Agenda of Ordinary Meeting

Ordinary Meeting

Meeting Date: Tuesday, 23 June, 2020

Location: Council Chambers, City Administrative Building, Bridge Road, Nowra

Time: 5.00pm

Membership (Quorum - 7)

All Councillors

Please note: The proceedings of this meeting (including presentations, deputations and debate) will be webcast and may be recorded and broadcast under the provisions of the Code of Meeting Practice. Your attendance at this meeting is taken as consent to the possibility that your image and/or voice may be recorded and broadcast to the public.

Agenda

1. Acknowledgement of Traditional Custodians

2. Opening Prayer

3. Australian National Anthem

4. Apologies / Leave of Absence

5. Confirmation of Minutes

· Ordinary Meeting - 26 May 2020

6. Declarations of Interest

7. Call Over of the Business Paper

8. Presentation of Petitions

9. Mayoral Minute

Mayoral Minute

MM20.7....... Mayoral Minute - 2020 Queen's Birthday Honours........................................ 1

MM20.8....... Mayoral Minute - North Mollymook Beach - Parking and Pedestrian Access 2

10. Deputations and Presentations

11. Notices of Motion / Questions on Notice

Notices of Motion / Questions on Notice

CL20.127..... Notice of Motion - Rescission Motion -SA20.102 Notice of Motion - Far North Collector Road - Upgrade of Taylors Lane, Cambewarra............................. 3

CL20.128..... Notice of Motion - SA20.120 - Far North Collector Road - Upgrade of Taylors Lane, Cambewarra................................................................................................... 4

CL20.129..... Question on Notice - Membership of Chief Executive Officer on Council Committees........................................................................................................................ 5

CL20.130..... Notice of Motion - Recycled Water - Regional Effluent Management Scheme - Vincentia Golf Club....................................................................................... 10

CL20.131..... Notice of Motion - Recognition and Apology to Police................................. 11

CL20.132..... Notice of Motion - Call In DA20/1349 4 Sand Drift Way Vincentia - Lot 1432 DP 1231370 - Boarding house........................................................................... 12

CL20.133..... Notice of Motion - Call In DA20/1494 - 25 Sunnymede Lane Berry - Lot 3 DP 713138 - Change of Use - Existing Ancillary Structure (Shed) to Detached Habitable Rooms...................................................................................................................... 13

CL20.134..... Notice of Motion - Statement from the Heart............................................... 14

CL20.135..... Notice of Motion - Exercise Circuit - Titania Reserve, Greenwell Point...... 16

CL20.136..... Notice of Motion - Sussex Inlet Canal - Badgee Boundary Adjustment and Waterway Dedication..................................................................................................... 17

12. Committee Reports

CL20.137..... Report of the Strategy & Assets Committee - 9 June 2020......................... 22

SA20.85...... 2019/2020 Council Borrowings - Loan Agreement - Holiday Haven

SA20.86...... March 2020 Quarterly Budget Review

SA20.87...... Proposed Lease of Part Lot 55 DP 1188161 & Part Lot 1 DP 1139157 - Berry Tennis Courts

SA20.88...... Proposed Lease of Part Lot 1 DP629175, 21 Meriton Street, St Georges Basin

SA20.89...... Classification of Land - Lot 2 DP 591885 - 3 Schofields Lane, Nowra

SA20.90...... Classification of Land - Lot 1 DP 1256763 - Yalwal Road, Yalwal

SA20.91...... Proposed Lease to Mollymook Beach Hut - Lot 7038 DP 1061116

SA20.92...... Classification of Land - Lot 8 DP 1255835 Currarong Road Kinghorne

SA20.94...... Nowra Golf Course - Proposed Leases to Bomaderry Bowling Club Ltd

SA20.97...... Shoalhaven Coastal Management Program - Stage 1 - Citywide Scoping Study Report - Community Feedback - Adoption

SA20.100.... Next Steps - Proposed Affordable Housing Development - Council Land, Coomea Street, Bomaderry

CL20.138..... Report of the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee - 9 June 2020....................... 28

TC20.28...... Parking Restrictions - Balmoral Road - Burrill Lake (PN 3601)

TC20.29...... Parking Restrictions - Tallwood Avenue - Mollymook (PN 3602)

TC20.30...... Woollamia Car Park - Signage and Line Marking - Frank Lewis Way Woollamia (PN 3600)

13. Reports

CEO Group

CL20.139..... Quarterly Progress Report - Councillors' Notices of Motion........................ 36

CL20.140..... COVID Stimulus to Business - Review of Council Fees and Charges........ 38

CL20.141..... Tenders - Woollamia Boat Ramp Service Wharf......................................... 40

Finance Corporate & Community Services

CL20.142..... Investment Report - May 2020..................................................................... 42

Assets & Works

CL20.143..... Provision of Traffic Control Services Panel.................................................. 48

CL20.144..... Tenders - Report - Boongaree Nature Play Park - Supply and Install Play Equipment...................................................................................................................... 50

Planning Environment & Development

CL20.145..... Draft Shoalhaven Local Strategic Planning Statement - Public Exhibition.. 52

CL20.146..... Planning Proposal (PP027) - Review of Subdivision Provisions - Post Exhibition Consideration and Proposed Finalisation.................................................... 58

CL20.147..... Proposed Submissions - NSW Government Infrastructure Contributions System Reform and Flood Prone Land Reform........................................................ 66

CL20.148..... Draft Covid-19 Contributions Discount Subsidy Policy - Proposed Exhibition 73

Shoalhaven Water

CL20.149..... St Anns and Lyrebird Park SPS and RM Upgrades - Review of Environmental Factors...................................................................................................................... 80

14. Confidential Reports

Committee Reports

CCL20.5...... Report of the Strategy & Assets Committee - 9 June 2020

CSA20.7...... Proposed Acquisition of Land - Moss Vale Road South Urban Release Area

Local Government Act - Section 10A(2)(c) - Information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information as disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to reveal commercial-in-confidence provisions of a contract, diminish the competitive commercial value of any information to any person and/or prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests.

Reports

CCL20.6...... Tenders – Confidential Report - Woollamia Boat Ramp Service Wharf - June 2020

Local Government Act - Section 10A(2)(d)(i) - Commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

CCL20.7...... Tenders – Confidential Report - Boongaree Nature Play Park – Supply & Install Play Equipment

Local Government Act - Section 10A(2)(d)(i) - Commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.129 Question on Notice - Membership of Chief Executive Officer on Council Committees

HPERM Ref: D20/208440

Submitted by: Clr John Levett

Question

Could the CEO please offer a response to the following questions in relation to the practice of the CEO having a full vote in the Strategy and Assets and Development and Environment Committee Meetings.

1. When was the practice introduced and what was the rationale and purpose behind it?

2. Do other Councils in NSW offer the same privilege to their CEO or General Manager?

3. Can the CEO give an assurance that the practice is legal under NSW law and in particular the Local Government Act?

4. Is it consistent with sound governance to have an unelected staff member who is responsible for the implementation of policy having a role in the formulation of policy?

5. Is the CEO concerned about any inherent conflicts of interest that arise from the practice?

6. Does the ability of the CEO to cast a vote carry the danger of the position of CEO being politicised?

7. Should it be of concern that the vote of the unelected CEO can be decisive in a sensitive community issue and yet the CEO is not accountable to that community?

8. What process would the Council need to follow to remove the CEO as a voting member of a Committee?

Background

There is considerable disquiet in the community about the capacity of the CEO to vote on important issues when the holder of the position is not accountable at an election. The concerns of the community are inherent in the questions.

Response

The following responses to the questions have been provided by the Public Officer in consultation with a member of Council’s external Legal Panel.

Q1: When was the practice introduced and what was the rationale and purpose behind it?

A: Council introduced Core or Standing Committees on 28 September 1999 (MIN 99.104). At that time, the General Manager (GM) was not a member, however membership was amended shortly thereafter on 12 October 1999 to include the General Manager or Nominee.

In the succeeding years, the General Manager or Nominee and sometimes Group Directors have held voting membership on some Core Committees, with those Committees having membership at different times varying between two (2) and all 13 Councillors.

There was a brief period of time in March 2011 (MIN11.239) where the General Manager was removed from membership of the Strategy and Works Committee, but since reinstatement in June 2011(MIN11.557) the General Manager (and more recently CEO) has consistently remained a member of the ‘Core’ Committees of the Council.

No record of the Council has been found which clearly outlines the rationale and purpose of the appointment of the CEO (or previous GM) to those Committees. However, it is understood from past debate of the Council, the addition of the GM or CEO has reflected a desire for those Committees to not be captured by provisions of the Code of Meeting Practice which apply to Committees made up of all Councillors (and only Councillors).

Q2: Do other Councils in NSW offer the same privilege to their CEO or General Manager?

A: A survey has been sent to other NSW Councils to enquire if their CEO/General Manager has a voting role on Committees with Delegated Authority.

At the time of writing this report, 12 responses from councils have been received (Wollongong, Sutherland, Canada Bay, Griffith, Bega Valley, Kiama, Shellharbour, Wollondilly, Camden, Fairfield, Blacktown and Eurobodalla) and each has confirmed that the GM / CEO holds no such voting position.

It is not considered usual practice for the CEO or GM to have a vote on ‘Core’ or ‘Standing’ Committees.

Q2: Can the CEO give an assurance that the practice is legal under NSW law and in particular the Local Government Act?

A: Section 355 of the Local Government Act outlines:

355 How a council may exercise functions

A function of a council may, subject to this Chapter, be exercised—

(a) by the council by means of the councillors or employees, by its agents or contractors, by financial provision, by the provision of goods, equipment, services, amenities, or facilities or by any other means, or

(b) by a committee of the council, or

(c) partly or jointly by the council and another person or persons, or

(d) jointly by the council and another council or councils (including by means of a joint organisation or a Voluntary Regional Organisation of Councils of which the councils concerned are members), or

(e) by a delegate of the council (which may, for example, be a joint organisation or a Voluntary Regional Organisation of Councils of which the council is a member).

Section 376 of the Local Government Act deals with the attendance of the General Manager (CEO) at meetings and provides as follows:

“376 Attendance of general manager at meetings

(1) The general manager is entitled to attend, but not to vote at, a meeting of the council or a meeting of a committee of the council of which all the members are councillors.

(2) The general manager is entitled to attend a meeting of any other committee of the council and may, if a member of the committee, exercise a vote.

(3) However, the general manager may be excluded from a meeting of the council or a committee while the council or committee deals with a matter relating to the standard of performance of the general manager or the terms of the employment of the general manager.”

In addition to legislative provisions, the main framework for Meetings of the Council and Committees are outlined in the Code of Meeting Practice. Legal advice has been sought on the application of the Model and Council’s Codes of Meeting Practice to this situation.

The practice of appointing the CEO to Council Committees appears not to be contrary to the Model Code of Meeting Practice for Local Councils in NSW 2018 (‘Model Code’). The Model Code does not apply to Council committees with members other than councillors and hence does not regulate the meeting procedure of such committees.

Council committees with members other than councillors are able to regulate their meeting procedures as they see fit, including regulating who may be the chairperson and deputy chairperson of meetings.

The practice of appointing the CEO to Council committees is expressly covered by the Council’s adopted Code of Meeting Practice (Policy Number: POL19/27; Adopted: 28/05/2019) (‘Adopted Code’)’. It is stated to apply to ‘Committees comprising of Councillors and Staff’ (p.1).

The Model Code of Conduct itself outlines the guidelines for Committees whose membership is all (and only) Councillors and clearly states that the Mayor is entitled to chair these Committees.

The amendments made to the Model Code of Meeting Practice included in the current SSC Adopted Code of Meeting Practice are less clear as to whether the Mayor is entitled to chair Council committees with members other than councillors; however. Part 20 of the Adopted Code is stated to apply ‘to committees of the council whose members are all councillors, in additional (sic.) to all Committees, Boards, and Advisory Groups appointed by the Council’ (cl.20.1). Clause 20.11 confers on the Mayor the right to be the chairperson of each committee of the council. The phrase ‘committee of the council’ is relevantly defined in Part 22 of the Adopted Code to mean ‘a committee established by the council in accordance with clause 20.2 of this code (being a committee consisting only of councillors)’. The heading appearing above clause 20.11 reflects this in so far as it reads ‘Chairperson and deputy chairperson of council committees - where all members are Councillors’. Notwithstanding this, the heading must be disregarded when interpreting the Adopted Code (see Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), s35(2)).

On one view, clause 20.11 is intended to only apply to one kind of committee to which Part 20 of the Adopted Code applies. On another view, clause 20.11 is inconsistent with the general application of Part 20 of the Adopted Code. Accordingly, there is some doubt about whether clause 20.11 does or does not apply to committees with members other than councillors and therefore whether the Mayor is or is not entitled to chair Council committees of which the CEO is a voting member.

Q3: Is it consistent with sound governance to have an unelected staff member who is responsible for the implementation of policy having a role in the formulation of policy?

A: Having the CEO as a voting member on Council committees is problematic for sound governance to the extent to which it may infect committee decision-making with perceived bias and conflicts of interest under the general law. In this regard, see the answer to the next question.

Members of the public may feel that their democratic rights to elect all those tasked with strategic decision making for the local government area are eroded by the current practice. This does pose a risk for the Council.

However, should the Council feel that the inclusion of the CEO is a control mechanism for other identified risks arising from having a Committee of only elected Councillors or provide a clear benefit to the Council it may be considered appropriate Governance, on balance, for this to occur. Such risks or benefits have not been identified in the review of Council files or legislation.

Q4: Is the CEO concerned about any inherent conflicts of interest that arise from the practice?

A: Due to the nature of the question, the CEO has not provided a response. The following is based on Legal advice sought in relation to this question.

There is a real concern about actual or perceived bias and conflicts of interest arising from the CEO’s membership of Council committees.

The CEO is legally responsible for all staff of the Council and all activities within the Council’s organisation. This includes responsibility for, and accountability to, Council committees for reports, advice and recommendations provided to Council committees by staff (irrespective of the particular staff member who prepared the report, advice or recommendations).

Under the general law, the test for whether there is a reasonable apprehension of bias is whether a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that the decision-maker might not bring an impartial mind to the matter: see McGovern V Ku-ring-gai Council [2008] NSWCA 209. A related test applies to whether the decision-maker has pre-judged a matter, and in this regard, the test is whether an independent observer might reasonably apprehend that the decision-maker’s mind might not be open to persuasion on the matter: see McGovern V Ku-ring-gai Council. Furthermore, under the general law, where a decision-maker can be characterised, in substance, as having a stake in the matter, the issue of a conflict of interest arises: see McGovern V Ku-ring-gai Council.

It can be readily appreciated that where the CEO has responsibility for a staff report, advice or recommendation provided to a Council committee in relation to a matter and also has a right to vote on the matter on the committee, the possibility that the CEO may be perceived as not having an impartial mind or not being open to persuasion on the matter or having a stake in ensuring that the staff position is adopted by the committee is real and ever present.

