Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Thursday, 15 December 2022

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - General Manager 13.3

Report No. 13.3 Draft Community Engagement Strategy

Directorate: General Manager

Report Author: Annie Lewis, Media and Communications Coordinator

File No: I2022/1738

Summary:

The purpose of this report is to provide the outcomes of the exhibition of the Draft Community Engagement Strategy with a recommendation the Strategy be adopted. Seven submissions were received, details of which are provided in the report.

The draft strategy was on public exhibition from 3 November 2022 to 1 December 2022.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council notes the submissions received during the public exhibition of the Draft Community Engagement Strategy and responses as outlined in this report. (Attachment 1 E2022/119582)

2. That Council adopts the Draft Community Engagement Strategy. (Attachment 2 E2022/119684)

2. That the current Community Engagement Policy be deleted as it has been superseded by the Community Engagement Strategy. (Attachment 3 E2018/10445)

Attachments:

1 Combined submissions redacted information, E2022/119582

2 Community Engagement Strategy, E2022/119684

3 Community Engagement Policy, E2018/10436

Report

The updated Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines from the Office of Local Government require every Council in NSW to adopt a Community Engagement Strategy before the end of 2022.

At the Ordinary Council meeting on 27 October 2022, it was resolved that the Draft Community Engagement Strategy be put on public exhibition. The closing date for the exhibition period was 1 December 2022.

Seven submissions were received (Attachment 1) and are summarised below.

Three of the seven submissions were generally supportive of the Strategy and with positive comments about Council’s work on fostering relationships with the community to support effective and ongoing engagement opportunities.

Note: detailed responses have been sent to each person/group.

Submission	Comments/Feedback
Response 1	Council has not grasped the concept of community engagement with an example provided of a lack of community consultation in relation to emergency housing being built for people displaced by the floods. Staff response The community engagement relating to the development of emergency housing for people displaced by the floods is managed by Resilience NSW.
Response 2	Generally the Draft Community Engagement Strategy is a good representation of the levels and types of community engagement. Referring to the IPA2 Spectrum of Public Participation, Council generally does extremely well at the Inform and Consult levels and pretty good at the Involve level. Consideration should be given to how to improve at the Collaborate and Empower levels because this seems to differ between Council Directorates/Departments. A suggestion is to have a greater level of collaboration built into Council’s project management software system. Overall Council is congratulated on its genuine and sustained efforts to engage “our diverse and sometimes unruly community”. Staff response To move into the Collaborate and Empower levels of the IAP2 spectrum requires substantial planning and resourcing and these engagement pieces are often run over many months. Council does do this work, but it is targeted and often designed to get an informed and balanced direction from the community. Examples of recent projects include: · Community Solutions Panels for prioritising infrastructure spending, the Byron Model’s “How to make democratic decisions in Byron Shire that can be widely supported”, and the Sustainable Visitation Strategy · Byron Arts and Industry Estate Enquiry by Design · Federal Masterplan
Response 3	Well thought out and inclusive. The challenge lies in connecting the various groups in the Shire in positive interactions and dialogues. The more the community knows what is going on and how they can contribute proactively, the more opportunities there are to build cohesion and respect.
Response 4	Two suggestions to help with Community Engagement in the Byron Shire: 1. Employ a full-time Community Engagement/Liaison Officer 2. Assign areas and towns in the Shire for each Councillor’s responsibility. Staff response: Employment of Community Engagement/Liaison Officer Different Councils have different approaches to community engagement and in the last five years there has been a very considered approach to providing as many opportunities as possible for people to know about our projects and work, as well giving them confidence that we are open and transparent. Project Officers are responsible for the communication and engagement relating to the different projects, supported by expert advice from the Media and Communications team. The Community Engagement Strategy further strengthens this approach by outlining our commitment and methods for community engagement. It explains how we conduct community engagement activities and how people can be involved in decisions that are important to them. Councillor Community Engagement The feedback in relation to ideas for how Councillors can better represent communities has been identified in this report. IPA2 training This year at least 12 staff received IAP2 training. Ongoing dialogue Council’s Community Roundtable, which meets three to four times a year, and is attended by representatives of key community organisations is a valuable forum for learning and sharing information. Feedback from organisations that are involved is very positive.
Response 5	The Community Engagement Strategy is a welcome companion piece to the Community Participation Plan. Acknowledgement that Council has worked on creating an inclusive and accessible culture that considers all voices and opinions. Zoom meetings have their place but they should not replace physical workshops and information sharing sessions. Suggested change to wording to include “community working groups”. The strategy is a very useful reference document for describing the overall engagement framework. Staff Response The suggested change to wording on p.14 will be included. It is hoped that face-to-face meetings will replace some Zoom meetings when the Council Chambers are operational again.
Response 6	Far greater attention should be given to the collaborate and empower levels of the IPA2 spectrum particularly using co-design principles for major planning and strategy development rather than completing a draft document and asking for comments as is the case with the Community Engagement Strategy. There is minimal opportunity to provide feedback. There needs to be greater commitment from Council to engage early. More information needs to be provided on how feedback is considered and applied, and this help address the lack of trust in the engagement process. In relation to the When We Engage table – suggested more information about what the community engagement process might be used for. Suggestion that Council should have developed a questionnaire to find out how people want to be engaged or how they learn about engagement opportunities as well as workshops, drop-in sessions etc. Council relies too much on public submissions of documents as the primary method of engagement. Staff response The organisation has moved into the collaborate and empower levels of the IAP2 spectrum for a number of projects in recent years including several projects that have used the deliberative democracy model to come up with solutions to wicked problems. Examples of projects include: · Community Solutions Panels for Prioritising infrastructure spending, the Byron Model “How to make democratic decisions in Byron Shire that can be widely supported”, and the Sustainable Visitation Strategy. · Byron Arts and Industry Estate Enquiry by Design · Federal Masterplan
Response 7	People in the community are complaining that Council no longer advertises DAs in the Echo. The Draft Community Engagement Strategy does not address Level 2 advertising for certain development applications. Staff response The Council website and the DA Tracker provide continually updated information about development applications lodged in the Byron Shire. Engagement and consultation for planning matters, including development applications, is outlined in the Community Participation Plan.

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action	Code	OP Activity
1: Effective Leadership We have effective decision making and community leadership that is open and informed	1.2: Engage and involve community in decision making	1.2.2: Communication - Provide timely information to the community about Council projects and activities through traditional and digital media	1.2.2.4	Develop a new Community Engagement Strategy to support the Community Strategic Plan

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Council currently has a Community Engagement Policy which is effectively superseded by the Community Engagement Strategy. It is recommended that the policy be deleted when the Strategy is adopted.

Financial Considerations

Nil.

Consultation and Engagement.

The Draft Community Engagement Strategy was on exhibition for 28 days to 1 December 2022.

A media release and social media supported the exhibition of the document, and it was shared with the Community Roundtable.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.7

Report No. 13.7 Council Investments - 1 November 2022 to 30 November 2022

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance

File No: I2022/1797

Summary:

This report includes a list of investments and identifies Council’s overall cash position for the period 1 November 2022 to 30 November 2022 for information.

This report is prepared to comply with Section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council notes the report listing Council’s investments and overall cash position as of 30 November 2022.

Report

Council has continued to maintain a diversified portfolio of investments. As of 30 November 2022, the average 90-day bank bill rate (BBSW) for the month was 3.07%. Council’s performance for November 2022 was 2.47%.

As investments mature Council should begin to see increased rates due to the recent Reserve bank increase in cash rates. The table below identifies the investments held by Council as at 30 November 2022:

Schedule of Investments held as at 30 November 2022

Purch Date	Principal ($)	Description	CP*	Rating	Maturity Date	No Fossil Fuel	Type	Int. Rate	Current Value ($)
15/11/18	1,000,000.00	NSW Treasury Corp (Green Bond)	N	AAA	15/11/28	Y	B	3.00%	955,540.00
20/11/18	1,000,000.00	QLD Treasury Corp (Green Bond)	N	AA+	22/03/24	Y	B	1.78%	1,001,340.00
28/03/19	1,000,000.00	National Housing Finance & Investment Corporation	Y	AAA	28/03/29	Y	B	2.38%	910,610.00
21/11/19	1,000,000.00	NSW Treasury Corp (Sustainability Bond)	N	AAA	20/03/25	Y	B	1.25%	946,200.00
27/11/19	500,000.00	National Housing Finance & Investment Corporation	Y	AAA	27/05/30	Y	B	1.52%	413,040.00
15/06/21	500,000.00	National Housing Finance & Investment Corporation	Y	AAA	01/07/31	Y	FRN	1.99%	501,515.00
06/09/21	1,000,000.00	Northern Territory TCorp	N	Aa3	15/12/26	Y	B	1.40%	1,000,000.00
16/09/21	1,000,000.00	QLD Treasury Corp (Green Bond)	N	AA+	02/03/32	Y	B	1.50%	928,180.00
17/12/21	2,000,000.00	NAB	P	AA-	19/12/22	N	TD	0.72%	2,000,000.00
20/01/22	1,000,000.00	Westpac (Tailored)	P	AA-	20/01/23	N	TD	0.79%	1,000,000.00
07/06/22	2,000,000.00	NAB	N	AA-	05/12/22	N	TD	3.05%	2,000,000.00
15/06/22	2,000,000.00	NAB	N	AA-	12/12/22	N	TD	3.25%	2,000,000.00
23/08/22	2,000,000.00	AMP Bank	P	BBB	23/02/23	N	TD	3.70%	2,000,000.00
29/08/22	1,000,000.00	NAB	N	AA-	27/12/22	N	TD	3.11%	1,000,000.00
30/08/22	2,000,000.00	NAB	N	AA-	28/12/22	N	TD	3.15%	2,000,000.00
01/09/22	1,000,000.00	Macquarie Bank Ltd	P	A	01/12/22	N	TD	3.20%	1,000,000.00
06/09/22	2,000,000.00	MyState Bank	P	BBB	05/01/23	Y	TD	3.30%	2,000,000.00
06/09/22	1,000,000.00	Macquarie Bank Ltd	N	A	06/12/22	N	TD	3.26%	1,000,000.00
09/09/22	1,000,000.00	Macquarie Bank Ltd	N	A	08/12/22	N	TD	3.43%	1,000,000.00
09/09/22	2,000,000.00	NAB	N	AA-	09/01/23	N	TD	3.32%	2,000,000.00
14/09/22	1,000,000.00	Macquarie Bank Ltd	N	A	14/12/22	N	TD	3.43%	1,000,000.00
29/09/22	2,000,000.00	AMP Bank	N	BBB	27/01/23	N	TD	3.95%	2,000,000.00
04/10/22	2,000,000.00	NAB	N	AA-	01/02/23	N	TD	3.75%	2,000,000.00
21/10/22	1,000,000.00	AMP Bank	N	BBB	21/02/23	N	TD	3.90%	1,000,000.00
26/10/22	1,000,000.00	AMP Bank	N	BBB	23/02/23	N	TD	3.85%	1,000,000.00
26/10/22	1,000,000.00	Macquarie Bank Ltd	N	AA-	24/01/23	N	TD	3.68%	1,000,000.00
16/11/22	1,000,000.00	AMP Bank	N	BBB	16/03/23	N	TD	3.95%	1,000,000.00
N/A	17,633,163.29	CBA Business Saver	P	AA-	N/A	N	CALL	2.45%	17,633,163.29
N/A	4,680,434.20	CBA Business Saver – Tourism Infrastructure Grant	N	AA-	N/A	N	CALL	2.45%	4,680,434.20
N/A	10,167,230.60	Macquarie Accelerator Call	N	A	N/A	N	CALL	1.60%	10,167,230.66
Total	67,480,828.09						AVG	%	67,137,253.15

Note 1.	CP = Capital protection on maturity

	N = No Capital Protection
	Y = Fully covered by Government Guarantee
	P = Partial Government Guarantee of $250,000 (Financial Claims Scheme)

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



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

Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing (ESRI)

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

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

Council has one investment with a financial institution that invests in fossil fuels but is nevertheless aligned with the broader definition of Environmental and Socially Responsible investments i.e.:

1. $1,000,000 investment with Westpac Bank maturing on 20 January 2023 is a tailored term deposit and certfied green investment.

Investment Policy Compliance

The below table identifies compliance with Council’s Investment Policy by the proportion of the investment portfolio invested with financial institutions, along with their associated credit ratings compared to parameters in the Investment Policy. The parameters are designed to support prudent short and long-term management of credit risk and ensure diversification of the investment portfolio. Note that the financial institutions currently offering investments in the ‘ethical’ area are still mainly those with lower credit ratings (being either BBB or not rated at all i.e., credit unions).

NSW Treasury Corporation Compliance – Loan Borrowing Conditions

Council has borrowed loans through NSW Treasury Corporation under the Local Government Low Cost Loans Initiative. As part of these loan borrowings, NSW Treasury Corporation has placed restrictions on where Council can invest based on the credit rating of the financial institution, the term of the investment and counterparty limit.

NSW Treasury Corporation has reviewed Council’s Investment Portfolio and reminded Council it needs to remain within the investment parameters outlined in the accepted loan agreements. Council currently complies with T Corp Borrowing conditions as indicated in the table below:

Council had discussions with NSW Treasury Corporation and indicated it would start reporting the compliance in the monthly investment report to Council. Council is able to hold existing investments not in compliance until maturity but must ensure new investments meet the compliance requirements.

Meeting the NSW Treasury Corporation compliance means Council will be limited in taking up investments that may be for purposes associated with Environmental and Socially Responsible outcomes. Investments which do not comply with NSW Treasury Corporation requirements and investments with financial institutions that do not support fossil fuels will have to be decreased due to their credit rating status or lack of credit rating.

The investment portfolio is outlined in the table below by investment type for the period 1 November 2022 to 30 November 2022:

Dissection of Council Investment Portfolio as at 30 November 2022

Principal Value ($)	Investment Linked to:	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
28,000,000.00	Term Deposits	28,000,000.00	0.00
1,500,000.00	Floating Rate Note	1,502,855.00	2,855.00
17,633,163.23	CBA Business Saver	17,633,163.23	0.00
4,680,434.20	CBA Business Saver – Tourism Infrastructure Grant	4,680,434.20	0.00
10,167,230.60	Macquarie Accelerator	10,167,230.60	0.00
5,500,000.00	Bonds	5,153,570.00	(346,430.00)
67,480,828.03		67,137,253.03	(343,575.00)

Council’s overall ‘cash position’ is not only measured by funds invested but also by the funds retained in its consolidated fund or bank account for operational purposes. The table below identifies Council’s overall cash position for the month of November 2022 as follows:

Dissection of Council’s Cash Position as at 30 November 2022

Item	Principal Value ($)	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
Investments Portfolio
Term Deposits	28,000,000.00	28,000,000.00	0.00
Floating Rate Note	1,500,000.00	1,502,855.00	2,855.00
CBA Business Saver	17,633,163.23	17,633,163.23	0.00
CBA Business Saver – Tourism Infrastructure Grant	4,680,434.20	4,680,434.20	0.00
Macquarie Accelerator	10,167,230.60	10,167,230.60	0.00
Bonds	5,500,000.00	5,153,570.00	(346,430.00)
Total Investment Portfolio	67,480,828.03	67,137,253.03	(343,575.00)
Cash at Bank
Consolidated Fund	7,910,215.44	7,910,215.44	0.00
Total Cash at Bank	7,910,215.44	7,910,215.44	0.00
Total Cash Position	75,047,468.47	75,047,468.47	(343,575.00)

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action	Code	OP Activity
1: Effective Leadership We have effective decision making and community leadership that is open and informed	1.3: Ethical and efficient management of resources	1.3.1: Financial Management - Ensure the financial integrity and sustainability of Council through effective financial management	1.3.1.6	Maintain Council's cash flow

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

In accordance with Section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021, the Responsible Accounting Officer of Council must provide Council with a monthly report detailing all monies it has invested under section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993.

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

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

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

Financial Considerations

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

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.9

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report No. 13.9 Planning Proposal 26.2020.1.1 Amendment to State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021
Short-term Rental Accommodation in Byron Shire - Submissions Report

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Shannon Burt, Director Sustainable Environment and Economy

Sharyn French, Manager Environmental and Economic Planning

Natalie Hancock, Senior Planner

Ben Grant, Planner

File No: I2022/1432

Summary:

This report provides a summary of the findings of the recent exhibition of Byron Shire Council’s Planning Proposal for short-term rental accommodation (STRA).

It also provides specific commentary on how Council has met the requirements of the gateway determination (a prerequisite for Council to move forward with its consideration of this planning proposal), and what further advocacy to State Government is required to enable the state created framework for STRA regulation to be reviewed to address anomalies and inadequacies in it as identified through the engagement process.

It needs to be acknowledged that Byron Shire, is the only local government area in NSW that has been given the opportunity to lodge a Planning Proposal that could identify or reduce the number of days that non-hosted STRA may be carried out in parts of its local government area.

This report recommends that Council adopt a Planning Proposal which amends State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 to:

- increase the number of days of non-hosted short term rental accommodation in part of the Byron Shire Local Government Area from the current 180 day cap to a 365 day cap for areas in set precincts in the Brunswick Heads and Byron Bay localities; and

- reduce the number of days of non-hosted short term rental accommodation for the balance of the Byron Shire Local Government Area from the current 180 days cap to a 90-day cap.

This recommendation has considered the feedback from the engagement activities and submissions received as documented in the Engagement with target stakeholders and community Report (Attachment 2), and that of the Consideration of Economic Impacts of the Planning proposal (Attachment 8).

If the changes are supported by Council, there will be a 12-month transition period for any changes to commence. This means any changes will not come into effect until 2024.

Council has been delegated authority to make the plan subject to the proposal not being amended to reduce non-hosted STRA period on any land to less than 90 days.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Amends the planning proposal to:

a) include in the 365-day cap precinct, the area as per the maps in the body of this report, namely:

i. Shirley Lane and south of Shirley Street and precinct west of bus interchange around Sommerset Street, Byron Bay

ii. Byron Bay central business area

b) remove from the 365-day cap precinct the areas as per the maps in the body of this report, namely:

i. Suffolk Park

ii. area south of Booyun Street, Brunswick Heads

2. Adopts the amended planning proposal to amend State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 to:

a) increase the number of days of non-hosted short term rental accommodation in part of the Byron Shire Local Government Area from the current 180-day cap to a 365-day cap for areas in set mapped precincts in the Brunswick Heads and Byron Bay localities; and

b) reduce the number of days of non-hosted short term rental accommodation for the balance of the Byron Shire Local Government Area from the current 180-days cap to a 90-day cap.

3. Forwards the adopted planning proposal to NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office (PCO) requesting that the amendment to the Housing SEPP 2021 be finalised.

4. Notes staff will report to Council in early 2023 on:

a) an updated STRA risk mitigation and monitoring strategy that reflects the finalised planning proposal and mapped precincts; and

b) STRA enforcement strategy.

5. Notes should the planning proposal be adopted by Council, there will be a 12-month transition period for any changes to commence. This means any changes will likely not come into effect until 2024.

