Agenda - Byron Shire Council - NSW Government

Thursday, 9 May 2013 

held at Council Chambers, Station Street, Mullumbimby 

commencing at 10.30am 

Public Access relating to items on this Agenda can be made between 9.00am and 10.30am on the day of the 

Meeting. Requests for public access should be made to the General Manager or Mayor no later than 12.00 midday on 

the day prior to the Meeting. 

Ken Gainger 

General Manager

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS 

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

Pecuniary - an interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable 

financial gain or loss to the person or another person with whom the person is associated. 

Non-pecuniary – a private or personal interest that a Council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as 

defined in the Local Government Act (eg. A friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or 

involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a financial nature). 

Remoteness – a person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it 

could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to a matter or if 

the interest is of a kind specified in Section 448 of the Local Government Act. 

Who has a Pecuniary Interest - a person has a pecuniary interest in a matter if the pecuniary interest is the interest of 

the person, or another person with whom the person is associated (see below). 

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

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

• The person, or a nominee, partners or employer of the person, is a member of a company or other body that has a 

pecuniary interest in the matter. 

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

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

or of the person’s spouse; 

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

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

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

other body, or 

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

• Just because the person is a member of, or a delegate of the Council to, a company or other body that has a 

pecuniary interest in the matter provided that the person has no beneficial interest in any shares of the company or 

body. 

Disclosure and participation in meetings 

• A Councillor or a member of a Council Committee who has a pecuniary interest in any matter with which the Council 

is concerned and who is present at a meeting of the Council or Committee at which the matter is being considered 

must disclose the nature of the interest to the meeting as soon as practicable. 

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

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

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

No Knowledge - a person does not breach this Clause if the person did not know and could not reasonably be expected 

to have known that the matter under consideration at the meeting was a matter in which he or she had a pecuniary 

interest. 

Participation in Meetings Despite Pecuniary Interest (S 452 Act) 

A Councillor is not prevented from taking part in the consideration or discussion of, or from voting on, any of the 

matters/questions detailed in Section 452 of the Local Government Act. 

Non-pecuniary Interests - Must be disclosed in meetings. 

There are a broad range of options available for managing conflicts & the option chosen will depend on an assessment 

of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of the interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with. Nonpecuniary 

conflicts of interests must be dealt with in at least one of the following ways: 

• It may be appropriate that no action be taken where the potential for conflict is minimal. However, Councillors 

should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict does not exist. 

• Limit involvement if practical (eg. Participate in discussion but not in decision making or vice-versa). Care needs to 

be taken when exercising this option. 

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

• Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the 

provisions in S451 of the Local Government Act apply (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary interest) 

RECORDING OF VOTING ON PLANNING MATTERS 

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

(1) In this section, planning decision means a decision made in the exercise of a function of a council under the 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979: 

(a) including a decision relating to a development application, an environmental planning instrument, a 

development control plan or a development contribution plan under that Act, but 

(b) not including the making of an order under Division 2A of Part 6 of that Act. 

(2) The general manager is required to keep a register containing, for each planning decision made at a meeting of the 

council or a council committee, the names of the councillors who supported the decision and the names of any 

councillors who opposed (or are taken to have opposed) the decision. 

(3) For the purpose of maintaining the register, a division is required to be called whenever a motion for a planning 

decision is put at a meeting of the council or a council committee. 

(4) Each decision recorded in the register is to be described in the register or identified in a manner that enables the 

description to be obtained from another publicly available document, and is to include the information required by the 

regulations. 

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

Ordinary Meeting Agenda 09/05/13 Distributed 02/05/13 

#E2013/27661 Amended 03/05/13, (Report 12.14) 06/05/13 (Page 49)

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL 

ORDINARY MEETING 9 MAY 2013 (1) 

1. APOLOGIES 

2. REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE 

BUSINESS OF ORDINARY MEETING 

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST – PECUNIARY AND NON-PECUNIARY 

4. TABLING OF PECUNIARY INTEREST RETURNS (s450A Local Government Act 1993) 

5. ADOPTION OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS 

5.1. Ordinary Meeting held on 18 April 2013 

6. RESERVATION OF ITEMS FOR DEBATE AND ORDER OF BUSINESS 

7. MAYORAL MINUTE 

8. NOTICES OF MOTION 

8.1. Support for Byron Bay Writers Festival 2013 and event sponsorship............................... 3 

8.2. North Coast Energy Forum – Lismore, 31 May 2013........................................................ 5 

8.3. Elite Surf and Community Coaching sub-licence category ............................................... 7 

9. PETITIONS 

10. SUBMISSIONS AND GRANTS 

11. DELEGATES’ REPORTS 

11.1. Australian Coastal Conference 2013 ................................................................................ 9 

12. REPORTS BY DIVISION 

Corporate Management 

12.1. Council Resolutions Review January to March 2013...................................................... 13 

12.2. Crown Caravan Parks administered by the North Coast Accommodation Trust 

(NCAT) in Brunswick Heads ........................................................................................... 15 

12.3. Revised Council Meeting Schedule for 2013 .................................................................. 25 

12.4. Investments – March 2013.............................................................................................. 30 

12.5. Budget Review - 1 January 2013 to 31 March 2013 ....................................................... 36 

12.6. Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014 ............................................................. 47 

12.7. Infrastructure Renewal Reserve...................................................................................... 49 

12.8. Councillor appointment to the Byron Coast Area Management Committee and 

Arakwal National Park Management Committee ............................................................ 53 

Environment and Planning 

12.9. NOROC Affordable Housing Strategy .......................................................................... 56 

12.10. PLANNING – Draft Byron LEP 2012 Submissions Analysis –Residential Zones 

and Controls (Policy Matters) ....................................................................................... 59 

12.11. PLANNING – Streamlining SEPP No 1 Variations determinations and reporting......... 62 

12.12. PLANNING – Copyright issues in relation to development applications....................... 66 

12.13. PLANNING – Public Exhibition Report for Amendments to Byron Shire DCP 

2010 – Chapter 1 Part F – Waste Minimisation and Management ............................... 71 

Ordinary Meeting Agenda 09/05/13



12.14. PLANNING – (Supplementary Report) 10.2012.583.1 Increase number of 

occupants for place of assembly/public entertainment at 13-17 Centennial 

Circuit Byron Bay .......................................................................................................... 73 

Society and Culture 

12.15. Management of the Multi Purpose Facility at Byron Regional Sport and 

Community Complex – Update on Negotiations and recommendation to 

commence a new selective tender process.................................................................. 75 

12.16. Youth Council Minutes Report February to April 2013 ................................................. 84 

Water and Recycling 

12.17. Review of Bulky Waste Disposal Scheme .................................................................... 87 

12.18. Easements for Pipelines Brunswick Valley Sewage Treatment Plant .......................... 91 

12.19. Section 64 Developer Charges Policy .......................................................................... 93 

12.20. Myocum Waste and Recycling Facility – Operation of Byron Shire Second 

Hand Shop.................................................................................................................... 97 

12.21. Drinking Water Quality Plan........................................................................................ 102 

13. COMMITTEE REPORTS 

Community Infrastructure 

13.1. Report of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 10 April 2013 ....................... 104 

13.1.1. Proposed closure of road to traffic, Jones Road, Yelgun...........................................104 

13.1.2. Approval for Loading Zone, Lawson Street, Byron Bay .............................................107 

13.1.3. Proposed regulatory signage, Bayshore Drive, A & I Estate, Byron Bay...................109 

13.1.4. Westpac Life Saver Rescue Helicopter Ballina to Byron Bay Charity Walk...............110 

13.1.5. Traffic Management, Mullum to Bruns Paddle, Sunday 26 May 2013.......................111 

13.1.6. Proposed No Parking 1am to 6am, Carlyle Street, Byron Bay...................................112 

13.1.7. Request for accessible car parking bay, 123 Dalley Street, Mullumbimby ................114 

13.1.8. Temporary Traffic and Parking Controls, Splendour music festival, Yelgun..............114 

13.1.9. Proposal for HML vehicles, waste transportation, Myocum Landfill...........................116 

13.1.10. Loading Zone, Byron Street, Bangalow......................................................................119 

13.1.11. Proposed 40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area, Brunswick Heads and Bangalow..120 

13.1.12. Late Item – changes to bus zone, Ocean Shores Public School, Shara Boulevard ..122 


13.2. Report of the Planning Review Committee Meeting held on 17 April 2013 ................ 124 


13.3. Report of the Tourism Advisory Committee Meeting held on 4 April 2013 ................ 125 

13.4. Report of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Advisory 

Committee Meeting held on 10 April 2013.................................................................. 128 

Councillors are encouraged to ask questions regarding any item on the business paper to 

the appropriate Executive Manager prior to the meeting. Any suggested amendments to the 

recommendations should be provided to the Administration section prior to the meeting to 

allow the changes to be typed and presented on the overhead projector at the meeting. 




NOTICES OF MOTION 

5 

Notice of Motion No. 8.1. 

#E2013/21674 

I move: 

Support for Byron Bay Writers Festival 2013 and event 

sponsorship 

10 

15 

1. That Council offer support to the Byron Bay Writers’ Festival 2013, become an Event 

Sponsor and provide promotional material for display. 

2. That the support involve the use of Council signage and associated materials for traffic 

management and staff assistance in placing those materials in position with respect to the 

Traffic Management Plan and identified as a donation of $1,500. 

3. That Council advertise this sponsorship support as a S356 donation. 

Signed: Cr Simon Richardson 

20 

Councillor’s Background Notes: 

The Byron Bay Writers Festival is to be held from 2-4 August 2013. 

25 

The Byron Bay Writers’ Festival is one of the regions most successful festivals and Council has for 

the last six years supported the event and been recognised as a sponsor. 

The festival has a broad audience and a high level of community involvement. 

30 

Recommended priority relative to other Delivery Plan tasks: 

Not applicable 

Definition of the project/task: 

35 

Donation to community group 

Source of Funds (if applicable): 

40 

45 

50 

Contribution Community Event - Approval Expenses (2341.6) 

Management Comments by Phil Holloway, Executive Manager Community Infrastructure 

and Mark Arnold, Executive Manager Corporate Management 

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

Clarification of project/task: 

The Notice of Motion is seeking Council to become an Event Sponsor and to consider the making 

of a S356 Donation of $1,500, as a contribution towards the provision and set up of signage and 

associated materials for the event in accordance with an approved Traffic Control Plan (TCP). 

The Byron Bay Writers’ Festival could hire the signage and undertake installation by external 

suppliers, or the works could be provided by Council at the applicable hire rates in accordance with 




Council’s Fees and Charges. Community Infrastructure provided similar and associated works for 

the 2012 event at a total cost of $3,030 (inc. GST). 

5 

10 

15 

20 

A donation for assistance with traffic management utilising Council’s facilities and Development 

Application fees can be considered under Policy 4.15 Assistance to Festivals and Community 

Events, of which the objective is to “To provide appropriate levels of assistance to community 

organisations through the use of Council's works resources. “ 

Council will soon be advertising for applications for donations under the Assistance for Festivals 

and Community Functions Policy. Closing date for receipt of these applications will be end of June 

2013. It is proposed that the allocation of these donations for assistance with holding community 

events for the 2013/14 financial year will be considered at a Council Meeting in August 2013. 

Council could resolve to provide in principle support to the application and then consider the 

amount of the donation after all requests for applications for a donation under the Assistance for 

Festivals and Community Functions Policy have been received and reported to Council in August 

2013. 

Executive Manager responsible for task implementation: 

Executive Managers Community Infrastructure and Corporate Management 

Relationship to, priority of, and impact on other projects/tasks: 

25 

The provision of works from Community Infrastructure would have an impact on Council’s routine 

operation and exposes Council to potential risks and liability. 

Financial and Resource Implications: 

30 

35 

In accordance with the draft 2013/2014 Budget the total allocation of moneys for a donation under 

Assistance for Festivals and Community Functions Policy (2341.16) is $7,000. 

Council resolved on 24 December 2012 to commit a maximum of $900 from this budget (2341.16) 

to assist with Council permit costs for the Mullumbimby Living Community Festival to be held in 

September 2013. 

It is proposed that any moneys remaining in this budget will be considered by Council at a meeting 

in August 2013 after all requests for assistance for 2013/14 have been received. 

40 

45 

On the basis that in considering this request, along with any other similar requests for financial 

assistance for festivals, Council allocates an amount of $1,500 contribution from Section 356 

donation allocation, then the organisers of the 2013 Byron Bay Writers Festival would be 

responsible for all other costs in excess of this amount. 

Legal and Policy Implications: 

The TCP is required to be endorsed by the Local Traffic Committee (LTC) which will require 

advertising in accordance with the Roads Act 1993. 

50 

55 

This request to be considered under Policy 4.15 Assistance to Festivals and Community Events. 

This Policy is available to be viewed on Council’s Website at http://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/policies. 

As stated in the Policy, “Moneys will be allocated depending on the estimate of Council’s costs for 

the road closure, moneys donated to charity, size of community involvement and the distribution of 

events across the Shire.” 




Notice of Motion No. 8.2. North Coast Energy Forum – Lismore, 31 May 2013 

#E2013/24970 

5 

I move that Council cover the registration and travel costs for the following Councillors to attend the 

North Coast Energy Forum to be held in Lismore on 31 May 2013: 

10 

 

 

 

Duncan Dey; 

Paul Spooner; 

Rose Wanchap. 

Signed: Cr Duncan Dey 

15 

20 

25 

30 


An invitation was circulated to Councillors on 18 April and further information has been supplied 

since. The invitation describes the forum as addressing how we as a region “Grow our Own 

Sustainable Energy System”. Such descriptions fit neatly into some of the initiatives Council 

decided on 28 February to take, under Resolution 13-107. 

I understand there will be a session on “selling power” and that it will cover ideas such as local 

energy retailers. This is a match for Part 8 of Resolution 13-107 “that Council consider sustainable 

energy initiatives such as the development of a locally owned and operated electricity retailer, for 

ventures for example such as buying solar generated electricity from Durrumbul Hall and selling to 

Council”. 

Registration is $130, or $90 if made before 31 April. As we don’t meet till 9 May, I have 

encouraged the Councillors above to book and pay their own registration at the $90 rate (through 

Robyn on 0413 693 104). If Council on 9 May supports attendance, Councillors can recover the 

$90, plus travel, through their Claim Form. 

Recommended priority relative to other Delivery Plan tasks: 

35 

Low priority, low cost but time-restrained. 


No task for staff other than normal processing of claims. 

40 


Councillors budget for Personal Development. This budget is nearing empty but still had sufficient 

funds for this small endeavour, when I last looked. 

45 

Management Comments Executive Manager Mark Arnold: 



50 

That, if resolved, Council reimburse Councillors registration and travel costs for their attendance at 

the North Coast Energy Forum. 


Executive Manager Corporate Management 





NA 

5 

10 


Councillors Professional Development and Training budget (2145.7) currently has $2,472 

available, which is sufficient for the reimbursement of the registration costs of $90 for each of the 

three Councillors listed in the motion. 


Most relevant to this Notice of Motion are: 

15 

 

Clause 8.1.1 of the Mayor and Councillors Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities 

Policy (1.1) states that "Councillors may be authorised to attend conferences, seminars and 

similar functions by a) Preferably, the Council, through resolution duly passed at a Council 

meeting arising from a report to Council or a notice of motion by a Councillor…" 




Notice of Motion No. 8.3. 

#E2013/25526 

Elite Surf and Community Coaching Sub-licence Category 

5 

10 

15 

I move that Council amend the current policy - Commercial Activities on Coastal and Riparian 

Crown Reserves, to include the following: 

a) That Council recommends the inclusion of a new category, Elite Surf and Community 

Coaching, to be included as a sub-licence category in tenders within Council’s Commercial 

Activities on Coastal and Riparian Crown Reserves. 

b) That details within the category be developed, using Ballina Council and other Council 

equivalent policies and guidelines, along with appropriate Byron Shire considerations. 

c) That a tender process be undertaken for a temporary licence for the duration of the current 

tender period. 

d) That Council create a mandatory, market based value on the required fee. 

e) That these recommendations be forwarded to Cape Byron Marine Park and National Parks 

and Wildlife Service for support and approval. 


20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 


Council currently issues sub-licences for commercial and personalised surf schools. This motion 

seeks to recommend to Cape Byron Marine Park and Nation Parks and Wildlife Service the 

introduction of a new sub-license category within Councils Commercial Activities on Coastal and 

Riparian Crown Reserves Policy, to be called Elite Surf and Community Coaching and that the 

number of licences issued under this category be one. 

This category would cover the coaching of elite juniors, professionals and advanced surfers, 

specialised rehabilitation/disabled surf coaching, surf fitness, personal training and coaching for the 

public. 


Recommend support and approval of a new category within Council’s Commercial Activities 

and Riparian Crown Reserves Policy. 

Develop guidelines for the introduction of the new sub-licence. 

Should such approval be given, a tender process be undertaken for a temporary licence. 


Not applicable 

Attachments: 

Extract of Ballina Shire Council’s Commercial Activities on Public Land - Schedule 

Tendered- Elite Surf Coaching Operating Requirements #E2013/25626 [4 pages]................. Annexure 20 

Management Comments by Trish Kirkland, Manager Property, Contracts and Information 

Systems: 



Amendment to the Commercial Activities on Coastal and Riparian Crown Reserves to include a 

new Surf School category for Elite Surf and Community Coaching will, as indicated, require the 

development of operational requirements in consultation with Cape Byron Marine Park and 

National Parks and Wildlife. 




5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

Staff have recently met with representatives from Ballina Shire Council in relation to Commercial 

Activities and recognise that the development of a new category for Elite Surf and Community 

Coaching within the current Policy is relatively simple, subject to consultation with the other 

stakeholders. 

Once the category has been developed and considered by Council, the policy will be placed on 

public exhibition and submissions considered. 

The setting of a market based annual licence fee will require the services of a valuer with the 

requisite skills to undertake the valuation process of the Elite Surf and Community Coaching Surf 

School category. Council has previously resolved 12-872 to set market based annual fees for all 

Commercial Activities covered by the policy in its current form – commercial surf schools, personal 

surf schools, and commercial kayaks. It would be appropriate for these valuations to be carried out 

at the same time to ensure the establishment of the market based annual fees is based on the 

different ‘capacities’ of each Surf School category. 

Issuing a sub-licence agreement for this new category, can only be done by Council with the 

consent of the Minister of Lands, and the provisions of the 34A Licence agreement between lands 

and Council for approved commercial activities. The provisions of the Crown Lands Directive will 

apply, which includes the requirement to establish sub-licence agreements by way of a competitive 

process. 

Council resolution 12-872 detailed the evaluation criteria for future Commercial Activities 

competitive processes. These criteria are not all consistent with those already contained in the 

current Commercial Activities Policy. Aligning the evaluation criteria in the Policy with those 

contained in resolution 12-872 will also be appropriate prior to calling further tenders for 

Commercial Activities. 


Executive Manager Corporate Management 


Council has recently undertaken a tender process for commercial activities and issued 5 year term 

sub-licences. Actions arising from Council resolution 12-872 to set market based annual fees, and 

to align the evaluation criteria with the current Policy evaluation criteria have been programmed 

into Council’s 4-year delivery program in 2015/16 prior to the next scheduled tender in 2017. 

Running a second commercial activities tender process will involve substantial resource impacts 

for Council, as below. 


Local Government Procurement estimate that it costs councils between $8,000 and $15,000 to run 

a tender process from beginning to end. This estimate accounts for staff time, miscellaneous 

resources, direct costs, administration and councillor time. Undertaking an additional tender 

process for commercial activities will negatively impact on other lease/licence activities, in 

particular those larger processes currently running and routine operational matters. 

There is currently no budget for valuation services to establish market based annual fees, 

however, the draft budget 2013/14 could accommodate this cost if it does not exceed $10,000. 

Estimates for the cost of these services have not yet been sought. 


Establishing an additional Surf School category is consistent with the 34A Licence agreement 

between Council and Crown Lands. However, it will be necessary for Council to undertake 

consultation with Crown Lands regarding the establishment of market based annual fees for 

commercial activities, and this consultation will need to take account of the provisions of the 34A 

licence between Council and Crown Lands as the primary legal instrument that facilitates the issue 

of sub-licences by Council for commercial activities and the subsequent allocation of income 

generated by those sub-licences. 




DELEGATE'S REPORT 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

Delegates Report No. 11.1. Australian Coastal Conference 2013 

#E2013/22029 

Though some conferences can feel like a never ending conveyor belt of sitting, drinking percolated 

coffee and trying to avoid the sweet nibblies, as with most conferences, this Coastal conference 

provided opportunities to learn from experts from across the country and from various fields and for 

fantastic networking and unexpected benefits. Professor Graeme Hugo AO presented his study’s 

findings on Non-Resident Populations in Coastal Communities. Of particular interest was his 

insight that to ascertain day trip numbers, European countries use mobile phone positioning data 

collected from service providers. In Australia, overcoming commercial confidentiality fears is 

required but could be a great way to accurately gauge how many people are in the Shire on any 

given day. Also, his findings that most holiday owners intend to permanently move in to holiday 

houses within 5 years has repercussions for Byron. Rob Oakeshott MP provided a rallying cry for 

The Need for a National Policy for the Coast, sadly lacking still with Federal Governments unwilling 

to set up to the challenge of coordinating a much needed response. When sharing his thoughts on 

Managing Legal Risks on the Coast, Andrew Beatty, from Beatty Legal provided 3 risk reduction 

tools: Knowledge (current, relevant and reliable), Courage (to make hard decisions) and 

Fortifications (to repel the inevitably unhappy.) 

Some speakers provided information that was probably already logically understood; however 

thoughts quantified always serve to add to a debate. Dr Rob Vertessy, Director and CEO, Bureau 

of Meteorology provided more sobering statistics on global warming when addressing the topic, 

Australia’s Extreme Weather Events: A Sign of Things to Come He shared that the predictive 

science is improving rapidly, what effects on societies weather and climate changes will have are 

less easy to nail down. To explain, he shared 

his broken vase analogy: 

Prediction 1: What will happen to the vase 

Hit a china vase with a hammer with enough 

force and it will break 

30 

Prediction 2: Where will the pieces land 

35 

40 

45 

Most will fall on the away side from contact, 

though exact locations not known. He 

finished with the fact that 20 of the last 25 

years have been the hottest on record. 

A panel discussion on Disaster Response 

and Recovery  , especially from the recent 

WA- Margaret River Fires, provided some 

ideas for our disaster circumstances. As part 

of their recovery process Recovery process 

an art exhibition was organised for affected 

residents to creatively process and make 

sense of what they have endured and to 

document it for others. Counselling for 

council staff was also provided. Both these 

initiatives could be appropriate and effective 

here also. 

The wind generating light with electric car 

refuelling option. 




5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

Mr Richard Turner, Founder, Zen Home 

Energy Systems, shared his company’s 

successes in rolling out Affordable 

Community Solar Programs. The solar take 

up in host town Victor Harbor was around 

40%! This is clearly a system from which we 

could learn, using our own local providers. 

Victor Harbor provided a few ideas itself. 

We viewed an example of a hybrid solar and 

wind light, which has the capacity to be an 

electric car-refuelling stop also. 

Lastly, in Victor Harbor, we saw ‘Beyond 

Display Village,’ an award winning 

sustainable development, the most energy 

efficient housing development in Australia 

and a great example for our developers to 

aspire. The Beyond team have produced 

easy to understand design guidelines 

covering: orientation to winter sun, optimal 

placement of windows for light, winter 

warmth and summer breezes, external 

shading for summer coolness, zero 

overshadowing from neighbours, 

indoor/outdoor living area linkage, solar hot water supply, solar energy supply, thermal mass for 

heat conduction, materials with lowest toxicity and lowest environmental impact and rainwater 

harvesting. They have house and land packages from $390,000. (http://www.beyondtoday.com.au) 




Part of the retirement home component of the development 

5 

A horse drawn tram was in use, making links to our possible park and ride along the train line 

obvious, as was travelling on a volunteer run, two-carriage train service for holiday periods and on 

weekends. Trains operate on up to 140 days a year and are manned by volunteers from the 

Australian Railways Historical Society, who are also responsible for maintenance of the rail line 

and the heritage locomotives and carriages. 

Cr. Wanchap enjoying the amazing views from the train 




5 

The Victor Harbour horse drawn trams 

10 

15 

Lastly, some of the delegates and the 

networking opportunities were highly 

beneficial. I managed to grab some time 

with the soon to be Mayor of Port Douglas, 

recently de-amalgamated, who was very 

happy to share all their research and 

evidence to debunk any ‘economies of 

scale’ myths that may arise if threats of 

amalgamations appear on the horizon. 

20 

25 

30 

Attractive and functional bins, provide ideas for the Shire 


35 

RECOMMENDATION: 

That the report be noted. 




CORPORATE MANAGEMENT – EXECUTIVE MANAGER’S REPORTS 

5 

Report No. 12.1. Council Resolutions Review January to March 2013 

Executive Manager: Corporate Management 

Report Author: Mark Arnold, Executive Manager 

File No: 

#E2013/23485 

Theme: 

Summary: 

Corporate Management, Administration 

This report provides an update on the status of Council resolutions 

outstanding and proposed actions, and on resolutions completed, for 

consideration by Council. 

10 


1. That Council receive and note the information provided in this report on outstanding 

Council resolutions. 

15 

2. That Council note the completed resolutions in Annexure 6(b) (#E2013/24444). 

Attachments: 

20 

25 

Summary Report on Council Resolutions – March 2013 Quarter #E2013/24446 [1 page] ....Annexure 6(a) 

Completed Resolutions – January – March 2013 #E2013/24444 [114 pages]...................... Annexure 6(b) 

Outstanding Council Resolutions status as at 31 March 2013 #E2013/24452 [213 pages]...Annexure 6(c) 

Please note: Annexure 6(b) and 6(c) will be provided to Councillors on the Agenda CD and a hardcopy available in the 

Councillors' Room. The public may view these annexures online at www.byron.nsw.gov.au/meetings or at the 

Administration Centre. 




Report 

This report provides a quarterly update on the status of Council resolutions to 31 March 2013. 

5 

Council resolutions relate across all Activities in Council’s Operational Plan with responsible 

officers within Council providing input into this status report. 

A summary status report is at Annexure 6(a). 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

107 new resolutions created during the January to March 31 quarter 

184 resolutions completed during period 1 January to 31 March 2013 

125 outstanding Council resolutions current Council (2012-2016) 

156 outstanding Council resolutions from previous (2008-2012) 

281 closing balance of outstanding resolutions as at 31 March 2013 

Details of completed resolutions for the period 1 January to 31 March 2013 are provided at 

Annexure 6(b). 

An update on the status of outstanding resolutions is provided at Annexure 6(c) which made up of: 

previous Council Oct 2008-2012 (pages 1 of 129 Annexure 6(c)) 

current Council Sept 2012-2016 (pages 130 of 213 Annexure 6(c)) 

Financial Implications 

A number of resolutions note that resource constraints limit completion of action required. Council 

may consider the priority of the respective resolutions and whether further action is still required. 

In accordance with Resolution 13-137 the following information is provided to Council in all reports 

prepared for the 9 May, 13 and 27 June 2013 Ordinary Meetings: 

 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately ½ hour. 

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications 

Council requires a quarterly report be prepared to allow it to consider the quarterly 

Management Plan and Budget reviews along with a review of Council resolutions. 

Implementation of Council resolutions in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 




5 

Report No. 12.2. Crown Caravan Parks administered by the North Coast 

Accommodation Trust (NCAT) in Brunswick Heads 


Report Author: Ralph James, Manager Governance 

File No: 

#E2013/26094 

Theme: 

Corporate Management, Compliance Services 

Summary: 

On 15 February 2013 Council representatives met with representatives of 

the Office of the Premier and Cabinet, NCAT and the Department of 

Lands. 

The meeting was convened at the request of the representative from the 

Office of the Premier to discuss the conditions contained in the Approvals 

for the Terrace Reserve, Massey Greene and Ferry Reserve Holiday 

Parks determined by Council in Resolutions 12-627, 12-995 and 13-25. 

This Report has been prepared in accordance with an Agreement reached 

with the representatives from the Office of the Premier and Cabinet, 

Council, NCAT and the Department of Lands to progress the actions 

agreed, in relation to the Terrace Reserve and the Massey Greene Holiday 

Parks, to allow Council to consider the issuing of a 12 month approval for 

both these Holiday Parks. 

This report is prepared in accordance with the Agreement reached and 

attached at Annexure 9(c). 


10 

15 

20 

25 

1. That Council note this report. 

2. That Council approve the application for Massey Greene Caravan Park for a period of 

twelve (12) months from the date of this Resolution, subject to compliance with the 

provisions of Section 68, Part F2 of the Local Government Act 1993; Local 

Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Local Government (Manufactured Home 

Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005, 

in accordance with Annexure 9(a) (#A2013/8382) hereof. 

3. That Council approve the applications for Terrace Reserve Caravan Park for a period 

of twelve (12) months from the date of this Resolution, subject to compliance with the 

provisions of Section 68, Part F2 of the Local Government Act 1993; Local 

Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Local Government (Manufactured Home 

Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005, 

in accordance with Annexure 9(b) (#A2013/8378) hereof. 

Attachments: 

30 

Draft Caravan Park Approval for Massey Greene Holiday Park #A2013/8382 [7 pages].......Annexure 9(a) 

Draft Caravan Park Approval for Terrace Reserve Holiday Park #A2013/8378 [7 pages] .... Annexure 9(b) 

Signed Agreement on Massey Greene and Terrace Reserve Caravan Park 

#E2013/24121 [1 page] ...........................................................................................................Annexure 9(c) 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

The “Massey Greene” and “Terrace Reserve” caravan parks were operated on Crown Reserves by 

Council for more than 60 years. 

As part of the ‘evolution’ of Holiday parks and camping grounds over this long period of time, the 

land occupied for this purpose had expanded outside the boundaries of the Crown Reserves into 

road reserves and into other Crown Reserve areas. 

At the point, in 2007, when the Byron Shire Holiday Parks Reserve Trust ceased to be the operator 

of the parks, there were significant deviations from both the land titles occupied for the holiday 

parks and camping grounds, and the specific layout of the parks in respect of the Regulations. 

A Notice of Compulsory Acquisition of Land and Notice to add the acquired lands to reserved 

Crown Land (for the compulsory acquisition of lands adjoining the Crown Holiday Parks) was 

published in the New South Wales Government Gazette No. 47 dated 4 May 2012. 

Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 7 June 2012 considered a Notice of Motion titled Brunswick 

Holiday Park Licence renewal 2012. Council resolved as follows: 

12-438 “that upon receipt of any application for licence renewal of Crown managed holiday parks, 

determination of the application by Council and the report provide clarification of the renewal that 

was given in 2006 for the Brunswick Holiday Parks after the dismissal of Byron Shire Council by 

providing the layout plan prior to 2006 and the approved 2006 licence layout” 

Applications for Renewal were received on 2 April 2012. Due to an administrative error at the time 

of the receipt and processing of the applications they were not brought to the attention of relevant 

staff until after 7 June 2012. 

