Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes

24 September 2019

MINUTES OF Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council
Ordinary Council Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chambers, Gundagai
ON Tuesday, 24 September 2019 AT 6:00pm

PRESENT: Cr Abb McAlister (Mayor), Cr Dennis Palmer (Deputy Mayor), Cr Leigh Bowden, Cr David Graham, Cr Gil Kelly, Cr Penny Nicholson, Cr Doug Phillips, Cr Charlie Sheahan, Cr Craig Stewart

IN ATTENDANCE: Phil McMurray (Acting General Manager), Ganesh Ganeshamoorthy (Manager Assets), Mark Ellis (Manager Civil Works), Miriam Crane (Manager of Community and Culture), Sharon Langman (Manager Development, Building and Compliance), Andrew Brock (Manager Facilities), Tim Swan (Manager Finance), Glen McAtear (Manager Regulatory Services), Wayne Bennett (Manager Waste, Parks & Recreation Services)

1 Acknowledgement of Country

The Chairperson acknowledged the Wiradjuri people who are the Traditional Custodians of the Land at which the meeting was held and paid his respects to Elders, both past and present, of the Wiradjuri Nation and extended that respect to other Aboriginal people who were present.

ADJOURN MEETING FOR OPEN FORUM

Resolution 304/2019

Moved: Cr Gil Kelly

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

Council adjourn for Open Forum.

Carried

2 Open Forum

List of Speakers

1. Keith Turner – Expressed his thanks to Council for the financial assistance it provided for the new signage at the dog on the Tuckerbox.

2. Hilary Connors – Addressed Council on item 8.3.1 Projects to be Submitted Through the Stronger Country Communities Fund Round 3 (Late Report), in particular the Muttama Hall Rejuvenation Works.

RESUME OPEN MEETING

Resolution 305/2019

Moved: Cr Gil Kelly

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

Council resume the Open Meeting.

Carried

3 Apologies

Nil

4 Disclosures of Interest

Cr Penny Nicholson disclosed a significant non-pecuniary interest in item 8.1.15 Gundagai Regional Enhancement Group Donation Request as she is the Treasurer of Gundagai Regional Enhancement Group.

Cr David Graham disclosed a pecuniary interest in item 8.4.5 Development Applications Approved August, 2019 for DA2019/85, Information Education Centre, Sheridan Lane for the reason that he recently sold land associated with the development application.

Phillip McMurray, Acting General Manager disclosed a pecuniary interest in item 5.2 Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of Council held on Friday 13 September, 2019

Cr Palmer disclosed a significant non-pecuniary interest in item 11.3 Lease of Road Reserve Between Lot 5 DP1092838 and Lots 60,61 and 62 DP753604 Cootamundra for the reason that a family member owns a neighbouring property.

5 Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday 27 August 2019

Resolution 306/2019

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday 27 August 2019 be confirmed as a true and correct record of the meeting.

Carried

5.2 Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of Council held on Friday 13 September 2019

Resolution 307/2019

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Charlie Sheahan

The Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of Council held on Friday 13 September 2019 be confirmed as a true and correct record of the meeting.

Carried

6 Mayoral Minutes

6.1 Mayoral Minute - Councillor Engagement

Resolution 308/2019

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

The information in the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

Carried

7 Reports from Committees

7.1 Minutes of the Access and Inclusion Committee Meeting held on Thursday 29 August 2019

Resolution 309/2019

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

1. The Minutes of the Access and Inclusion Committee Meeting held on Thursday 29 August 2019, attached to the report, be received and noted.

2. The procurement of a 200 kilogram waterproof wheelchair and portable lift for Gundagai and the installation of an adult change facility be investigated.

Carried

8 General Manager’s Report

8.1 Business

8.1.1 Election of Mayor for the 2019/20 Term

Resolution 310/2019

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

The voting for the election of the Mayor for the 2019/20 term be conducted by Ordinary Ballot.

Carried

The General Manager, as Returning Officer called for nomination for the Office of Mayor.

Nominations were received for Councillor McAlister and Councillor Sheahan.

In accordance with the previous resolution the election was conducted by Ordinary Ballot.

Following the Ordinary Ballot Councillor McAlister was declared elected as Mayor for the 2019/20 term

8.1.2 Election of the Deputy Mayor 2019/20

Resolution 311/2019

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Craig Stewart

The voting for the election of the Deputy Mayor for the 2019/20 term be conducted by ordinary ballot.

Carried

The General Manager, as Returning Officer called for nomination for the Office of Deputy Mayor.

Nominations were received for Councillor Bowden and Councillor Palmer.

In accordance with the previous resolution the election was conducted by Ordinary Ballot.

Following the Ordinary Ballot Councillor Palmer was declared elected as Deputy Mayor for the 2019/20 term

8.1.3 Stockinbingal Ellwood's Hall s.355 Committee Meeting Minutes

Resolution 312/2019

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

The Minutes of the Stockinbingal Ellwood’s Hall s.355 Committee Extraordinary Meeting held on 22 August 2019, attached to the report, be received and noted.

Carried

8.1.4 The Cootamundra Heritage Centre Management s.355 Committee Meeting Minutes

Resolution 313/2019

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr Craig Stewart

The Minutes of the Cootamundra Heritage Centre Management s.355 Committee meeting held on 2 September 2019, attached to the report be received and noted.

Carried

8.1.5 Cootamundra Tourism Action Group s.355 Committee Meeting Minutes

Resolution 314/2019

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

1. The Minutes of the Cootamundra Tourism Action Group s.355 Committee meetings held on 5 September 2019, attached to the report, be received and noted.

2. The cost to purchase electronic billboards, for event and tourism related promotion be investigated and a report be prepared and submitted to Council.

Carried

8.1.6 Draft Agency Information Guide 2019 (AIG)

Resolution 315/2019

Moved: Cr Doug Phillips

Seconded: Cr David Graham

The draft Agency Information Guide (AIG), attached to the report, be adopted.

Carried

8.1.7 Draft Privacy Management Plan

Resolution 316/2019

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

The draft Privacy Management Plan presented to Council, be adopted.

Carried

8.1.8 Draft Statement of Business Ethics

Resolution 317/2019

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

The draft Statement of Business Ethics, attached to the report, be adopted.

Carried

8.1.9 Draft Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Management Plan

Resolution 318/2019

Moved: Cr Craig Stewart

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

The draft Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Management Plan, attached to the report, be adopted.

Carried

8.1.10 Draft Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct Policy and Procedure

Resolution 319/2019

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

The draft Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct Policy, Procedure, Risk Assessment Worksheet and Unreasonable Complainant Conduct Form, attached to the report, be adopted.

Carried

8.1.11 Cootamundra- Gundagai Regional Council Gifts for Visiting Dignitaries

Resolution 320/2019

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

1. The practice for the provision of gift bags at the request of Councillors and for not-for-profit events be adopted.

2. The nominal value of the gift bag be no greater than $100.

Carried

8.1.12 SHIFT - Report by Cr Leigh Bowden and Miriam Crane, Manager Social and Community

Resolution 321/2019

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

The SHIFT report by Cr Leigh Bowden and Miriam Crane, Manager Social and Community be received and noted.

Carried

8.1.13 Australia Day 2020

Resolution 322/2019

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

The information on Australia Day Awards, 2020 be received and noted.

Carried

8.1.14 Gundagai Historic Bridges Inc. - Request for Donation

Resolution 323/2019

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

Council donate the sum of $1464.84 for the levied amount of rates, and water access charges for the 2019/20 financial year, to the Gundagai Historic Bridges Incorporated.

Carried

8.1.15 Gundagai Regional Enhancement Group Donation Request

Note: Having disclosed a significant non-pecuniary interest Cr Nicholson left the meeting during discussion and voting.

Resolution 324/2019

Moved: Cr Craig Stewart

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

Council donate $7000 to Gundagai Regional Enhancement Group.

Carried

Note: Cr Nicholson returned to the meeting.

8.1.16 Information Bulletin

Resolution 325/2019

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

The Information Bulletin and correspondence, attached to the report be received and noted.

Carried

8.2 Finance

8.2.1 Donation to Town and Country Club

Resolution 326/2019

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

Council donate the sum of $2,831.24 to Town & Country Club (Cootamundra) Incorporated.

Carried

8.2.2 Monthly Finance Report for August 2019

Resolution 327/2019

Moved: Cr Doug Phillips

Seconded: Cr David Graham

The Monthly Finance Report for August, 2019 be received and noted.

Carried

8.2.3 Investment Report - August 2019

Resolution 328/2019

Moved: Cr Craig Stewart

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

The Investment Report as at 31^st August, 2019 be received and noted.

Carried

8.2.4 Monthly Major Projects Program Report

Resolution 329/2019

Moved: Cr Doug Phillips

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

1. That the progress report on project status be received and noted.

2. That the recommended changes to the project budgets as listed be adopted.

Carried

8.3 Community and Culture

Nil

8.4 Development, Building and Compliance

8.4.1 Modification Application DA 2010/1048 - Subdivision, Adelong Creek Road Tumblong

Resolution 330/2019

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

1. Council approve the modification of development consent 2010/1048 subject to the following conditions:

GENERAL CONDITIONS

(1) GEN Condition - Compliance with Council

The Development being completed in accordance with plans stamped by Council and the Statement of Environmental Effects, except where varied by conditions of this consent.

Reason: To confirm the details of the application as submitted by the applicant and as approved by Council.

(2) GEN Condition- Public Land Costs

Costs attributed to all work involved on public land shall be borne by the proponent.

Reason: Need for applicants to be reasonable for costs arising as a result of development work.

(3) GEN Condition- Subdivision Telecommunication Services

The provision of separate telecommunications services to proposed Lots indicated on the sketch plan submitted with the development application, at the full cost of the applicant.

Reason: To ensure that utility services are satisfactory for the proposed development.

(4) GEN Condition – Subdivision Services Consent

The applicant shall obtain consent from the appropriate supply authority relating to water, electricity, gas and telephone where relevant. Work required is to be completed by the applicant in accordance with the consent authority conditions.

Reason: To ensure utility services are protected and satisfactory for the proposed development.

(5) GEN Condition – Subdivision Electrical Supply

The provision of a separate electrical supply line to proposed Lots at the full cost of the applicant.

Reason: To ensure that existing services can be separately metered in the event of separate titles being issued.