6. Requests staff write to the NSW government advocating for changes in response to the alternative policy measures shared by many stakeholders including:

a) differential rating of STRA properties

b) establishing a levy to generate funds to cover enforcement and infrastructure demands

c) assigning the STRA register to Council to administer with appropriate fees for servicing

Attachments:

1 Timeline summary Short term rental accommodation planning proposal - current to Sept 2022 - 26.2020.1.1., E2022/84003

2 Locale Consulting, Engagement Report - Short Term Rental Accommodation Planning Proposal exhibition, E2022/118657

3 Combined submissions without form letters, E2022/115754

4 Combined form letter submissions from business owners, E2022/115661

5 Combined form letter submissions from ASTRA, E2022/115638

6 Combined form letter submissions from bookings@byronbayaccom, E2022/115641

7 Combined form letter submissions from others, E2022/115662

8 Peter Phibbs, Epic Dot Gov - Report on Byron Shire's Planning Proposal on Short-Term Rental Accomodation, E2022/119043

9 Gateway determinations and letters 24 June 2021 and 3 June 2022, E2022/67974

Report

Background

The Planning Proposal is the result of a “Local Planning Direction” originally issued by the Minister for Planning on 15 February 2019. The Direction gave Byron Shire Council the opportunity to lodge a Planning Proposal that could identify or reduce the number of days that non-hosted STRA may be carried out in parts of its local government area.

The project has had a long project history dating back to 2003 (Attachment 1).

There have been reports to Council more recently on STRA which have provided a detailed background and rationale for the current approach and position of Council.

Report No. 13.21 Update - Impacts of and management options for short term rental accommodation (STRA) in Byron Shire Agenda of Ordinary (Planning) Meeting - Thursday, 19 November 2020 (infocouncil.biz)

Report No. 13.13 Economic Impact Assessment of Planning Proposal for Short-Term Rental Accommodation Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Thursday, 24 February 2022 (infocouncil.biz)

It is not proposed to repeat or revisit in detail these reports unless necessary.

What does the Planning Proposal do?

At the current time, non-hosted STRA is limited to 180-days per year. This rule is set by the NSW Government and has applied to the Byron Shire since 31 January 2022.

If the Planning Proposal is adopted, non-hosted STRA will be limited to 90-days per year in most of the Byron local government area. Exceptions to this are proposed. As exhibited these areas included four mapped precincts in parts of Byron Bay (East and West), Suffolk Park and Brunswick Heads where it would be permitted 365-days per year.

26.2020.1.1-STRA-Planning-Proposal-Appendix-4-Mapping (1).pdf

However, changes are now proposed to these indicative mapped precincts, as discussed in detail in section Precinct Map Methodology.

Key issues

An altered gateway determination was issued by the Minister for Planning 3 June 2022, which altered the earlier gateway issued 24 June 2021 (Attachment 9).

In his issuing of the gateway determination the Minister advised Council of the following:

· Acknowledged Byron Shire’s unique and exceptional circumstances in relation to housing availability, affordability and the 2022 Flood events impact on local housing.

· Acknowledged the high proportion of STRA compared to permanent rental accommodation.

· Concerned about the impact of the proposal on the economy and as such stated that any mapped precinct could not go below 90 days and that amendments to expand the 365 days should be explored.

· Council must receive and assess submissions and respond accordingly.

· Council must make public any justification for changes to the mapped precincts prior to proceeding to make the plan.

Response to Gateway Determination and Minister’s requirements

· Engagement with target stakeholders and community

Locale Consulting was engaged by Council to assist with the design and delivery of a range of engagement activities during and following the exhibition period including the preparation of an Engagement Report, Attachment 2.

It was important to engage an independent facilitator to provide impartiality to the process, especially as Council has been delegated to act as the Local Plan Making Authority.

In undertaking these engagement activities, Locale’s role has been to listen and document the views of stakeholders and to report on these to Council for consideration in its decision-making process.

Locale have not undertaken a review of the merits of the planning proposal, nor does the Engagement Report make any recommendations to Council about how the planning proposal should progress.

The Engagement Report documents the feedback received through the engagement activities and provides a high-level summary of this feedback to highlight any key themes as well as the different perspectives and views of stakeholder groups.

The Report is being used to inform Council in its post-exhibition decision making process about the planning proposal. This being a requirement of the Minister as stated above.

Below is an extract from Locale Consulting’s Engagement Report which can be viewed in full in Attachment 2.

The results of each engagement activity are summarised in the report as follows.

In total, over 1,500 forms of feedback were received whilst the planning proposal was on exhibition, refer to Attachments 2 to 7.

An online survey on the planning proposal was available on Council’s Your Say webpage between 1 September and 31 October 2022. The survey sought to obtain information on:

· Where people lived, either within or outside the Byron Shire LGA

· Whether they owned residential property within the Shire

· Whether they used their property for STRA purposes

· Whether they lived or owned property within the proposed 365-day precincts

· Whether they agreed or disagreed with the proposed precinct boundaries, including how and why changes should be made to the boundaries

· What other interests they may have in the area and/or subject matter if not living or owning property in the Byron Shire

· How they believed they will be impacted by the changes

· Any other comments that they would like to make, and

· Whether they had made or were intending to make a written submission

The survey received a total of 766 responses.

784 written submissions were received over the exhibition period. 530 identified as STRA property owners and the majority of those submissions being pro-forma letters (379). There was also an online petition submitted via Change.org under the banner of ‘Byron Deserves Balance’. The petition received 981 signatures online and 142 signatures offline.

Six one-to-one stakeholder interviews were undertaken during the exhibition period. This includes interviews with the STRA industry, online travel platforms and advocacy groups that campaign to regulate the STRA industry.

The interviews were based on a common set of questions which were provided in advance of the meetings. The interviews were attended by two representatives of Locale Consulting.

Eight focus group sessions were undertaken during the exhibition period. This included in-person and online sessions with a diverse range of stakeholders who represented various perspectives. This included local workers, local property industry, local property owners, local accommodation providers (who are not STRA operators), local community, local businesses, local tourism organisations and local renters / displaced people. A total of 130 stakeholders were invited to attend the sessions, plus an open invitation was made to local property owners via Council’s Your Say page and e-news. A total of 69 stakeholders registered to attend a session, and a total of 46 stakeholders shared their feedback across the eight focus groups. The focus groups were facilitated by two representatives of Locale Consulting.

Overall, the feedback showed general support for some form of regulation of the STRA industry and that better management of STRA is required, particularly to address amenity impacts.

Many also agreed that it is important to provide more housing stock that is affordable for people in the Shire, particularly essential and frontline workers.

However, many felt that the planning proposal will not address the issues relating to housing affordability, availability and security in the Byron Shire and that housing supply is a separate issue (requiring different policy responses) to regulating STRA.

The lack of support for the planning proposal was often related to the significant changes that have occurred in recent years that stakeholders feel need to be considered in any policy response to STRA in the Byron Shire. These include:

· The introduction of a new regulatory framework by the NSW Government which took effect in the Byron Shire on 31 January 2022

· The professionalisation of the STRA industry and increasing reliance on third-party booking platforms since the arrival of Airbnb

· The impacts of COVID on travel patterns and visitation numbers, as well as housing prices

· The impacts of the flood events in early 2022 particularly concerning housing availability and affordability.

There was also concern about the potential for negative impacts on the local economy and employment. Many saw the local economy as intrinsically linked to tourism and the STRA industry, and that the proposed changes would create seasonal tourism and result in job losses, particularly for those industries that service STRA or indirectly benefit from STRA visitors.

There was, however, a difference of perspective between STRA property owners and other property owners or residents about the proposed changes. STRA property owners often raised concerns about the adverse impacts of the changes on their personal situations. Despite this concern, many stated they would retain their property for personal use rather than changing it to long-term rental. More broadly, the proposed changes and precinct model were often seen as inequitable and unfair, particularly for STRA property owners subject to a 90-day cap.

On the other hand, residents shared stories and lived experiences about the unpleasant impacts of STRA on their neighbourhood and the sense of community. These stakeholders welcomed the proposed changes as a way of addressing these impacts and some felt the changes could go further. At the same time, concern was expressed by some that the 365-day precincts would exacerbate the loss of a sense of community in those areas, particularly in areas such as Suffolk Park and Brunswick Heads.

There was also concern expressed that the proposed changes could result in a change in the demographic of residents and visitors alike, changing the fabric of the community and making holidaying in the area unaffordable for the average person and families. Others felt that the changes were long-overdue and would bring a sense of balance back to the community.

Overall, there was limited support for the proposed precinct model. Concerns were raised about its underlying basis, the data used, equity issues and financial implications for STRA property owners. Others were concerned about its practical implementation and how the rules will be enforced. The broader STRA industry (including STRA property managers and booking platforms) would prefer for there to be no cap at all or for the current regulatory framework to continue. Others, often residents of the area, want stricter controls in residential areas.

There was also a wide range of views expressed about the proposed precinct boundaries. Some people want the precincts to be removed completely, whilst others asked for the precincts to be expanded or reduced. Generally, STRA property owners asked for the boundaries to be expanded to include their property for equity reasons, whilst residents wanted them to be reduced due to amenity concerns.

Despite these differences of opinion, across the various engagement activities, there was some relatively consistent feedback about the precinct boundaries including the expansion of Byron Bay (East) and Byron Bay (West), the reduction or removal of Suffolk Park and reduction of Brunswick Heads. There was also commentary about expanding STRA opportunities to other towns/villages and hinterland areas.

Alternative policy measures were also shared by many stakeholders. These measures were often aimed at addressing STRA management, along with housing affordability and access to housing. These were generally considered to be outside the scope of, or in addition to, the current planning proposal and included:

· Differential rating of STRA properties

· Addressing housing affordability and availability through other interventions e.g., affordable housing supply, new land release etc.

· Restricting STRA properties based on zoning e.g., excluding STRA from residential zones

· Increasing enforcement to better control STRA impacts and poor operators

· Creating a stronger tourism focus within the Byron Bay township

· Enabling a STRA approval process for quality / long-term operators

· Establishing a levy to generate funds to cover enforcement and infrastructure demands

· Improving public transport to enable local workers to live across the Shire.

Separate commentary is provided on these in the Other Issues section below.

In summary, the exhibition process and engagement activities highlighted the wide diversity of views on both STRA and broader housing matters within the Byron Shire.

Views between different stakeholder groups varied widely, with highly passionate perspectives provided both in favour and against restrictions on STRA properties.

The issues raised during the exhibition process and engagement activities about Council’s planning proposal have otherwise been considered and addressed in the report.

· Consideration of Economic Impacts of the Planning proposal

Dr Peter Phibbs previously provided an independent peer review of the Urbis EIA that the DPIE had required council to consider in its planning proposal.

As part of the process of finalising the planning proposal, Dr Peter Phibbs was engaged to provide further advice on aspects of the planning proposal. Issues considered:

Below is an extract from Dr Phibb’s report which can be viewed in full in Attachment 8.

The rental market has deteriorated significantly since the Urbis EIA report. A key statistic here is the size of the private long-term rental market which can be measured by the total number of active rental bonds. These are shown in Figure 1 and are based on figures from the NSW Rental Bond Board. Since the last reporting period from the Urbis EIA (March 2021), the rental market has continued to shrink, losing over 200 rental properties by the June quarter 2022. As supply has shrunk rents have risen – with the median rent rising from $710 per week to $775, or by about 9 percent, over this period.

Reliable estimates of the number of properties that will convert to the long-term market are difficult to produce. However, it must be remembered that even small changes in the number of rental properties available on the market can have a significant impact on rents. Rents are influenced by the size of the vacancy rate. In a market of about 3,000 long-term rental properties, a change as small as 30 properties can move the vacancy rate by 1%. This can have a significant impact on private rental rates. For example, the addition of only 70 properties can move rents from significant increases to stable rents.

A further point is that the planning proposal is not just about encouraging the conversion of existing STR properties to long-term rentals but also to provide a signal to future investors in the Byron residential property market that long-term rental is a better option. Without this signal the long-term rental market may continue to deteriorate (ie the shrinking long-term rental market trends shown in Figure 1 might continue).

This report is being used to inform Council in its post-exhibition decision making process about the planning proposal. This being a requirement of the Minister as stated above.

The general conclusions from the report show that Council has, and or can address all the requirements of the Gateway determination.

· Risk Mitigation and Monitoring Report

A matrix framework has been included in the planning proposal which:

- summarises the key potential risks of maintaining a 180-day per year cap versus a 90-day/365-day cap model on certain market segments.

- aims to minimise the potential risks associated with reducing the short-term rental accommodation day cap on certain key groups.

Comments have been provided in the Dr Peter Phibbs report about the matrix framework and monitoring strategy being fit for purpose.

However, a further update on the risk mitigation and monitoring strategy will be required following the finalisation of the planning proposal and its precinct maps. This will be reported separately to Council early 2023. Notwithstanding this Council intends to commit to a monitoring and review period of a minimum 3- 5 years to align with the ABS census cycles.

· Precinct Map Methodology

A key question that has come up time and time again during the planning proposal progression has been: Are the boundaries shown on the indicative STRA precinct maps contained in the planning proposal appropriate? Should additional areas be added?

The Minister also asked Council to consider the mapped precinct boundaries in issuing his revised gateway determination.

It is important to understand that the indicative precinct maps that were exhibited, were formed at a point in time, 2018/9 based on the data and information available to Council, as well as informed by earlier iterations of similar precinct map models endorsed by Council.

Previous reports to Council discussed this. In the absence of relevant stakeholder feedback, and other data i.e., data being made available from the online platforms like Airbnb to inform a review in between times, the precincts maps have remained static and as determined by Council back then.

Another point worth mentioning, and in response to feedback during the engagement activities about the precinct map model, is that it had been Council’s preference prior to now to not apply a precinct map model. Instead, a 90-day cap on non-hosted across the Byron Shire was sought.

“As reported to Council in February [sic] 2020, after considering community feedback and the results of further research, Council opted for a more simplified approach for STRA that seeks to introduce a 90 day limit for non-hosted STRA in all areas as an initial planning control response. The reason for this is that a proposed precinct model apart from being difficult to define in Byron Shire with hard boundaries, if done, has the potential to create an unequal distribution of benefits and burdens across the community.

We also seek to introduce a ‘zero (0) day cap’ on Council managed land and new release areas identified in a strategy. The reason for this was to address our housing deficit (the result of STRA occupations) necessary to achieve strategic planning objectives for residential dwelling targets and to meet the needs for permanent housing stock for our resident community and key workers. This also has not been accepted by the DPIE.”

Links to reports in full:

Agenda of Ordinary (Planning) Meeting - 20 February 2020 (infocouncil.biz)

Agenda of Ordinary (Planning) Meeting - Thursday, 19 November 2020 (infocouncil.biz)

The DPIE rejected this approach to STRA leaving Council with no other option but to default to a mapped precinct model.

Moving forward, a robust set of criteria is needed to demonstrate that the final mapped precincts to be adopted by Council for the application of non-hosted 365-day caps are suitable and appropriate to the local context of Byron Shire.

So, to address the above question, and the Minister’s requirements, a set of criteria have been established.

Three key attributes have been used to inform the criteria:

· visitors to Byron Shire do so predominantly for leisure-based activities

· as a coastal holiday hotspot, holiday homes may not necessarily have been attractive for holidaying in August* hence are unoccupied (* census month)

· the community seeks to maintain and enhance the sense of community and minimise the amenity impacts neighbours.

As shown in Diagram 1, a series of steps have been applied using the quantitative and qualitative data to then identify localities and mapped precincts:

· with relatively high levels of unoccupied dwellings; and

· with leisure-based experiences, attractions and services including safety and evacuation; and

· with correlated feedback received from engagement undertaken to inform the planning proposal including the most recent, in Oct- Nov 2022.

Diagram 1. Criteria assessment

Diagram

Description automatically generated

On application of this criteria the following localities and mapped precincts have resulted.

Key

n 365-day cap precincts

Byron Bay West

Unoccupied dwellings (dw) - an indicator of holiday let

% unoccupied dw @ 2021

% change 2016- 2021

Leisure based experiences & attractions

1: available

2: somewhat

Tourist services

1: available

2: somewhat

3. limited

4. none

Relative safety, evacuation

1: manageable

2: precautionary

Feedback dominant view

1: include

2: not definitive

3: remove/reduce

~ 50%

Up ~25%

expand to include south of Shirley St and Sommerset St area

Recommendation: Expand to include Shirley Lane and south of Shirley Street and precinct west of bus interchange around Sommerset Street.

Exhibited	Proposed

Byron Bay East

Unoccupied dwellings (dw) - an indicator of holiday let

% unoccupied dw @ 2021

% change 2016- 2021

Leisure based experiences & attractions

1: available

2: somewhat

Tourist services

1: available

2: somewhat

3. limited

4. none

Relative safety, evacuation

1: manageable

2: precautionary

Feedback dominant view

1: include

2: not definitive

3: remove/reduce

~51%

Up 11%

some concerns regarding Wategos Beach inclusion

Recommendation: no change

Exhibited	Proposed

Byron Bay Central

This area is being included for consideration as a new precinct because of public feedback and its assessment against the quantitative criteria.

Unoccupied dwellings (dw) - an indicator of holiday let

% unoccupied dw @ 2021

% change 2016- 2021

Leisure based experiences & attractions

1: available

2: somewhat

Tourist services

1: available

2: somewhat

3. limited

4. none

Relative safety, evacuation

1: manageable

2: precautionary

Feedback dominant view

1: include

2: not definitive

3: remove/reduce

~72%

Up ~30%

expanded to include the CBD

Recommendation: include CBD

Exhibited	Proposed
N/A

Brunswick Heads

Unoccupied dwellings (dw) - an indicator of holiday let

% unoccupied dw @ 2021

% change 2016- 2021

Leisure based experiences & attractions

1: available

2: somewhat

Tourist services

1: available

2: somewhat

3. limited

4. none

Relative safety, evacuation

1: manageable

2: precautionary

Feedback dominant view

1: include

2: not definitive

3: remove/reduce

~ 30%

Up ~13%

more accepted areas - main town centre, north of Booyun Street, and east of Simpsons Creek

Recommendation: remove area south of Booyun Street

Exhibited	Proposed

Suffolk Park

Unoccupied dwellings (dw) - an indicator of holiday let

% unoccupied dw @ 2021

% change 2016- 2021

Leisure based experiences & attractions

1: available

2: somewhat

Tourist services

1: available

2: somewhat

3. limited

4. none

Relative safety, evacuation

1: manageable

2: precautionary

Feedback dominant view

1: include

2: not definitive

3: remove/reduce

Varies ~17% - 29%

Trend mixed ~2% down to ~8% up

evacuation routes

residents seeking intervention to avoid the deterioration of the community essence

Recommendation: remove Suffolk Park precinct

Exhibited	Proposed

New Brighton

Whilst New Brighton was not exhibited as a precinct, it did record an unoccupied dwelling rate of 34% which is greater than 3 times the NSW level of 9.4%. Hence, this location has been assessed against the criteria.

Unoccupied dwellings (dw) - an indicator of holiday let

% unoccupied dw @ 2021

% change 2016- 2021

Leisure based experiences & attractions

1: available

2: somewhat

Tourist services

1: available

2: somewhat

3. limited

4. none

Relative safety, evacuation

1: manageable

2: precautionary

Feedback dominant view

1: include

2: not definitive

3: remove/reduce

~34%

up ~9%

flooding and evacuation routes

Recommendation: No change – remains 90 days and include as a focus area for monitoring and review.

