplan.

As stated above, it is now appropriate to seek feedback from a wider audience. It is suggested that the engagement activities described in Attachment 2 (which have been considered by the Communications Panel) be undertaken in order to seek feedback from the wider community.

It is also suggested that a photo competition run alongside the exhibition of the Draft Masterplan, celebrating things that people love about Mullumbimby in a way that links to the draft vision and principles. It is hoped that these photos will not only be able to be used in the final Masterplan, but will engage a wider audience in the exhibition of the plan. The photo competition would have both a youth and a general category, all with prize money available.

Suggested Additions from the Guidance Group

There were a number of suggested additions tabled at the last Guidance Group meeting that were not included in this draft of the Masterplan. The justification for not including these suggested amendments is in Attachment 3.

In addition, a suggestion came from some members of the group to include the ‘Demographic appendix’ and a constraints mapping appendix. Staff consider this information to be unnecessary for the creation of a Masterplan (whose primary purpose is to set a vision for the town for the next 10 years and corresponding actions to meet this vision), as well as noting that the information can be easily accessed in other planning documents such as the Draft Residential Strategy and the Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014. The addition of such information would make the Masterplan unnecessarily large and impractical for its purpose, due to the large addition of superfluous pages.

Staff recommend instead displaying the Masterplan in Attachment 1 in its current form for wider community feedback.

Next steps

The next steps are to display the draft Masterplan as per the Communication Plan. Following this, a submissions report will be put to Council at a later date.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4		OP Activity
Community Objective 4: We manage growth and change responsibly	4.1	Support the visions and aspirations of local communities through place-based planning and management	4.1.1	Develop, implement and update Place Plans that promote place-based forward planning strategies and actions	4.1.1.2	Continue to develop Our Mullumbimby Masterplan

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

N/A

Financial Considerations

A budget has been allocated in the FY19/20 for the completion of the Masterplan.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.4

Report No. 13.4 Place Planning Cluster Group - A new method of managing implementation of place plans

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Isabelle Hawton, Planner

File No: I2019/1087

Summary:

The aim of this report is to introduce the concept of a Place Planning Cluster Group (PPC group).

The PPC group would comprise key staff, councillors, representatives from community groups and randomly selected community members, who could represent the Byron Arts and Industry Estate, Mullumbimby and Bangalow localities (i.e. localities subject to place plans / master plans). Other towns and villages could be added when and as plans are completed.

The PPC group would enable early communication and a real time information exchange with the community about the implementation of the Bangalow Village Plan, Our Mullumbimby Masterplan and the Byron Arts and Industry Estate Precinct Plan. Councillors would be invited to take part in each meeting as is the case for the Byron Bay Town Centre Guidance Group. The Byron Bay Town Centre Guidance Group would continue to operate separately, alongside this group (unless resolved otherwise), but would also be invited to participate through nominated representatives.

With the formation of the PPC group, any other existing town / village specific guidance groups would be disbanded at adoption of the relevant town / village masterplans.

The amalgamation of these guidance groups into a single PPC group for plan implementation purposes is considered critical by staff to ensure the plans stay live, and to ensure the efficient and effective use of staff resources, councillor and community time post plan adoption.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council support the establishment of a Place Planning Cluster Group to manage the implementation of Mullumbimby, Bangalow and Byron Arts and Industry Estate Place Plans (in the first instance).

2. That an Expression of Interest and random selection process for membership commence concurrently with the public exhibition of the Mullumbimby Masterplan and Byron Arts and Industry Estate Precinct Plan, in order to identify members for the Place Planning Cluster Group, with a further report to Council following on the outcome.

3. That Council nominate Councillors to participate in the Place Planning Cluster Group as deemed necessary.

Attachments:

1 Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest, E2012/2815

REPORT

Purpose of the Place Planning Cluster Group (PPC group)

The purpose of a PPC group is to provide a centralised group for council staff to disseminate information about, and assist with achieving the outcomes and implementation actions of the Place Plans that Council has adopted, and will adopt in the coming months, for various towns and villages.

The formation of a PPC group for implementation purposes is critical to ensure the plans stay live, and to ensure the efficient and effective use of staff resources, councillor and community time post plan adoption. It will enable opportunities for the cross pollination of ideas and an innovative and holistic approach to place making - from the fine grain town and village scale to the Shire wide scale.