Under the general law, perceived bias or a conflict of interest of the CEO would disqualify the CEO from voting on a matter and, if he did nevertheless vote on the matter, his participation would infect the Council committee’s decision with bias and undermine the validity of the decision on the matter.

Q5: Does the ability of the CEO to cast a vote carry the danger of the position of CEO being politicised?

A: The inclusion of the CEO as a voting member may create the perception that a CEO could vote on political grounds rather than merit. This perception is increased in situations where there is lack of consensus between the elected Councillors.

It would be anticipated that the CEO would hold the required personal ethics and knowledge to ensure the application of the vote on merit as required by the Code of Conduct. However, it is acknowledged that the employment of the CEO is managed by the elected Council and this has the potential to become a factor in that employment relationship.

Q6: Should it be of concern that the vote of the unelected CEO can be decisive in a sensitive community issue and yet the CEO is not accountable to that community?

A: As outlined above, this may be considered a reputational risk to the Council, as the Community may feel the provision of the vote is outside the democratic process.

Q7: What process would the Council need to follow to remove the CEO as a voting member of a Committee?

A: Council’s Strategy and Assets and Development and Environment Committees (including role, delegation and membership) are established by Council Resolution. The membership or features of those Committees can be altered by Council Resolution at any time.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.134 Notice of Motion - Statement from the Heart

HPERM Ref: D20/236085

Submitted by: Clr Bob Proudfoot

Clr Nina Digiglio

Purpose / Summary

The following Notice of Motion, of which due notice has been given, is submitted for Council’s consideration.

Recommendation

That Council adopt the Local Government NSW Albury 2018 Conference policy on the Statement from the Heart as follows:

1. Recognise that the Uluru Statement is a clear expression of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ vision toward Makarrata and reconciliation.

2. Acknowledge the challenges in the Uluru Statement and call on our national parliament to rise to these challenges and to establish a First Nations voice to Parliament.

3. Endorse that a statement supporting the Uluru Statement be submitted to the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition Relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples on behalf of LGNSW.

Background

The ‘Uluru Statement from the Heart’ was developed through wide consultation with First Nations peoples across Australia. The Statement not only outlines the history and pain of dispossession but also outlines the desired outcomes for the future – “a future for our children based on justice and self-determination”. Our non-indigenous community have now had extensive education and discussion on Constitutional Reform and have given every indication that it is time to formalise the general feeling of the wider community.

Uluru Statement from the Heart:

We, gathered at the 2017 National Constitutional Convention, coming from all points of the southern sky, make this statement from the heart:

Our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tribes were the first sovereign Nations of the Australian continent and its adjacent islands, and possessed it under our own laws and customs. This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according to the common law from ‘time immemorial’, and according to science more than 60,000 years ago.

This sovereignty is a spiritual notion: the ancestral tie between the land, or ‘mother nature’, and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were born therefrom, remain attached thereto, and must one day return thither to be united with our ancestors. This link is the basis of the ownership of the soil, or better, of sovereignty. It has never been ceded or extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown.

How could it be otherwise? That peoples possessed a land for sixty millennia and this sacred link disappears from world history in merely the last two hundred years?

With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia’s nationhood.

Proportionally, we are the most incarcerated people on the planet. We are not an innately criminal people. Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates. This cannot be because we have no love for them. And our youth languish in detention in obscene numbers. They should be our hope for the future.

These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the torment of our powerlessness.

We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.

We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.

Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.

We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making between governments and First Nations and truth-telling about our history.

In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.136 Notice of Motion - Sussex Inlet Canal - Badgee Boundary Adjustment and Waterway Dedication

HPERM Ref: D20/234906

Submitted by: Clr Patricia White

Purpose / Summary

The following Notice of Motion, of which due notice has been given, is submitted for Council’s consideration.

Recommendation

That:

1. Council receive the update report for information.

2. Council allocate loan funding of up to $250,000 to carry out preliminary works to enable the boundary Adjustment and waterway dedication.

3. Those residents who ‘opt in’ to the proposed dedication of the boundary adjustment and waterway dedication equally share the repayment of the loan funds.

4. Residents who wish to ‘opt in’ with hardship issues, may seek Council support under Council’s Hardship policy with a view to establish a payment plan.

5. Council enter a Deed with those residents who ‘opt in’ for repayment of funds. This Deed to be secured by a Caveat on the land.

Background

For many years Council has received reports regarding the Taliac land and canal in Sussex Inlet. The concerns include the need to regularise many unauthorised structures and have the waterway portion dedicated to Council. This would then form part of the existing canal infrastructure in Sussex Inlet as part of boating navigation.

At present the Canal is privately owned by Taliac between the Jacobs Drive Bridge and the Badgee Bridge Sussex Inlet. This canal was constructed in the 1960’s. Over time residents have built revetment walls, jetties and other structures along the canal and on Taliac land. Currently, Taliac own a proportion of land between the resident property owners and the canals with the biggest proportion on one lot being approximately 60m².

Following complaints, a report to Council last year highlighted the need to regularise the unauthorised structures and the ownership of the canal.

Over the last 12 months meetings have been held with Council Staff, Taliac and Planners, Allen Price and Scarratts. There have also been 2 public meetings with residents residing on the affected canal to resolve the issues.

At the meetings we have worked through issues including: -

1. Ownership of the revetment walls

2. Jetty and structures in the canal – both approved and unauthorised

3. Residual land owned by Taliac – between the residents’ property and the canal and unauthorised structures on this land.

4. Council owned land around the bridge areas

5. Legislation and way forward

6. Residents’ concerns with costs, the process for regularising unauthorised structures, revetment walls and land ownership

7. Hardship for residents who have lived on the canal for many years

8. Cost of project works to enable transfer and dedication linguistics

Council staff and Taliac representatives have now come up with a plan to move forward as follows:

(a) Council Officers’ perspective

(i) Keen to only take over the waterway and licence the jetties that are located within the waterway.

(ii) Prefer the retaining walls and land are transferred to the current residential landowners before the jetties are regularised.

Taking on ownership of revetment walls and the parcels of land between residents and the canals would have major cost implications such as maintenance & insurance. Access issues from residents’ properties to the water’s edge would be problematic as land would be classified as Council reserve and public access into people’s backyards would be difficult to manage.

It is acknowledged that not all owners may “opt in” due to the cost. The proposed dedication of funds to allow this to happen with an interest free payment option should entice everyone to opt in.

(b) Property Boundaries

Taliac has agreed to transfer the land between the residents’ property boundaries and the canal boundary to the residents by way of dedication.

(i) This work will be carried out by a boundary adjustment between Taliac and the residents.

(ii) Residents will have the option to “opt in” to the boundary adjustment. Following the resident meetings, it is expected that most owners will ‘opt in’. Owners that choose to ‘opt in’ to the boundary adjustment will need to:

(1) Pay for the legal fees to have the transfer completed; and

(2) Pay on a pro rata basis to offset the costs for the original survey works.

(iii) Opt-out residents: Residents that “opt-out”, will not need to pay for the survey work but they will not receive the land. These residents will be advised that land will be transferred to Council’s ownership and it will be included in the licence agreements for any jetty they may want to retain. Should an owner opt out and the land is transferred to Council, then any future transfer of ownership would need to be at the market rate.

If there is a revetment wall and jetty associated with these properties, then they will need to pay for an Engineer’s report attesting to the adequacy of the revetment wall. All jetties will need to be demolished if the owner opts out. Any works deemed necessary for rectification of the revetment walls, will need to be carried out by the owner.

The logistics of this project for the boundary adjustment to residents and transfer of the canal to Council are difficult due to the number of residents involved. The process involves:

(i) Main survey of the whole canal and residential properties including structures

(ii) Preparation of legal documentation including Deeds and Transfers

(iii) Legal advice for residents

(iv) Discussion and sign off with Mortgagees

(v) Engineers’ Reports

(vi) Meetings ongoing Resident, Consultant and Staff

(vii) Subdivision Costs

The costs have been estimated at $250,000 excluding Engineering Costs for the jetties which are to be met by all residents separately. Those that “opt in” will not require engineering certification on the revetment walls because these will be wholly contained within the landowner’s parcel as part of the boundary adjustment. When these revetment walls need to be replaced, they will be the subject of a separate development application.

As we are dealing with 54 residents it is difficult to undertake the work required whilst waiting for payment from those who “opt in”. As the first stage is a survey of the whole area. This involves establishing the current boundaries of the properties and to highlight:

(1) the area of land (in m²) that is being used by the individual property owners. This area must account for the outer edge of the revetment walls.

(2) location of the revetment walls, jetties, boat ramps and any other structure that has been constructed on Taliac land.

This recommendation proposes Council loan fund the works required to complete the works required and the residents repay Council. This is believed to be the simplest straightforward way forward to ensure the canal and unregularized structures are resolved in a quick, efficient, professional and organised manner.

Council will need to enter a Deed for repayment of the loan funds which is estimated to cost residents between $5,000 if all residents opt in or $7,000 if 50% of residents opt in. This is a major cost saving for the residents as if each resident had to pay individually for the works it would cost approximately $16,000 each.

Council is aware that some residents may have difficulty in paying the costs. Following discussions with the CEO, Council should be able to establish a payment plan, for those residents in hardship and unable to meet the costs for ‘opting in’ on a single payment to Council.

(d) Engineering Reports

In relation to the illegal structures and jetties, Council will require the residents to obtain Engineering reports at their own costs.

Following the works project the revetment walls will largely be within the ownership of the residents. All jetties will need to be assessed for structural stability. Only one Engineer will be engaged for this work. This will be a second “Opt-in” or “Opt-out” arrangement – but at no cost to Council.

(i) “Opt-in” owners: The owners of the property would pay the cost of the report on their own jetty.

(ii) Opt-out residents: The jetties would need to be demolished by the owners.

(iii) On completion of any works identified in the Engineer’s report as any work identified by the Engineer would need to be completed by the owners of the jetty within a set time period (say 3 months).

(iv) The Engineer will prepare a final clearance certificate once the work has been completed.

(v) Failure to complete the works within that time would revert to a demolition order.

(vi) Licence agreements: Owners would enter into licence agreements for the use of the jetties and pay the annual fees (and land if they did not opt into the purchase pathway identified in point (b) above).

(e) Building Information Certificate (BIC)

Following all the project works, Taliac Pty Limited is required to submit 1 building information certificate application to Council. The survey plan accompanying this BIC would show:

(i) the location of all remaining Jetties.

(ii) the new boundary accounting for all owners that have opted in and out of the boundary adjustment identified in item 2 above.

(iii) Council will also require a copy of each engineering certificates attesting to the structural adequacy of each jetty.

(f) Transfer of waterway and any residual land to Council

Once Council has issued the BIC, Taliac Pty Limited would arrange for the completion of the DP and the transfer of the waterway and any residual land to Council.

This has been a long and complex matter to resolve. It is in the best interest of our residents who live on the Canal and the community to resolve the issues that have developed over the last 60 years on this canal. Resolving the issues will improve the safety on the canal, regularise illegal structures, and complete the boating access on the canal system in Sussex Inlet.

I request all Councillors to support the residents and resolve the issues.

Note by the CEO

Council’s Compliance staff have been working with the Community for over two years to resolve the unauthorised structures and jetties on this stretch of waterway in Sussex Inlet. Council’s staff are keen to get this resolved as there have been complaints concerning the safety of the canal and in particular the structural stability of the jetties contained along it.

Having this resolved will reduce Council’s liability should an incident occur where a jetty was found to be unsatisfactory.

Two public meetings have been held with owners where the issues and process have been explained in detail. Owners have expressed a general desire to work with Council to resolve this issue but they are understandably cautious and worried about the likely costs involved.

At the last public meeting, Council staff gave owners an undertaking to obtain firm quotations and then present these to a future meeting for their consideration.

Essentially, the resolution of these issues would require the following processes to be completed and these have been discussed with the landowners and Taliac:

(a) The survey of the land to establish the extent of the encroachments onto Taliac land.

(b) Boundary adjustments to ensure all revetment walls and other land structures are located wholly upon the individual land owner’s properties (Note: - the jetties will remain on the waterway). This will require separate development applications and the registration of the boundary adjustment with NSW Land Titles.

(c) The assessment of the jetties from a professional engineer, the completion of any identified remedial works and final certification. This is all completed at the owners’ cost and will not be paid for out of the Council account.

(d) A single building certificate to regularise the jetties

(e) A final boundary adjustment dedicating the waterway to Council.

(f) The licensing of the jetties with Council.

This will be a long process and the key to its success is the need for all impacted owners to “opt-in” to the proposal. To “opt-in” owners will need to provide written acceptance moving forward. The more owners that “opt-in”, the cheaper the overall costs will be for them. The benefit to the owner is the gift of the portion of land transferred from Taliac into their ownership. The size of this land gift will vary between owners and this will have a pro-rata component for the payment of the initial survey.

The delay has been with obtaining firm quotations for each process and this is understandable given the level of complexity. The quote was received on 19 May 2020 and it can now move to the next stage. The overall cost is in the order of $250,000. The main costs are associated with survey work ($130K), legal fees ($70K) and registrations (23K). The quote also includes a contingency.

The setting of an account with Council is seen as the best way to get things moving and ensure consultants are paid for their services in a timely manner. Once the survey is completed, the pro-rata rate can be set for each property owner. This is the only variation in the amount payable by owners as the requirements for legal fees, development application fees and registration fees with NSW Land Titles are all standard. Council would pay the consultant for the initial survey and then invoice property owners for their total contribution to the overall project.

Council would then pay the consultant’s accounts for legal fees and registration fees as these stages are completed.

It is acknowledged some owners will struggle with the payment and this has been identified during the public meetings. Council will be able to consider these on their merit and arrange for a payment plan over 3 to 5 years. There will also be a requirement that if the property changes ownership, then the account is paid at settlement.

If this notice of motion is approved, a further public meeting will be held whereby the costs will be discussed along with this payment method. It is hoped most people will see the goodwill offered to them by Council and “opt-in” to the proposal. In an effort to encourage everyone to “opt-in”, Council staff will highlight that the long-term benefits to owners will far outweigh the costs of this proposal.

Support is given to this Notice of Motion for the creation of loan funding to the value of $250,000.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.137 Report of the Strategy & Assets Committee - 9 June 2020

HPERM Ref: D20/224913

Attachments: 1. SA20.8 - Letter of Offer - Loan Agreement - Holiday Haven (under separate cover) ⇨

SA20.85 2019/2020 Council Borrowings - Loan Agreement - Holiday Haven

HPERM Ref: D20/203949

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Enter into a loan agreement with National Australia Bank Limited for the amount of $1,528,500 with a term of 10 years @ 2.177% to cover Holiday Haven’s borrowing requirements that were included in 2019/20 Operational Plan.