The applications were reported to Council on 9 August 2012. 

www.byron.nsw.gov.au/meetings/2012-08-09-ordinary 

In respect of the subject parks Council resolved (12-627) as follows: 

35 

40 

1. “That Council approve the Applications for Massey Greene Caravan Park, Terrace Reserve 

Caravan Park…., subject to compliance with the provisions of Section 68, Part F2 of the Local 

Government Act 1993; Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Local Government 

(Manufactured Home Estates, Holiday Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) 

Regulation 2005, in accordance with Annexures 11(q), 11(r) and 11(s) and subject to the 

following additional conditions: 

Massey Greene 

45 

50 

55 

That the following be excluded from the operational area: 

a. Lot 7005 DP1113421 

b. Part Lot 20 DP1169546 (Mona Lane and Tweed Street area) 

c. A 3 metre buffer zone between the top of the river bank and the operational boundary of the 

Park (which is to be retained essentially as a public walkway (noting that public includes 

Park patrons). 

The Terrace 

i. That the following be excluded from the operational area: 

a. Part Lot 416 DP728666 

b. Part Lot 50 DP 1169550 Brunswick Terrace-4013m2 




5 

c. A 3 metre buffer zone between the top of the river bank and the operational boundary of 

the Park (which is to be retained essentially as a public walkway (noting that public 

includes Park patrons)). 

ii. That the following be included in the operational area: 

Lot 1 DP1169548 (park entrance) Terrace and Fingal Street junction-318m2” 

In accordance with Section 72(2) LGA and Part 4. of Resolution 12-627, Council wrote to notify 

North Coast Accommodation Trust (NCAT), the applicant, of the additional conditions. 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

In accordance with Section 72 (3) (d) LGA and Part 4. of Resolution 12-627, Council wrote to the 

Minister on 17 August 2012. 

On 19 October 2012 Council received a letter from the Local Government Division of the 

Department of Premier and Cabinet. The letter raised the question of a lack of consultation by 

Council with the North Coast Accommodation Trust (NCAT) and requisitioned evidence that 

Council has “made a constructive effort to resolve the issue by direct negotiations with NCAT” and 

requiring Council “to formally consider the implications on the current operations of these Holiday 

parks, after having undertaken consultation with NCAT”. 

Consequent upon matters raised in the DLG letter, on 23 October 2012 Council wrote to NCAT 

again suggesting that a meeting take place between it and NCAT to explore whatever negotiated 

position may be available and to enable Council to further consider the implications of the 

additional conditions determined in Resolution 12-627 on the operation of the Holiday parks in 

question. 

In that letter NCAT were advised that “whilst staff can participate in any meeting and move toward 

a “negotiated position”, if the “negotiated position” is different to that in Council’s resolution as to 

approval conditions, it will be necessary to report the matter back to Council”. 

Council and NCAT met on 12 November 2012. 

NCAT, in correspondence dated 16 November advised Council of what it maintained were the 

financial impacts of the additional conditions. 

35 

On 6 December 2012 Council considered a report (#E2012/18681) on, inter alia, the 12 November 

meeting and resolved (12-927): 

1. “That Council receive and note this Report. 

40 

45 

50 

55 

2. That Council confirm that there has been a constructive effort to consult with North Coast 

Accommodation Trust as to the conditions of approval imposed by Resolution 12-627, 

noting Council’s correspondence dated 20 August 2012 and 23 October 2012 and the 

meeting between representatives of the NCAT and Council held on 12 November 2012 

3. That Council confirm that it has considered the implications of the conditions of approval 

imposed by Resolution 12-627 on the current operation of the Holiday Parks and that 

following that consideration; 

a) supports the previously required fore-shore buffer zones being integrated within the 

NCHP Plans of Management. 

b) notes the community view and reaffirms the terms and effect of Resolution 12-627 

particularly that the foreshore area of each park must remain in public hands for 

unimpeded public access. 

c) accepts that in implementing the resolution where foreshore access is limited by 

encroachment of Caravan Park infrastructure, including private vans, the relocation of 

that infrastructure should be planned now but executed as and when the long-term 

permanent resident vacates or chooses to relocate to an alternative suitable site within 




5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

the park (ie residents personally occupying a permanent site as of Parks hand-over date 

in 2007 should remain undisturbed and their structure be relocated on their leaving the 

site, or before if the resident so asks, at Parks expense). 

d) That Council’s licensing conditions as per Resolution 12-627 of 9 August 2012 is 

amended to include: 

i) Part Lot 7005 – The operational boundary of the caravan park is to be aligned with the 

existing picket fence on the western side of Massy Greene adjoining site 88 through to 

the high water mark. 

4. That Council advise the Division of Local Government in terms of 2 and 3 above. 

5. That Council advise the North Coast Accommodation Trust and the Division of Local 

Government of its preference to also extend public foreshore area to retain the land north of 

the old Fins Building adjoining Part Lot 102 DP 851964 so as to integrate the foreshore into 

that RTA foreshore pathway. This land is the northern part of DP 804961. 

6. That Council requests the North Coast Accommodation Trust and the Division of Local 

Government defer the development within the foreshore parklands known as the Terrace 

and Banner Park, pending further consultation with stakeholders, Council and 

NCAT/NCHP. These parklands are Part of Lot 416 DP728666.” 

The General Manager subsequently received a Notice of Motion (NoM) titled Crown Parks in 

Brunswick Heads. This NoM sought to further amend the operational boundaries of the Holiday 

parks in Brunswick Heads. 

The NoM was the subject of a teleconference on Monday, 17 December 2012, between 

representatives of NCAT, Cr Dey and Council staff. The NCAT representatives were invited to 

provide written comment on the NoM but advised that any comment on the proposed adjustments 

to the operational boundaries would be provided only on any Resolution adopted by Council. 

Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 20 December 2012, considered the NoM. 

The resolution adopted by Council as it relates to the subject parks is reproduced below: 

35 

12-995 “Resolved that Council inform itself and the Division of Local Government on some 

Caravan Park licence boundaries by defining them: 

1. as lines on survey plans as follows: 

40 

45 

50 

55 

a) at The Terrace: 

i) a western boundary at the western side of Lot 50, the 4,110m 2 area outlined in red on 

page 5 of 8 of Annexure 1(d) to our papers of 6 December (note: this licence boundary 

allocates to the Park about 12.5m of the 30m wide road reserve of Brunswick Terrace); 

ii) a northern boundary east of the 318m 2 area outlined in red on page 8 of 8 of Annexure 

1(d) to our papers of 6 December is a line parallel to Fingal Street and 3.0m south of the 

centre of the footbridge where its timber ends at Fingal Street; 

iii) a southern boundary through the centres of sites P190, P191 and U146 indicated on 

page 6 of 8 of Annexure 1(d) to our papers of 6 December plus a Christmas & Easter 

overflow to 10m south of the southern edge of the bitumen track within the Park and 

square (90°) to Brunswick Terrace. 

b) at Massey Green: 

i) an eastern boundary on the north-south join between Lot 409 and Lot 20 and extended 

south to the Old Pacific Highway; 




ii) a southern boundary on the southern edge of Lot 20; 

iii) a western boundary as defined in our Resolution 12-947 of 6 December, on the picket 

fence.” 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

Following the meeting a Rescission motion was received by the General Manager in relation to 

Resolution 12-947. 

The Rescission Motion was considered by Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 14 February 

2013. 

Council resolved via Resolution 13-23 to rescind Resolution 12-947 and adopt in its place 

Resolution 13-25 which reads as follows: 

13-25 “Resolved: 

1. That Council receive and note this Report. 

2. That Council confirm that there has been a constructive effort to consult with North 

Coast Accommodation Trust as to the conditions of approval imposed by Resolution 

12-627, noting Council’s correspondence dated 20 August 2012 and 23 October 2012 

and the meeting between representatives of the NCAT and Council held on 12 

November 2012. 

3. That Council confirm that it has considered the implications of the conditions of 

approval imposed by Resolution 12-627 on the current operation of the Holiday Parks 

and that following that consideration: 

a) supports the previously required foreshore buffer zones being integrated within the 

NCHP Plans of Management. 

b) notes the community view and reaffirms the terms and effect of Resolution 12-627 

particularly that the foreshore area of each park must remain in public hands for 

unimpeded public access. 

c) requires that within three years, Park Management implements a 3m foreshore 

buffer zone in Terrace Park. For all parks, all foreshore buffer zones are to remain 

outside the operational area of the caravan parks for public use and all caravan 

park infrastructure, including permanent sites are to be relocated, with a minimum 

10m building setback from the riverbank at NCHP’s expense. All buffer and 

setback measurements are to be taken from the top of the riverbank and will be 

reviewed periodically. Alternate accommodation is to be provided ON A SITE IN 

THE SAME PARK for long term residents whose vans cannot be relocated or fails 

to comply with current legislation. All short term sites and camp sites are required 

to maintain a minimum 3m setback from foreshore buffer zone boundary in all 

caravan parks. New Plans of Management are to retain approx 30% sites for 

permanent residents in all caravan parks and precincts considered for long term 

sites. All new license conditions are required to be included in Plans of 

Managements. 

d) that Council's licensing conditions as per Resolution 12-627 is amended to include 

Part Lot 7005 – The operational boundary of the caravan park is to be aligned with 

the existing picket fence on the western side of Massey Greene adjoining site 88 

through to the high water mark. 

4. That Council advise the Division of Local Government in terms of 2 and 3 above. 




5. That Council advise the North Coast Accommodation Trust and the Division of Local 

Government of its preference to: 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

a) extend public foreshore area to retain the land north of the old Fin’s Building 

adjoining Part Lot 102 DP 851964 so as to integrate the foreshore into that RTA 

foreshore pathway. This land is the northern part of DP 804961. 

b) support NCHP’s requests for the inclusion of additional lands (Old Pacific Hwy & 

Fins Building) within Ferry Holiday Park. 

6. That Council requests the North Coast Accommodation Trust and the Division of Local 

Government defer the development within the foreshore parklands known as the 

Terrace and Banner Park, pending further consultation with stakeholders, Council and 

NCAT/NCHP. These parklands are Part of Lot 416 DP728666. 

7. That Council reiterates the need to ensure the protection and appropriate management 

of all native vegetation including the stand of cypress pines within the Terrace Park to 

standards in accordance with applicable legislation. 

8. That Council reiterates the need to retain and appropriately sign public vehicular 

access to the public boat ramp at Ferry Reserve.” 

On 15 February 2013 Council representatives met with representatives of the Office of the Premier 

and Cabinet, NCAT and the Department of Lands. The meeting was convened at the request of 

the representative from the Office of the Premier and Cabinet to discuss the conditions contained 

in the Approvals for the Terrace Reserve, Massey Greene and Ferry Reserve Holiday Parks 

determined by Council in Resolutions 12-627, 12-995 and 13-25. This action being undertaken at 

the request of the Minister for Local Government to bring the parties together to discuss these 

conditions. 

The Minutes of the meeting were taken by Council and distributed to each of the representatives at 

the meeting from Office of the Premier and Cabinet, Council, NCAT and the Department of Lands. 

The Minutes included the proposed actions to be implemented by Council and the NCAT. 

Agreement has been reached between the representatives from Office of the Premier and Cabinet, 

Council, NCAT and the Department of Lands on the actions proposed for both the Terrace 

Reserve and the Massey Greene Holiday Parks. 

No agreement has been reached in relation to the actions proposed for the Ferry Reserve Holiday 

Park. 

The Agreement reached is for the following actions: 

45 

50 

55 

Massey Greene Holiday Park 

1. That Council grant an approval for 12 month period (from the date of issue) for the same 

operational area as defined in the 2007 Approval and on the same terms and conditions with 

the exception of the inclusion of an additional condition for a 3 metre buffer zone along the 

foreshore. 

(Note: The 3 metre buffer zone has already been created and agreed to by Council and the NCAT) 

2. That the NCAT prepare and exhibit a draft Plan of Management (POM) for the Caravan Park 

during this period. 




3. That prior to placing the draft Plan of Management (POM) for the Caravan Park on exhibition 

that the NCAT facilitate a meeting with the parties to review the PoM, and to agree the maps 

used in the PoM, to define the operational boundaries. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

(Note: Adoption of the POM within this period is subject to Ministerial processes and that the 

parties referred to in 3. above are the representatives of the stakeholders involved in the 15 

February meeting.) 

Terrace Reserve Holiday Park 

1. That Council grant an approval for 12 month period (from the date of issue) for the same 

operational area as defined in the 2007 Approval and on the same terms and conditions. 

2. That the NCAT prepare and exhibit a draft Plan of Management (POM) for the Caravan Park 

during this period. 

3. That prior to placing the draft Plan of Management (POM) for the Caravan Park on exhibition 

that the NCAT facilitate a meeting with the parties to review the PoM, and to agree the maps 

used in the PoM, to define the operational boundaries. 

(Note: Adoption of the POM within this period is subject to Ministerial processes and that they 

parties referred to in 3. above are the representatives of the stakeholders involved in the 15 

February meeting.) 

In relation to the above actions further Agreement was reached in respect of the terms to progress 

these actions, which included the preparation of this report to the 9 May Ordinary meeting of 

Council, to enable Council to consider a 12 month approval for each of the Massey Greene and 

Terrace Reserve Holiday Parks. A copy of the Agreement is contained in Annexure 9(c). 

The Agreement also includes an obligation on the NCAT to progress Actions 2 and 3 for both 

Holiday Parks. 

The terms of agreement 1 are embodied in Annexures 9(a) and 9(b). 

35 

Staff will continue to liaise with NCAT in respect of compliance with agreements 2 and 3. 

Staff will inform the Minister of Council’s approvals and will withdraw Council’s previous referral on 

the basis that the conditions as proposed in the 12 month approval are agreed by all parties. 

40 

45 

The Agreement at Annexure 9(c) is an Agreement between the representatives at 15 February 

2013 meeting. It is acknowledged by all parties that recommendations are subject to Council’s 

consideration and adoption of the recommendations for the issue of a 12 month approval, as is the 

progression of the further actions by NCAT. 




50 

 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 2 hours. 


55 

The operation of caravan parks and camping grounds require approval under Section 68 (Part F2) 

of the Local Government Act 1993. Applications are lodged by the land owner to continue the 




operation of caravan park and camping ground activities, and application fees are paid in 

accordance with Councils’ adopted fees and charges. 

5 

10 

15 

The process of assessing and determining applications is regulated under Chapter 7 Part 1 of the 

Local Government Act 1993. Part of the consideration of such applications involves the auditing of 

compliance with the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping 

Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005 (the Regulation). 

Once it had been determined that the application represented the actual site activities, and 

satisfies the requirements of the Regulation, then an approval is granted. 

Development consent necessary for the conducting of caravan park activities on any land is 

considered as part of the application under the Local Government Act 1993. As Council did not 

obtain development consent for the expansion of caravan park activities outside the various 

allotment boundaries under its control, prior to the Crown taking control in 2007, then it is now a 

requirement that the Crown restore compliance. The Crown has more options available to restore 

compliance in relation to the Brunswick Heads Crown Reserve caravan parks. 

Under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 - Division 12 - Parks and 

other public reserves 2(d) the following development is permitted without development consent. 

(2) Development for any purpose may be carried out without consent: 

20 

25 

30 

(d) in the case of land that is a reserve within the meaning of Part 5 of the Crown 

Lands Act 1989, by or on behalf of the Director-General of the Department of 

Lands, a trustee of the reserve or (if appointed under that Act to manage the 

reserve) the Ministerial Corporation constituted under that Act or an 

administrator, 

if the development is for the purposes of implementing a plan of management adopted for 

the land under the Act referred to above in relation to the land. 

Existing use rights under Division "Existing Uses" should not apply where merely because the 

development is there which is also confirmed in section 109A of the Environmental Planning and 

Assessment Act 1979. 

109A Uses unlawfully commenced 

(1) The use of a building, work or land which was unlawfully commenced is not 

rendered lawful by the occurrence of any subsequent event except: 

35 

(a) the commencement of an environmental planning instrument which 

permits the use without the necessity for consent under this Act being 

obtained therefore, or 

(b) the granting of development consent to that use. 

40 

45 

An application under Section 68 of the Local Government Act and the Local Government (General) 

Regulation 2005 (specifically clause 5) nominates that Local Government (Manufactured Home 

Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005 is to be 

regulation used for the assessment of any approval to operate a Manufactured Home Estate, 

Caravan Park and/or Camping Ground. 

Under the Crown Lands Act 1989 Section 81 ‘Addition to dedicated land’ can occur by: 

(1) The Minister may, by notification in the Gazette, add Crown land to any land 

dedicated under this Act. 




(2) On publication of the notification in the Gazette: 

(a) the added land becomes part of the dedicated land, 

(b) the added land becomes subject to the same dedication and trusts as the 

dedicated land, 

5 

(c) any rules, regulations or by-laws applicable to the dedicated land become 

applicable to the added land, and 

(d) a reserve trust which is trustee of the dedicated land becomes trustee of 

the added land. 

10 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993 - SECT 72 

Determination of applications by the Crown 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

72 Determination of applications by the Crown 

(1) A council, in respect of an application for approval made by the Crown or a person 

prescribed by the regulations, must not: 

(a) refuse to grant approval, except with the written consent of the Minister, or 

(b) impose a condition of an approval, except with the written consent of the Minister or the 

applicant. 

(2) If the council proposes to refuse to grant approval or to impose a condition of approval, it 

must immediately notify the applicant. 

(3) After the applicant is so notified, the council must submit to the Minister: 

(a) a copy of the application for approval, and 

(b) details of its proposed determination of the application, and 

(c) the reasons for the proposed determination, and 

(d) any relevant reports of another public authority. 

(4) The applicant may refer the application to the Minister whether or not the council complies 

with subsection (3). 

(5) After receiving the application from the council or the applicant, the Minister must notify the 

council and the applicant of: 

(a) the Minister’s consent to the refusal of approval, or 

(b) the Minister’s consent to the imposition of the council’s proposed conditions, or 

(c) the Minister’s intention not to agree with the council’s proposed refusal and the period 

within which the council may submit any conditions it wishes to impose as conditions of 

approval, or 

(d) the Minister’s refusal to agree with the council’s proposed conditions and any 

conditions to which the Minister’s consent may be assumed. 

(6) At the end of the period specified in subsection (5) (c), the Minister must notify the council 

and the applicant: 

(a) whether the Minister consents to the imposition of any of the conditions submitted by 

the council during that period and, if so, which conditions, or 

(b) of the conditions to which the Minister’s consent may be assumed. 

(7) The Minister must notify the council and the applicant of the reasons for a decision under 

subsection (5) or (6). 




(8) If the council does not determine the application within the period notified by the Minister for 

the purpose, the council is taken, on the expiration of that period, to have determined the 

application in accordance with the Minister’s consent. 

5 

10 

74 Prohibition on appeals concerning Crown applications 

No review or appeal lies against a determination that the council is taken to have made under 

section 72 (8) or a decision or determination of the Minister under section 72 or 73. 

105 Circumstances in which approval is taken to have been refused 

(1) If the council has not determined an application: 

(a) within the period of 40 days after the application is lodged with it, except as provided by 

paragraph (b), or 

15 

(b) 

within the period of 80 days after the application is lodged with it in the case of an 

application for which the concurrence of a person or authority is required by or under 

this Act, the council is, for the purposes only of section 176, taken to have determined 

the application by refusing approval on the date on which that period expires. 

20 

25 

30 

(2) Nothing in subsection (1) prevents the council from determining an application after the 

expiration of the 40-day or 80-day period, whether on a review under section 100 or 

otherwise. 

(3) A determination under subsection (2) does not prejudice or affect the continuance or 

determination of an appeal made under section 176 in respect of a determination that is 

taken under subsection (1) to have been made, subject to subsection (4). 

(4) Where a determination under subsection (2) is made by granting approval, the council is 

entitled, with the consent of the applicant and without prejudice to costs, to have an appeal 

made under section 176 in respect of a determination that is taken by subsection (1) to have 

been made, withdrawn at any time before the appeal is determined. 




5 

Report No. 12.3. Revised Council Meeting Schedule for 2013 


Report Author: Ken Gainger, General Manager 

File No: 

#E2013/26690 

Theme: 

Corporate Management, Councillors 

Summary: 

This report is prepared to allow Council to consider a proposed revision to 

the schedule of Council meetings for 2013. The proposed schedule would 

commence from 8 August 2013 and work on the basis of holding an 

Ordinary Meeting every third Thursday. It also proposes the removal of the 

Strategic Planning Committee from the schedule. 

Council’s Code of Meeting Practice states, in part, that: 

“4.3 The scheduling of Ordinary meetings of Council may be 

changed by resolution of Council.” 

In future, should this schedule be adopted beyond 2013, the Code of 

Meeting Practice would require an amendment at part 4.1 which states: 

“4.1 Ordinary Meetings will be held: 

(a) on the second and fourth Thursdays of each of the 

months of February, April, June, August, October and 

December; 

(b) on the second Thursday of each of the months of March, 

May, September and November." 

Further, due to feedback received from Councillors, this report allows for 

adoption of a revised agenda delivery date. That is, agendas would be 

delivered to Councillors nine days before each Ordinary Meeting rather 

than seven days prior. 

Council's Code of Meeting Practice states: 

"5.1 The General Manager of the Council must send to each 

Councillor, at least seven days before each Ordinary meeting of 

the Council, a notice specifying the time and place at which, 

and the date on which, the meeting is to be held and the 

business proposed to be transacted at the meeting." 


10 

15 

1. That Council adopts a three weekly meeting cycle for ordinary Council meetings 

commencing in August 2013 in accordance with the following revised schedule of 

Ordinary Meetings: 

8 August 2013 

29 August 2013 

19 September 2013 

10 October 2013 


21 November 2013 




12 December 2013 

First meeting for 2014 on Thursday 6 February 

5 

2. That Ordinary Meeting Agendas be delivered to Councillors at noon, nine days prior to 

each Ordinary Meeting from August 2013. 

3. That the Strategic Planning Committee be abolished and be replaced with regular 

Strategic Planning Workshops which commence from 30 May 2013. 

10 

15 

4. That the Planning Review Committee be abolished effective from the beginning of 

August 2013. 

5. That staff prepare a clear set of criteria/guidelines for the consideration of the Council 

which guide staff in determining which Development Applications are to be determined 

directly by the Council – such criteria to be considered and adopted by the Council 

prior to August 2013. 

6. That Council limit staff administrative support for each PRG to the first three meetings. 




Report 

5 

10 

At a recent informal meeting between Councillors and senior staff, Council’s current meeting 

schedule and the role of committees was discussed. In accordance with preferences stated at that 

meeting this report proposes moving to a three weekly cycle for Council meetings, the abolition of 

the Strategic Planning Committee in favour of regular Strategic Planning Workshops, and the 

abolition of the Planning Review Committee in favour of the development of clearer criteria for 

evaluating which planning matters are to be determined by the Council rather than by staff under 

delegated authority. This report also proposes that staff administrative support for Project 

Reference Groups (PRGs) be limited to the first three meetings of such groups as a means of 

encouraging PRGs to become more self reliant and stabilising Council’s administrative workload. 

Council Meetings 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

The proposal to change the Council meeting cycle to three weekly has arisen due to the current 

heavy and continuous administrative workload that the current system imposes on staff and 

Councillors. Currently staff are in a constant cycle of either preparing for or responding to these 

meetings and this is detracting from our ability to implement the many critical initiatives taken by 

the Council. Similarly Councillors have to wade through substantial Council business papers on a 

fortnightly basis and this provides little opportunity for them to consult with constituents and ensure 

well informed decision making. It is therefore suggested that Council consider a proposed revision 

to the schedule of Council meetings for 2013 and beyond. The proposed schedule would 

commence from 8 August 2013 (after the July recess) and work on the basis of holding an 

Ordinary Meeting every third Thursday. 

Council’s Code of Meeting Practice states, in part, that: 

“4.3 The scheduling of Ordinary meetings of Council may be changed by resolution of 

Council.” 

In future, should a three weekly cycle be adopted beyond 2013, the Code of Meeting Practice 

would require an amendment at part 4.1 which states: 

“4.1 Ordinary Meetings will be held: 

(a) 

on the second and fourth Thursdays of each of the months of February, 

April, June, August, October and December; 

40 

(b) 

on the second Thursday of each of the months of March, May, September and 

November." 

The proposed meeting schedule for the remainder of 2013 is: 

45 

50 

8 August 2013 







The adopted meeting schedule is: 

55 

8 August 2013 






5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

26 September 2013 – Strategic Planning Committee Meeting 




28 November 2013 – Strategic Planning Committee Meeting 



Adoption of the amended meeting cycle would also allow for adoption of a revised 

agenda delivery date. That is, agendas would be delivered to Councillors nine days prior 

to an Ordinary Meeting rather than seven days prior. This would provide greater 

opportunity for Councillors to digest complex reports in the Business Papers and consult 

constituents and/or interest groups. The business papers would also be uploaded onto 

Council’s website for public access two days earlier than currently. 

Strategic Planning Committee 

Strategic Planning Committee meetings comprising all Councillors are currently held every two 

months. The nature of this committee and its modus operandi inevitably leads to the meetings 

dealing with a limited number of strategically significant matters which, by their nature, are complex 

and require in-depth consideration. Thus the meetings are fractured with long periods spent in 

committee or workshop sessions while a small and sometimes confused gallery hovers expectantly 

to await the outcome. This process is not an effective utilisation of time for staff or Councillors and 

often leads to duplication of decision making whereby any matters having a budgetary impact are 

still required to be reported to the Council. 

Discussions with Councillors have disclosed a preference for regular Strategic Planning workshops 

where potential solutions and strategies for complex issues are formulated through discussions 

between Councillors and senior staff and these outcomes are reported to the next available 

Council meeting for consideration and adoption. These workshops would be held in lieu of the 

current Strategic Planning Committee. It is proposed that the Strategic Planning Committee 

meeting that is currently scheduled for 23 May 2013 be replaced with a Strategic Planning 

Workshop on 30 May 2013 and that the Strategic Planning Committee be abolished thereafter. 

Planning Review Committee 

The Planning Review Committee meets monthly to consider current Development Applications 

under assessment by staff to determine which of these applications should be determined directly 

by the elected Council. Attendance at these meetings by Councillors has been increasingly poor 

and at times a quorum is not attained. Most councils operate with a clear set of mandated 

criteria/guidelines to help staff determine which Development Applications should be determined 

by the Council and which are able to be determined by staff under delegated authority. It is 

recommended that such a system be introduced at Byron Shire Council in lieu of the current 

Planning Review Committee. Discussion with Councillors indicated that Councillors were well 

disposed towards such a change. 

A separate report has been prepared by the Manager Regulatory Services which outlines 

suggested criteria for guiding staff in relation to those Development Applications which must be 

determined by the Council. 

Project Reference Groups 

From time to time the Council forms Project Reference Groups (PRGs) comprising elected 

Councillors and members of the community to advise Council on the resolution of particular issues 

and problems. These PRGs, which have a pre-determined but at times lengthy life span, have 




5 

10 

become a significant drain on Council staff who service the PRGs through their role in organising 

meetings, sending out meeting notices, attendance at meetings, advising on appropriate processes 

and resourcing issues, minute taking, reporting minutes to Council meetings and actioning 

recommendations. Staff have proposed that Council move towards making these PRGs more self 

reliant by limiting staff involvement to the “start up phase” for each PRG, nominally the first three 

meetings. This would create a clear and apparent expectation that community members who 

participate in PRGs must be active members who contribute to the organisation of the meetings 

and reporting of meeting outcomes to the Council. Such responsibility will also build a stronger 

sense of “ownership” of the PRG’s achievements while being less resource intensive for the 

Council. 


15 



 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 2.5 hours. 

20 

25 


In accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, Council is required to set the dates for its 

Ordinary and Strategic Planning Committee Meetings at an Ordinary Meeting in either November 

or December of each calendar year, however, it allows for changes by resolution of Council at 

other times of the year. 

The draft 2014 Meeting Schedule will be reported to Council in November 2013. Should Council 

adopt the three week meeting cycle permanently, it would be proposed that the first meeting in 

2014 would be held in the first week of February (i.e. Thursday 6 February), to allow Council to 

meet its statutory requirements for the consideration of the December Quarterly Budget Review. 




5 

Report No. 12.4. Investments – March 2013 


Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance 

File No: 

#E2013/17233 

Theme: 

Corporate Management, Financial Services 

Summary: This report includes a list of investments as at March 2013. 


10 

That Council receive and note the record of investments for the month of March 2013. 

Attachments: 

15 

Investment Valuations and Graphs March 2013 #E2013/17232 [2 pages] ............................Annexure 8(a) 

Denison Investment Report #E2013/23122 [10 pages] ......................................................... Annexure 8(b) 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

In relation to the investment portfolio as at 31 March 2013, Council has continued to maintain a 

diversified portfolio of investments. The average 90 day bank bill rate for the month of March was 

3.04%. Council’s performance for the month of March is a weighted average of 3.87%. This 

performance is again higher than the benchmark. This is largely due to the active ongoing 

management of the investment portfolio, maximising investment returns through secure term 

deposits. Council’s investment portfolio should continue to out-perform the benchmark as the 

capital protected investments earning 0% interest begin to mature or are able to be switched 

favourably. There are still a number of Council’s capital protected investments being partially and 

fully allocated to an underlying zero coupon bond. This is part of the “Capital Protection 

Mechanism” and coupons will not be paid if any allocation is made to this bond. 

The current value of an investment compared to the principal value (face value or original purchase 

price) provides an indication of the performance of the investment without reference to the coupon 

(interest) rate. The current value represents the value received if an investment was sold or traded 

in the current market, in addition to the interest received. 

For the month of March, the current value of investments has remained lower than the principal 

amount. The table below shows a slight increase in the cumulative unrealised loss for Council 

along with a reconciliation of investment purchases and maturities for the period 28 February 2013 

to 31 March 2013. 

Movement in Principal and Current Market Valuations – 28 February 2013 to 31 March 2013 

Month Type Date Principal 

(at month 

end) 

Current 

Market Value 

(at end of 

month) 

Cumulative 

Unrealised 

Gain/(Loss) 

Opening Balance at 28 February 2013 59,704,113.05 59,172,343.05 (531,770.00 

Add: New Investments Purchased 

ME Bank TD 4/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 

Elders Rural Bank TD 4/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Suncorp TD 11/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Suncorp TD 11/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Heritage Bank TD 11/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 

ING Bank Australia TD 11/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Bendigo & Adelaide Bank TD 21/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

ME Bank TD 25/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 

Police Credit Union TD 28/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 

CBA Business On-Line Saver Deposits Cash Various 7,516,068.43 7,516,068.43 0.00 

Total Investments Purchased 20,516,068.43 20,516,068.43 0.00 

Less: Investments Matured 

ME Bank TD 4/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Elders Rural Bank TD 4/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Suncorp TD 4/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 

Suncorp TD 5/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Heritage Bank TD 5/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Wide Bay Australia Ltd TD 5/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 




Bendigo & Adelaide Bank TD 21/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 

ME Bank TD 25/3/13 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 

Police Credit Union TD 28/3/13 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 

CBA Business On-Line Saver Withdrawals Cash Various 8,100,000.00 8,100,000.00 0.00 

Total Investments Matured 21,100,000.00 21,100,000.00 0.00 

Fair Value Movement February to March 0.00 (1,570.00) (1,570.00) 

Closing Balance at 31 March 2013 59,120,181.48 58,586,841.48 (533,340.00) 

5 

This unrealised loss is a consequence of the lingering effects of the Global Financial Crisis. Some 

of Council’s investments are linked to the Credit and Equity Markets which have been adversely 

affected and are yet to recover. A breakdown of this can be seen in the table below. The figures 

are for March 2013. 