The PPC Group will inform Council decision making on the implementation of place plans. It will function under a defined terms of reference, which may include some of the following objectives:

· Develop and maintain communication and understanding between the community and Council regarding the implementation of Masterplans.

· Provide comment and feedback to Council on projects relating to the implementation of the Masterplans.

· Actively engage with the community and provide feedback to Council on local aspirations, visions, needs and concerns.

· Identify and assist in facilitating partnerships between the community and Council for relevant projects.

Draft terms of reference would be tabled at the first meeting of the PPC Group and would be reported back to Council for endorsement. The framework for the draft terms of Reference being as follows:-

Meeting Frequency

The PPC group would meet as a minimum on a quarterly basis at Council or rotating to each town and village as deemed appropriate.

Reporting Mechanisms

Minutes from PPC Group meetings would be reported to Council at regular intervals to ensure that information is filtered to and from the PPC group. A web page could also be provided to enable the wider community to have access to all relevant PPC Group information.

Numbers and Representatives

To keep the PPC group manageable, it is proposed that membership is limited to a maximum of four representatives (two randomly selected members and two members from an EOI process) from each town / village/ locality. In addition, selected staff, including members of the place planning team, the Manager Environmental and Economic Planning, the Director of Sustainable Environment and Economy, and the Place Manager – Byron Bay will attend regularly, and others as required. Councillors would be invited to attend the group, but no official Councillor quorum would be required for meetings to take place.

Procurement of Group Members

An expression of interest combined with a random selection process would be undertaken later in 2019, to run concurrent with the public exhibition of Our Mullumbimby Masterplan and the Byron Arts and Industry Estate Precinct Plan. It is thought that these different types of recruitment processes used together will ensure the widest possible selection of membership occurs.

Continuation of other Guidance Groups

The existing guidance groups for the Mullumbimby, Bangalow and Byron Arts and Industry Estate would disband upon adoption of their relevant plans and be replaced with the PPC Group.

Notwithstanding the above, the options remains for the continuation of community led individual place planning groups or similar, as a sub working group to the larger PPC Group at the discretion of those groups. Representatives who sit on the PPC Group as such may choose to lead or host a community led town / village group to report back on implementation matters pertinent to them. Conversely, the community led groups could also push ideas back through their representatives to the larger PPC Groups for support and or sponsorship of Council.

Noteworthy is that the community led groups would not be directly facilitated or resourced by Council.

The above approach is consistent with the ‘Future of Local Government Declaration’ Council adopted (RES 18-176) as it aligns with the directive to “Empower citizens through participatory and deliberative democracy, including community boards, precinct committees, cooperatives, citizens juries and others…”

Key issues

The PPC Group will ensure the equitable distribution of information between Council and the wider community. It is a new and some what innovative approach to manage the implementation of the many Place Plans we have to enable the ongoing life of the plans through their implementation.

More importantly, a PCC Group will enable the efficient and effective use of staff and community time, by streamlining the number of meetings required, persons that need to attend, and creating a collaborative environment for the cross pollination of creative ideas and solutions.

Options

1. Create the Place Planning Cluster Group to manage the implementation of place plans for Mullumbimby, Bangalow, Byron Arts and Industry Estate and any future place plans – disbanding any existing groups. (recommended)

2. Continue with the current situation of individual groups for each town / locality. Disband existing groups and run a new EOI and random selection process to procure members for the individual town implementation groups. (not recommended)

3. Disband existing guidance groups and not constitute any further groups to manage place plan implementation. (not recommended)

Next steps

Staff to commence an EOI and a random selection process in order to gain members for the PPC Group.

A further report to Council to endorse nominees as members of the PPC Group. First meeting of the PPC Group to follow.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

	CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 4: We manage growth and change responsibly		4.1	Support the visions and aspirations of local communities through place-based planning and management	4.1.1	Develop, implement and update Place Plans that promote place-based forward planning strategies and actions

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Nil

Financial Considerations

Nil

Consultation and Engagement

The concept of the PPC Group has been discussed with Our Mullumbimby Masterplan Guidance Group. The group are supportive of better governance generally for the delivery of place plans.

The Executive Team has also been consulted regarding the introduction of a PPC Group. They have endorsed the concept of the PPC Group.

Further consultation, including seeking members for the PPC Group, is anticipated to run concurrently with the public exhibition of the Byron Arts and Industry Precinct Plan and Our Mullumbimby Masterplan.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.5

Report No. 13.5 Integrated Pest Management Strategy 2019-2029

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Karen Love, Research Officer – Integrated Pest Management

File No: I2019/1212

Summary:

In 2014, Council resolved (Res 13-621) to develop an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Policy and Strategy for Council owned and managed land.

