Agenda of Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee 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.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Adoption of Minutes from Previous Meetings 3.1

Adoption of Minutes from Previous Meetings

Report No. 3.1 Adoption of Minutes from 30 July 2020 Meeting

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Dominika Tomanek, Executive Assistant Infrastructure Services

File No: I2020/1181

RECOMMENDATION:

That the minutes of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting held on 30 July 2020 be confirmed.

Attachments:

1 Minutes 30/07/2020 Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee, I2020/1094 , page 8⇩

Report

The attachment to this report provides the minutes of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting of 30 July 2020 .

Report to Council

The minutes were reported to Council on

Comments

In accordance with the Committee Recommendations, Council resolved the following:

Report of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting held on 30 July 2020

File No: I2020/1173

20-427

Resolved:

1. That Council notes the minutes of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting held on 30 July 2020.

2. That with regard to Report No. 4.2 Effects of water mining in Byron and surrounding shires on groundwater resources, that point 3 of the Management Recommendation in the minutes be amended to read as follows: That the report be brought to next WWSC and Coastal Estuary Catchment Panel meetings outlining water resourcing both commercial and domestic prior to any changes to the LEP the being undertaken.

3. That a report also be provided to the next meeting of the WWS committee that clarifies the advice from staff to the WWS Committee held on 30 July 2020 that, under the Byron LEP 2014 water mining for bottled water is not a permitted use in the RU1 and RU2 Zones” in the light of DA 10.2015.102.1 approved in July 2015 under the current BYRON LEP 2014 for a Rural industry (fruit juice production, winery and water bottling facility) at Huonbrook.

20-428

Resolved that Council adopt the following Committee and Management Recommendations:

Report No. 4.2 Effects of water mining in Byron and surrounding shires on groundwater resources

File No: I2020/879

Committee Recommendation 4.2.1

1. That Council note the report.

2. That Council introduce in next round of “housekeeping” for the LEP, a clause similar to Tweed Shire Council LEP clause 7.15 relating to groundwater extraction, but with no exception and no part (3).

3. That the report be brought to next WWSC and Coastal Estuary Catchment Panel meetings outlining water resourcing both commercial and domestic.

Management Recommendation

1. That Council note the report.

2. That Council introduce in next round of “housekeeping” for the LEP, a clause that prohibits Ground Water extraction as follows:

7.15 Industry—groundwater extraction, etc

(1) This clause applies to development for the purpose of industry, being a building or place at which groundwater is extracted, handled, treated, processed, stored, packed or transported offsite for commercial bottling and drinking purposes.

(2) Development to which this clause applies is prohibited on land to which this Plan applies similar to Tweed Shire Council LEP clause 7.15 relating to groundwater extraction, but with no exception and no part (3).

3. That the report be brought to next WWSC and Coastal Estuary Catchment Panel meetings outlining water resourcing both commercial and domestic.

4. That Council write to the relevant NSW Government Agency seeking a review of water extraction licenses in relation to the terms of such licenses prohibiting water being extracted for commercial bottling/ drinking purposes, and limiting extraction for on farm purposes such as irrigation of crops, watering of farm animals and other domestic purposes associated with the farm.

20-429

Resolved that Council adopt the following Committee Recommendations:

Report No. 4.3 Byron STP Condition 9. Additional Load - Quarterly report

File No: I2020/1011

Committee Recommendation 4.3.1

1. That Council note the report.

2. That Council add actual volumes reused to the quarterly report.

20-430

Resolved that Council adopt the following Committee Recommendation:

Report No. 4.4 Inflow and Infiltration - quarterly update

File No: I2020/1062

Committee Recommendation 4.4.1

That Council note the report.

20-431

Resolved:

that Council adopt the following Committee Recommendations:

Report No. 4.5 Nutrient Loading in the Belongil Update

File No: I2020/1078

Committee Recommendation 4.5.1

1. That the Council note the update provided to resolution 20-243 in relation to nutrient loading in the Belongil catchment.

2. That Council consider amendment of Delivery Plan Action 1.5.2 to read "ensure our STPs meet or exceed EPA Licence conditions and don't negatively impact on their receiving environments".

According to resolution 20-427 point 2, minutes of WWSC Meeting, recommendations in Report 4.2.3 has been amended to read as follows:

That the report be brought to next WWSC and Coastal Estuary Catchment Panel meetings outlining water resourcing both commercial and domestic prior to any changes to the LEP the being undertaken.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.1

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services

Report No. 4.1 Byron STP Condition 9. Additional Load - Quarterly Report

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Dean Baulch, Principal Engineer, Systems Planning

Vivianne Lins, Environmental Planner

File No: I2020/1125

Summary:

This report is for the Committees information and reviews compliance with the Byron Bay Sewerage Augmentation Scheme - Conditions of Approval (2002).

Condition 9(iii) requires that sufficient reuse (recycled water) capacity be available before the acceptance of any additional load at the treatment plant.

In the years since the approval was granted (2002 to date), 2,508 Equivalent Tenements (ET) have been approved, resulting in an additional load of 1.48 ML/day at the treatment plant. The current day operating capacity of the reuse system equates to 2.02ML/day or 3,427ET. Therefore the reuse system provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional load as defined in the Conditions of Approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report is noted.