PRIOR TO ISSUE OF SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

(1) PSC Condition- Formal Plan of Subdivision

A formal Plan of Subdivision is to be prepared in accordance with the plans submitted with the Development Application DA2010/048 dated 25 June 2018 (Ref. 07027) and dated 13 June 2018 (Ref. 07027.2) noting the following:

1. A covenant is to be created over the proposed allotments with common boundary to the road reserve of the Hume Highway to deny access.

Reason: To confirm the details of the application as submitted by the applicant and as approved by Council.

(2) PSC Condition- Subdivision Plan Release - Other Authorities

The requirements of other public utility authorities shall be satisfied prior to Council releasing the Subdivision Plan.

Reason: To ensure that the requirements of public authorities are met prior to work commencing.

(3) PSC Condition- Registration of Subdivision Plans

In accordance with S.109C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act; the applicant is required to obtain a subdivision certificate from the consent authority that will authorise the registration of the plan of subdivision under Division 3 of Part 23 of the Conveyancing Act, 1919. The subdivision certificate is in the format supplied to the consent authority upon the plan acceptable to the Registrar General.

Reason: The legal obligations of Council to administer the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979.

(4) PSC Condition- Driveway and Layback

The applicant is required to receive written consent from the Engineers of Council for final approval of the proposed driveway and layback construction standard for the access to Old Hume Highway from proposed allotment 93.

Reason: To ensure appropriate vehicle access is provided to the development which does not adversely impact on pedestrian traffic or Council's public road infrastructure.

(5) PSC Condition – All Weather Vehicle Access

All weather gravel road vehicle access is to be constructed as a part of this development to a standard which complies with Rural Fire Service Standards (Planning for Bushfire Protection) and Council's Engineering Standards. Cross Sections and Site Plans are to be approved by Council's Engineers prior to works commencing, with all vehicle access and carriageways to be completed to the satisfaction of Council prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate.

Reason: To ensure that adequate vehicle access and internal movement is achieved and maintained throughout the development

(6) PSC Non Standard Condition- Boundary Tree Corridors

Vegetation endemic to the site is to be planted along proposed allotment boundaries as shown in the approved subdivision plans and protected from impact from livestock.

Reason: To minimise visual impact and promote/enhance the rural character of the area.

DURING CONSTRUCTION

(1) DUR Condition- Undertake Works on Road Reserve

An application to undertake works on the road reserve is required to be lodged and crossing installed to Council Engineers specifications as part of the development, (application attached). Twenty four (24) hours' notice is to be given to Council Works & Services group before placement of concrete to enable formwork to be inspected. Failure to do so may result in rejection of the works and a need for reconstruction.

Reason: To ensure appropriate vehicle access is provided to the development which does not adversely impact on pedestrian traffic or Council's public road infrastructure.

ONGOING USE

(1) USE Condition- Access to the Hume Highway

Access directly to the Hume Highway is denied. No gates or entrances may be placed allowing access to the road reserve of the Hume Highway.

Reason: Road safety and the effect operation of the road network.

VOTING RECORD
FOR RESOLUTION	AGAINST RESOLUTION
Cr Abb McAlister (Mayor) Cr Dennis Palmer Cr Leigh Bowden Cr David Graham Cr Gil Kelly Cr Penny Nicholson Cr Doug Phillips Cr Charlie Sheahan Cr Craig Stewart	Nil
ABSENT	DECLARED INTEREST
Nil	Nil

Carried

8.4.2 Exhibition of Draft Rural Lands Strategy

Resolution 331/2019

Moved: Cr Doug Phillips

Seconded: Cr Craig Stewart

The Draft Rural Lands Strategy be placed on public exhibition for a period of no less than twenty eight (28) days

VOTING RECORD
FOR RESOLUTION	AGAINST RESOLUTION
Cr Abb McAlister (Mayor) Cr Dennis Palmer Cr Leigh Bowden Cr David Graham Cr Gil Kelly Cr Penny Nicholson Cr Doug Phillips Cr Charlie Sheahan Cr Craig Stewart	Nil
ABSENT	DECLARED INTEREST
Nil	Nil

Carried

8.4.3 Control of Public Reserve 88379 - Lot 7022 DP94977 - Corner Gundagai and Jugiong Roads Cootamundra

Resolution 332/2019

Moved: Cr Doug Phillips

Seconded: Cr David Graham

Further investigation be undertaken with a report containing more comprehensive information, on options regarding the use of the land, be prepared and submitted for the consideration of Council.

Carried

8.4.4 Removal of Restriction on Land to Permit A Dwelling - Lot183 DP1078686 - Bourke Street Gundagai

Resolution 333/2019

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

1. Council release the restriction as to user to allow an application to be lodged for the erection of a suitably designed dwelling to be erected on Lot 183 DP1078686 Bourke Street Gundagai

2. That the costs associated with the release of the restriction as to user be borne by those seeking the release

VOTING RECORD
FOR RESOLUTION	AGAINST RESOLUTION
Cr Abb McAlister (Mayor) Cr Dennis Palmer Cr Leigh Bowden Cr David Graham Cr Gil Kelly Cr Penny Nicholson Cr Doug Phillips Cr Charlie Sheahan Cr Craig Stewart	Nil
ABSENT	DECLARED INTEREST
Nil	Nil

Carried

8.4.5 Development Applications Approved August, 2019

Note: Having disclosed a pecuniary interest in this item Cr Graham left the meeting during discussion and voting.

Resolution 334/2019

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

The information on Development Applications approved in August, 2019 be noted

Carried

Note: Cr Graham returned to the meeting.

8.4.6 Exhibition of Draft Cootamundra 2050 Strategy

Resolution 335/2019

Moved: Cr Doug Phillips

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

The Draft Cootamundra 2050 Strategy be placed on public exhibition for a period of no less than twenty eight (28) days.

VOTING RECORD
FOR RESOLUTION	AGAINST RESOLUTION
Cr Abb McAlister (Mayor) Cr Dennis Palmer Cr Leigh Bowden Cr David Graham Cr Gil Kelly Cr Penny Nicholson Cr Doug Phillips Cr Charlie Sheahan Cr Craig Stewart	Nil
ABSENT	DECLARED INTEREST
Nil	Nil

Carried

8.5 Regulatory Services

Nil

8.6 Assets

Nil

8.7 Civil Works

8.7.1 Bituminous Surfacing Tender 2019

Resolution 336/2019

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

1. That Council accept the 2019/2021 Bituminous Sealing Contract to Bitupave Ltd (Boral Asphalt)

2. Council consider the option of a twelve (12) month extension in a further report to be submitted for consideration prior to the 2021/2022 financial year.

Carried

8.7.2 Civil Works Report - September 2019

Resolution 337/2019

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

The Civil Works Report for the month of September, 2019 be received.

Carried

8.7.3 Plant Replacement - Motor Grader

Resolution 338/2019

Moved: Cr Gil Kelly

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

1. Council approve the procurement of the John Deere Grader.

2. Council authorise the Internal Finance Committee to investigate funding options for the John Deere Grader including the disposal of the Caterpillar grader.

Carried

8.7.4 Plant Replacement Program Update - September 2019

Resolution 339/2019

Moved: Cr Craig Stewart

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

That Council approved the amended plant replacement program as tabled.

Carried

8.8 Technical Services

Nil

8.9 Facilities

8.9.1 Electricity Procurement

Note: It was noted that the information in the table on page 183 of the agenda was incorrect and should read as follows:

Bland Shire Council	$328,163
Coolamon Shire Council	$171,816
Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council	$397,756
Greater Hume Council	$335,137
Junee Shire Council	$233,637
Temora Shire Council	$345,797

Resolution 340/2019

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

1. Council acknowledge that there are extenuating circumstances surrounding the procurement of electricity due to the 2-day validity of offers from electricity retailers where anything longer than this is likely to include a price risk component and as such Council should be excused from the tendering requirements under S55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act, 1993 for the procurement of electricity for small tariff sites, large contract sites and street lighting which are due to commence on 1^st January, 2020.

2. Council delegate authority to the General Manager to execute the contracts for the supply of electricity for small tariff sites, large contract sites and street lighting.

3. Council contribute 20% of Council’s electricity load to a renewable energy Power Purchase Agreement where the pricing is financially advantageous.

4. Council advise Riverina Eastern Region Organisation of Councils (REROC) of its decision

Carried

8.10 Waste, Parks and Recreation

Nil

9 Motion of which Notice has been Given

9.1 Notice of Motion - The Lighting Scheduled for Replacement at Fisher Park be donated to the Cootamundra Rodeo Association

Resolution 341/2019

Moved: Cr Gil Kelly

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

The lighting scheduled for replacement at Fisher Park be donated to the Cootamundra Rodeo Association.

Carried

9.2 Notice of Motion - Cootamundra-Gundagai Local Area Traffic Committee Develop Draft Guidelines for Roadside Trailer Advertising

Resolution 342/2019

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

Council request Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Local Traffic Committee develop a draft policy guidelines paper to regulate the use of advertising trailers across the local government area. Once the draft policy guidelines to regulate the use of advertising trailers has been completed a report will be prepared and submitted for the consideration of Council. The policy guidelines should commit to:

a) Present a degree of fairness, reflecting Council’s ongoing support for the promotion of local businesses,

b) Regulate appropriate sites to protect public access and safety,

c) The proposal of a fee to cover the cost of administration of the regulation of the policy guidelines, and

d) Ensure the proposed fee reflect fair commercial advertising costs

Carried

9.3 Notice of Motion - Council Disregard the Trial Period of the Cootamundra Main Street Tree Enhancement Lighting Program and Approve its Implementation in Full

It was moved by Councillors Kelly and Palmer;

That Council disregard the trial period of the Cootamundra Main Street Tree Enhancement Lighting Program and approve its implementation in full.

On being put to the vote the motion was lost

Resolution 343/2019

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

Council continue the 3 month trial and following the conclusion of the trial a report be prepared and submitted to Council on the costs and potential funding options for continuation of the program.

Carried

10 Questions with Notice

10.1 Questions With Notice

Resolution 344/2019

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

The Questions with Notice from Councillors and related responses from Council officers be noted.

Carried

11 Confidential Items

11.1 Closed Council Report

Resolution 345/2019

Moved: Cr Gil Kelly

Seconded: Cr David Graham

1. Items 11.2, 11.3 and 11.4 be considered in closed Council at which the press and public are excluded in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and related public interest reasons detailed.