· Statutory Matters

Council as the planning proposal authority is authorised to exercise the function of the local plan-making authority under section 3.36(2) of the EP&A Act subject to the following:

a) the planning proposal authority has satisfied all the conditions of the gateway determination

The planning proposal has satisfied all of the conditions as discussed in the report.

b) the planning proposal is consistent with applicable directions of the Minister under section 9.1 of the EP&A Act or the Secretary has agreed that any inconsistencies are justified

The planning proposal is consistent with all applicable directions.

c) there are no outstanding written objections from public authorities

Both NSW Rural Fire Services and NSW Fair Trading were consulted.

The planning proposal will not facilitate additional development on bushfire prone land compared to the existing provisions in the Housing SEPP

Further consultation with the Secretary will occur as and if required to finalise the Plan.

d) that the proposal is not at any time amended to reduce non-hosted STRA periods on any land to less than 90 days

The minimum period non-hosted STRA can be let on any land is 90 days.

Other issues

Response to the alternate policy options follow:

· Differential rating of STRA properties

Differential rating applies different rates to different land use categories. Under the Local Government Act 1993 the categories of rates are:

o farmland

o residential

o mining

o business

STRA as defined under the Local Government Act is rated as residential. This is despite non-hosted STRA for 365 days being considered by many as a commercial use of residential land. Council has raised this as a concern previously with State Government.

There is support from other councils to look at a new rating category for this land use. See Shoalhaven Council link here:

Shoalhaven Council investigates higher rates for holiday home owners - ABC News

Further advocacy to, and support of State Government is required to recognise the need for a change in the Local Government Act 1993 for this to occur.

· Addressing housing affordability and availability through other interventions e.g., affordable housing supply, new land release etc.

There are many resolutions, actions and initiatives that Byron Shire has current to address housing affordability and availability.

Housing Affordability Initiatives - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

Council also has a Housing and Affordability Advisory Committee

Advisory Committees - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

The scope of the Housing and Affordability Advisory Committee is:

o Monitor and promote the implementation of Council's Affordable Housing Policy and other relevant policies and plans related to affordable housing for very low-, low- and moderate-income households, including essential workers, boarding house residents, homeless people and others experiencing housing stress.

o Serve as a resource for Council in relation to the housing market, trends and community impacts, including supporting access to and opportunities for affordable, sustainable and accessible housing options where relevant.

o Suggestions on improving the development of housing options that support the retention of a diverse and inclusive community and an accessible and sustainable place to live.

o Assist in the development of programs and initiatives to highlight the importance of housing to the well-being and dynamism of the community.

o Agenda of Housing and Affordability Advisory Committee Meeting - Thursday, 18 August 2022 (infocouncil.biz)

o Agenda of Housing and Affordability Advisory Committee Meeting - Thursday, 17 November 2022 (infocouncil.biz)

· Restricting STRA properties based on zoning e.g., excluding STRA from residential zones

(Housing SEPP) commenced on 26 November 2021now includes STRA. Because of this policy position councils are unable to exclude STRA from residential zones.

The Housing SEPP web page states the following:

Examples of other councils that have resolutions looking at options to manage or restrict STRA in residential areas:

Ballina Agenda of Ordinary Meeting of Ballina Shire Council - Thursday, 28 July 2022 (nsw.gov.au)

Shoalhaven Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 12 September 2022 (infocouncil.biz)

· Increasing enforcement to better control STRA impacts and poor operators

The need for an STRA enforcement strategy is acknowledged and will be the subject of a separate report to Council in early 2023.

· Creating a stronger tourism focus within the Byron Bay township

The proposed precinct maps address this issue directly. Council otherwise has strategies, plans and policies in place to support Byron Bay Township in this way.

· Enabling a STRA approval process for quality / long-term operators

A review of the State implemented STRA registration system and Code of Conduct is needed for this to occur.

There are many issues with these that need to be addressed for both to work transparently and with accountability. Further details will be reported in early 2023 as part of the Council’s STRA enforcement strategy.

For example, other states enable councils to oversee the registration system. Council has requested this to be the case on numerous occasions.

Short Stay Letting and Home Hosted Accommodation Local Law – Noosa Shire Council

· Establishing a levy to generate funds to cover enforcement and infrastructure demands

The State Government recently removed Council’ ability to levy for enforcement purposes.

Report No. 13.25 Prohibition on Compliance Levy Changes Agenda of Ordinary (Planning) Meeting - Thursday, 5 August 2021 (infocouncil.biz)

Councils in NSW are otherwise restricted by the Local Government Act as to what levies can be imposed under what circumstances.

By comparison, other states like Queensland and Tasmania have imposed rates and levies on STRA recently:

Brisbane City Council to hike rates on short-stay properties like Airbnb to tackle rental crisis - ABC News

Dorset Council hikes Airbnb waste levy by more than $2,000 to 'level the playing field' - ABC News

· Improving public transport to enable local workers to live across the Shire.

Council has strategies, plans and policies in place that acknowledge the need to improve public transport across the Shire.

Moving Byron - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

Next steps

· This report recommends that Council amends the planning proposal to:

o include in the 365-day cap precinct, the area as per the maps in the body of this report, namely:

§ Shirley Lane and south of Shirley Street and precinct west of bus interchange around Sommerset Street, Byron Bay

§ Byron Bay central business area

o remove from the 365-day cap precinct the areas as per the maps in the body of this report, namely:

§ Suffolk Park

§ area south of Booyun Street, Brunswick Heads

· adopts the Planning Proposal to amend State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing )2021 to:

o increase the number of days of non-hosted short term rental accommodation in part of the Byron Shire Local Government Area from the current 180-day cap to a 365-day cap for areas in set precincts in the Brunswick Heads and Byron Bay localities; and

o reduce the number of days of non-hosted short term rental accommodation for the balance of the Byron Shire Local Government Area from the current 180-days cap to a 90-day cap.

· Council has been delegated authority to make the plan subject to the proposal not being amended to reduce non-hosted STRA period on any land to less than 90 days.

· If the changes are supported by Council, there will be a 12-month transition period for any changes to commence. This means any changes will not likely come into effect until 2024.

· A further update on the risk mitigation and monitoring strategy will be required as a result of the finalisation of the planning proposal and its mapped precincts. This will be reported separately to council early 2023.

· Development of and subsequent implementation of a STRA enforcement strategy will be required also and will be reported separately to council in early 2023.

· Further advocacy to State Government is needed in response to the alternative policy measures shared by many stakeholders including:

o differential rating of STRA properties

o establishing a levy to generate funds to cover enforcement and infrastructure demands

o return of the STRA register to council to administer with appropriate fees for servicing

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action	Code	OP Activity
4: Ethical Growth We manage growth and change responsibly	4.1: Manage responsible development through effective place and space planning	4.1.4: LEP & DCP - Review and update the Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plans	4.1.4.7	Progress Short Term Rental Accommodation planning proposal
4: Ethical Growth We manage growth and change responsibly	4.2: Enable housing diversity and support people experiencing housing insecurity	4.2.3: Legislation changes - Establish planning mechanisms and advocate for changes to legislation to support housing that meets the needs of our community	4.2.3.1	Prepare submission/s on draft changes to State government planning policy or legislative reforms.

Recent Resolutions

· 22-060

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Extract from Planning Circular, Delegation of plan making decisions (PS 22-002):

Financial Considerations

Resourcing implications for Council to consider in its development and subsequent implementation of its enforcement strategy for STRA.

Further advocacy to State Government is required in response to the alternative policy measures shared by many stakeholders including:

· differential rating of STRA properties

· establishing a levy to generate funds to cover enforcement and infrastructure demands

· return of the STRA register to council to administer with appropriate fees for servicing

These are within the remit of State Government to enable Local Government to do.

Consultation and Engagement

As discussed in the report and attachments.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.10

Report No. 13.10 After the Floods Discussion Paper - Submissions Report

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Shannon Burt, Director Sustainable Environment and Economy

Sharyn French, Manager Environmental and Economic Planning

File No: I2022/1433

Summary:

In response to the devastating floods of early 2022, Council resolved 22-249 to develop an ‘After the Flood Discussion Paper’ to rethink how our communities and their built environments exist and can grow in the future.

After the Floods Discussion Paper - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

The Discussion Paper will mark a point in time in the complex recovery journey of our community.

This report presents the consultation feedback and findings from our community engagement during October and November 2022.

Ultimately, this consultation feedback will inform Council’s long-term 'settlement' strategies.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Notes the ‘After the Floods: Settlement Discussion Paper, Engagement Report’ in Attachment 1 (E2022/119447).

2. Accepts the consultation feedback received in the ‘After the Flood: Settlement Discussion Paper, Findings Report’ in Attachment 2 (E2022/119445).

3. Notes the ‘After the Flood Discussion Paper’ Findings Report will now be used to set a platform for the review of Council’s strategic land use planning framework. It will directly inform the preparation and or review of the:

· Residential Strategy

· Rural Land Use Strategy

· Business and Industrial Lands Strategy

· Place Plans

4. Thanks all who participated in the ‘After the Flood Discussion Paper’ engagement process.

Attachments:

1 After the floods - Settlement Discussion Paper - Engagement Report, E2022/119447

2 After the floods - Settlement Discussion Paper - Findings Report, E2022/119445

Report

Council resolved 22-249 to prepare a Discussion Paper ‘Working out the possibilities together After the floods: settlement discussion paper’.

The purpose of the Discussion Paper to start the conversation with our community about long-term planning for how and where people will live and work in the future given the wider consideration of climate change and natural disaster management.

The Discussion Paper was focused around four key pillars:

Four key pillars of the After the Floods Discussion paper - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

Engagement activities

Community consultation on the Discussion Paper commenced 15 October 2022 and concluded 18 November 2022.

A range of engagement activities were held to directly inform and involve our community including:

· Awareness raising – 4 information sessions with around 50 participants

· Hosted kitchen table conversations – 11 community groups with 24 participants

· Online and hard copy survey – 117 responses from 17 different localities

· Café conversations – 4 locations with around 30 participants

In addition to the above we received submissions from 9 individuals and 3 community organisations. Some of the individual submissions will require further follow up from staff due to the specifics raised in them. Some of the submissions will also be considered further in the Residential Strategy refresh currently progressing.

Attachment 1 provides a copy of the Engagement Report.

Engagement findings

The consultation process has resulted in the feedback received being consolidated and distilled into several principles in the Findings Report. The Findings report recognises that the four pillars in the Discussion Paper are interconnected. Attachment 2 provides a copy of the Findings Report.

More detail about each of the principles can be found in the Findings Report. A summary of each follow:

Overarching principles

The overlapping issues and opportunities identified from the engagement activities have been identified as four overarching principles.

• Overarching Principle 1: Communication is key - This keeps people informed about public infrastructure build back efforts, provides public education and assists in preparedness planning

• Overarching Principle 2: Enable local responses - Listening and responding to the local context is important, these are lived experiences and this localised understanding of circumstance is paramount to supporting outcomes

• Overarching Principle 3: Options are necessary - Outcomes across Pillars 1 to 3 are needed to support options for impacted communities so that they are not forced into any set form of response

• Overarching Principle 4: Coordination is needed - A comprehensive program and coordinated response from all levels of Government is needed rather than a myriad of isolated outcomes

Key principles

Pillar 1 Build Back Better

This pillar recognised the link between where people live, land ownership and the desire for many to remain in their neighbourhood, even following natural disasters.

· Principle 1.1: The scaffold is missing - Building back better can only occur when information, resources and funding are available

• Principle 1.2: Rebuild bottom up - Community empowerment can assist communities to help each other, building resilience and trust

• Principle 1.3: Government has a role - Building back better needs to be supported by public infrastructure that provides confidence that the effort is worthwhile

• Principle 1.4: Outcomes are everything - Council’s staff need to use their skills to focus on outcomes from a people perspective rather than a process perspective

Pillar 2 Build Different

This pillar recognised that Council and its communities have traditionally resisted changes to planning controls that enable increases in height and or density. However, the current housing crisis, demographic changes and need to find new long-term solutions may necessitate building differently.

• Principle 2.1: It’s time for change - More of the same can only result in worsening impacts on communities over the long-term

• Principle 2.2: Focus on the town centre - Height and density within key centres, e.g. Byron Bay, is needed to reduce urban sprawl

• Principle 2.3: We can change too - Growing the population within existing areas is possible if we’re prepared to live differently

• Principle 2.4: Flood prone land has its place - Urban settlements can benefit from repurposing flood prone land

Pillar 3 Build Elsewhere

This pillar recognises that growth within established urban areas may be limited in the future, potentially necessitating the identification of new future urban growth areas elsewhere.

• Principle 3.1: Well sited future settlements - Fundamental to siting future settlements is that they are not flood prone and they are well-connected

• Principle 3.2: Built-in sustainability - Greenfield expansion must encapsulate core principles of sustainability and community outcomes

• Principle 3.3: Balanced rural land take - Retaining the best agricultural land can be balanced with growth and expansion on poorer quality lands

• Principle 3.4: Leadership is needed - Whilst a regional approach is supported, the need for local leadership to progress new settlements is here and now

Pillar 4 Build Supporting Infrastructure

This pillar recognises that resilient communities need to be supported by appropriate infrastructure and services. However, it also establishes that rebuilding infrastructure is costly, complex and can take an extended period to deliver.

• Principle 4.1: Communicate ‘making it better’ - Communities deserve quality, robust infrastructure, but this takes time, so progress needs to be well communicated

• Principle 4.2: Review before expanding - Ensure that existing infrastructure is fit for purpose and working to capacity

• Principle 4.3: Empower local communities - With relatively small contributions, risk tolerant communities can be well supported

• Principle 4.4: Educate and prepare - Future events are inevitable, learning lessons, providing education and preparing will reduce
the impacts

More information on Roads impacted by flood - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au) can be found here.

Next steps

The Discussion Paper was developed to rethink how our communities and their built environments exist and can grow in the future.

The Findings Report will now be used to set a platform for the review of Council’s strategic land use planning framework. It will directly inform the preparation and or review of the:

· Residential Strategy

· Rural Land Use Strategy

· Business and Industrial Lands Strategy

· Place Plans

It is also to be used to communicate our approach to other levels of government and to our communities on same.

To this end a copy of the Engagement Report and Findings Report are available on our web page After the Floods Discussion Paper - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

More information on our Flood Recovery Response can be found here Flood recovery - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action	Code	OP Activity
4: Ethical Growth We manage growth and change responsibly	4.1: Manage responsible development through effective place and space planning	4.1.2: Growth Management Strategies - Implement Local Growth Management Strategies	4.1.2.5	Revise and update Residential Strategy
4: Ethical Growth We manage growth and change responsibly	4.1: Manage responsible development through effective place and space planning	4.1.2: Growth Management Strategies - Implement Local Growth Management Strategies	4.1.2.1	Review Rural Land Use Strategy

Recent Resolutions

· 22-249

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Council adopted a Recovery Action Plan 2022-2024 at the 24 November 20022 meeting.

The Recovery Action Plan describes the whole-of-Council approach to disaster recovery and describes what Council will deliver to support recovery and build disaster resilience.

Financial Considerations

None relevant to this report.

Consultation and Engagement

As discussed in the report.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.11

Report No. 13.11 Unsolicited Proposal to use and occupy Council owned land for a movable tiny house cluster and permaculture garden

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Shannon Burt, Director Sustainable Environment and Economy

Esmeralda Davis, Director Corporate and Community Services

Celeste Harris, Project Officer - Rough Sleeping

File No: I2022/1633

Summary:

A proposal has been received from One Roof Byron for consent to use and occupy Council owned land at 1/125 Vallances Road for the purpose of a movable tiny house cluster development prototype. The proposal may be captured by Council’s Supporting Partnerships Policy under the definition of an ‘unsolicited proposal’ and has been preliminarily assessed as such.

The positive intent of the proposal is recognised and acknowledged, and commentary has been provided in response to the request with respect to the suitability of the proposed site, the robustness of the service model for temporary housing for vulnerable community groups, the criteria for ‘unsolicited proposals’ in accordance with Council’s policy and, planning related matters.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Declines to progress with the One Roof Proposal for the reasons outlined in this report but acknowledges the positive intent of the proposal and encourages the organisation to continue to develop their service delivery model to consider and incorporate best practice approaches.

2. Notes staff will undertake an audit of Council owned or managed properties which may meet the stated requirements for crisis and transitional supported accommodation, to be able to give due consideration to future opportunities or proposals in a holistic manner.

3. Notes the proposed amendments to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (Housing SEPP) will, when in effect, streamline consideration of Temporary Supported Accommodation on Council operational land/buildings to provide for housing for people experiencing, or at risk of homelessness, managed by an appropriate provider.

4. Notes subject to 2 and 3 above, if suitable properties are identified, it may be possible to undertake an Expression of Interest to identify and assess (based on robust criteria) appropriate uses by suitable organisations of these properties, which could include One Roof.

Attachments:

1 One Roof Byron Proposal to Council, E2022/117972

Report

A request has been received from One Roof Byron for consent to use and occupy Council owned land at 1/125 Vallances Road for the purpose of building a proof-of-concept prototype movable tiny house cluster, permaculture garden and community (Attachment 1 E2022/117972)

The proposal seeks to provide housing for a socially diverse group of residents at risk of or experiencing homelessness and essential workers, in the form of four movable 6.5m diameter Yurts with food gardens for each housing recipient.

A rudimentary indicative budget has been provided and is included in the proposal.

Key issues

Site Suitability Vallances Road

The land is currently designated as ‘Operational’, meaning it serves a commercial or operational function, or is retained for commercial or strategic reasons.

The site currently hosts the Brunswick Valley Sewage Treatment Plant (BVSTP), which has been the primary treatment plant since the closure of the Mullumbimby and Brunswick Heads STP in Mullumbimby in 2011.

The new BVSTP, which was constructed in 2009 has delivered improved wastewater management for Mullumbimby and nearby Brunswick Heads, while assisting in better water quality outcomes for the Brunswick River Estuary.

Vehicle access to site is restricted. While Vallances Road is a sealed road, it is unpainted and relatively narrow in the context of regular 2-way traffic, with the centre of the site only accessible by a narrow dirt driveway. There is a decommissioned railway bridge to the south-west of the site, however it requires significant investment to reinstate function for pedestrian and small vehicle uses

The Brunswick Valley, Vallances Road Vision and Roadmap charts the future use and long-term development of the Council-owned land at Vallances Road, Mullumbimby. This site was formerly known as the “Brunswick Valley Sustainability Centre”.

For more details, download Adopted-2021-Brunswick-Valley-Vallances-Rd-Vision-and-Roadmap-24-June-2021-Res-21-250-includes-Addendum-for-the-Natural-Burial-Ground.pdf

The Vision and Road Map provide for a range of future use and development on the site that is complementary to the existing operational role while providing an economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable future for the site. The Vision and Road map do not include or provide for a movable tiny house cluster development as envisaged by One Roof Byron.

Council considered Report No. 13.13 Vallances Road Options and Next Steps Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Thursday, 24 November 2022 (infocouncil.biz) and Resolution 22-658 resolved that Council considers this report at the next available Councillor Workshop.

The Councillor workshop will assist Council in their decision making of which land uses should be investigated and progressed further on this site. Until then it would be pre-emptive to support this request.

Service model for providing temporary housing to vulnerable community groups

The proposal aims to provide “temporary emergency relief accommodation with a pathway to long term accommodation” for “residents experiencing homelessness” and “essential workers”.