Dissection of Council Investment Portfolio as at 31 March 2013 

Principal ($) Investment Linked to:- Current Value Cumulative 

Unrealised 

Gain/(Loss) 

42,771.000.00 TERM DEPOSITS 42,771.000.00 0.00 

3,349,181.48 BUSINESS ONLINE SAVER 3,349,181.48 0.00 

3,500,000.00 MANAGED FUNDS 3,320,250.00 (179,750.00) 

3,000,000.00 CREDIT 2,937,660.00 (62,340.00) 

6,000,000.00 EQUITY 5,694,250.00 (305,750.00) 

500,000.00 BONDS 514,500.00 14,500.00 

59,120,181.48 58,586,841.48 (533,340.00) 

10 

15 

20 

25 

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

Council’s historical strategy is to use credit/equity markets for exposure to long term growth. It 

should be noted that Council’s exposure to credit/equity products is capital protected when held to 

maturity, which ensures no matter what the market value of the product is at maturity, Council is 

insured against any capital loss. The investment strategy associated with long term growth is now 

prohibited under the current Ministerial Investment Order utilising credit/equity markets to seek 

investment products. However, the ‘grandfathering’ provisions of the Ministerial Investment Order 

provides Council can retain investments now prohibited until they mature. Council is also looking 

continually at ‘switch’ opportunities for these investments in conjunction with its independent 

investment advisors. Any ‘switch’ opportunities undertaken are reported to Council in the 

investment report relating to the month the ‘switch’ occurred. Notwithstanding the current 

valuations of credit/equity investments, these products will trend toward their full principal value as 

they approach maturity. 

Investments held as at 31 March 2013 

Date Principal ($) Description CP* Rating M’ty Type Rate Current Value 

24/7/07 1,000,000 AVERON II CP AAA 07/14 CR 0.00%* 935,000.00 

22/4/08 2,000,000 ANZ TRANSFERABLE DEPOSIT N AA- 04/13 CR 4.36% 2,002,660.00 

26/9/05 1,500,000 EMU NOTES CP AAA- 10/15 MFD 0.00%* 1,376,850.00 

29/6/06 2,000,000 ALL SEASONS NOTE CP AA+ 08/14 MFD 0.00%* 1,943,400.00 

22/6/06 1,000,000 HIGH INCOME NOTES CP A 06/13 E 0.00%* 980,600.00 




30/3/07 1,000,000 INFRASTRUCTURE AND 

UTILITIES NOTE 

CP A 04/14 E 0.00%* 965,720.00 

28/9/07 1,000,000 TRI-SECTOR LINKED NOTE CP A 09/14 E 0.00%* 950,430.00 

28/11/07 3,000,000 CLIENT MANAGED NOTE CP A 11/14 E 0.00%* 2,797,500.00 

20/6/12 500,000 HERITAGE BANK LTD BONDS N BBB+ 06/17 B 7.25% 514,500.00 

24/1/13 2,000,000 HERITAGE BANK LIMITED N BBB+ 04/13 TD 4.35% 2,000,000.00 

11/3/13 2,000,000 SUNCORP P A+ 06/13 TD 4.25% 2,000,000.00 

12/10/12 1,000,000 MACQUARIE BANK P A 04/13 TD 4.65% 1,000,000.00 

29/9/08 2,000,000 WESTPAC BANK P AA 09/13 TD 8.00% 2,000,000.00 

16/12/08 1,000,000 WESTPAC BANK N AA 12/13 TD 6.00% 1,000,000.00 

28/9/09 785,000 INVESTEC BANK P BBB+ 01/14 TD 8.02% 785,000.00 

18/6/10 786,000 SUNCORP N A 06/14 TD 7.30% 786,000.00 

24/1/13 1,000,000 BANK OF QUEENSLAND P A2 04/13 TD 4.30% 1,000,000.00 

25/3/13 1,000,000 ME BANK P BBB 06/13 TD 4.40% 1,000,000.00 

2/1/13 2,000,000 SOUTHERN CROSS CR UNION P NR 04/13 TD 4.45% 2,000,000.00 

12/5/11 1,000,000 INVESTEC BANK N BBB+ 05/14 TD 7.48% 1,000,000.00 

19/2/13 2,000,000 ING BANK (AUSTRALIA) P A1 06/13 TD 4.29% 2,000,000.00 

8/8/11 1,000,000 RABO BANK N AA 08/13 TD 6.50% 1,000,000.00 

24/1/13 1,000,000 GREATER BUILDING SOCIETY P NR 04/13 TD 4.40% 1,000,000.00 

28/2/13 1,000,000 NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK P AA- 05/13 TD 4.23% 1,000,000.00 

4/3/13 1,000,000 ME BANK N BBB 06/13 TD 4.38% 1,000,000.00 

4/2/13 2,200,000 POLICE CREDIT UNION P NR 05/13 TD 4.23% 2,200,000.00 

7/1/13 2,000,000 INVESTEC N BBB+ 07/13 TD 4.33% 2,000,000.00 

20/12/12 2,000,000 ME BANK N BBB 04/13 TD 4.65% 2,000,000.00 

5/2/13 2,000,000 BANK OF QUEENSLAND N A2 05/13 TD 4.25% 2,000,000.00 

4/3/13 1,000,000 ELDERS RURAL BANK N BBB 06/13 TD 4.25% 1,000,000.00 

6/9/12 2,000,000 RABOBANK N AA 09/13 TD 5.02% 2,000,000.00 

12/10/12 1,000,000 INVESTEC N BBB+ 10/13 TD 4.71% 1,000,000.00 

5/2/13 2,000,000 SOUTHERN CROSS CR UNION P NR 05/13 TD 4.20% 2,000,000.00 

28/3/13 2,000,000 POLICE CREDIT UNION N NR 07/13 TD 4.35% 2,000,000.00 

11/3/13 1,000,000 SUNCORP N A 07/13 TD 4.25% 1,000,000.00 

11/3/13 1,000,000 HERITAGE BANK LIMITED N BBB+ 06/13 TD 4.20% 1,000,000.00 

21/3/13 2,000,000 BENDIGO & ADELAIDE BANK N NR 05/13 TD 4.10% 2,000,000.00 

11/3/13 2,000,000 ING BANK (AUSTRALIA) N A1 07/13 TD 4.30% 2,000,000.00 

N/A 3,349,181 CBA BUSINESS ONLINE SAVER N A N/A CALL 3.00% 3,349,181.48 

Total 59,120,181 AVG 3.87% 58,586,841.48 

Note 1. 

CP = Capital protection on maturity 

N = No Capital Protection 

Y = Fully covered by Government Guarantee 

P = Partial Government Guarantee of $250,000 




Note 2. Type Description 

CR Credit Principal varies based on valuation, interest 

payable via a floating interest rate that varies 

except for those capital protected investments that 

have transferred to their capital protection 

mechanism. 

E Equity Principal varies based on valuation, interest 

payable via a floating interest rate that varies 

except for those capital protected investments that 

have transferred to their capital protection 

mechanism. 

MFD Managed Fund Principal varies based on fund unit. 

Price valuation, interest payable varies depending 

upon fund performance. 

TD Term Deposit Principal does not vary during investment term. 

Interest payable is fixed at the rate invested for the 

investment term. 

CALL Call Account Principal varies due to cash flow demands from 

deposits/withdrawals, interest is payable on the 

daily balance at the cash rate +0.50% 

5 

10 

Note 3. 

Note 4. 

Floating rate notes and Term Deposits can be traded on a day-to-day basis, and 

therefore Council is not obliged to hold the investments to the maturity dates. 

Managed funds operate in a similar manner to a normal bank account with amounts 

deposited or withdrawn on a daily basis. There is no maturity date for this type of 

investment. 

The coupon on these investments is zero due to the Capital Protection mechanism 

working. This occurs when the investment falls below a certain level. This coupon 

may be paid again in the future as the market recovers. 

Other Information – Financial Claims Scheme (FCS) 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

From 1 February 2012, the Financial Claims Scheme (FCS - or Government guarantee) coverage 

for any one investor in deposits reduced to $250,000 from $1,000,000 per Approved Deposit 

Institution (ADI). The Financial Claims Scheme was introduced as a result of the Global Financial 

Crisis (GFC), essentially to provide investors confidence when taking out deposit's with all ADIs 

and to ensure that their primary business of lending money was not significantly hindered due to 

lack of funding. NSW Local Government Councils have under the Ministers Order always been 

able to invest with ADIs without a dollar limit on any one institution. 

Under Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA) regulation Building Societies and Credit 

Unions must meet the same capital requirements as a Bank. Whilst the majority are much smaller 

in terms of balance sheet size to the Banks they are still considered to be strong business' and 

investing in their term deposits still low risk. Most of Councils’ term deposits have now been 

amended to show a partial guarantee of this $250,000 per deposit taking institution. 


The reduction of the current value of Council’s portfolio is a result of the downturn in global markets 

stemming from the global financial crisis. It should be noted that Council’s exposure to the 

credit/equity markets is supported by capital protection which ensures that the initial value of the 

investment is not reduced when held to maturity. In downward cycles, the capital is protected by 

allocating the investment to an underlying bond. If the investment is 100% allocated to this bond, 




no interest will be paid up to maturity. This will impact negatively on Council’s interest earnings on 

investments. 

5 

10 

Council’s investment strategy is to invest for the long term while maintaining sufficient liquid 

investments to meet short term requirements. It is important that this strategy is maintained to 

ensure that principal attached to credit/equity investments is recovered over time as maturity 

occurs or ‘switch’ opportunities to alternative investments present themselves. 



 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 1 hour. 

15 

20 

25 

30 


In accordance with clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, the 

Responsible Accounting Officer of Council must provide Council with a monthly report detailing all 

monies Council has invested under section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993. 

The Report must be presented at the next Ordinary Meeting of Council after the end of the month 

being reported. In this regard, the current Council Meeting cycle does not always allow this to 

occur, especially when the second meeting of a month is a Strategic Planning Meeting or when the 

meeting dates are brought forward. Under normal circumstances it is not possible to present the 

investment report to the first Ordinary Meeting in the month, as investment valuations required for 

the preparation of the report, are often received after the deadline for the submission of reports for 

the meeting. 

Council’s investments are carried out in accordance with section 625(2) of the Local Government 

Act 1993 and Council’s Investment Policy. The Local Government Act 1993 allows Council to 

invest money as per the Ministers Order – Forms of Investment, last published in the Government 

Gazette on 11 February 2011. 

Council’s Investment Policy includes the objective of maximising earnings from authorised 

investments and ensuring the security of Council Funds. 




5 

Report No. 12.5. Budget Review - 1 January 2013 to 31 March 2013 


Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance 

File No: 

#E2013/18257 

Theme: 

Corporate Management, Financial Services 

Summary: 

This report is prepared to comply with Clause 203 of the Local Government 

(General) Regulation 2005 and to inform Council and the Community of 

Council’s estimated financial position for the 2012/2013 financial year, 

reviewed as at 31 March 2013. 

This report contains an overview of the proposed budget variations for the 

General Fund, Water Fund and Sewerage Fund. The specific details of 

these proposed variations are included in Annexure 7(a) and 7(b) for 

Council’s consideration and authorisation. 

Annexure 7(c) contains the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework 

(IP&R) Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS) as outlined by the 

Division of Local Government in circular 10-32. 


10 

15 

20 

25 

1. That Council authorise the itemised budget variations as shown in Annexure 7(b) 

(#E2013/11950) which includes the following results in the 31 March 2013 Quarterly 

Review of the 2012/2013 Budget: 

a) General Fund - $288,100 increase in accumulated surplus 

b) Water Fund - $163,300 increase in reserves 

c) Sewerage Fund - $224,100 increase in reserves 

2. That Council adopt the revised working fund surplus of $42,600 for the 2012/2013 

financial year as at 31 March 2013. 

Attachments: 

Budget Variations for the General, Water and Sewer Funds #E2013/26283 [71 pages] ..Annexure 7(a) 

Itemised Listing of Budget Variations for the General, Water and Sewerage Funds 

#E2013/11950 [3 pages] ................................................................................................... Annexure 7(b) 

New Integrated Planning and Reporting framework (IP&R) required Quarterly Budget 

Review Statement (QBRS) components #E2013/26284 [16 pages]. ................................Annexure 7(c) 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

Council adopted the 2012/2013 budget on 28 June 2012 via Resolution 12-542. It also considered 

and adopted the budget carryovers from the 2011/2012 financial year, to be incorporated into the 

2012/2013 budget, at its Ordinary Meeting held 30 August 2012 via Resolution 12-666. Since that 

date, Council has reviewed the budget taking into consideration the 2011/12 Financial Statement 

results and progress through the September and December 2012 quarter budget reviews. This 

report considers the March 2013 Quarter Budget Review. 

The details of the budget review for the Consolidated, General, Water and Sewer Funds are 

included in Annexure 7(a), with an itemised listing in Annexure 7(b). This aims to show the 

consolidated budget position of Council, as well as a breakdown by Fund and Principal Activity. 

The document in Annexure 7(a) is also effectively a publication outlining a review of the budget 

and is intended to provide Councillors with more detailed information to assist with decision making 

regarding Council’s finances. 

Contained in the document at Annexure 7(a) is the following reporting hierarchy: 

20 

Consolidated Budget Cash Result 

General Fund Cash Result Water Fund Cash Result Sewer Cash Result 

25 

Principal Activity Principal Activity Principal Activity 

30 

Operating Income Operating Expenditure Capital income Capital Expenditure 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

The pages within Annexure 7(a) are presented (from left to right) by showing the original budget as 

adopted by Council on 28 June 2012 plus the adopted carryover budgets from 2011/2012 followed 

by the resolutions between July and September, the September review, resolutions between 

October and December, the December review, resolutions between January and March and the 

revote (or adjustment for this review) and then the revised position projected for 30 June 2013 as 

at 31 March 2013. 

On the far right of the Principal Activity (pages 11 – 64 of 71), there is a column titled “Note”. If this 

is populated by a number, it means that there has been an adjustment in the quarterly review. This 

number then corresponds to the notes at the end of the Annexure 7(a) (pages 66 – 71 of 71) which 

provides an explanation of the variation. 

There is also information detailing restricted assets (reserves) to show Council estimated balances 

as at 30 June 2013 for all Council’s reserves (pages 7 – 10 of 71). 

A summary of Capital Works is also included by Fund and Principal Activity (page 65 of 71). 

Division of Local Government Budget Review Guidelines:- 

The Division of Local Government on 10 December 2010 issued the new Quarterly Budget Review 

Guidelines via Circular 10-32, with the reporting requirements to apply from 1 July 2011. This 

report includes a Quarterly Budget Review Statement (refer Annexure 7(c)) prepared by Council in 

accordance with the guidelines. 




The Quarterly Budget Review Guidelines set a minimum standard of disclosure, with these 

standards being included in the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial 

Reporting as mandatory requirements for Council’s to address. 

5 

Since the introduction of the new planning and reporting framework for NSW Local Government, it 

is now a requirement for Councils to provide the following components when submitting a Quarterly 

Budget Review Statement (QBRS): 

10 

15 

20 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A signed statement by the Responsible Accounting Officer on Councils financial position 

at the end of the year based on the information in the QBRS 

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

o Consolidated 

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

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

Budget Review Capital Budget 

Budget Review Cash and Investments Position 

Budget Review Key performance indicators 

Budget Review Contracts and Other Expenses 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

The above components are included in Annexure 7(c):- 

Income and Expenditure Budget Review Statement by Type – This shows Councils 

income and Expenditure by type. This has been split by Fund. Adjustments are shown, 

looking from left to right. These adjustments are commented on through pages 66 to 72 of 

Annexure 7(a). 

Capital Budget Review Statement – This statement identifies in summary Council’s capital 

works program on a consolidated basis and then split by Fund. It also identifies how the 

capital works program is funded. As this is the second quarterly review for the reporting period, 

the Statement may not necessarily indicate the total progress achieved on the delivery of the 

capital works program. 

Cash and Investments Budget Review Statement – This statement reconciles Council’s 

restricted funds (reserves) against available cash and investments. Council has attempted to 

indicate an actual position as at 31 March 2013 of each reserve to show a total cash position 

of reserves with any difference between that position and total cash and investments held as 

available cash and investments. It should be recognised that the figure is at a point in time 

and may vary greatly in future quarterly reviews pending on cash flow movements. 

Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) – Council is currently developing a series of KPI’s to be 

built into the Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP currently under development). At this stage, the 

KPI’s within in this report are:- 

50 

o 

o 

Debt Service Ratio - This assesses the impact of loan principal and interest repayments 

on the discretionary revenue of Council. 

Rates and Annual Charges Outstanding Ratio – This assesses the impact of 

uncollected rates and annual charges on Councils liquidity and the adequacy of recovery 

efforts 




o 

Asset Renewals Ratio – This assesses the rate at which assets are being renewed 

relative to the rate at which they are depreciating. 

5 

These may be expanded in future to accommodate any additional KPIs that Council may 

adopt to use in the Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP.) 

Contracts and Other Expenses - This report highlights any contracts Council entered into 

during the January to March quarter that are greater then $50,000. 

10 

15 

CONSOLIDATED RESULT 

The following table provides a summary of the overall Council budget on a consolidated basis 

inclusive of all Funds budget movements for the 2012/2013 financial year projected to 30 June 

2013 but revised as at 31 March 2013. 

2012/2013 Budget Review 

Statement as at 31 March 2013 

Original 

Estimate 

(Including 

Carryovers) 

1/7/2012 

Adjustments 

to March 

2013 

including 

Resolutions* 

Proposed 

March 2013 

Review 

Revotes 

Revised 

Estimate 

30/6/2013 at 

31/3/2013 

Operating Revenue 61,900,300 117,500 54,700 62,072,500 

Operating Expenditure 72,142,500 2,562,400 (235,600) 74,469,300 

Operating Result – 

(10,242,200) (2,444,900) 290,300 (12,396,800) 

Surplus/Deficit 

Add: Capital Revenue 1,010,000 (96,500) 0 913,500 

Change in Net Assets (9,232,200) (2,541,400) 290,300 (11,483,300) 

Add: Non Cash Expenses 16,496,000 0 0 16,496,000 

Add: Non-Operating Funds 

971,300 2,800,000 (971,300) 2,800,000 

Employed 

Subtract: Funds Deployed for (20,213,500) (2,591,300) 421,400 (22,383,400) 

Non-Operating Purposes 

Cash Surplus/(Deficit) (11,978,400) (2,332,700) (259,600) (14,570,700) 

Restricted Funds – Increase / (12,016,400) (2,049,200) (547,700) (14,613,300) 

(Decrease) 

Forecast Result for the Year – 

Surplus/(Deficit) – Working 

Funds 

38,000 (283,500) 288,100 42,600 

20 

25 

Note: The Adjustments to March 2013 including Resolutions column includes resolution 13-170 

(Removal of Roundhouse Subdivision from 2012/2013 budget). This was resolved on 18 April 

2013, but has been included in this column due to its size and to make the budget estimates more 

reflective of Councils decision. 

As the table above highlights, the forecast result for the year has increased by an estimated 

$288,100 during the review period including Council resolutions. Results by General, Water and 

Sewerage Fund are provided below: 

GENERAL FUND 

In terms of the General Fund projected Accumulated Surplus (Working Funds) the following table 

provides a reconciliation to the estimated position as at 31 March 2013: 




Opening Balance – 1 July 2012 $623,300 

Plus original budget movement and carryovers 38,000 

Council Resolutions July – September Quarter 0 

September Quarter Budget Review (120,100) 

Council Resolutions October – December Quarter (64,400) 

December Quarter Budget Review (163,500) 

Council Resolutions January - March Quarter 0 

Council Resolutions April – June Quarter 64,500 

Recommendations within this Review – increase/(decrease) 288,100 

Forecast Working Funds Result – Surplus/(Deficit) – 30 June 2013 42,600 

Estimated Working Funds Closing Balance – 30 June 2013 $665,900 

5 

The General Fund financial position has improved by $288,100 (including budget movements and 

Council resolutions) in total as a result of this budget review. The various factors that have 

impacted on this result have been highlighted in the Annexure 7(a) and summarised further in this 

report below. 

Council Resolutions 

10 

There were no Council resolutions during the January to March 2013 quarter that impacted the 

2012/2013 budget result. 

$64,500 – Roundhouse Project Deferral and funding review 

15 

20 

Prior to this report being completed, at the meeting of 18 th April 2013, council resolved through 

resolution 13-170 part 2 “That Council remove the budget provision and associated funding 

sources from the 2012/2013 budget estimates for the Roundhouse Subdivision” Within this was 

$64,500 funded from revenue which can be recognised as a saving. 

This has been input in the Council Resolution April to June Quarter columns in the Annexures 7(a) 

and 7(c). 

Budget Adjustments 

25 

The budget adjustments identified in Annexure 3(a) and 3(b) for the General Fund have been 

summarised by division in the following table: 

Revenue 

Increase/ 

(Decrease) $ 

Expenditure 

Increase/ 

(Decrease) $ 

Accumulated 

Surplus 

(Working 

Funds) 

Increase/ 

(Decrease) $ 

Division 

General Managers Office 0 0 0 

Organisational Support 0 (30,000) 30,000 

Society and Culture 11,100 (400) 11,500 

Corporate Management 8,600 (55,300) 63,900 

Community Infrastructure (23,000) (23,000) 0 

Environment and Land Use 37,500 (145,200) 182,700 

Waste Management 0 0 0 

Total Budget Movements 34,200 (253,900) 288,100 




Budget Adjustment Comments 

5 

Within each of the Divisions of the General Fund, are a series of budget adjustments identified in 

detail at Annexure 7(a) and 7(b). More detailed notes on these are provided in Annexure 7(a) from 

pages 66 to 71 of 71 but in summary the major additional items included are summarised below by 

Division and are included in the overall budget adjustments table above. 

Organisational Support 

10 

 

Within the Organisational Support program it is proposed to reduce operating expenditure by 

$30,000 as the position of Organisational Development Officer has been vacant for a 

significant period of time during the financial year. 

15 


 

Within the Economic Development program, income increased by $14,600 due advertising in 

the Visitor Trail maps. This is offset by an increase in expenditure of $14,600 to assist with 

printing costs of producing the maps. 

20 

25 

 

 

Within the Community Development program, it is proposed to reduce operating expenditure 

by $15,000 as the positions of the Aboriginal Services Officer and the Youth Activities Officer 

are currently shared with a reduction in hours compared to what has been budgeted for. 

These positions are soon to be vacated due to extended leave with no replacements 

expected until the 2013/14 financial year. These savings have already been realised with 

adequate budget still available should the positions be filled this financial year. 

Within the Library Services program, income decreased by $3,500 due to a slight reduction 

in the funding Council received from the Per Capita Grant. 

30 

Corporate Management 

35 

40 

45 

50 

 

 

 

 

 

Within the Administration – Councillors program, actual election expenses ($16,200) and 

other contributions and memberships ($6,400) were less than the budgeted amounts. 

Within the Administration program, a traineeship incentive of $2,500 was received from the 

Department of Employment, Education & Workplace Relations (DEEWR). 

Within the Financial Services program, income has decreased by $14,900 due to tax 

equivalent charges to water and sewer being less than the budget. This adjustment is 

already reflected within the water and sewer budgets. 

Within the Information Services program, income has increased by $1,200 due to the sale of 

old Councillor equipment to former Councillors from the last term of Council. Expenditure 

has decreased by $68,600 largely due to a review of the budget for lease payments for 

desktops and hardware ($50,000) and savings across various licences and maintenance 

agreements for software. 

Within the Property Services program expenditure has increased by $15,900 due to slight 

increases in various line items. Most of these are offset by various small increases against 

income ($9,800). 


55 

 

Within the Local Roads and Drainage Program, the overall decrease in expenditure is due to 

$58,000 to be allocated for Councils contribution to the natural disaster funding for the 




January and February 2013 events. Other adjustments include the reallocation of PAMP 

funding of $97,900 and the deferral of the Byron Bay bike racks ($14,000, funded through 

section 94) 

5 

10 

 

 

Within the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) program expenditure has increased by 

$58,000 to cover Councils contribution for the January and February 2013 Natural Disasters. 

(This is covered by the decrease in expenditure in the Local Roads program – see above) 

Within the Open Spaces and Recreation program, income and expenditure has decreased 

by $9,000 due to a reduction in the budget for the Embellishment of Parks – Byron Bay 

($20,000 – funded through developer contributions) and an increase to the Options Study to 

Address the Bangalow Weir Failure ($11,000 – funded through the risk management 

reserve). 

15 

Environment and Land Use 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

 

 

 

Within the Development Assessment program, it is proposed to reduce operating 

expenditure by $58,000 as the position of Process Improvement has been vacant all financial 

year ($13,000) with savings of $40,000 that can be realised due to the Executive Manager 

and Managers acting in other roles. The Managers positions were not backfilled for all of the 

acting periods, therefore savings can be made. The additional $5,000 saving is attributable to 

the JRPP Legal advice budget not being required. 

Within the Land and Natural Environment Program, income and expenditure has increased 

by $32,500 due to new and additional grants received for the Protecting and Managing 

Roadside Vegetation ($17,500) and NDGRS Risk Analysis ($15,000). Further reductions to 

expenditure of $29,600 are due to grant funded projects being completed. All grant money 

has been expended in accordance with their funding agreements, with some of the 

expenditure not costed against the grant. This means even though we are showing the 

grants as unexpended, the funds have been spent. This is where a saving can be 

recognised. A further $50,000 saving can be recognised as the position of Coastal Officer 

has been duplicated in the budget. 

Within the Certification and Customer Service program, a traineeship incentive of $2,500 was 

received from the Department of Employment, Education & Workplace Relations (DEEWR). 

It is proposed to decrease operating expenditure by $37,900 as the position of the Local 

Approvals and Certification Officer and the Development Engineer have been vacant for a 

period of time. In the absence of a Development Engineer, consultant engineers have been 

engaged to perform tasks as and when required. These savings allow for these consultant 

costs. 

WATER FUND 

45 

50 

After completion of the 2011/2012 Financial Statements the Accumulated Surplus (Working Fund) 

balance for the Water Fund, as at 30 June 2012, is $1,912,900 with capital works reserves of 

$1,372,900. It also held $9,302,500 in section 64 developer contributions at this time. 

The estimated Water Fund reserve balances as at 30 June 2013, and forecast in this Quarter 

Budget Review, is derived as follows: 

Capital Works Reserve 

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2012 $1,372,900 

Plus original budget reserve movement (84,400) 

Less reserve funded carryovers from 2011/2012 (453,400) 




Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease) (115,000) 

September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) (14,000) 

Resolutions October - December Quarter – increase / (decrease) 0 

December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) (25,400) 

Resolutions January to March Quarter – increase / (decrease) 0 

March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 85,000 

Forecast Reserve Movement for 2012/2013 – Increase / (Decrease) (607,200) 

Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2013 $765,700 

Section 64 Developer Contributions 


Plus original budget reserve movement (425,000) 


Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease) (450,000) 

September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) (24,000) 


December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 19,000 

Resolutions January - March Quarter – increase / (decrease) 0 


Forecast Reserve Movement for 2012/2013 – Increase / (Decrease) (928,100) 

Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2013 $8,374,400 

5 

10 

15 

Movements for Water Fund can be seen in Annexure 7(a), (pages 54 to 58 of 71) with a proposed 

estimated increase to reserves (including S64 Contributions and unexpended loans) overall of 

$163,300 from this quarter. 

SEWERAGE FUND 

After completion of the 2011/2012 Financial Statements the Accumulated Surplus (Working Fund) 

balance for the Sewer Fund, as at 30 June 2012, was $1,670,700 with capital works reserves of 

$280,200 and plant reserve of $741,800. It also held $3,836,700 in section 64 developer 

contributions and $1,779,900 in unexpended loans. 

Capital Works Reserve 

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2012 $280,200 

Plus original budget reserve movement 1,029,700 


Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease) 0 

September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 184,000 

Resolutions October - December Quarter – increase / (decrease) (127,000) 

December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) (146,000) 

Resolutions January - March Quarter – increase / (decrease) 

March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 1,801,000 

Forecast Reserve Movement for 2012/2013 – Increase / (Decrease) 2,147,300 


20 

Plant Reserve 


Plus original budget reserve movement 0 

Less reserve funded carryovers from 2011/2012 0 





September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 0 


December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 0 


March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 0 

Forecast Reserve Movement for 2012/2013 – Increase / (Decrease) 0 

Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2013 $741,800 

Section 64 Developer Contributions 


Plus original budget reserve movement (1,579,000) 

Less reserve funded carryovers from 2011/2012 (1,258,100) 


September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 840,000 


December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 26,300 



Forecast Reserve Movement for 2012/2013 – Increase / (Decrease) (1,767,800) 


5 

Unexpended Loans 


Plus original budget reserve movement 0 

Less reserve funded carryovers from 2011/2012 0 


September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 0 


December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) 0 


March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease) (1,779,900) 

Forecast Reserve Movement for 2012/2013 – Increase / (Decrease) (1,779,900) 

Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2013 0 

10 

15 

20 

Movements for the Sewerage Fund can be seen in Annexure 7(a), (pages 59 to 64 of 71) with a 

proposed estimated overall increase to reserves (including S64 Contributions and unexpended 

loans) of $227,000 from this review. It should be noted that unexpended loans of $1,779,900 have 

been transferred to the Capital Works Reserve. This is because works that the loan was originally 

drawn down for have been completed but loan funds are still available. The loan funding should 

have been utilised prior to utilisation of the Capital Works Reserve. This adjustment has no overall 

impact on overall Sewerage restricted funds. 

Legal Expenses 

One of the major financial concerns for Council over previous years has been legal expenses. Not 

only does this item represent a large expenditure item funded by rate income, but is also 

susceptible to large fluctuations. 

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

a fund basis. 




Total Legal Income and Expenditure as at 31 March 2013 

2012/2013 

Budget ($) Actual ($) 

Percentage To 

Revised Budget 

Program 

Income 

Compliance 0 0 0% 

Development Assessment 4,989 0 0% 

Total Income 4,989 0 0% 

Expenditure 

General Managers Office 163,100 8,432 5% 

Administrative Services 2,600 0 0% 

Property Services 10,400 1,165 11% 

Financial Services 0 2,270 - 

Crown Property 1,100 0 0% 

Council Caravan Parks 5,200 0 0% 

Asset Management Services 1,600 2,357 147% 

Development Assessment 235,700 107,878 48% 

Building Certification 1,100 0 0% 

Environmental Health Services 1,100 0 0% 

Compliance Services 188,500 35,993 19% 

Ranger Services 3,100 0 0% 

Community Planning 5,200 1,965 38% 

Total Expenditure General 618,700 160,060 26% 

Fund 

**Financial Services – S94 15,500 0 0% 

**Sewerage Fund 30,000 0 0% 

5 

** These are restricted funds. 

The current status of the Legal Services Reserve is shown below: 

Legal Reserve 

10 

15 

20 

25 


Less amount committed for Complaints investigations (Res 09-350) $(54,200) 

Less Resolution 10-960 $(191,300) 

Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2013 as at 31 March 2013 $609,200 

Fluctuations in legal expenditure can happen rapidly and for reasons not necessarily within 

Council’s control. Council has developed and is maintaining a legal reserve to enable Council to 

manage the potential fluctuations. The current reserve of $600,000 is considered adequate for this 

purpose at this time. 