The IPM Policy (Policy) was adopted by Council in August 2018 (Res 18-565). The IPM Strategy (Strategy) delivers the Policy and was on public exhibition for six weeks from 24 June 2019 to 2 August 2019.

Five submissions (Attachment 1) were received: two in support of the Strategy and three of non-support. This report summarises and addresses the submissions received and recommends that Council adopt the Integrated Pest Management Strategy 2019-2029 (Attachment 2) with minor only amendments.

Further, there is a prioritised action table in the Strategy to deliver on the objectives of Council’s adopted Policy and its implementation from now on. This however will require inclusion in the Operational Plan as a new activity, and associated resourcing which is addressed in the report and recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Adopt the Integrated Pest Management Strategy 2019-2029 (Attachment 2 E2019/63575).

2. Include the ‘Implementation of the Integrated Pest Management Strategy 2019-2029’ as an activity in the 2019/20 Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

3. Note that implementation of the Integrated Pest Management Strategy 2019-2029 will be accommodated within the Infrastructure Services Directorate budgets.

Attachments:

1 Combined submissions report Draft Integrated Pest Management Strategy 24.2018.71.1 Public, E2019/57660

2 Integrated Pest Management Strategy 2019-2029, E2019/63575

3 IPM Project milestones, E2019/63545

REPORT

Background

Council resolved (Res 13-621) to develop an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Policy (adopted by Council, 23 August 2018; Res 18-565) and Strategy for Council owned and managed land. Since passing the 2013 resolution, pesticide use by Council staff has ceased in all children’s playgrounds, formal bus stops, town and village centres, on roadsides and 15 of 23 sports fields. This significant achievement has been realised through the adoption of IPM principles and continues to be integrated and improved upon in Council practices.

The development of the Strategy delivers the three objectives within the Policy and outlines the actions required to deliver these objectives within a five and ten year timeframe.

Objective 1. Provide guidance for the development of an Integrated Pest Management Strategy that will optimise efficient and effective resolution of pest problems while avoiding adverse impacts upon human health and the environment.

Objective 2. Establish decision-making tools to underpin and inform Integrated Pest Management. These tools include (but are not limited to):

(i) a digital map – pesticide exclusion/minimisation zones

(ii) a set of protocols – Managers Pesticide Use Decision Tree

Objective 3. Provide impetus for Council to build, improve and maintain employee and contractor knowledge and skills for selecting the lowest risk methodologies, including but not exclusively applying non-pesticide methods, for attaining the desired pest management outcome on Council-managed land.

Project Delivery

Key project deliverables are summarised and presented (Attachment 3).

Public Exhibition and Submissions

The Strategy was on public exhibition for six weeks from 24 June 2019 to 2 August 2019.

Five submissions were received: two in support of the Strategy and three of non-support. The five submissions have all been considered; and all (except submission no.5) are contained in Attachment 1 of this report. Submission no.5 has been withheld from the public agenda due to Council’s concern that the submission contains defamatory statements that Council does not wish to publish. A copy of this submission is available to Councillors on the hub.

Submission comments are summarised in Table 1 (below) with the relevant actions undertaken and incorporated into the final version (Attachment 2).