2. In accordance with section 11 (2) and (3) of the Local Government Act, 1993, the reports, correspondence and other documentation relating to Items 11.2, 11.3 and 11.4 be withheld from the press and public.

11.2 Cootamundra Aerodrome Lands Farming and Grazing Licence for Part Lot 3 Deposit Plan 1243629

Provisions for Confidentiality

Section 10A (2) (d(i)) – The Confidential Report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

Public Interest

It is considered that discussions of this matter in open Council would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest as, by providing commercial in confidence information, the applicant has facilitated the full consideration of the matter by Council. The release of that information by Council may discourage the provider of such information, or others, from doing so in the future, and therefore prejudice Council’s ability to appropriately resolve the matter without negatively impacting the community.

11.3 Lease of Road Reserve Between Lot 5 DP1092838 and Lots 60,61 and 62 DP753604 Cootamundra.

Provisions for Confidentiality

Section 10A (2) (g) – The Confidential Report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice as comprises a discussion of this matter, that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

Public Interest

It is considered that discussion of this matter in Open Council would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest as it may prejudice Council's ability to secure the optimum outcome for the community.

11.4 Review of Legal Proceedings of Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council

Provisions for Confidentiality

Public Interest

Carried

11.2 Cootamundra Aerodrome Lands Farming and Grazing Licence for Part Lot 3 Deposit Plan 1243629

Resolution 346/2019

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr David Graham

Council consent to the transfer of the Cootamundra Aerodrome Lands Farming and Grazing licence, for Part Lot 3 Deposit Plan 1243629, from Mr Garry Waters to Wallandoon Pty Ltd.

Carried

11.3 Lease of Road Reserve Between Lot 5 DP1092838 and Lots 60,61 and 62 DP753604 Cootamundra.

Note: Having declared a significant non-pecuniary interest in this item Cr Palmer left the room for discussion and voting.

Resolution 347/2019

Moved: Cr Doug Phillips

Seconded: Cr David Graham

1. The proposal to lease the subject road reserve as identified on the plan attached to the report be placed on public exhibition for a period of thirty (30) days to comply with Section 153-Section 157 of the Roads Act, 1993.

2. Notification of the proposed lease be sent to neighbouring landholders to comply with Section 153-Section 157 of the Roads Act, 1993.

3. Following the statutory exhibition period, a further report be presented to Council outlining submissions received (if any) for Council’s consideration.

Carried

11.4 Review of Legal Proceedings of Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council

Resolution 348/2019

Moved: Cr Gil Kelly

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

1. Council adopt recommendations 37, 38 and 39 and undertake the related actions as detailed in the confidential correspondence from Lindsay Taylor Lawyers dated 4^th September, 2019, attached to the report.

2. Council receive and note the information provided in the Memorandum of Advice from Jason Lazarus (Barrister) dated 29^th August, 2019, attached to the report.

Carried

Note: Cr Palmer returned to the meeting

11.5 Resumption of Open Council Meeting

Resolution 349/2019

Moved: Cr Craig Stewart

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

The Open Council meeting resume.

Carried

11.6 Announcement of Closed Council Resolutions

Note: The Chairperson announced the resolutions made in Closed Council.

The Meeting closed at 8:23pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 29 October 2019.

................................................... ...................................................

CHAIRPERSON GENERAL MANAGER

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

29 October 2019

8.1.11 Life After Amalgamation Forum

DOCUMENT NUMBER

314175

REPORTING OFFICER

Leigh Bowden, Councillor

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

RELEVANCE TO COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN

4. Good governance: an actively engaged community and strong leadership team

4.3 Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council is a premier local government Council

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no Financial implications associated with this report.

LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS

There are no Legislative implications associated with this report.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

There are no Policy implications associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Recommendation

Councillors and the General Manager read and consider the dot points in the report and, at a future workshop, discuss what, if any, could be of benefit/be implemented by Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council.

Introduction

The Life After Amalgamation Conference was co-hosted by Local Government NSW and Central Coast Council and held on 16 and 17 September, 2019, at the Crowne Plaza Terrigal Pacific, Terrigal. It was attended by Councillors Abb McAllister, Mayor, Dennis Palmer, Deputy Mayor, Charlie Sheahan and Leigh Bowden.

The report below has been compiled from input from the Mayor, Cr Sheahan and myself.

Discussion

In 2016, 20 new NSW councils were formed through amalgamations. Three years later, some of these councils have made extraordinary advances. For others, including CGRC, challenges remain and there is still much work to be done on harmonising cultures, systems and processes.

The aim of the forum, as articulated by Tara McCarthy, CEO of LGNSW, was to share the experiences of those councils represented and to identify the successes, challenges, the lessons learned, future needs of amalgamated councils and possible ways forward. The forum included expert speakers and case studies, as well as workshops and informal discussion between the participants.

Speakers included Cr Linda Scott, President of LGNSW; Graham Sansom, Adjunct Professor, UTS Institute of Public Policy and Governance; Cr Angelo Tsirekas, Mayor, Canada Bay and Vice President Urban LGNSW; Glenn Inglis, Councillor and ex-GM Tamworth Regional Council; Jane Smith, Mayor, Central Coast Council; Matthew Stewart, GM Canterbury Bankstown City Council; James Hayes, Mayor, Snowy Valleys Council; Peter Teggart, GM Queanbeyan-Palerang Council; Ruth McCrae, Mayor, Murrumbidgee Council; Greg Warren, Shadow Minister for Local Government; Nellette Kettle, Inner West Council, Karen Legge, I&R Consultant; Maria Frangeskou, INS Career Management; Mark Cleland, Bayside Council and several LGNSW staff – Jane Partridge, Ross Nassif, Greg Smith, Morrison Low and Shaun McBride.

The councils represented were Armidale Regional Council, Canterbury Bankstown Council, Central Coast, City of Parramatta Council, CGRC, Cumberland Council, Dubbo Regional Council, Federation Council, Hilltops Council, Mid Coast Council, Murray River Council, Murrumbidgee Council, Northern Beaches Council, Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council, Snowy Monaro Regional Council and Snowy Valleys Council.

In her opening address, Linda Scott, acknowledged that there are a range of opinions about amalgamations. Whatever view we hold, commitment to our communities is the starting point. She stated that LGNSW’s relationship with State Government was impacted by forced amalgamations but that the role of LGNSW is advocacy and it will continue to lobby for what our councils want. It is important that we all keep working together.

Amalgamations were supposed to deliver financial stability and to get rid of financial barriers and cost shifting. They didn’t. Councils need financial independence and financial stability. Meanwhile councils are trying to continue to provide high quality services to our communities as we were elected to do. Local Councils are best placed to determine our futures.

Background to the 2016 Amalgamations

Professor Graham Sansom gave a very comprehensive background to the 2016 amalgamations.

Samson explained that although amalgamations have the potential to generate increased capacity and sustainability, better services, efficiencies and cost savings none of those are guaranteed. The keys to successful amalgamations include: a sound strategy, compatible partners; careful planning, lots of consultation and patience and adequately resourcing the transition. This did not happen with Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council.

What the Independent Local Government Review Panel (ILGRP) put forward in its report included that the goal of any amalgamation was to create a more sustainable system of democratic local government with the capacity to meet the needs of local and regional communities and to be a valued partner of state and federal government. ILGRP stated that there would be different objectives and strategies from one part of the state to another, tailored to different circumstances; a new legal process in the LG Act, with regional reviews and gradual implementation through a stronger boundaries commission; in some rural situations amalgamation could help improve sustainability, along with increased FAGS and resource sharing (JOs), but a ‘rural councils’ alternative was proposed; and a “community board” option where the community has a real say.

The key words were local “government” not local “administration”.

What actually happened:

· A lengthy delay, then the questionable “Fit for the Future“ review.

· No clear strategy and objectives apart from cost savings.

· No tailoring of strategies to different regional circumstances – options for ‘rural councils’, ‘community boards’ and JOs in Metro Sydney ruled out.

· No change to the LG Act process, Boundaries Commission sidelined, rushed ‘inquiries’ and resulting litigation.

· Focus on quick results rather than supporting gradual transition.

· Necessary complementary changes still incomplete – IPART rating and regulation review.

· Some emerging ‘success’ stories but also some very unhappy marriages.

· Not one size fits all.

The Situation Now – September 2019

From the individual presenters, panel discussions and workshop feedback from each council the following successes, challenges, lessons learned, future needs and possible ways forward were identified.

The Successes

While actual successes from the recent amalgamations were few, some possible benefits of past amalgamations were:

· Economy of scale, though evidence is patchy.

· Creditable partner in government, rather than some small outback post.

· Robust revenue base.

· Staff levels and quality, can attract better staff.

· Larger and better knowledge base, creativity and innovation.

· Advanced skills in strategic planning and policy development.

· Effective regional collaboration.

· High quality credible political and managerial leadership.

The Challenges

· Challenges to progress: political harmony, human resources, planning and zoning integration, IT integration, and cultural integration.

· Hard for staff to work for an organisation getting bad press; staff disenchanted.

· Attracting staff is hard: merged councils are unattractive and it’s hard to get new employees.

· Sustainability is the greatest concern.

· ‘Us and them’ culture: social discord between the merged communities.

· Operating in damage control.

· The “Save Tumbarumba Shire” group is a big issue and challenge – a nasty presence on social media.

· Lots of time travelling and loss of productivity.

· Problem with some merged council names, e.g. Murrumbidgee omits Jerilderee. Names are part of identity.

· Sense of abandonment from government.

· Financial deficits.

· Lack of communication.

· One size fits all in local government is just not appropriate.

· Independent Local Government Review Panel found that there were people elected to Council who were unfit for public office and ill prepared to fill the roles and responsibilities of councillors.

Lessons Learned (from those councils who have been amalgamated for some time)

· The first four years are the hardest.

· Phased in rate harmonisation over 5 – 6 years; ditto fees and charges. They don’t have to align.

· Guaranteed that service delivery would remain the same for 3 years.

· All 355 committees were reinstated to ensure there was not a democratic deficit.

· Community committees were a way of handing back assets to the community; for every $ in a grant there’s a $ in kind from community members.

· Supported 355 committees with administration. 355 Committees save the council money.

· Communication was critical –regular media reports and information were constantly getting out.