REPORT

The relevant section from Condition 9 of the Approval is Condition 9(iii), which states, “Additional load at West Byron STP will not be accepted until: availability of sufficient reuse capacity to accommodate 100% of the volume of treated effluent generated by the additional load”.

“Additional Load” is defined in the report as “any sewage load resulting from development consents after the date of this approval”. Date of Approval is 9 December 2002.

From December 2002 through to the end of September 2020, 2,508 additional sewer Equivalent Tenements (ET) have been approved by Council through development consents. This additional load (including approvals for secondary dwellings) was also adjusted (reduced) based on development applications that have been withdrawn or refused during the same period. Figure 1 shows the annual approved additional ET load from 2002 to 2020.

The current day operating capacity of the reuse system to produce treated effluent is 26 Litres per second or 2.25ML/day less 10% of water for filter backwash purposes equates to 2.02ML/day or 3,427ET.

Current Approved

Available Capacity

(ET)

Condition 9(iii) Additional Load Calculation

2,508

Current effluent reuse system capacity 2020

3,427

919

Figure 1 - Equivalent Tenements approved by Council from 2002-2020

Therefore, the existing reuse system provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional load as defined in the Conditions of Approval.

Committee Report Tracking Summary: Condition 9. Additional Load at Byron STP	Current Approved ET	Difference (ET)
30 January 2020	2,408	-
30 July 2020	2,478	70
29 October 2020	2,508	30

In terms of the actual reuse volumes for Byron Bay since the system was commissioned the following annual figures are provided:-

Calendar Year	Total Urban Reuse Flows (ML)
2006	258.8
2007	336.1
2008	204.4
2009	174.5
2010	257.2
2011	287.4
2012	294.0
2013	287.2
2014	296.9
2015	261.9
2016	221.8
2017	257.3
2018	246.7
2019	424.7
2020	311.2

Figure 2 – Annual Reuse Volumes for Byron Bay

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.2

Report No. 4.2 2020 Household Kerbside waste Compostion Audit

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Danielle Hanigan, Team Leader Resorce Recovery and Quarry,

File No: I2020/1524

Summary:

The purpose of this report is to provide the Water Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee with a summary of the findings of the kerbside waste composition audit conducted throughout the Byron Shire in Autumn 2020.

In March 2020, consultants EC Sustainable conducted a compositional audit of residential kerbside bins in both the urban and rural areas of the Byron Shire. The purpose of the audit was to provide data on the characterisation of the three waste streams (organics, recycling and general waste) which will enable planning for future services, community education programs, and information on the number of eligible containers within the Container Deposit Scheme (CDS).

The audit was undertaken in accordance with NSW EPA Guidelines and targeted a sample size of 220 households in accordance with these guidelines. Audits were conducted across all areas of the Shire, including the rural village / areas of Possum Creek, Talofa, Coopers Shoot, Main Arm, Federal and Coorabell and the urban townships of Byron Bay, Bangalow, Ocean Shores, Suffolk Park, Mullumbimby, Brunswick Heads and South Golden Beach.

From the audit, the consultants have provided a comprehensive report of their findings, a summary report with visual representations of the data (see Attachment 1 E2020/83797) as well as the raw data collated from the audit.

The audit was conducted using an aggregate methodology, whereby the contents of bins was placed in labelled bags, and taken to a suitable site to be sorted into up to 100 different waste material categories.

It should be noted that the collection component of the audit was completed by in March 2020, just prior to the “lockdown” impacts of Covid-19, and EC Sustainable did not feel that there was any significant impact to the data at this time.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Committee note the report

Attachments:

1 Byron Shire Council Kerbside Bin Audit 2020-Summary, E2020/83797 , page 19 ⇩

REPORT

Objectives:

The primary objectives of undertaking the kerbside bin composition audit are to determine the following information;

· Generation rates based on weight and volume – in essence how much are residents putting into each of their 3 bins.

· Resources in the waste stream – what useful recyclable or compostable materials are unnecessarily going to landfill because they are placed in the red lidded bin

· Contamination rates and types in the recycling and organics streams

· Resource Recovery rates

· Landfill diversion rates

· CDS eligible containers across the three streams ( what containers are in the domestic bins that are eligible for the 10c redemption)

· Comparable data with that of the previous audit conducted in 2016 to show trends and improvements / declines.

Outcomes:

The audit report analysed data in comparison to the previous audit conducted in 2016 and made a number of key findings. The 2020 audit found that waste diversion from landfill overall was 71%, an increase from the previous audit conducted in 2016 which had a 51% waste diversion rate. This was achieved through higher resource recovery rates in both the recycling and organics streams, as well as reduced contamination to these streams. It also showed a significantly higher weight collected within the organics bins than the previous audit.

Whilst these results are pleasing, there is still improvement to be made in diverting resources away from the general waste stream, particularly food and garden waste which still makes up 28% of the general waste stream overall, and 34% in rural areas where an organics service is not present. This also creates a significant environmental impact through methane production so diverting this material to be composted will be a key focus of Resource Recovery Education programs in the future.

A further breakdown on waste volumes per household, as well as the composition of each bin in both the urban and rural areas of the Shire is found within Attachment 1 (E2020/83797) Byron Shire Council Kerbside Bin Audit 2020 – Summary.