2. Execute the following documents under the Seal of Council:

a. Letter of offer.

b. Authorised representative certificate.

c. Compliance certificate.

SA20.86 March 2020 Quarterly Budget Review

HPERM Ref: D20/204355

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Receive the March Quarterly Budget Review Report.

2. Adopt the adjustments, as outlined in the March Quarterly Budget Review document.

3. Approve the projects being carried forward to 2020/2021 financial year.

4. Note that the net impact of Council’s response to and recovery from the Currowan bushfire, the flood event and COVID-19 is currently at $3.9M, out of which $3.2M is included in proposed budget adjustments to the general fund.

5. It is recommended for the Council to assess any savings achieved in completed projects at year end and to use these funds to replenish working capital to offset the unfavourable impact of $3.2M budget adjustment reporting at this Review with this assessment to be undertaken as a part of June Quarterly Budget Review.

6. Future quarterly budget reviews will provide updated information as it becomes available, along with the necessary adjustments for the full financial impact of these disasters to be recognised.

SA20.87 Proposed Lease of Part Lot 55 DP 1188161 & Part Lot 1 DP 1139157 - Berry Tennis Courts

HPERM Ref: D19/390898

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Enter into a Five (5) year lease agreement, with a Five (5) year option period over Part Lot 55 DP 1188161 & Part Lot 1 DP 1139157, Woodhill Mountain Road, Berry to Berry Tennis Club at a commencement rent of $3,466 plus GST per annum with annual CPI increases. Noting that

a. The estimated Whole of Life costing of the facility is approximately $22,000 per annum.

b. The Berry Tennis Club will be responsible for routine maintenance and repairs at the facility.

2. Restrict the rent received, via a Restricted Asset Account established for Berry Tennis Club, with the funds contributing towards the cost of resurfacing of the four tennis courts, repair/replacement of existing fencing and floodlighting (8 poles).

3. Approve the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven be affixed to any documents required to be sealed otherwise the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign any documentation necessary to give effect to this resolution.

SA20.88 Proposed Lease of Part Lot 1 DP629175, 21 Meriton Street, St Georges Basin

HPERM Ref: D20/76196

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Enter into lease agreements for the areas depicted in Attachment 1 (D20/107448) for the use and occupation of the community building located on Part Lot 1 DP 629175, 21 Meriton Street, St Georges Basin with:

a. Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District (ISLHD) for a term of five (5) years at an initial annual gross rental of $66,211 Ex GST with annual CPI increases

b. Bay & Basin Community Resources Limited (BBCR) for a term of five (5) years at an initial annual gross rental of $2,823 Ex GST with annual CPI increases

noting that the estimated Whole of Life costs for the facility are estimated to be approximately $61,300

2. Increase St Georges Basin Community Centre Management Committee quarterly payment for loss of rent and office space to $4,569.25 (GST free) with annual CPI increases.

3. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the lease terms and conditions that may not yet be determined.

4. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign any documentation required to give effect to this resolution and to affix the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven to all documentation required to be sealed.

SA20.89 Classification of Land - Lot 2 DP 591885 - 3 Schofields Lane, Nowra

HPERM Ref: D20/149017

Recommendation

That Council classifies the land described as Lot 2 DP 591885 known as 3 Schofields Lane, Nowra as Operational Land.

SA20.90 Classification of Land - Lot 1 DP 1256763 - Yalwal Road, Yalwal

HPERM Ref: D20/150873

Recommendation

That Council classifies the land described as Lot 1 DP 1256763 known as Yalwal Road, Yalwal as Operational Land.

SA20.91 Proposed Lease to Mollymook Beach Hut - Lot 7038 DP 1061116

HPERM Ref: D20/152174

Recommendation

That Council:

1. As the Crown Land Manager of R52790 (Mollymook Beach Reserve) enter into a 5-year lease plus 2 x 5-year options for shops 1, 2 & outdoor dining area, 83 Ocean Street, Mollymook with Bruce Maxwell Yalden and Maria Teresa Yalden (T/A Mollymook Beach Hut) at a commencement rent of $43,000 (excl GST) pa + outgoings with annual CPI increases and market reviews in years 5, 10 & 15.

2. Require each party to pay their own legal costs in this matter.

SA20.92 Classification of Land - Lot 8 DP 1255835 Currarong Road Kinghorne

HPERM Ref: D20/173414

Recommendation

That Council classify the land described as Lot 8 DP 1255835 Currarong Road Kinghorne, as Operational Land.

SA20.94 Nowra Golf Course - Proposed Leases to Bomaderry Bowling Club Ltd

HPERM Ref: D20/186416

Recommendation

That Council

1. Accept the surrender of the licence between Council and Nowra Golf Club Limited over Lot 2 DP 540883 & Lot 3 DP 528318 dated 11 October 2001.

2. As Crown Land Manager accept the surrender of the licence between the Greys Beach (R68918) Reserve Trust (the affairs of which were formerly managed by Council) and Nowra Golf Club Limited over Lot 7303 DP 1164490 dated 11 October 2001.

3. Enter into a twenty (20) year lease agreement with Bomaderry Bowling Club Limited over Lot 2 DP 540883, Lot 3 DP 528318 (Nowra Golf Course - 86 Fairway Drive, North Nowra) for an initial rent of $504pa (excl GST) with annual CPI increases.

4. As Crown Land Manager of R68919 (known as Greys Beach Reserve) enter into a twenty (20) year Crown lease agreement with Bomaderry Bowling Club Limited over Part Lot 7303 DP 1164490, Part Lot 239 DP 728005 & Part Lot 7302 DP 1164490 for an initial rent of $504pa (excl GST) with annual CPI increases.

5. Note that Council maintains Fairway Drive to the benefit of the general community, but the latter part (approximately 415 metres) of Fairway Drive is more akin to a dedicated driveway to the Golf Club. Periodic maintenance (pothole filling) and resealing on an eight to ten-year cycle costs Council in the order of $15,000pa and this is funded from standard road maintenance allocations.

6. Require each party to pay their own legal costs in this matter.

7. Approve the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven be affixed to any documents required to be sealed otherwise the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign any documentation necessary to give effect to this resolution.

SA20.97 Shoalhaven Coastal Management Program - Stage 1 - Citywide Scoping Study Report - Community Feedback - Adoption

HPERM Ref: D19/444132

Recommendation

That Council adopt the Final Shoalhaven Coastal Management Program Scoping Study (referred as The Scoping Study) with amendments following public exhibition taking into considerations community submissions, as detailed in the report and proceed with the following:

1. Formation of the proposed North, Central, and Southern Coast and Estuary Management Committees and coastal management program working groups, the following Councillors to be Chairpersons:

a. Ward 1 Clr. John Wells

b. Ward 2 Clr. Bob Proudfoot

c. Ward 3 Clr. Patricia White

2. CMPs priority and timeline for completion as follows:

Coastal Management Program Priority	Timeline for Completion
Lake Conjola Estuary	2021
Shoalhaven Coastline (update)	2021
Jervis Bay (Stand-alone)	2021
Sussex Inlet/Swan Lake Berrara (Stand-alone)	2022
St Georges Basin	2022
Lower Shoalhaven River	2022
Lake Wollumboola	2023
Burrill Lake Lake Tabourie Lake Willinga	2023
Currambene Creek, Moona Moona Creek	2024
Shoalhaven Urban & Rural Estuaries	2025

3. Seek additional grant funding where required to undertake assessments as detailed in the Scoping Study.

4. Council allocate funding as follows:

a. Additional $497,500 (including additional funding for a stand-alone Jervis Bay, St Georges Basin, Sussex Inlet/Swan Lake/Berrara) in 2020/21, to provide 50% contribution to the above grants and revise section 7 of the Scoping Study accordingly.

b. Long Term financial plan from 2021/22 each year to match approved grant funding, to continue CMPs.

5. Commence preparation of Tender documentation for the preparation of the Shoalhaven Coastline, Jervis Bay, Lake Conjola, and St Georges Basin/Sussex Inlet Coastal Management Programs.

SA20.100 Next Steps - Proposed Affordable Housing Development - Council Land, Coomea Street, Bomaderry

HPERM Ref: D20/11340

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Engage at no cost via a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) the NSW Department of Communities & Justice (DCJ) to assist Council in the delivery of Council’s vision of an affordable housing development consistent with the Shoalhaven Affordable Housing Strategy.

2. Contribute land known as 44-50 Coomea Street, Bomaderry via an Assistance/Funding Agreement with DCJ (the Secretary of the Department of Family and Community Services (FACS) – as the ‘Housing Agency’) to be used to construct an affordable housing development, conditional upon:

a. The land being used for long term Affordable Housing;

b. The capital contribution by Council being retained in perpetuity within the Shoalhaven Local Government Area;

c. Any change in use of the land must be approved by Council;

d. DCJ agreeing to Council staff, as nominated by the CEO, constituting part of any tender committee and ongoing steering committee established under the assistance/funding agreement; and

e. The Minister for DCJ directly appoint Southern Cross Housing as the Tier One registered Community Housing Provider (CHP) to build, own, manage and operate the affordable housing development as defined in the Community Housing Assistance Agreement entered into between the Secretary of the Department of Family and Community Services (FACS) – as the Housing Agency and Southern Cross Housing as the provider

3. Grant authorisation to DCJ (Housing Agency) to register an Interest in the Council land restricting dealings in the land without the consent of the Minister of DCJ (Housing Agency) consistent with Clause 14 of the Community Housing Providers (Adoption of National Law) Act 2012 (CHP Act)

4. Transfer as and when identified in the Assistance/Funding Agreement (Point 2 above) the ownership of 44-50 Coomea Street, Bomaderry to Southern Cross Housing for $1.00, noting that this will reflect a financial contribution from Council to the affordable housing project in the form of property assets valued at $1.75 million plus legal and administrative costs.

5. Approve the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven to be affixed to any documents required to be sealed otherwise the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign any documentation necessary to give effect to this resolution.

Note by the CEO:

Following subsequent feedback received from the NSW Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ) Parts 1 and 2(e) of the original recommendation need to be adjusted slightly to enable its smoother/timelier implementation. In hindsight, the specific project Memorandum of Understanding mentioned in Part 1 and the reference to the Minister in Part 2(e) are not required and could unnecessarily complicate things.

Recommended alternative resolution:

That Council:

1. Work with the NSW Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ) to deliver Council’s vision of an affordable housing development consistent with the Shoalhaven Affordable Housing Strategy.

a. The land being used for long term Affordable Housing;

b. The capital contribution by Council being retained in perpetuity within the Shoalhaven Local Government Area;

c. Any change in use of the land must be approved by Council;

d. DCJ agreeing to Council staff, as nominated by the CEO, constituting part of any tender committee and ongoing steering committee established under the assistance/funding agreement; and

e. DCJ will enter into contracts with the community housing provider appointed by Council as required to facilitate the development of affordable housing.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.139 Quarterly Progress Report - Councillors' Notices of Motion

HPERM Ref: D20/202382

Approver: Stephen Dunshea, Chief Executive Officer

Attachments: 1. Incomplete Notices of Motion (councillors information folder) ⇨

2. Completed Notices of Motion (councillors information folder) ⇨

Reason for Report

To provide the quarterly progress status on Councillors’ Notices of Motion as resolved at the Ordinary Meeting in December 2018.

Recommendation

That the Progress report on Councillors’ Notices of Motion be received for information.

Options

1. As recommended

2. Alternate recommendation

Implications: Not known

Background

In response to a Notice of Motion (CL18.350), at the Council Meeting held on 18 December 2018, Council resolved (MIN18.992):

“That the progress status of councillors’ notices of motion be reported quarterly at Ordinary Meetings of Council.”

Report

This report provides, in the Councillor Information folder, the following:

· A list of incomplete Notices of Motion (Note: Notices of Motion from recent meetings may not contain comments).

· A list of Notices of Motion completed since 1 March 2020.

The report has been provided for Councillors’ information. As requested, a Councillor Briefing has been scheduled for Thursday 18 June 2020 to discuss any concerns raised prior to consideration at the Ordinary Meeting on 23 June 2020.

In regard to MIN20.240 - Notice of Motion - COVID 19 / Economic Crisis - Rate Relief report request - Core Committees - Sport / Arts / Community groups - Fees & Charges - Staff - Development assessment / fees / refusal / 90 days - Sect 64 / 7.11 contributions – Contributions the following table, which was provided to the Ordinary meeting of 28 April 2020 has been updated for your information.

Minute Part	Topic	Status / When Report to be provided	Responsible Group
1	Payment under s356 of $300 to ratepayers	Complete – emails and letters provided to residents, week of 8 June 2020	CEO
2	Strategy and Assets, Development & Environment be retained and be referred matters not requiring Council Resolution	Complete	FCCS
3	Conduct of Electronic Meetings	Complete	FCCS
4	Report on measures to give relief to sporting, arts and community groups	Complete – report provided to S&A Committee 12 May 2020	FCCS
5	Progress report on the review of fee and charges applicable to business.	Report to Ordinary Meeting 23 June 2020	ED
6	Report on a strategy to redeploy Staff	Complete – report provided to Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2020	FCCS
7a	Waive fees for pre-lodgement meetings	Complete – report provided to Ordinary Meeting 28 April 2020	PED
7b	Discount DA lodgement fees by 50%	Complete – report provided to Ordinary Meeting 28 April 2020	PED
7c	Transfer of Duties – Compliance Staff	Complete – report provided to Ordinary Meeting 28 April 2020	PED
7d	Fast Track Unit for Employment Generating Proposals	Complete – report provided to Ordinary Meeting 28 April 2020	PED
7e	Discounting of Water and Sewer Headworks Charges	Complete – report provided to Ordinary Meeting 28 April 2020	SW
7f	Discounting of Section 7.11 Developer Contributions (Section 94 Contributions	Complete – report provided to Ordinary meeting 23 June 2020	PED
7g	Amend the Current Shoalhaven Development Contributions Plan	Complete – report provided to Ordinary meeting 23 June 2020	PED
7h	Be pro-active, process DA’s quickly and efficiently	Complete – report provided to Ordinary meeting 28 April 2020	PED
7i	DA’s with Council for more than 90 days	Complete – report provided to Ordinary meeting 28 April 2020	PED
7j	Immediate acknowledgment of DAs	Complete – report provided to Ordinary meeting 28 April 2020	PED
7k	Removal of Delegation to CEO to Refuse DA’s	Completed – delegations updated	FCCS/ PED

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.141 Tenders - Woollamia Boat Ramp Service Wharf

HPERM Ref: D20/229818

Section: Economic Development

Approver: Greg Pullen, Economic Development Manager

Reason for Report

To inform Council of the tender process for Woollamia Boat ramp Service Wharf.

In accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, some information should remain confidential as it would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it. It is not in the public interest to disclose this information as it may reveal commercial-in-confidence provisions of a contract, diminish the competitive commercial value of any information to any person and/or prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests. This information will be considered under a separate confidential report.

This report is submitted directly to the Ordinary Council Meeting pursuant to Clause 3 of Council’s “Acceptance of Tenders – Reports to Council” Policy.

Recommendation

That Council consider a separate confidential report in accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Options

1. Consider the separate confidential report.

Implications: Full details of the tendering process is available within the confidential report to enable Councillors to make an informed decision.

2. Council could propose an alternative

Implications: No opportunity to assess and make an informed decision on the tender process and results.

Details

Council called tenders for the design and construction of a service wharf to Currambene Creek at Woollamia Boat ramp including rebuild of the existing revetment and provision of screening to prevent small craft accessing under wharf. This project was made possible by Council securing a Growing Local Economies grant under Restart NSW. Tenders were called on 25 April 2020 and closed at 10:00am on 19 May 2020.

Details relating to the evaluation of the tenders is contained in the confidential report.

Community Engagement:

The service wharf is a component of the Woollamia Boat Ramp Master Plan that was adopted by Council in 2020.

The original Masterplan Rev C was for a long service wharf with a travel lift at the upstream end adjacent the disabled parking bay and this required removal of existing trees. Following user group requests for more pontoons and less wharf, the wharf was reduced. Residents expressed concerns in regard to noise and traffic congestion at the car park entrance so the location was moved downstream under Masterplan 2020 Rev H as far as practicable without removing any existing stage 2 pontoons.

The relocation was not favoured by the user groups as it created a split between the downstream and upstream pontoons and mixed the commercial use with recreational use. While the relocation is not favoured by the user groups they have been advised that the design includes for the front of the service wharf being faced to allow recreational vessels to “shuffle” along the pontoons during peak times and that the separation can be of benefit to delineate “drop and go” pontoons from “short stay” pontoons.

User group consultation also highlighted the restrictions of a 7 metre wide wharf at class 15 loading; however, due to funding limits no commitments were made to increase the width or strength. The Masterplan Rev H relocation was also not fully supported by the users as it was not aligned with the car park lanes and retained only the existing berthing pontoon length.

Subsequent to tenders closing the pricing of the options is such that the budget can afford the 9 metre wide class 25 wharf.

Providing the 9 metre class 25 wharf facilitates a greater capability in terms of width and strength, provides a nominal increase in the downstream pontoon length, provides more direct vehicle access to and from the service wharf, retains the existing upstream trees and retains the objective to have the facility as far downstream away from Coulon St as practicable.

Financial Implications:

Sufficient funds have been allocated in the Economic Development budget for the 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 Financial Years. Funding is available to cover the tender amount and other project costs.

The funding for this project is to cover two contracts, the service wharf and the Frank Lewis Way single vehicle car park.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.142 Investment Report - May 2020

HPERM Ref: D20/232237

Section: Finance

Approver: Jane Lewis, Acting Director Finance Corporate & Community Services

Attachments: 1. Monthly Investment Report - Shoalhaven City Council - May 2020 (under separate cover) ⇨

Reason for Report

In accordance with section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 and Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation, a written report is provided to Council setting out the details of all money it has invested.

Recommendation

That

1. The report of the Chief Executive Officer (Finance, Corporate & Community Services Group) on the Record of Investments for the period to 31 May 2020 be received for information.

2. Council note Council’s investment portfolio returned a very strong 1.77% for the month of May 2020, exceeding the benchmark AusBond Bank Bill Index (0.10% pa) by 1.67 basis points (1.67%).

Options

1. The report on the Record of Investments for the period to 31 May 2020 be received for information

Implications: Nil

2. Further information regarding the Record of Investments for the period to 31 May 2020 be requested

Implications: Nil

3. The report of the Record of Investments for the period to 31 May 2020 be received for information, with any changes requested for the Record of Investments to be reflected in the report for the period to 30 June 2020

Implications: Nil

Background

Please refer to the attached monthly report provided by Council’s Investment Advisor, CPG Research and Advisory Pty Ltd.

All investments are within the current Minister’s Order. Investments are diversified across the eligible fixed interest universe and well spread across maturities. Available capacity exists in all terms, with medium term particularly relevant to new issues.

Portfolio Return

Council’s investment portfolio returned a very strong 1.77% for the month of May 2020, exceeding the benchmark AusBond Bank Bill Index (0.10% pa) by 167 basis points (1.67%).

The following graph shows the performance of Council’s investment portfolio against the benchmark on a rolling twelve (12) month basis. As can be seen, performance has consistently exceeded the benchmark due to the mix of Council’s investment portfolio.

Interest Earned – May 2020

The following table shows the interest earned for the month of May 2020. The interest earned for the month of May was $286,875, which was $100,073 below the current budget.

Fund	Original Monthly Budget	Actual Earned	Difference	Revised Budget	Revised Difference
General	$277,471	$156,245	-$121,227	$265,071	-$108,827
Water	$57,329	$85,727	$28,398	$70,918	$14,809
Sewer	$50,959	$44,903	-$6,056	$50,959	-$6,056
Total	$385,759	$286,875	-$98,884	$386,948	-$100,073

Interest Earned - Year to Date

Return on the Council investment portfolio was negatively impacted by the catastrophic bushfires followed by floods and the COVID-19 pandemic. Closure of Council community facilities and Holiday Haven Tourist Parks resulted in a significant decrease in cash inflow. In addition, rapid deterioration of interest rates across all types of investments due to natural disasters and pandemic resulted in lower than budgeted return on investments.

The impact of these events on interest revenue continues to be monitored with necessary variations to be reported in future quarterly budget reviews.

The following table shows how the interest earned year to date actual dollars against the total budget forecast dollars is performing with 92% of the year passed – the interest earned to the month of May was $3,959,011, 86.9% of the current full year budget.

Fund	Original Total Annual Budget	Actual YTD February	% Achieved	Revised Budget	Revised %
General	$3,266,999	$2,375,172	72.70%	$3,120,999	76.10%
Water	$675,000	$1,044,218	154.70%	$835,000	125.06%
Sewer	$600,000	$539,622	89.94%	$600,000	89.94%
Total	$4,541,999	$3,959,011	87.16%	$4,555,999	86.90%

The graphs below illustrate the cumulative interest earned for the year for each fund against the original and adjusted budgets.

Please Note: there has been no adjustment to the Sewer Fund interest budget

RECORD OF INVESTMENTS - Cash and Investment Balances

	May 2020	April 2020
Cash And Investments Held
Cash at Bank - Transactional Account	$15,882,527	$7,250,196
Cash at Bank - Trust Fund	$0	$0
Cash on Hand	$43,469	$43,773
Other Cash and Investments	$176,901,762	$180,149,104
	$192,827,757	$187,443,074
Fair Value Adjustment	$286,648	$187,644
Bank Reconciliation	$162,421	-$104,276
	$449,069	$83,368
Book Value of Cash and Investments	$193,276,825	$187,526,441
Less Cash & Investments Held In Relation To Restricted Assets
Employee Leave Entitlements	$8,119,913	$8,119,913
Land Decontamination	$763,913	$764,339
Critical Asset Compliance	$1,739,706	$1,783,788
North Nowra Link Road	$19,650	$19,660
Other Internal Reserves	$12,311,001	$12,002,122
Section 7.11 Matching Funds	$311,169	$311,169
Strategic Projects General	$1,605,304	$0
Industrial Land Development Reserve	$5,928,795	$5,975,838
Plant Replacement	$1,905,613	$1,793,741
Financial Assistance Grant	$6,548,913	$1,574,827
S7.11 Recoupment	$24,262,781	$24,263,548
Commitment To Capital Works	$455,600	$542,692
Property Reserve	$1,596,392	$1,826,518
Total Internally Restricted	$65,568,751	$58,978,155
Loans - General Fund	$4,230,369	$6,765,415
Self Insurance Liability	$1,957,777	$1,925,195
Grant reserve	$4,749,874	$5,325,618
Section 7.11	$12,016,849	$11,826,651
Storm Water Levy	$1,069,646	$1,128,461
Trust - Mayors Relief Fund	$201,401	$241,082
Trust - General Trust	$2,970,519	$3,051,919
Waste Disposal	$5,107,979	$5,322,883
Sewer Fund	$28,720,229	$27,181,903
Sewer Plant Fund	$1,908,012	$2,133,086
Section 64 Water	$19,199,969	$19,307,610
Water Fund	$30,131,078	$31,877,681
Water Communication Towers	$2,005,443	$1,923,447
Water Plant Fund	$2,523,810	$2,857,811
Total Externally Restricted	$116,792,954	$120,868,762
Total Restricted	$182,361,705	$179,846,918

Unrestricted Cash And Investments
General Fund	$10,915,120	$7,679,524

Restricted Asset Movements

The table below lists the major movements in Restricted Assets:

Total Cash	$5,750,384	May was a rates instalment month.
Loans - General Fund	-$2,535,046	Purchase of Land for Moss Vale Road Open Space
Financial Assistance Grant	+$4,974,086	One quarter transferred to General Fund in line with the Financial Assistance Grant instalment month (-$1,574,827), receipt of 2020/21 advance payment (+$6,548,913)
Strategic Projects General	$1,605,304	ShoalWater Dividend FY2019 Paid ($1.4m)
Water Fund	-$1,746,603	ShoalWater Dividend FY2019 Paid ($1.4m)
Unrestricted Cash	+$3,325,597	May was a rates instalment month

COVID-19 Impact

Finance are monitoring cash flows as the unprecedented effects of the COVID 19 pandemic are felt in the community. To support our suppliers through this pandemic, Council is paying their accounts sooner than our previous payment terms.

COVID 19 has also impacted our cash balance, due to the continued closure of Council’s community facilities and Holiday Haven Tourist Parks.

Despite the negative impact of COVID-19, Council continues to maintain a sufficient level of working capital and management closely monitors cash position of the Council.

The rates instalment was due on Sunday 31 May, Council received $4.4M during the month of May with an extra $1.4M on the 1 June due to the weekend. This total received is slightly below what was expected by $250K.

Financial Implications

It is important for Council to be informed about its investments on a regular basis. Revenue from interest forms a vital part of Council’s revenue stream.

Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer

I hereby certify that the investments listed in the attached report have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 and Council’s Investments Policy POL19/72.

A picture containing arthropod, invertebrate

Description automatically generated

Olena Tulubinska Date: 17 June 2020

Responsible Accounting Officer

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.143 Provision of Traffic Control Services Panel

HPERM Ref: D20/196548

Section: Works & Services

Approver: Paul Keech, Director Assets & Works

Attachments: 1. Evaluation Report - Traffic Control Panel Tender - Signed (Confidential - under separate cover)

Reason for Report

To inform Council of the tender outcome for the establishment of a panel of contractors for the Provision of Traffic Control Services across Shoalhaven City Council.

Recommendation

That

1. Council endorse the recommendation of the Tender Evaluation Team and:

a. Accept the tenders from Altus Traffic Pty Ltd, Atlas Traffic Management Pty Ltd, Evolution Traffic Management Pty Ltd, Nowra Shoalhaven traffic Control Pty Ltd, Nowra Traffic 24/7 Pty Ltd, Platinum Traffic Services Pty Ltd, Roadworx Surfacing Pty Ltd, Stop Slow Traffic Control Pty Ltd, Titanium Traffic Pty Ltd, TMPACS Pty Ltd and Traffic Logistics Pty Ltd and form a panel for the provision of traffic control services.

b. Contractors on the panel to be appointed based on best value for Council for the package of works. Noting that in the Bay and Basin region the Jervis Bay Territory will be approached for Traffic Control Services as appropriate.

2. The panel shall be active for a period of two years with options for Council to extend for a further 2 periods of 1 year each.

Options

1. Establish the panel as recommended (preferred option).

Implications: A traffic control services panel will save administration time and energy and provide all parts of Council access to an efficient engagement in accordance with the purchasing policy.

2. Council select different providers.

Implications: This is not recommended as an extensive tender evaluation, comprising price and non-price criteria, has been undertaken in accordance with a Tender Evaluation Plan.

3. Council not to proceed with establishing a panel for traffic control services.

Implications: Currently engaging contractors absorbs a significant amount of time and resources. In addition, current practice potentially exposes Council to allegations of favouritism as quotations are not sourced from the wider industry.

Background

Current practice for engaging traffic control services involves seeking quotations for packages of work. This process takes considerable administration time and resources, with officers required to obtain quotes, select providers, and engage. For a support function such as Traffic Control provision, this is disproportionate to the works in hand.

Tender Details

Council called tenders for Provision of Traffic Control Services across the Shoalhaven from 9 February 2020 to 24 March 2020 with 11 tenders received at the close of tender. One late tender was received from Nowra Traffic 24/7 and was accepted to be considered.

Tenders Received

Tenders were received from the following:

Tenderer	Accepted
Altus Traffic Pty Ltd	Yes
Atlas Traffic Management Pty Ltd	Yes
Evolution Traffic Management Pty Ltd	Yes
Nowra Shoalhaven Traffic Control Pty Ltd	Yes
Nowra Traffic 24/7 Pty Ltd	Yes
Platinum Traffic Services Pty Ltd	Yes
Quickway Solutions Pty Ltd	No
Roadworx Surfacing Pty Ltd	Yes
Stop Slow Traffic Pty Ltd	Yes
Titanium Traffic Pty Ltd	Yes
TMPACS Pty Ltd	Yes
Traffic Logistics Pty Ltd	Yes

The detailed tender evaluation results are shown in Attachment 1.

As a Government Entity Council can work with the Jervis Bay Territory when mutually acceptable to do so, and the Bay and Basin staff will consider this possibility when planning projects.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.144 Tenders - Report - Boongaree Nature Play Park - Supply and Install Play Equipment

HPERM Ref: D20/220315

Section: Project Delivery & Contracts

Approver: Paul Keech, Director Assets & Works

Reason for Report

To inform Council of the tender process for Boongaree Nature Play Park - Supply and Install Play Equipment.

This report is submitted directly to the Ordinary Council Meeting pursuant to Clause 3 of Council’s “Acceptance of Tenders – Reports to Council” Policy.

Recommendation

That Council consider a separate confidential report in accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Options

1. Award the contract as recommended

Implications: The development of the Berry Boongaree Nature Play Park can proceed as planned.

2. Council could choose not to accept the recommendation, and select a different contractor, giving reasons

Implications: This is not recommended as an extensive tender evaluation, comprising price and non-price criteria, has been undertaken in accordance with the Tender Evaluation Plan. There may also be an increase in the cost of the project

3. Council could elect to accept no tender and negotiate with any other person

Implications: This is not recommended as an extensive tender evaluation, comprising price and non-price criteria, has been undertaken in accordance with the Tender Evaluation Plan. The project would be delayed and grant funding deadlines may not be met as a result.