· GM sent out a weekly emails about what was happening – built confidence in the elected members and confidence of the community.

· Fact sheets were produced stating the amount of money spent in each area (ie pre-merger council areas) to assure the community that spending was “fair”.

· Established a community/citizens panel email to give feedback.

· Employed an “internal ombudsman” – a confidential “go-to” person for the community, councillors and staff.

· Employment levels were maintained.

· The mayor showed political leadership – stood for being honest with the community.

· Acted on “low hanging fruit” (easy and immediate projects) – showed that council cared.

· Introduced wards; you can introduce wards at any time (by referendum).

· Minimised stupid mistakes.

Future Needs

· Communication is vital – need a media person.

· Patience -“Take time so you get it right!”

· Leadership – about motivating people to get things done.

· Advocacy and support.

· Good IT and HR are most important.

· Social capital – need to focus on the commonality - “shared destinies”.

· A good General Manager: the role of the GM is engagement with the people; the GM has to be a people person, you have to take the people with you, especially in a rural area.

The Way Forward

· Learn as much as possible from the current situation.

· The community is the ultimate arbiter of how merged councils are doing – listen to the community.

· Human resources are the most important asset that councils have. Plan cultural integration staff events to create the team.

· Gather input from other amalgamated councils.

· Know that we are building a brand new organisation; no one taking over anyone else. Stay focussed – it’s about the people.

· City and urban councils should be collaborating with rural and regional councils.

· Maintain a good working relationship with the union - it’s essential for staff morale.

· Teamwork is essential: give staff “awards” for jobs well done.

· Each LGA has a unique community personality – get onto it quickly and focus on building, retaining it and enhancing it.

· Communication needs to be regular and honest.

· Have a plan: 10- 12 years and prioritise the list.

· Be visual early; infrastructure upgrades; events; broader and frequent engagement.

· Important to be future focussed – reputation matters.

· Need to do more celebrating of successes – internally and in the community.

· Promote your ongoing continuous improvement journey.

· The only thing that matters is the community’s opinion and how council is performing. People are really important; the most important. There must be an ongoing conversation with the community.

· Look to the future. We’re only 3 years in – don’t judge achievable long-term outcomes on the basis of 3 years.

Conclusion

There was significant learning and networking at the Life After Amalgamation Forum. Not one of the councils represented, on the tool LGNSW used to measure success, indicated that they were on top of the issues related to the amalgamation. However, some were further advanced than others.

In summation, Cr McAllister, our Mayor, reflected,

No two amalgamations are the same. There are specific issues and problems which relate to each individual amalgamation. There are many differences and each is contextually different. Differences between amalgamations in city, coastal or rural councils need to be looked at on an individual basis. The size of council areas - bigger is not always better; the ability to raise revenue, the social and cultural differences, the tyranny of distance, community cohesion and expectations are all significant points of difference.

The Government made its decision without taking into account any of the points above and without researching the feasibility for success or genuine and transparent consultation with the communities involved.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

29 October 2019

8.3.4 Quarterly Library Report

DOCUMENT NUMBER

314194

REPORTING OFFICER

Penny Howse, Library Manager

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

RELEVANCE TO COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN

1. A vibrant and supportive community: all members of our community are valued

1.1 Our Community is inclusive and connected

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no Financial implications associated with this report.

LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS

There are no Legislative implications associated with this report.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

There are no Policy implications associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Recommendation

The Quarterly Library Report from 1 July - 30 September 2019, be received and noted.

Introduction

During the months of July, August and September the libraries had a total of 15,284 loans and 123 new members. 3160 People accessed the Stephen Ward rooms and 19,814 people entered the library at Cootamundra and Gundagai.

Cultural events:

· NAIDOC week was again celebrated by Gundagai library at Mirrabooka in conjunction with the Neighbourhood Centre, Multicultural group and Youth Council with a huge day that included the flag raising and smoking ceremony, dreamtime story time presented by Aunty Sonia, followed by morning tea and the official cutting of the cake.

Then ensued many different demonstrations and hand on sessions of crafts such as basket weaving, rope making, boomerang throwing, rock painting, face painting and lots more.

Over 50 children attended the event with around 40 adults also joining in the festivities.

· Both libraries hosted winning entries from the Rural Lands Protection board Aboriginal Art Competition for two weeks.

The winning entry from Narrandera was exceptional but the runner up from our very own Gundagai High School was certainly the local favourite.

· The Flix N Pix film club at the Gundagai library has kicked off Gundagai's first regular film nights since our grand old Gundagai Theatre closed in the early 80s.

Movies screen every first Tuesday evening of the month and are held in the children's section which seats up to 30 people.

Features shown have included a wide and varying array of films selected from the Kanopy collection to which Riverina Regional Library subscribes.

· Rochelle Nicholls organised an author meet and greet at both libraries for Australian Reading Hour.

Local authors from both towns including Jenny Glazebrook, Michael Murphy, Rochelle Nicholls and Debra Williams read excerpts from their books and answered questions from audiences.

· Playing @ The Pond is a free lunchtime concert that is held at the fishpond outside the Cootamundra Library once a month.

Audiences have recently been entertained by award winning country singer Grant Luhrs and local Gundagai band ‘Liquid Sun’.

Community Education:

· Gundagai library have introduced Creative Communities, an ongoing community craft program, every 2nd Friday of the using the fantastic craft resource kits from Riverina Regional Library.

This quarter we have had Beeswax Cosmetics, Recycled Paper Art and Paper Making.

The response has been excellent and an added bonus is the opportunity to run these as intergenerational events during the school holidays promoting the library as a family friendly creative and recreational space that everyone can share.

· Cootamundra Library also runs creative sessions once a month.

Recent activities have included making gift cards, silk paper making and calligraphy.

· Dr Rae Luckie made a return appearance after a successful workshop last year, this time with a “Writing Your Life Story” workshop at Gundagai and “Writing Family History” at Cootamundra.

· Mahjong beginner group has been introduced to the Gundagai library and runs each Wednesday.

Mahjong is also held every Monday afternoon in the Stephen Ward rooms at Cootamundra.

· This quarter Gundagai Library continued the successful STEAM (Science Technology Engineering Art Mathematics) Robotechtronics program, targeting children from 8-12yrs between 4pm and 5pm.

On a Monday we started the trial with 4 children which quickly doubled, grew a bit more and we now have up to 12 regularly per session.

Staff worked hard to get funding from different sources to purchase equipment such as sphero balls, little-bits and radio circuit boards.

We have found that the great thing about this program is that if staff have a little training and knowledge and a lot of passion the kids will quickly pick it up and run with it.

As it is not a competitive program, children participating have been found to easily share ideas and encourage and help others to research, invent and create.

We have introduced a $2.00 cost per session to help offset replacement and purchasing of equipment although staff still actively looks for funding that aligns with the program.

· During Adult Learners week Gundagai Library had on display for everyone to try two 3D printers from RRL.

The printers were easy to use and gave people a taste of what 3D printing is.

Their popularity was a surprise being well received by both the older and younger generation.

· Online Photo Books Workshop at Gundagai was another Adult Learners workshop that was aimed at helping people navigate online and put together their own beautiful glossy professionally printed photobook.

· Wrap with love collection was also held at Gundagai with 4 knit-ins being held during August.

Over 400 squares were collected in total for this worthy cause and with local craft ladies also offering to put the rugs together.

Cootamundra Knit in ladies meet each month at the library to also contribute to this charity.

· Sydney based author Sophie Green spoke at the Cootamundra Library in August about her latest book the “Shelley Bay Ladies Swimming Circle”.

Fifty adults also joined local lady Merilyn Pickford for her recipe book launch in September.

· Gundagai’s Yoga guru Marianna Halas launched her book at Gundagai to a large crowd of devoted fans and yoga students in August.

The book titled “Good Time Yoga for the Not So Young,” sharing her lifelong wealth of knowledge on the subject and featuring one of her local students demonstrating the moves and positions.

· Both libraries also played host to “Pitch n Pizza” for Steph Cooke’s youth consultation initiative.

Around a dozen local youths from Gundagai and fifty youths from Cootamundra participated in having a say for their future.

Collections

· Weeding program - During September the RRL staff visited Gundagai library and took part in a large weed giving the collection a fresh look after adding some exchanged books from other libraries.

· Gundagai libraries’ youth collection had recently been part of the gentrification trial. It was moved into the adult fiction to see if this encourages intergenerational reading, as 95% of the titles are suitable for both adults and young adults. It is also hoped it will encourage the youth who may be getting restless with current reading material to try something from the adult domain.

· The large print gentrification 12 month trial at Gundagai Library will finish at the end of the year but so far results are very encouraging and it looks like, at least for the large print, genrefication is here to stay.

School Holiday programs

· VR Oz-grav – During the July school holidays Lisa Horsely from Swinburne University gave a dazzling hands on presentation of Black holes, Stars, planets and gravity.

She also brought the workshop to Cootamundra in October.

Cootamundra borrowed the virtual reality equipment from RRL for the school holidays. This proved very popular with children and teenagers.

· Suminagashi – Gundagai held two Suminagashi workshops in the school holidays.

· This super popular art was loved by both the adults when held as an intergenerational event and also by the children in a special ‘Start Art’ aimed at 5-8 year olds.

· The traditional story of Sleeping Beauty was bought to life by the Allegro Youth Ballet Company for a school holiday performance.

· Crocodile Encounters also visited our libraries to booked-out sessions.

· Debra Clewer ran a Writing Workshop at Cootamundra for Primary aged school children.

· The Harden Kite Festival committee provided kite making kits for children to make kites in the library for the school holidays.

Training/Staff Development

· Staff members from Cootamundra and Gundagai attended the RRL training day and workshop being brought up to date on the latest RRL services.

Staff were shown how to implement the new craft kits on offer including soap making and silk paper.

· Cootamundra Library staff recently attended training in Temora, in the use of the Ulibrary app and website. Gundagai staff attended the training in Tumut.

The app offers patrons at our libraries free audio books to download and listen to.

Promotion

· Sign Up September, a membership drive across the whole RRL region, saw memberships double from the previous month in Gundagai.

Gundagai are continuing the membership drive giving welcome packages (including book bag, pencil and book mark) and entering all new members into the ‘new member’ draw to be decided at the end of November.

· Cootamundra Library had 33 new members sign up in September.