Table 1: IPM Strategy Submission Comments and Staff Action

Submission	Issue	Comment	Staff Action
1. Email	Supports the progressive and innovative policy. Urges Council to stop the use of Glyphosate and or phase out its use ASAP.	Noted	No change
2.	Asks where the Roadside Management Plan is.	This is addressed within the Strategy with the Roadside Vegetation Management Plan to be audited as an action.	No change
	False statement that council roads are pesticide free.	Council roadside work teams ceased pesticide use after 2013 resolution. Rous County Council regulate and control the Biosecurity Act high risk weeds on rural roadsides.	Wording changed on pages 9 & 27.
	Unable to find Rous County Council’s Local Priority Weed Management Strategy 2018-2025.	A draft document that was received by Council, however the priority weeds are listed on Rous County Council’s website.	Reference changed on page 14 and removed from references
	Thinks that the document appeases the community, promotes a mythical image, and is a marketing tool, while erecting obstacles to efficient pest management.	Noted. The IPM Strategy delivers the IPM Policy and is for Council staff to enact on Council owned and managed land.	No change.
3.	Supports the goal of minimising pesticide use and the eradication of pesticide use.	Noted.	No change
4.	States that the Strategy is a watered down version of the original policy proposals where the original motion wasn’t met. Comments on the original motion.	The IPM Strategy delivers Councils adopted IPM Policy.	No change
5	Comments on the original Council resolution in 2014 and the actions within that resolution.	The IPM Strategy delivers Councils adopted IPM Policy.	No change
	Questions the need or suitability of the consultant.	This process was undertaken via procurement process as per Council policy.	No change
	Questions the public consultation process.	The IPM Policy and Strategy public consultation process was undertaken as per the approved Communication plans. The Strategy’s public consultation included a six week public exhibition period, peer review, staff workshops and Biodiversity Advisory Committee Workshop.	No change
	Questions the risk assessment of pesticide use.	All risk assessments are embedded into WH & S Policy and processes alongside monitoring and reporting mechanisms on a monthly basis.	No change
	States there is ignorance of non-pesticide control methods.	The Strategy showcases non-pesticide alternatives as well as illustrating where Council utilises non-pesticide control methods. All current control methods (including non-pesticide alternatives) are also listed within the Invasive Plant Species List.	No change
	Comments on the Public right to know what pesticide is used.	See Council’s Pesticide Notification Plan. All pesticides used by Council are notified via Council’s website.	No change
	Disagrees with pesticide use as best practice.	Best practice is based on the NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) and Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicine Authority (APVMA) information, as well as the National Standards for ecological restoration (SERA).	No change
	Comments on there being no baseline data to measure reduction.	All pesticide use is recorded and monitored as per the NSW Pesticide Regulation 2017.	No change
	Comments that Council has no avenue for participation, inclusion or consultation of pesticide free techniques.	There are three pesticide free restoration sites currently operating within the Shire, one of which is almost 10 years old. Please note that the Environmental Trust stipulates the use of herbicide inclusion into funding for environmental restoration sites.	No change
	Suggests improved pathways for usage transparency, community reporting and participation be developed.	Noted. These actions are within the action table – see Goal 3 actions on page 31 of the Strategy.	No change

Conclusion

The submissions received during public exhibition of the Strategy have resulted in only minor amendments to the document. As such, it is recommended that Council adopt the Integrated Pest Management Strategy 2019-2029 with the amendments (Attachment 2).

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 3: We protect and enhance our natural environment

3.1

Partner to protect and enhance our biodiversity, ecosystems and ecology

3.1.1

Protect and enhance our natural environment and biodiversity

3.1.1.4

Prepare a Shire Wide Integrated Pest Management Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Related Legislation:

Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Administration Act 1992

Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Code Act 1994

Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016

Biosecurity Act 2015 & Biosecurity Regulations 2017

Companion Animal Act 1998

Crown Land Management Act 2016

Crown Land Legislation Amendment Act 2017

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Forestry and National Park Estate Act 1998

Game and Feral Animal Control Act 2002 & Game and Feral Animal Control Regulations 2012

Local Government Act 1993

Local Land Services Act 2013

National Parks & Wildlife Act 1974

NSW Pesticide Act 1999 & Pesticide Regulation 2017

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

Roads Act 1993

Work Health and Safety Act (2011) & Work Health and Safety Regulations (2017)

Related Council Policies

Integrated Pest Management Policy 2018

Personal Protective Equipment Policy 2016

Planting and Landscaping on Footpaths and Nature Strips within Road Reserves and Drainage Easements Policy 4.16

Procurement and Purchasing Policy 2.6

Work Health & Safety Policy

Related Plans/ Standards and Registers

Byron Shire Pest Animal Management Plan 2018-23

Byron Shire Council Pesticide Use Notification Plan

Byron Shire Roadside Vegetation Management Plan 2012

Byron Shire Tree and Vegetation Removal Procedure 2017

Byron Shire Chemical Sensitive Residents and Organic Growers Register

National Standards for the practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia 2017

North Coast Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017-2022

North Coast Regional Strategic Pest Animal Management Plan 2018-2023

Pesticide Use Notification Plan 2018

Strategic Asset Management Plan 2016-2026

AS 4373-2007 Pruning of amenity trees - SAI Global

Financial Considerations

In order to implement the Strategy to deliver Objective 3 of the Policy, there are potential staff work load and other resource allocations needed. These however can be accommodated within the existing Infrastructure Services Directorate budgets.