Summary 

The 31 March 2013 Quarter Budget Review of the 2012/2013 Budget has produced an estimated 

surplus result of $288,100. This result will increase the estimated accumulated surplus (working 

funds) position attributable to the General Fund by $288,100 from $377,800 (includes resolution 

13-170) to $665,900. Significant savings attributable to staff vacancies to date during the financial 

year and estimated associated expenditure for the final quarter of 2012/2013 financial year are the 

major reason a budget surplus has been recognised. 






 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report and attached annexures was 

approximately 35 hours. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 


In accordance with Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 the 

Responsible Accounting Officer of a Council must:- 

(1) Not later than 2 months after the end of each quarter (except the June quarter), the 

responsible accounting officer of a council must prepare and submit to the council a budget 

review statement that shows, by reference to the estimate of income and expenditure set out 

in the statement of the council’s revenue policy included in the operational plan for the relevant 

year, a revised estimate of the income and expenditure for that year. 

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

(a) a report as to whether or not the responsible accounting officer believes that the 

statement indicates that the financial position of the council is satisfactory, having regard 

to the original estimate of income and expenditure, and 

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

(3) A budget review statement must also include any information required by the Code to be 

included in such a statement. 

Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer 

This report indicates that the short term financial position of the Council is satisfactory for 

2012/2013, having consideration of the original estimate of income and expenditure and budget 

revisions as per the 31 March 2013 Quarter Budget Review. 

The estimated Accumulated Surplus (Working Funds) closing balance of $665,900 is still below 

Council’s adopted target of $1,000,000 by an estimated $334,100. Council will need to carefully 

monitor the 2012/2013 budget over the remainder of the financial year. Significant savings 

attributable to vacant positions have resulted in the March 2013 Quarter Budget Review revealing 

a significant improvement to the estimated budgetary position of Council for 2012/2013. The 

budget deficit projected for 2012/2013 as per the December 2012 Quarter Budget Review has 

been recovered and now the budget is estimating to realise a surplus of $42,600 as at the 31 

March 2013 Budget Quarterly Review. This is a pleasing result considering the unexpected loss of 

Financial Assistance Grant (FAG) income of approx $132,000 that has been absorbed. 




5 

Report No. 12.6. Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014 


Report Author: Mark Arnold, Executive Manager Corporate Management 

File No: 

#E2013/26393 

Theme: 

Corporate Management, Finance Services 

Summary: 

The Strategic Planning Committee meeting held on 

28 March 2013 adopted (in part) Resolution 13-148. This 

Resolution in addition to providing in principle support to a strategic 

approach to managing the Financial Sustainability of Council also included 

the following actions: 

“2. request that reports be provided to Council on: 

(a) specific proposals outlined in the sustainability reform package 

including opportunities for reviewing contract services; and 

(b) the rationalisation of Council's property portfolio and the 

associated establishment of an Infrastructure Fund. 

3. develop a Financial Sustainability Project Plan (FSPP) which provides 

for communication on proposed reforms to the community. 

4. submit progress reports in implementing the FSPP to the Council's 

Finance Committee. 

5. issue a press release as soon as possible highlighting the proposed 

financial sustainability package.” 

This report has been prepared to allow Council to consider the draft 

“Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014” which has been prepared 

in accordance with part 3. of Council Resolution13-148. 


10 

That Council adopt the Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014 (#E2013/23493). 

Attachments: 

15 

Byron Shire Council Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014 

#E2013/23493 [26 pages] ......................................................................................................... Annexure 14 




Report 

5 

This report has been prepared to allow Council to consider the draft “Financial Sustainability 

Project Plan 2013/2014” which has been prepared in accordance with part 3. of Council 

Resolution13-148 being: 

3. develop a Financial Sustainability Project Plan (FSPP) which provides for communication on 

proposed reforms to the community. 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

A copy of the draft “Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014” has been included at 

Annexure14 to this report. 

The draft “Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014” is part of the strategic approach 

adopted by the Strategic Planning Committee at its meeting held on 28 March 2013, and provides 

the Community with guidance on the approach being taken by Council, to manage the financial 

sustainability of the organisation in the short, medium and long term. 

The “Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014” when adopted by Council will provide the 

Community with information on proposed reforms and actions that may be considered by the 


Part 2 of Resolution 13-148 requires the General Manager to prepare reports on specific elements 

of sustainability reform package, including any rationalisation of Council's property portfolio and the 

associated establishment of an Infrastructure Renewal Fund. The Infrastructure Renewal Fund 

was established by Council by Resolution 13-170 and the terms of operation for this Reserve is the 

subject of a separate report to this meeting. 

Part 4 of Resolution 13-148 requires the General Manager to prepare progress reports on the 

implementation of the draft “Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014” to the Council's 

Finance Committee. 


35 

40 

The draft “Financial Sustainability Project Plan 2013/2014” forms part of the strategic approach 

adopted by Council in managing the short, medium long term sustainability of Council. The Plan 

needs to be considered in context with the adopted annual Operational Plan, the Quarterly Budget 

Reviews and the Long Term Financial Plan when Council is considering the financial impacts of 

specific activities, projects and Services. 



 


45 


Section 8 of the Local Government 1993 provides (in part) that Council as part of its Charter 

consider the following principles: 

50 

• to exercise community leadership 

• to have regard to the long term and cumulative effects of its decisions 

• to bear in mind that it is the custodian and trustee of public assets and to effectively plan for, 

account for and manage the assets for which it is responsible 

• to engage in long-term strategic planning on behalf of the local community 




5 

Report No. 12.7. Infrastructure Renewal Reserve 


Report Author: Mark Arnold, Executive Manager Corporate Management 

File No: 

#E2013/26109 

Theme: 

Corporate Management, Administration 

Summary: 

This report recommends to Council the terms of operation 

for the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve established by part 

6 of Resolution 13-170. 

The report also recommends that Council transfer the funds held in the 

Infrastructure Reserve as at 30 June 2013 to the Infrastructure Renewal 

Reserve, that the Infrastructure Reserve be retired and funding provided to 

the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve via internal loan from other internal 

reserves to enable projects consistent with the terms of reference to be 

determined. 


10 

15 

1. That Council adopt the following terms of operation for the Infrastructure Renewal 

Reserve: 

“Purpose 

This reserve was created to restrict funds to fund General Fund infrastructure renewal 

works other than for Waste Management Infrastructure. 

Source of funds 

The funds restricted in the reserve will be sourced from: 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

a) sale proceeds generated from the development and/or sale of land, that are in 

excess of the development and/or sale costs. 

b) revenue generated from the development of land and/or property that are in 

excess of the annual operational costs. 

c) revenue derived from new and recurrent sources as determined by Council from 

time to time. 

d) interest generated annually from the investment of the funds held in the reserve. 

Projects funded 

The reserve will be used to fund infrastructure renewal projects that meet the 

following criteria: 

a) infrastructure renewal projects identified in the Asset Management Plan and 

meet the criteria determined in the Asset Management Plan for funding as a 

priority renewal project. 

b) projects that meet the criteria in a) above, for Projects funded and are included in 

the Capital Works Schedule adopted by Council, as a component of the annual 

Operational Plan. 




c) development of land and/or property assets for the purpose of generating 

revenues as a funding source for the Reserve. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

d) projects prior to being endorsed by Council are to be subject to an assessment 

under the Capital Expenditure Guidelines issued by the Division of Local 

Government, and any other applicable Guidelines issued by the Division, where 

the projects meet the applicable criteria.” 

2. That Council transfer the funds held in the Infrastructure Reserve as at 30 June 2013 

($83,500) to the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve and that the Infrastructure Reserve be 

retired. 

3. That Council via an internal loan on an interest free basis transfer up to $916,500 to 

the Infrastructure Renewal Fund from existing internal reserves being Quarry Reserve 

$600,000, $156,500 from the Plant Reserve and $160,000 from the Information 

Technology Reserve to enable priority infrastructure works in the north of the Shire to 

be brought forward. 

4. That the loans from the internal reserves identified in recommendation 3 be 

progressively repaid as a priority from revenue derived from sources feeding the 

Infrastructure Renewal Reserve, e.g. funds from the sale proceeds from allotments in 

the Roundhouse subdivision. 




Report 

Council at its Ordinary meeting held on 18 April 2013 resolved (in part) as follows: 

5 

10 

15 

13-170 Resolved: 

“6. That Council establish a Infrastructure Renewal Reserve and that any proceeds realised 

from sale of the developed lots of the Roundhouse Subdivision in excess of the 

construction cost be transferred to the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve… 

10. That in conjunction with the proposed establishment of an Infrastructure Reserve Fund as a 

repository for revenue derived from Council asset sales (as recently endorsed by the 

Council's Strategic Planning Committee), Council include Ocean Shores infrastructure 

renewal projects listed in the Council's Asset Management Plans as high priorities in the 

expenditure of those Reserve funds.” 

Council having established the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve via 13-170, should establish the 

criteria for the operation of the Reserve. 

20 

25 

30 

The recommended criteria for the operation of the Reserve are detailed below: 

Purpose 

This reserve was created to restrict funds to fund General Fund infrastructure renewal works other 

then for Waste Management Infrastructure. 

Source of funds 

The funds restricted in the reserve will be sourced from: 

1. Sale proceeds generated from the development and/or sale of land, that are in excess of 

the development and/or sale costs. 

2. Revenue generated from the development of land and/or property that are in excess of the 

annual operational costs. 

35 

3. Revenue derived from new and recurrent sources as determined by Council from time to 

time. 

4. Interest generated annually from the investment of the funds held in the reserve. 

40 

45 

50 

55 

Projects funded 

The reserve will be used to fund infrastructure renewal projects that meet the following criteria: 

1. Infrastructure renewal projects identified in the Asset Management Plan and meet the 

criteria determined in the Asset Management Plan for funding as a renewal project. 

2. Projects that meet the criteria in 1. above, included in the Capital Works Schedule 

adopted by Council, as a component of the annual Operational Plan. 

3. Development of land and/or property assets for the purpose of generating revenues as a 

funding source for the Reserve. 

4. Projects prior to being endorsed by Council are to be subject to an assessment under the 

Capital Expenditure Guidelines issued by the Division of Local Government, and any 

other applicable Guidelines issued by the Division, where the projects meet the 

applicable criteria. 





5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

Council has previously established an Infrastructure Reserve that was funded from a levy on 

Council owned and managed Holiday Parks. It is estimated that this Reserve will at 30 June 2013 

hold funds of $83,500. With the loss of the Crown Holiday Parks managed by Council no funds are 

now generated and it is recommended that the funds held as at 30 June 2013, be transferred from 

the Infrastructure Reserve to the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve and that the Infrastructure 

Reserve be retired. 

To give Council the flexibility to embark on works/projects relevant to the terms of reference for the 

Infrastructure Renewal Reserve more immediately before sources of funds are realised, Council is 

able to internally loan to the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve from its other internal reserves held. 

Based on projected future commitments, if Council wished to establish a total of $1,000,000 in 

initial funding for the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve including the $83,500 from the retired 

Infrastructure Reserve, it could do so from the following sources: 

Quarry Reserve $600,000 

Plant Reserve $156,500 

Information Technology Reserve $160,000. 

As the funding sources for the internal loan are from other internal reserves, Council is not obliged 

to charge itself interest as in effect it is simply reallocating existing funding within the basket of 

internal reserves so the internal loan can be on an interest free basis. Council should, as a priority, 

repay the internal loans when funding sources feeding the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve are 

realised, e.g. sale proceeds from the Roundhouse subdivision, to restore the Quarry, Plant and 

Information Technology Reserves for the amounts borrowed to meet potential future demands in 

those reserves. 

Undertaking an internal loan as indicated above may restrict the capacity of the Quarry, Plant and 

Information Technology reserves to meet unexpected future demands not currently foreseen but if 

Council proceeds with the internal loan this is a risk that can be managed should it eventuate. 

Once established, the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve will be funded from the sources identified 

above for the operation of the Reserve and will be used to fund eligible infrastructure renewal 

projects as indicated in the recommended criteria identified earlier in this report. 



40 

 



45 

50 

Internally Restricted Funds or Reserves must be established by Resolution of Council. The Council 

should also determine the criteria for the operation of the Reserve to provide a governance 

framework for transfers to and from the Reserve. 

Council is only able to borrow by way of internal loan against funds that are externally restricted ie 

water, sewerage, domestic waste and developer contributions through application to an approval 

by the Minister for Local Government in accordance with Section 410 of the Local Government Act 

1993. 




5 

Report No. 12.8. Councillor appointment to the Byron Coast Area Management 

Committee and Arakwal National Park Management Committee 


Report Author: Gayle McCallum, Governance Officer 

File No: 

#E2013/22628 

Theme: 

Corporate Management, Governance, Committee Coordination 

Summary: 

Council on 27 September 2012 appointed its Councillor representatives to 

regional committees. 

Cr Rose Wanchap was endorsed as Council’s representative to the Byron 

Coast Area Management Committee and Arakwal National Park 

Management Committee. 

Council has recently received advice from the Office of Environment and 

Heritage (OEH) that it requires three (3) Byron Shire Council nominees for 

the Minister for the Environment to determine the appointment of a Council 

representative to these committees. 


10 

15 

20 

That Council forward the following Councillor nominees to the Office of Environment and 

Heritage being: 

1. Cr Rose Wanchap 

2. Cr _____________ 

3. Cr _____________ 

to allow the Minister for the Environment to determine the appointment of a Council 

representative to the Byron Coast Area Management Committee and the Arakwal National 

Park Management Committee. 

Attachments: 

25 

OEH Advisory Committees Pecuniary Interest Declaration #E2013/22654 [3 pages]............Annexure 2(a) 

Conduct Guidelines for NSW Government Boards and Committees 

#E2013/22683 [11 pages] ...................................................................................................... Annexure 2(b) 




Report 

5 

10 

Council has recently received advice from the OEH that it requires three (3) Byron Shire Council 

nominees for the Byron Coast Area Management Committee and the Arakwal National Park 

Management Committee. The names of all nominees will be referred to the Minister for the 

Environment for determination of the appointment of a council representative to these Committees. 

Council on 27 September 2012 endorsed Cr Rose Wanchap as Council’s representative to these 

committees. The OEH acknowledges the nomination of Cr Rose Wanchap and requests an 

additional 2 nominees. The nominees will need to complete a pecuniary interest declaration 

(Annexure 2(a)) and provide a CV for submission with their nomination. 

Information on these Committees are as follows: 

15 

Byron Coast Area Management Committee 

Role, responsibility and functions of Byron Coast Area Management Committee 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

Recommendations to the Office of Environment and Heritage 

1. The Management Committee may make recommendations to the Director-General 

concerning the care, control or management of the National Park Lands. 

2. The Management Committee may make recommendations to the Director-General regarding 

educational and interpretative policies to be adopted by the Director-General and DEC in 

relation to the National Park Lands. 


its capital and recurrent budget estimates for the National Park Lands. 


expenditure for the National Park Lands. 

Meetings are held: 

When: Bimonthly, 2 nd Friday 

Time: 9.30am for approximately 2-3 hours 

Where: Byron Coast Area office meeting room (Arakwal Depot, Tallow Beach Road, Byron 

Bay) 

Arakwal National Park Management Committee 

The Arakwal National Park Management Committee is established under the Indigenous Land Use 

Agreement (ILUA) between the State Government and the Byron Bay Arakwal People under the 

Native Title process. The Minister for the Environment appoints the Committee members. The 

ILUA states that the Committee will have one Byron Shire Councillor Representative who is for the 

time being a member of the Byron Shire Council Aboriginal Consultative Committee. 

Meetings are held: 

When: Bimonthly, 2 nd Friday 

Time: 12:30pm to 2.00pm 

Where: Byron Coast Area office meeting room (Arakwal Depot, Tallow Beach Road, Byron 

Bay) 





5 

10 

Councillors’ travel to and from Regional Committee meetings is reimbursed by Council and 

budgeted for in the Councillors’ Budget. 



 



The OEH requires all Nominees to complete a Pecuniary Interest Declaration shown at Annexure 

2(a) and follow the Code of Conduct at Annexure 2(b). 




ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – EXECUTIVE MANAGER’S REPORTS 

5 

Report No. 12.9. NOROC Affordable Housing Strategy 

Executive Manager: Environment and Planning 

Report Author: Sharyn French, Manager Land and Natural Environment 

File No: 

#E2013/10353 

Theme: 

Summary: 

Environment, Land and Natural Environment 

The Northern Rivers Regional Organisation of Councils (NOROC) General 

Managers group financed the development of an affordable housing 

strategy for the Northern Rivers that built on the work already done by 

individual councils and in accordance with state government provisions. 

Clarence Valley Council managed the consultants engaged to deliver the 

strategy through a steering group of respective council representatives, 

NSW Housing and NSW Planning and Infrastructure. 

The Draft Northern Rivers Regional Affordable Housing Strategy is 

presented to Council for consideration. 

10 

15 

20 


1. That Council note the draft Northern Rivers Regional Affordable Housing Strategy and 

proposed Memorandum of Understanding contained in Annexures 3(a), #E2013/10886 

and 3(b), #E2013/10885. 

2. That the General Manager liaise with the NOROC councils in an effort to resolve the 

outstanding issues outlined in this report and report to Council on the outcome of 

those discussions. 

Attachments: 

Draft Northern Rivers Regional Affordable Housing Strategy #E2013/10886 [28 pages] ......Annexure 3(a) 

NOROC Memorandum of Understanding Affordable Housing #E2013/10885 [4 pages]...... Annexure 3(b) 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

One of the Northern Rivers Regional Organisation of Councils (NOROC) projects was the 

development of an affordable housing strategy for the Northern Rivers that built on the work 

already done by individual councils. Clarence Valley Council managed the consultants engaged to 

deliver the strategy through a steering group of respective council representatives and officers from 

NSW Housing and NSW Planning and Infrastructure. 

The draft Northern Rivers Regional Affordable Housing Strategy, Annexure 3(a) builds on the 

initiatives contained in Councils Affordable Housing Options Paper, 2009. The direct provision of 

affordable housing by local councils is problematic in so far as this is (a) not a traditional or core 

responsibility for NSW local government, and (b) is not affordable within the current constrained 

financial resources available to most councils. Councils’ current role in affordable housing is 

restricted to advocacy and collaboration with other levels of government and facilitation through 

complementary and enabling provisions within its major planning instruments. The use of 

Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPAs) between councils and developers has also been a 

successful tool in generating additional affordable housing stock. Since Council’s adoption of the 

Affordable Housing Options Paper in 2009 there has been little implementation of the Strategy’s 

initiatives. When Council included one of the Options Paper’s initiatives, the provision of developer 

incentives in the draft Byron LEP 2012, Council was not supported by the Department of Planning 

and Infrastructure. Two development applications for boarding houses have been received in the 

past three years; one at Suffolk Park was approved but not yet built and one at Brunswick Heads 

was refused. On a positive note, the provision of secondary dwellings has significantly increased 

since Council lifted the S94 charges. 

Whilst the draft Northern Rivers Affordable Housing Strategy actions are similarly unlikely to realise 

an increase in affordable housing in Byron Shire, Council would benefit from being part of a 

consortium of Council’s advocating to state and federal government on the need for affordable 

housing in the region. Accompanying the Strategy is a draft Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU), Annexure 3(b), between the seven NOROC local Councils that aims to bring the NOROC 

councils together as a united front on the issue of affordable housing in the region. There are 

however a number of potential issues associated with supporting the draft Strategy and MOU at 

this time and it is recommended that the Council simply note these documents at this time pending 

resolution of those issues. These issues include: 

 

 

 

 

 

Since the Affordable Housing Strategy was formulated two NOROC councils (Richmond 

Valley and Clarence Valley) have resolved to end their membership of NOROC (Clarence 

Valley Council was the lead council in this project); 

Kyogle Council has signalled that it is contemplating withdrawal from NOROC; 

NOROC Funds earmarked for the appointment of a Regional Affordable Housing Officer are 

now in dispute; 

The 3 year budget developed to fund the Regional Affordable Housing Officer is predicated 

upon the commitment (for 3 years) of substantial contributions by NOROC councils (how 

many NOROC councils remain to share the burden of these costs is now unclear); 

The draft MOU provisions relating to the “Scope of the Work for Strategic Areas” are not 

unanimously supported by NOROC councils. 

As such it is recommended that Council note the draft Northern Rivers Regional Affordable 

Housing Strategy and the draft MOU and request the General Manager to liaise with the NOROC 

councils in an effort to resolve the outstanding issues outlined in this report. 


55 

Central to the implementation of the actions in the draft Northern Rivers Regional Affordable 

Housing Strategy is the proposed employment of a Regional Affordable Housing Officer. The 

Strategy proposes that this officer be funded by the seven NOROC councils potentially with 




matching funding from the NSW government. There is $65,000 remaining from the NOROC 

council’s contribution to this project that was formerly earmarked to support this officer in the first 

year of a 3 year commitment. The availability of these funds for this project is now in dispute. 

5 

10 

15 

As two and perhaps three NOROC councils have either resolved to withdraw from NOROC or are 

contemplating withdrawal, it is preferable that Council does not commit to the project and the draft 

MOU at this stage. 

It is reiterated that whilst Byron Council does have an adopted Affordable Housing Policy (2009), 

council does not have the financial capacity or resources to pursue affordable housing 

opportunities beyond general facilitation and advocacy. 



 



20 

Nil 




5 

Report No. 12.10. PLANNING – Draft Byron LEP 2012 Submissions Analysis – 

Residential Zones and Controls (Policy Matters) 


Report Author: Alex Caras, Team Leader Strategic Land Planning 

File No: 

#E2013/24531 

Theme: 

Environment, Land and Natural Environment 

Summary: 

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with details of submissions 

received in response to the public exhibition of the Draft Byron Local 

Environmental Plan 2012. In particular, this report addresses those 

submissions made concerning residential zones and controls (policymatters). 

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS: 

This report (specifically the discussion paper at Annexure 12(a)) provides 

an analysis of the issues raised in the submissions and provides 

recommendations for the consideration of Council. 

10 

In accordance with the provisions of S375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a Division is to be called 

whenever a motion for a planning decision is put to the meeting, for the purpose of recording voting on 

planning matters. Pursuant to clause 2(a) under the heading Matters to be Included in Minutes of Council 

Meetings of Council's adopted Code of Meeting Practice (as amended) a Division will be deemed to have 

been called by the mover and seconder of all motions relating to this report. 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 


That in relation to the draft Byron LEP 2012 Council resolves to adopt the following 

recommendations from Parts A, B and C of the discussion paper at Annexure 12(a) 

(#E2013/19990) outlined as follows: 

Recommendations – Part A Development Standards 

1. Amend the Floor Space Ratio map for the R2 Low Density Residential zone in Draft 

Byron LEP 2012 from 0.4:1 to 0.5:1. 

2. Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map within the proposed R2 zone in the western part of 

the Bayside Brunswick estate (to the north of the area marked ‘deferred matter’) so 

that it correctly aligns with the cadastral boundaries of all affected land. 

3. Retain the exhibited objective at clause 4.4 (1)(b) of draft Byron LEP 2012 except for a 

minor word change for clarification and interpretation as follows: 

“To enable a diversity of housing types by encouraging low scale medium density 

housing in suitable locations.” 

4. Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map for the block of land shown in Figure 1 of the 

discussion paper (#E2013/19990) contained in Annexure 12(a) to this report from 0.4:1 

to 0.8:1. 

5. Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map for land zoned R3 Medium Density Residential by 

increasing the minimum FSR from 0.4:1 to 0.6:1. 

6. That the Minimum Lot Size Map as exhibited be amended to identify a 300 square 

metre minimum lot size for the land shown as ‘indicative medium density’ on ‘Map 6 – 




5 

10 

15 

Area 7 Structure Plan Bangalow urban release areas’ in Chapter 22 of Byron DCP 

2010. 

7. Amend the 600 square metre Minimum Lot Size Map as exhibited for the western side 

of the Bayside Brunswick estate (north of the area identified as ‘deferred matter’) so 

that it correctly aligns with the proposed R2 zone boundary. 

8. That Council consider a reduction in the minimum lot size for dual occupancy 

development in residential zones as part of the preparation of a Shire-wide residential 

strategy after Draft LEP 2012 has been finalised. 

9. That a reduction in the minimum lot size for multi dwelling housing and residential flat 

buildings in residential zones and better differentiation of development controls 

between the R2 and R3 zones be investigated as part of a Shire-wide residential 

strategy after Draft LEP 2012 has been finalised. 

10. That the table to clause ‘4.1B Minimum lot sizes for dual occupancy, multi dwelling 

housing and residential flat buildings’ of Draft Byron LEP 2012 be amended to identify: 

(i) a 1200 square metre minimum lot size for multi dwelling housing and residential flat 

buildings in the R2 zone; and (ii) a 1000 square metre minimum lot size for multi 

dwelling housing and residential flat buildings in the R3 zone. 

20 

25 

Recommendations – Part B Residential zones (R2, R3 & R5) 

11. That the draft Byron LEP 2012 apply an R3 Medium Density Residential Zone to the 

lots north of Pandanus Court as illustrated in Figure 3 of the discussion paper 

(#E2013/19990) contained in Annexure 12(a) to this report. 

12. That recreation facilities (indoor) be inserted as permitted with consent in the R5 

Large Lot Residential Zone of draft Byron LEP 2012. 

13. That the following land uses be inserted as permissible with consent in the R5 Large 

Lot Residential Zone of draft Byron LEP 2012: horticulture, animal boarding or training 

establishments and neighbourhood shops. 

30 

Recommendations – Part C Specific issues and miscellaneous 

14. That DCP provisions be developed to clarify the application of clause 6.5 in relation to 

the triggers and/or thresholds for assessment (e.g. locational factors, types of 

development). 

35 

Attachments: 

Discussion Paper #E2013/19990 [66 pages]........................................................................Annexure 12(a) 

Extracts of relevant statutory information #E2013/24806 [10 pages] .................................. Annexure 12(b) 

Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest #E2012/2815 [2 pages]...........................Annexure 12(c) 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

Background 

Draft Byron LEP 2012 was publicly exhibited from 24 September to 24 December 2012. On 

14 February 2013 Council considered a report (13.11) on submissions from the public exhibition of 

Draft Byron LEP 2012 and resolved (13-26): 

1. That Council note the Draft Byron LEP 2012 Consultation Report as attached in Annexure 

13(a) (#E2013/6532). 

2. That Council adopt the process to complete the draft Byron LEP 2012 as per Table 1 of this 

report as amended to include investigation, ground truthing (as appropriate) and responding 

to submissions where mapping errors are noted. 

At Council’s Ordinary meetings of 14 March and 18 April 2013 Council considered reports on the 

outcomes of submissions analysis concerning the Byron Arts and Industry Estate and other 

Business and Industrial zones respectively. 

The purpose of this report is to present the outcomes of the analysis of submissions received on 

policy matters for residential zones and controls. The discussion paper at Annexure 12(a) provides 

a comprehensive stand-alone overview of the issues raised in submissions and the corresponding 

planning discussion and recommendations. Note that the recommendations of this report 

(including numbering) directly correspond with the recommendations presented in each part of the 

discussion paper at Annexure 12(a). 




• The estimated combined staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 260 

hours (including time spent on background analysis, meetings, etc.) 

The other financial implications relate to the LEP Acceleration Funding Agreement with the State 

government and corresponding deadline for completion of the draft LEP. The amount of grant 

funding that can be claimed by Council will depend on its ability to maximise project delivery within 

the 2012/13 financial year. 

In addition, this report recommends that a Shire-wide residential strategy be prepared after the 

LEP gazettal to investigate future minimum lot size requirements for multi dwelling housing and 

residential flat buildings zones and better differentiation of development controls between the R2 

and R3 zones. Council will need to allocate sufficient funds from its budget should it proceed to 

adopt this recommendation. 


There are a number of legislative requirements and policy considerations applicable to Council’s 

consideration of draft LEP submissions. The recommendations of this report are consistent with 

these legislative requirements and policies. 

For detailed discussion of the relevant statutory and policy considerations specific to Council’s 

consideration of the issues raised in submissions on residential zones and controls refer to the 

Discussion Paper at Annexure 12(a). 




5 

Report No. 12.11. PLANNING - Streamlining SEPP No 1 Variations determinations and 

reporting 


Report Author: Wayne Bertram, Manager Development Assessment and Certification 

File No: 

#E2012/12896 

Theme: 

Ecology - Development Assessment 

Summary: 

In order to improve processing times and to move in the direction outlined 

in the :”White Paper” on Planning Reform and Local Government Reviews, 

Council should review delegations in relation to planning approvals. 


10 

15 

20 

25 







1. That Council delegate to the General Manager the following development assessment 

matters previously required to be determined by the elected Council: 

a) Development Applications with an estimated value not exceeding $5 million or 

any subdivision not exceeding 40 lots 

b) Development Applications for strata subdivision in a 7f(2) Urban Coastal Land 

Zone under Clause 32 of the BLEP. (except any subdivision exceeding 40 lots) 

c) All Development Applications with State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 

Variations (except when associated within Development Applications with an 

estimated value exceeding $5 million or any subdivision exceeding 40 lots). 

d) The amendment or review of all development applications, except: 

30 

(i) 

the review of a determination made by the Council, and not by a delegate of 

the Council, of an application for approval or an application that may be 

reviewed under Section 82A of the Environmental planning and 

Assessment Act 1979. 

35 

2. That Council receive a quarterly report on all Development Applications with State 

Environmental Planning Policy No 1 Variations that have been determined. 




Report 

Council resolved at the Ordinary meeting held 27 September, 2012 the following: 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

Resolution 12/781 (2) “That a report be provided as to how the streamlining of State 

Environmental Planning Policy No 1 variation, reporting can occur. 

Coupled with this resolution is the direction of the “White Paper” on planning reform and the current 

Local Government Review which promote efficiency in process. 

Council had previously resolved to have all Development Applications with a State Environmental 

Planning Policy No 1 (SEPP No.1) variations 10% or greater determined by the elected Council. 

This requirement has increased the number of developments being determined by elected Council, 

which has also increased average reportable Development Application process times due to the 

lead time taken to prepare reports for council meetings. The average Development Application 

processing time for Development Applications reported to Council for the 2011/2012 reporting year 

was 188 days for the 32 applications determined. 

The Department of Planning and Infrastructure in Planning Circular PS 08-14 “Reporting variations 

to development standards” (PS 08-14) led to the adopted practice of reporting all determined 

Development Applications with a SEPP No.1 variation under 10% to the next available meeting 

and having the elected Council determine SEPP No.1 variations greater than 10%. 

Department of Planning and Infrastructure has also required the establishment of a register of all 

Development Applications with a SEPP No.1 determination. Such register has been developed and 

is publicly available with all Development Applications with a SEPP No.1 determination also 

published on Council’s website. 

It should be noted that after the adoption of the Draft Byron Local Environment Plan 2012, (being a 

Standard Instrument LEP), the requirements of SEPP No. 1 will no longer be applicable. 

Staff have written to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure, providing solutions and 

seeking advice on how to reduce the number and the frequency of State Environmental Planning 

Policy No 1 (SEPP No.1) matters being reported to Council. 