Next steps:

· Increased focus on community education programs that aim to divert resources from the general waste stream, and reduce contamination to the resource recovery streams, focussing on the top contamination items.

· Increased promotion of home composting in rural areas.

· Resume Contamination Reduction Program Lift the Lid - bin audits whereby recycling and organics bins are inspected and tagged dependant on their contents, providing personalised advice on whether they have placed the correct items in their bins.

· Increased focus on the tourism business and accommodation sector as per the Integrated Waste Strategy to ensure correct behaviours within this demographic who are often integrated with residents.

· Consider feasibility of expanding the organics collection service into higher density rural areas and whether this would have an overall positive impact on carbon emission and waste diversion.

· Delivery of actions within the Towards Zero – Byron Shire’s Integrated Waste Management and Resource Recovery Strategy 2019-2029.

Covid-19 Impacts:

It is important to note that the information provided in the attached summary report is indicative of a “normal” state of play, and is useful in comparing data from previous audits which are conducted outside peak holiday periods. Whilst the data within the attached report shows a positive trend, the consequences of Covid -19 on the waste streams has been considerable due to the overall reversion back to single use items, as well as an increase in the take-away food market. This is particularly evident in the public place waste management sector whereby bins are filled with takeaway food and beverage containers. There has also been increased demand for larger residential waste bins to cater for working from home and increased number of people living within single dwellings.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations

1.4

Provide a regular and acceptable waste and recycling service

1.4.1

Implement Integrated Waste Management and Resource Recovery Strategy

1.4.1.1

Implement 2020/21 action plan activities identified in the Waste Management Strategy

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.3

Report No. 4.3 Framework for guiding the strategic direction of (recycled) water management

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Pablo Orams, Mr

File No: I2020/1573

Summary:

Recycled water in Byron Shire has become a significant resource to improve the resilience of the community and delivery sustainability outcomes. To help unlock this potential, BSC’s Utilities team is assessing its current water recycling strategy and management practices. This work has identified a series of improvement opportunities, particularly the need to shift to a more integrated and collaborative approach to manage recycled water in conjunction with the whole water cycle.

This report explores the legacy and complexity of Byron Shire’s recycled water, current efforts to improve its performance, and proposes a conceptual approach (“Urban Metabolism”) to guide the future strategic direction of recycled water and broader water management in the Shire. Urban metabolism provides a simple framework to characterise urban areas, while enabling robust analysis of how they use water and other resources to provide benefits to the resident population, and with consideration of the limits of the natural environment. This framework, with its set of sustainability-focused strategic objectives and indicators, provides unparalleled potential to support decision making in water management.

By presenting this new approach, the Utilities team hopes to gain feedback and approval to progress it into practical implementation.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the committee approves further development of the proposed framework and assessment of the requirements for its practical implementation

REPORT

Background

Byron Shire Council’s (BSC) recycled water schemes were originally conceived as a way to avoid treated effluent discharge into the environment. This has produced a “new” water source expected to be beneficially used. However, in a region historically characterised by its generous rainfall, finding sustainable ways to use this water has proved challenging.

Environmental re-use schemes have offered a partial solution, and have achieved valuable outcomes (e.g. support management of acid sulphate soils and peat fires, enhance local biodiversity, carbon sequestration, etc.). This has been complemented with recycled water connections to businesses (e.g. sport fields, nurseries, schools, etc.) and municipal use (e.g. irrigation of open spaces and public toilets). However, a proportion of treated effluent, while of high-quality, still remains unused.

Partly influenced by the recent drought conditions, community interest in recycled water has increased. This could offer an opportunity to improve inflow-to-recycled-water conversion. However, the Utilities team recognises that its current strategic framework and management practices could be improved to better align with the current sustainability issues of the Shire and the region. The “how” (and “why”) to provide recycled water to new customers requires long-term, systems thinking to ensure maximum benefit is achieved. This is the improvement opportunity this report intends to explore.

The problem we are facing

As the region’s population and economy grows, pressure over potable water resources is increasing. In parallel, climate variability and an increase in extreme events is exposing the water security risks to the region. Byron Shire’s strong reliance on climate-dependant water sources (i.e. Rous County Council’s water supply) represents a risk to residents, the economy and the environment.

Recycled water can offer an alternative and reliable (but not unlimited) water source as a demand management tool to offset potable water requirements. However, BSC recognises that the original motivation for recycled water (i.e. to avoid effluent discharge into the environment), while still critically important, did not fully incorporated a water security narrative.

In addressing this gap, since March 2020 the Utilities team has undertaken a review of its current recycled water management approach. Some of the improvement opportunities that have been identified are:

- Recycled water is currently managed in isolation from the wider water system^{^[1]}, as well as from Council’s high-level strategic objectives (e.g. BSC’s Community Strategic Plan, Net Zero Emissions Strategy, etc.).

- There is a need for clear and context-specific key performance indicators (KPIs) to assess and communicate the effectiveness of recycled water efforts, particularly when addressing sustainability issues.

- Current recycled water monitoring and information management systems are fragmented, not allowing for timely and efficient decision-making support.

- There is a need to improve and update governance arrangements, policies, internal procedures and systems to effectively manage recycled water, its related infrastructure and the final users.