4. Council could elect not to proceed with the Boongaree Nature Play Park – Supply & Install Play Equipment tender.

Implications: This is not recommended as an extensive tender evaluation, comprising price and non-price criteria, has been undertaken in accordance with the Tender Evaluation Plan.

Details

The Berry Boongaree Nature Play Park project has been developed in collaboration with Berry Rotary and the local community to provide a nature based outdoor play experience for children of all ages.

Tenders Received

Tenders were received from the following:

Tenderer	Location
Play By Design	St Leonards , NSW
Moduplay	Unanderra,NSW
Regal	Mulgrave,NSW
CRS	Unanderra,NSW
POPWORKS	Seven Hills,NSW

Details relating the evaluation of the tenders are contained in the confidential report.

Community Engagement:

The community requirements were incorporated through the involvement of Berry Rotary in the development of the conceptual design.

Financial Implications:

Discussed within the Tender Report.

Risk Implications:

Risk implications are considered in the confidential report.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.145 Draft Shoalhaven Local Strategic Planning Statement - Public Exhibition

HPERM Ref: D20/132491

Section: Strategic Planning

Approver: Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group

Attachments: 1. Draft Local Strategic Planning Statement (under separate cover) ⇨

Reason for Report

Obtain Council’s endorsement of the draft Shoalhaven Local Strategic Planning Statement (Attachment 1) for public exhibition to enable the community to provide feedback and participate in the continued development of this required document.

Note: Attachment 1 is the current version of the draft document that is continuing to be refined and ‘desktop’ published ahead of the proposed exhibition.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Endorse the draft Shoalhaven Local Strategic Planning Statement for public exhibition (28-days) to allow the community to participate in the continued development of the draft Statement; and

2. Receive a report on the outcomes of the public exhibition to enable the finalisation and adoption of the Shoalhaven Local Strategic Planning Statement.

Options

1. As recommended.

Implications: This option will provide Shoalhaven’s communities the opportunity to participate in the continued development of the draft Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS), an essential step in its finalisation.

2. Amended recommendation.

Implications: This will depend on the nature of any recommendation. It could however further impact on the LSPS delivery timeframe and this may not be well received by the NSW Government. At present there is an expectation that the LSPS will be finalised in September 2020.

3. Not proceed.

Implications: The delivery of an LSPS is a legal requirement of the NSW Government’s 2018 amendments to the NSW Planning System.

Background

In March 2018, the NSW Government amended the NSW Planning Legislation to attempt to refocus land-use planning activities and community participation into front end strategic planning. These changes included a new requirement for all NSW councils to prepare and publish an LSPS – a new strategic land-use policy document.

LSPSes need to set out a 20-year vision for land use in the Council area, the character, and values to be preserved and outline how change will be managed. These statements also need to implement actions from NSW Government’s plans, in this case the Illawarra-Shoalhaven Regional Plan 2015, and work with adopted Community Strategic Plans (prepared under local government legislation). LSPSes work by informing/guiding future changes to Council’s land-use planning documents, including the Local Environmental Plan, Development Control Plan, and Development Contributions Plan.

The draft Shoalhaven Local Strategic Planning Statement (Attachment 1) is the initial work on the first LSPS for Shoalhaven. The draft Statement brings together and builds on Council’s existing plans, Strategies etc. to set out how Council will identify and meet the Shoalhaven communities’ needs over the next 20-years. It covers how it is anticipated that the City will change and the work required to manage growth, guide development, support the economy, and deliver the infrastructure and services required by communities. This means the draft LSPS addresses a broad range of land use planning related matters, including:

· Number, type and location of new homes,

· Provision of infrastructure and services,

· Job creation, economic growth, and the strengthening of commercial centres,

· Protecting and adapting to our environment, and

· Enhancing our heritage, landscape, and neighbourhoods.

The draft LSPS aims to:

· Establish a land-use Vision for Shoalhaven to provide long-term direction for future land use planning work;

· Summarise the City’s opportunities and challenges;

· Identify Planning Priorities for a range of economic, environmental and social matters;

· Set Actions to deliver the Planning Priorities and the required homes, jobs, services and infrastructure; and

· Show how the implementation of the Planning Priorities and Actions will be monitored.

The draft LSPS (land use planning focus) sits alongside Council’s adopted Community Strategic Plan, which has a similar, but broader, purpose explaining how Council will work to meet the communities’ needs. It also needs to give effect to the Illawarra-Shoalhaven Regional Plan by implementing relevant directions at a local level.

The draft LSPS is a starting point providing a record of current land use planning work and the work required to plan for the next 20-years. It has a seven-year timeframe but can be updated at any time when new planning matters emerge such as significant population growth, infrastructure delivery or the NSW Government’s update of the Regional Plan. It can also be updated as Actions are completed or to implement the direction of a newly elected Council. This could be a relevant consideration following the 2021 elections for example.

The draft LSPS has been prepared to be a succinct and easy to understand document to allow Shoalhaven’s communities to contribute to and understand the future direction of land use. It includes five chapters:

1. Managing growth, focusing on providing the required number and type of homes in appropriate locations and supporting Shoalhaven’s communities with infrastructure.

2. Great places, identifying ways to revitalise Nowra CBD and Ulladulla Town Centre, and protect and enhance the character of the smaller towns and villages.

3. Growing the economy, addressing the provision of more jobs close to home, strengthening commercial centres, and supporting Shoalhaven’s diverse industries.

4. Protecting and adapting to the environment, examining how to protect the environment, adapt to natural hazards, and sustainably manage resources.

5. Celebrating culture and heritage, managing the protection of important landscapes and heritage items/places, and promoting community events and public art.

Together, these chapters contain and set sixteen (16) Planning Priorities for the land use planning matters expected to change or affect Shoalhaven (set out in Table 1). They were informed by an evidence base of existing information, technical studies or strategies dealing with specific matters. Some Planning Priorities are supported with Policy Statements on key planning matters, for example, seeking to protect important rural and industrial lands from residential rezoning proposals. The draft statement also identifies Council’s Current Work and also the collaboration that is occurring or will be required with other organisations – Council’s Collaboration Activity.

Managing growth

Great places

Growing the economy

Protecting and adapting to the environment

Celebrating culture and heritage

Planning Priority 1

Providing homes to meet needs and lifestyles

Planning Priority 3

Protecting and enhancing neighbourhoods

Planning Priority 6

Providing jobs close to home.

Planning Priority 11

Protecting the environment

Planning Priority 14

Heritage items and places

Planning Priority 2

Delivering infrastructure

Planning Priority 4

Nowra CBD

Planning Priority 7

Strengthening commercial centres

Planning Priority 12

Adapting to natural hazards through building resilience

Planning Priority 15

Scenic and cultural landscapes

Planning Priority 5

Ulladulla Town Centre

Planning Priority 8

Promoting a responsible visitor economy

Planning Priority 13

Managing resources

Planning Priority 16

Promoting events and public art

Planning Priority 9

Supporting agriculture and aquaculture

Planning Priority 10

Industrial and defence related opportunities

The proposed Planning Priorities will be worked on and delivered through approximately forty (40) Actions guiding Council’s land-use planning work over the next 7-years (to 2027). This includes the preparation of technical studies and strategies for specific planning matters and a series of updates and amendments to Council’s key planning documents, including the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014, Shoalhaven Development Control Plan 2014, and Shoalhaven Development Contributions Plan 2019. Each action has been allocated a suggested timeframe to prioritise and focus resources on those matters considered the most important.

The draft LSPS also sets out how the implementation of the Planning Priorities and Actions will be monitored. This includes the identification of measures to monitor and report on as follows:

· Using Council’s existing Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework, which requires the publication of an Annual Report and an End of Term Report.

· Working with the existing network of Community Consultative Bodies as reference groups.

· Establishing an internal Strategic Planning Implementation Advisory Committee to coordinate implementation and resources, and track delivery progress.

Council staff will keep working on the development of the LSPS and it is intended that a review of the first version of the LSPS will commence in late 2021 following the NSW Local Government elections (set for September 2021) and also the release of the updated or new Regional Plan (anticipated mid-2021). It is then intended that further reviews will then take place every four (4) years to align with Council’s terms and the update of the adopted Community Strategic Plan. These regular reviews will ensure the Shoalhaven LSPS is contemporary, reflects the Shoalhaven communities’ vision and is aligned to the latest trends and information available regarding the environment and social/economic needs.

Key considerations

There are some key short-term actions and Policy Statements in the current draft LSPS, including:

· The retention and management of existing rural and industrial lands, including protection from competing pressures, especially residential, rural-residential, and mixed-use rezoning proposals and encroachment from sensitive land uses such as residential.

· Developing a Local Housing Strategy to complete the update of the Growth Management Strategy and review of the Nowra-Bomaderry Structure Plan, Jervis Bay Settlement Strategy, Sussex Inlet Settlement Strategy, and Milton Ulladulla Structure Plan.

· Requiring new urban/residential release areas to provide, either directly or through funding, employment opportunities equivalent to the expected number of resident workers.

· Developing and testing an affordable housing development contribution scheme for new urban/residential release areas.

· Undertaking technical studies to determine the future role of Shoalhaven’s rural lands and the amount and type of employment land (including shops and other commercial premises) required in coming years.

Community Participation

The current draft LSPS has been informed by:

· The results of community consultation on other strategic planning documents, including the:

o Growth Management Strategy Discussion Paper (Nov 2018-Jan 2019),

o Draft Shoalhaven Character Assessment Report (Nov 2018-Jan 2019), and

o Various rezoning applications/planning proposals.

· An online community survey testing some draft LSPS content, with 100 survey responses received between February and March 2020.

· Workshops between Councillors and Council staff about the draft LSPS and the related Strategic Planning Works Program.

The draft LSPS needs to be publicly exhibited to provide Shoalhaven’s communities the opportunity to participate in its continued development and finalisation. The NSW Planning Legislation sets a minimum public exhibition requirement of twenty-eight (28) days.

Ways to provide the community more time and ways to participate in the development of the draft LSPS have been considered. This includes longer exhibition timeframes and a range of participation activities, including online surveys and community information sessions. However, current COVID-19 control measures are likely to restrict opportunities for ‘face to face’ community information sessions and the ability to discuss the draft LSPS in person. It is likely that the formal exhibition will take place completely online, via a dedicated page on Council’s “Get Involved” website. This online-only approach is endorsed by the NSW Government as part of the COVID-19 measures.

Council staff are investigating the use of webinars (online presentations), short online surveys, forums, and chat rooms to provide information on the draft LSPS and answer queries and collect feedback. Formal submissions on the draft LSPS will also still need to be made by email or letter.

Opportunities for earlier community participation were delayed due to the 2019/20 bushfires and then due to the continued focus on recovery efforts in recent months, combined with the impact of COVID-19. The NSW Department of Planning, Infrastructure and Environment’s (DPIE) deadline for completing the statement (1 July 2020) removes the opportunity for a longer exhibition period. The exhibition of the draft LSPS will however be widely notified and publicised.

Proposed Next Steps

It is intended that if the recommendation is accepted that the draft LSPS will be exhibited from 1 to 31 July 2020. A further report presenting community submissions and the results of the community engagement will be provided for Council’s consideration in September 2020. This report will also seek Council’s adoption of a final version of the LSPS.

Policy Implications

The LSPS will be the main document identifying and guiding Council’s future strategic land-use planning work (outcomes will be reflected in the Strategic Planning Works Program).

It will also inform future changes to the Council’s key land use planning documents (Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014, Shoalhaven Development Control Plan 2014 and Shoalhaven Development Contributions Plan 2019), the next review of Council’s adopted Community Strategic Plan and also the NSW Government’s current work updating the Regional Plan.

Financial Implications

The implementation of the Actions in the LSPS will need to be considered against existing resources and budgets. The Actions in the Statement are linked/will link to the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework and will inform Council’s Resourcing Strategy.

Risk Implications

Council is legally required to make the first Shoalhaven LSPS by 1 July 2020. However, this timeframe will not be met due to a range of factors that have been communicated to DPIE, including the prioritisation of other strategic planning projects, delayed guidance/training from DPIE, and the impact of the bushfires and subsequent recovery efforts. The development and exhibition of the draft LSPS has most recently affected by the current COVID-19 situation.

An extension to the NSW Government’s deadline has been sought on several occasions, both directly and through Local Government NSW. However, no extension has been granted.

However, DPIE has acknowledged the work undertaken to date and the significant issues Council has and is facing and appears to be comfortable with the planned completion of the LSPS in September 2020.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.146 Planning Proposal (PP027) - Review of Subdivision Provisions - Post Exhibition Consideration and Proposed Finalisation

HPERM Ref: D20/183027

Section: Strategic Planning

Approver: Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group

Attachments: 1. Public Exhibition Submission Summary (under separate cover) ⇨

Reason for Report

· Detail the outcomes of the public exhibition of the Review of Subdivision Provisions Planning Proposal (PP027).

· Enable the amendments to Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 to proceed to finalisation.

Note: this matter is being reported direct to Council given the need for a final position on this Planning Proposal as it responds in part to the impending commencement of the NSW wide Low Rise Medium Density Code on 1 July 2020.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Adopt the Planning Proposal (PP027) as exhibited and forward to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation as a matter of urgency.

2. As part of a separate process:

a. Monitor the effectiveness/appropriateness of the minimum parent lot sizes in proposed clause 4.1A during operation and review as required.

b. Review the zoning of the R1 zoned large lots at the periphery of Huntingdale Estate Berry.

3. Advise key stakeholders, including all CCBs, relevant industry representatives and submitters, of this decision and when the LEP amendment will be made effective.

Options

1. As recommended.

Implications: This is the preferred option as it will enable Council to respond to the changing nature of medium density development and associated subdivision through an amendment to Shoalhaven LEP 2014. The amendment will also involve rezoning 718 lots that are currently zoned R2 Low Density Residential to R5 Large Lot Residential to adequately reflect the prevailing large lot character of the land given the impending commencement of the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code.

This option also enables monitoring of the new clause 4.1A following commencement and a review of a number of large lots at the periphery of Huntingdale Estate Berry as part of separate processes.

2. Adopt an alternative recommendation.

Implications: This will depend on the extent of any changes and could postpone the amendments to Shoalhaven LEP 2014. This may have implications for Shoalhaven as the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code commences on 1 July 2020.

3. Not adopt the recommendation.

Implications: This could stop or postpone the implementation of amendments to Shoalhaven LEP 2014. This option is not preferred as the relevant subdivision provisions in Shoalhaven LEP 2014 may not be amended and 718 large residential lots across Shoalhaven will retain a R2 Low Density Residential zone which does not adequately reflect the prevailing large lot character of the land.

This option also means that the zoning of a number of large lots at the periphery of Huntingdale Estate Berry will not be reviewed.