On the 17 April 2013 the Director General of the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure 

agreed to Council’s request to vary the requirement in PS 08-14 by allowing Byron Shire Council to 

report on determined Development Applications with SEPP1 variations on a quarterly basis instead 

of at each council meeting. This will reduce the frequency of reporting of SEPP No.1 determined, 

in-line with the same requirements for reporting to Department of Planning and Infrastructure. As 

such it has been recommended that all (if any) SEPP No 1 variations be reported quarterly to 


Council also requested advice on the approval of variations greater than 10% to development 

controls for the topmost floor level of the building set out in Clause 40(2) Height of Byron Local 

Environmental Plan 1988 without reporting these matters to the full Council. This clause is 

proposed to be excluded from the Draft Byron Local Environment Plan 2012 (Standard Instrument 

LEP). On the basis that Council is successfully progressing work on finalising its standard planning 

instrument, the Director General of the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure agreed to 

an exception to the requirement set out in PS 08-014 such that Development Applications involving 

a variation to Clause 40(2) of Byron LEP 1988 greater than 10% may be determined by the 

General Manager or a nominated staff member. 

The Director General of the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure also reminded Council 

that the minor realignment of lot boundaries can already be determined as exempt development 




under State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008. 

This could further reduce Development Applications with SEPP No.1 variations. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

The Director General considered the reporting of boundary adjustment variations where there has 

been a variation in standards of greater than 10% under SEPP No.1 to be determined by full 

council should be maintained. 

There is no statutory requirement for determination of Development Applications with State 

Environmental Planning Policy No 1 variations by full council. As the majority of SEPP No.1 

variations relate to realignment of lot boundaries (lot sizes), it is recommend that all Development 

Applications with a State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 variation be determined by the 

General Manager or sub-delegated staff member. All Development Applications with SEPP No.1 

variations will be reported quarterly and be publicly available on-line to ensure transparency of 

these determinations whilst streamlining the determination process. 

A review of other development assessment matters required to be determined by the elected 

Council has noted that the following types of development could be streamlined by delegation to 

the General Manager. 

1. Development Applications for strata subdivision in a 7(f2)(Urban Coastal Land Zone) under 

clause 32 of the BLEP (Res 09-962). 

2. Development Applications with an estimated value not exceeding $3 million dollars or any 

subdivision not exceeding 20 lots. Note: Developments from $1,750,000 to $3,000,000 are 

required to be reported to the Planning Review Committee (Res 10-668(3)). 

As per the “Revised Council Meeting Schedule for 2013” report, being provided to this meeting of 

Council, the Planning Review Committee is proposed to be phased out by August 2013. A review 

of the criteria for the consideration of Development Applications to be determined directly by 

Council has been recommended to occur. 

To ensure that the streamlining of the holistic development reporting process can occur, a set of 

criteria / guidelines detailing which Development Applications are determined by the elected 

Council are to be developed. 

The preparation of the guidelines will have to consider that Councillor’s time is a valuable and 

limited resource so that only major developments having potential for significant community impact 

should be determined by full council. Major developments have been considered as Development 

Applications with an estimated value exceeding $5 million or any subdivision exceeding 40 lots. 

Additionally Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 specifies functions the Council can not 

delegate in relation to development assessments being: 

45 

 

the review of a determination made by the Council, and not by a delegate of the Council, of an 

application for approval or an application that may be reviewed under Section 82A of the 

Environmental planning and Assessment Act 1979 

50 

The reporting of smaller significant developments to Council may still occur where in the opinion of 

the General Manager or the Executive Manager, using professional judgement and considering the 

merits of the development, it is deemed necessary and appropriate. 


55 

There would be a saving in both Councillor and staff resources by reducing the number of 

development applications determined by Council. 

 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 15 hours 





5 

10 

There is no statutory requirement for the reporting and / or determination of Development 

Applications with State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 variations to Council. However this has 

previously been requested in the Department of Planning and Infrastructure in Planning Circular 

PS 08-14 “Reporting variations to development standards.” 

Under Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council may, by resolution, delegate to 

the General Manager or any other person or body (not including another employee of the Council) 

any of the functions of the Council except those noted in Section 377 including: 

 

the review of a determination made by the Council, and not by a delegate of the Council, of an 

application for approval or an application that may be reviewed under Section 82A of the 

Environmental planning and Assessment Act 1979. 




5 

Report No. 12.12. PLANNING – Copyright issues in relation to development 

applications 



File No: 

#DM1215976 

Theme 

Environment and Planning - Development Assessment 

Summary: 

On the 22 March 2012 as a result of a notice of motion, Council resolved 

12-195 That Council receive a report that: 

a) Clarifies the justification and determination for not making 

available to the community the opportunity to make copies 

and/or view development application information as it is 

currently practised by Byron Shire Council. 

b) Define opportunities for making information available and 

expanding the openness, accountability and transparency of 

information on-line and in hard copy. 

c) Provide information on how individuals can access information 

on their own properties including historical records, 

development approvals and information for prospective 

purchasers or real estate agents to provide for pre-sale due 

diligence. 

These issues have been reviewed and as a result of recent legislative 

changes opportunities for making information available have been 

proposed. 


10 

That Council review DCP 2010 Chapter 17 to ensure that this chapter is up to date with 

legislative changes; allows for advertising/notification to those parties that are most likely 

to be effected; and to allow for ‘view only’ access to development application plans on 

Council’s website to facilitate a transparent process for advertised and neighbour 

notification of developments. 




Background 

5 

At the Ordinary meeting held on 22 March 2012, as a result of a notice of motion, the following 

resolution was made:- 


That Council receive a report that: 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

a) Clarifies the justification and determination for not making available to the community the 

opportunity to make copies and/or view development application information as it is currently 

practised by Byron Shire Council. 

b) Define opportunities for making information available and expanding the openness, 

accountability and transparency of information on-line and in hard copy. 

c) Provide information on how individuals can access information on their own properties 

including historical records, development approvals and information for prospective 

purchasers or real estate agents to provide for pre-sale due diligence. (Barham / Morrisey) 

The issue of copyright and compliance with the GIPA Act has previously been clarified in the Office 

of the Information Commissioner’s information sheet of April 2011. This information sheet 

specified: 

Local councils should not publish any copyright material on websites or provide any copies 

(including be email) under the GIPA Act unless the copyright owner has expressly 

consented. 

However the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) has also advised that councils could 

continue to allow for “view only” access to fulfil their functions under the Environmental Planning 

and Assessment Act 1979 and rely on the indemnity in clause 57 of the Environmental Planning 

and Assessment Regulation 2000. 

The use of “view only” access to copyright material is also consistent with legal advice previously 

obtained by Council. 

On 19 March 2012, the Government Information (Public Access) Amendment Act 2012 (NSW) 

commenced which made amendments to the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 

(GIPA Act). The amendments were minor and technical in nature and did not modify the object of 

the GIPA Act however included amendments in the area of open access information and copyright. 

In May 2012 the Information and Privacy Commission of NSW further clarified the issue of open 

access information obligations under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) 

(GIPA Act) and Government Information (Public Access) Regulation 2009 and concerns that can 

arise about the release of personal information, and issues around copyright. 

http://ipc.e-newsletter.com.au/link/id/zzzz4fa0d1b042821958/page.html#zzzz4f9f64f03d04b101 

The key issues are summarised below: 

50 

55 

Personal information on council websites 

Development Application (DA) information remains open access information and therefore must be 

disclosed via the methods set out in the GIPA Act and Regulation, unless there is an overriding 

public interest against disclosure. Just because DAs contain personal information about applicants 

and people making submissions does not mean that certain information should not be disclosed. 

Councils should disclose as much DA information as possible, including personal information 




where appropriate, to assist members of the public to understand the decisions being made and 

the reasons for those decisions. 

5 

However, there is some personal information in DAs that should not be disclosed on council 

websites due to privacy considerations. The Information and Privacy Commission of NSW are of 

the view that councils should not disclose the following DA information on their websites: 

10 

 

 

 

 

 

personal contact details of an individual, including personal phone/mobile numbers and 

email addresses; 

signatures on DA applications or submissions or objection letters; 

personal financial information, e.g. credit card details; 

health and medical information; 

photos depicting people. 

15 

Additionally under schedule 1(3)(2) of the GIPA Regulation the following information should also be 

excluded: 

20 

 

 

The plans and specifications for any residential parts of a proposed building, other than the 

plans that merely show its height and external configuration in relation to the site on which it 

is proposed to be erected; or 

Commercial information, if the information would be likely to prejudice the commercial 

position of the person who supplied it or to reveal a trade secret. 

25 

30 

Copyright 

Councils should not publish or provide copies of documents under the GIPA Act to which copyright 

is attached without the consent of the copyright holder. Section 6 of the GIPA Act has been 

amended to reflect this. However, the fact that documents are subject to copyright does not stop 

them being open access information: it just affects the way that councils should provide access. 

With regard to copyright documents to which consent to copy or publish online has not been given, 

councils could: 

35 

 

 

 

provide ‘view only’ access; 

consider asking for multiple copies of plans and reports; 

provide copying facilities for the public to use, with a notice alerting people to copyright 

obligations. 

40 

45 

50 

55 

In March 2013 amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 inserted a 

new provision being Section 158A(1) which states: 

A relevant person who is not entitled to copyright in a document that is part of a planning 

matter is taken to have indemnified all persons using the document for the purposes of this 

Act against any claim or action in respect of a breach of copyright in the document. 

Section 158A(2) also sets out what constitutes a ‘planning matter’ and who the ‘relevant person’ is. 

Section 158A(3) provides that a document is part of a planning matter if ‘it forms part of or 

accompanies the planning matter, or is subsequently submitted by the relevant person in support 

of the planning matter or is exhibited or made public in accordance with a requirement made by or 

under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in relation to the planning matter.’ 

The indemnification provided by section158A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 

1979 (EPA Act) is wider than that previously provided by clause 57 of the Environmental Planning 

and Assessment Regulation (now repealed) and also extends to the use of documents ‘for the 

purposes of the Act’. 




The changes to the EP&A Act do not have any impact on the provision of information under the 

GIPA Act. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

Report 

The recent amendment to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 has provided 

increased indemnification protection for Councils and allows for an opportunity for making 

additional information available on-line. As advised previously by the Office of the Information 

Commissioner (OIC), councils can and should allow for “view only” access for Development 

Application documentation on exhibition, including relevant plans. The provision of on-line 

Development Application information would enable Council to expand the openness, accountability 

and transparency of information regarding development applications and enable increased access 

for community consultation and review. By amending Council’s current application forms to 

relocate personal information to a single page that is not published Council could provide on-line 

advertising including the major portion of the application form; the Statement of Environmental 

Effects and relevant plans (view only). Additionally any submissions received while the 

development was under assessment would also be provided on-line to also facilitate the 

development process. 

To allow for increased opportunity for making information available in hard copy format, Council 

could, request multiple copies of advertising DA plans (copied with the consent of the copyright 

owner) to be provided with the lodgement of the Development Application. This would require an 

amendment to Development Control Plan 2010 Chapter 17 to require this additional information. A 

review of Chapter 17 of Development Control Plan 2010 has indicated that this document has not 

remained current with recent legislative changes and as such this would be an opportune time to 

review the holistic document 

Council could provide photocopying facilities for the public to make copies of documents and 

display appropriate notices regarding the user’s obligations under copyright legislation. This would 

require the purchase or leasing of a photocopying machine for the Council foyer however where 

Council was providing development applications and any associated documents, in relation to a 

proposed development on Council’s website, Council could charge for this service and a pay-tocopy 

machine could be provided. The need for photocopying facilities in the foyer for the public to 

use should be significantly reduced by the on-line advertising of information. 

In relation to Part C of Council resolution 12-195, whilst it is clear that under Section158A 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council could provide information for the 

purposes of the EP&A Act including public notification, the same changes do not have any impact 

on the provision of information under the GIPA Act and the copyright provisions. 

The Executive Manager of Corporate Management has advised that a pay-to-copy photocopying 

machine will not work for accessing archived records as historical records are kept in many 

mediums including microfilm, on CDs, electronically and hardcopy. By allowing a customer to copy 

what they want potentially has major privacy issues as Microfilm hold other peoples records not 

just the persons who is in the office, same goes with the information stored on CDs. Typically 

customers ask how to use our facilities and if staff knowingly realise that they are copying plans 

then Council may be in breach of copyright by assisting them. 

The GIPA Act 72(2) clearly states that "an agency must provide access in the way requested by 

the applicant unless to do so would involve an infringement of copyright" copying plans under 

GIPA is still an infringement. 


55 

There would be staff resources required to upload information to Council’s website along with 

redacting software to ensure that the limited information that should not be published can be 




redacted. However savings could also be made in staff time where the public are able to directly 

access information on-line without the need to come to council or speak to an officer. As such the 

proposed changes could be implemented using the current resources. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

There is currently no budget for the provision of photocopying facilities for the public on the foyer 

area, however, subject to the provision of on-line advertising / notification, photocopying facilities in 

the foyer for the public may not be required. 

 



Agencies, including Councils, must publish open access information in the manner prescribed by 

the GIPA Act or Regulation unless there is an overriding public interest against disclosure (s 6(1)), 

or if it would involve an unreasonable cost to the agency (s 6(2)). Section 18 of the GIPA Act 

outlines the type of information that comprises an agency’s open access information. For local 

councils, DA information forms part of a council’s open access information pursuant to Schedule 

1[3] to the GIPA Regulation. 

Schedule 1[3] provides as follows: 

3(1) Information about development applications 

(a) development applications (within the meaning of the Environmental Planning and 

Assessment Act 1979) and any associated documents received in relation to a proposed 

development including the following: 

(i) home warranty insurance documents, 

(ii) construction certificates, 

(iii) occupation certificates, 

(iv) structural certification documents, 

(v) town planner reports, 

(vi) submissions received on development applications, 

(vii) heritage consultant reports, 

(viii) tree inspection consultant reports, 

(ix) acoustics consultant reports, 

(x) land contamination consultant reports, 

(b) records of decisions on development applications (including decisions made on appeal). 

However, the following information is excluded under schedule 1(3)(2) 

(a) the plans and specifications for any residential parts of a proposed building, other than 

plans that merely show its height and external configuration in relation to the site on 

which it is proposed to be erected; or 

(b) commercial information, if the information would be likely to prejudice the commercial 

position of the person who supplied it or to reveal a trade secret. 




5 

Report No. 12.13. PLANNING – Public Exhibition Report for Amendments to Byron 

Shire DCP 2010 – Chapter 1 Part F – Waste Minimisation and 

Management 



File No: 

#E2013/13882 

Theme: 


Summary: 

Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 10 February 2011 resolved to 

adopt for public exhibition, the inclusion of a Waste Minimisation and 

Management draft Chapter in the Shire wide Development Control Plan. 

(Res11-59). As a result of potential funding losses in the Waste & 

Sustainability Improvement program, the advertisement of the Waste 

Minimisation and Management draft Chapter was brought forward for 

inclusion in the current Shire wide Development Control Plan (2010). The 

proposed amendments to “Byron Shire Development Control Plan 2010” 

(DCP 2010) were exhibited for public comment from the 12 March 2013 to 

11 April 2013 in accordance with the Environmental Planning and 

Assessment Regulation 2000. 


No Submissions were received. It is recommended that Council adopt the 

amendments to DCP 2010 and notify the public in accordance with the 

Regulations. 

10 






15 


1. That Council adopt the amendment to Byron Shire Development Control Plan 2010, 

Chapter 1 Part F - Waste Minimisation and Management, Annexure 4, #E2013/13987. 

20 

25 

30 

2. That Council give public notice of its decision to adopt the amendment in accordance 

with Clause 21 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 and 

that the date it comes into effect is the first available date that the public notice can be 

published, after the amendments are made. 

3. That a copy of the amendment to Byron Shire Development Control Plan 2010 – 

Chapter 1 Part F - Waste Minimisation and Management, be provided to the 

Department of Planning to forward to the Director General in accordance with Section 

25AB of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. 

Attachments: 

Draft DCP 2010 Chapter 1 Part F Waste Minimisation and Management 

#E2013/13987 [39 pages] ........................................................................................................... Annexure 4 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 10 February 2011 resolved to adopt for public exhibition, 

the inclusion of a Waste Minimisation and Management draft Chapter in the Shire wide 

Development Control Plan (Res11-59). 

As a result of potential funding losses in the Waste & Sustainability Improvement program the 

advertisement of the Draft Waste Minimisation and Management DCP has been brought forward 

for inclusion in the current Byron Shire Development Control Plan (2010). 

The proposed amendment to “Byron Shire Development Control Plan 2010” DCP 2010 was 

exhibited for public comment from the 12 March 2013 to 11 April 2013 in accordance with the 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. No Submissions were received. 

The Waste Minimisation and Management draft Chapter is proposed to facilitate sustainable waste 

management within Byron Shire in a manner consistent with principles of Ecologically Sustainable 

Development by considering both waste minimisation and management in developments. 

The DCP introduces controls for demolition of buildings, construction of buildings, residential, 

commercial and industrial development. Applications for these types of developments will need to 

include a Site Waste Minimisation and Management Plan. The DCP also provides a template as to 

how to prepare the plan. 

It is recommended that Council adopt the amendments to Byron Shire DCP 2010 and notice to be 

given in the local newspaper as per Clause 21 of the EPA regulations 2000. 


30 

35 

The introduction of a Waste Minimisation and Management DCP is a standard requirement for 

payment under the NSW Government’s Waste & Sustainability Improvement Program; the 

anticipated 2012/13 payment being in the order of $191,000. The funds paid to Council under this 

Program are sourced from the Waste Levy payments made to the NSW EPA. 

The adoption of the Waste Minimisation and Management amendments to DCP 2010 should 

enable Council to retain this funding. 



40 

 



45 

50 

55 

Clause 21of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 prescribes the 

requirements for the making of DCP’s and dates of adoption, which states: 

(1) After considering any submissions about the draft development control plan that have been 

duly made, the council: 

(a) may approve the plan in the form in which it was publicly exhibited, or 

(b) may approve the plan with such alterations as the council thinks fit, or 

(c) may decide not to proceed with the plan. 

(2) The council must give public notice of its decision in a local newspaper within 28 days after the 

decision is made. 

(3) Notice of a decision not to proceed with a development control plan must include the council’s 

reasons for the decision. 

(4) A development control plan comes into effect on the date that public notice of its approval is 

given in a local newspaper, or on a later date specified in the notice. 




5 

Report No. 12.14. PLANNING – (Supplementary Report) 10.2012.583.1 Increase number 

of occupants for place of assembly/public entertainment at 13-17 

Centennial Circuit Byron Bay 


Report Author: Ray Darney, Executive Manager Environment and Planning 

File No: 

#E2013/26844 

Theme: 

Development Approvals 

Summary: 

Council has been advised that this application has been appealed in the 

Land and Environment Court, the appeal being against Council’s deemed 

refusal to consent to the development application. Deemed Refusal is 

available to an applicant, when Council has not determined an application 

within the required period under the Environment Planning and 

Assessment Act. The matter is listed in the Court on 27 May, 2013. 


The report on this application will recommend approval subject to some 

limitations on the size of events, hours of operation and subject to 

conditions. 

The Assessment Report will be forwarded to Council under separate 

cover. 

10 






15 

20 


That pursuant to Section 80 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, 

development application 10.2012.583.1 for increase number of occupants for place of 

assembly/public entertainment, be granted approval subject to restriction on hours of 

operation, numbers of patrons, and conditions of consent. 

Attachments: 

25 

Assessment Report 10.2012.583.1 #E2013/26067 [16 pages] ............................................Annexure 10(a) 

Plans Byron Entertainment Centre #E2013/27267 [3 pages] .............................................. Annexure 10(b) 

Copy Easement #E2013/27126 [2 pages] ............................................................................Annexure 10(c) 

Conditions for approval #E2013/26324 [11 pages].............................................................. Annexure 10(d) 




Report 

The site contains an industrial building that operates as the Byron Entertainment Centre (BEC). 

5 

The BEC is the subject of prior consents DA 10.2004.255 and 10.2007.415 which variously 

regulated the size, frequency and timing of events at the centre. 

Current Proposal 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

8 events per annum x 1100 attendance x 5pm-1am 

4 events per annum x 1100 attendance x 5pm-6am 

4 events per annum x 1100 attendance by bus x 5 days each 7am-1am 

Unlimited events x 400 attendance 5pm weekdays – no finish time specified 

Unlimited events x 400 attendance 7am weekends - no finish time specified 

Unlimited daytime events x 160 attendance 

No trial periods 

Restaurant use by public and for take-away 

No conditions requiring the surrender of conditions of prior consents (as required in DA 

10.2007.415) 

No requirement for a S88B instrument re parking on adjacent land (as required in DA 

10.2007.415) 

No requirement for Lighting Plan for external areas (as required in DA 10.2007.415) 


The determination of the application may reduce Council’s cost in the Land and Environment 

Court. 



 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 10 minutes. 

35 


The assessment report recommends approval of the application subject to limitations and 

conditions and will be forwarded to Council under separate cover. 




SOCIETY AND CULTURE - EXECUTIVE MANAGER’S REPORTS 

5 

Report No. 12.15. Management of the Multi Purpose Facility at Byron Regional Sport 

and Community Complex – Update on Negotiations and 

recommendation to commence a new selective tender process 

Executive Manager: Society and Culture 

Report Author: Greg Ironfield, Acting Executive Manager Society and Culture and 

Shannon McKelvey, Executive Manager Organisational Support 

File No: 

#E2013/15788 

Theme: 

Summary: 

Society and Culture, Byron Regional Sport and Cultural Complex 

The purpose of this report is to update Council on of direct negotiations 

with the PCYC NSW for the management of the Multi Purpose Facility at 

the BRSCC. From the progress to date and the outcomes of a meeting 

with the PCYC CEO on Friday 12 April 2013, it is recommended that 

Council terminate the current direct negotiations with the PCYC and 

commence a new expression of interest process to inform a new selective 

tender. 

10 


1. That Council terminate the negotiations with the PCYC NSW for management of the 

Byron Regional Sport and Cultural Complex (BRSCC) Multi Purpose Facility. 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

2. That Council write to the PCYC and the Minister of Police and Emergency Services to 

withdraw Council's expression of interest to establish a PCYC for Byron, with reasons, 

and to thank them for their consideration of Council’s application. 

3. That Council extend the current direct management interim management 

arrangements until 30 September 2013 and establish a budget of $148,475 from 

General Fund to cover the continuation of the interim management arrangements. 

4. That Council, pursuant to Clause 166(b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 

2005, commence a selective tender process, by which invitations to tender are made 

following a public advertisement asking for expressions of interests from suitably 

qualified and experienced leisure/recreational facility managers/management 

organisations for management of all and/or different parts of the Multi Purpose 

Facility. 

5. That the Expression of Interest and selective tender processes: 

a) be developed under delegation based on the original tender specifications but 

with variation to the term (up to 3 + 3 years), the footprint, options to optimise 

community use and inclusion of new performance criteria for example 

performance measures for exercising option renewal as well as profit incentives 

and profit sharing arrangements etc; 

b) include different options, as required, for management and operations of the 

Multi Purpose Facility and the outside hardcourts eg management as a whole 

and options where areas are excised (eg the commercial kitchen) potentially for 

separate management/contracts. 

6. That the outcome of the calling of tenders be reported to Council for determination 

under Clause 178 of the Local Government (General) Regulations. 




Attachments: 

5 

CONFIDENTIAL Summary of Issues and Recommendations #DM1261257 [29 pages].....Annexure 16(a) 

CONFIDENTIAL Participation Agreement and Lease – Revised documents from PCYC 

#E2013/21534 [13 pages] .................................................................................................... Annexure 16(b) 

CONFIDENTIAL Legal Advice #DM1259041, #S2013/5078 [19 pages]..............................Annexure 16(c) 




Background 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

At the Ordinary meeting on 28 June 2012 Council received a Confidential report on the 

management of the Multi Purpose Facility at the Byron Regional Sport and Cultural Complex 

(BRSCC) and resolved (12-544): 

1. That Council note the report and the assessment of the submissions received in 

relation to the management of the Multi Purpose Facility at the Byron Regional 

Sport and Cultural Complex. 

2. That Council defer consideration of entering into contractual arrangements for the 

multi purpose facility until the 9 August 2012 Ordinary Meeting to allow for written 

notification of the outcome of the expression of interest with the PCYC NSW. 

3. That Council seek advice of the outcome of the expression of interest from the 

PCYC by 20 July 2012 including financial implications. 

4. That if no written notification is received from the PCYC by 20 July 2012 in 

relation to the outcome of the Council's expression of interest that: 

a) enter into contractual negotiations with the YMCA Brisbane as the candidate 

considered to be the most advantageous to Council and that draft contracts 

be tabled at the 9 August 2012 Ordinary Meeting for consideration. 

b) write to the PCYC and the Minister of Police and Emergency Services to 

retract Council's expression of interest. 

On 13 July 2012, Council received a response from the PCYC NSW which included a letter of 

acceptance for the Council’s expression of interest, a draft Memorandum of Understanding, a draft 

Participation Agreement and a draft Lease to cover the centre operations. 

At the Ordinary meeting on 9 August 2012 Council resolved (12-636) 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

1. That in relation to the Management of the Byron Regional Sport and Cultural 

Complex (BRSCC) Multi Purpose Facility that; 

(i) 

Council as per s178 of the NSW Local Government (General) Regulation 

2005, resolve to decline to accept the negotiated offers from Brisbane YMCA 

and The Consortium and that they are advised accordingly 

(ii) Council make public its decision in accordance with Clause 179(b) of the 

Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 

2. That in relation to the PCYC NSW offer, Council delegate to the General 

Manager to: 

(a) settle the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between 

Council and the PCYC NSW with the intent to enter into a ‘Participation 

Agreement’ and ‘Lease’ of the Byron Regional Sport and Cultural Complex 

Multi Purpose Facility for the purpose of “providing a facility that is open to 

the community for use, including sports groups, cultural activities, events, 

meetings and festivals”; and 

(b) That the MOU provide for additional income to be paid to Council for special 

events that may be held in accordance with Council’s business plan for the 

facility 




5 

10 

15 

(c) enter into negotiations to develop the ‘Participation Agreement’ and the 

‘Lease’ documentation, incorporating the inclusion of amendments/ 

recommendations as provided in Annexure 5(h); and 

(d) that a revised ‘Participation Agreement’ and ‘Lease’ be reported to Council 

for further consideration. 

3. That this report and annexures of the closed part of the meeting remain 

confidential until the lease is executed. 

4. That Council note in Table 1 of Management Cost Comparison of the report the 

word “offer” in column 2 is changed to read “cost to Council” and relates to detail 

contained in annexure 5(i) being Debt Servicing, Indirect Costs and Insurance 

and Rates and Charges. 

Negotiations 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

Council’s Acting General Manager, Executive Manager Community Infrastructure, Executive 

Manager Corporate Management and Acting Executive Manager Society and Culture met with the 

Chief Executive Officer of Police and Community Youth Club NSW (PCYC) on 26 July 2012 at 

Council’s Administration Building to commence negotiations over on the documents. A site visit of 

the facility was also undertaken at that time. Since then Council has continued with negotiations but 

so far has been unable to reach agreement on terms that would be likely to be acceptable. 

On 20 February 2013 Council received revised draft documents from the PCYC. Council staff 

cross checked the revised documents and a summary table of items which had not been included 

in the draft documents is attached at Confidential Annexures 16(a) and (b). There are still 

significant differences which have not been able to be resolved. 

Some of the key components of the draft proposed PCYC Lease document included: 

1. Term – 20 years (10+10). 

2. Exercise of Option – Entirely at discretion of PCYC with no performance criteria or choice on 

Council’s behalf. 

3. Rent - $1 for the term of the Lease. 

4. No profit incentives or profit sharing proposed. 

5. Premises – the whole of the Multi Purpose Facility and the outdoor hardcourts at the Byron 

Regional Sport and Cultural Complex. 

6. Proposed Use – Operation as a Police Citizens Youth Club including activities associated 

with the promotion of youth development, promotion of individual and community 

participation in sport and the promotion and development of programs to reduce crime, the 

providing of a centre for community groups sporting, cultural and community activities and 

events and other forms of not for profit public entertainment and any other activities required 

to meet the objectives of the PCYC. 

7. Expenses – the PCYC would have been responsible for electricity, gas, water, telephone and 

other services. 

8. Emergency Use of the Premises – it was proposed that the facility would be made available 

for evacuation and accommodation services during times of natural disaster; and for use in 

the case of the loss of Council’s main offices. 

9. The minimum operating hours were proposed between 9.00 to 21.00 Monday to Friday, and 

between 9.00 to 17.00 on Saturday and Sundays. 

10. Maintenance and Repairs – the PCYC were to be responsible for keeping the premises in 

good repair and condition, tidy, clean and free of rubbish, free from pests and replace glass if 

damaged. 




5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

11. Council’s obligations were to be the maintenance of the grounds external to the building, the 

external security of the complex, payment of required insurances, Council rates, and all 

major capital upgrades or maintenance or repair. 

12. the PCYC wanted to be able to assign a sublease with Council’s agreement. 

Some key components of the draft PCYC Participation agreement included: 

1. The ‘Joint Objectives’ of the draft Participation Agreement were drafted as being: youth 

development, the promotion of individual and community participation in the Activities 

(Activities was defined as activities similar to those conducted or facilitated by PCYC 

throughout NSW including not limited to sport and recreational activities and programs 

directed at youth), the promotion and development of programs to reduce crime by and 

against young people, and the use of the premises by Community Groups. 

2. The PCYC proposed to form a Club Advisory Committee with 2 Council representatives but 

that the Committee would be bound to and required to operate in accordance with PCYC 

governance policies. 

3. Booking of the facility - The proposed participation agreement intended that the PCYC would 

be responsible for the day to day operations and management of the facility. They would 

take enquiries and accept bookings and payment on terms determined acceptable by PCYC 

in its absolute discretion. 

4. Use of the facility – The use was proposed as being ‘in line with’ the ‘Joint Objectives’ with 

the proposal being that PCYC would set the fees and charges for different uses at its 

discretion and access and use would be determined and governed by PCYC licences. In line 

with the Council resolution, there was an addition to the draft Participation Agreement that 

allowed Council to hire the facility two times each calendar year for ‘Council special events’ 

which the PCYC would not charge Council for. 

5. If Council derived any income from ‘approved sponsor signage’ it was proposed to be 

required to be reserved by Council to a sinking fund for upgrades and maintenance of the 

premises as agreed by the PCYC. 

6. Council would be required to reserve 2 designated car spaces for PCYC staff. 

7. PCYC would have discretion over the people employed at the facility as well as the 

responsibility for those employees. 

8. Any income generated from the PCYC’s operations from the facility would be retained by the 

PCYC to cover their operating costs. 

9. It was proposed that the PCYC would keep any net operating profit or fund any net operating 

losses for the term of the Lease. 

Council obtained legal advice at various points in the negotiations, copies of which are attached at 

Confidential Annexure 16(c). 

Council staff had ongoing communication relating to the draft documents and the outcomes of 

entering into the draft Lease and Participation Agreement with the PCYC. At times there were 

delays in being able to obtain responses and this delayed the negotiations. On Friday 12 April 

2013, the Chief Executive Officer of the PCYC attended a meeting with Council’s General 

Manager, A/Manager Society and Culture and Executive Manager Organisational Support. 

The following outlines the key items discussed and the outcome from discussions: 

50 

55 

1. Term 

PCYC have a standard 20 years term. Deviation from this was not a favourable option for the 

PCYC. Other terms were discussed, such as a 3 + 3 year or a performance-based 5 + 5 year, but 

no agreement was established. Council’s original tender was on the basis of 2 years and then 

later negotiated on basis of 3 + 3 year. 