- The benefit/cost balance of BSC’s recycled water is not fully understood. The resource is currently supplied for free and there is a need to clearly articulate the value it provides the community.

- There is a disconnection between BSC’s current recycled water practices and the community’s expectations/understanding of the resource.

- Community education regarding recycled water has been limited.

More importantly, there is need for a comprehensive and robust long-term strategy to guide BSC’s recycled water efforts, and aid with addressing the above improvement opportunities. The current Byron Shire Recycled Water Management Strategy 2017 – 2027 has a strong focus on the implementation of environmental schemes to use recycled water, but does not make links to the potential of recycled water to address broader strategic outcomes and the regional water security problem.

At a higher level, the Utilities team has found that there is lack of shared understanding among stakeholders of the overall water system’s dynamics, and hence difficulty in articulating and justifying the reasons and benefits/impacts of investment and management decisions (including water recycling). This is also perceived to promote reactive and siloed management approaches, failing to factor in the complex nature of water cycle processes and the long-term sustainability of decisions made. State Government initiatives such as DPIE’s 30-year Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) Strategy framework^{^[2]} for local water utilities offer a pathway to address this challenge. IWCM’s seek to plan water management activities to complement each other and provide optimal outcomes for the community and the environment. However, IWCMs require fundamental re-structuring of governance and management practices, and is often hampered by institutional, political, planning and cost barriers^{^[3]}. BSC developed an IWCM strategy in 2009, but it hasn’t been adopted yet and is currently under review, despite it being a comprehensive and substantial document.

Current decision-making frameworks don’t allow for adequate coordination and integration in water-related strategic, planning and investment decisions. This denotes a more fundamental issue than that of the current under-review recycled water strategy, and which should be addressed as a priority.

What are we doing to address this issue?

The Utilities team is currently developing the conceptual framework to re-structure the recycled water management strategy, based on long-term, whole-of-water-cycle approach. This will allow for managing recycled water in the context of systemic sustainability. This conceptual framework is introduced in the next section and is the central focus for discussion.

Additionally, the team is working on the following fronts:

Short-term (1 to 2 years)

- Undertaking an operational audit of the Byron Bay STP (BBSTP) and the Byron Bay Urban Recycled Water Scheme (BBURWS) to assess its level of compliance with current regulations, and identify what compliance considerations are required to expand it.

- Mapping of compliance obligations (e.g. licenses, conditions of consent, etc.) related to the BBSTP and BBURWS, aiming to inform improvement opportunities to our monitoring and reporting practices.

- Standardising end-user and recycled water meter auditing processes.

Mid-term (2 to 5 years)

- Defining possible key performance indicators to better guide, and assess the impact of, management/investment decisions in recycled water.

- Consolidating available information to establish a baseline and identify improvement opportunities to the current monitoring and data management practices.

- Better understanding the potential uses for recycled water in the Shire, including residential, commercial, environmental and municipal uses.

- Defining a framework to guide/prioritize the allocation of recycled water between competing users, in a socially fair, economically efficient and environmentally-sensitive manner.

- Investigating the benefit/cost balance of recycled water, and articulating possible recycled water pricing approaches.

- Involving other Council departments in the conversation (e.g. Planning, Open Spaces, Sustainability, Rates, etc.) to drive shared understanding of the issues surrounding recycled water.

- Engaging neighbouring councils (e.g. Ballina Shire Council) to benchmark recycled water practices.

- Engaging relevant regional bodies (Rous County Council and DPIE) to align BSC recycled water strategy to regional water strategies and financial incentives.

- Developing a communication and community engagement plan to educate the community and stakeholders about recycled water.

The above initiatives represent a shift to a more proactive approach to manage recycled water, and to set the foundations for improvements at both strategic and operational management levels. Further engagement with key stakeholders will be required to define the long term vision of recycled water management, and how to get there. The section below aims to start this process.

Introducing urban metabolism - a conceptual framework to inform strategic decision making in (recycled) water management

How can we proactively address the need for better integration and coordination in a practical way? How to support strategic decision making to ensure the sustainability of our water resources and systems? And, how can we do this now?

The concept of “urban metabolism” can offer a way to answer these questions.

Urban metabolism is a conceptual model which, at it simplest, uses a mass balance approach to quantify materials entering and/or leaving a city. The idea was first presented in 1965 with the aim of addressing contemporary urban resource issues. It is used for the analysis, critical assessment and management of urban areas as systems that `metabolise' material and energy inputs needed to sustain the city’s inhabitants at home, work and play - ultimately releasing them back to the environment as waste.^{^[4]}^{,^[5]}

Figure 1: The urban metabolism concept, showing energy, water and material flows entering a city system as resources, and exiting as waste. Energy and water are shown to be closely interrelated^{^[6]}

A key strength of the urban metabolism framework is its clear definition of the system boundary which leads to clear analytical options and strong relevance to urban planning and design. Knowing the system boundary is fundamental in defining which factors should be included in, or excluded from, the analysis.^{^[7]}

If focusing solely on water resources management, metabolic models of cities can be constructed using a water-mass balance. This enables the identification and quantification of water inputs, outputs and storage, and related impacts in urban water systems. It also provides a way to understand how water is being used within the system (e.g. residential, commercial, environmental or cultural water uses). Depending on how the boundary of the system is defined, urban metabolism can include both anthropogenic water flows (e.g. potable water, wastewater, etc.) and natural water flows (e.g. rain, infiltration, etc.), serving as a simple tool to conceptualise whole-of-water-cycle issues.