Council agrees that there is a critical need for emergency accommodation and affordable housing provision in the Byron Shire.

This proposal begins to articulate an innovative response to this unmet need, that brings together local not-for-profit partners with diverse skill sets but does not provide adequate information about the model of service delivery proposed to support vulnerable community members; in this case, people experiencing homelessness.

Research shows that people experiencing homelessness and those at risk of homelessness are among Australia’s most socially and economically disadvantaged (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2021).

Byron Shire has the second highest number of people sleeping rough in NSW. The Byron Shire By-Name List uses survey data to provide detailed information about the experience of primary homelessness in our LGA. There are 195 people on this list and 55% of those surveyed (89 people) have measured high levels of health and social vulnerability. All persons have experienced a form of substance abuse, and 47% are identified as having a tri-morbidity (physical ill-health, mental ill-health and substance abuse) (End Street Sleeping Collaboration, 2022).

Best practice housing delivery for people experiencing homelessness requires access to affordable, permanent housing coupled with flexible, quality supports to address disadvantage and reduce vulnerability (NSW Department of Communities and Justice, 2019).

The proposal states that the project will provide temporary housing with “wrap around services and continuity of care”. Further detail is required on the proposed delivery of support services, the organisation’s governance framework and demonstrated housing/service delivery experience to ensure safe and effective project delivery.

Additional information is also needed on the model of emergency/temporary accommodation provision and the stated pathway to long term accommodation.

The proposal articulates some broad project outcomes but further detail is required to understand how the organisation will measure, monitor, and evaluate project impact to improve participant outcomes.

At a minimum, in considering any similar proposal, Council would be seeking demonstrated evidence of:

· High quality service delivery model/s for people experiencing homelessness, drawing upon up-to-date evidence of best practice in housing and homelessness service provision. Accreditation against relevant quality standards and demonstrated alignment with industry practice guidelines is recommended.

· Collaboration with mainstream support services with demonstrated experience in best practice, quality service delivery for people experiencing homelessness. Partnership approaches are highly regarded.

· An evidence informed outcomes framework, articulating the measurement, monitoring, and reporting of outcomes for project participants and demonstrating continuous improvement.

One Roof are encouraged to continue to develop their service delivery model to move towards alignment with best practice approaches, or alternatively reconsider the intended recipients of this temporary housing model and project outcomes.

Supporting Partnerships Policy

The proposal may be captured by Council’s Supporting Partnerships Policy under the definition of an unsolicited proposal.

Supporting Partnerships Policy - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

Guideline-Partnership-Proposals

Council’s Supporting Partnerships Policy and Guidelines establish a framework to assess if there is a genuine benefit to the community to deliver projects that will provide economic, social, environmental and civic leadership outcomes.

Council recognises that it needs to be open to partnerships and opportunities to deliver great project outcomes for our community. Partnerships can either be solicited or unsolicited.

To ensure Council operates in an open and transparent manner, any unsolicited proposal is assessed, and a summary of the proposal published on Council’s website.

In order for a proposal to be considered by Council the proposal must be consistent with the objectives of Byron Shire Community Strategic Plan and be considered unique or innovative. The Guidelines also state that proposals are not considered unique where they are seeking to directly purchase, lease, use or otherwise acquire a Council owned or Council-managed property or asset and that Council will not consider unsolicited proposals seeking Council support for a “pilot” program.

Based on the two above guiding principles, the One Roof proposal does not meet the requirements of an ‘unsolicited proposal’ and as such, is unable to be supported under this policy, at this time.

Instead, it is recommended that One Roof continue to develop their service delivery model in partnership with service providers. Also to consider looking for land or building opportunities to house their proposal with private landholders, until such time as public land may become available through an appropriate procurement process.

Planning pathways for temporary supported accommodation – flood impacted residents

State Government has made changes to legislation to provide temporary accommodation options for residents displaced from their homes due to the 2022 floods.

On privately owned land these options include:

· Extended stays in caravan parks or camping grounds.

· Installing a movable dwelling.

· Extension of the two-year exemption period for moveable dwellings.

· Councils can modify conditions for camping grounds.

· At-home caravan program (Resilience NSW and Camplify)

On public land

The State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (Housing SEPP) allows caravan parks or camping grounds to be established without development consent to provide temporary, emergency accommodation for people who have been displaced by a natural disaster. The sites will be established by or on behalf of a public authority.

Temporary emergency caravan parks and camping grounds are not subject to the usual requirements for caravan parks and camping grounds under the planning system or local government framework, including the need to obtain section 68 approval under the Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act) or comply with the requirements of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 (LG Regulation). However, the public authority establishing the site must ensure that the development: • is carried out within five years of the natural disaster occurring • is carried out on land that is supplied with water and electricity • is carried out on land that is provided with sewerage and drainage services • is carried out on land that has access to communal amenities

While temporary emergency caravan parks must be established on or on behalf of a public authority, they will be managed by an operator under agreement with the public authority. The operator is responsible for the management of the sites, including admission and turnover of occupants, and closing the sites.

Temporary housing sites

Three sites in Byron Shire have been identified by the NSW Government as locations for temporary housing for people who had their homes damaged by the floods.

· 125 Tweed Street on the remediated former Sewage Treatment Plant site, behind the sports fields.

· Torakina Road and Kingsford Drive, Bayside, Brunswick Heads. Extended into privately owned land next to and behind Lilly Pilly Preschool.

· Station Street, Mullumbimby, in the rail lands behind Woolworths.

Housing SEPP Temporary Supported Accommodation

The DPIE is currently seeking feedback on proposed amendments to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (Housing SEPP).

The changes include but are not limited to – pathways for temporary supported accommodation (TSA) in certain circumstances.

These changes largely mirror those previously proposed by Council in its Tiny Homes planning proposal, not supported by the DPIE.

These changes are not expected to take effect until 2023.

Once in place, these changes will enable consideration of TSA on Council operational land/buildings to provide for housing for people experiencing, or at risk of homelessness, managed by an appropriate provider.

As such, it is recommended that staff undertake an audit of Council owned or managed properties which may meet the stated requirements for crisis and transitional supported accommodation on operational land, to be able to give due consideration to future opportunities or proposals in a holistic manner.

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

There are no relevant activities identified in the current Operational Plan, although there is alignment with CSP and DP objectives.

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

4: Ethical Growth
We manage growth and change responsibly

4.2: Enable housing diversity and support people experiencing housing insecurity

4.2.1

People experiencing housing insecurity - Seek opportunities that provide fair, appropriate, and affordable housing for people experiencing housing insecurity

4: Ethical Growth
We manage growth and change responsibly

4.2: Enable housing diversity and support people experiencing housing insecurity

4.2.2: Partnerships and pilots to address housing needs - Investigate partnerships and pilots that deliver an innovative and affordable housing model for the Shire

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Supporting Partnerships Policy - Byron Shire Council (nsw.gov.au)

Guideline-Partnership-Proposals

Financial Considerations

None relevant to this report.

Consultation and Engagement

N/A

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.12

Report No. 13.12 PLANNING - Supplementary Report DA 10.2021.114.1 - 'Fed Sheds' Light Industry Excluding Artisan Food & Drink Premises at 467 Federal Drive, FEDERAL 2480

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Patricia Docherty, Planner

File No: I2022/1658

Summary:

Council considered Report No 13.11 - PLANNING - 10.2021.114.1 - ‘Fed Sheds’ Light Industry Excluding Artisan Food & Drink Premises at 467 Federal Drive, Federal at the Council (Planning) Meeting of 11 August 2022. Council Resolved:

22-374 Resolved:

1. That a decision on the DA be deferred in the public interest, given the extent of community opposition, the need to consider social impact and specific queries raised with the proposal (consistent with section 4.15 of the EPAA 1979 - old section 79C), and that the developer be requested to conduct a workshop with invited representatives from the Federal community and the Federal Village Masterplan Committee.

2. That a report come back to Council within 28 days to consider the Development Application including any modifications.

3. That Infrastructure Services staff assess the drainage system in Coachwood Court in the next 4 weeks.

Further, Council considered Report No 13.9 - Update - Resolution 22-374 - PLANNING - 10.2021.114.1 - ‘Fed Sheds’ Light Industry Excluding Artisan Food & Drink Premises at 467 Federal Drive, Federal at Council (Planning) Meeting of 8 September 2022. Council resolved:

22-447 Resolved:

That Council:

1. Notes that points 1 and 3 of Resolution 22-374 are being progressed.

2. Notes a report as per points 2 and 3 of Resolution 22-374 will be presented to Council at the next available meeting following their completion. (Lyon/Hunter)

The motion was put to the vote and declared carried.

This report responds to the above Resolutions of Council as per points 1 and 2 of Resolution 22-374 and updates Council on the status of progress of point 3 of Resolution 22-374.

In terms of the proposed development the applicant conducted a further workshop with representatives of the Federal Community on 29 August 2022. The plans were amended further with changes made to the development by way of setting back the central building “B” further from the Federal Drive from 1.5 metres to a minimum of 7 metres and lowering it so that it its well within the 9 metre height limit. These changes were made in response to concerns the development takes away from the prominence of the Church and hall opposite. Other changes were also proposed with a reduction in three car parking spaces and a minor re-siting of the buildings to the north west to further reduce shadow and amenity impacts on the immediate neighbour to the south east.

Council also engaged HMC Consulting to further independently review the proposed OSSM system for the development, and associated documentation. In summary they found that the proposed system for the disposal of effluent onsite as “sound with very conservative design factors and sufficient protection from trade waste and stormwater impacts”, and concurring “with the findings of the peer review by Whitehead & Associates”.

The proposed amendments to the design of the development raise no additional issues and the proposal remains recommended for approval subject to conditions of consent.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

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

RECOMMENDATION:

That Pursuant to Section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Development Application No 10.2021.114.1 - ‘Fed Sheds’ Light Industry Excluding Artisan Food & Drink Premises at 467 Federal Drive, Federal, be granted consent subject to the updated conditions of approval in Attachment 2 (# E2022/115565) to this report.

Attachments:

1 DA10.2021.114.1 - Updated Design Plans, E2022/119307

2 DA10.2021.114.1 - Amended Recommended Conditions of Consent, E2022/115565

3 DA10.2021.114.1 - Council Commissioned Independent Peer Review of OSMS by HMC HMC2022.1162 FINAL ISSUE C, E2022/99555

4 DA10.2021.114.1 - Federal Community Document Submission to Byron Shire Council staff and Councillors and Additional Documents Received., E2022/119297

5 DA10.2021.114.1 - Email from Developer dated Thursday 20 October 2022 response to workshop of Monday 29 August 2022 _PAN-70196, E2022/103604

6 DA10.2021.114.1 - 22.01.11 - Updated Wastewater Management Report_PAN-70196 19313_ww Revision E complete with correct page ordering and appendices, E2022/86478

7 DA10.2021.114.1 - AWS Peer review general letter of support OSSMS (WMS)_PAN-70196 (1), E2022/103606

8 DA10.2021.114. - Updated Stormwater Management Report_PAN-70196, E2022/110655

9 DA10.2021.114.1 - Acoustic Report_PAN-70196 referred to in recommended condition 1, E2021/40088

Report

1. Introduction

Resolution 22-374 deferred Development Application (DA) No. 10.2021.114.1 - ‘Fed Sheds’ Light Industry Excluding Artisan Food & Drink Premises at 467 Federal Drive, Federal and asked that the developer be requested to conduct a workshop with invited representatives of the Federal community and that a report come back to Council within 28 days to consider the DA including any modifications.

An update reported to Council (Planning) Meeting of 8 September 2022 that all items were being progressed and this was noted by Council Resolution 22-447.

This report concludes the final response to Resolutions 22-374 and 22-447 to the extent it relates to determination of DA 10.2021.114.1.

Council staff communicated with the applicant representing the owner and developer of 467 Federal Drive, Federal to advise of Council Resolution 22-374. As such, the developer was requested to conduct a workshop with the Federal community. Council staff advised the applicant that Council officers must remain independent and impartial and therefore could not participate in or facilitate the delivery of the workshop.

Council commissioned Helen Tunks of HMC Environmental Consulting to undertake a further independent peer review of all information provided to Council by the applicant and the community with regards to on-site sewage management (OSMS).

Council’s Infrastructure Services Engineers commenced further investigation of the drainage system in Coachwood Court.

2. Workshop with Federal Community Representatives

The developer hired a room and facilitator and held the workshop as requested by Council at the Cavanbah Centre on Monday 29 August 2022. The developer’s response to the workshop including amended plans and further submissions made by the Federal community are all attached.

It is noted that all correspondence from the Federal community, represented at the consultation workshop and referred to in these attachments comprises volunteer representatives, as follows:

The FCC Steering Group is comprised of representatives from the following Federal organisations and groups:

• Federal Community Centre

• Federal Masterplan Steering Committee

• Federal School of Arts Association Inc (FSAAI), Jasper Corner facility

• Coachwood Court and nearby residents’ group

In summary, the Federal community made the following recommendations in a submission addressed to the developer, dated 28 August 2022:

Recommendations:

1. Remove Building B from the proposal to reduce the building footprint by approximately 1/3. This would provide natural ground for an approvable onsite sewage management system.

2. In addition, by providing a central common courtyard area, Fed Sheds could integrate positively with Jasper Corner producing a 'town square' effect.

3. Review the cost of the development in relation to more current costs of building. The existing estimate of costs could cover two sheds and contain the proposed eight spaces, with smaller provisions for start-up enterprises.

4. That Council seek an urgent independent review of the feasibility of this onsite sewage treatment system on this site, or the developer is willing to reduce a shed and revert to a more conventional system proven to work in the area.

The Federal Community made a further submission to Council, dated September 2022, that raised the following concerns:

1. Concerns and questions regarding the Onsite sewerage management system (OSMS)

2. Concerns and questions regarding the stormwater plan

3. Concerns and questions regarding the risk with liquid trade waste

4. Concerns with the DA documentation and Council’s recommendation to approve the proposal.

5. Concerns with the Heritage Report and Council's Heritage advisor.

6. Concerns over impact on the community amenity - the Hall and Church at Jasper Corner

7. Concerns with exacerbation of traffic volumes and parking issues in Federal as a result of this DA

8. The context of the Masterplan in this DA recommendation. Community led planning and its relationship with the DCP and LEP: The fear of litigation

9. Concerns and questions regarding Council’s legal requirements

10. Miscellaneous concerns regarding Council’s approach to planning and the assessment process for this development application

3. Response from Applicant - Amended Plans

The developer reported in writing by email to Council on 20 October 2022 on their response to the workshop of 29 August 2022. The outcomes were summarised as follows:

Issues raised were parking, bulk and scale, wastewater and stormwater.

I have had discussions with Council’s stormwater team and Derek Mc Kenzie, our stormwater consultant, and believe that Council is satisfied with our design.

In order to improve Community Engagement and address other concerns raised we have made the following changes to the original submission, please see plans attached.

· Moved Building B back between 7m and 10m from boundary to the face of the building to create more space between the deconsecrated Church and Hall. Parking on site is thus reduced to 19, which is still 3 more than required to be compliant.

· As per Councils prior condition issued in the recommendation for approval, we have moved Buildings A, B & C by 750mm to the NW to minimize overshadowing of the neighbor [sic] to the South. The distance to the South boundary is now 4750mm.

· We have attached a proposed Community Access Plan 20.2 which reflects the above and in addition provides for the following: Community Accessible Garden along Coachwood Court 151m2 Forecourt Deck 173m2 Landscaped Forecourt 326m2 Total Community accessible area on our site 650m2 Community accessible area as relates to site area 16.25% Community accessible area to building footprint 60.35%

· I have also attached a letter from AWS who are highly experienced in OSSMS in remote areas all over Australia. They endorse the system as designed.

A full set of the amended plans are found in Attachment 1 and an extract of the amended site plan is provided in Figure 1 below.

4. Section 4.15 Considerations

The previous assessment of DA 10.2021.114.1 carried out as published in Report No 13.11 - PLANNING - 10.2021.114.1 - ‘Fed Sheds’ Light Industry Excluding Artisan Food & Drink Premises at 467 Federal Drive, Federal at the Council (Planning) Meeting of 11 August 2022 remains valid and relevant for the development, with the following additional comments provide below.

Figure 1. Amended Site Plan/Proposed Community Access

Environmental Planning Instruments

The proposed amendments to the design raise no planning issues against the relevant environmental planning instruments including Byron LEP 2014.

Byron DCP 2014

Chapter B3 Services

Stormwater

With regards to the revised design, this further reduced impervious surfaces and further improved stormwater runoff calculations. An amended stormwater management plan was submitted to reflect these changes. This was assessed by Council’s Development Engineer and the original wording in the recommended conditions of consent with regards to stormwater have been updated for consistency. It is considered that DA 10.2021.114.1 complies with what it must terms of the stormwater controls in accordance with Byron Shire Development Control Plan 2014 and Byron Shire Comprehensive Stormwater Guidelines, meeting the requirements for onsite detention and treatment prior to stormwater leaving the site and entering the stormwater system in Coachwood Court.

Onsite Sewage Management System

In terms of the onsite sewage management system the proposal is not the conventional household system designed as per Councils prescriptive measures under the DCP. Such a design generally relies upon evaporation from transpiration beds whereas the proposed design is for absorption under the car park area with high degree of treatment in terms of managing phosphorous and nutrients.

Council commissioned an independent peer review of the proposed OSMS, undertaken by Helen Tunks of HMC Environmental Consulting (See attachment 3). The findings of this peer review concluded that the proposal is satisfactory, as follows

Overall, the concept of the absorption based effluent drainage cell is sound with very conservative design factors and sufficient protection from trade waste and stormwater impacts. The site and soil assessment adequately addressed the relevant issues including impact on groundwater and surrounding properties. Based on the information presented above, the OSSM report by Greg Alderson & Associates (Revision E, 9/12/2021) is supported. I concur with the findings of the peer review by Whitehead & Associates (10/1/2022).

The independent peer review also considered other matters separate to the OSMS design that affect site feasibility, including Hydraulic Loading/Wastewater Flow Allowance, Water Balance/Soil Loading, Trade Waste, Stormwater. These matters were raised to the extent it is applicable to the OSMS design. The independent review also provided suggested wording for conditions of consent to provide for a primary point of collection for Trade Waste to overcome any concerns that this would be managed on an ad-hoc basis by future tenants (if any Trade Waste was in fact required).

In conclusion it is considered that the site including the soils is capable of managing effluent onsite. The system is appropriate for the industrial development as proposed in terms of the objectives under this design element in the DCP.

Chapter B4 Traffic Planning, Vehicle Parking, Circulation and Access

Further assessment, by Council’s Development Engineer considered the amended plans with regards to parking, access, manoeuvring, and loading and the proposal is supported, subject to amended conditions of consent. The amended proposal removed three car parking spaces. The development generates a need for 16 spaces with 19 provided plus 4 motor bike spaces and bike racks. The proposal as amended, complies with Councils requirements for parking.

Chapter E6 Federal Village

The proposal in response to concerns raised by the community in terms of the development’s context with the Village Hall and Church increased the setback of Building B from Federal Drive enabling the area to be landscaped and more inviting to the public. Building B has also been lowered in terms of its height above natural ground level and now sits well within the 9 metre height limit as there was an issue raised that its height somehow took away from the importance of the Community facilities opposite. It is considered the proposal, is compatible with the bulk, scale, and character of the village in terms of built form, landscaping, materials and setbacks to the street.