Background

In 2016, Council commenced a planning review looking at medium density development, dual occupancy development and subdivision potential/implications across the City. Following the review, it was considered that a number of changes to the existing subdivision provisions in Shoalhaven LEP 2014 were required to:

· Tidy up several clauses (interpretation / definition),

· Assist deliver appropriate medium density development in certain residential zones,

· Respond to the NSW Government’s Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code, and

· Lift the restriction on the subdivision of medium density development via the Torrens system.

Thus, on 17 July 2017, Council resolved (MIN17.611) to prepare a Planning Proposal (PP) to amend Shoalhaven LEP 2014 to facilitate this.

Through this process, the appropriateness of an R2 Low Density Residential zoning for certain large lot residential land in Shoalhaven was identified as something that needed reconsideration. The scope of the PP was subsequently expanded to rezone certain R2 land to R5 Large Lot Residential.

The exclusion of certain residential areas/land from the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code was also explored and six villages were ultimately proposed for exclusion (Greenwell Point, Kangaroo Valley, Bawley Point, Kioloa, Depot Beach, Durras North).

The intent and content of the PP was refined following two Councillor workshops (15 October and 10 December 2018) and a Forum with key Development Industry representatives on 5 November 2018. On 2 April 2019 (MIN19.210), Council resolved to endorse a PP and to submit it to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for a Gateway determination.

The PP was submitted to the then NSW Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) and received a mostly favourable Gateway determination on 10 July 2019. The NSW Government required Council to remove the part of the PP that sought to exclude the six villages from the Code and to also include a savings and transitional provision to protect any undetermined development applications or appeal processes. Council was not given delegated authority to finalise the LEP amendment which means the PP will ultimately need to be submitted to the NSW Department of Planning, Infrastructure & Environment (DPIE) for finalisation.

Planning Proposal

Following satisfaction of the requirements of the Gateway determination, the exhibition version of the Planning Proposal seeks to amend Shoalhaven LEP 2014 as follows:

· Include a new sub clause in clause 4.1 (minimum subdivision lot size) to clarify that for the purpose of calculating the area of a battle-axe lot, an access handle is excluded from the calculation.

· Replace existing clause 4.1A (minimum lot sizes for dual occupancies and multi dwelling housing) with a minimum lot size for the parent lot prior to the erection of a dual occupancy, manor house, multi dwelling housing, multi dwelling housing (terraces) or residential flat building. The provision also seeks to lift the restriction on Torrens subdivision via clause 4.1 following lawful medium density development.

This means that medium density development in certain urban zoned locations can only be undertaken if the minimum lot size for the parent lot can be met, however once this is satisfied, the resulting dwellings can be Torrens subdivided to any size.

· Amend clause 4.1C (exception to minimum subdivision lot sizes) relating to dwelling houses, attached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings to reduce the minimum lot size for resulting lots from 350m²to 300m².

· Include term ‘battle-axe’ in the Dictionary.

· Amend all relevant Lot Size Maps to remove the clause 4.1A layer.

· Rezone certain R2 Low Density Residential land in the following locations to R5 Large Lot Residential to assist ensure that the low density large lot characteristics of the land can be maintained into the future: Berry, Bomaderry, Bangalee, Tapitallee, North Nowra, Worrowing Heights, Bewong, St Georges Basin, Conjola Park, Milton, Lake Tabourie.

It is noted that an R5 zoning would trigger clause 4.2D of SLEP 2014 which requires a lot to have a dwelling entitlement prior to the erection of a dwelling house or dual occupancy (clause 4.2D(3)). This clause also considers replacement dwellings (4.2D(5)). It is Council’s intention that all lots potentially affected by this change would retain a dwelling entitlement in this regard.

· Include a savings and transition provision to ensure that the proposed amendments do not affect any undetermined development applications or appeal processes.

Government Agency Feedback

The Gateway determination required consultation with the following relevant NSW Government Agencies prior to public exhibition:

· WaterNSW.

· NSW Rural Fire Service.

It is noted in this regard that Shoalhaven’s recent bushfires resulted in a 6-month delay in receiving a response from the NSW Rural Fire Service, which was received during the public exhibition period. This has unfortunately caused substantial delays in the timeframes associated with the PP.

The Biodiversity and Conservation Division (formerly Office of Environment and Heritage) of DPIE was also directly consulted during the public exhibition period as per the Gateway determination.

The agency responses are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of State Authority Consultation Responses (pre-public exhibition)

Agency	Response Summary
WaterNSW	Supports replacement of existing clause 4.1A with a minimum lot size for parent lots and the lifting of restrictions on Torrens title subdivision as proposed. This change will reduce the opportunity for ‘low rise medium density’ development to bypass the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Drinking Water Catchment) 2011, NorBE and the concurrence of WaterNSW. Recommends describing the relationship of the new clause 4.1A to the Subdivisions Code under the Codes SEPP. Comment - The PP was updated prior to exhibition to provide commentary in this regard. Agrees that the PP does not adversely affect water quality in the Sydney Drinking Water Catchment in relation to Section 9.1 Direction 5.2. Requested reference to the Sydney Catchment Authority be replaced with WaterNSW. Comment - the PP was updated in this regard. Consistency with Section 9.1 Direction 5.2 was noted relating to the timing of consultation with WaterNSW. Comment - This matter has been resolved through WaterNSW’s response and the PP has been updated accordingly. Has no objections to the other elements of the PP, however, notes that further consultation should be undertaken with WaterNSW should the scope of the rezoning be expanded to include land in the Sydney Drinking Water Catchment in the future.
NSW Rural Fire Service	No objection to the PP. Provides commentary on a range of matters to be considered at the DA stage, including requirements for subdivisions, dual occupancy and multi-dwelling development on bushfire prone land. The response also notes that Council should consider other mechanisms to identify and address impacts of an increase in density dispersed across the existing urban landscape (contributions, infrastructure plans) which will be undertaken, as appropriate, through separate processes.
DPIE - Biodiversity and Conservation Division	No comments: however, note that the proposed rezoning of numerous areas from R2 to R5 can result in a range of positive environmental benefits.

Public Exhibition

In accordance with the Council resolution (MIN19.210) and Gateway determination, the PP was publicly exhibited for a period of 30 days, from 22 April to 22 May 2020 (inclusive).

Notices appeared in local newspapers on 22 April 2020. All Community Consultative Bodies (CCBs), Development Industry Representatives and over 700 directly affected landowners (i.e. those subject to the proposed rezoning) were notified directly in writing.

Note: the PP was exhibited during the COVID-19 pandemic period and this was unfortunately unavoidable as Council was advised by the DPIE to exhibit the Planning Proposal as soon as possible in light of the impending 1 July 2020 commencement of the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code (the Code) set by the NSW Government (see further discussion on the Code below).

Given that Council’s customer service centres and other facilities were at the time closed to the public in response to COVID-19, the PP was available for viewing on Council’s public exhibition webpage only. A Get Involved Page was also set up for the project.

Council staff were also available via phone or email to answer any detailed or specific enquiries regarding the proposed rezoning or broader PP. Council staff also held several online meetings with landowners, business owners and CCBs regarding the PP so that these stakeholders can better understand what the proposal means for them. Printed copies of the PP were made available and posted to landowners who advised they did not have access to a computer.

Despite some criticism related to the exhibition occurring during the COVID-19 period, on balance it is considered that the approach generally worked well, with over 100 phone calls received regarding the PP and appreciation being noted for Council’s additional effort in light of the COVID-19 restrictions.

The exhibition material consisted of the following:

· Review of Subdivision Provisions Planning Proposal (PP027).

· Explanatory Statement.

· Gateway determinations dated 10 July 2019 and 12 December 2019.

· Rezoning Frequently Asked Questions.

· Newspaper advertisement.

As a result of the exhibition, twenty (20) formal submissions were received including:

· Sixteen (16) submissions from the community members (i.e. individuals).

· Two (2) submissions from CCBs (The Milton & District Community Forum and The Berry Forum Committee).

· One (1) submission from the Development Industry (Allen Price & Scarratts)

· One (1) internal Council staff submission: Community and Recreation Section.

A detailed summary of the submissions and a Council staff response to all comments raised is provided in Attachment 1 and a brief summary of feedback and resulting recommendations is provided in Table 2.

Copies of the actual submissions can also be made available to Councillors for review prior to the meeting, if required, on request.

Table 2: Consolidated feedback summary and recommendations

Component of Planning Proposal	Summary and Recommendations
New sub clause in clause 4.1 to clarify that for the purpose of calculating the area of a battle-axe lot, that an access handle is excluded from the calculation.	Two (2) submissions were received - one support, one objection. Concern raised regarding exclusion of access handle for smaller blocks and inequity with standard residential blocks. It is noted that this is now a common clause across NSW Standard Instrument LEPs. It is also noted that clause 4.6 (Exceptions to development standards) could be considered where individual flexibility in lot size would result in a better outcome. No changes to the proposal are recommended at this stage.
Replace existing clause 4.1A with a minimum lot size for the parent lot prior to the erection of a certain medium density development. Lift the restriction on Torrens subdivision via clause 4.1 following lawful medium density development. Amend all relevant Lot Size Maps to remove the clause 4.1A layer.	Six (6) submissions were received: · One (1) submission in support. · Five (5) objections: - One (1) suggesting the proposed parent lot sizes are too large. - Four (4) suggesting the proposed provision is too pro-development. The concerns of overdevelopment identified by the community is balanced by the concerns of the development industry that the lot sizes are too large. No changes to the proposed parent lot sizes or resulting Torrens potential in the PP is recommended at this stage. Recommendation: That Council monitor the effectiveness / appropriateness of the minimum parent lot sizes in clause 4.1A during operation and review as required.
Amend clause 4.1C relating to dwelling houses, attached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings to reduce the minimum lot size for resulting lots from 350m²to 300m².	Three (3) submissions objected to the minimum lot size change: · One (1) objection related to a certain part of Berry, which is not applicable as the clause does not apply in that location. · One (1) objection related to size – not large enough to address adverse impacts. · One (1) objection related to size – too large and should be consistent with medium density changes. The concerns of overdevelopment identified by the community is balanced by the concerns of one development industry member that the lot sizes are too large. No change recommended.
Include term ‘battle-axe’ in the Dictionary.	One (1) objection - did not support the definition as the amendment to clause 4.1 was not supported. Noted that ‘access handle’ in the definition should be defined. The drafting has been considered appropriate by the NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office for other LEPs across NSW. As such no change is recommended.
Rezone certain R2 Low Density Residential land in the following locations to R5 Large Lot Residential: Berry, Bomaderry, Bangalee, Tapitallee, North Nowra, Worrowing Heights, Bewong, St Georges Basin, Conjola Park, Milton, Lake Tabourie.	As expected, this was the aspect of the PP that was commented on the most – total of eleven (11) Submissions were received in relation to the proposed rezoning at: · Milton – two (2) in support. · Bangalee – one (1) support, one (1) objection. However the reasons for objection were actually in support of the intent of the rezoning i.e. to stop further subdivision. · Bomaderry – one (1) objection. However again on reading the reasons for objection were actually in support of the intent of the rezoning i.e. to stop further subdivision. · Berry – one (1) in support, two (2) objections. · Citywide generally – one (1) in support, two (2) objections. No submissions were received in relation to the proposed rezoning at Tapitallee, North Nowra, Worrowing Heights, Bewong, St Georges Basin, Conjola Park or Lake Tabourie. It is noted that general support was received via phone enquiries, especially in relation to the Berry, Bangalee and Tapitallee areas. Points of support related to retention of large lot character and future restrictions on subdivision. Objections related to loss of development opportunities and reduction in land value. In this regard it is relevant to note that the areas in question were originally proposed to be zoned R5 in earlier versions of LEP 2014 given their previous zoning under LEP 1985. The R5 zoning did not proceed at that time due to concerns about the potential impact of the then Native Vegetation Act. These concerns are no longer present given legislative changes. Thus on balance, no changes are recommended to the exhibited rezoning proposal. Two (2) submissions raised concern regarding the zoning of the large lot parcels of land at the periphery of Huntingdale Estate, Berry (e.g. Parker Crescent) that are currently zoned R1. Suggest the land should be rezoned to R2 Low Density Residential or R5 Large Lot Residential. There may be some merit in exploring this matter further to consider the appropriateness of an alternative zoning for this land. It is noted that the process has always been that once R1 zoned areas are subdivided/developed that their zoning is then adjusted to the most appropriate residential zone. This change/review is however outside the scope of this current PP. Recommendation: Review the zoning of the R1 zoned large lots at the periphery of Huntingdale Estate Berry as part of a separate process.
Include a savings and transition provision to ensure that the proposed amendments do not affect any undetermined development applications or appeal processes.	One (1) submission in support. No change recommended.

Commencement of the NSW Government’s Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code

The Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code enables the consideration of the following medium density development types as complying development (do not need a development application):

· One and two storey dual occupancies, manor houses and terraces in Shoalhaven’s R1 General Residential, R3 Medium Density Residential and RU5 Villages zones; and

· One and two storey dual occupancies in Shoalhaven’s R2 Low Density Residential zone.

Following the review of the Code by Professor Roberta Ryan in 2019, commissioned by the NSW Government, the commencement of the Code was ‘deferred’ again for Shoalhaven until 1 July 2020. Despite representations, Council has been advised that no further extensions to the Code will be extended by the Minister.

As advised by DPIE, the PP needs to be finalised as soon as possible. It is noted that the delays with the NSW RFS referral have meant that the LEP Amendment will not be in place for 1 July 2020, however, if adopted by Council it can be in place shortly thereafter.

Conclusion

The PP will enable the existing provisions in Shoalhaven LEP 2014 to be refined and brought in line with industry and community expectations, whilst also responding, in part, to recent amendments to NSW Government medium density policy. The PP also seeks to protect the current and proposed large lot character of eleven (11) large lot residential locations across Shoalhaven.

As a result of the public exhibition, no changes are recommended to the exhibited PP, however it is recommended that the following be undertaken as part of separate processes:

· Monitor the effectiveness/appropriateness of the minimum parent lot sizes in clause 4.1A during operation and review as required.

· Review the zoning of the R1 zoned large lots at the periphery of Huntingdale Estate Berry.

The recommendation, if accepted, will enable the PP to be submitted to DPIE for finalisation as soon as possible in line with DPIE’s advice. Thus timing is critical in this regard.

Policy and Risk Implications

The PP represents a change in how medium density development and related subdivision is considered in Shoalhaven. This approach is more responsive and provides a greater element of flexibility for subdivisions.

The Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code commences for Shoalhaven on 1 July 2020. Whilst the LEP Amendment will not be in place for 1 July 2020, in is likely to be place shortly thereafter.