· Penny Howse spoke to the local ladies Probus group in September to highlight library services and to attract new library members.

· The CGRC library promotional banners purchased last year have now all been given permanent anchor points. The banners look great along the front of Mirrabooka and are put out each morning to compliment whatever activity is running at the library.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

29 October 2019

8.4.4 Development Application 2019/103 - Fish Rendering Trial - 572 Stockinbingal Road, Cootamundra

DOCUMENT NUMBER

314320

REPORTING OFFICER

Sharon Langman, Manager Development, Building and Compliance

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

RELEVANCE TO COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN

3. Sustainable natural and built environments: we connect with the places and spaces around us

4.1 Decision-making is based on collaborative, transparent and accountable leadership

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no Financial implications associated with this report.

LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS

Council is required to undertake its duties under planning legislation in an ethic and transparent manner. Applications are required to be assessed against criteria of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 contained within Section 4.15.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

There are no Policy implications associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Recommendation

Council refuse development consent for the trial of fish rendering at 572 Stockinbingal Road, Cootamundra for the following reasons:

(a) The application does not contain sufficient information in regards to the identification, assessment and mitigation of potential impacts to the environment by the proposed development to allow an adequate assessment by Council.

(b) The applicant has failed to satisfy Council that the environmental impacts posed by the trial are not significantly greater when compared to existing approved operations in accordance with Clause 35 of Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000.

(c) The current operation of the facility for the rendering of fish has indicated that there are significant negative impacts on the environment and the community that are not adequately identified, managed or mitigated.

Introduction

Council has received an application for a trial of fish rendering at the old abattoir site on Stockinbingal Road, Cootamundra. The applicant seeks a six month trial consent to permit fish to be trucked from the south coast of NSW to the Cootamundra plant for processing into fish meal. The meal is then to be trucked off site. The matter was notified to adjoining and potentially impacted property owners with 12 submissions received in response to the notification. In accordance with the delegations issued to staff, due to the number and nature of the submissions this matter is referred to Council for determination

Discussion

Applicant: Manildra Meat Company

Site: Lot 1 DP611755, 572 Stockinbingal Road, Cootamundra

Development: Rural Industry - Trial alternate material through existing rendering plant (six months trial)

Date Received: 1 August 2019

Zone: RU1 Primary Production, Cootamundra Local Environmental Plan 2013

Council records indicate that the site has operated as an abattoir in some form since the early 1970’s. There have numerous additions and amendments to the site since that time, including the construction of additional killing floors, chillers, boning areas, by products plant, yards, and effluent systems. In recent years production at the site has significantly declined with the site being put into maintenance mode. The owners have made attempts to source alternate product for the plant in a variety of areas including use of the rendering/by products plant for material sourced off site.

In July 2019 the applicant approached Council with a mind to process mackerel caught in southern NSW in the rendering plant at the site. The applicant verbally indicated that they were not certain that the rendering plant would be suitable or capable of being put to such a use. Accordingly, a development application was lodged for the use of the rendering/by products plant for the processing of fish on a trial basis.

The site has an environmental protection licence (No 3889), issued by the NSW Environment Protection Authority, for ‘rendering or fat extraction and slaughtering or processing animals’. Accordingly, an application to alter processing would be subject to a licence variation which can be done through the integrated development process. Similarly, the operation of the abattoir is designated development for which an Environmental Impact Statement is required.

In order for Council to consider the application for the trial it must first be satisfied that the application has in fact been made in the correct manner and be satisfied, as the consent authority, that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required for the proposed alteration to the existing approval operations of an abattoir at the site. There is such a mechanism for an applicant to provide information to satisfy the consent authority that an EIS is not required even though the original operation on site required this. That mechanism is contained within the provision of Part 2 of Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000.

The applicant has argued that the proposed trial does not constitute designated development (and therefore does not require an EIS) pursuant to the provisions of Clause 35, Part 2, Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000 as the environmental impacts posed by the trial are not significantly greater when compared to existing approved operations. This Clause permits alterations and additions to a development is not designated development if, in the opinion of the consent authority, the alterations or additions do not significantly increase the environmental impacts of the total development compared with the existing approved development. In this instance the applicant is arguing that the proposed fish rendering at the existing approved abattoir and rendering/by products plant do not significantly increase the environmental impacts of the development when compared with the operation of the plant as an abattoir.

Clause 36 provides the factors that are to be taken into consideration to determine if the altered or additional development on site is in fact designated development. It is worth noting that without reliance on this clause that the proposal to render fish at the plant would be designated development due to the amount of material processed. These factors to be considered are:

(a) The impact of the existing development having regard to factors including:

(i) Previous environmental management performance, including compliance with the conditions of any consent, licences, leases or authorisations by a public authority and compliance with any relevant codes of practice,

The proposal has been referred to the NSW EPA as it is a licenced premises; the alteration proposed being for the processing of fish (rather than the approved slaughter by products) in the rendering plant. This activity has been occurring on site without approval since early July 2019 and whilst the trial application has remained underdetermined. This has resulted in significant odour complaints to both Council and the NSW EPA. Odour complaints have been received by Council from within a 1.5km radius of the site but also as far away as 4km and from within the main street of Cootamundra. The applicant has indicated that work needs to be undertaken on the biofilter to assist in the reduction of odour (no notification has been provided that this has occurred or when this is likely to occur) and some of the effluent areas have been covered, nonetheless odour complaints continued to be received.

Furthermore the site, in the past, has processed material through the rendering plant that has been sourced from off site contrary to the documents supporting the existing consents. The processing of that material also resulting in odour complaints to Council and the EPA.

It is acknowledged that throughout the time the abattoir has been operating that improvements to the operation and effluent systems have been made to reduce odour impact.

Notwithstanding the above, a pollution incident offsite also occurred where is was found that fish had been transported from the site and deposited along Temora Road and also at Council’s truckwash area, resulting in environmental and water pollution. Complaints regarding a fish odour from the saleyards area were received by Council around this time.

(ii) rehabilitation or restoration of any disturbed lands

The proposal does not require the rehabilitation or restoration of any disturbed land. The site has existing effluent systems that will be utilised as part of the proposed trial, however the ability to cope with the variation in the type of material from the rendering of fish have not been examined within the documentation submitted with the application. The processing of fish produce odours that are more noticeable in the rural environment than that of abattoir and animal effluent put out by the approved abattoir when operational.

(iii) the number and nature of all past changes and their cumulative effects

There have been no less than 30 amendments, modifications and alterations approved on the site since 2000. This proposal is one more modification, the applicant has verbally indicated that they are prepared to submit a fresh development application to govern the site which would supersede any operational consent that exist on site. This would permit all site operations to fall under a single consent. The application indicates that the site would process fish only when it is unviable to process meat. It is unclear whether this intention is for the trial period only or as an ongoing operational commitment. Past modifications have involved upgrades and improvements to the effluent system but that applicant has not indicated how the proposal impacts on this system.

(d) the likely impact of the proposed alteration or addition having regard to factors including:

(i) the scale, character or nature of the proposal in relation to the development,

Whilst the proposal does not involve any new construction and heavy vehicle movements and animal noise impacts are likely to be less than when the site operated as an abattoir, and notwithstanding the applicant’s statements that only fish OR meat would be processed at any one time, the odour generated by the processing of fish is different in character and nature to that of an abattoir. The site has been processing fish unlawfully since early July this year and the odour impacts remain.

The scale and character of the built environment remains the same, however the scale, character and nature of the outputs in terms of odour are significantly greater as referenced by many of the complaints noting timeframes of impact are longer, the character and nature of the odour is stronger and more offensive than that of an abattoir.

(ii) the existing vegetation, air, noise and water quality, scenic character and special features of the land on which the development is or is to be carried out and the surrounding locality,

The proposal was referred to the EPA who have agreed to a trial being undertaken, however they have received considerable odour complaints during the period of unapproved use of the site for the rendering of fish. The applicant has not identified all the potential individual odour sources in the documentation supporting the application nor has there been any proposal or discussion on potential mitigation measures.

The site itself does not contain any special features or scenic qualities nor can it be said that any such features exist in the surrounding locality. As noted above and throughout this report the air quality is impacted by odour which is significantly different in strength, offensiveness, time impacts and character to that of the approved abattoir when operational.

Similarly, the ability of the existing effluent system, designed to cater for abattoir wastewater, to adequately cater for the wastewater from fish processing have not been considered nor identified as a potential odour or pollution source. There has been no indication of the volume of wastewater production nor the impacts on the receiving effluent system, its ability to treat and mitigate any impacts. The lack of quantified effluent content make an assessment of the impacts difficult to determine, factors such as acidity, biological oxygen demand, temperature and oils will impact on the operation of the effluent system and these factors must be known in order to make predictions about the system’s ability to cope.

It is acknowledged that there is likely to be less noise impact than that produced by an operating abattoir. Due to the absence of live animals on site, reduced truck movements and less coolroom compressor equipment and the like.

It is unclear what impacts, if any, proposed alterations are likely to have on vegetation, however due to the limited details of wastewater impacts this cannot be stated with certainty.

(iii) the degree to which the potential environmental impacts can be predicted with adequate certainty,

Whilst the rendering of fish at the site has been undertaken since July, albeit without the necessary approvals, there has been no communication with Council as to the actual or potential environmental impacts. There has been no monitoring data provided nor any communication as to the success or otherwise of the operations. It is known, via verified complaints, that air quality is impacted by the rendering of fish and this is increased in strength and spread from that of the operational abattoir.

Research undertaken by staff into the impacts of similar operations has revealed that odour from fish rendering is difficult to control due to escape of steam, vapours and odours unless the system is fully enclosed and contained. This research has also indicated that the process itself and end product as well as the wastewater are odour sources. The applicant has not indicated that there will be potential environmental impacts and therefore the proposal does not contain measures to mitigate any impact. The application states that the purpose of the trial is to identify impacts, however research into similar processing operations would reveal at least some potential impacts to guide the applicant on what, and how, mitigation measures should be assessed and considered.

(iv) the capacity of the receiving environment to accommodate changes in environmental impacts,

The largest impact of the proposed operation is odour and staff research has indicated four potential odour sources being the rendering (heating and cooking) process itself. An adequately designed, installed and maintained biofilter would assist in reducing this odour, however fugitive odours are to be expected from a system that is not fully enclosed. It is suspected that the existing biofilter on site is not of an appropriate size and there are some questions about its effectiveness given the state of repair evidenced in parts of the structure. The applicant has indicated (verbally) that new medium has been added to the biofilter, whilst this may have assisted in odour control, complaints in relation to odour persist.