Figure 2: Conceptual water-mass balance of a city, including anthropogenic (e.g. potable water) and natural (e.g. rain) water flows, and the various water users within the system (e.g. social, economic and environmental).

Water-mass balance analysis offers simple, big-picture representations of complex urban systems using water. But most importantly, they can accurately quantify all water flows into, through and out of the defined urban boundary (similarly to what is done in an accounting exercise). These two characteristics facilitate the framing of useful indicators to assess the water metabolic performance (i.e. how water resources are used) of urban systems.^{^[8]}

A substantial body of research led by the University of Queensland, the Cities Research Centre (Griffith University) and the CRC for Water Sensitive Cities has provided a comprehensive set of urban metabolic indicators focused on assessing urban water management performance. The indicators respond to visions and principles for urban water management set by peak industry bodies and international development agencies^{^[9]}, as well as already stablished assessment frameworks that report and benchmark water management performance of cities^{^[10]}. The indicators are categorised in four key urban metabolism strategic objectives. These are summarised bellow:^{^[11]}

1. Resource efficiency

Denotes the efficient use of water-related resources (including water, energy for moving and treating water, and the nutrients mobilised in water). It refers to the overall water efficiency of the urban area in relation to water drawn from the environment, rather than the water use efficiency of end users.

2. Supply internalisation

Aims to decrease reliance on water drawn from the environment by using water sources available within the urban area (i.e. rainwater and/or stormwater harvesting and the recycling of wastewater and/or greywater).

3. Protection of water resources and hydrological flows

Refers to the sustainable management of water resources in terms of stocks, qualities and flows. This includes: (i) managing water extraction from the environment with consideration of the region’s capacity to supply, (ii) limiting the discharge of pollutants to the environment to maintain the quality of waterways, and (iii) restoring natural hydrological flows altered by increased imperviousness, i.e. reducing stormwater runoff, increasing infiltration and increasing evapotranspiration.

4. Recognition of the diverse functions of water

Water has functions that go beyond just meeting primary needs for potable water. This can include social functions (e.g. urban liveability, recreation, cultural), provision for environmental flows within urban catchments to sustain habitat health and biodiversity, enabling economic activities (e.g. industrial, commercial, energy generation, agricultural, forestry, fisheries, livestock), and supporting a range of urban spaces (e.g. green infrastructure, vegetation and green open space for amenity, recreation and urban heat island mitigation). (Note: Currently it is not clear how to quantify water functionality, as water functions are multidimensional and context specific. Hence, this objective remains aspirational and more research is required to design indicators to measure it).

Examples of indicators that respond to these objectives are presented in Table 1. Please refer to Figure 3 to place these indicators in the context of a hypothetical water-mass balance representation of Byron Bay.

Table 1: Examples of urban metabolic indicators to assess urban water management performance^{^[12]}

Strategic objective	Indicator	Examples of how each indicator can be quantified	Additional explanation
Resource efficiency	Water efficiency per person	Total use of environmental water* per person litres / person / day	A smaller result indicates higher resource efficiency (e.g. more benefits are achieved with less).
	Water-related energy efficiency per person	Total energy use for the water system per person energy / person / day
	Nutrient recovery (e.g. from wastewater and/ or stormwater)	Wastewater nutrient load that is beneficially utilised Nutrients_recovered/ Nutrients _{total in wastewater}	A result of 0 indicates no nutrient recovery. A result of 1 indicates all nutrients are recovered, avoiding their release into receiving waterways.
Supply internalisation	Water supply internalisation	Proportion of total water demand met by internally harvested and/or recycled water recycled water / (recycled water + environmental water)	A result of 0 indicates that the urban system relies solely on externally sourced environmental water. A result of 1 indicates the urban system is completely self-sufficient with regards to its water supply.
Protecting water resources and hydrological flows	Water use within sustainable extraction limits	Rate of environmental water extraction relative to the sustainable urban water allocation environmental water / sustainable water allocation	A result of <1 indicates that water extraction from the environment (e.g. for potable water) is done within sustainable levels. A result of >1 indicates water extraction exceeds the capacity of the environment to supply water sustainably.
	Restoration of natural hydrological flows (runoff, infiltration, Evaporation) compared to pre-development baseline	Current hydrology relative to pre-development hydrology run-off_current / run-off_{pre-development} evaporation_current / evaporation_{pre-development} infiltration_current / infiltration_{pre-development}	Results closer to 1 indicate a hydrological performance closer to pre-development levels, hence resembling the natural hydrology.
Recognising the diverse functionality of water	Support to the diverse functions of water (social, environmental, economic, urban spaces, etc.)	This indicator remains aspirational, as a methodology to quantify water functionality is yet to be defined. Nevertheless, considering the multi-functionality of water within the urban environment can help inform more comprehensive decision making.
*Environmental water: Water drawn from outside the urban boundary, typically undergoing centralised treatment, purification and subsequent distribution to different water users (e.g. households, industry, agriculture, etc.) through a large water distribution network. Centralised surface or groundwater supply schemes are typical examples of environmental water being drawn for supplying today’s cities. In the case of Byron Shire, Rous County Council’s water supply scheme falls within this category.