Environmental Impacts and Site Suitability

Council staff also investigated concerns raised that the development may impact on platypus habitat reported in the yard of a property at 20 Coachwood Court. Council can be satisfied that that the development will have no direct or indirect impacts on platypus habitat.

The pond is approximately 220 metres from the site and approximately 110 metres to the lawful point of discharge on Coachwood Court. Refer to Figure 2 below.

Council staff considered whether the development with stormwater run-off post detention/ treatment in accordance with Council’s design specifications would have any impact on the Platypus Habitat a couple of hundred metres downstream. Considering this pond is fed by rainwater/ stormwater runoff from all directions including a watercourse that directs water into the pond from the north, and looking at the size of the catchment, any additional stormwater run-off post development should not have an impact on platypus habitat. Figure 3 below indicates this catchment is likely to have an area of approximately 25 hectares.

Figure 2: Location of pond

Council staff also considered if the development with the proposed OSMS would impact on the platypus habitat. If the OSMS is constructed in accordance with what’s proposed and regularly maintained like all OSMS should be, the proposal should not have an impact on the platypus habitat.

It is considered the site is suitable for the proposed development and appropriate conditions of consent are recommended in relation to the construction of the development and for the operation of the Federal Shed to mitigate and manage any potential impacts that could arise once the buildings are occupied. This includes hours of operation, lighting, limitations on the type of future uses, noise management and the like.

Figure 3. Catchment area of the pond

Additional Matters raised by the Community

Other matters raised by the community are noted, particularly those that relate to procedures for development assessment and relevant matters for consideration. All development assessment procedures, which Council must follow at all times in accordance with NSW planning legislation (namely Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Regulation) have been undertaken, as required.

For example, cost of works for the purposes of lodging a DA are calculated at the time the DA was submitted and fees calculated accordingly in accordance with the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, not at the time the DA is approved.

Other concerns raised by the Federal community were either already assessed and addressed under the original DA report to Council or by way of recommended conditions of consent.

Masterplan Integration

The proposal has also been designed to integrate with the Federal Masterplan in terms of upgrading Federal Drive. If approved the applicant will be required to construct a footpath for the frontage of the site with a ramp to facilitate pedestrians crossing the road and widen the road with parallel parking across the frontage of the site. This provides a saving to the ratepayers of the Shire whilst also improving the public amenity of the street in terms pedestrian and parking accessibility.

Public Interest

As originally assessed the proposal is unlikely to prejudice or compromise the public interest or create an undesirable precedent.

5. Part 3 of Resolution 22- 374

That Infrastructure Services staff assess the drainage system in Coachwood Court in the next 4 weeks.

Council Infrastructure Service Staff have carried out an assessment of the drainage system in Coachwood Court including a site inspection of the system. It is a mix of overland swales and surface inlet pits that convey stormwater flows to the discharge location. Such stormwater includes overland flows from the broader catchment as well as hard stand areas (e.g., roof, driveway, road runoff). The system is considered atypical for a village in the Shire and would have been designed to the standards of the day as the village developed.

In normal rain events the system will cater for minor flows but in heavy rainfall like the 2022 flood events and or heavy short downpours (e.g. thunderstorms) the system will fail to cope. This is not unusual for many of the older urban and village areas in Byron Shire.

Infrastructure Services over the next 12-24 months (following a successful NSW Government Grant) will be assessing all drainage infrastructure across the Shire to identify critical problem areas to be prioritised for future capital works project based on available Council budgets.

6. Conclusion

It is considered the proposed Development Application satisfactorily addresses Council’s planning controls and is suitable for the site. The proposed amendment to the plans improves the development in terms of its context with the Village Hall and Church and the application is recommended for approval.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.13

Report No. 13.13 PLANNING - 10.2022.165.1 Change of Use of Storage Area in The Basement of Level 1 to Restaurant at 139 Jonson Street BYRON BAY

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Chris Larkin, Manager Sustainable Development

File No: I2022/1688

Proposal:

DA No:	10.2022.165.1
NSW PP	PAN-215680
Proposal description:	Change of Use of Storage Area in Basement of Level 1 to Restaurant at 139 Jonson Street, Byron Bay
Property description:	LOT: 29 DP: 1270920
	139 Jonson Street, BYRON BAY
Parcel No/s:	270510
Applicant:	JD Property Group Pty Ltd
Owner:	JD Property Group Pty Ltd
Zoning:	B2 Local Centre
Date received:	22 April 2022
Integrated / Designated Development:	☐ Integrated	☐ Designated	☒ Not applicable
Concurrence required	No
Public notification or exhibition:	- Level 2 advertising under Council’s Community Participation Plan. - Exhibition period: 4 – 17 May 2022 - Submissions received: Thirteen (13)
Variation request to Development Standards under an EPI	Clause 4.6 Variation to the Floor Space Ratio
Estimated cost	$257,763.00
Issues	· Further variation to the floor space ratio (FSR) controls being sought.

Summary:

The DA proposes a Change of Use of the Storage Area in the Basement of Level 1 to a Restaurant and provision of an additional three car parking spaces in Level 2. The subject development is located on the property known as “Jonson Lane” which is located on the corner of Jonson Street and Browning Street in Byron Bay. The development has been approved with a floor space ratio exceeding the 1.3:1 by 10.2%. The proposed restaurant will result in a further increase in floor area by 159 m² resulting in a floor space ratio (FSR) of 1.488:1, representing a 14.5% variation.

The applicants have submitted a Section 4.6 variation to further vary the FSR ratio for the development. In support of the proposed variation, the restaurant is located below ground, adds no further bulk, scale, or height to the development as approved.

The proposal is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood considering its location and is consistent with the objectives of the B2 Business zone by value adding to the development which has limited commercial purpose at present. Further, the proposal may result in an interesting food and drink premise being subterranean offering a different experience to other venues in Byron Bay.

This proposal in terms of its commercial context has merit for the reasons outlined in the report and on review of the applicants Clause 4.6 variation, the development application is recommended for approval subject to conditions of consent.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

RECOMMENDATION:

That Pursuant to Section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Development Application No. 10.2022.165.1 for Change of Use of Storage Area in Basement of Level 1 to Restaurant, be approved subject to the conditions of consent in Attachment 2 (#E2022/118594).

Attachments:

1 DA10.2022.165.1 Proposed Plans, E2022/112338

2 DA10.2022.165.1 Conditions of Consent, E2022/118594

3 Confidential - DA10.2022.165.1 Submissions, E2022/112344

4 DA10.2022.165.1 Clause 4.6 variation request, E2022/113800

Assessment:

INTRODUCTION

History/Background

The following development approval history is noted:

DA 10.2017.510.1	Mixed use development comprising demolition of all existing structures, removal of vegetation and construction of commercial premises, cafe, childcare centre, shop top housing, serviced apartments and associated basement car parking and landscaping.	Refused (NRPP) 14/11/2018
DA 10.2019.616.1	Demolition of Existing Buildings and Construction of Mixed-Use Development	Approved 21/05/2020
DA10.2019.616.2	Modify design of basement car park; raise ground floor level by 300mm; extend lift to provide roof access; modify roof to reduce thickness; and minor internal modifications	Approved 19/11/2020
DA 10.2019.616.3	Modify design to include roof top pool and facilities	Approved
DA 10.2019.616.4	Modify design for the layout and uses of approved retail shops and gym and alter design of internal courtyard	Approved 5/1/22
DA 10.2019.616.5	Alter hours of operation of gym, modify services, ducting and roof top toilet	Approved 8/9/22
DA 10.2022.146.1	Two lot stratum subdivision – to separate residential uses from commercial uses	Approved 11/10/22

Description of the proposed development

This application seeks approval to Change the Use of Storage Area in the Basement of Level 1 to Restaurant (see Figure 1) and to reconfigure a Storage Area in the Basement of Level 2 to create three (3) additional car parking spaces.

Figure 1. Basement 1 Plan – Showing location of new restaurant (highlighted yellow)

Figure 2. Location of proposed restaurant in the Basement

The restaurant has a floor area of approximately 159 m² and is proposed to be open between the hours of 5pm and midnight seven days a week. The restaurant will have a maximum capacity of 80 patrons and employ up to 8 staff.

Description of the site

Property	137-138 Jonson Street, Byron Bay Lot 29 DP 1270920
Area:	2,835m²
Land is zoned:	B2 Local Centre
Property is constrained by:	Acid Sulfate Soils (Class 5)

The property is located at the southern fringe of the Byron Bay Town Centre. It is zoned B2 Local Centre, as is land immediately north and on the opposite side of Jonson Street. Land on the eastern side of Ruskin Lane is zoned R2 Low Density Residential. (See Figure 3 below).

Land in the vicinity of the property on the eastern side of Jonson Street is largely residential in nature with a two-storey dwelling neighbouring the property to the north.

Figure 3. Image of the Jonson Lane Building from the street

On the opposite side of Jonson Street, land uses comprise of ground floor shops and commercial with shop-top housing. The recently completed Byron Bypass roundabout is located at the front of the property, at the Jonson/ Browning Streets intersection, and Council has approved the Harris Farm Development to the south west in the old Wicked Weasel Factory building.

Figure 4. Aerial photo with land zoning overlay (property highlighted)

SUMMARY OF REFERRALS

Referral	Issue
Environmental Health Officer	No objections subject to conditions.
Development Engineer	Insufficient parking – See comments under DCP 2014.
Building Surveyor	No objections subject to conditions.
S64 / Systems Planning Officer	No objections subject to conditions.

State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPP)

Consolidated SEPPs 2021

Considerations	Satisfactory	Unsatisfactory
Transport and Infrastructure SEPP 2021 Consideration: The subject property has frontage to a classified road however no changes to vehicular access are proposed and the development is not sensitive to traffic noise and emissions being in the basement (cl.2.119). The proposed restaurant is below the threshold that would require the proposal to be considered as “traffic-generating development” (cl.2.122).	☒	☐

Considerations

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Transport and Infrastructure SEPP 2021

Consideration:

The subject property has frontage to a classified road however no changes to vehicular access are proposed and the development is not sensitive to traffic noise and emissions being in the basement (cl.2.119).

The proposed restaurant is below the threshold that would require the proposal to be considered as “traffic-generating development” (cl.2.122).

☒

☐

Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 (LEP 2014)

In accordance with LEP 2014 clauses 1.4 and 2.1 – 2.3:

(a) The proposed development is defined in the LEP 2014 Dictionary as “restaurant or café” being a category of “food and drink premises” being a category of “retail premises” being a category of “commercial premises”;

(b) The land is within the B2 Local Centre Zone;

(d) Regard is had for the Zone Objectives as follows:

Zone Objective – B2

Consideration

• To provide a range of retail, business, entertainment and community uses that serve the needs of people who live in, work in and visit the local area.

• To encourage employment opportunities in accessible locations.

• To maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

• To encourage vibrant centres by allowing residential and tourist and visitor accommodation above commercial premises.

The proposed basement restaurant is consistent with the zone objectives to provide a range of retail uses. Operation of the restaurant will provide employment opportunities and will add further to town centres vibrancy.

Clause 4.4 Floor space ratio

The applicable floor space ratio (FSR) for the property is 1.3:1. The proposal will add a further 159 m² of floor area to the development resulting in a floor space ratio of 1.488:1. The applicants have submitted a Section 4.6 Variation to further amend the development standard as discussed below.

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to Development Standards

The restaurant will result in a further increase in floor area by 159 m2 resulting in a floor space ratio (FSR) of 1.488:1 in an area of Byron Bay where the floor space ratio controls for the property are set at 1.3:1. The development already has a floor space ratio of 1.432:1. enjoying a 10.2% variation from previous approvals granted by council.

The applicants have submitted a Section 4.6 variation to further vary the FSR ratio for the development (see attachment 4 for details ) with the following reasons being provided:

Council, in assessing variations under Clause 4.6, must consider the following:

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

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

In this instance the proposal will have minimal impacts on the environment and in particular the built environment through the use of this space as a restaurant. The reasons for this are provided below:

· The restaurant is located below ground;

· Adds no further bulk, scale or height to the development as approved;

· Is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood considering its location;

· Is consistent with the objectives of the B2 Business zone by value adding to the development and utilising part of the site which has limited commercial purpose at present; and

· The proposal will result in an interesting food and drink premise being subterranean offering a different experience to other venues in Byron Bay.

As such and having regards to the commercial context and zoning of this property, it is considered there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to vary the development standard and that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. A variation to the floor space ratio is supported in this instance.

Clause 5.21 Flooding

The subject site is not identified as being prone to flooding on Council’s mapping, and the provisions of this clause do not apply.

Clause 6.6 Services

The subject property is adequately serviced with all necessary infrastructure to cater for the proposed restaurant. Conditions of consent would apply in terms of additional headworks charges for water and sewer infrastructure.

Clause 6.13 Design Excellence – Byron Bay Town Centre

The subject property is identified on the design Excellence Map for the Byron Bay town Centre. The proposal raises no issues under the clause being a DA for the use of an existing part of the building and construction work limited to internal fitout.

Clause 6.14 Active Street Frontages in Byron Bay Town Centre

The subject property is identified under this clause. The proposed subterranean restaurant provides no additional opportunities to present to the street. Access however is via the central courtyard area which brings customers into the development from the Corner of Jonson and Browning Street. It is considered access to the development is satisfactory in terms of this clause.

Any proposed Instrument that has been the subject of public consultation and has been notified to the consent authority

No draft environmental planning instruments affect the proposed development.

Byron Shire Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP 2014)

Chapter B4 - Traffic Planning, Vehicle Parking, Circulation and Access

The proposed basement restaurant has a floor area of 159m² which generates a need for 8 additional car parking spaces (1 space per 20m² GFA). The proposal includes a further 3 spaces on the lower-level basement for parking and also includes car share space and additional motor bike spaces.

The development as proposed will have a total of 119 car parking spaces but remains 5 spaces short. The proposal is not supported by Council’s Development Engineer due to the shortfall in this instance. Further, the car share space is of little benefit for the proposal as opposed to a tourist and visitor accommodation development whereby a car share is available for guests staying at the hotel/ motel/resort, whilst the development already includes a sufficient number of motor bike spaces.

Notwithstanding the above, a number of retail uses on the site operate during the day only and are closed by 6 pm. In this regard the applicant has submitted further detail to justify the parking onsite and notes that Tenancies G.O2, G.O3 and G.O4 have a combined floor area of 305.m² and have 15.2 spaces allocated to them combined based on the car parking rate of 1 space per 20 m².

Further, the Gym Yoga facility in Tenancies G.01B with an area of 231 m² also has some 11.5 spaces allocated to it. Once closed, these tenancies actually free up these spaces for other uses. There appears to be no specific conditions of consent for the retail tenancies regarding operating hours, but the gym is conditioned under DA10.2019.616.5 to operate as follows:

· Monday to Friday Saturday, from 7am to 7pm.

· Sunday (and public holidays) from 8am to 4pm.

Figure 5. Retail Shops and Gym on the ground level

The applicants have submitted the retail tenancies are closed by 6 pm and would be happy for a condition of consent to be imposed limiting there hours to the following:

· Monday to Saturday 7am to 6pm

· Sundays 10am to 4pm.

Although there is some crossover between the proposed restaurant opening and the closing of the retail shops and the Gym, it would be highly unlikely that all 5 tenancies are operating at 100% capacity in terms of car parking utilisation. Having regards to the quantum of parking provided for this development overall it is submitted that this is satisfactory to cater for the (numerical) shortfall of 5 spaces. Conditions of consent are to apply for the operating hours of the restaurant and the abovementioned retail premises.

B8 - Waste Minimisation and Management

The proposed restaurant will generate additional waste. The development site includes a large garbage storage area and collection area at ground level and accessible from the rear lane for the standard garage truck operating in Byron Shire. It is considered this is adequate for the proposed development and for the additional waste that is generated the restaurant.

Figure 6. Bin storage and loading area of Ruskin Lane

Chapter D4 Commercial and Retail Development

As no changes to the building form and/or external appearance are proposed, many of the criteria under Chapter D4 are not relevant to this proposal. Notwithstanding this, the applicant has submitted a management plan which is to be utilised for all the food and drink premises within this development to provide guidance to tenants in terms of limiting or minimising the likelihood of amenity impacts on the site residents and the neighbourhood.

The plan has been based on the DCP provisions under D4.2.10 and adequately addresses the criteria managing complaints, measures to limit noise impacts, staffing, security servicing of alcohol, patron behaviour and the like. The proposal is considered satisfactory subject to conditions of consent in terms of hours of operation, noise management, and patron numbers.

E10 - Byron Bay Town Centre

The proposal raises no issues under Chapter E10 of DCP 2014, considering the restaurant is located below ground level and has no impact on the appearance of the development to the street or the public domain areas.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 considerations

	Applicable to the proposal:	Considered the control as it relates to the proposal:	If this control is applicable, does the proposal comply?
Section 61 - Additional matters that consent authority must consider	☐ Yes ☒ No	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA
Section 62 - Consideration of fire safety	☐ Yes ☒ No	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA
Section 64 - Consent authority may require upgrade of buildings	☐ Yes ☒ No	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA
Section 63 - Considerations for erection of temporary structures	☐ Yes ☒ No	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA	☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ NA

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

Impact on:	Likely significant impact/s?
Natural environment	The proposal will not have a significantly adverse impact on the natural environment of the locality.
Built environment	Potential for impacts on the built environment exist primarily from noise from the restaurant. However, such impacts if generated will impact directly on residents within the facility itself and it is highly likely the development will be self-managed through the body corporate for the development. Notwithstanding conditions of consent to apply in terms of patron numbers, noise management and hours of operation.
Social Environment	The proposal will not have a significant social impact on the locality.
Economic impact	The proposal will utilise an existing area of the building that has no other commercial purpose at present providing a boutique food and drink premise being a restaurant. The proposal will generate additional economic impacts by way of employment in the hospitality sector on an ongoing basis and short term impacts through the fit out of the restaurant.
Construction Impacts	The development will generate minor impacts during its construction. Conditions of consent recommended to control hours of work, builders waste, construction noise, installation of sedimentation and erosion control measures and the like to ameliorate such impacts.

The suitability of the site for the development

The site is considered suitable for the proposed development subject to conditions of consent.

Submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations

The development application was publicly exhibited

There were thirteen (13) submissions made on the development application:

- twelve (12) in support

- one (1) in objection

Most submissions in support were received from nearby business owners and/or investors in the development on the property.

Key matters raised in submissions	Consideration
Underground restaurant will provide something unique	Noted
Opening of the restaurant from 5:00pm will reduce parking issues	Noted – Conditions to apply
Insufficient information on hours of operation	Hours of operation are specified in the SEE as 5pm – midnight daily Conditions to apply

Public interest

There remains a risk that this application could be perceived by the development sector as a means to manoeuvre around Council’s planning controls. Such applications like the proposal will need to be considered on a case by case basis and it should not be viewed as the controls being abandoned by Council.

In the circumstances the proposal is considered to have merit and the proposed restaurant is unlikely to prejudice or compromise the public interest or create an undesirable precedent.

DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

Water & Sewer Levies

Section 64 levies will be payable.

Developer Contributions

Section 7.12 Contributions will be payable.