With the proposed 10 + 10 years term the PCYC could exercise the second 10 year option without 

Council agreement and without having met any pre-agreed performance standards, so the 

exercise of the option would be at the sole discretion of the PCYC. 

5 

10 

15 

2. Profit Incentives/Sharing 

PCYC indicated that they believed provisions in the draft agreement were adequate to enable any 

profit generated to be reinvested in operations; staff disagreed and indicated a preference for 

reinvestment in maintenance of the asset. Staff asked for examples of how PCYC would invest 

back into the facility if a profit was generated and the examples provided were replacement of court 

surfaces, vehicles or painting. 

In response to enquiries, PCYC indicated that if other issues being discussed could be resolved, 

there might be scope to negotiate additional terms to prioritise works that PCYC would consider 

investing profits into, given that Council had indicated building repairs, not vehicles, would be its 

preference. This issue was left on the table without resolution. 

3. Sponsorship 

20 

25 

The draft Participation Agreement allows for Council to negotiate with potential sponsors and 

attract sponsorship funds, with the provision that any money received by Council must be placed in 

a sinking fund for use at the multi purpose facility. The draft agreement proposed that PCYC’s 

agreement on how those funds were expended would be required. It was noted that Council would 

not want to restrict these funds and want to retain exclusive control over expenditure. This issue 

too was left on the table. 

4. Services / Suitability of PCYC as a Partner for this Facility 

30 

35 

40 

45 

Council were looking for confirmation that the PCYC would be a well suited partner with the 

community for management of this facility, particularly given the 20 year proposed term. 

For example, staff sought confirmation as to the types of cultural events the PCYC would be 

interested in running at the facility but the response was that the draft agreement allowed Council 

to use the Centre for cultural activities for 2 days each year and if it was required, a higher number 

of days could be negotiated and up to 10 days each year reserved to Council was suggested as 

being potentially possible. 

The response implied that the Council would be responsible for any cultural activities at the Facility 

and that cultural activities would not be a priority of the PCYC. In that part of the discussion the 

PCYC outlined that they are “youth focused but community accepting”. 

Council were reminded that they had approached the PCYC through their Expression of Interest 

process and that the PCYC had expressly not submitted a tender to Council. It was explained that 

this was because the PCYC would not be ‘managing the facility’ for Council, rather they would be 

‘establishing a PCYC’. It was expressly stated that if Council wanted a ‘manager for the facility’ 

Council needed to approach alternative organisations. 

5. Membership of PCYC / Permission to Enter/Use the Facility 

50 

55 

Staff sought clarification of the draft Participation Agreement provisions relating to ‘PCYC 

membership’. 

It was explained that under the PCYC Model everyone who enters the Facility for any activity must 

become or be a member of the PCYC. That involves a fee ($20 for adults and $5 for children per 

annum) and signing a membership agreement. It was confirmed that this would extend to Council 




staff and contractors as well as to everyone wanting to hire any part of the facility and their 

invitees. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

By entering the membership agreement, members commit to abide by the PCYC values and Code 

of Conduct. In addition, the membership agreement also covers liability, medical treatment, 

assignment of rights to photographic and video material, agreement to police regulation of conduct 

and permission for continuing police checks. The membership agreement can be downloaded 

from: http://www.activecarrot.net/public/contract/application 

When asked whether this is the only model that the PCYC would agree to, it was indicated that it is 

never PCYC’s preference but they might consider operating what they called a ‘consumer model’ 

but Council would have to indemnify the PCYC against all liability absolutely and there would need 

to be an acceptance by the community that it would be more difficult for PCYC staff to provide the 

PCYC services because there would be less clarity about powers to regulate conduct. 

6. Agreement / Documentation 

Council confirmed that it had been advised that to be able to directly negotiate with the PCYC the 

negotiations should be the on the basis of the tender documents. The PCYC were not accepting of 

the use of the Council tender documents, referring again to Council having approached the PCYC 

and the PCYC having intentionally not made a submission under Council’s terms of tender. 

It was pointed out that there were key components of an agreement that Council would have to 

insist on but it was indicated that the negotiations needed to conclude on the basis of the draft 

documents as presented, with some limited room for further negotiation on particular aspects, and 

that the negotiations would need to be concluded by 30 June 2013. 

7. Excisions from areas of operations 

30 

35 

40 

Information was provided that during the period Council had been operating the facility, Council 

received some approaches/enquiries about longer term arrangements in the Facility, and Council 

enquired whether PCYC were prepared to consider excising spaces/rooms, such as the 

commercial kitchen and meeting room 1, from the areas under the agreement. The response was 

that this would not be acceptable as it would impact on PCYC’s income generation potential. 

PCYC indicated that they would be prepared consider use of areas by other organisations/users, 

but that it would need to be under a sub-lease from, and on terms negotiated by, the PCYC. PCYC 

also confirmed they would want to retain the rent as per the draft agreement and that the 

organisations/users would need to become members and agree to PCYC membership conditions, 

including power to eject individuals and police checks for both staff and patrons of those 

organisations/users. 

Current Status 

45 

50 

55 

From the progress of the negotiations to date and the outcomes of the most recent meeting with 

the PCYC CEO on Friday 12 April 2013, it appears that Council must either largely accept the 

terms and conditions of the PCYC draft Lease and Participation agreement (many of which are not 

advantageous to Council or the community and some of which may require Minister’s consent) or 

Council needs to end negotiations with the PCYC and explore alternatives. 

The current draft PCYC Lease and Participation Agreement documents do not incorporate the full 

intent of Council’s previous vision for the use of the facility. The PCYC will operate courses and 

activities for young people in the community, which is their core function and which is of course of 

considerable benefit to the community. However, the PCYC have made it clear that they are not in 

the business of providing other cultural or community activities and it is unclear to what extent 




other cultural or community use will be promoted/encouraged or permitted to occur. This may be 

inconsistent with the high community expectation for access to and use of the facility. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

The term of the proposed PCYC Participation Agreement and Lease excludes Council from input 

into or assessment of the success of the use of the facility for up to 20 years, which as a new 

facility will be its optimal time for use. The PCYC would be established for 20 years, and all 

programming and utilisation would be in the exclusive control of the PCYC except for the agreed 

number of days (2 – 10 days) where Council could use the facility for other uses. There would be 

no performance or evaluation criteria that could be considered to ensure that the community 

interests and expectations were being met. 

The PCYC model has potential financial advantages in that Council would have no operational 

costs for 20 years. However, this has to be considered against PCYC being entitled to retain all 

income and any profit and Council’s continuing financial liability for ‘other than minor’ maintenance 

of the building and grounds. The PCYC agreement as drafted does not encourage profit 

generation, that is not their focus, nor reinvestment into building maintenance. Under the current 

proposed drafts, there would be no mechanisms by which Council could request or influence the 

promotion or marketing of the Facility in order to generate income or share in a profit to fund 

ongoing maintenance costs. 

There has been a substantial investment from Council, the community and other tiers of 

government to develop a multi purpose sport and cultural facility. With the PCYC draft Agreement 

and Lease, Council would be relinquishing its involvement and accountability to the community to 

the PCYC without the ability to affect changes to operations for up to 20 years. 

It is appropriate that there be careful consideration by Council of the potential impacts of such a 

long-term decision prior to proceeding with the current negotiations. 

Tender and Community Land Issues 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

There are restrictions imposed on Council’s capacity to ‘directly negotiate’ with potential 

contractors, particularly following a tender process – refer to confidential legal advice. Staff remain 

concerned that the current negotiations with PCYC might not strictly accord with Council’s 

obligations to test the market to make sure it is getting ‘best value’ for the community. 

For example, the original tender specification proposed a 2 year management agreement term. 

This was proposed to enable Council to test this new community asset and create baseline usage 

data that would inform the best future management option for the Facility. Council as it had the 

right to, sought after the tender process to direct negotiation with identified parties. Those 

negotiations should be on the basis of similar terms to the terms in the tender specification. 

The proposed 20 year PCYC agreements with exclusive control and no profit sharing etc are on 

terms that are significantly different to those which Council tendered on or sought to negotiate on. 

Council could not know what responses it might attract from other organisations, including 

community organisations such as the YMCA/YWCA, if it went to were to go to the market on these 

very different terms and therefore it does not seem that Council can have confidence in being sure 

that it is getting ‘best value’ for the community (both in terms of services/use of the Facility as well 

as minimising long term financial costs/maximising potential financial return). 

In addition, the BRSCC is classified ‘community land’. A review of the PCYC draft documents 

against the Local Government Act requirements indicates that, while a lease with a potential 20 

year total term may be possible, Council is required to publicly exhibit the proposal and consider 

any submissions received before agreeing to grant the lease and that, if any objections to the 

proposed Lease are received, Council must not proceed without Minister’s consent. 




Where to From Here 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

In light of all the above, it is recommended that the current direct negotiations with the PCYC be 

terminated and that Council test the market again with a fresh selective tender process involving 

different options not just a single whole-of-facility approach. 

Due to interest Council has received, for example in medium term arrangements for management 

of the well-equipped Commercial Kitchen, it might be preferable to test the market on a number of 

different options such as management of: 

- the entire Facility; 

- the facility excluding particular areas (such as meeting rooms or Commercial Kitchen); and/or 

- just particular areas of the facility. 

Seeking interest on variable bases would enable Council to directly compare and assess the 

different potential management options. To enable this to occur, it is proposed that delegation be 

granted to enable the specifications to be prepared, expressions of interest to be called and 

selected applicant invited to tender. The ‘selective tendering’ approach is therefore recommended 

and, as with all tenders, the results would be reported to Council for final determination. 

In the meantime, it is recommended that Council continue to directly manage the facility and try to 

increase the promotion and marketing of the facility. While this will have short term financial 

implications for next financial year, it is considered prudent to ensure that Council’s long term 

financial position with regard to this significant asset is not prejudiced, as well as to ensure that the 

use of this important regional community facility is maximised for the benefit of the whole 

community. 


30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

There is currently no provision in Council’s draft 2013/14 Budget to continue the current Council 

direct interim management arrangements for the Multi Purpose Facility. 

A draft budget, based on the current year's operations has been developed. An expenditure 

budget of $148,475 is required, with an offset of $40,000 income (net cost $108,475). 

A reduced version of that budget would be required also if Council were to continue with 

negotiations with the PCYC because it is unlikely that negotiations could be concluded, and the 

requirements for notification of the proposed lease, and potentially for Minister’s consent, satisfied 

before 1 July 2013. 



 



Relevant provisions of the Local Government Act and Regulations governing tenders apply and 

need to be complied with. Refer to confidential legal advice. 

In addition, provisions in relation to management of Community Land also apply and must be 

followed, including s47 (Leases, licences and other estates in respect of community land – terms 

greater than 5 years) and s47A (terms less than 5 years) must be complied with, which require at a 

minimum all proposed leases be placed on public exhibition. 

The Local Government Act can be accessed at 

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/fullhtml/inforce/act+30+1993+CD+0+N . 




5 

Report No. 12.16. Youth Council Minutes Report February to April 2013 


Report Author: Belle Arnold, Youth Activities Officer 

File No: 

#E2013/25213 

Theme: 

Community Services, Society and Culture 

Summary: 

Youth Council met on 6 February, 6 March and 3 April 2013 and the 

minutes are attached for Council’s consideration. In addition, Youth 

Council met on 16 February for a full day of strategic planning. 

During the February to April period Youth Council members participated in 

the selection panel for the Youth Activities Grant Round, developed and 

delivered an extensive Youth Week Program, discussed Youth Transport, 

further developed Youth Employment Projects and made suggestions to 

improve Council’s youth related web pages. 


10 

That Council note the minutes from the 6 February, 6 March and 3 April 2013 Youth Council 

Meetings. 

15 

Attachments: 

Youth Council Minutes February 2013 #E2013/7209 [4 pages] ...........................................Annexure 18(a) 

Youth Council Minutes March 2013 #E2013/20172 [5 pages]............................................. Annexure 18(b) 

Youth Council Minutes April 2013 #E2013/20089 [3 pages].................................................Annexure 18(c) 

Youth Council Strategic Planning Day Notes #E2013/10699 [2 pages] .............................. Annexure 18(d) 




Report 

5 

10 

Youth Council met on 6 February, 6 March and 3 April 2013 and the minutes are attached for 

Council’s consideration. In addition, Youth Council met on 16 February for a full day of strategic 

planning. 

During the February to April period Youth Council members participated in the selection panel for 

the Youth Activities Grant Round, developed and delivered an extensive Youth Week Program, 

discussed Youth Transport, further developed Youth Employment Projects and made suggestions 

to improve Council’s youth related web pages amongst other things. 

Youth Week 2013 

15 

20 

25 

The Youth Week program developed by Council staff with Youth Council and local Youth services 

included: 

Youth Council/Council events: 

Self Harm Training – 53 enrolled in training 

Youth Film Competition – 23 entries 

Youth Arts Exhibition – 56 entries 

Council funded events: 

Byron Youth House – Youth Homelessness Matters Day 

BYS – Youth Forum 

BYS – Skate Competition 

BYS – Youth Event 

Youth Council Transport Priorities 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

In Youth Council’s discussion and formation of transport priorities, it was acknowledged that 

transport issues are linked to many other issues for young people and especially impacts on 

employment. Youth Council also noted that improved transport options would increase tourism 

and potentially improve the local economy and provide more employment options for young 

people. 

Trains 

Trains on tracks was the first transport priority of the Byron Shire Youth Council as a form of 

transport that could link villages, and link Byron Shire to other major centres such as Sydney, 

Brisbane, the Gold Coast and Lismore. The reinstatement of the train service was prioritised over 

increased bus services as trains are seen as safer and more reliable than buses. Youth Council 

suggested the railway could be reopened in stages rather than all at once. 

Bike paths 

The development of bike paths as transport corridors that are safe and provide a viable transport 

option was listed as another Youth Council transport priority. Bike paths could be developed 

adjacent to railway lines making use of the existing rail corridors. Bike paths need to link towns 

and villages in the Byron Shire as many young people ride bicycles to work and school, often in 

unsafe conditions. 

Buses 

55 

Youth Council listed increased frequency of buses, extended services and at realistic prices for 

young people to travel around the Byron Shire and to neighbouring shires, Tweed, Lismore and 




Ballina as their third transport priority. Youth Council proposed increase in the funding of the BAT 

bus service which provides a transport brokerage and subsidy service for local young people. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

Road safety education 

Youth Council showed support for educational projects such as STEER which reaches young 

people in schools and provides appropriate information about road safety. 

Youth Employment 

At the March meeting Youth Council members discussed work experience and careers advice at 

their various schools. It was noted that each school’s approach to work experience and careers 

advice differed greatly. It was also noted that Youth Council agreed that work experience was very 

valuable and would be useful if it occurred more regularly throughout school years. 

Youth Council noted that much careers advice focussed on career paths that led out of Byron 

Shire. Youth Council members advised that attending the volunteer expo at the Byron Community 

Centre was very useful in learning about opportunities within the shire. Youth Council discussed 

the creation of a local careers day to be focussed on career opportunities that encouraged them to 

develop career paths within the Byron Shire. 

At the April meeting, Youth Council continued to develop and discuss Youth Employment. From 

this discussion Youth Council identified potential Youth Employment projects, listed below: 

Local careers day expo – focussing on showcasing careers for young people to stay in the 

Byron Shire, 

Local Careers forum – where young people working in careers in the Byron Shire present on 

their career pathways, 

Council to hold regular free workshop series on Resume Writing and Job Application 

processes, and Small Grant Writing for young people, 

Establish a rewards program for local businesses that employ local young people. The 

project would involve recognising local businesses with a sticker for their front window, for 

employing local young people as a percentage of their staff. 

Council’s Website - Youth Web page suggestions 

Youth Council considered Byron Shire Council’s Youth related web pages and gave some 

feedback on how to make the existing pages more user friendly to young people. Youth Council 

noted that currently the pages are difficult to navigate with a bombardment of text. Youth Council 

have prepared detailed suggestions which are contained in the March 2013 minutes. 


Nil from this report 

45 



 


50 


Local Government Act 1993 

Youth Strategy and Action Plan 2011 - 2015 




WATER AND RECYCLING - EXECUTIVE MANAGER’S REPORTS 

5 

Report No. 12.17. Review of Bulky Waste Disposal Scheme 

Executive Manager: Water and Recycling 

Report Author: Phil Warner, Executive Manager Water and Recycling 

File No: 

#E2013/17753 

Theme: 

Summary: 

Community Infrastructure, Waste and Recycling Services 

On 1 March 2012, Council resolved: 

12-127 that, in lieu of the annual urban kerbside collection of bulky waste, 

Council commence a bulky waste service at the Myocum Landfill from 

1 July 2012 for properties within the Shire that allows annually, as a oneoff, 

150 kilograms of permissible bulky waste to be received free of charge. 

The revised program has now been operating for nine months and this 

report reviews the success of the scheme, highlights areas for 

improvement and recommends that the scheme be continued. 

10 


That Council continue with the current bulky waste disposal scheme with some minor 

changes to the voucher system for rate payers. 

15 

Attachments: 

Report to Council 1 March 2012 - Bulky Waste Kerbside Collection #DM1145206 [6 pages] ... Annexure 5 




Report 

On 1 March 2012, Council resolved: 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

12-127 that, in lieu of the annual urban kerbside collection of bulky waste, Council commence 

a bulky waste service at the Myocum Landfill from 1 July 2012 for properties within the Shire 

that allows annually, as a one-off, 150 kilograms of permissible bulky waste to be received free 

of charge. 

Issues relating to the previous kerbside collection program included, but were not limited to (the full 

report can be viewed at Annexure 5): 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Safety hazards for contract workers and Council staff in terms of sharp objects and sodden 

heavy furniture and mattresses 

Safety hazards for the public, particularly children, engaging in scavenging 

Non compliant waste such as glass and chemicals being included in the piles 

Illegal dumping on the waste piles of households, including hazardous materials 

Scattering of previously neatly stacked piles across lawns and onto the road by scavengers 

Boxes of small items being over turned and scattered by scavengers 

Lack of potential contractors to conduct the collection 

Dumping of waste both prior to and after the collection 

Escalating costs relating to removal of illegal dumping 

Waste is comingled and there is a lack of resource recovery 

Metal scavenging reducing the return to the contractor and thereby increasing the cost 

The photo below depicts just one of the many illegal dumping sites during the 2011 kerbside 

collection. 

30 

Byron Industrial Estate 

Review of the Current program 

35 

As at 11 April 2013, a total of 1,389 residents in the Shire have taken advantage of the new service 

which includes 1,183 property owners and 206 renting residents. This represents approximately 




11% of total properties in the Shire. The revised scheme has resulted in approximately 208 tonnes 

of mixed waste being deposited at the Myocum Landfill. 

5 

10 

15 

The direct costs associated with the service include $41,600 in mixed waste fees and $8,819 in 

waste levy fees, bringing the total cost to date to $50,419. Compared with the total cost in 2011/12 

of $125,000 when the last bulky waste kerbside collection was conducted, this is a significant 

saving to Council. In addition, items brought to the landfill can potentially be recycled rather than 

crushed and with the extended timeframe for residents to take advantage of the scheme, many 

items have been salvaged for re-sale at the Tip Shop which generates revenue to support this 

recycling initiative. A further advantage of the new service is that a large amount of metal has been 

deposited along with mixed waste which Council has been able to salvage for recycling, further 

offsetting the costs of the service. 

A number of issues have emerged during the trial of the new service and these are addressed in 

the following sections considering mixed waste, rates notices and aged pensioners. 

Mixed waste 

20 

25 

30 

The majority of loads presented to the landfill were mixed loads of waste and often included metal 

and other recycling items such as plastic and paper, for which disposal is free. Due to logistics and 

operational requirements at the weighbridge, it is not feasible to separate loads and specifically 

weigh the different elements of the mixed waste so Council staff often have to estimate the weight 

of mixed waste. 

Improvements 

Consideration has been given to options to address this issue, however, for operational reasons a 

clear solution is not possible. One feasible option to at least minimise errors in estimating such 

loads is to ask residents to load all their recyclables in one section. A message to this effect could 

be printed on vouchers and included in any advertising material for the scheme as well as on 

Council’s website. 

Rates notices 

35 

40 

45 

In order to minimise residents accessing the service more than once, rate-payers were requested 

to bring their July Rates instalment notice to receive the free waste disposal service. This message 

was clearly communicated on all advertising and flyers, however, many residents presented at the 

weighbridge with notices later than July 2012. When approached by weighbridge operators in 

relation to this, Council staff were often verbally abused by the resident. A decision was therefore 

made to accept any notices and use the tracking mechanism put in place to identify potential 

duplications. 

Weighbridge operators were often also the subject of verbal abuse from residents who objected to 

a charge being applied to weights above 150 kilograms. It is felt this issue was exacerbated by the 

Rates notices which were required to access the service, with many citing the quantum of their 

rates and charges on the notice as a reason to object to the small additional charge. 

Improvements 

50 

55 

In order to minimise issues associated with the use of rates notices, it is recommended vouchers 

be issued to rate-payers to avoid the need to bring their rates notice to the landfill. This will bypass 

potential issues around duplication in respect to the four instalment notices that are issued each 

financial year. This change will also minimise the administration required at the weighbridge which 

means loads will be processed more efficiently. 




Aged pensioners 

5 

10 

15 

Initially there was some criticism received from aged pensioners in the community who were 

concerned they had a lack of resources to move and transport heavy items. Consideration has 

been given to implementing a system whereby residents on an aged/disabled pension book in a 

service which is collected and disposed of on their behalf. 

Currently there are 14,690 rate payers in the Shire and 2,501 of these are rate payers who are 

eligible for an exemption under the aged/disability category, accounting for approximately 17% of 

total residences. At an estimated cost of $100 per household to conduct the service, this would add 

approximately $250,000 to the overall cost of a bulky waste service. This cost would be even 

greater if pensioners who rent their property are included. 

The large number of people in this category proportional to the total rate means that 

implementation of this service would result in a significant increase in rates across the Shire to 

cover these costs and this is considered not feasible. 

Improvements 

20 

25 

30 

35 

Whilst providing a direct bulky waste service for aged/disability pensioners is considered unfeasible 

at this stage, the scheduled introduction of a kerbside green waste and organics collection service 

will provide residents, including aged and disability pensioners, with the opportunity to 

progressively dispose of waste that might otherwise have been done once a year during the former 

annual bulky waste kerbside collection. 


One of the key reasons Council changed the service delivery model for bulky waste collection was 

cost. 

The trial of the new service based at the landfill is lower cost and has far more scope for cost 

control than the former kerbside service. 

Retaining the new service with the recommended improvements will assist Council with the goal of 

achieving long term financial sustainability. 

Retaining the new service with the recommended improvements will also assist with addressing 

drivers that are increasing the cost of waste and recycling services and these include: 

40 

45 

50 

 

 

 

 

 

Continuing increases to the NSW waste levy 

Increased regulatory requirements for operating the landfill 

Increasing costs for key inputs such as fuel and heavy plant 

Land purchases to provide for future waste handling capacity 

Development and construction of the new Quarry landfill 



 



Continuation of the new bulky waste drop off service at the landfill reduces waste to landfill and 

increases recycling. 




5 

Report No. 12.18. Easements for Pipelines Brunswick Valley Sewage Treatment Plant 


Report Author: Paul Hay, Engineer Planning and Compliance 

File No: 

#E2013/22716 

Theme: 

Water and Recycling 

Summary: 

This report seeks approval to obtain easements over pipelines associated 

with Brunswick Valley Sewage Treatment Plant where the pipelines 

traverse Council owned land. 

The purpose of creating these easements will allow Council continuing 

legal access to these Council assets should these land parcels or parts 

thereof be sold to private ownership at some time in the future. 


10 

15 

1. That Council obtain easements for pipelines associated with Brunswick Valley Sewage 

Treatment Plant where these pipelines traverse Council owned properties, being Lot 4 

DP 841856 (Horse Paddock at north end of Station Street) PN123455 and Lot 1 

DP 129374 (Site of Brunswick Valley Sewage Treatment Plant) PN 98765. 

2. That the Council seal be affixed to all necessary documents that effect the creation of 

these easements. 

20 

Attachments: 

Plan of Proposed Pipeline Easement Lot 1 DP129374 #E2013/24360 [1 page]..................Annexure 11(a) 

Plan of Proposed Pipeline Easement Lot 4 DP841856 #E2013/24359 [1 page]................. Annexure 11(b) 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

The Brunswick Area Sewerage Augmentation Scheme (BASAS) was commissioned at the end of 

2010. Pipelines have been constructed across Council owned land in association with this major 

program of work. 

Creation of easements over these pipelines will allow Council continuing legal access to these 

Council assets should these land parcels or parts thereof be sold to private ownership at some 

time in the future. 

Council has recently considered options for its key operational land holdings and the potential 

development/sale of surplus sewer fund land will assist in raising revenue to pay down loans. 

Ensuring easements are in place is an important step in facilitating this opportunity. 


The funding for the creation of the easements including survey, plan preparation and registration 

costs can be funded by the capital budget allocation for BASAS. 

20 



 


25 


377 General power of the council to delegate 

30 

(1) A council may, by resolution, delegate to the general manager or any other person or body 

(not including another employee of the council) any of the functions of the council, other than 

the following: 

(h) the compulsory acquisition, purchase, sale, exchange or surrender of any land or other 

property (but not including the sale of items of plant or equipment) 




5 

Report No. 12.19. Section 64 Developer Charges Policy 



File No: 

#E2013/23733 

Theme: 


Summary: 

In March Council considered the recommendations of the 21 February 

meeting of the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee and one of 

the resolutions was in part: 

4. That Council receive a report on the option of implementing a policy 

mechanism for lessee change of use development applications that 

would allow delayed timing for obtaining a certificate of compliance 

pursuant to legislation and ensure that any consent would lapse if the 

certificate is not obtained within the timeframe. 

The purpose of this report is to address point 4 of the resolution and 

present to Council an option for lessee change of use development 

applications. 


10 

15 

That Council change the Local Approvals Policy to allow a condition of DA consent such 

that a proponent who is a lessee seeking a change of use approval, is granted a period of 

time of up to two years in which to obtain a section 307 certificate and pay the associated 

section 64 water and sewer charges by instalments (this provision does not apply to 

section 64 Rous Water charges). 

Attachments: 

20 

Legal advice dated 24 January 2013 #E2013/24939 [4 pages]............................................Annexure 13(a) 

Legal advice dated 8 April 2013 #E2013/24938 [2 pages] .................................................. Annexure 13(b) 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

In March Council considered the recommendations of the 21 February meeting of the Water, 

Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee and one of the resolutions was in part: 


3. That the Water and Sewer S64 Development Charging Plans be amended to include a clause 

on deferred and periodic payments as per the S94 Plan and that lessees be encouraged to 

investigate s64 charges before taking up a lease, and be encouraged to ask landlords to 

contribute (relates to Committee Recommendation WW&S 4.3). 

4. That Council receive a report on the option of implementing a policy mechanism for lessee 

change of use development applications that would allow delayed timing for obtaining a 

certificate of compliance pursuant to legislation and ensure that any consent would lapse if the 

certificate is not obtained within the timeframe. 

The purpose of this report is to address point 4 of the resolution and present to Council an option 

for lessee change of use development applications. 

Overview 

Section 64 headworks charges for water supply and sewerage are substantial. In some parts of 

Byron Shire, an Equivalent Tenement (ET) of demand is worth nearly $30,000 in combined 

charges. S64 charges apply to all DA's where there is a demand (or increasing demand) on the 

infrastructure. The effect of S64 charges is most dramatic on Lessee DA's where a proposed 

change of use is assessed as increasing the demand/ load and therefore attracts associated S64 

charges. In most cases start up businesses have poor cash flow, poor access to loans and even if 

the charges can be paid, the tenant faces the very real risk that the large investment in the 

charges is completely lost if the business fails for whatever reason. 

It is important to note from the outset that the Bulk Water component of the S64 charge is a matter 

for Rous Water who have their own policy. Byron Shire Council only collects the Bulk Water S64 

charge on behalf of Rous Water. 

S64s are calculated on the estimated water and sewerage load from a DA proposal. The DA 

approval and any paid S64 ET (equivalent tenement) credit is attached to the property. The ET 

credits influences potential future use and where the credit is substantial can certainly add value to 

the property. 

Potential way forward 

Lessee DAs lodged with owners consent is the category of development applications where the 

impact of S64 charges is most acutely felt and where Council has been approached to develop 

some form of flexibility that would assist in the payment of applicable S64 charges. 

When a lessee is proposing a change of use to a property that involves a higher assessed water 

and sewerage load, the associated S64 charges can be significant. The lessee may well be 

attempting to establish a business, may have limited cash flow, and may have limited access to a 

bank guarantee. 

As stated above, the DA approval and any paid S64 ET (equivalent tenement) credit is attached to 

the property. If a Lessee gains DA approval, pays the S64 charges and subsequently fails for 

whatever reason, the approval and ET credit stays with the property and property owner. 




5 

10 

Legal advice has confirmed that a DA approval and any associated ET credit cannot be legally 

attached to the lessee business; it can only be attached to the property. The advice also confirms 

that no conditions can be attached to a Section 307 certificate such that an ET credit lapses with 

non payment (see Annexure 13(a)). 

It appears that the most effective approach to provide flexibility is to condition the DA consent. This 

would be a period of time granted in which a proponent a can obtain a 307 certificate. Payment 

could be made by installments throughout the period (probably a good thing) based on a separate 

agreement (see Annexure 13(b)). The most viable way of incorporating this approach into policy is 

to modify Council’s existing Local Approvals Policy. 

Implications of a change to Policy 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

Council would need to set out the consequences of not complying with the consent. The key 

consequences are: 

the development would be illegal and subject to regulatory action. 

Council would not recognize the ET entitlement for any future development because the S64 

charge associated with the ET credit was not paid. 

Whilst regulatory action is permissible it may not be feasible due to a lack of resources and or not 

efficient due to the costs of attempting to enforce compliance. 

A property with an approved DA for change of use maybe sold before a section 307 certificate is 

obtained or potentially leased to a new tenant. In both cases the new owner or tenant maybe 

unaware that whilst an approved DA is in place the necessary certificate of compliance has not 

been obtained and the associated section 64 charges have not been paid. There are a number of 

key effects of this circumstance: 

The new owner or tenants are unwittingly placed in conflict with Council. 

There is the potential for further change of use with no reference to Council. 

 

 

Council will be forced to take costly regulatory action. 

Council may never recover the required section 64 charges but has facilitated the increased 

load on the water and sewerage system via an approved DA but with the provision of a 

delayed compliance certificate. 

Council will need to keep a strong administrative approach and deploy a reminder system for the 

proponent and also find and deploy a warning mechanism for potential property buyers regarding 

any illegal status and nonpayment of charges. 

Conclusion 

Potential economic and social benefits associated with payment flexibility of S64 charges will come 

with the increased risk and cost of Council needing to take regulatory action to recover charges 

where payment does not occur. However, it is also possible a flexible approach will increase 

approved activity and hence S64 charge cash flow and this would help offset the costs and losses 

associated with the increased risk of non payment. 

The actual implications of a change in policy can only be established over time. In this case the 

value of the charges and the costs of implementation are substantial, as such it is recommended 

that Council make the change to policy but review the outcomes in two years time. 