The second odour source is the wastewater, effluent and irrigation systems. As indicated above it is unclear as to the content and physical composition of the wastewater and therefore the potential impacts on the system have not been considered by the applicant and are unable to be assessed by Council.

The third is the sludge material that is produced as part of the rendering process, this material is high in oil and is highly odourous. It is unclear what the disposal methods of this material are currently being, or proposed to be, utilised.

The end product itself, being fishmeal, also has a high odour output. It has been observed that this material is not stored in bunded areas or undercover. The applicant has not provided details of how the temperature of this product is monitored or regulated as this product has the potential to be considered a dangerous good in terms of transport regulations.

(e) any proposals:

(i) to mitigate the environmental impacts and manage any residual risks,

The site, and the proposal, are subject to EPA licence conditions. The EPA have indicated that they are prepared to consider a trial of fish rendering at the plant, subject to Council consent. At the conclusion of the trial period the licence would be amended to provide limits, monitoring, reporting and control measures.

The application does not identify any measures to be implemented during the trial period to mitigate environmental impacts, rather stating that any required measures would be implemented at the end of the trial period. Similarly the identification of potential environmental risks as a result of the proposal have not been provided, accordingly no measures are proposed to manage any residual risks.

(ii) to facilitate compliance with relevant standards, codes of practice or guidelines published by the department or other public authorities

The supporting documentation does not propose any measures to ensure compliance with standards, codes of practice or guidelines, rather it relies on past environmental improvement measures as an indication of intent to comply with environmental requirements.

Research undertaken by staff indicates that the odour generation from the slaughtering and processing of meat and meat by products is significantly different to that of rendering fish. Fish have a higher unsaturated fat content when compared to meat and the decomposition of the different fats occurs at different rates and impacts greatly on the odour produced during that process. Similarly the amount of waste generated per volume of product processed varies significantly between meat and fish, with fish generating more waste per equivalent volume than meat. Once again this will impact on odour generation and the efficiency of the wastewater and effluent systems.

The above assessment indicates that the applicant has failed to satisfy the consent authority that the alterations or additions do not significantly increase the environmental impacts of the total development compared with the existing approved development. Accordingly the ability of Council to determine the application in its current form is not satisfied.

Nonetheless other matters for consideration in the determination of the application pursuant to Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 are addressed below:

Section 4.15(1)(a)

The provisions of any State Environmental Planning Policies are not altered as a result of this proposal from that assessed as part of the application for the establishment and subsequent expansion and additions to the approved development onsite; being an abattoir.

The proposal as a rural industry (as defined within the Local Environmental Plan to include rendering plants) are permissible within the RU1 Primary Production Zone of the Cootamundra Local Environmental Plan 2013.

The site has been identified on the Terrestrial Biodiversity Map of the Cootamundra Local Environmental Plan as being applicable. The applicant has not addressed how this may be impacted by the proposed, rather relying on the statement that there is no extensions or additions proposed to the existing buildings and the rendering plant is not located within the identified area to indicate there will be no impact. There is no indication or assessment of how effluent irrigation may impacted upon the identified terrestrial biodiversity.

The site is also identified on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map of the Cootamundra Local Environmental Plan. The applicant has indicated that the groundwater will not be impacted by the proposal due to the limited amount of wastewater generated during the trial period being able to be accommodated within the existing effluent system. There is no evidence in terms of capacity of the wastewater system, volumes of water used, wastewater outputs (in terms of volumes and composition) to validate this statement nor against which to make an informed assessment.

The applicable provisions of Cootamundra Development Control Plan are not altered as a result of the application for a trial of fish rendering at the site.

Section 4.15(1)(b)

This section of the Act requires an assessment of the likely impacts of the development on the natural and built environment as well as the social and economic impacts in the locality likely to occur as a result of the development. This section is supported by Schedule 1 of the Regulations that requires applicants to submit a statement of environmental effects which examines what the likely impacts of the development will be, how they have been identified and how they are proposed to be mitigated. Council relies on the information provided by applicants, as well as research, site visits and experience to assess the information provided by applicants to make an informed and balanced assessment of the validity and veracity of the information provided.

As indicated above the major impacts with this proposal are the impacts on air quality as a result of odour generated by the proposal. The statement submitted with the proposal does not identify all the potential odour sources, nor all mitigation measures to limit the impact of odour. Research undertaken by staff of similar operations, as well as observations of the operations on site, has identified four potential odour sources, only one of which (the biofilter) has been included in proposed odour mitigation measures. It is clear from the complaints received that these measures, if they have been put in place, are inadequate to mitigate the odour. If they have not been put in place, despite numerous complaints to both Council and the EPA resulting in site visits and discussions with staff of the operations, then the trial period where mitigation measures are tested, monitored and evaluated is not the appropriate means for the operation of this site. Given that the operation has been occurring onsite since July and staff having asked for the information, no assessment of the effectiveness of implemented measures nor information on further mitigation measures have been provided. Furthermore there is no independent assessment of potential or realised odour generation from experts to back up the assumptions made in the documentation supporting the application.

In addition to odour from the processing, no information is provided on waste generated from the proposed operation. There is no indication as to what will occur in extreme heat conditions (given that the application requests the trial to continue for six months into summer) and the likelihood that fish will become unsuitable for processing particularly as there is no information as to how the fish will remain chilled in transport from the south coast to Cootamundra, a travel time of approximately four hours. Nor is there any information on how the temperature will be monitored or maintained during transport and whilst on site awaiting processing.

Similarly there is limited information in relation to the generation of sludge, wastewater or other wastes. Council has insufficient information to make an assessment on the volume, type, odour, content, source or adequacy of disposal measures nor on any proposed measures to mitigate any impact. In the instance where wastes are unknown it is not possible to impose appropriate condition to manage and mitigate impacts.

There is unlikely to any negative visual or noise impacts of the proposal, the visual amenity of the locality is unlikely to change from that of a site that has had limited use since the closure of the abattoir. The visual and noise impacts are likely to be less than that of an operating abattoir due to less vehicles (both passenger and transport) visiting the site, less live animals and less employees. The proposal states that there are to be 11 employees.

As mentioned above it is unclear if there will be any impacts on groundwater, stormwater or vegetation as water use for washing of vehicles (observed to be occurring on site) and for processing is not included in the supporting documentation. Similarly the volume, composition and disposal of wastewater is not sufficiently examined or explanation to allow an assessment of the likely impacts on groundwater and vegetation as a result of onsite effluent disposal. Likewise there is no assessment as to how stormwater is likely to be impacted given trucks were observed to have been washed out onsite onto the concrete that is not independently bunded or isolated from the stormwater system.

Energy and utility usage and impacts, whilst not expected to increase from the needs of an operating abattoir have not been assessed. The supporting documentation does mention that there is no impact on items of heritage significance in the area as non are contained onsite. Given the disturbed and ongoing nature of the site and the limited further disturbance of the soils it is unlikely that the proposal would have an impact on items of aboriginal heritage onsite.

The raw material is to be trucked to site from the south coast of NSW. The supporting documentation indicates that material arrives in three truck and dog type covered trailers during the trial period. The supporting documentation indicates that the average hourly through put capacity is 4 tonnes per hour and the proposal will operate 24 hours per day (however this is unclear as another section of the documentation talks about commencing operations on site at 4am), six days per week with an estimated through put of 14,976 tonnes during the six months trial period. There is no mentioned of how the processed material is transported from site, however it has been observed that the material is lodged on semi trailers in bulk bags during day time hours.

The site has direct access from Stockinbingal Road via separate entry and egress points. These access and egress points are tar sealed and do not require upgrades as part of this proposal. Given the location on the Stockinbingal Road the proposal was referred to the NSW RMS for comment. That authority did not have any objections to the proposal provided that a condition be imposed that the rendering of fish is denied whilst the abattoir is in operation. The authority also noted that the traffic generated by this proposal will be less than that of a fully operational abattoir.

It is noted that fishmeal can be considered a dangerous good in accordance with transport guidelines and must be kept at controlled temperatures. It is unclear if, or how the applicant proposes to achieve this as there is no mention of outputs leaving site within the supporting documentation. Similarly, fish oil is an output of the process and it has been observed onsite that this is stored in plastic ‘pods’. The storage of such materials, oil and fishmeal, should be within a bunded area which is separated from the stormwater system to prevent the potential for a pollution event to occur should a breach occur in the storage system of either product. The documentation supporting the application does not identify this as a potential source of pollution and therefore there are no proposed mitigation measures included.

The impact of the proposal on soil is unknown. It would appear that as the exiting wastewater and effluent systems will be used for the proposal irrigation of effluent would continue as was the case with the operational abattoir. However as there is no indication of the volume or constitution of wastewater, nor is there any contingency for extreme weather events, it is unclear how the application of effluent produced through this process will impact upon soils in terms of structure, nutrient holding capacity, toxicity, salinity, stability and productivity. Council is therefore unable to make an assessment of the likely or potential impacts on soils as a result of this proposal.

The site is not subject to bushfire or flooding nor is it known to be subject to slip, subsidence or other technological and geophysical risks. Similarly the site is not known to contain any threatened fauna or habitat for any threatened fauna. The site does contain terrestrial biodiversity as identified in the Cootamundra Local Environmental Plan, however an assessment of the likely impacts of the proposal on the biodiversity is unable to be taken due to the limited information in relation to the irrigation methods and locations, volumes and composition of effluent water.

The proposal indicates that there is likely to 11 employees at the development and it is therefore likely to have a small flow on economic benefit. However the negative impacts of odour in the central business district and people (locals and visitors alike) not wanting to spend time in that area is likely to counter any positive impact gained by employment.

Similarly the inability for those impacted by odour to the enjoyment of their property and the impacts that odour is having on their lifestyle have flow on negative social impacts. Negative lifestyle impacts create a general distrust of regulators to protect the public interest and people leaving town due to impacts on lifestyle has a negative impact on the social fabric of a community.