Figure 3: Conceptual water-mass balance model of Byron Bay. The thickness of the arrows broadly exemplifies the magnitude of the water flow. This model is only hypothetical and does not include all elements of the real systems.

Evaporation,Rain,Byron Bay urban system,Stormwater,- Environmental
- Cultural
- Livability
- Urban character
- Urban cooling
- Etc.…
,Environmental water,Functions of water:
- Residential
- Commercial
- Agriculture
- Amenity
- Public space
- Municipal

RRC’s surface water supply sources (Rocky Creek Dam)

Wastewater,Ç√ Amenity/ ,Ç√ Amenity/ ,Ç√ Amenity/ ,Ç√ Amenity/ ,Recycled water

Infiltration,Ground water system

Practical application of urban metabolic indicators

Urban metabolism provides a conceptually simple framework to characterise cities, while enabling robust and holistic analysis of their resource use performance relative to the functions they provide to the resident population and the limits of the natural environment. This framework, with its set of sustainability-focused strategic objectives and indicators, provides unparalleled potential to support decision making at a city-wide scale. This includes:

· Evidence-based strategy and policy planning and implementation

· Benchmark water resource management and development performance (e.g. assessment of scenarios)

· Guide investment strategies and assess their impact

· Collaboration across different scales (e.g. organisational, sectorial, catchment, etc.)

· Policy innovation (e.g. holistic planning, water-energy nexus, etc.)

· Stakeholder engagement (e.g. education, communication, participation, decision-making, etc.)

By quantifying and mapping different resource flows, we can show decision-makers where resources are most used, where interventions may be possible, and what types of interventions are necessary to enhance the sustainability and resilience of our cities (e.g. land-use planning, policy, infrastructure, technology, behavioural changes, etc.).^{^[13]}

Relevance to BSC’s recycled water efforts

By taking an urban metabolism approach, management of recycled water can be done within the context of the whole urban system, rather than the current siloed management approach focused on reducing effluent loads into the environment.

Adopting the urban metabolism strategic objectives and indicators will, by design, encourage better management coordination across different stages of the urban water cycle (e.g. water supply, wastewater, catchment and coastal management, demand management, etc.). Decisions in recycled water will require consideration of the whole water-mass balance, surfacing the potential trade-offs, impacts or opportunities that such decisions generate in other parts of the cycle, and vice versa. This also includes consideration of the broader regional problematic and the relevant strategies and institutions that govern it.

For instance, recycled water can be proactively managed to increase the level of water supply internalisation of the Shire, and hence reducing reliance on potable water supplied by RCC. This in turn can support higher levels of resource use efficiency as well as alleviating pressure on the sustainable extraction limits of RCC’ water supply catchments.

An urban metabolism model can also help assess the role of recycled water in the hydrological performance of the Shire, given it is currently supplied to environmental schemes (e.g. BBIWMR) that influence evaporation and infiltration rates, as well as having links to the Shire’s drainage system.

It can also provide a way to assess the energy/emissions implications of recycled water decisions. Water treatment and conveyance can be energy-intensive activities. Being able to quantify and assess this water-energy nexus is particularly important to support BSC’s climate mitigation and adaptation efforts (e.g. Net Zero Emissions Strategy).

By recognising the multi-functionality of water, urban metabolism can help in linking recycled water efforts to BSC’s various strategic objectives, such as the Community Strategic Plan, Sustainable Visitation Strategy, Economic Development Strategy and urban masterplans (which focus heavily on greening the urban environment and improving sense of place and community).

Urban metabolism provides an evidence-based framework to inform how to prioritize recycled water supply among competing users (e.g. is more benefit achieved by prioritizing uses that achieve potable water substitution? is environmental/hydrological performance more important? etc.), with consideration of social fairness, environmental sustainability and economic efficiency outcomes.

It’s very important to note that the above benefits can be translated to the management of all other aspects of the urban water cycle. While this initiative arises from the recycled water section, it is highly relevant to all of BSC’s water management efforts.

What is the next step?

The above proposal is intended to establish a robust position for discussion with the BSC’s Executive Team and the relevant Advisory Committees. Feedback from these key stakeholders will help provide direction to the Utilities team to further advance the proposed conceptual framework. The next step will be to assess the requirements for the practical implementation of such a framework.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.4

Report No. 4.4 Inflow and Infiltration - quarterly update

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Jason Stanley, Inflow & Infiltration Project Manager

File No: I2020/1583

Summary:

The Byron Shire Council Inflow and Infiltration (I&I) project involved two separate projects, being condition assessments and rectification works that were both successfully awarded to Interflow.

Despite the presence of the COVID-19 viral pandemic and the imposed limitations by the Australian and state Government, measures and contingencies were put in place to ensure that these projects could continue in a safe and timely manner.