DISCLOSURE OF POLITICAL DONATIONS AND GIFTS

Disclosure details

Response

Has a Disclosure Statement been received in relation to this application?

If Yes, Provide Disclosure Statement register reference: 91.

Yes ☐ No ☒

Have staff received a ‘gift’ from anyone involved in this application that needs to be disclosed.

Yes ☐ No ☒

CONCLUSION

The proposed restaurant is satisfactory having regard to the relevant environmental planning instruments and planning controls applicable to the site. The restaurant will result in a further increase of floor space ratio, however for the reasons as outlined in this report a variation to the floor space ratio is supported and the application is recommended for approval subject to Conditions of Consent.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.14

Report No. 13.14 Proposed Wildlife Protection Area - ‘Old New Brighton Road, Ocean Shores’

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Sarah Nagel, Manager Public and Environmental Services

File No: I2022/1539

Summary:

Council resolved to create a ‘Dogs in Public Spaces Strategy’ (DiPS) that reflects a balanced policy approach to this issue.

A draft DiPS was placed on public exhibition for 6 weeks.

During that process, six submissions identified ‘Old New Brighton Road, Ocean Shores’ as a proposed Wildlife Protection Area.

This report therefore seeks Council endorsement for the public exhibition of a proposed Wildlife Protection Area on the area known as ‘Old New Brighton Road’, Ocean Shores.

Council may declare a location as a Wildlife Protection Area pursuant to the Companion Animals Act, following a period of public exhibition to allow for community feedback.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Endorses the public exhibition of a proposed Wildlife Protection Area on the area known as ‘Old New Brighton Road, Ocean Shores’ for a minimum 6 weeks to allow for community feedback and submissions.

2. Receives a submissions report following the public exhibition referred to in point 1.

Report

Council resolved via 18-362 that a ‘Dogs in Public Spaces Strategy’ (DiPS) be prepared instead of a revised Companion Animal Exercise Area Policy: Minutes of Ordinary Meeting - 21 June 2018 that reflects a balanced policy approach to the use of public spaces in the Shire.

The progress of DiPS was noted in Resolution 22-208:Minutes of Ordinary Meeting - Thursday, 26 May 2022 and Resolution 22-420: Minutes of Ordinary Meeting - Thursday, 25 August 2022 (infocouncil.biz)

A draft DiPS was prepared which aims to consider the needs of dog owners, as well as members of the public, who all use and enjoy these spaces. The draft builds on feedback received from the community about improving dog exercise areas in the Shire whilst also balancing dogs with the environment.

Council resolved that the DiPS be placed on public exhibition for a minimum of 6 weeks to allow for community feedback and submissions. During that process, the following location was identified by six submissions as being suitable of being declared as a Wildlife Protection Area. One of those submissions was a formal submission from National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS).

The DiPS submission report is on this Council meeting agenda as a separate report.

Proposed Area

The area known as ‘Old New Brighton Road, Ocean Shores’, is a small section of Billinudgel Nature Reserve between Kolora Way and Brunswick Valley Way in North Ocean Shores. The former road is managed by Council as a shared cycle and pedestrian path. The area is surrounded on both sides by Marshalls Creek Nature Reserve.

National Parks and Wildlife Submission

Old New Brighton Road bisects Marshalls Creek Nature Reserve, and this secluded area has a historic problem with compliance.

Koalas used to frequent the area. Sightings have dwindled as the population declines due to habitat loss, bushfires, vehicle collision, disease and the impact of dogs (scent, noise and predation).

Two thirds of this section of path and surrounding NPWS estate was mapped by Council as Primary koala habitat. The remainder is Secondary koala habitat (Byron Coast Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management 2016).

Koalas in this area are part of the ‘Endangered Koala Population between the Tweed and Brunswick Rivers east of the Pacific Highway’ (Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016). Koalas are listed as Endangered at the State level (Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016) and National level (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999).

Many other native animals including swamp wallabies, bandicoots and ground-feeding rainforest pigeons also use this area.

As in all public spaces where dogs are permitted, but which are not designated as off-lead areas, dogs must always be leashed. However, for many years people have let their dogs off-lead in this area. Anecdotal evidence suggests that non-compliance is increasing. The off-lead dogs often leave the Council path and roam into the surrounding forest, which is NPWS estate. Old New Brighton Road seems to have become an unofficial off-lead area. Even when dog walkers do keep their dogs leashed, the scent and sounds of dogs will affect feeding and breeding behaviours of wildlife in this area, including key species such as koalas.

Recommendation

To protect koalas and other native fauna, NPWS strongly recommends that Council designates the section of Old New Brighton Road, North Ocean Shores, that is surrounded on both sides by NPWS estate as a dog prohibited area. NPWS is willing to work with Council on a communication Strategy, signage and compliance to introduce and manage the new dog prohibited area.

Wildlife Protection Areas

Section 14(1) of the Companion Animals Act specifies that dogs are prohibited in the following places…(h) Wildlife Protection Areas (meaning any public place or any part of a public place set apart by the local authority for the protection of wildlife and in which the local authority has ordered that dogs are prohibited for the purposes of the protection of wildlife and in which, or near the boundaries of which, there are conspicuously exhibited by the local authority at reasonable intervals notices to the effect that dogs are prohibited in or on that public place).

Council may declare a location as a Wildlife Protection Area pursuant to the Companion Animals Act, following a period of public exhibition to allow for community feedback.

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action	Code	OP Activity
2: Inclusive Community We have an inclusive and active community where diversity is embraced and everyone is valued	2.2: Enhance safety and contribute to the physical, mental, and spiritual health and well being of our people	2.2.4: Companion animals - Promote awareness of the requirements of the Companion Animals Act with respect to the ownership of companion animals	2.2.4.4	Develop Dogs in Public Space Strategy

Recent Resolutions

· Resolution 18-362

· Resolution 20-727

· Resolution 22-208

· Resolution 22-420

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

· Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016

· Companion Animals Act 1998

· Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

· Byron Coast Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management 2016

Financial Considerations

None relevant to the report.

Consultation and Engagement

Public consultation and engagement have been undertaken via the DiPS public exhibition process.

A submission was received from National Parks and Wildlife Services and is outlined in this report.

The Wildlife Protection Area proposal be placed on public exhibition for a minimum of 6 weeks to allow for community feedback and submissions.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.16

Report No. 13.16 Former Mullumbimby Hospital - Land Use and Development Planning Update

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Andrew FitzGibbon, Place Planning Coordinator

Isabelle Hawton, Place Liaison Officer

Kristie Hughes, Planning Projects Officer

File No: I2022/1640

Summary:

This report provides an update on the land use and development planning for the former Mullumbimby Hospital site (1 Azalea Street, Mullumbimby). It focuses on the future of the vacant land (not the aged care facility).

A community feedback period has just been completed regarding the vision, objectives and urban design principles for the site as presented in the draft Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol (SSUDP).

The draft SSUDP was developed by Council and relied heavily on the endorsed recommendations by the Mullumbimby Hospital Project Reference Group in 2018.

There was strong interest from the community during the draft SSUDP feedback period with 41 submissions received. This provided a good basis for updating the document (refer Attachment 1) and as input for the next steps of the project.

It is recommended that the SSUDP be used as a guiding document for the project moving forward, and that Council moves ahead with the concept masterplan/feasibility work and statutory planning amendment process as outlined in this report.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. thanks all community members who gave feedback during the consultation period on the draft Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol.

2. notes that submissions have been used to improve the exhibited document and will be used as inputs into future planning and design stages.

3. endorses the revised Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol (refer Attachment 1 #E2022/113329) for the former Mullumbimby Hospital site to be used as a guiding document for the project.

4. requests staff to prepare a draft planning proposal informed by the Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol and any required Baseline Studies and Advice and report this to Council for consideration prior to seeking a gateway determination.

5. requests staff to arrange an Enquiry by Design process (inclusive of community, industry and Councillor engagement) to underpin Concept Masterplan and Development Control Plan drafting.

6. requests staff to report the Concept Masterplan, Development Control Plan, and associated development options to Council.

Attachments:

1 Former Mullumbimby Hospital Site Strategy Urban Design Protocol (SSUDP) - Nov 2022, E2022/113329

2 Former Mullumbimby Hospital - Combined Submissions Redacted, E2022/112685

3 Former Mullumbimby Hospital SSUDP - Submissions Review, E2022/113067

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

Report

The former Mullumbimby Hospital Site (1 Azalea Street, Mullumbimby) is a 4.4ha parcel of Council owned land located near the centre of town and close to regional schools and services. It is rare flood-free land in Mullumbimby that has the potential to deliver much needed housing, community facilities and services.

A draft Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol (SSUDP) was prepared that defines the vision, objectives and urban design principles for the site. This document relies heavily on the work and process previously undertaken by the Mullumbimby Hospital Project Reference Group.

The SSUDP provides an outline for the project and guides the next stages of the project being:

1) concept master planning and feasibility to inform a development plan

2) statutory planning process to amend the Byron Local Environmental Plan 2014 (LEP) and Byron Development Control Plan 2014 (DCP)

A community feedback period has just been completed regarding the draft SSUDP (as per Resolution 22-571 from 27 October 2022 Council Meeting).

There was strong interest from the community during the feedback period with 41 submissions received. This provided a good basis for updating the SSUDP and for the next steps of the project.

A revised SSUDP is provided at Attachment 1. This has been updated to reflect feedback provided during the consultation period.

Map showing the site in red and the broader context including surrounding residential communities, community facilities and the town centre.

Description automatically generated

Consultation feedback

A community feedback period has recently been completed regarding the draft SSUDP (as per Resolution 22-571 from 27 October 2022 Council Meeting).

A full compilation of feedback is provided at Attachment 2. A categorisation of the feedback and responses is provided at Attachment 3.

Key feedback received is summarised below:

· Seeking Council to recognise the significant financial value of the site and looking to capture ongoing revenue through the development.

· Noting importance of connecting with local indigenous representatives at multiple project stages.

· Support for the provision of more dwellings and more affordable dwellings that caters for a range of people (e.g. ageing population, key workers, local indigenous community, people living with a disability, low-moderate income workers, local creatives and artists).

· Seeking more community and public space in the concept with a number of submissions wanting the provision of arts and cultural facilities.

· Requests for a greater focus on creating a vibrant, mixed-use precinct – not a suburban neighbourhood.

· Seeking better recognition of the history of the site and the need to be responsive to this in the planning and design.

· Wanting more details on housing typologies, form and density.

· Wanting more emphasis on sustainability.

· Concerns about ability of existing road infrastructure to support increased demand.

· Concerns about the impact on flora and fauna on the site.

There were also three requests to add some adjoining large-lot residential properties to the planning proposal process. This land is part of the Left Bank Road R5 Large Lot Residential area. In June 2022, Council resolved to progress Rural Land Use Strategy action 21 to investigate the capacity for re-subdivision of large lot residential areas. A separate report to the 8 December 2022 Council Planning meeting outlined a program for this work to align with the Residential Strategy refresh. This will facilitate an open and transparent consideration of options and issues such as infrastructure capacity. Another consideration will be the suitability for an affordable housing contribution scheme to be applied on possible land value uplifts resulting from an urban residential zoning and or further subdivision/densification.

Thirty-five (35) respondents used the Your Say survey form to provide their feedback. The survey asked specific questions in relation to the vision statement, project goals, land use, and building heights. Results are as follows.

Survey Questions	Yes	Somewhat	No
Do you agree with the vision statement?	17 (49%)	15 (43%)	3 (8%)
Do you agree with the project goals?	17 (49%)	15 (43%)	3 (8%)
Do you agree with the proposed land uses?	17 (49%)	13 (37%)	5 (14%)
Do you agree with the proposed building height?	17 (49%)	7 (20%)	11 (31%)

Almost 50% of respondents agreed with these provisions. Between 8-14% disagreed with the vision statement, project goals and land uses. However, there were 11 people (31%) that disagreed with the proposed building height.

Revised Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol

A revised SSUDP is provided at Attachment 1. This has been updated to reflect feedback provided during the consultation period as responded to in Attachment 3.

Many of the points raised will only be able to be addressed/considered during the concept master planning stage. As such, it is recommended that these submissions be used as inputs at appropriate next stages.

The survey results are considered sufficiently supportive to proceed with the proposed land uses and building heights as a basis for further investigation. Noting that this report recommends undertaking further analysis before reporting back a draft planning proposal for consideration prior to seeking a gateway determination.

Next Steps

The following program is an estimate only and may be accelerated or delayed depending on funding, staff resourcing and other operational priorities.

STAGE	ESTIMATE
Stage 1 – Project Outline	2022
Review Community Project Reference Group recommendations Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol (incl. community feedback) Dependencies: Site Auditor Remediation Signoff	By End 2022
Stage 2 – Feasibility and Planning	2023
Baseline Planning and Advice · Country Advice: Input from Arakwal and Byron Tweed LALC · Commercial Advice: Community/Economic Needs; Property; Financing; Housing Models etc. · Planning Studies: Traffic; Ecology; Heritage; Servicing; Stormwater; Contamination; Bushfire; Geotechnical, Built form bulk and scale	Jan – May 2023
Development Plan · Concept Masterplan developed with community engagement · Development Options – staging and subdivision concepts · Feasibility Assessment · Financing Strategy	May – Aug 2023
LEP and DCP Updates – Drafting and Processing · Planning Proposal lodgement, assessment, and refining · Development Control Plan drafting	May – Aug 2023
LEP and DCP Updates – Consultation and Finalisation · Includes community consultation of LEP and DCP proposed amendments	Sep – Dec 2023
Stage 3 – Implementing the agreed Development Plan	2024-2025

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action	Code	OP Activity
4: Ethical Growth We manage growth and change responsibly	4.1: Manage responsible development through effective place and space planning	4.1.3: Town / Village Masterplans - Develop, implement and update Place Plans that promote place-based forward planning strategies and actions	4.1.3.7	Amend Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan in accordance with Mullumbimby Hospital Precinct Plan

Recent Resolutions

· Resolution 18-721 (22 November 2018) Mullumbimby Hospital Site Project Reference Group Recommendations: future use of the site

· Resolution 22-571 (27 October 2022) Endorsement to exhibit Draft Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Financial Considerations

The work recommended for endorsement in this report is for the bulk of ‘Stage 2 – Feasibility and Planning’ as per the Next Steps section earlier. A budget of $250,000 has been estimated by staff for this stage.

Council has applied for a $250,000 grant under the NSW Regional Housing Strategic Planning Fund to support this work. A decision on this grant is scheduled to be made by the end of 2022.

If the funding grant doesn’t eventuate, then Council will look to alternate resource and funding options both internal and external to council including support from the NRRC and DPIE.

Consultation and Engagement

Consultation on the Draft Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol

The community feedback period of the draft Site Strategy and Urban Design Protocol was formally from 28 October to 14 November 2022.

We promoted this feedback period by:

· public notice on council website

· advertisement in the echo

· email notification to relevant community and business groups

· email notification to previous members of the PRG and to the Mullumbimby Hospital Action Group

· local social media posts

· seeking input from the Tweed Byron Local Aboriginal Land Council

· media release

· interview with ABC radio

We heard directly from people via:

· drop-in session at Council offices on 9 November 2022 3-6pm (approximately ten people attended)

· multiple one-on-one meetings with community members and local professionals

· multiple phone calls with community members

· presentation to the Housing and Affordability Advisory Committee (17 November 2022)

· presentation to the Place Planning Collective Mullumbimby representatives (31 November 2022)

· discussion with the Department of Planning and Environment

· Your Say form to gather written feedback – as discussed in the body of the report

Consultation proposed in the next stage

As per the Next Steps section of this report, there will be two major stages of further community consultation in 2023. This will be: 1) as part of the development of a Concept Masterplan, and 2) when the draft LEP and DCP amendments are exhibited.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.17

Report No. 13.17 Update Resolution 22-595 - State Imposed land use planning changes for Agritourism and Implications for Council

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Shannon Burt, Director Sustainable Environment and Economy

Alex Caras, Land Use Plannning Coordinator

Sam Tarrant, Planner

File No: I2022/1672

Summary:

Council considered a Mayoral Minute No. 8.1 State imposed land use planning changes for agritourism at the Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Thursday, 27 October 2022 (infocouncil.biz) and resolved as follows:

Resolved 22-595 that Council:

1. Urgently and strongly confirms to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment, that Byron Shire Council:

a) ‘Opts out’ of the new provisions for agritourism and associated land uses until such time as we conduct our own review of where the provisions/ clauses could be appropriate;

b) Reaffirms its earlier resolutions 21-203 and 22-065;

c) Objects to the land use terms ‘Agritourism’, ‘Farm experience premises’ and ‘Farm gate premises’ and ‘Farm Stay accommodation’ being made permissible with consent anywhere in our LEPs at this stage;

2. Receives a short report as soon as practical on the agritourism related land use planning changes being considered/pursued by the NSW Government following a meeting with the DPE. (Lyon)

This report provides a response to item 2 of the resolution.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Urgently informs the NSW Government that Council insists that the new ‘Agritourism’, ‘Farm experience premises’ and ‘Farm gate premises’ land use terms be prohibited across all zones in the Byron LEP 2014, including in the RU1, RU2 and C3 zones.

2. Reminds the DPE of its many assurances via the Explanation of Intended Effect, statements on the Planning Portal and various emails that councils could “identify zones in which they wish to allow the new farm events and farm gate land uses”, and “councils could decide to amend their LEPs to prohibit these new uses in all zones.”

3. Strongly objects to the ambiguity and quasi mandating of ‘Agritourism’ and its sub terms as permissible with consent in the Byron LEP 2014 from 1 December 2022 and February 2023.

4. Strongly objects to the significant weakening of the development standards in the exempt and complying provisions that were exhibited in 2021 and have been amended and notified without any meaningful consultation with Council.

5. Notes Council’s strong disappointment with the lack of meaningful or transparent consultation with local constituents and communities, and the disregard for the LGNSW President Darriea Turley’s letter outlining serious concerns (dated Oct 13, 2022).

6. Should the NSW Government persist with effectively mandating ‘Agritourism’ in certain zones in Byron Shire:

a. Opt-in to the ‘Farm gate premises’ optional clause (only) for Byron LEP 2014;

b. Commence a review of the existing Byron LEP and DCP controls relevant to ‘Agritourism’ and ‘Farm stay accommodation’ and report back to Council on any consequential changes to these, in due course.

c. Strongly request a deferral from the commencement of the Agritourism Reforms until February 2024, to enable the preparation, exhibition and finalisation of local planning controls (as required), that will establish additional Byron Shire specific development standards for the range of agritourism land uses.

7. Requests that the NSW Government commit to:

a. Arranging public information sessions, as a matter of urgency, to explain the reforms to the public and interested communities; and

b. Depending on what eventuates, undertaking a 12-month review of the reforms to enable them to be refine, improve or adjust if needed or appropriate.

8. Sends a copy of this resolution to relevant local members of the NSW Parliament and relevant Ministers and Shadow Ministers.