Section 4.15(1)(c)

The suitability of a site for a development proposal is required to be assessed. In this instance the proposal is to be carried out on a site that has an approved but currently non-operational abattoir situated upon it. It is noted that the proposal is to only render fish when the abattoir is not operating. The rendering of fish has higher and stronger odour generation rates than that of an abattoir. This is backed up by complaints received from further afield than those received when the abattoir was in operation. Complaints received in relation to the current (unlawful) use of the site for the rendering of fish have also been from further afield than those received when product sourced from off site was being processed through the rendering plant. Furthermore, the residential zone is encroaching closer to the site and the need to mitigate odour is becoming greater. The site itself, is suitable for a rendering plant, and has successfully operated as such in the past. Nonetheless in terms of ecologically sustainable development principles it must be questioned as to whether transporting a sea product some four hours by road and then shipping then end product back to ocean based aquaculture is a practice that is both economically and environmentally sustainable in the long term.

Section 4.15(1)(d)

This section relates to the assessment of the issues raised in the public submissions. It is due to the submissions received that this matter is being referred to Council for determination. Council received 12 submissions during the notification period, all but two of which were objections. The two that were not objections indicated that they would support the proposal if odour impacts could be controlled. The most signification issue raised in the submissions was that of odour with some describing the odour as unreasonable, fetid, strongly offensive, obnoxious, putrid, appalling stench, disgusting smelly, pungent, making physically ill, smell of rotten fish, vile, overpowering, fish, chemical, constant and major rotting fish smells. Most of the submissions indicated that the odour generated by the current unlawful rendering of fish was a significant increase from that produced by the abattoir and that from the previously rendered material sourced off site.

The issue of lifestyle impacts was also raised with some submissions indicating that it was not possible to hang washing out, open windows, go outside or have BBQs. Most were concerned that these impacts would increase in summer heat when most residents desire to be outside or have windows open; of particular concern was smell permeating washing and soft furnishings.

Many submissions raised the issue that the rendering of fish (or the trial period) had commenced before notification of the proposal had been received. It should be noted that the rendering of fish commenced in early July with the application, the subject of this report, being received by Council on 1 August.

Some submissions raised concerns that the impacts of the proposal would impact upon property values, tourism and businesses with little benefit achieved by way of employment. Concerns about health impacts and the capacity of the owners of the site to mitigate odour and other environmental impacts.

The issue of odour has been discussed elsewhere in this report as has the commencement of the operation without the benefit of the application having been determined. The issue of negative economic impact in terms of lost tourism dollars is significant when the odour travels to the central business district of town and impacts on the willingness of locals and visitors alike to spend time in that space. The issue of property value impacts is not a planning consideration, however people feeling they have to leave town does have an impact on the social fabric of the community and the trust that people have in regulators to protect their interests and the wider interests of the community.

Section 4.15(1)(e)

This section relates to matters of public interest and includes issues such as regulators acting fairly and in the best interest of the whole of the community. In this instance the activity has been occurring onsite since July without the benefit of a development consent, during this period the applicant has been requested to provide additional information to Council to allow an informed assessment of identified potential (and actual known) impacts and mitigation measures to be undertaken. The applicant has advised Council that the requested information will be provided as part of a development application for the rendering of fish on site on a long term basis and will not be forthcoming in support of the application for a trial, accordingly an assessment is being made on the information provided and where information is insufficient to make an informed assessment this is noted within this report.

It has been asserted that the applicant is proposing the trial as a way to avoid the necessary identification and assessment and to assess the impacts of the trial rather than to monitor the adequacy of mitigation measures that would need to be implemented as a result of thorough investigation and assessment of potential impacts. The absence of an assessment of environmental considerations undermines the objectives of the Act where the integration of impacts into decisions of environmental planning, the orderly use and development of land is paramount.

Council, as the consent authority, must take account of the public interest and act in the best interests of the community as a whole, including the environment which surrounds the community exists. In the case of this proposal there is insufficient evidence to indicate that the interests of the community would be protected in the absence of rigourous identification, assessment and mitigation of the impacts imposed upon it by this proposal.

Conclusion

The application does not contain sufficient information in regards to the identification, assessment and mitigation of potential impacts to the environment by the proposed development to allow an adequate assessment by Council. Furthermore, the impacts of the proposal differ significantly from that of the approved abattoir development and the applicant has failed to satisfy Council to the contrary in accordance with the provisions of Clause 35 of Schedule 3 of the Regulation. The current operation of the facility for the rendering of fish has indicated that there are significant negative impacts on the environment and the community with the proposal seeking to authorise the continuation of an unlawful use whilst a development application is prepared for the rendering of fish on an ongoing basis.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

29 October 2019

8.10.3 Airport Slasher Replacement No.6221

DOCUMENT NUMBER

313588

REPORTING OFFICER

Wayne Bennett, Manager Waste, Parks and Recreation Services

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

RELEVANCE TO COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN

2. A prosperous and resilient economy: we are innovative and 'open for business'

2.4 Our local workforce is skilled and workplace ready

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The replacement value from the Plant Reserves is estimated at between $25,000 to $60,000.00

LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS

There are no Legislative implications associated with this report.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

There are no Policy implications associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Recommendation

As part of the council 2019/2020 plant replacement program, Council replace plant No. 6221 (6’ tow behind slasher) with a new 16’ or 20’ tow behind slasher, estimated value between Min $25,000 to Max $60,000.

Introduction

This report is to seek approval to replace the existing Jarret 6’ slasher (Plant No. 6221) with a new high tech three winged 16’ to 20’ slasher to be used in part to mow 40ha known as the airport.

Discussion

In response to CASSA regulatory requirements to maintain the airport grass areas to specific heights, the airport grass areas need to be mown during a normal growing season, approximately 30 activities/year. This of course is pending seasonal conditions during (September to April).

Going on financial figures from the last 3 years, the total labour maintenance hours has averaged out at 283hrs/pa, and plant 310hrs/pa. Labour costs averaged $39.50/hr and plant $19/hr. This is a total average mowing cost of $58.50/hr or $36.56/ha.

According to current financial records, this has equated to an average annual maintenance costs of labour $11,178.50 and plant $5,890, totally $17,068.50pa for grass cutting.

Currently it takes one man approx. 25hrs to mow 40ha, given an average of 12 activities/ pa over the last three years. Due to the very dry conditions over the past three years, this is around half the activities that would be expected under a normal growing season.

The averaged hire rate of $19/hr for a combined mowing system (tractor/slasher) valued at over $160,000 is well undervalued, and would leave the plant reserve lacking if to replace the plant on the current seven year program.

The approximate area currently being maintained is 40ha. Going on the above figures it costs $36.56 incl. labour/hectare/activity, knowing that it takes approx. one hour to mow 1.6 hectare.

Going on the past three year average of 12 activities and using the existing hire rates the average annual costs to mow the airport should be $ 17,556.

The following revised calculations have been developed from a zero base and have been calculated on the average past three year figures (12 activities). The mowing requirement and expenditure will always be dependant or dictated by season conditions. The existing airport budget methodologies (e.g. in-house Vs contract, equipment type efficiencies etc.) have not been used or associated with these financial calculations but, base on more realistic in house operating costs using past history.

For the purpose of this report a contract price was sort and had a value of $4,500/activity. This results in a contract price of $112.00/ha. No time was given so an hourly rate could not be determined. This contract price of $112. /ha against the in-house rate of $36.56 is substantially higher and therefore not considered an option.

It at best, currently takes 25hrs to mow 40 ha @ 12 activities = 300hrs (approx.)

To undertake 12 maintenance activities with a new high tech 16’ tractor slasher performance rate would result in a reduced mowing time of 17hrs/40ha an approx. 32% savings or 204 hours, a saving of 96 hours/man & machine annually.

This report recommends that the hire rate for the new tractor/slasher have a combined hire rate of $45/hr, an increase of $25/hr or 56% increase.

To undertake 12 mowing activities (using a 16’ slasher) at an increased $45/hr over a revised 204 hours, gives an annual plant hire charge of $9,180. This would give a plant and labour cost to mow one hectare of $35.96. Estimating that it will take approx. one hour to mow 2.35 hectare.

Going on the past three year average of 12 activities and using the new hire rates and productivity efficiencies, the annual costs would be $ 17,260.80. This is a $296 annual saving over current estimated costs.

The proposed new hire rates for both the existing tractor and new slasher would pay for a replacement program of 5 years for the slasher and 7 years for the tractor at current values.

Summary

The current plant change over for ‘like for like’ would be in the vicinity of $3,000 to $9,000 pending fit for purpose and quality. Due to the number of overseas brands now on the market, there is a large difference in prices and quality available.

By purchasing the proposed new high tech 16’ slasher, combined with the existing 80Hp tractor, will give a 32% improvement in productivity over current operations, and reduced plant maintenance and down time costs (no values available at this time). On current averages, this equates to fourteen working days saved annually for both plant and staff to be utilised elsewhere. Purchasing a 20 foot version will give an estimated 45% increase in efficiencies.

The terrain being mown is very raw and extremely wearing on the existing mowing equipment. The proposed slasher is specifically design to mow broad-acre rough and rugged terrain with minimal down time (if well maintained).

By increasing the hire rate as recommended, will give an accurate financial return to the plant reserve knowing that at the end of 5 years, there will be sufficient funds to replace the slasher and tractor after seven years. Determining the proposed plant hire rates was based on the combination working an industry standard of 800hrs/pa. To ensure that hire rates maintain relativity, they should be reviewed every six to twelve months against required productivity outcomes. If for whatever reason productivity is down, the hire rate will need to be reassessed and increased if required as to maintain plant reserve obligations.

The current hire rates are unrealistic, and would be leaving the existing plant reserve short, resulting in there being insufficient fund to replace the relevant plant on the scheduled dates. Working on industry standards for a tractor/slasher combination @ 800/hr/pa, gives the current plant hire income of $15,200 increasing to $36,000 annually.

It is anticipated that the new slasher will enable additional savings in productivity, reduce cost in down time, repair and parts and result in reducing the mowing time and increase diversification for mowing other areas under the control of the Works Division e.g. wide road & crown reserves, showground etc.