Consultation and Engagement

· IPM Working Group who comprise representatives across three divisions within the Infrastructure Services Directorate and an external consultant.

· Staff strategic planning workshop with approximately 30 field and office staff at the depot.

· Two field visits with staff on roadsides.

· Presentation to the Biodiversity Advisory Committee on the Pesticide Use Decision Tree and IPM Mapping.

· Confidential peer review to four members of the public and Rous County Council including two representatives of ‘chemical free land care’ and two local ecologists to inform the Draft IPM Strategy.

· Integrated peer review Draft IPM Strategy distributed to Managers for comment.

· IPM Strategy Presented to the Director’s - Infrastructure Services and Sustainable Environment and Economy.

· Strategic Planning Workshop with Councillors.

· Public exhibition for six weeks from 24 June 2019 to 2 August 2019.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.6

Report No. 13.6 Report of Planning Review Committee held on 8 August 2019

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Noreen Scott, EA Sustainable Environment and Economy

File No: I2019/1221

Summary:

This report provides the outcome of the Planning Review Committee meeting held on 8 August 2019.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council note the report of the Planning Review Committee meeting held on 8 August 2019.

REPORT

The meeting commenced at 4:30pm and concluded at 5:00pm.

Present: Crs Lyon, Martin, Hunter, Hackett

Staff: Chris Larkin (Manager Sustainable Development), Rob Van Iersel (Major Projects Planner), Shannon Burt (Director Sustainable Environment and Economy)

Apologies: Crs Richardson, Spooner

The following development applications were reviewed with the outcome shown in the final column.

DA No.	Applicant	Property Address	Proposal	Exhibition Submission/s	Reason/s Outcome
10.2019.301.1	Ardill Payne & Partners	16 Short Street BRUNSWICK HEADS	Demolition of existing Dwelling House and Construction of Two (2) New Dwellings and Two (2) Swimming Pools to create Dual Occupancy (Detached)	Level 1 18/6/19 to 1/7/19 116 submissions against	The number of public submissions The perceived public significance of the application Council
10.2019.349.1	Ardill Payne & Partners	14 Short Street BRUNSWICK HEADS	Stage 1: De-commissioning of existing Dual Occupancy to form One (1) Dwelling, Stage 2: Construction of New Dwelling House to form a Dual Occupancy and Alterations & Additions to existing Dwelling House	Level 1 24/7/19 to 6/8/19	The perceived public significance of the application Council
10.2019.285.1	Ardill Payne & Partners	18 Pioneers Crescent BANGALOW	Mixed Use Development comprising Agricultural Produce Industries, Depot, Garden Centre, Childcare Centre, Swimming Pool and Recreational Facilities	Level 2 11/7/19 to 9/8/19 35 submissions	Staff Delegation

Council determined the following original development application. The Section 4.55 application to modify the development consent is referred to the Planning Review Committee to decide if the modification application can be determined under delegated authority.

DA No.

Applicant

Property Address

Proposal

Exhibition

Submission/s

Reason/s

Outcome

10.2006.322.3

Mr M C Wilkinson

471 Friday Hut Road

POSSUM CREEK

S4.55 to Modify Trading Hours and Seating Numbers

Level 1

26/7/19 to 8/8/19

3 submissions

Staff Delegation

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.7

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services

Report No. 13.7 Draft Plan of Management Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

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

Darren McAllister, Acting Open Space and Facilities Coordinator

File No: I2019/1297

Summary:

A draft Plan of Management for the Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds (PoM) has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 and associated regulations.

Council resolved in March 2019 to publicly exhibit the draft Plan of Management, and arrange an independently chaired Public Hearing prior to reporting back to Council (19-110).

The Statutory process was completed,and the draft was reported back to Council on the 22^nd of August 2019, where it was resolved that “Council defer the Draft Plan of Management Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds to a future meeting of Council as the Draft plan of management does not adequately address the Suffolk Park Recreation Ground Public Hearing report.” (19-420)

The Draft Plan of Management has been amended (Attachment 1)in accordance with Resolution 19-420.

This report provides the submissions received (Attachment 3) during the public exhibition and the report of the independent Chair of the public hearing; the “Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds Public Hearing Report” (Attachment 2).

The public hearing report provides a summary of the submissions made to the Public Hearing, a summary of the written submissions made during public exhibition process and provides a response to the issues raised in both the verbal and written submissions. The report also makes recommendations to Council.