The financial implications of the proposed change to the Local Approvals Policy to allow a period of 

time to be granted in which a proponent a can obtain a 307 certificate, cannot be accurately 

quantified. As detailed above there are potential positive financial outcomes and some potential 




negative financial outcomes. The proposed change will need to be tested over time and a review 

conducted to accurately establish if this change to policy has achieved the desired outcomes. 

5 



 


10 

15 


Regarding the collection of Section 64 charges, Council can impose a condition on development 

consents requiring the developer to obtain a certificate of compliance from Council (as the LWU) 

for water and/or sewer. This condition can be imposed in accordance with s80A(1)(a) of the EP&A 

Act for development of a kind described in clause 224 of the Water Management (General) 

Regulation, 2011. Such a condition would require the developer to obtain a certificate of 

compliance prior to a relevant milestone for the development. 




5 

Report No. 12.20. Myocum Waste and Recycling Facility – Operation of Byron Shire 

Second Hand Shop 


Report Author: Warren Burgess, Manager Waste and Recycling Services 

File No: 

#E2013/18293 

Theme: 

Community Infrastructure, Waste and Recycling Services 

Summary: 

This report reviews the operation of the Byron Shire Second Hand Shop 

and presents options and recommendations for its future operations. 


10 

15 

1. That Council authorise the General Manager to call for Expressions of Interest for the 

operation of the Byron Shire Second Hand Shop by either a commercial or social 

enterprise, pursuant to clauses 166 and 168 of the Local Government (General) 

Regulation 2005. 

2. That following the Expressions of Interest process a Recommendation Report be 

submitted to Council for consideration and final determination of the next stages of 

the Project. 

20 

Attachments: 

Council Report 10.27 - Development of a Salvaging Facility/Tip Shop 

#DM895734 [5 pages] ............................................................................................................... Annexure 19 




Report 

5 

At its ordinary meeting held on 22 October 2009 Council considered a report on the Development 

of a Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop; the establishment of which was included as an initiative of the 

2009 – 2012 Management Plan. Council resolved as follows: 


10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

1. That Council establishes a Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop at the Myocum Landfill. 

2. That the location and general design of the Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop be as outlined in 

Figure 1 and Figure 2 of this report. 

3. That Council seek expressions of interest from suitably qualified contractors to assist 

Council in the set up, fit out and operation of the proposed second hand shop for a period 

of 12 months. 

4. That Council authorise the General Manager to enter into a contract with a suitably qualified 

operator to operate the proposed Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop at the Myocum Landfill. 

5. That prior to entering to a contract for operation of the Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop at the 

Myocum Landfill, Council receive a report on the impact of the proposed 12 month contract 

for operation of the Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop at the Myocum Landfill on the Waste 

Management Budget. 

6. That after six months of operation, Council receive a report outlining the proposed long 

term operating arrangements for a Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop beyond the initial 12 month 

period. 

7. That the Salvaging Facility / Tip Shop be known as the Byron Shire Second Hand Shop. 

As a consequence of the above Council resolution the Byron Shire Second Hand Shop (the 

“Shop”) was planned, built and commissioned in mid 2011, for a total capital cost of approximately 

$100,000. The purpose of the Shop was to provide a salvaging facility, from which second hand 

reusable goods recovered from the Myocum landfill and transfer station could be sold to the public. 

The benefits of which include: 

 

 

 

Improving resource recovery; 

Diversion of waste from landfill; and 

Providing funded employment opportunities. 

In order to open the Shop and to obtain operating data that could inform any subsequent leasing / 

contractual opportunity it was decided to commence operation using casual staff and this 

arrangement has continued to date. 

Whilst the Shop has proven popular and is well patronised, it commenced operation in a basic 

manner and this could be improved with the guidance of a robust Business Plan. Such a Plan 

could include: 

45 

50 

 

 

 

 

 

An Operational Strategy (including but not limited to: resource recovery and inventory control; 

equipment requirements; pricing policy; and record keeping and reporting requirements) 

A Human Resources Strategy (including but not limited to: staffing requirements and 

responsibilities; skill development) 

A Marketing Strategy (including but not limited to: target customers to obtain goods from; target 

customers to sell goods to; sales targets; expected product range; market positioning; and 

promotion plan) 

A Standard Operating Procedures Manual 

A Shop specific Workplace Health and Safety system 

55 

Since its opening, conflicting waste management priorities have precluded the development and 

implementation of a strategic business approach to optimise the Shop’s operations. The continued 




5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

operation of the Shop is a testament to the good work of the staff involved in developing systems 

and procedures from the ground up. 

Following is a table presenting the revenue directly generated from the Shop and the expenditure 

incurred for casual staff involved in its operation: 

August 2011 to June 2012 July 2012 to 12 April 2013 

Sales Revenue $44,931.28 $48,469.60 

Casual Labour Expenditure $40,711.61 $62,459.68 

The above data is not intended to provide a detailed net position for Council in running the Shop, 

as it does not include associated operating expenses, nor does it account for benefits associated 

with reducing waste to landfill and the maintenance of valuable airspace. In terms of sales revenue 

and expenditure on staff is shows the 2011 – 2012 period as favourable; however, whilst sales are 

up in 2012 – 2013 (projected to be over $60,000 by the year’s end – up 35% on 2011 – 2012 

revenue), expenditure on staff has increased at a faster rate (projected to be almost $79,000 by 

the year’s end – up 94% on 2011/12 expenditure). This data is consistent with changed operational 

hours at the Shop, with it being open an extra day per week with staff hours increasing beyond this 

to improve resource recovery from the Transfer Station and to allow the Shop to be stocked prior to 

opening. 

For the Shop to be run as an efficient and viable venture by Council staff into the future, the 

business model will need to be revisited to address the planning and operational needs as outlined 

above. This will require additional in house and, likely, consultancy resources. 

In terms of other operational impediments and challenges, a recent internal audit of the Waste 

Services business produced findings that suggested the current mode of operation needs more 

robust systems and procedures to price stock and accurately measure the inflow and outflow of 

stock and monies. 

Discussion 

30 

There are a number of significant concurrent projects currently being managed by Council’s Waste 

and Recycling Branch, to: 

35 

 

 

 

Temporarily close the existing Myocum Landfill as it is reaching its approved final landform and 

capacity; 

Establish a system and contract for the transport of waste from the Myocum Waste and 

Recycling Facility for offsite disposal, until Council secures future landfill disposal capacity (dot 

point below); and 

Planning for and obtaining statutory approval for the proposed Myocum Quarry Landfill. 

40 

45 

In order for Council to bulk up waste at the Myocum Facility for collection, transport and offsite 

disposal, an upgrade of the Transfer Station is required and this project is also underway. As part 

of the upgrade, the Facility will be reconfigured to allow a more efficient drop off location for 

increased and improved resource recovery. It is envisaged that this will result in a reasonable 

increase in the volume and number of materials available for sale through the Shop. In this regard, 

and in the context of the above mentioned Council resolution, it is now timely to strategically revise 

the operation of the Shop. 

Options for Future Operating Arrangements 

50 

There are three options available to Council the future operating arrangements for the Shop: 

1. Operate the Shop as is, but using Council permanent staff rather than casual agency staff; 

2. Outsource the operation of the Shop to a commercial entity; or 

3. Operate the Shop as a “Community Recycling Venture”. 




1. Operate the Shop as is, but using Council permanent staff rather than casual agency 

staff 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

This option would require a paradigm shift to a more business oriented model, starting with the 

development of a Business Plan, with the subsequent development of subordinate plans and 

strategies as discussed above, and well documented systems and procedures to price stock 

and accurately managed the inflow and outflow of stock and monies. 

2. Outsource the operation of the Shop to a commercial entity 

Council could call for expressions of interest by individuals or businesses to enter into a 

commercial arrangement with it to operate the Shop. Such an arrangement could be structured 

to minimise business risk through the existence of a simple leasing or licensing contractual 

arrangement. Such an arrangement could be pursued via an expressions of interest process, 

which would involve an open approach to the market requesting submissions from businesses 

interested in entering into an arrangement with Council. The list of potential businesses that 

have submitted expressions of interest may be used as the basis for conducting a select tender 

process. 

3. Operate the Shop as a “Community/Social Enterprise” 

Social enterprises are organisations that use economic trading activities to resource a social or 

community mission. With respect to the operation of the Shop, a Community Recycling 

Enterprise or Venture would be a business based on a social enterprise strategy, designed to 

reduce waste disposed of to landfill while at the same time creating jobs and volunteer 

positions through the resale of materials and equipment. Such a model would allow for the 

reinvestment of profit/surplus into the venture to increase its viability and achieve its objectives. 

Research has been undertaken into Community Recycling Enterprises (CREs) with findings 

that they “produce significant environmental, economic and social benefits within communities 

in which they operate. These include: 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Local economic benefits through employment creation, skills development, niche 

market development and value adding, and contribution to local supply chains; 

Environmental benefits through direct resource recovery and community education; 

Social benefits through improving social inclusion and building social capital between 

people from different backgrounds; and 

Civic and cultural benefits through reinvesting in other community-based activities and 

organisations.” 

The same research indicates that Australian CREs employ at least 1500 people and recover at 

least 152,000 tonnes of resources from landfill each year. 

(Source: “A baseline study of Australian community recycling enterprises” June 2012, 

Prepared by The Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Non Profit Studies, Queensland 

University of Technology for Community Recycling Network Australia) 

There are various CRE business based models that Council could consider; particularly as it is 

the owner of the site, the existing infrastructure, and the feedstock materials. For example 

Council could investigate either owning or partnering with a social enterprise, or entering into a 

licence with a social enterprise, amongst others. 

Conclusion 

55 

An opportunity exists for Council to explore the feasibility of either a commercial or social 

enterprise operating the Shop into the future. This can be achieved by calling for Expressions of 




5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

Interest (EOI) pursuant to clauses 166 and 168 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 

2005. Respondents would be required to submit to Council, inter alia, a commentary on their 

proposed business and governance models and the anticipated Triple Bottom Line advantages 

and disadvantages. 

In the interim, it is proposed to continue the operation of the Shop with casual staff, commence an 

inventory of all sales, and align the opening hours of the Shop with those of the Transfer Station. 


The Expressions of Interest process can be managed by Council staff. Depending upon the 

outcomes of the EOI, consultancy and legal services may be required and this along with the 

longer term financial implications will be reported to Council in a subsequent recommendations 

report. 



 



In calling for Expressions of Interest Council would ensure strict compliance with the procurement 

requirements of both the Local Government Act and the Local Government (General) Regulation 

20051993. Further stages of the investigation/project will require due diligence to ensure Council, 

for example, maintains competitive neutrality, and complies with all other statutory requirements. 

Investigating the feasibility of establishing a social enterprise venture is also consistent with the 

following action in Council’s Strategic Initiatives Implementation Plan: 

 

focussed attention on volunteerism and social enterprises 




5 

Report No. 12.21. Drinking Water Quality Plan 



File No: 

#E2013/22856 

Theme: 

Community Infrastructure, Water and Sewer 

Summary: 

The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) 2004 have been 

developed as a framework for good management of drinking water 

supplies that if implemented, will assure the safety of customers at the 

point of supply. The guidelines are a risk based approach to the 

management and operation of water supply systems. A key requirement is 

the documentation of a Drinking Water Quality Management Plan. The 

NSW Public Health Act 2010 and associated regulation requires these 

plans to be in place by 2013. 

The purpose of this report to Council is to present the Drinking Water 

Quality Plan and seek adoption by Council. 


10 

That the Drinking Water Quality Management Plan be adopted. 

Attachments: 

15 

Drinking Water Quality Management Plan #E2013/25777 [66 pages]...................................... Annexure 22 

Annexure 22: Due to the size of this document it has been provided on the Councillors' Agenda CD only; an 

electronic copy can be viewed on Council's website. 




Report 

In October Council considered a report on the draft Drinking Water Quality Policy and resolved: 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

12-805 Resolved that the draft Drinking Water Quality Policy be placed on public exhibition for a 

period of 28 days and if there are no submissions, the policy be adopted. 

The Policy was placed on exhibition, no submissions were received and the Policy was accordingly 

adopted as per the resolution of Council. 

A Drinking Water Quality Plan has been prepared in association with the Policy and has previously 

been reported to the Water, Waste and Sewer Advisory Committee who recommended that the 

Plan not be adopted until the Policy had been adopted. 

The purpose of this report to Council is to present the Drinking Water Quality Plan and seek 

adoption by Council. 

The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) 2004 have been developed as a framework for 

good management of drinking water supplies that if implemented, will assure the safety of 

customers at the point of supply. The guidelines are a risk based approach to the management 

and operation of water supply systems. A key requirement is the documentation of a Drinking 

Water Quality Management Plan. The NSW Public Health Act 2010 and associated regulation 

requires these plans to be in place by 2013. 

There are 12 Elements defined in the guidelines for a Drinking Water Quality Plan. These are as 

follows: 

Element 1 – Commitment to Drinking Water Quality Management 

Element 2 – Assessment of the Drinking Water supply system 

Element 3 – Preventative measures for drinking water quality management 

Element 4 – Operational procedures and process control 

Element 5 – Verification of drinking water quality 

Element 6 – Management of incidents and emergencies 

Element 7 – Employee awareness and training 

Element 8 – Community involvement and awareness 

Element 9 – Research and development 

Element 10 – Documentation and reporting 

Element 11 – Evaluation and audit 

Element 12 – Review and continual improvement 

The adoption of a Drinking Water Quality Management policy is a requirement of Element 1 and 

has now been completed by Council. 


A clear policy for supply of drinking water is acknowledged as best practice and will contribute to 

the efficient management and operation of the drinking water supply system. 



 


55 


The NSW Public Health Act 2010 and associated regulation requires Drinking Water Quality 

Management Plans to be in place by 2013. Adoption of a Drinking Water Quality Management 

Policy is a part of Council’s implementation of a Drinking Water Quality management Plan. 




COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE - COMMITTEE REPORT 

5 

Report No. 13.1. Report of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 10 April 2013 

Executive Manager: Community Infrastructure 

Report author: Simon Bennett, Traffic and Transport Planner 

File number: #E2013/21610 

MEETING COMMENCED: 1.30pm 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

PRESENT: 

Councillor: Cr Duncan Dey 

Roads and Maritime Services: Ian Shanahan 

Police: Snr Constable Justin Lavin 

Staff: Simon Bennett, Traffic and Transport Planner 

Staff: Michael King, Manager Infrastructure Planning 

Staff: Ralph James, Manager Governance (item 6) 

Staff: Sally MacDonald (minute taker) 

Guest: Val Scanlon (item 1) 

Guest: Kathy Heathcote, Byron Bay Primary School (item 6) 

Guest: Greg Alderson, Greg Alderson & Associates (item 8) 

Guest: Michiel Kamphorst, Greg Alderson & Associates (item 8) 

Guest: Elise Huntley, Splendour In The Grass (item 8) 

Guest: Rob Doolan, Consultant Planner (item 8) 

APOLOGIES 

Member for Ballina, Don Page MP 

Member for Lismore, Thomas George MP 

Roads and Maritime Services: Liz Smith 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 

35 

There were no declarations of interest raised. 

MATTERS ARISING 

There were no matters arising from previous meetings. 

40 

45 

1. Proposed closure of road to traffic, Jones Road, Yelgun 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 

The Committee reviewed the information provided in the Agenda, which is as follows. 

Jones Road is at the north east corner of the shire. It runs east from the Tweed Valley Way 

(formerly the Pacific Highway) to the Billinudgel Nature Reserve, serving a small number of shire 

residents. 




Figure 1: Locality of Jones Road, Yelgun 

5 

By email, an officer of the NPWS wrote: 

I am seeking Byron Shire Council support for the closure of Jones Road as shown on the 

attached map. 

10 

15 

Jones Road is currently not maintained by Byron Shire Council beyond the driveway to Lot 

1 DP 394452 (location of proposed locked gate). Beyond this point the road is a boggy, 

narrow and largely unformed trail to the point where it meets Billinudgel Nature Reserve at 

a locked gate. 

Some vehicles are currently accessing this trail despite the poor condition and impacting on 

the nature reserve. The two gates within the nature reserve are regularly being broken and 

fences cut to provide access. The pressure for this damage is twofold 

20 

25 

 

 

vehicles that traverse Jones Road beyond Lot 1 DP394452 go through very boggy 

and rough conditions before they get to the locked gate at the nature reserve – 

there is therefore an incentive to go through or around the gate rather than return 

the way they have come Gating and signage are recommended to manage this. 

many vehicles are equipped with GPS which show Jones Road as a through road to 

Wooyung which it is not. NPWS will be liaising with GIS providers to update the 

roads layer to show ‘no through access’ through Billinudgel nature reserve 

30 

35 

The remote location of Jones Road at Billinudgel Nature Reserve is also encouraging illegal 

activity and in particular doof or dance parties within the reserve. 

It is understood that formal closure may be a protracted issue and it is recommended that 

gating and signage be installed as an interim measure. Neighbours at the end of Jones 

Road are supportive of both formal road closure and immediate gating and signage to 

manage this growing issue. 




I would be available to meet with Council officers to inspect and discuss this issue at your 

convenience. 

5 

The map referred to above by the NPWS officer is shown below: 

10 

The NPWS officer and a Council officer have inspected the locality. The formed road beyond this 

point is not much more than a track and can only be safely traversed by 4WD vehicles. 

Two submissions have been received by residents of Jones Road, one of whom is attending the 

LTC meeting to address the Committee on this matter. 

15 

20 

25 

As the formed road is open to public use, the proposal to ‘gate the road’, thus closing it to general 

traffic use, is referred to the Committee for formal endorsement of the draft Recommendation to 


Committee Comments 

Resident addressed the Committee which led to amendment to recommendation 3; ie keys be 

issued to the three residents at the eastern end of Jones Road for the purposes of emergency 

egress. 

Resident also requested the works (if endorsed by Council) occur prior to the Splendour music 

festival which starts Friday 26 July 2013 and was advised this was a matter for NPWS who will 

be responsible for organising and funding the works. 




Management Comments 

Nil 

5 

10 

15 

20 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 

1. That Council endorse the closure to traffic of that part of Jones Road, Yelgun, east of 

the access to Lot 1 DP394452. 

2. That the closure of Jones Road to traffic be affected by the erection of a lockable gate 

to be erected at the cost of the NPWS. 

3. That keys to the lockable gate be provided to all relevant emergency services 

including, but not necessarily limited to Council, Rural Fire Service, SES, VRA and 

Police, and appropriate residents of the eastern end of Jones Road. 

4. That in accordance with the Roads Act 1993, the proposal to close that part of Jones 

Road, Yelgun, east of the access to Lot 1 DP394452, be advertised in the local news 

paper for a period of 28 days. 

Attachments: 

25 

 

 

CONFIDENTIAL Letter from resident requesting permission to speak to LTC in regards 

to Jones Road #E2013/25001 [1 page] ................................................................................Annexure 1(a) 

CONFIDENTIAL Submission regarding Jones Road #E2013/25003 [2 pages] ................. Annexure 1(b) 

2. Approval for Loading Zone, Lawson Street, Byron Bay 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 

30 


On 20 December 2012 Council received and supported the LTC recommendation as follows: 

35 

40 

45 

50 


1. That Council change the No Stopping length on the north side of Lawson Street, Byron Bay 

immediately east of Jonson Street, to a Loading Zone. 

2. That following the installation of the Loading Zone, Council assess any impacts upon the 

existing disabled bay, with any decision regarding potential changes (if any) be first 

consulted upon with Council’s Access Advisory Committee before being reported back to 

the Local Traffic Committee. 

The Committee will recall this recommendation was based on the tabling of a late item and time 

was not available to ascertain the benefit and or feasibility of Part 1 which has been unable to 

proceed due to insufficient length. 

However, as per Part 2, this matter was referred to Council’s Access Advisory Committee who at 

their 7 February 2013 meeting supported relocating the existing disabled bay to the opposite 

(south) side of the street so space is made available for the creation of a loading zone on the north 

side. 

On 28 February 2013 Council endorsed this proposal as follows; 





That the endorsement of the Local Traffic Committee be sought for the following: 

5 

10 

a) that the existing accessible parking bay on the north side of Lawson Street, Byron Bay, 

immediately east of Jonson Street, be changed to a loading zone 

b) a new accessible parking bay be installed on the south side of Lawson Street, Byron Bay 

located immediately east of the first driveway found to the east of Jonson Street 

The location of each is depicted. 

Committee approval is recommended. 

If needed, and to assist the 

Committee further, a copy of the 

report tabled at the Access Advisory 

Committee (#E2012/14626) will be 

made available at the LTC meeting. 

15 


 

The Committee had no comments on this matter. 


20 

 

The cost of the works are expected to be minimised to signs and some line marking and 

pavement patch (ie no more than $500) as the new accessible (disabled) bay and Loading 

Zone can utilise existing kerb ramps. 

25 


That Council endorse the Local Traffic Committee approval for the following: 

30 

a) that the existing accessible parking bay on the north side of Lawson Street, Byron 

Bay, immediately east of Jonson Street, be changed to a loading zone. 

b) a new accessible parking bay be installed on the south side of Lawson Street, Byron 

Bay located immediately east of the first driveway found to the east of Jonson Street. 




3. Proposed regulatory signage, Bayshore Drive, A & I Estate, Byron Bay 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 

5 


The Committee has previously received details 

on the approved ‘Bayshore village’ development 

application for LOT: 3, DP: 1004514 Bayshore 

Drive, Byron Bay. Council are now in receipt 

plans associated with the DA. 

While these plans will be made available at the 

meeting, it is noted that Committee approval is 

sought for the following as depicted, that is on 

Bayshore Drive: 

1. immediately north of Sunrise Boulevard, the 

installation of a pedestrian refuge with Keep 

Left signage and associated works such as 

adjacent kerb ramps, line marking and 

kerbside No Stopping; and 

2. between Ewingsdale Road and Grevillea 

Street 

a. the centre line be moved westward and 

replaced with a double barrier line; 

b. installation of two southbound traffic 

lanes dedicated for left and right turn 

movement at Ewingsdale Road; 

c. No Stopping along the east side kerb. 

10 

15 

20 

25 


The Committee noted that the design plan provided shows incorrect No Stopping signage and 

needs to use RMS signs R5-400 as well as meet other requirements specified in the RMS 

technical direction TDT 2011/01a - Pedestrian Refuges 

The Committee also recommend that No Stopping occur on both west and east side kerbs 

between Ewingsdale Road and Grevillea Street due to lane width noting this will also require 

the relocation of the bus zone north of Grevillea Street which the local bus company supports 


This work is for the developer to undertake and to be monitored by Council’s Development 

Engineer involved with the DA 


That in regard to the Bayshore Village development proposal of Lot 3, DP 1004514, and 

subject to the applicable Australian Standards and RMS technical direction being met 

(namely TDT 2011/01a - Pedestrian Refuges), Council approve the following upon Bayshore 

Drive, Byron Bay, that is: 

1. immediately north of Sunrise Boulevard, the installation of a pedestrian refuge; and 

2. between Ewingsdale Road and Grevillea Street; 




5 

a) the centre line be moved westward and replaced with a double barrier line; 

b) installation of two southbound traffic lanes dedicated for left and right turn 

movement at Ewingsdale Road; 

c) No Stopping along the east side kerb and west side kerb; and 

d) relocation of the west side bus zone to north of Grevillea Street. 

10 

4. Westpac Life Saver Rescue Helicopter Ballina to Byron Bay Charity Walk 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 


15 

The event is proposed for Sunday 19 May 2013 and expected to occur within Byron shire between 

11.30am and 3pm as participants follow the same route as last year as depicted; namely on the 

beach with exception of on road along Seven Mile Beach Road and two road crossing locations on 

Lighthouse Road, Byron Bay at Lee Lane and Tallow Beach Road, both of which will be catered for 

under traffic control provided. 

Above: from Tallow’s Beach to Clarkes Beach via 

walking track (red line) and on-road (yellow line) 

Right: from south of Broken Head to Tallows Beach via 

the near 4.7km long and unsealed Seven Mile Beach 

Road and part of Broken Head Reserve Road 

(as per yellow line) 

20 

25 

30 

The event will attract up to 200 participants and as raised last year concern remains for this 

number along Seven Mile Beach Road; a concern which is reflected in the Committee and 

Management comments as reported to Council in February 2012 in lead up to the inaugural event: 


The Committee considered the potential of closing the road for the duration of the event, 

however given low traffic volumes and the time of the event it is believed such measures are 

unnecessary on the proviso the following measures are undertaken by the organisers: 

o signage, which specifies the date, hours and nature of the event, to be positioned at the 

entrance and exit of Seven Mile Beach Road, as well as at 500m intervals along the road 




o 

(facing both directions of travel) and installed a few days prior to the event. Suggested 

wording for the signs include “Special Event - Charity Walk Ahead” 

a safety induction for walkers advising of hazards on Seven Mile Beach Road. 

5 

10 


Staff will liaise directly with the proponent to ensure signage as suggested by the Committee is 

installed and the induction undertaken. 

It is believed these comments and requirements remain valid and therefore worked into the 

recommendation below. 


Amend recommendation 2 a) to specify that signage be positioned one week prior to the event. 

15 


Nil 


20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

1. That Council endorse the Westpac Life Saver Rescue Helicopter organised Ballina to 

Byron Bay Charity Walk as to be held Sunday 19 May 2013, subject to the: 

a) use of an accredited designed and implemented Traffic Control Plan; 

b) meeting of the advertising requirements of the Roads Act 1993; 

c) event being notified on Council's website; 

d) consideration of any submissions received; 

e) proponent’s timely lodgement of current and appropriate levels of insurance and 

liability cover; and 

f) attainment (by the event proponent) of NPWS written acceptance of the event. 

2. That the endorsement in Part 1 is also subject to the following in regard to the use of 

Seven Mile Beach Road, that is: 

a) signage, which specifies the date, hours and nature of the event, be positioned 

at the entrance and exit of Seven Mile Beach Road one week prior to the event; 

b) on the day of the event, at 500m intervals, and facing both directions of travel, 

signs advising of “Special Event - Charity Walk Ahead” (or similar) are installed 

prior and removed after the event occurs; and 

c) a safety induction for participants advising of hazards be provided. 

5. Traffic Management, Mullum to Bruns Paddle, Sunday 26 May 2013 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 

45 


As with previous years, this event requires traffic control and management on the local residential 

streets of Mullumbimby as depicted. 

50 

The organisers have advised that the traffic management proposed is the same as last year, 

meaning the measures pictured below will be in effect from 7.30am – 10.30am on Sunday 26 May 

2013. It is noted last year’s event was the second time for such measures to be implemented with 

no known problems reported by organisers or adjacent residents. 




It is also noted Council is providing s356 community grant funding toward costs associated with the 

event and the TCP used has been designed by Council staff. 

5 

10 




Nil 


15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

That Council approve the temporary traffic control measures in Mullumbimby for the 

Mullum to Bruns Paddle to be held on Sunday 26 May 2013, subject to the proponent’s: 

a) use of an accredited designed and implemented Traffic Control Plan; 

b) meeting of the advertising requirements of the Roads Act 1993; 

c) letter box drop of residents advising of the event and the proposed traffic 

management; 

d) event being notified on Council's website; 

e) consideration of any submissions received; and 

f) timely lodgement of current and appropriate levels of insurance and liability cover. 

6. Proposed No Parking 1am to 6am, Carlyle Street, Byron Bay 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 


President of the Byron Bay Primary School's P&C Association has written to advise the following: 

We have had a number of parents express concern about the extent to which people are 

camping in travel vans overnight in Carlyle St. This street borders the School and is one of the 

main streets where parents drop children off and collect them from the School. 

Parents are disturbed about the frequent sightings of travellers cooking breakfast in the Street 

(some in their underwear) and the impact this has on the children. The other concern is that 




these people may wander onto School Property, using the water taps that are on the Carlyle St 

side of the School. Our Principal, Geoff Spargo has expressed concern to the P&C about the 

increasing numbers of people trespassing onto the School property. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

Council Rangers have advised they “patrol this area most days and do not find campers very 

often”, thus suggesting signage that enforces No Parking, rather than No camping, be considered. 

Accordingly it is proposed No Parking 1am to 6am, as done elsewhere in residential streets, be 

installed on the school (south) side of Carlyle Street, while consultation occurs on the north side 

prior to installing given the residential properties affected. 

The subject site and proposal is depicted. 


The discussion led to agreement that this matter (at this time at least) is not a parking matter 

and better managed via No Camping signage 

The Committee met with Council’s Manager Governance, Ralph James, and a representative 

from Byron Bay Primary School, Kathy Heathcote 

Rather than No Parking signs, actions would be to install No Camping signage and task 

rangers to have an enforcement blitz after 6am 

To assist, signs need to be installed near Tennyson Street and the school 

Enforcement procedures will include waking campers, moving them on, issuing each occupant 

with a $110 fine, plus advise the registered owner that fines have been issued to occupants 

More generally it was agreed Byron Bay needs more prominent No Camping signage at each 

entry, as well as repeater signs throughout streets 

To assist, RMS offered to provide advice to Council separate to LTC business 

Manager Governance advised that under delegation No Camping signage can be installed by 

staff as required and said that his team would aim for signs to be installed near the school prior 

to second term commencing 


Nil 





5 

1. That Council note the Committee does not recommend installation of No Parking 

along Carlyle Street, Byron Bay at this time for the purpose of addressing in-vehicle 

street camping. 

2. Council notes that Council’s compliance officers will erect No Camping signage in 

Carlyle Street, Byron Bay. 

10 

15 

7. Request for accessible car parking bay, 123 Dalley Street, Mullumbimby 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 


Meadows Medical Centre at 123 Dalley 

Street, Mullumbimby request an onstreet 

accessible (disabled) parking bay 

at their frontage as closest as possible to 

the building access ramp. 

The subject site and area for the parking 

bay is depicted. The location is chosen 

on using the existing kerb ramp. 

The location is outside the centre of town 

and demand for car parking at this 

location is considered low and the 

provision of the disabled bay believed as 

minimal to no impact. 



20 

25 


The cost of the works are expected to be minimised to signs and some line marking and 

pavement patch (ie no more than $500) as the new accessible (disabled) bay and Loading 

Zone can utilise existing kerb ramps. 


That an accessible (disabled) car parking bay be signed and marked at the frontage of 

123 Dalley Street, Mullumbimby immediately south of the property driveway. 

30 

35 

8. Temporary Traffic and Parking Controls, Splendour music festival, Yelgun 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 





The Splendour music festival has been 

given NSW Department of Planning 

approval to proceed at the new Yelgun 

site, north of the residential area of 

Ocean Shores. The festival site and the 

main temporary regulatory changes to 

the local road network are depicted. 

The festival will be held Friday 26 to 

Sunday 28 July 2013 and will attract 

thousands of day visitors per day and 

campers for the 3 nights, with peaks 

expected on arrival Friday and departure 

Monday. 

How to handle this increased load and 

the traffic changes required are detailed 

in a series of traffic control plans which 

will be presented at the Committee by 

the consultant that has developed them. 