The assessment of the sewer gravity mains and maintenance holes within catchments 3002 and 5012 in Byron Bay and Ocean Shores has now been finalised. Various lines and maintenance holes were unable to be assessed despite best efforts from council’s sewer maintenance teams to locate and uncover buried maintenance holes. The results of the vast majority of the catchment that was assessed is discussed in detail throughout this report.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Committee note the report

Attachments:

1 24.2015.79.1 - WWSAC - Attachment 1 - 3002-5012 Rectification, E2020/82583 , page 40 ⇩

2 24.2015.79.1 - WWSAC - Attachment 2 - 4001 Relines, E2020/82585 , page 46⇩

REPORT

1. Introduction

This report will provide an update on the findings from the assessments that were undertaken on the gravity sewer mains and maintenance holes within sewer catchments 3002 and 5012. It will also present the scope for the FY20/21 rectification works through catchments 3002 and 5012, as well as the next highest priority works within catchment 4001 to be assessed.

2. Condition Assessment

2.1 Completed Scope Catchment 3002

The 3002 gravity sewer catchment is located in Byron Bay and encloses the area shaded blue in Figure 1 below which includes the Byron Bay CBD. This catchment comprises a total of 329 gravity sewer mains and 262 maintenance holes. Despite the fact that council’s sewer maintenance crews assisted with the location and uncovering of buried maintenance holes, not all were able to be undertaken within the time constraint of the project, hence 10 gravity sewer mains and 53 maintenance holes could not be assessed.

Figure 1 – Byron Bay 3002 Sewer Catchment, CCTV Works

2.2 Completed Scope Catchment 5012

The 5012 gravity sewer catchment is located in Ocean Shores and encloses the area shaded blue in Figure 2 below. This catchment comprises a total of 223 gravity sewer mains and 159 maintenance holes. It should be noted that a large portion of the catchment was inaccessible prior to undertaking the assessments mainly due to the maintenance holes within this catchment being built over by residents constructing raised gardens, sheds, etc. Despite the fact that council’s sewer maintenance crews assisted with the location and uncovering of buried maintenance holes, not all were able to be undertaken within the time constraint of the project, hence 59 gravity sewer mains and 47 maintenance holes could not be assessed.

Figure 2 – Ocean Shores 5012 Sewer Catchment, CCTV Works

2.3 Assessment Findings

Of the mains and maintenance holes that were assessed within the 3002 and 5012 catchments, the below table summarises the recommended proposal based on the assessment findings.

Catchment	3002	5012
MAINS
Total number assessed	319	164
Total number not assessed	10	59
Number requiring rectification	101	43
Rectification cost	$390,000	$107,000
MHs
Total number assessed	209	112
Total number not assessed	53	47
Number requiring rectification*	100	62
Rectification cost	$237,000	$35,000

Total rectification cost	$627,000	$142,000

It should be noted that the majority (72% in 5012 and 41% in 3002) of rectification works on maintenance holes involves the simple addition of lifting lugs on the existing concrete lid to facilitate access for operations and maintenance crews without the need for heavy manual intervention with a crowbar.

3. Proposed works FY20/21

3.1 Rectification

The proposed rectification works include the rectification of the gravity mains and maintenance holes noted above in Section 2.3 of this report and as detailed in Attachment 1, in addition to the relining of the next highest risk mains within the original Mullumbimby 4001 catchment which is still subjected to peaking factors during rainfall events. These 7 mains to be relined that total a length of 424m all reportedly had active infiltration during their assessment. Therefore, the relining of these mains in the 4001 catchment in addition to the rectification works recommended for catchments 3002 and 5012 are expected to cost in the order of $810,000 (±20%).

3.2 Assessments

The proposed works for FY20/21 includes the condition assessment of the gravity sewer mains (29.2km) and maintenance holes (~550) within catchments 3005, 4002, 4003, 4004, and 5009 located within Byron Bay, Mullumbimby, and Ocean Shores respectively. Maps of these catchments are shown in the below figures. CCTV assessments are expected to cost in the order of $150,000 in addition to the assessment of maintenance holes, contract management and reporting which will cost in the order of $100,000.

Figure 3 – Byron Bay 3005 Sewer Catchment

Figure 4 – Mullumbimby 4002 Sewer Catchment

Figure 5 – Mullumbimby 4003 Sewer Catchment

Figure 6 – Mullumbimby 4004 Sewer Catchment

Figure 7 – Ocean Shores 5009 Sewer Catchment

4. Conclusion

The assessments that were undertaken in FY19/20 have uncovered various concerns throughout the relevant networks that require council’s attention. The recommended scope subsequently established from these assessments’ and the remaining relining works from the Mullumbimby 4001 catchment totals ~$810,000. This in addition to the assessment of the gravity sewer assets in catchments 3005, 4002, 4003, 4003, and 5009 which totals $250,000 results in a total FY20/21 spend of $1.06M for both rectification and continued assessment works.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.5

Report No. 4.5 Commercial and domestic water resourcing

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Chris Larkin, Manager Sustainable Development

File No: I2020/1584

Summary:

The report refers to Res 20-427:

1. That Council notes the minutes of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee Meeting held on 30 July 2020.

2. That with regard to Report No. 4.2 Effects of water mining in Byron and surrounding shires on groundwater resources, that point 3 of the Management Recommendation in the minutes be amended to read as follows: That the report be brought to next WWSC and Coastal Estuary Catchment Panel meetings outlining water resourcing both commercial and domestic prior to any changes to the LEP the being undertaken.