There was 1 formal verbal submission made to the Public Hearing.

11 written submissions were received during the exhibition period.

Based on the assessment of submissions, and the conclusions and recommendations of the independent report into the Public Hearing, it is recommended that Council adopt the Plan of Management as exhibited.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council adopt the Draft Plan of Management for the Suffolk Park Recreation Ground as amended at Attachment 1 (E2019/63630).

Attachments:

1 Draft Plan of Management Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds V2, E2019/63630

2 Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds Public Hearing Report - Planners North, E2019/52466

3 Submissions Draft Plan of Management Suffolk Park Recreation Ground, E2019/52211

REPORT

There was 1 formal verbal submission made to the Public Hearing. However, it is noted that other attendees made comment throughout the hearing. A total of 7 people attended the hearing, all representing the Suffolk Park Community Garden.

11 written submissions were received during the exhibition period.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2		CSP Strategy		L3	DP Action		L4		OP Activity
Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community		2.3		Provide accessible, local community spaces and facilities	2.3.5		Maintain Public Open space in a safe and efficient way that provides for both active and passive recreation (SP)		2.3.5.1	Plan and deliver Open Space works programs based on defined levels of service

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Local Government Act 1993

38 Public notice of draft plans of management

(1) A council must give public notice of a draft plan of management.

(2) The period of public exhibition of the draft plan must be not less than 28 days.

(3) The public notice must also specify a period of not less than 42 days after the date on which the draft plan is placed on public exhibition during which submissions may be made to the council.

(4) The council must, in accordance with its notice, publicly exhibit the draft plan together with any other matter which it considers appropriate or necessary to better enable the draft plan and its implications to be understood

40 Adoption of plans of management

(1) After considering all submissions received by it concerning the draft plan of management, the council may decide to amend the draft plan or to adopt it without amendment as the plan of management for the community land concerned.

(2) If the council decides to amend the draft plan it must either:

(a) publicly exhibit the amended draft plan in accordance with the provisions of this Division relating to the public exhibition of draft plans, or

(b) if it is of the opinion that the amendments are not substantial, adopt the amended draft plan without public exhibition as the plan of management for the community land concerned.

(2A) If a council adopts an amended plan without public exhibition of the amended draft plan, it must give public notice of that adoption, and of the terms of the amended plan of management, as soon as practicable after the adoption.

(3) The council may not, however, proceed to adopt the plan until any public hearing required under section 40A has been held in accordance with section 40A.

40A Public hearing in relation to proposed plans of management

(1) The council must hold a public hearing in respect of a proposed plan of management (including a plan of management that amends another plan of management) if the proposed plan would have the effect of categorising, or altering the categorisation of, community land under section 36 (4).

(2) However, a public hearing is not required if the proposed plan would merely have the effect of altering the categorisation of the land under section 36 (5).

(3) A council must hold a further public hearing in respect of the proposed plan of management if:

(a) the council decides to amend the proposed plan after a public hearing has been held in accordance with this section, and

(b) the amendment of the plan would have the effect of altering the categorisation of community land under section 36 (4) from the categorisation of that land in the proposed plan that was considered at the previous public hearing.

41 Amendment of plans of management

A council may amend a plan of management adopted under this Division by means only of a plan of management so adopted.

42 Revocation and cessation of plans of management

(1) A plan of management for community land may be revoked by a plan of management adopted under this Division by the council.

(2) A plan of management ceases to apply to land if:

(a) the land is reclassified as operational land, or

(b) in the case of land that is not owned by the council—the land ceases to be controlled by the council.

Financial Considerations

There are no financial implications from the development and adoption of the Plan of Management. Proposed actions consistent with an adopted plan of management may generate income and expenditure that Council will have to consider when they are presented.

Consultation and Engagement

Submissions closed 14 June 2019.

	Draft Plan of Management	Public Hearing
Byron Shire Echo	1/5/19 + 8/5/19	1/5/19 + 8/5/19
Byron Shire News	2/5/19 + 9/5/19	2/5/19 + 9/5/19
Byron Shire Council Website/Public Notices	23/4/19 to 23/6/19	30/4/19 to 30/6/19
Public Hearing		Held 19/6/19 at Cavanbah Centre

PoM on exhibition 61 days (minimum required 28), allowing 50 days (52 minimum required) for submissions.

The amended draft was reviewed by staff of BSC’s SEE directorate on 28 August 2019.