Financial Implications

Finalisation of the PP will continue to be undertaken within the existing Strategic Planning budget.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.147 Proposed Submissions - NSW Government Infrastructure Contributions System Reform and Flood Prone Land Reform

HPERM Ref: D20/187113

Section: Strategic Planning

Approver: Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group

Attachments: 1. Draft Submission - Improving the infrastructure Contributions System Policy Package (under separate cover) ⇨

2. Draft Submission - Flood Prone Land Policy Package (under separate cover) ⇨

Reason for Report

Endorse the draft submissions on the following proposed NSW Government reforms:

· Infrastructure Contributions System Reform (Attachment 1).

· Flood Prone Land Reform (Attachment 2).

Note: because of the timeframes involved it was not possible for these to be reported for consideration through the Development & Environment Committee as would normally be the case.

Recommendation

That Council endorses the draft submissions on the following planning reforms to enable them to be finally submitted to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry & Environment:

1. Proposed Infrastructure Contributions System Policy Package (Attachment 1)

2. Proposed Flood Prone Land Reform Policy Package (Attachment 2).

Options

1. As recommended.

Implications: This is the preferred option as the support and concerns regarding the two reform packages will be presented to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for consideration.

2. Make changes to the draft submissions included at Attachment 1 and 2 and submit to DPIE.

Implications: This option will still enable Council to provide a submission, however the implications of any possible changes are unknown and may require closer consideration or refinement.

3. Not make a submission

Implications: This is not favoured as it will mean Council does not provide input on the changes proposed in the two reform packages.

Overview - Infrastructure Contributions System Reform and Draft Submission

On 15 April 2020, the NSW Government announced a review of the NSW Infrastructure Contributions system by the NSW Productivity Commission. This is to be a comprehensive review of the way local and state infrastructure is funded and how the infrastructure system can be improved, with findings to be reported at the end of 2020.

Running in parallel with this review, and considered as background documents to the review itself, DPIE has proposed a series of shorter-term changes to the infrastructure contributions system. These changes are set out in a suite of five documents that have been exhibited for review/comment:

· Draft planning agreement policy framework.

Planning agreements form one part of the infrastructure contributions system and are negotiated between a planning authority (e.g. Council) and developers to deliver innovative infrastructure solutions, such as community facilities and open space or public infrastructure. They are associated with either a rezoning of land or a development application. The updated draft planning agreements policy framework includes the:

- Draft Secretary’s Practice Note on Planning Agreements which sets out thresholds for the levying of local infrastructure contributions. Councils proposing to levy above the set Section 7.11 thresholds are required to have their plans assessed by IPART to ensure they reflect the reasonable costs of providing infrastructure. The Discussion Paper proposes a number of improvements generally intended to make the IPART review of the contributions plans more efficient

- Ministerial Direction on Planning Agreements which aims to make the use of planning agreements more transparent and increase accountability.

· Improving the review of local infrastructure contributions plans discussion paper.

Section 7.11 of the EP&A Act allows Councils to collect contributions from development towards the cost of providing local infrastructure, for example local roads, drainage, open space and community facilities. The NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Direction 2012 sets out thresholds for the levying of local infrastructure contributions. Councils proposing to levy above the Section 7.11 thresholds are required to have their plans assessed by IPART to ensure they reflect the reasonable costs of providing infrastructure.

The Discussion Paper proposes a number of improvements generally intended to make the IPART review of the contributions plans more efficient.

· Criteria to request a higher Section 7.12 percentage discussion paper.

DPIE is proposing to adopt consistent criteria and principles for Section 7.12 percentages to assist with the assessment and determination of requests to increase the maximum percentage of levies in specific areas from 1% to either 2% or 3%.

Note: Shoalhaven does not have a section 7.12 (percentage based) contributions plan.

· Draft Special Infrastructure Contributions (SIC) guidelines.

Special infrastructure contributions are paid by developers to help fund key elements of state and regional infrastructure in growing areas of Greater Sydney and regional NSW. They operate under Division 7.1 Subdivision 4 of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and are one of the tools the State government uses to ensure that new communities and employment areas are supported with the right infrastructure at the right time. The purpose of the Draft SIC Guidelines is to give greater clarity about the purpose, objectives, principles, methodology of a SIC and allocation of the SIC revenue.

It is noted that there is currently not a SIC in place for the Illawarra-Shoalhaven Region.

· Proposed amendments to the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

The proposed changes seek to improve transparency and accountability in how contributions are received and used via contributions plans and planning agreements. The changes also clarify what information needs to be published by councils and planning authorities on contributions received through contributions plans and planning agreements in annual statements and financial reports.

The overall Reform package and its various elements can be viewed on the DPIE Website.

The key points in the draft Council submission at Attachment 1 include:

· While a review of the contributions system is welcomed, concerns are raised in relation to the timing of the Productivity Commissioner's findings versus the current DPIE reforms.

· The current review does not go far enough in discussing issues associated with development contributions, particularly the payment of contributions relating to complying development.

· Planning Agreements:

- Concern that the strong emphasis on strategic planning throughout the Draft Practice Note may limit the type of public benefits and innovative infrastructure that could be provided under a Planning Agreement, especially where these were not envisaged as part of the higher level planning work.

- Greater guidance on what is meant by: “must not be wholly unrelated to the development”.

- Greater clarity regarding Council policy/procedure content and thresholds for Planning Agreements should be provided.

- More commentary is required on Planning Agreements that are related to Planning Proposals. Importantly, a Planning Agreement should be required to be executed prior to an amendment to a local environmental plan (LEP) being finalised. If this does not occur and the LEP amendment is finalised before the Planning Agreement is executed, then there is no obligation on the developer to enter into the Planning Agreement.

- Appropriate to clarify that delays in Planning Agreements are not exclusively due to Council timeframes etc.

- Clarify whether Council’s Planning Agreement register applies only to Planning Agreements the Council is a party to, or whether it applies to all Planning Agreements that affect land in the LGA. The latter would result in duplication with the DPIE Planning Agreement register, for example.

- Consideration of financial securities instead of registering a Planning Agreement on a title has multiple adverse implications.

· Ministerial Direction: Submission generally supports the proposed Ministerial Direction and its intent.

· Improving the review of local infrastructure contributions plans:

- Support for the proposed increase to the existing thresholds that trigger the IPART review process (Option 2).

- Support for the introduction of an annual indexation mechanism for the thresholds and that the ABS Consumer Price Index – All Groups Sydney (CPI) is the most widely used and suitable mechanism. CPI should be applied to whichever threshold option is ultimately adopted.

- Amendments to the IPART terms of reference is required to assist with transparency and simplifying the system. IPART’s Essential Works List criteria should also be reviewed.

- Removing the existing exemptions to the IPART review process (i.e. grandfathered contributions plans) is not supported, especially for regional areas.

- The submission supports the removal of the requirement to re-exhibit IPART reviewed contributions plans.

· Criteria to request a higher Section 7.12 (flat rate levy) percentage

- Shoalhaven does not have a Section 7.12 plan, however clear and strategic-based assessment criteria, identifying a clear approval pathway is essential and supported for this type of plan.

· Special Infrastructure Contributions (SIC) guidelines. The SIC process for the Illawarra-Shoalhaven Region has commenced, however it is unclear when (or if) a draft SIC will be exhibited and implemented. In addition to the SIC Guidelines, priority must be given to the preparation and delivery of outstanding SIC schemes. Shoalhaven has a number of Part 6 Urban Release Areas where the requirement for a State infrastructure contribution is triggered. As a result, the Illawarra-Shoalhaven SIC needs to be urgently resolved and advice has recently been received that a draft SIC should be available before the end of 2020. In the meantime, given the ongoing absence of a SIC, the effective coordination of regional and state infrastructure is questioned given that individual planning agreements are currently being required/negotiated as required for each development.

· Amendments to the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

- Amendments generally supported. Issues are raised regarding:

§ The additional reporting requirements for Section 7.11 contributions is detailed and this information may be difficult to obtain from Council’s current system application and financial systems.

§ Question whether the required Section 7.11 and Planning Agreement annual statements will be required to stay on Council’s website in perpetuity, or are they are to be replaced on an annual basis with the most recent statement? The extent of the information required regarding land or material public benefit should be explained in detail.

§ Proposed Clause 30A appears to enable the Minister to direct councils not to undertake public participation required in Division 2. If this is the case, further guidance is required regarding this point and its application.

Note: Due to the tight timeframe set down by DPIE for submissions on the Infrastructure Contributions System Reform, it was important for staff to make an initial submission on this matter prior to the deadline of 12 June 2020 to ensure that the submission content would be considered in the reform review. Any additions or amendments to the Council staff submission will be forwarded to DPIE along with the Council resolution. An extension for this further submission has been granted until 30 June 2020.

Overview - Flood Prone Land Reform and Draft Submission

The NSW Government also announced a review of how flooding is considered in land use planning. The Flood Prone Land Review proposes a series of changes via the following:

· Revised Planning Circular – to supersede the current flood related Planning Circular PS07-003 and provide information on the package of changes to how land use planning considers flooding and flood-related constraints.

· Amendment to Schedule 4, section 7A of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 - affects flood related information on Section 10.7 Planning Certificates.

· Revised Ministerial Direction relating to flooding - applies to new Planning Proposals and seeks to ensure that development of land is consistent with the NSW Government’s Flood Prone Land Policy and the principles of the Floodplain Development Manual 2005 and that the LEP provisions on any land are commensurate with flood behaviour and include consideration of the potential flood impacts on and off the subject land.

· Revised LEP flood clauses. Three new local clauses have been developed:

- Flood Planning Area (replaces existing LEP Clause 7.3 - Flood Planning) – Must consider impacts of Climate Change on flood levels in development design; “cumulative impacts” and “safe evacuation from the land” are common themes throughout package and are brought into the clause; additional terms also added to LEP dictionary.

- Regional Evacuation Consideration Area – this clause will not apply to Shoalhaven at this point in time. Currently it only applies to the Hawkesbury Nepean area, as they are the only LGA with a regional flood evacuation strategy or flood related state emergency sub-plan by NSW State Emergency Services.

- Special Flood Considerations - Enables consideration of evacuation process and risk to life in areas between Flood Planning Levels and Probable Maximum Flood Height.

· Proposed new guideline: Considering Flooding in Land Use Planning (2020). This guideline provides advice to councils on flood-related land use planning and the areas where flood-related development controls should apply.

The Review package can also be viewed on the NSW Government Planning Portal.

The key points in the draft Council submission at Attachment 2 include:

· The submission is generally supportive of the proposed changes.

· New notations for Section 10.7 Planning Certificates are generally supported, noting:

- Proposed Planning Certificate Clause 7A(3) – is a new requirement that requires councils to include a notation to advise whether there is a need to consider the impact of development against an established regional evacuation strategy or flood-related state emergency sub-plan, within the Regional Evacuation Consideration area (if the information is available).

Currently, Council is not aware of any regional evacuation strategy or flood-related state emergency sub-plan applying to Shoalhaven. Until such time as a plan/strategy is developed, the notation under Clause 7A(3) of Shoalhaven Planning Certificates, will be ‘No’.

As the State Emergency Service (SES) is a separate government agency, it is essential that a mechanism exists to ensure that the SES liaise with Councils during the regional evacuation strategy or flood-related state emergency sub-plan policy development stage, or at the very least, a referral process is in place so that Councils are aware these documents are being developed so that the Planning Certificates can be updated appropriately.

- Existing definitions in Planning Certificate Clause 7A(3) should be retained as it provides consistency and a place of reference, which is particularly important from a legal context.

- A deferred commencement for the changes should be put in place to allow appropriate time for Council to make changes to its Planning Certificate program.

- The proposed changes need to be consistent with DPIE’s broader Planning Certificate Review.

· The Local Planning Direction (Ministerial Direction) is generally supported as it will provide additional measures to support consideration of flooding during the Planning Proposal process.

· The proposed new LEP clauses are supported, especially noting that the proposed wording regarding application is compatible with Council’s recent amendment to Clause 7.3 of Shoalhaven LEP 2014. This amendment removed the existing Shoalhaven flood mapping from the LEP and instead applied LEP Clause 7.3 to land at or below the flood planning level.

· In regard to the proposed New guideline: Considering Flooding in Land Use Planning (2020), It is assumed that a hierarchy exists in the instance that the Regional Evacuation Consideration Area and Special Flood Considerations categories overlap with the flood planning area. Confirmation/clarification is required in this regard.

The submission on the Flood Prone Land Reform is due on 25 June 2020, however an extension until 9 July 2020 has been provided by the NSW Government, if required.

Proposed new process for Council submissions responding to NSW Government legislative/policy change

Responding to legislative change (e.g. preparing submissions to respond to NSW legislation and policy proposals) is currently identified as a priority project on the Strategic Planning Works Program. This function is ongoing and generally reactionary; however, it is noted that preparing submissions takes up a significant amount of staff time due to the range of detailed and widespread reforms being advanced by the NSW Government, often with little warning or notice.

The 2020-2021 Strategic Planning Works Program was considered at the 2 June 2020 Development and Environment Committee. The report posed a question for Council, being should we continue to devote time to all reform proposals, often with tight comment timeframes and limited or no resulting changes, or do we focus on key ones as required?

This question remains unresolved and it is intended that Council staff will separately report possible new options for responding to planning and development legislative or policy changes being proposed by the NSW Government for consideration shortly.

Conclusion

It is recommended that the draft submissions at Attachment 1 and 2 be submitted to DPIE so that Council can provide input on the changes proposed in the two reform packages.

Community Engagement

The draft documentation was on exhibition on the DPIE’s website as follows:

· Infrastructure Contributions System Reform - period of approximately 8 weeks until 12 June 2020.

· Flood Prone Land Reform - period of approximately 8 weeks until 25 June 2020.

Policy Implications

The Infrastructure Contributions System Reform has direct and indirect implications for Council’s contributions framework, including Shoalhaven Contributions Plan 2019 and voluntary planning agreements. The Flood Prone Land Reform has implications for the way Council provides information on flood constraints and considers flooding during the assessment process.

The submissions at Attachment 1 and 2 address the related concerns.

Financial Implications

There are no immediate financial implications in this regard.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.148 Draft Covid-19 Contributions Discount Subsidy Policy - Proposed Exhibition

HPERM Ref: D20/216919

Section: Strategic Planning

Approver: Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group

Attachments: 1. Draft COVID-19 Contributions Discount Subsidy Policy ⇩

Reason for Report

Obtain endorsement to proceed to exhibit the draft COVID-19 Contributions Discount Subsidy Policy (draft Policy).

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Endorse the content of the draft COVID-19 Contributions Discount Subsidy Policy (draft Policy) and proceed to exhibit the draft Policy in accordance with legislative requirements.

2. Notify key industry stakeholders of the exhibition arrangements.

3. Proceed to finalise the Policy following exhibition if no submissions or submissions of a minor, largely mechanical nature are received; however if submissions of substance are received that require closer consideration then the exhibition outcomes be reported back to Council as a matter of urgency to enable the Policy to be finalised.