Report

Background

In October 2022, the NSW Government notified a range of changes to legislation relating to Stage 1 of the Agritourism Reforms. Below are also links to the following relevant to the Reforms:

- Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Amendment (Agritourism) Order 2022

- State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) Amendment (Agritourism) 2022

- Environmental Planning and Assessment (Development Certification and Fire Safety) Amendment (Farm Stay Accommodation) Regulation 2022

- DPE Agritourism webpage Agritourism - (nsw.gov.au)

As a result, the new and amended terms to be inserted into LEPs under the guise of ‘Agritourism’ and other definitions include:

· ‘Farm gate premises’ – where visitors interact with produce from the farm, such as fruit picking, sales, tastings, workshops and cafes (type of agritourism)

· ‘Farm experience premises’ – where visitors can experience life on a farm including tours, horse riding, weddings, functions and retreats (type of agritourism)

· ‘Farm stay accommodation’ – including temporary accommodation in buildings or movable dwellings like tents, caravans. (type of tourist and visitor accommodation).

New planning pathways will allow these activities to happen with either fast-track approval (complying development) or no planning approval (exempt development) with development standards. If an activity doesn’t meet the standards for exempt or complying development, a development application may be able to be lodged in those zones that permit these uses.

The new land use terms are only to apply where the main use of the land is the production of agricultural goods for commercial purposes.

A key objective of the agritourism proposals is to ensure primary production remains the principal use of farmland. This includes by allowing agritourism only on a farm that is a primary production business under the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) or has been categorised as ‘farmland’ by the council under the Local Government Act 1993.

What this means is you must continue to have a commercial farm to run your agritourism business and the agritourism activities must be ancillary (secondary) to the farm.

Ostensibly this is the State Government’s safety net to ensure that perverse land use outcomes do not result from these reforms on rural lands that should otherwise not be used for Agritourism without a full and proper development assessment.

However, concerns remain with this approach and the development standards applied to enable these new land uses.

Stage 2 of the Agritourism reforms will see an amending SEPP made in February 2023.

Reform Stages explained

Stage 1 reforms commencing on 1 December 2022

• Amend the NSW Standard Instrument LEP to:

- Insert the new agritourism and related land use terms in the SI LEP dictionary — notably, ‘Agritourism’, and its sub terms (‘Farm experience premises’ and ‘Farm gate premises’).

- Introduce the new ‘Farm stay accommodation’ and ‘Farm gate premises’ optional clauses. These clauses remain optional and as such, Council has the opportunity to opt in or maintain its opt-out nomination.

- Make changes to the definition of ‘Farm stay accommodation’.

- Expand ‘development without consent’ opportunities for ‘Poultry farms’ and ‘Pig farms’.

• Amend State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 to:

- Make changes to the Interpretation section (i.e., dictionary) to reflect the new and amended definitions.

- Introduce savings provisions for complying development.

- Introduce an ‘exempt development’ pathway for the rebuilding of farm buildings damaged by natural disasters, agritourism signs, ‘Farm experience premises’, ‘Farm gate premises’, ‘Farm stay accommodation’ and ‘Roadside stalls’. These changes will apply to the RU1, RU2 and C3 zones in LEP 2014.

- Introduce a new Code, being the ‘Agritourism and Farm Stay Accommodation Code’ that provides a ‘complying development’ pathway for ‘Farm experience premises’, ‘Farm gate premises’ and ‘Farm stay accommodation’.

• Make consequential changes to the Housing SEPP, Primary Production SEPP and the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Development Certification and Fire Safety) Regulation 2021 in response to the Agritourism Reform changes.

Stage 2 reforms commencing February 2023

A new (amending) SEPP will include the following in councils LEPs:

· Agritourism permitted with consent where ‘agriculture’ is permitted with consent, in the RU1, RU2 (and RU4) zones.

· Agritourism permitted with consent in additional zones as nominated by councils

· The optional clauses as nominated by councils

Note: Updates to Byron LEP 2014 to include the new land uses and the optional clauses for ‘farm stay accommodation’ and ‘farm gate premises’ are intended to be made in February 2023 through an amending SEPP. Councils must complete and submit the council-endorsed nomination form to nominate additional zones or adopt the optional clauses by 23 Dec 2022.

Nomination process

As stated above, councils have been asked to:

o to nominate any additional zones for agritourism land uses to implement the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Amendment (Agritourism) Order 2022 (LEP Order)

o to nominate to adopt the revised optional clauses for farm stay accommodation and farm gate premises in the LEP Order if it has not previously nominated to adopt them.

Otherwise, it is proposed to permit agritourism (including farm gate premises and farm experience premises) as being permissible with consent as follows:

o where agriculture is permitted

o in the RU1, RU2 and RU4 zones, and

o in other zones as nominated by councils.

Farm stay accommodation is already a permissible land use in the RU1, RU2 and C3 zones, and clause 6.8 Rural and nature-based tourism development of the LEP 2014 applies to it. There are also provisions in DCP 2014 for this type of use. As such the optional clause is not needed for this use at this time.

Farm gate premises is a new land use term, and by State Government mandate the use will be permitted in the RU1, RU2 and C3 zones in LEP 2014 from 1 December. There are no existing provisions in the LEP 2014 or DCP 2014 that apply to this use. As such, Council needs to opt in by nomination for the optional clause for farm gate premises before 23 December to ensure that the clause is included in February 2023 without the need for a planning proposal.

It is not recommended that Council nominate any additional zones for these uses.

Key issues

· DPE Consultation – pathway changed during the process without consultation with councils and with significant implications

· We have worked with our community over several years to set up a Byron appropriate framework for the use of rural land underpinned by a Rural Land Use Strategy – this has the capacity to derail this good work and community confidence

· We have an Agricultural Cluster Group and adopted Agricultural Action Plan which has not been considered by the DPE - this has the capacity to derail this good work and community confidence

· Only Limited exclusions to these development pathways are being considered by DPE e.g., Hunter Water Drinking Catchment and the Mount Panaroma precinct

· The development standards relied upon are the result of a pilot program with a limited number of councils, none of which were on the north coast or in sensitive coastal locations – as such regional variations and needs have been ignored

· The changes to the Standard Instrument LEP and Byron LEP have substantial implications for Byron Shire, including undermining current endorsed policy positions for land uses like rural weddings, events and tourist and visitor accommodation (e.g., cabins).

· Notwithstanding the new exempt and complying pathways introduced above 1 December 2022, the new land use term ‘Agritourism’, and its sub terms will become permissible with consent anywhere that ‘Agriculture’ is permissible with consent in NSW from February 2023.

· The significantly heightened potential for land use conflict will require attention and response from Council officers. This will unfortunately divert council planning resources – already under extreme pressure – away from critically important development assessment functions – hampering the ability of this council to contribute to addressing the urgent need for more housing, which is especially acute following this year’s flood events.

· Council will also need time to consider issues such as lots without dwelling entitlements, compliance implications, unregulated clearing, risk to life in camping areas (from fires and floods) and other potential impacts.

Conclusion

Council staff have made repeated representations to and had discussions with the DPE (and Minister’s Office) since October about these reforms.

Despite this, the DPIE position remains as follows:

· Agritourism reforms are progressing regardless of councils resolutions

· No deferral of these reforms can be granted to councils like other SEPPs e.g., Low Rise Medium Density Code

· No ability to request a SEPP exclusion exists

· No ability to request or option to scope out Coastal Specific development standards for exempt or complying development which had been previously indicated by DPE staff

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action
4: Ethical Growth We manage growth and change responsibly	4.1: Manage responsible development through effective place and space planning	4.1.4: LEP & DCP - Review and update the Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plans

Recent Resolutions

· 22-595

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

As discussed in this report.

Financial Considerations

None relevant to this report.

Consultation and Engagement

These are State Government Reforms.

Council has continued discussions with the DPIE staff in good faith, only to be told that the Minister for Planning’s position is that the Agritourism reforms will remain as drafted and apply as a blanket across all NSW.

The numerous representations to the Minister and DPIE about our concerns as such have not been satisfactorily responded to.

Councils, such as Tweed, Ballina, Bellingen, Clarence Valley and Shoalhaven, have been making similar submissions and considering opportunities to request deferrals as well. Most have current reports and resolutions on same.

It is noted that Local Government NSW has written to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Homes, outlining a range of concerns regarding the proposed new agritourism rules. Their advocacy on behalf of NSW Councils includes a request to postpone the commencement of the reforms (Recommendation point 5).

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.18

Report No. 13.18 Annual Emissions Inventory and update on Net Zero Emissions goal

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Phillip Ridler, Sustainability Officer

File No: I2022/1715

Summary:

This report outlines the annual emissions inventory for the 2021/22 financial year for Byron Shire Council operations and provides an update on the current identified emissions boundary.

FY2021/22 is the first year that Council has produced an annual emissions report inclusive of scopes 1, 2 and 3, i.e. Council’s full Climate Active-compliant emissions boundary. Previous emissions reports identified six scope 1 and 2 emission sources, and in this year’s report Council has added another 26 scope 3 emission sources.

With the addition of scope 3 emission sources this year the overall emissions are higher than reported last year, however, the overall trajectory of Council’s emissions is down.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Notes the annual emissions inventory, (Attachment 1 #E2022/114369), and Council’s progress toward meeting the net zero emissions target.

2. Notes the progress update on the Net Zero Emissions Action Plan for Council Operations 2025.

3. Notes that the annual emissions report will be tabled at the next available Climate Change & Resource Recovery Advisory Committee Meeting.

Attachments:

1 2021-22 Annual inventory of Council's emissions profile all scopes - Final, E2022/114369

2 Net Zero Emissions Action Plan for Council Operations 2025, E2020/56957

Report

Council has been annually reporting on its greenhouse gas emissions since baseline year 2015/16. Council has resolved to be net zero emissions for its operations by 2025, to source 100% of its energy through renewable sources by 2027 (Res 17-086), and to become certified carbon neutral under the Climate Active standard commencing in financial year 2025/26 (Res 19-634).

The Net Zero Emissions Action Plan for Council Operations 2025 (the Action Plan) was adopted by Council in 2020 (Res 20-628) and maps a path for future activities that Council will undertake to reduce emissions from Council operations (Attachment 2, E2020/56957).

Part A of this report presents the 2021/22 Annual Emissions Inventory for Council operations. Part B of this report presents the second annual progress update on the Action Plan.

Part A: 2020/21 Annual Emissions Inventory overview

FY2021/22 is the first year that Council has produced an annual emissions report inclusive of scopes 1, 2 and 3, i.e., Council’s full Climate Active-compliant emissions boundary. Previous emissions reports identified six scope 1 and 2 emission sources, and in this year’s report Council has added another 26 scope 3 emission sources.

On 5 May 2022 staff presented Councillors with an internal report on Council’s scope 3 emissions generated by consultants, 100% Renewables. This report was prepared after last year’s annual report ‘cut-off date’, so we have retrospectively added the FY2020/21 figures to the report to give better context.

Consequently, Council has experienced an increase in reported organisational carbon emissions compared to the previous reported year, however, lower than the retrospectively added figures to the FY2020/21 report. This shows the Council’s emissions have reduced this year by 5.4% compared to the equivalent widened emissions boundary of last year.

Figure 1 and Table 1 below show how Council is tracking towards the net zero target by 2025. Table 2 provides a summary of change in relation to different emissions sectors.

Figure 1. 2019-20 Emissions tracking towards 2025 target.

Table 1. 2019-20 Actual and net emissions since baseline year 2015/16.

Table 2. Summary of Emissions Sectors and Change

Summary of Emissions Sectors
	Highlights	Emissions Change (tCO2e)
Electricity & Fossil fuels
Electricity	· Contract with Powershop until Jan22, then Iberdrola and Origin provided 100% renewable electricity. · 3.8% reduction in electricity use. · Annual cost $1,248,775.	-161 (net emissions is zero)
Streetlights	· Contract with Powershop until June22, then Iberdrola provided 100% renewable electricity. · Electricity use was reduced by 6.1% due to the replacement program of failed fluorescent lamps with LED lamps. · Annual cost if street light service is $326,188.	-36 (net emissions is zero)
Fleet	· 1.8% decrease in fuel consumption. · Emissions fell 1% for FY2021/22 · The price of petrol and diesel increased significantly this year due to higher world demand of fuel post the Covid travel restrictions, and current international market volatility. · 39% of fuel used in light (passenger) vehicle fleet and 61% used in heavy plant and equipment. · Significant action is required to reduce fleet sector emissions. · Annual cost $781,084.	-9
Waste
Waste	· 8.2% reduction in overall emissions for waste. · 8.6% natural decline of emissions in landfill. · Composting emissions increased compared to the previous year by 15.5%. · No Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCU’s) sold during the year.	-618
Wastewater	· 11% decrease in wastewater fugitive emissions (108 tCO2e), despite a 1.75% decrease in flow. · Main decrease in emissions was due to a review of the calculation methods for Bangalow STP. · The annual flow was slightly lower than last year, although significantly higher than the previous 5 years.	-108
Community investment - Construction
Asphalt	· Increase over FY2020/21 emissions due to the extreme weather events	+267
Concrete		+53
Road Building Materials		+211
Equipment hire		+147
Water for Council operations
Water	· Water usage increased by 9.7ML to 45.80ML, up 27% on the previous year. · Emissions were up 25% to 94.96 (tCO2e)	+25
Employee commute
Commute	· Based on survey, increased due to increased number of FTE	+63
Other emissions
Paper IT equipment IT software Postage & couriers Telecommunications Entertainment Advertising Cleaning Stationery Legal fees Popcar – Car share service Machine & vehicle repairs Refrigerants Education Working from home Air travel Business accommodation Food and catering Office equipment	These emissions contribute approximately 958 (tCO2e) or 6.8% of the total. The emissions are calculated using Climate Active factors based on the spend on each of the emission sources or uplift factors.	-20

Impacts of extreme weather events

The extreme weather events in February and March 2022 caused severe infrastructure damage in Byron Shire through flooding and storm damage. Infrastructure, such as roads, bridges and pavements had the most damage but also the large volume of rainfall had a direct impact in the provision of services by Council. The above-mentioned issues had a direct cost impact to Council but also resulted in an increase in the emissions profile, due to an increased use of materials, electricity, workforce resources and asset utilisation. Some of the key identified impacts in the emissions in FY21/22 are as follows:

Infrastructure and construction:

· This sector had one of the largest increases in emissions for FY2021/22, and the ongoing repair and replacement of Council infrastructure will continue to impact future emissions.

· Areas that saw direct increases included asphalt, concrete, general building materials, equipment hire, work force, diesel usage, and transport.

Electricity:

· Although the total electricity consumption was down 3.8% compared to the previous year, some increased asset consumption directly corresponded with the weather events.

· The sewage treatment plants (STP) had higher than average volumes to treat due to increased water entering the system. This requires extra duty from pumps, blowers, chemicals and associated STP infrastructure.

· The Resource Recovery Centre had an increased consumption due to the need to pump out contaminated rainfall and manage increased amounts of leachate. This resulted in extra electricity consumption in pumps but also transport costs to treat the liquid at the Byron STP.

A full and detailed analysis of each sector and suggested action is provided in Attachment 1.

Part B: Progress update on Net Zero Emissions Action Plan for Council Operations 2025

The Net Zero Emissions Action Plan for Council Operations 2025 (the Action Plan) (Attachment 2) was adopted by Council at the Ordinary Meeting of 26 November 2020 (Resolution 20-628). The Action Plan maps a path for future activities that Council will undertake to reduce emissions from Council operations. It was designed to align with the Delivery Program and Operational Plan and allocates responsibility for specific actions to different Directorates. This helps keep staff accountable and to track progress.

There are five objectives, based on Council’s principal sources of emissions, which provide the Action Plan’s basic structure:

· Objective A – Electricity;

· Objective B – Fuel;

· Objective C – Waste, Water, and Sewer;

· Objective D – Governance; and

· Objective E – Community Infrastructure.

Actions within the Action Plan are labelled based on the emissions objective (i.e. sector) they correlate to. For example, under Objective A – Electricity, Action A1 is “investigate 5MW solar farm at Dingo Lane, Myocum”.

The measure under 2021/22 Operational Plan Activity 3.2.1.1 “Implement the Net Zero Emissions Action Plan for Council Operations 2025” is, “annual report to Council on delivery of Action Plan, alongside annual emissions inventory”. The following update completes that OP Activity.

Objective A – Electricity

Objective: improve electricity efficiency and transition to 100% renewable energy.

As of 1 January 2022, Council achieved the “100% renewables” part of Resolution 17-086 and fulfilled the overarching Action Plan Electricity objective to “transition to 100% renewable energy”. This is five years ahead of the 2027 target. Until 1 January 2024, Council has a contract with electricity retailer Iberdrola to source approximately 60% of its total operational electricity needs (all large sites) from Collector Wind Farm in Cullerin, NSW. The remainder of Council’s electricity needs will be 100% GreenPower (all small sites). Fulfilling the 100% renewables target will help Council achieve our net zero emissions target by 2025.

While Council may have achieved this renewable energy target, the best solution is to always avoid use of electricity in the first place or seek to reduce current consumption. The following actions seek to minimise Council’s carbon profile.

Action	Corresponding OP Activity	Status update	Estimated delivery date
A1. Investigate 5MW solar farm at Dingo Lane, Myocum	1.4.4.5	Staff are continuing with the Development Application process to progress the project to shovel ready status. The project is due to the Northern Rivers Regional Planning Panel in November 2022.	30 June 2023 (project to be shovel ready)
A2. Investigate bioenergy facility at West Byron STP	3.2.1.5	The Development Application consent was granted in May 2022. If/when State and Federal grant funding approvals are forthcoming, Council can consider the holistic financial implications of the Bioenergy and Dingo Lane projects on Council’s Long Term Financial Strategy and make a decision for 'Go/No Go' on construction for the Bioenergy Facility. Note also that Public Private Partnerships with private financing could be contemplated for this and the solar farm projects.	30 June 2023 (Council decision for ‘Go/No Go’)
A3. Facilitate bulk roll out of LED streetlights for Byron Shire	n/a	Planning for the bulk upgrade is currently being undertaken and the project is expected to be rolled out in early 2023 with Essential Energy.	2023 (bulk rollout planned)
A4. Investigate energy efficiency upgrade of Council Administration Building, Mullumbimby	3.2.1.11	The Sustainability team has partnered with Council’s Property Maintenance team to investigate options for energy efficiency upgrades at the Administration Building. Quotations have been sought for lighting upgrades and new solar PV systems and these are currently being reviewed.	30 June 2023 (business case to Council)

Objective B – Fuel

Objective: optimise fuel efficiency and transition to renewable fuel sources.