3. That a report also be provided to the next meeting of the WWS committee that clarifies the advice from staff to the WWS Committee held on 30 July 2020 that, under the Byron LEP 2014 water mining for bottled water is not a permitted use in the RU1 and RU2 Zones” in the light of DA 10.2015.102.1 approved in July 2015 under the current BYRON LEP 2014 for a Rural industry (fruit juice production, winery and water bottling facility) at Huonbrook.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Committee note the report.

REPORT

Water Mining

Council resolved (20-427 (3))

The following information is provided to address this resolution.

Under Byron LEP 2014 water mining for bottled water is not a permitted use in the RU1 and RU2 Zones. In terms of defining the activity it is considered that it fits within the definition of general industry and is an industrial activity.

general industry means a building or place (other than a heavy industry or light industry) that is used to carry out an industrial activity.

industrial activity means the manufacturing, production, assembling, altering, formulating, repairing, renovating, ornamenting, finishing, cleaning, washing, dismantling, transforming, processing, recycling, adapting or servicing of, or the research and development of, any goods, substances, food, products or articles for commercial purposes, and includes any storage or transportation associated with any such activity.

Other definitions of Rural Industry, Extractive Industry or Mining would not apply to the activity due to the manner in which those definitions are drafted.

Rural industry means the handling, treating, production, processing, storage or packing of animal or plant agricultural products for commercial purposes, and includes any of the following—

(a) agricultural produce industries,

(b) livestock processing industries,

(c) composting facilities and works (including the production of mushroom substrate),

(d) sawmill or log processing works,

(e) stock and sale yards,

(f) the regular servicing or repairing of plant or equipment used for the purposes of a rural enterprise.

extractive industry means the winning or removal of extractive materials (otherwise than from a mine) by methods such as excavating, dredging, tunnelling or quarrying, including the storing, stockpiling or processing of extractive materials by methods such as recycling, washing, crushing, sawing or separating, but does not include turf farming.

extractive material means sand, soil, gravel, rock or similar substances that are not minerals within the meaning of the Mining Act 1992.

mine means any place (including any excavation) where an operation is carried on for mining of any mineral by any method and any place on which any mining related work is carried out, but does not include a place used only for extractive industry.

mining means mining carried out under the Mining Act 1992 or the recovery of minerals under the Offshore Minerals Act 1999, and includes—

a) the construction, operation and decommissioning of associated works, and

b) the rehabilitation of land affected by mining.

Water is not listed for the purposes of the Mining Act 1992 as a “Mineral”.

It is noted Tweed Shire Council have amended the Tweed LEP 2014 to permit ground water extraction for commercial purposes under Clause 7.15. The provisions nominate the activity as an industry and limit or enable the activity to only six properties in the Shire. The Byron LEP 2014 has no planning clauses of a similar nature. The clause under the Tweed LEP states:

Council has previously approved a water bottling plant under DA 10.2011.530.1 at Clunes in 2012. The use was considered under Byron LEP 1988 at the time as a permitted use. It has also been brought to Council attention a DA has also been approved at Huonbrook under DA 10.2015.102.1 for a Rural Industry comprising fruit juice production, winery and water bottling facility. The staff assessment report described the development as:-

The application seeks development consent for the use of an existing shed for the purposes of a fruit juice production, winery and bottling plant. Water is also proposed to be bottled on site.

The site is presently used for agricultural activities including horticulture (fruit growing) and grazing cattle. Organic tropical fruit from the farm and produce from other local farms is proposed to be juiced or made into wine or cider and bottled within the existing shed structure. Water is to be sourced from a licensed bore on the property is also proposed to be bottled at the proposed facility.

The applicant has advised that the fruit winery and bottling plant does not involve the public visiting the property. No cellar door service is to be provided. The proposed internal changes to the existing shed include installation of internal partitions for the creation of a cold room, bottling room processing room.

The applicant described the proposal in the following extract as:-

The staff assessment report considered the proposal to fit within the definition of a rural industry at the time and the following comments provided in terms of permissibility

The proposed fruit juice production, winery and water bottling plant is considered to fall within the definition of rural industry and is therefore permissible with Consent within the RU2 zone.

Whether this is a correct interpretation of the planning controls would be a matter for consideration by the Court if the approval was ever challenged under Section 9.455 of the EPA Act 1979 for a Breach of the Act.

Not withstanding, any future application which included elements of water mining and bottling would be rigorously reviewed in terms of permissibility, and based on the interpretation above, it is considered that such an activity is prohibited in the RU1 and RU2 Zones. Council can however seek to draft an LEP amendment and forward a Planning proposal to the Department of Planning for Gateway Determination to clarify the matter and to plainly identify that water mining and water bottling is a prohibited activity within Byron shire.

[1] Refers to the various stages of the urban and catchment water cycles, including source extraction, treatment, supply, use, wastewater, recycling and hydrological flows (run-off, precipitation, infiltration, evaporation).

[9] Includes: The International Water Association, the OECD, the Asian Development Bank, the UK Water Partnership, and the Australian CRC for Water Sensitive Cities.

[10] Includes: Green City Index (EIU 2009, 2011), City Blueprint (van Leeuwen et al. 2012), Water Sensitive Cities Index (CRC WSC 2016), Sustainable Cities Water Index (Arcadis 2016), Asian Water Development

Outlook (ADB 2013, 2016)

Venue	Conference Room, Station Street, Mullumbimby
Date	Thursday, 29 October 2020
Time	11.30am