Options

1. As recommended.

Implications: This is the preferred option as it will enable Council to advance the draft Policy process and proceed to exhibition in line with legislative requirements.

2. Adopt an alternative recommendation.

Implications: This will depend on the extent of any changes and could cause a delay in the exhibition and finalisation of the draft Policy.

3. Not adopt the recommendation.

Implications: This could stop or postpone the draft Policy process.

Background

On 7 April 2020, Council resolved (MIN20.240) in part to:

7. Maintain, continue and encourage as much economic activity as possible Council adopt the following policies, to be followed by an implementation report from the CEO:

f. Discounting of Section 7.11 Developer Contributions (Section 94 Contributions)

Council, as a matter of policy, discount all developer contributions levied under Section 7.11 of the EPA Act 1979 (As Amended) by 50% for any proposal that will result in the creation of employment, or places of employment (i.e. new retail buildings, buildings of a commercial nature, industrial buildings and the like (other than construction jobs).

Subsequently on 28 April 2020, Council’s intent was further refined by the following resolution (MIN20.275):

5 Further vary policy by the amendment of the previous Council Resolution MIN 20.240 as follows:

a. Amending Part 7f. as follows:

i. deletion of the words “other than construction jobs” at the end of the part

ii. The insertion of the following words at the end of Part 7f “Discounts will not apply to any contribution required for works directly related to a development where public safety is an issue i.e. traffic facilities.”

b. The discounted Section 7.11 charges will be applied as a refund following an application for a refund from the owner once the development is approximately 25% complete,

c. Any claims for a discount made under the provisions of Part 7f must be made within two years of the issue of an operational Development consent.

d. Any proposal that has been approved where development contributions have not yet been paid will qualify for the discount.

e. In the event that a property changes ownership, the entitlement to a discount under this policy will remain with the land

f. Should any part of this policy need further adjustment for legal reasons that section be the subject of a further report to the Development Committee or Council.

6. For the purpose of approving the refund of Section 7.11 contributions the CEO/delegate will be the sole arbitrator in determining and assessing the status of a development regarding it satisfying the refund criteria or if the development is staged that a point of approximately 25% of the stage has been reached at which point the CEO/delegate may make the refund.

9. That a review of the Policy be undertaken after 6 months at which time the Council will be informed of the impact of the Policy.

As a result a draft Policy has now been prepared in response to the two resolutions (Attachment 1) and to assist in the operation of the COVID-19 Contributions Discount Subsidy. The draft Policy has been reviewed by Lindsay Taylor Lawyers and was discussed in a Councillor workshop on 4 June 2020.

In addition to the content of the above resolutions, the following additional content has been included in the draft Policy to provide greater clarity regarding the intent and operational detail:

· Clarification that the Policy applies to eligible development which is the subject of a development consent granted before 28 April 2020 (including applications approved prior to the COVID-19 pandemic) or granted on or after 28 April 2020. This essentially clarifies that all consents are captured and eligibility is further refined within the draft Policy.

· Clarification of what is ‘approximately 25% complete’. The CEO or his delegate will ultimately determine the trigger points; however, it is considered important to outline for people what ‘25%’ would typically look like for the different types of development.

· Inclusion of an identified list of Contributions Plan projects that include a public safety element. These are projects that have not been completed or commenced and are generally road related, for example roundabouts and intersections upgrades. However some drainage projects have also been included as the proposed works include retention and detention to manage public safety in flood and storm surge events.

· Clarification that the funding source is the general fund, rather than the Shoalhaven Contributions Plan 2019 (Contributions Plan). This is to ensure that the integrity of the Contributions Plan is maintained.

· The initial operating period has been extended to 12 months (from the 6 months in the resolution) to enable a greater period for monitoring. Depending on impact etc. at the 12 month mark Council can consider extending the Policy.

· Project ‘CWMGMT3001 - Contributions management & administration’ in the Contributions Plan has been excluded from the draft Policy so that Council can continue to collect fees that are used to administer and manage the plan. CWMGMT3001 also includes committed staff salaries and as such will assist in funding the administration of the Policy.

· The draft Policy notes that an applicant cannot receive a 50% subsidy under the draft Policy and then also another 50% subsidy under the Nowra CBD Contributions Discount Policy for the Nowra Car Parking Contributions Project (01CARP3001). This avoids ‘double dipping’ but ensures that a 50% subsidy remains available for the project.

· It is intended that the Policy will not apply to developments that are subject to compliance action relating to contributions payments. When contributions are paid retrospectively, there will be no entitlement to the subsidy.

Community Engagement

The payment of the Subsidy to eligible developers under the draft Policy constitutes the grant of financial assistance that is subject to Section 356 of the NSW Local Government Act 1993.

Given that some of the developers who will receive the subsidy would ‘act for private gain’, the draft Policy must be exhibited for a period of twenty-eight (28) days as per legislative requirements.

Policy Implications

If any new projects are added to the Contributions Plan that have a public safety element, it would be appropriate, if needed, for the Policy to be updated at that point to specify for clarity that the subsidy would not apply to those projects.

The draft Policy seeks to exclude ‘double dipping’ as it relates to Nowra CBD Contributions Discount Policy for the Nowra Car Parking Contributions Project (01CARP3001).

Financial Implications

Finalisation of the Policy will continue to be undertaken within the existing Strategic Planning budget.

The funding source for the Policy is the general fund, rather than the Contributions Plan, to importantly maintain the integrity of the Contributions Plan.

Risk Implications

The draft Policy has been reviewed by a member of Council’s external legal panel to ensure it is appropriately constructed and robust.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

CL20.149 St Anns and Lyrebird Park SPS and RM Upgrades - Review of Environmental Factors

HPERM Ref: D20/208559

Section: Water Asset Planning & Development

Approver: Robert Horner, Acting Director Shoalhaven Water

Attachments: 1. EMAP Consulting - Review of Environmental Factors (REF) St Anns and Lyrebird Park SPS and RM Upgrades (under separate cover) ⇨

Reason for Report

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the Revised Review of Environmental Factors (REF) for the Proposed Replacement of St Anns and Lyrebird Park Sewer Pumping Stations (SPS) and Rising Mains (RM).

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council, after consideration of the Review of Environmental Factors for the Proposed Replacement of St Anns and Lyrebird Park Sewer Pump Stations (SPS) and Rising Mains (RM), dated June 2020:

1. Determine that it is unlikely that there will be any significant environmental impact as a result of the proposed works and an Environmental Impact Statement is therefore not required for the proposed activity.

2. Adopt and implement the proposed mitigation measures and controls outlined in the REF.

Options

1. Adopt the recommendations.

Implications: This is recommended as the project, with the mitigation measures adopted, will significantly reduce the risk of unplanned releases from the existing sewage pumping stations and rising mains. This will in turn reduce the risk of adverse impact to the environment and public health.

2. Council could determine not to proceed with the proposed St Anns and Lyrebird Park SPS and RM upgrades.

Implications: The risk of unplanned releases of raw sewage into the environment from the identified SPS and RM sites would not be reduced.

3. Council could determine that the environmental impacts warrant the preparation of an EIS.

Implications: This is not recommended as the REF has found that the identified potential impacts are satisfactorily addressed by the proposed management and mitigation measures.

Background

Shoalhaven Water operate and maintain approximately 224 sewage pumping stations (SPSes) throughout its 13 sewerage schemes. Shoalhaven Water proposes to upgrade two of its largest and most critical SPSes, Lyrebird Park (SPS 2) and St Anns Street (SPS 3) and their associated rising mains to the Nowra wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The existing pumping stations were constructed in the 1950s (SPS 2) and 1960s (SPS3). Both of these assets are reaching the end of their useful lives and require replacement to reduce the overall operating and maintenance costs and to reduce the risk of failure.

SPS 2 is located between sporting fields in Lyrebird Park, Nowra. The existing SPS consists of a wet well with an approximate internal diameter of 6.9 metres, surrounding a dry well of approximately 2.7 metres internal diameter. During periods of heavy rainfall the volumes of transported sewage in the catchment network can greatly increase, causing increased demand on the Lyrebird Park pumping station. These situations increase the risk of overflows to the adjacent drainage channel that runs parallel to the sports grounds at the park.

Shoalhaven Water proposes to upgrade the Lyrebird Park pumping station to improve the performance and reliability of the infrastructure, and to reduce the risk of sewage overflow to the surrounding environment.

SPS 3 is a major sewerage pumping station which serves a large catchment of approximately 360 hectares and approximately 1,650 residential dwellings. It is the main collector station for several upstream pumping station catchments in the south and south-western areas of Nowra. SPS 3 is a conventional wet well sewage pump station that pumps sewage to the Nowra STP via a 300 millimetre diameter asbestos cement rising main.

Similar to Lyrebird Park SPS, this pumping station also experiences significant increases in sewage flows during heavy rain events and can lead to overflows to the adjacent Nowra Creek.

A large emergency storage tank was constructed at SPS 3 in 2014, to reduce the frequency and volume of overflow events occurring at the site. Whilst the tank has assisted in alleviating some operational pressures at SPS 3 during critical times, the pumping station still requires upgrade to further improve performance and reduce the risk of overflows.

St Anns St SPS will also support the new development areas in West Nowra (such as Mundamia) and will require greater capacity to ensure its levels of service are maintained. The replacement of this aging infrastructure at SPS 3 (including the rising main) will be a major improvement to a system that has been the cause of concern for some time.

A Review of Environmental Factors (REF) was originally prepared for the combined project in 2015 by consultant GHD Pty Ltd, and shortly after the project was placed on hold due to budget and resource limitations, primarily due to the commitment to the REMS 1B project.

Shoalhaven Water is now in a position to progress this project and has engaged EMAP Consulting Pty Ltd to prepare a Revised REF (the subject of this report) to re-assess the environmental impacts on the proposed activity, accounting for any legislative changes since the original project REF was prepared in 2015.

The REF has been attached under separate cover for Council’s reference, and concludes as follows:

Based on the information in this REF, it is concluded that:

i. the proposed mitigation measures will be adopted and implemented.

ii. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the environmental impact of the proposed activity; and

iii. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the proposed works if all mitigation measures in this REF are implemented by Shoalhaven City council.

The proposed activity is recommended to proceed subject to the implementation of the measures to avoid, minimise or manage environmental impacts listed in this REF.

The mitigation measures outlined in the REF will be incorporated in the construction contract documents.

Community Engagement

The REF for this project was placed on public exhibition from 11 May 2020 to 1 June 2020 during which time submissions were invited. Approximately 160 letters were sent to those properties in the vicinity of the proposed works giving a more detailed summary of the pending works and guidance to the REF on Council’s website. By the close of the exhibition period three (3) responses were received and managed as indicated below:

The first respondent was generally supportive of the project, and sought the following:

1. Assistance locating the REF document on Council’s website;

2. Clarification on anticipated commencement date for rising main works within St Anns Street; and

3. Clarification on whether access will be maintained to their property during the works.

Following further discussions with the project’s nominated Council representative, the project team was able to:

· Assist the respondent locate the REF document as per item 1 above; and

· Provide the requested clarifications as identified in items 2 and 3 above.

The second respondent raised concern with existing odour from their bathroom plumbing. This concern did not specifically relate to the exhibited REF and accordingly the matter was referred to Shoalhaven Water Operations and Maintenance Section for review and investigation/landowner assistance.

The third respondent was generally supportive of the project, and sought the following:

1. Clarification on the proposed location of the new rising main within St Anns Street; and

2. Clarification on anticipated commencement date for rising main works within St Anns Street.

Following further discussions with the project’s nominated Council representative, the project team was able to provide the requested clarifications.

Financial Implications

Adequate funds have been allocated in the sewer budget for the construction of the project in 2020/21 and 2021/22 financial years.

Risk Implications

A risk assessment for the project has been established. Environmental risks have been identified and addressed in the project REF by recommending mitigation measures. These mitigation measures will be required to be implemented by the construction contractor through their Construction Environmental Management Plan.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 23 June 2020

Page 0

Local Government Amendment (governance & planning) act 2016

Chapter 3, Section 8A Guiding principles for councils

(1) Exercise of functions generally

The following general principles apply to the exercise of functions by councils:

(a) Councils should provide strong and effective representation, leadership, planning and decision-making.

(b) Councils should carry out functions in a way that provides the best possible value for residents and ratepayers.

(c) Councils should plan strategically, using the integrated planning and reporting framework, for the provision of effective and efficient services and regulation to meet the diverse needs of the local community.

(d) Councils should apply the integrated planning and reporting framework in carrying out their functions so as to achieve desired outcomes and continuous improvements.

(e) Councils should work co-operatively with other councils and the State government to achieve desired outcomes for the local community.

(f) Councils should manage lands and other assets so that current and future local community needs can be met in an affordable way.

(g) Councils should work with others to secure appropriate services for local community needs.

(h) Councils should act fairly, ethically and without bias in the interests of the local community.

(i) Councils should be responsible employers and provide a consultative and supportive working environment for staff.

(2) Decision-making

The following principles apply to decision-making by councils (subject to any other applicable law):

(a) Councils should recognise diverse local community needs and interests.

(b) Councils should consider social justice principles.

(d) Councils should consider the principles of ecologically sustainable development.

(e) Council decision-making should be transparent and decision-makers are to be accountable for decisions and omissions.

(3) Community participation

Councils should actively engage with their local communities, through the use of the integrated planning and reporting framework and other measures.

Chapter 3, Section 8B Principles of sound financial management

The following principles of sound financial management apply to councils:

(a) Council spending should be responsible and sustainable, aligning general revenue and expenses.

(b) Councils should invest in responsible and sustainable infrastructure for the benefit of the local community.

(c) Councils should have effective financial and asset management, including sound policies and processes for the following:

(i) performance management and reporting,

(ii) asset maintenance and enhancement,

(iii) funding decisions,

(iv) risk management practices.

(d) Councils should have regard to achieving intergenerational equity, including ensuring the following:

(i) policy decisions are made after considering their financial effects on future generations,

(ii) the current generation funds the cost of its services

Chapter 3, 8C Integrated planning and reporting principles that apply to councils

The following principles for strategic planning apply to the development of the integrated planning and reporting framework by councils:

(a) Councils should identify and prioritise key local community needs and aspirations and consider regional priorities.

(b) Councils should identify strategic goals to meet those needs and aspirations.

(d) Councils should ensure that the strategic goals and activities to work towards them may be achieved within council resources.

(e) Councils should regularly review and evaluate progress towards achieving strategic goals.

(f) Councils should maintain an integrated approach to planning, delivering, monitoring and reporting on strategic goals.

(g) Councils should collaborate with others to maximise achievement of strategic goals.

(h) Councils should manage risks to the local community or area or to the council effectively and proactively.

(i) Councils should make appropriate evidence-based adaptations to meet changing needs and circumstances.