It is noted the main changes requiring Committee approval is the temporary use of No Parking and 

No Stopping along Brunswick Valley Way. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

Discussion with attendees 

Greg Alderson highlighted the following about the proposed Traffic Control Plan 

The TCP proposes to move the merge point into Tweed Valley Way so that the available queue 

length from the Pacific Highway off-ramp increases from 70m to 130m with traffic control at the 

merge point managing the release and direction of festival traffic in regard to the queue length 

and local (non-festival) through traffic 

There will be key monitoring points where traffic numbers will be assessed to determine at 

what point traffic may need to be diverted, eg via Brunswick Heads 

In 2012, at the former festival camping site at north end of Bayshore Drive, Byron Bay queues 

occurred on site as most campers depart the day after the festival 

In contrast, this year campers exiting the site will (before departing the site) be divided into 

north bound and south bound 

Approval of the TCP is also required from the Police, the RMS including their TMC and 

Regulatory Working Group and the Director General NSW Planning who requires approved 

documents no less than sixty (60) days prior to the event. 

Splendour In The Grass representative agreed the contractor undertaking the traffic 

management will be advised of the RMS event policy and make sure everything is ticked off, 

which will be assisted by the development of the proposed “communications protocol” 

It was highlighted that the traffic control measures extend either side of the three day festival 


Council staff tabled a local resident request that Ocean Shores, New Brighton, South Golden 

Beach and Yelgun be included in a special events parking policy, which if implemented could 

provide temporary parking restrictions with exemptions for residents and their guests as done 

within the Sunrise residential area when Splendour was previously held at Belongil Fields, 

Byron Bay 

While Splendour representatives confirmed that Yelgun areas will be declared No Parking and 

they will have traffic controllers and security at key points it was agreed temporary No Parking 

in the most immediate local roads would assist if included in the LTC recommendation to 

Council 




 

 

RMS advised that their biggest concern is to keep south bound traffic on the Pacific Highway 

flowing, and more generally have no impact on the highway 

In addition and separate to LTC endorsement of both Police and RMS approval will be required 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 


This is the first year this long running event will be held at their new site. As such monitoring of 

the event and a post-event debrief is required to assist with future events at this site and 

minimising impacts on local residents and traffic alike 


That the temporary traffic management and regulatory changes within the series of Traffic 

Control Plans related to the Splendour in the Grass Music Festival between Friday 26 to 

Sunday 28 July 2013 be endorsed subject to: 

a) their design and implementation being undertaken as specified, ie between 24 and 30 

July 2013 inclusive and by those with appropriate RMS accreditation and the holding 

of current and appropriate levels of insurance and liability cover 

b) meeting of the advertising requirements of the Roads Act 1993 

c) event being notified on Council's website 

d) consideration of any submissions received 

e) a communications protocol being developed in conjunction with RMS, Police and any 

other identified stakeholder and explained to those involved in the implementation of 

traffic management 

f) the holding of an event debrief within the month following the festival which includes 

but not limited to Council, RMS and Police 

g) written approval of both the RMS and Police separate to LTC; and 

h) No Parking be signed and implemented on Jones Road, Yelgun Road and Billinudgel 

Road. 

9. Proposal for HML vehicles, waste transportation, Myocum Landfill 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 

35 


In accordance with the relevant guidelines, LTC advice on this matter is sought to inform a 

separate report to Council. 

40 

45 

50 

Council’s waste services have provided the following detail in regard to the proposal to operate 

Higher Mass Limit (HML) vehicles. 

Background 

Council is currently negotiating a contract with Veolia Environmental Services to transport and 

dispose of waste from the Myocum Landfill and Transfer Station. This will involve the use of 

trucks with a higher mass limit, details attached (see Table 1), to enable Council to avail of 

better rates for the transport and disposal of waste. 

Proposed route 

The proposed route from the Myocum facility is travelling a westerly direction along The Manse 

Road, then turning left onto Myocum Road and travelling in a south-easterly direction, until 

reaching Tyagarah Road, then turning left into Tyagarah Road until reaching the Pacific 

Highway. 




5 

Number of Loads per day 

Based upon the information captured by Council's weighbridge system at the Myocum Landfill, 

it is estimated that between 2 and 4 loads in the higher mass limit trucks will come from the 

Myocum Facility each week day, and 1 to 2 loads each weekend. Actual numbers of loads will 

be dictated by incoming waste loads and cannot be determined definitively. 

Waste and Recycling Services would like to commence the process to obtaining approval for 

these higher mass limit trucks to utilise the route as outlined above as soon as possible. 

10 

The proposed route is approximately 7km in length and depicted, as is the proposed vehicle; ie a 

quad axle vehicle, details of which are in Table 1 below. 

15 

20 

25 

30 

The relevant RMS criteria for assessment are established within their NSW Route Assessment 

Guide for Restricted Access Vehicles (RAV) available online at: 

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/heavyvehicles/downloads/route_assessment_guide_dl1.html 

Section 2.5 of the guidelines advises that the first stage is to: 

…assess the route for the relevant vehicle combination at GML (see Table 1). As HML involves 

only additional mass and no change in vehicle dimensions, the next stage is to assess the 

mass and axle spacing for the vehicle configuration on infrastructure. 

This is done by a route inspection and assessment that reviews any safety and risk concerns plus 

physical obstructions, such as bridges, overhead structures, etc. This assessment does not 

require driving the proposed vehicle (ie a “field trial”) and can be undertaken by Council officers. 

While this has occurred, it has been requested that the RMS assist with a further route 

assessment, the outcome of which will be reported to the Committee, noting that Appendix D.5 of 

the guidelines advise the role of LTC as follows: 

35 

 

 

 

LTC is to manage involvement and advice on an application as a separate matter 

As the advice is outside formal business, the informal advice is to be a separate report from the 

LTC to council to help council’s assessment of the route. A report can summarise discussion 

and indicate the various positions of the LTC members. 

A report is not binding on council 




As such the requested RMS review of the route, along with the input of the Committee, is sought to 

inform the separate report to Council. 

5 

Table 1: Summary - mass limits for single axles and axle groups 

(as copied from RMS Higher Mass Limits Fact Sheet) 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 


Committee were advised that RMS and Council staff inspected the route prior to the meeting 

and detected no physical obstruction or asset of concern other than the general poor condition 

of the existing road pavement in some sections 

Moreover RMS advised this is not required to be a Committee matter nor is committee 

recommendation required, however as per the guidelines stated Committee advice can be 

sought which is as follows 

There are no traffic issues associated with the proposal which is akin to operating semi-trailers 

on the local road which can occur without additional approvals 

However the higher mass raises matters in terms of asset protection (eg road pavement) and is 

therefore solely a matter for Council to consider 

In this regard Council may wish to consider collecting a contribution for asset maintenance as 

done with quarry operations 

However it is also noted in comparison to semi-trailers the new HML vehicles offer less trucks 

per day, improve load distribution across axle groupings and are able to reduce the turning 

(screwing) impact of wheels upon pavement 


It is recommended that as with quarry operations a tonnage rate apply 

Safety concerns also need to be addressed including but not limited to intersection sightlines at 

Pinegrove Road and the landfill entry/exit on The Manse Road, noting that the landfill exit is on 

a steep incline and obstructed by the crest on the western approach, meaning a slow moving, 

longer vehicle such as the HML proposed will potentially be across the path of oncoming traffic 

As such it also recommended Council seek an RMS speed review of the proposed route 

including a ball bank assessment to assist with improving advisory curve and speed signage 

and delineation works such as line marking, curve alignment markers (CAMs), etc 





5 

That Council note that the Local Traffic Committee has no objections to the proposal to use 

HML vehicles for the purposes of waste transfer from Council’s landfill facility at Myocum 

via The Manse Road, Myocum Road and Tyagarah Road. 

MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATION 

10 

15 

20 

1. That Council note that the Local Traffic Committee has no objections to the proposal 

to use HML vehicles for the purposes of waste transfer from Council’s landfill facility 

at Myocum via The Manse Road, Myocum Road and Tyagarah Road. 

2. That a unit rate of $0.10 per tonne per km apply to all tonnage carried by vehicles 

transferring waste from Myocum landfill via The Manse Road, Myocum Road and 

Tyagarah Road with funds being reserved for the maintenance of these roads. 

3. That improvements to the Myocum Landfill and The Manse Road intersection, 

including sightlines, be investigated with options, costs and funding sources be 

reported back to Council. 

4. That Council request an RMS speed zone review and ball bank assessment of the 

proposed route via The Manse Road, Myocum Road and Tyagarah Road. 

25 

Attachments: 

 

Waste and Recycling HML Report to Council #E2013/22261 [1 page] ................................Annexure 1(c) 

30 

10. Loading Zone, Byron Street, Bangalow 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 


35 

On the 1 March 2012 Council resolved as follows. 


40 

1. That a 15-minute time limit be introduced within the existing Loading Zone as located on the 

south side of Byron Street, Bangalow and immediately west of Station Street. 

2. That the request this same Loading Zone be relocated from Byron Street to Station Street, 

Bangalow be, like any others received, referred to the Bangalow car parking review. 

45 

However more recently Council has resolved to progress Byron Bay car parking, thus further 

deferring any review of Bangalow. As such this item is now brought to the Committee as a local 

trader seeks the relocation of the loading zone to the nearby Station Street, noting this location has 

received support by a delivery operator who made contact independently to the trader. 




But given this matter is greater than just the one 

trader and one delivery operator the removal of the 

Loading Zone would require broader consultation, 

especially given the current location went through 

considerable community and traffic committee 

consultation previously. 

However as the main complaint is the illegal use of 

the Loading Zone by the general public there are 

two alternate options as follows. 

First is greater enforcement, but given this option has been previously suggested more is believed 

required. 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

Thus the second option (as depicted) is offered; ie the extension or duplication of the existing 

concrete median located on the approach side to the Loading Zone. Through on-site observation 

this median is straddled by delivery vehicles to reach the Loading Zone, therefore its duplication or 

extension, which is too high for the typical passenger vehicle, is table for committee advice. 


The Committee does not support relocating the loading zone. 

Instead the Committee recommends installing a kerb blister and No Stopping as per the 

relevant RMS technical directions to assist demarcate the Loading Zone from the pedestrian 

crossing and intersection 

Liaise with the Billycart Derby organisers to advise of changes to kerb configurations 

The issue of vehicles parking in the Loading Zone is an enforcement issue 

It is noted the subject site is also included in proposal at Item #11 below 


Staff advise the RMS technical directions of relevance are 2011/01a - Pedestrian Refuges and 

2001/04a - Use of Traffic Calming Devices as Pedestrian Crossings as available from RMS 

website http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/trafficinformation/downloads/tmdirections_dl1.html 

The work recommended (if endorsed by Council) will be considered in the broader context of 

the project outlined in this report at Item #11 below 


1. That the existing Loading Zone on the south side of Byron Street, Bangalow, 

immediately west of Station Street remain at this time. 

2. That a kerb blister be designed and installed in accordance with appropriate RMS 

guidelines and technical directions. 

35 

11. Proposed 40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area, Brunswick Heads and Bangalow 

File No: F161\02 #E2013/21610 


40 

RMS have provided Council with funding for 2012/13 to develop concepts, undertake any 

necessary survey and design and, after undertaking broader consultation, provide them with these 

details and cost estimates to deliver 40km per hour High Pedestrian Activity Areas in Brunswick 

Heads and Bangalow during 2013/14. 




Part of the process is seeking traffic committee input prior to consultation. The two areas are 

depicted and further detailed on the attached. Typically 40k pedestrian areas are implemented by 

signage and pavement markings, such as coloured pavement to distinguish the area. 

5 

10 

15 

For Bangalow the highest pedestrian activity is within Byron Street, between the roundabout at 

intersection with Lismore and Granuaille Rd and Station Street. Therefore the proposal is these 

two locations be signed and marked as entering/departing 40/50 zone according to relevant RMS 

guidelines. 

The potential variation is that the four legs of the Byron-Station Street intersection be incorporated 

into the scheme including the potential use of a raised intersection, noting the volumes are 

significant (near 5,000 AADT, 4% as heavy vehicles, 2007) given this is the main street and link 

between the main road (Lismore Rd) and the Pacific Highway. 

The extent of the area within Brunswick Heads however is potentially more complex given the 

existence of a school zone on Fingal Street and the town centre is based on the block bounded by 

Fingal St, Park St, Mullumbimbi Street and The Terrace. Therefore several options have been 

developed with Option1 recommended which would incorporate the main pedestrian areas of 

20 

 

 

 

Mullumbimbi Street, between Park Street and The Terrace; 

The Terrace, between Mullumbimbi Street and Fingal Street; 

Fingal Street, between Park Street and The Terrace. 

25 

Option 1 would limit the physical works of kerb extensions, pedestrian refuges, line marking, 40/50 

patches and signage to 4 sites, while option 2 would require 5 sites and introduce potential 

confusion due to it incorporating the variable 40k school zone. The same confusion would exist 

with option 3 which would require work at 8 sites and, due to its size, extend the 40k zone beyond 

the main pedestrian area. 

Above: Byron Street, Bangalow, between 

roundabout at intersection with Lismore and 

Granuaille Rd and Station Street. 

30 

35 

Left: three potential option for Brunswick Heads, 

with Option 1 recommended for consultation and 

further progress 


The Committee noted that any treatment of the road pavement at the intersection of Byron 

Street and Station Street, Bangalow, needs to be at grade in consideration of the annual 

Billycart Derby and heavy vehicle movement 

Following the RMS explanation of how a temporary (ie time limited) 40k school zone and 

permanent 40k zone can co-exist the Committee endorse Option 3 for the High Pedestrian 

Activity Area in Brunswick Heads 




 

The comments and recommendation of the Committee however are provided for advice only 

and not required to be endorsed by Council nor do they constitute approval to implement a 

40kph speed zone 

5 

10 

15 


The Committee endorsement of Option 3 results in a larger scale high pedestrian area and 

therefore requires more signs, line marking, pavement patches and physical works (and 

thereby cost) than the staff recommendation of Option 1 

However as RMS have provided funds to develop the submission (including necessary site 

survey and designs), and will potentially fund the works that Council provide in any submission 

made, the Committee recommendation of Option 3 is supported at this time 

As such the concepts now attached are an update to those provided to the Committee and will 

be the basis of consultation subject to Council endorsement 


That Council note the Local Traffic Committee advice in regard the proposal for a 40 km per 

hour High Pedestrian Activity Area including that: 

20 

25 

1. on Byron Street, Bangalow, the scheme apply the east side of the Lismore and 

Granuaille Road roundabout to the Byron Street and Station Street intersection, noting 

that all treatments be developed at grade 

2. within Brunswick Heads, Option 3 be supported which would encompass the town 

centre as bounded by Fingal Street, The Terrace, Mullumbimbi Street and Park Street. 

MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATION 

30 

35 

1. That on the basis of Council acceptance of the Local Traffic Committee advice, staff 

continue to develop concepts and design for the purpose of undertaking broader 

community consultation which, along with cost estimates, be reported back to Council 

in due course. 

2. That as need be Council staff 

a) report this matter back to RMS and the Local Traffic Committee; 

b) lodge a funding submission with the RMS. 

Attachments: 

40 

 

Updated Details of Concepts and Design #E2013/22693 [3 pages] ................................... Annexure 1(d) 

12. Late Item – changes to bus zone, Ocean Shores Public School, Shara Boulevard 

45 

The Committee reviewed the information provided as follows. 

The Principal has advised of problems associated with the school bus zone and also seeks the 

establishment of a children’s crossing. Both issues are depicted and were inspected on-site. 

50 

55 

Parents often use the long (50m) bus zone to drop off and pick up children. By doing so bus 

movement and access to/from the bus zone is impeded and can create traffic queues. 

While this is a matter of enforcement and increases risk to safety, the Principal has also advised 

that the length of the bus zone is more than required and suggests it be reduced to accommodate 

two buses (the maximum at any one time and verified by bus drivers at the on-site inspection) and 




that any remaining space be marked as No Parking to provide a legitimate area for the parental 

drop off and pick up (eg a kiss and ride area) adjacent to the school gate. 

5 

Australian Road Rule 195 requires that a bus zone length should be no less than 30m, with the 

State Transit Bus Infrastructure Guide (from NSW Transport) stating this length is comprised of the 

bus length (12.5m) plus the minimum draw-out and draw-in lengths which are 6m and 11.5m 

respectively. The same guidelines also state that while No Stopping can be used for the purpose 

of draw out (exit) and draw in (entry) to a bus zone No Parking can not. 

Therefore in efforts to minimise the 

cost of works yet maximise the length 

for the ‘kiss and ride’ area within the 

existing site it is recommended (as 

depicted) the bus zone be reduced to 

a 40m length (ie catering for two 

12.5m buses and a draw-in of 11.5m) 

and a No Stopping length (10m) be 

provided via shifting the existing bus 

zone north with the remaining length 

available (approx 20m) south of the 

bus zone be signed as No Parking 

with the supplementary Kiss and Ride 

signage thus catering for up to three 

cars at any one time. 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

The other issue raised is also 

depicted, ie establishment of a 

children crossing across a two staged 

crossing. 

The Principal advises he is confident of finding volunteers that would be willing and able to gain the 

necessary accreditation to implement the children crossing daily. However the warrant of such a 

facility needs to be first addressed and therefore Committee advice is sought including the relevant 

criteria to be considered. 


1. That Council endorse the adjustment to the school bus zone at the frontage of Ocean 

Shores Public School as located on the west side of Shara Boulevard, Ocean Shores 

as follows, namely that commencing from the: 

a) intersection with the drive-way on the north side of the school, No Stopping be 

signed and apply for a 10m length south; 

b) south end of the new No Stopping and continuing for a length 40m south, the 

school Bus Zone apply; and 

c) south end of the relocated school Bus Zone and continuing south to the existing 

kerb extension (ie an approximate length of 40m) No Parking along with 

supplementary Kiss and Ride signage be installed and apply. 

2. That in regard to the Children’s Crossing, Council undertake the necessary 

investigations to support (or not) its provision and report the matter back to the Local 

Traffic Committee if found to be warranted. 


35 



 





ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING - COMMITTEE REPORT 

5 

10 

15 

Report No. 13.2. Report of the Planning Review Committee Meeting held on 

17 April 2013 



File No: 

#E2013/23622 

PRESENT: Councillors: Crs Hunter, Dey and Wanchap 

Staff: Wayne Bertram, Manager Development Assessment and Certification 

The meeting commenced at 9.45am and concluded at 10.00am. 

Council determined the following original development applications. The Section 96 application to 

modify these development consents are referred to the Planning Review Committee to decide if 

the modification applications can be determined under delegated authority. 

DA No. Applicant Property 

Address 

10.2012.360.2 Mr A Scionti 126 Goremans 

Road Eureka 

Proposal Reason/s Outcome 

S96 to amend 

Right of 

Carriageway 

(Subdivision to 

create two lots) 

Delegated 

Authority 

 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 0.5 of an hour. 

20 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: 

That the report be noted. 




SOCIETY AND CULTURE - COMMITTEE REPORTS 

5 

Report No. 13.3. Report of the Tourism Advisory Committee Meeting held on 

4 April 2013 


Report Author: Sarah Workman/Joanne McMurtry, Tourism Officer 

File No: 

#E2013/23966 

Theme: 

Summary: 

Economy, Economic Development 

This report provides the minutes of the Tourism Advisory Committee 

meeting held on 4 April 2013 and recommendations for Council to 

consider. 

10 


1. That in relation to Report 6.1 Communication Plans for the implementation of the 

Byron Shire identity, Council adopt: 

15 

Committee Recommendation TAC 6.1.1 

1. That the Byron Shire Identity Communication Plan for Visitors (#E2013/10940) be 

adopted with the following amendment: 

20 

25 

a) In Annexure 1(a), on page 14 of 15 and page 6 of 15, Objective 1 – change 

the wording to ensure ‘Byron’ is the parent brand for Byron Shire and 

acknowledge that ‘Don’t Spoil Us, We’ll Spoil You’ is the tag line. 

2. That the Byron Shire Identity Communication Plan for Residents be adopted 

(#E2013/10943). 

3. That the Tourism Advisory Committee prepares a list of organisations and 

groups for the Byron Shire identity community engagement schedule. 

30 

2. That in relation to Report 6.2 Tourism Levy and Governance Framework, Council 

adopt: 


35 

40 

1. That the Special Rate/Variation (Tourism Levy) funding option be deferred until 

the 2014/15 financial year due to Council’s adjusting focus and exploration of 

other possible revenue sources during 2013. 

2. That the other tourism funding options and the Governance Framework be 

progressed. 

Attachments: 

45 

Minutes of the Tourism Advisory Committee Meeting held on 4 April 2013 

#E2013/17883 [4 pages] ........................................................................................................... Annexure 15 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

This report provides the minutes of the Tourism Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting held on 4 April 

2013 and recommendations for Council to consider. The report of the meeting is attached at 

Annexure 15. The agenda was provided to Councillors both electronically, and in hard copy on 

28 March 2013. The agenda is also available on Council’s website. 

At the meeting on 4 April 2013, the TAC considered the communication plans for the Council 

adopted identity for Byron Shire. These communication plans outline how the identity will be 

implemented as per Resolution No. 12-120 below. 

That in relation to Report No. 5.4 – Public Exhibition Summary – Proposed Identity 

for Byron Shire, that Council supports the proposed identity (Ordinary Agenda 13 

October 2011, Annexure 18(b) #1136785), particularly the images and text that 

comprise the identity, and refer the project back to the TAC for recommendations for 

its implementation and possible application, to achieve the desired outcomes of the 

Tourism Management Plan. These plans detail how the identity will be implemented. 

The TAC also considered the tourism levy and funding options for 2013/14 and provided feedback 

on a transport vision for the Shire as requested by the Transport Advisory Committee. 

Some of the Committee’s recommendations were procedural and do not require adoption by 

Council, with the exception of the Committee recommendations below. 

25 


1. That the Byron Shire Identity Communication Plan for Visitors (#E2013/10940) be adopted 

with the following amendment: 

30 

35 

a) In Annexure 1(a), on page 14 of 15 and page 6 of 15, Objective 1 – change the 

wording to ensure ‘Byron’ is the parent brand for Byron Shire and acknowledge that 

‘Don’t Spoil Us, We’ll Spoil You’ is the tag line. 

2. That the Byron Shire Identity Communication Plan for Residents be adopted 

(#E2013/10943). 

3. That the Tourism Advisory Committee prepares a list of organisations and groups for the 

Byron Shire identity community engagement schedule. 

40 

45 

50 


These recommendations are fully supported by management. Once Council adopt this 

recommendation, management will commence the implementation phase. 


1. That the Special Rate/Variation (Tourism Levy) funding option be deferred until the 2014/15 

financial year due to Council’s adjusting focus and exploration of other possible revenue 

sources during 2013. 

2. That the other tourism funding options and the Governance Framework be progressed. 


These recommendations are supported by management. 





That the Transport Advisory Committee considers the following: 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

Byron Bay transport vision 

a) Park and Ride 

b) Shire-wide, hop-on, hop-off visitor bus circuit (‘Green Frog’) to be run on biofuel diesel 

c) Priority bus transit lane into Byron Bay 

d) Paid parking to raise funds for infrastructure improvements 

e) Increased outdoor dining with a reasonable fee 

f) Pedestrian mall in Jonson Street 

g) Inter-town bikeway connections with options to encourage use such as: 

coin operated bike stations 

use of the existing railway trail 

advocate for optional helmet wearing 

h) Electric cars (try before you buy) 

i) Electric buggies and bikes 

j) Visitor Centre to be located in a tourism precinct at the centre of town 

k) Lockers at the Visitor Centre and beachfront 

l) Transit visitor centre at the Byron Regional Sport and Cultural Complex (BRSCC) 

m) Special parking spots for hybrid or electric cars and allow use of bus transit lane 

n) Integrated destination signage 

o) Integrated Shire-wide transport plan 

p) Discuss with the RTA adding Brunswick Heads to the Yelgun exit highway sign 

q) Encourage better utilisation of existing bus services, eg provide transport to SCU, TAFE 

r) Safe cars 

Northern Rivers Transport Guide 

The Tourism Advisory Committee supports the proposal from Northern Rivers Social Development 

Council for the Northern Rivers Transport Guide. 


These recommendations will be reported back to the Transport Advisory Committee and do not 

require adoption by Council. 


40 

45 

All projects mentioned in this report are either budgeted for in the remainder of the 2012/13 

financial year, or are recommended in the draft budget for 2013/14 which will be considered by 

Council at a later date. 


prepared for 9 May, 13 and 27 June 2013 Ordinary Meetings: 

 

The estimated staff hours for the preparation of this report was approximately 1.5 hours. 

50 


Byron Shire Council Tourism Management Plan 2008 - 2018 




5 

Report No. 13.4. Report of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) 

Advisory Committee Meeting held on 10 April 2013 


Report Author: Belle Arnold, Aboriginal Project Officer 

File No: 

#E2013/23870 

Theme: 

Community Services, Society and Culture 

Summary: 

On 10 April 2013 the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory 

(MoU) Committee met to discuss the development of the MoU between the 

Bundjalung of Byron Bay, Arakwal People and Byron Shire Council, the 

residual transfer of land in the Sandhills Estate, Motor Vehicle Beach 

Access and other matters. 


10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

1. That Council note the minutes from the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding 

Advisory Committee Meeting held on 10 April 2013. 

2. That in relation to Report No. 4.1 Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding, Council 

adopt: 

Committee Recommendation AMoU 4.1.1 

1. That the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee 

recommend to Council the adoption of the revised Memorandum of Understanding 

(#E2013/25031). 


recommend to Council that the Memorandum of Understanding be formally signed 

off by Council during NAIDOC Week 2013. 

3. That the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee nominates 

the priority projects to be delivered from the Memorandum of Understanding and 

commences work on the Implementation Plan for these projects for the next 

twelve month period. These priority projects include: 

3.1 That Council hold a workshop with Arakwal and other relevant stakeholders 

to develop a working definition of Caring for Country applicable to all areas 

of Council. 

3.2 Participation in Governance - 2.2.2 Consultation processes for development 

applications and other matters in regards to land management of public 

lands. Development of clear processes in regard to Arakwal engagement in 

development applications and other planning mechanisms on Arakwal lands 

in the Byron Shire. 

3.3 Cultural and Economic Development – 3.2.1 Indigenous Employment 

Strategies. Council to develop and implement an Indigenous Employment 

Strategy. 

3.4 Caring for Country – 4.2.4 Cultural Awareness Training. Cultural Awareness 

Training. Cultural Awareness induction for all staff and Councillors through 




Arakwal website and specifically tailored training packages for relevant staff 

to include Native Title and other relevant land management issues. 

5 

10 

3.5 Native Title. That Council consider the ongoing responsibilities and 

potential impacts of Native Title processes including, confirming Council as 

a party to the determination application and Council’s role as a party to the 

Native Title Determination Application NSD6020/01 Byron Bay Bundjalung 

People 3 (NC01/8). 

3. That in relation to Report No. 4.2 Bundjalung of Byron Bay ILUA 2 – Sandhills 

Transfer, Council adopt: 


15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

1. That the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee notes the 

history of the Sandhills land transfer under the Bundjalung of Byron Bay 

Indigenous Land Use Agreement 2. 


recommends that Council develop a Plan of Intended Use for the 1.65 hectares 

land identified for transfer from the Sandhills estate for civic and community 

purposes. 

3. That the draft Byron Shire Local Environment Plan 2012 be adapted to reflect the 

proposed uses for this parcel of land for civic and community uses. 

4. That Council be aware that the Bundjalung of Byron Bay Arakwal people’s 

position on this matter has not changed. Arakwal continue to support the transfer 

of this land to Council and have raised this matter within the legal processes of 

the finalisation of Indigenous Land Use Agreement 2. Arakwal have sighted this 

matter as an outstanding issue yet to be resolved. 

4. That in relation to Report No. 4.3 Bundjalung of Byron Bay Beach Access, Council 

adopt: 


1. That Council note the consultation of Arakwal in the development of the Draft 

Vehicle Access Policy. 

2. That Arakwal members apply for a letter from the Arakwal board for access 

permission for a specific reason. This letter is to be printed on Arakwal letterhead 

and displayed when accessing the beach with a motor vehicle. Letters will also 

specify timeframes and conditions of access. 

3. That Council note the development of an identification card by the Arakwal Board 

for Arakwal family members. In time, this card will identify which Arakwal 

members have access and the conditions of the access. 

5. That the Section 355 Committee for the Byron Bay Library Community and Exhibition 

Space be advised of the following: 

Management Recommendation AMoU 

55 

That the Bundjalung of Byron Bay Aboriginal Corporation (Arakwal) have advised: 




5 

 

 

 

 

 

Their understanding of the space was that it was to be open for community use. 

Uses included exhibitions, meetings, conferences and other activities. 

They have not been consulted on any changes to the uses of the space. 

The proposed name ‘Lone Goat Gallery’ is not culturally appropriate as goats 

caused much environmental degradation to many special places to Arakwal 

people. 

The name ‘Sheoaks’ room was suggested as an alternative as it reflects the 

environmental integrity and identity of the area. 

10 

Attachments: 

Minutes of the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Committee Meeting held 

on 10 April 2013 #E2013/23467 [3 pages]................................................................................ Annexure 17 




Report 

5 

10 

15 

20 

On 10 April 2013 the Arakwal Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Advisory Committee met to 

discuss the development of the MoU between the Bundjalung of Byron Bay, Arakwal People and 

Byron Shire Council, the residual transfer of land in the Sandhills Estate, Motor Vehicle Beach 

Access and other matters. 

Representatives of the Bundjalung of Byron Bay Arakwal people raised a discussion about the 

ongoing negotiations of the Native Title Determination Application NSD6020/01 Byron Bay 

Bundjalung People 3 (NC01/8). Arakwal representatives were concerned that Byron Shire Council 

was not currently a party to the Native Title determination application. In the interests of 

transparency and the goodwill of the partnership, Arakwal urged Council to follow up with the 

Native Title Tribunal regarding becoming a party to the Native Title Claim. 

Matters Arising from Other Business 

Proposed naming of Byron Bay Library Exhibition Space to Lone Goat Gallery 

The Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee were asked to consider the proposed renaming of the 

Byron Bay Library Exhibition Space to Lone Goat Gallery. The Arakwal representatives present 

provided the following feedback to the proposed naming: 

25 

 

 

 

 

 

Their understanding of the space was that it was to be open for community use. 

Uses included exhibitions, meetings, conferences and other activities. 

They have not been consulted on any changes to the use of the space. 

The proposed name ‘Lone Goat Gallery’ is not culturally appropriate as goats caused much 

environmental degradation to many special places to Arakwal people. 

The name ‘Sheoaks’ room was suggested as an alternative as it reflects the environmental 

integrity and identity of the area. 

30 

35 

40 

NAIDOC Week 2013 

The Arakwal MoU Advisory Committee discussed NAIDOC Week activities for 7- 14 2013. It was 

proposed that Council continue to host the flag raising ceremony on the Monday 8 July of NAIDOC 

week at Council Chambers in Mullumbimby followed by the official signing of the Memorandum of 

Understanding. 

Arakwal representative expressed concern at the process and cost involved with the street march 

held from Railway Park to Main Beach every year on the Thursday of NAIDOC Week as a part of 

the Arakwal Family Cultural Day. In 2012, the process changes and became unclear, 

cumbersome and has a cost associated which has not been planned for. Arakwal representatives 

request that this process be clarified and streamline to simplify this annual event and reflect 

Council’s commitment to supporting this important cultural event. 


45 

Nil from this report 


prepared for 9 May, 13 and 27 June 2013 Ordinary Meetings: 

50 

 



55 

Native Title Act 1993 

Local Government Act 1993

Agenda - Byron Shire Council - NSW Government

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?