Action	Corresponding OP Activity	Status update	Delivery date
B1. Investigate new bulk fuel storage and monitoring system to minimise manual data entry	3.2.1.3	Fleet Team Leader is still reviewing Council’s fuel infrastructure, including software used for data capture and reporting. Current infrastructure has passed its recommended life span and the fuel management processes currently used are inefficient. The project has been started and testing of new valves is underway, it is thought to be completed by the end of FY2022.	30 June 2023 (ET report)
B2. Develop and deliver Electric Vehicle Charging Station Policy and Procedure	1.6.3.2	Electric Vehicle Charging Station Instalment and Maintenance Procedure 2021 was introduced as an internal document to guide staff in June 2021. This document applies to staff wishing to install new or maintain existing Council-owned EV charging stations. A how-to guide for external providers wishing to install charging stations on Council land is currently being investigated by staff. In addition, the Sustainability Team has engaged a third party to manage and monitor Council’s two EV charging stations on one software platform, and formalised Council’s Property Maintenance Coordinator as the EV charging station asset owner. The chargers in Mullumbimby were replaced in March 2022 and the charger at Byron Library was repaired and recommissioned in September 2022. A user-pays system was implemented in 2022 for both locations.	30 June 2023 (ongoing management)
B6. Review Council’s passenger vehicle policies and procedures to encourage Hybrid and Electric Vehicle ownership	n/a	This was partially achieved on 7 October 2020 when staff updated the Light Motor Vehicle Fleet Procedure – “Fees and Charges Makes & Models” to include Hybrid and Electric Vehicle options. A plan outlining what needs to be included in an EV Transition strategy was developed and presented to the Executive Team on 30 November.	Partially achieved October 2020. It is recommended to develop the EV implementation strategy in FY2023.
B9. Investigate options for decentralised workforce - Review Scope 3 emissions boundary to include working from home arrangements.	n/a	Due to the “work from home” health orders resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, Council’s workforce has become decentralised over the past two years. This contributed to a decrease in electricity usage at Council’s Administration building in 2021/22. It is anticipated that staff will continue to be given the opportunity to work from home in some capacity post-pandemic. The Council’s emissions boundary is now reporting separate Scope 3 emission sources for working from home and staff commute.	Completed 30 June 2022 (review of scope 3 emissions boundary)

Objective C – Waste, Water, and Sewer

Objective: Reduce waste and improve water efficiency.

Action	Corresponding OP Activity	Status update	Delivery date
C3. Progress the closure and rehabilitation of the Southern Expansion landfill cell at the Byron Resource Recovery Centre.	1.4.4.4	Staff are progressing the landfill capping and closure of civil works of the Southern Expansion and will commence rehabilitation as outlined in the Byron Resource Recovery Centre Master Plan.	30 June 2023 (Stage 1 works completed)
C4. Increase efficiency of sewage treatment plants and pump infrastructure.	3.2.1.13	A new temporary position of Sustainability Officer – Utilities was filled in April 2021 to focus on increasing energy efficiency and reducing emissions in the utilities (wastewater collection and treatment) sector. Energy usage audits and benchmarking of Council's utilities services are ongoing. Energy efficiency actions have been identified and the utilities electricity consumption decreased by 2.66% this year.	30 June 2022 (energy usage audit complete)
C6. Review operation of gas flare at Byron Resource Recovery Centre	3.2.1.4	Staff are working with a consultant to review the efficiency of the Myocum Landfill Gas Flare and investigate Council's Australian Carbon Credit Unit (ACCU) generation in line with the net zero emissions target. The ACCU contract was due to expire in December 2021, but there was a shortfall in Council’s credits. Staff have requested a five-year extension from the Clean Energy Regulator in order to generate sufficient ACCUs and meet contract obligations.	30 June 2023 (report to Council)

Objective D – Governance

Objective: Disclose and improve emissions reporting and invest in high quality carbon offsets.

Action

Corresponding OP Activity

Status update

Delivery date

Actions D2 and D3. Conduct Councillor and staff education on carbon monitoring and offsets and develop and implement a carbon offset policy for Council

3.2.1.10

The Sustainability team has begun research and development of a draft carbon offset policy for Council operations that will set out how Council selects carbon offset units to achieve net zero emissions. Internal workshops with Councillors and senior leadership staff were held in May and October 2022 and further work is being undertaken by the Sustainability team. This is looking at the possibility of locally generated carbon credits.

30 June 2023

(report to Council)

D5. Develop an emissions disclosure framework for Council staff - Define Council’s emissions boundary in accordance with the Climate Active guidelines

3.2.1.2

All relevant scope 3 emissions will need to be included in Council’s boundary by 2025/26 when we aim to become certified carbon neutral under Climate Active.

Through working with a consultant, 100% Renewables, the Climate Active-compliant boundary was determined and calculated for FY21 & FY22. All future emission reports will include the full scope 3 boundary.

30 June 2022

Completed and included in FY2022 emissions report

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action		Code	OP Activity
3: Nurtured Environment We nurture and enhance the natural environment	3.4: Support and empower our community to adapt to, and mitigate our impact on climate change	3.4.3: Monitoring and reporting - Monitor and report on actions that aim to address climate change	3.4.3.2		Prepare Annual Emissions Inventory to determine progress towards 2025 Net Zero Emissions Target.
3: Nurtured Environment We nurture and enhance the natural environment	3.4: Support and empower our community to adapt to, and mitigate our impact on climate change	3.4.4: Net Zero - Work towards achieving Council's 100% net zero-emissions target	3.4.4.1		Develop a carbon offset policy and procedure for Council in order to achieve net zero emissions.
3: Nurtured Environment We nurture and enhance the natural environment	3.5: Minimise waste and encourage recycling and resource recovery practices	3.5.5: Facilities and services - Provide resource recovery facilities and services that meet statutory requirements		3.5.5.5	Investigate Council's methane gas flare and Australian carbon credit unit generation in line with net zero emissions target

Recent Resolutions

· Res 17-086: To achieve net zero emissions for Council operations by 2025; and to source 100% of its energy through renewable sources within ten years (by 2027).

· Res 19-268: Adoption of Net Zero Emissions Strategy for Council Operations 2025.

· Res 19-634: To become certified carbon neutral under the Climate Active standard (formerly the National Carbon Offset Standard, or NCOS) commencing in financial year 2025/26.

· Res 20-628: Adoption of Net Zero Emissions Action Plan for Council Operations 2025.

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

None relevant to the report.

Financial Considerations

None relevant to the report.

Consultation and Engagement

None relevant to this report.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.21

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services

Report No. 13.21 Request For Tender Outcome - Rifle Range Road Intersection Upgrade

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Hayden Kress, Project Engineer

File No: I2022/1102

Summary:

On 16 March 2022, the General Manager, under delegated authority, approved the use of the open tender method to call for tenders for Contract 2022-1314– Lismore Road and Rifle Range Road Intersection Upgrade.

The Request for Tender was advertised from 21 March 2022 to 4 May 2022. Tenders were received from the following organisations:

· Bellwether Contractors

· Brooks Hire Service Pty Ltd

· Durack Civil

· Logical Line Marking

· Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd

Tenders have been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2005. This report summarises the background and assessment of the tenders and provides a recommendation to award the works for Contract 2022-1314.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council awards Tender 2022-1314– Lismore Road and Rifle Range Road Intersection Upgrade to the preferred supplier identified in the tender evaluation report (Attachment 1 #E2022/118145).

2. That Council makes public its decision, including the name and amount of the successful tenderer, in accordance with Clause 179(b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021.

Attachments:

1 Confidential - Signed Request for Tender - Evaluation Report Rifle Range Road Upgrade, E2022/118145

Report

On 16 March 2022, the General Manager, under delegated authority, approved the use of the open tendering method to call for tenders for Contract 2022-1314– Lismore Road and Rifle Range Road Intersection Upgrade. The contract is required for the construction delivery of the intersection upgrade.

The Request for Tender sought responses from proponents to provide the following:

· Widening Lismore Road to allow for a right turning lane into Rifle Range Road.

· Drainage upgrades including a new major culvert under Lismore Road to reduce flooding and improve access on Rifle Range Road

· A new bus bay and shelter for the north-bound bus on Lismore Road

· A new bus bay and shelter for the south-bound bus on Rifle Range Road

· Shared paths connecting the bus bays to Tristania Street

· Signage, safety barriers and line marking

The Contract was expected to commence in July 2022 and with construction taking 5 months.

Tenders were advertised as follows:

Byron Shire News: 20 April 2022

Vendorpanel: 23 March – 4 May 2022

Council website: 23 March – 4 May 2022

A non mandatory tender site briefing was held on 12 April 2022.

An Evaluation Panel comprising of three Council staff members was formed.

Tenders closed on 4 May 2022 and tenders were received from the following proponents:

· Bellwether Contractors

· Brooks Hire Service Pty Ltd

· Durack Civil

· Logical Line Marking

· Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd

Tenders were evaluated by the Evaluation Panel in accordance with the following evaluation criteria:

Mandatory criteria:

a) Tenderer must have a valid Australian Business Number.

b) Substantial conformance to Conditions of Contract and Statement of Requirements.

c) Workers compensation insurance for all employees.

d) Holds, or is willing to obtain, the insurances as specified in the Statement of Requirements.

e) Satisfactory Work Health and Safety practices.

f) Commitment to ethical business practice principles.

Qualitative criteria:

Criteria	Elements
Profile and relevant experience	Tenderer profile
	Previous relevant experience
	Environmental practices
	Opportunities for disadvantaged people
	Local employment opportunities
Quality and availability of resources	Proposed key personnel
	Proposed staff
	Use of subcontractors
	Vehicles, plant and equipment
Delivery Plan	Goods/services standards and methodology
	Implementation plan
	Product sustainability
	Supporting local business, social enterprise and Indigenous business
Price	Total contract price

The Evaluation Panel have conducted referee checks on the preferred tenderer. The results of this check is deemed by the Evaluation Panel to be satisfactory as detailed in the attached Evaluation Report.

Financial checks on the preferred tenderer are underway. Council will be advised prior to the Council meeting if this check results in unsatisfactory outcome.

Key issues

Tender pricing is valid until 31 December 2022. On this basis if the contract is to proceed it must be awarded in December 2022.

Financial Considerations

The price basis for the contract is a lump sum.

Council has increased the budget to $2,920,778 for this project following the September 2022 Quarterly review.

The tender assessment estimate and available funding is outlined in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Tender Assessment Estimate

There is sufficient funding for the proposed contract in the current budget.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Considerations

The tendering process has been undertaken in accordance with Council’s Purchasing and Procurement Policy, and the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021.

The Local Government (General) Regulations 2021 define the options available to Council. An extract is provided below.

Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 - Reg 178

Acceptance of tenders

178 Acceptance of tenders

(1) After considering the tenders submitted for a proposed contract, the council must either—

(a) accept the tender that, having regard to all the circumstances, appears to it to be the most advantageous, or

(b) decline to accept any of the tenders.

(1A) Without limiting subsection (1), in considering the tenders submitted for a proposed contract for the performance of domestic or other waste management services, the council must take into account whether or not existing workers (within the meaning of section 170) will be offered employment or engagement on terms and conditions comparable to those applicable to the workers immediately before the tender was submitted.

(2) A council must ensure that every contract it enters into as a result of a tender accepted by the council is with the successful tenderer and in accordance with the tender (modified by any variation under section 176). However, if the successful tender was made by the council (as provided for in section 55(2A) of the Act), the council is not required to enter into any contract in order to carry out the requirements of the proposed contract.

(3) A council that decides not to accept any of the tenders for a proposed contract or receives no tenders for the proposed contract must, by resolution, do one of the following—

(a) postpone or cancel the proposal for the contract,

(b) invite, in accordance with section 167, 168 or 169, fresh tenders based on the same or different details,

(c) invite, in accordance with section 168, fresh applications from persons interested in tendering for the proposed contract,

(d) invite, in accordance with section 169, fresh applications from persons interested in tendering for contracts of the same kind as the proposed contract,

(e) enter into negotiations with any person (whether or not the person was a tenderer) with a view to entering into a contract in relation to the subject matter of the tender,

(f) carry out the requirements of the proposed contract itself.

(4) If a council resolves to enter into negotiations as referred to in subsection (3)(e), the resolution must state the following—

(a) the council’s reasons for declining to invite fresh tenders or applications as referred to in subsection (3)(b)–(d),

(b) the council’s reasons for determining to enter into negotiations with the person or persons referred to in subsection (3)(e).

Council’s endorsement of the recommendation to award the tender as recommended in the attached Evaluation Report is sought.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.23

Report No. 13.23 Preferred Alignment Mullum to Bruns Cycleway

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Kate Draskovic, Planning Support Officer

Judd Cornwall, Traffic & Transport Engineer

File No: I2022/1736

Summary:

The purpose for this report is to put forward a recommendation for the proposed Mullumbimby to Brunswick Heads Cycleway alignment based on community feedback.

This report has summarised the feedback received from the public in response to their preferred outcome. The exact alignment of the routes will be determined as part of future investigation and design activities.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council supports option 1 (from the community “Tell us what you think” survey) Mullum to Bruns Cycleway and endorse Council staff in progressing with the design on this alignment.

Attachments:

1 Raw Data - Mullum to Bruns Cycleway, E2022/117394

Report

Council is proposing to build a cycle path that connects Mullumbimby to Brunswick Heads and surrounding areas including Ocean Shores.

Following investigations into a number of different options, two potential outcomes have been proposed as shown in figure 1.

Option 1 (formally route A, figure 2) – north route begins near the rail station in Mullumbimby and heads north along the rail corridor until Synotts Lane and then heads east through adjoining properties, the Brunswick Valley STP and connects to Brunswick Valley Way just north of Rajah Road Ocean Shores.

Option 2 (formally route D, figure 2)– south route follows Argyle Street out of Mullumbimby and cuts through old paper roads to a section of the Saddle Road and then connects to Brunswick Heads from the southern entry point (the Motorway overpass) to Tweed Street Brunswick Heads.

Figure 1: Proposed cycleway options Mullum to Bruns (media release)

Map showing Route A and Route D options to connect Mullumbimby to Brunswick Heads. Route A is pink dashed line and Route D is yellow dashed line

Figure 2 – Route A (Pink) and Route D (Yellow) options to connect Mullumbimby to Brunswick Heads

Community Feedback

Council asked for community feedback via a survey located on the Byron Shire Council website. The ‘Mullum to Bruns Cycleway project – tell us what you think’ survey was available from 7 September 2022 to 7 October 2022.

803 responses were received during the survey period, a summary and analysis of the responses is provided below:

Survey Question 1 - To what degree do you support the concept of a cycle route that connects Mullumbimby to Brunswick Heads and Ocean Shores?

The options available to respondents were strongly support, somewhat support, neutral, somewhat oppose and strongly oppose. Respondents were only able to select one option.

The overwhelming majority of respondents (89%) strongly support the concept.

The results are as below;

· Strongly support (89%)

· Somewhat support (5%)

· Strongly oppose (3%)

· Neutral (2%)

· Somewhat oppose (1%)

Chart type: Doughnut. Strongly support accounts for the majority of 'Field1'.

Description automatically generated

Survey Question 3 - How would you be likely to use the cycleway routes proposed?

Respondents were given six options to choose from, which are listed below and could select any number of options.

The most selected use of the cycle way was for recreation, leisure, health and well-being (going to the park, beach etc) which was selected 719 times and accounted for 44% of responses.

The results are as below;

· For recreation, leisure, health and well-being (going to the park, beach etc) (44%)

· Taking visitors on the cycleway (28%)

· Commuting to work or school (13%)

· For business or tourism purposes (10%)

· I won't use it (3%)

· Other (1%)

Survey Question 5 - Please select the three things you value the most.

Respondents were asked to select the three things they value the most out of the options listed below.

The values selected the most amount of times were ‘opportunity for active recreation, improving health and wellbeing’ (19%), followed closely by ‘Safety – I want a route that is safe from traffic, has good passive surveillance, and is not difficult to ride’ (18%).

The results are as below;

· Opportunity for active recreation, improving health and wellbeing (19%)

· Safety – I want a route that is safe from traffic, has good passive surveillance, and is not difficult to ride (18%)

· An alternative transport option for the local community (12%)

· A sustainable transport option (11%)

· Less traffic, less emissions (11%)

· Mostly rail corridor option (7%)

· Mostly off-road option (6%)

· Ease of route/accessibility – I want a route that is easy and enjoyable to ride (6%)

· Opportunity for increasing regional tourism (4%)

· Environmental – I want a route that has the least ecological impact (4%)

· Location of route – I want a route that is closer to where I live so I will be more likely to use (2%)

· Speed – I want the fastest route (1%)

· Mostly on-road option (1%)

Survey Question 6 (Whole data set) – Which option do you prefer?

The respondents were asked which cycle route they would prefer, Option 1 – the north option or Option 2 – the south option:

Option 1 – the north option was the preferred option with 61% of the votes.

The results are as below;

· Option 1 – the north option (61%)

· Option 2 – the south option (26%)

· Unsure (8%)

· I don’t support either of the two options proposed (5%)

· No answer (0%)

$Chart type: Doughnut. Option 1 - the north option accounts for the majority of 'Which option do you prefer?\t'. Description automatically generated$

Survey Question 6 (Only considers people who strongly support a Mullum to Bruns Cycleway)– Which option do you prefer?

Looking at just the answers from the 89% of respondents that strongly support the cycleway, the results are as below;

· Option 1 – the north option (66%)

· Option 2 – the south option (23%)

· Unsure (8%)

· I don’t support either of the two options proposed (3%)

Chart type: Doughnut. Option 1 - the north option accounts for the majority of 'Field2'.

Description automatically generated

Survey Question 9 – Tick the age group that applies to you.

Respondents were asked to select their age group bracket.

The results are as below;

· 56-65 (28%)

· 46-55 (27%)

· 36-45 (15%)

· 66-75 (15%)

· 26-35 (7%)

· 75+ (3%)

· 18-25 (3%)

· 0-17 (2%)

Survey Question 10 – Tick all that apply to you.

Respondents were asked to select all that apply out of the following options.

The results are as below;

· I am a resident of the Byron Shire (35%)

· I am a ratepayer of the Byron Shire (33%)

· I work in the Byron Shire (22%)

· I am a visitor to the Byron Shire (7%)

· Other (3%)

Survey Question 11 – Which suburb do you live in?

Respondents were asked to enter the suburb they live in

The most common responses are as below;

· Mullumbimby (25%)

· Ocean Shores (22%)

· Brunswick Heads (7%)

· Byron Bay (5%)

· South Golden Beach (4%)

· Main Arm (2%)

· Myocum (2%)

· Bangalow (2%)

· Lismore (2%)

· Suffolk Park (2%)

Survey questions not contained within this report:

For the purpose of this report only questions that relate to the cycleway alignment are referred to. Other responses to general questions have been noted and are contained within attachment 1 of this report (E2022/117394).

Strategic Considerations

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	CSP Strategy	DP Action	Code	OP Activity
5: Connected Infrastructure We have connected infrastructure, transport, and facilities that are safe, accessible, and reliable	5.1: Provide a safe, reliable, and accessible transport network	5.1.3: Active transport - pedestrians and cycleways - Deliver the actions identified in the Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan and in the Bike Plan	5.1.3.3	Mullumbimby to Brunswick Heads On Road Cycleway

Recent resolutions

Resolution number 22-140

1. Commences community consultation on Route Options A and D as part of the Mullum to Bruns cycleway project.

2. Reports the findings of the community consultation back to Council with a view to inform a single preferred route for the cycleway which is to be progressed in terms of investigation, planning and design activities. (Lyon/Ndiaye)

Financial Considerations

Design for the Mullum – Bruns Cycleway can be funded through the budget allocation in (GL 44281.013) there is currently approximately, $300k available to progress the design.

Consultation and engagement

Council released a survey to the public seeking feedback in relation to the Mullum to Bruns cycleway. The Media release went public on 13September 2022 and closed on 7October 2022.

Submission	Council response
In favour of proposal to lease the treehouse artwork as it adds character to the street. All safety issues exist due to the removal of the access rope making the treehouse inaccessible. The treehouse is built in a way that is safe for the trees and it will not fall from the tree. It is not play equipment but a piece of art. People who walk along the street enjoy the artwork and the artwork creates conversation and enjoyment.	Noted.
In favour of proposal to lease the treehouse as it provides some fun in a lovely, shaded area.	Noted