Fig (1)

Specifications:

. Cutting width---------15' / 180" / 4571mm

. Cutting height--------50mm-380mm

. Cutting capacity-----2.5"

. Deck thickness-------.135"

. Side frame------------.25"

. Weight ----------------1860 kg

Standard Features:

. 15-foot Dual-wing cutter

. Main driveline: Cat 6 CV / Cat 5 Heavy 3 joint

. Cutting area standard chain shielding

. Cuts brush up to 1.5-inches in diameter

. Standard integrated chain shielding

. Fully baffled deck

woods bw180x 648559 001
Fig (1) Fig (1)

Above: WOODS BW180X ROTARY SLASHER 15 FOOT BAT-WING 180" MOWER FOR SALE $25,000 - also available WOODS BW240X ROTARY SLASHER 20 foot BAT-WING 6096MM BW240X MOWER

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

29 October 2019

8.10.4 Cootamundra Sports & Recreation Council Meeting Minutes

DOCUMENT NUMBER

314113

REPORTING OFFICER

Wayne Bennett, Manager Waste, Parks and Recreation Services

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

RELEVANCE TO COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN

1. A vibrant and supportive community: all members of our community are valued

1.2 Public spaces provide for a diversity of activity and strengthen our social connections

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

$1,800 to be funded from the Sports Ground Maintenance budget for the purchase of soil for the refurbishment of the senior cricket ground pitch located at Fisher Park.

LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS

There are no Legislative implications associated with this report.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

There are no Policy implications associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Sports and Recreation Council Minutes 15 October 2019 (under separate cover) ⇨

2. Draft Cootamundra Sport and Recreation Facilities & User Groups Policy and Procedure (under separate cover) ⇨

3. Sports & Recreation Council MoU (under separate cover) ⇨

Recommendation

1. The Minutes of the Sports and Recreation Council meeting held on 15 October 2019, attached to the report, be received and noted.

2. Council approve the recommendations detailed in the attached Minutes, and summarised in the report.

Introduction

The Sports and Recreation Council (S&RC) held an ordinary meeting on Tuesday, 15 October 2019 at 6:00 pm at the Ably Schultz meeting Centre, Cootamundra.

The meeting was well attended and was a very positive and progressive meeting. The committee was starting to appreciate the role the S&RC will have on addressing and having an influence on the many sport and recreation issues this town and council have to deal with, now and into the future.

Recommendations to Council

Review of Draft Sport and Recreation Council Memorandum of Understanding And Policy

Recommendation

That the Sport and Recreation Council (S&RC) Memorandum of Understanding and Policy, (attached to the report) be adopted with the following conditions:-

1. If a usual representative is not available and a vote is made by the substitute, that vote will be binding.

2. Amendment to number of members to constitute a quorum from three (3) S&RC members plus one Council employee to eight (8) S&RC members plus one Council employee.

3. The reference to exclusion of fees for primary schools be changed to “all schools” to include high school students.

Review the Cootamundra Swimming and Lifesaving Club Summer Season Access Agreement

Recommendation

That the Cootamundra Swimming and Lifesaving Club (CSLSC) 2019/2020 Agreement be presented to Council for adoption with the following inclusions:-

Item 1 – Two lanes be reserved in the outdoor pool on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday from 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm, plus a third lane for overflow when required.

Item 2 – Two lanes be reserved in the indoor pool from 5:30 pm to 8:00 pm two nights per week.

Item 3 – Permission to train in the indoor pool due to bad weather pending usage of the pool at a given time and at the discretion of the Pool Supervisor.

Item 4 – Access to the outdoor pool from 4 November 2019. Due to installation of new maintenance systems the water quality will not be to standard until mid-November. Access to outdoor pool to be granted at the earliest opportunity.

Item 5 – The facility be closed to the public on Thursday nights from 6:00 pm to 8:30 pm, with set up of lane ropes from 5:45 pm.

Item 6 – The request that family members and spectators be permitted free entry to the facility, and suggestion that full staff including lifeguard is not required not be granted.

Item 7 – All day event for the outdoor pool on Sunday 9, February 2020 be approved free of charge. Staff to be supplied by Council.

Item 8 – Parents and CSLSC members be permitted access on Saturday, 8 February 2020 to set up marquees, on the condition no vehicles are allowed within the pool grounds.

Item 9 – CSLSC members and volunteers be permitted access from 7:15 am on Sunday, 9 February 2020 for final set up of event.

Item 10 - CSLSC be permitted to charge a gold coin entry fee at front of facility as a Club fundraiser.

Item 11 – On Sunday, 9 February 2020 public access will be to the indoor pool only. Participants of the swim meet to use outdoor pool only.

Item 12 – Barbeque to be run at event held on Sunday, 9 February 2020.

Accept for Review the Draft Proposed Fees & Charges Policy

Recommendation

Draft fees and charges to be sent to Groups with Minutes of Meeting for review and comment prior to presentation to Council for adoption.

Update on Major Projects; Splash Park, Fisher Park Light Towers, Junior League Ground Upgrade

Recommendation

That the progress of these major projects be noted:-

- Splash Park is on schedule and due for completion by December and that the area will be a fenced construction zone.

- Fisher Park Light Towers now have all electricals installed with the towers expected to be installed and operative at 200 lux in December 2019, with option to upgrade to 300 lux as per Cricket NSW guidelines when budget permits. Old lights to be donated to Cootamundra Rodeo Association.

- Junior League Ground Upgrade to be scheduled around various sporting group schedules with expected completion being August 2020. Possible requirement for Nicholson Park users to use other sports fields to allow works to be completed.

Current Eoi for the Aquatic Centre And Sports Facility Review

Recommendation

That it be noted eight submissions were received with a report going to November Council Meeting to recommend and accept one of those proposals.

Review of the Final Draft Recreation Needs Study

Recommendation

That it be noted the Recreational Needs Study is now completed and to be sent to all Groups for their information.

Update on the new round of Grant Applications Submitted By Council

Recommendation

That the following sport and recreation based grant funding applications be noted:-

- Rock climbing wall for Cootamundra Sports Stadium

- Upgrade and installation of cycle ways, running tracks, interpretive signage, fencing and facilities etc. at Pioneer Park.

- Jumping pillow for Cootamundra pool complex.

- Pump Track for Cootamundra

Fisher Park Cricket Wicket

Cootamundra District Cricket Association submitted a letter to Council requesting assistance with upgrading Fisher Park cricket wicket. The ends of the cricket wicket was upgraded five years ago, with the centre section remaining too low. The Rugby League and Rugby Union grand finals, followed by rain, has caused substantial damage to the cricket wicket. The Cootamundra District Cricket Association is requesting that Council pay for materials (two pallets of soil) to repair the cricket wicket, which is approximately $1,800. Repairs will be carried out by the club.

RECOMMENDATION

That council pay for materials (two pallets of soil) to repair the cricket wicket, which is approximately $1,800 to be funded through the Sportsground maintenance budget.

Bradman Oval Cricket Net Improvements

Cootamundra Junior Cricket were unsuccessful in obtaining grant funding for the upgrade of the cricket nets at Bradman Oval. The current condition of these cricket nets is unsatisfactory and require refurbishment. Repairs are required to the mesh barriers, the damaged synthetic turf, and an upgrade to the length of the wicket from 18 metres to 21 metres. It was also noted that Cootamundra Senior Cricket members also use the Bradman Oval cricket nets for training. It was requested that Council provide an estimate for the cost of these items and a submission be made to Council for the cost of these repairs.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That council investigate the costs to repair all the associated issues to ensure the nets are brought up to an acceptable standard.

2. That a report come back to council outlining the proposed scope of works and related costs for council’s consideration.

Upgrade of Rugby League Posts at Nicholson Park

Cootamundra Junior Rugby League (CJRL) would like to upgrade the current steel posts with more suitable aluminium posts. Following the removal of two large trees one field is to be moved across to adhere with safety regulations. Space is becoming limited, due to numbers the Club now require two international fields and the two mini/mod fields to relocated to where the grass netball court area. The removal of the two large trees also allows extra space for netball, which was taken into consideration by CJRL when discussing the removal of these trees.

RECOMMENDATION

That the upgrade of the football posts be funded from the current Grant for Junior League ground upgrades.

Project	Amount	Commentary / Recommendation
Cootamundra Water Mains Replacement	$3,024,333	To be funded from the Water Reserves until concerns raised by TCorp can be resolved, and funding for the remainder of the project secured.

APP. NO.	PROPOSED BUILDING	STREET NAME
DA2019/101	Machinary Shed	Coolac Road
DA2019/93	Dwelling	Wantiool Street
DA2019/108	Change of use	Parker Street
DA2019/110	Shed	O'Brien Street
DA2019/111	Transportable Dwelling	Punch Street
DA2019/114	Awning residential	Kilrush Road
DA2019/115	Dwelling	Boxsells Lane
DA2019/116	Retaining Wall	Virgil Street
DA2019/120	Machinary Shed	William Street
DA2019/121	Dwelling	Lawson Drive
DA2019/122	Dwelling	Lawson Drive
DA2019/123	Shed	Dudaman Road
DA2019/125	New Commercial Building	Pinkerton Road
DA2019/128	New Advertising Structure	Gundagai Road
CDC2019/21	New Gazebo	Netherleigh Lane
CDC2019/23	New Carport	Jubilee Avenue
CDC2019/24	Shed additions	Olympic Highway
VALUE OF WORK REPORTED TO THIS MEETING:			$2,355,890.00
VALUE OF WORK REPORTED YEAR TO DATE :			$5,138,838.00
THIS TIME LAST YEAR:
VALUE OF WORK –September 2018 - $ 1,798,398.00
VALUE OF WORK – YTD 2018 - $ 2,450,905.00

REPORTING OFFICER	Teresa Breslin, Governance Officer
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS	There are no Financial implications associated with this report.
LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS	There are no Legislative implications associated with this report.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS	There are no Policy implications associated with this report.
ATTACHMENTS	1. Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday 24 September 2019

DOCUMENT NUMBER	313617
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager
REPORTING OFFICER	Abb McAlister, Mayor
ATTACHMENTS	Nil

DOCUMENT NUMBER	312826
REPORTING OFFICER	Penny Nicholson, Councillor
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

DOCUMENT NUMBER	314114
REPORTING OFFICER	Leigh Bowden, Councillor
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

DOCUMENT NUMBER	314244
REPORTING OFFICER	Charlie Sheahan, Councillor
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager

DOCUMENT NUMBER	313789
REPORTING OFFICER	Teresa Breslin, Governance Officer
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phil McMurray, Acting General Manager